Are you suffering from Fox-o-phobia?

[sirs]

So he isn't a reporter, despite your original concession that he and the Post likely believes him to be...which brings us back to my original questions, posed in the 3rd posting

[BT]

No he is a columnist. I was wrong. He was a reporter at one time, assigned to the WH during the Bush Admin.

But that doesn't lessen O'Reillys error in trying to muddy the distinction between journalists and columnists, which he clearly is trying to do when discussing Milbanks. He knows what Milbanks is, he has been feuding with him for a year or so.

[sirs]

I'm guessing like you, most people, including the Post might consider Milbanks a reporter

Now back to the original questions

[BT]

I don't see how they could if they actually read his columns instead of being told by someone else what to think.



The picture of Milbank at the top with OP-ED Columnist right next to it would be a dead give-away of what he is.

Perhaps you thought he was a reporter still because O'Reilly blurred the line. And perhaps you didn't check the posted link that showed the about header.

or perhaps your browser didn't display the image capture properly.

But other than that, the Post seems to be clear on what Milbanks function is, though O'Reilly isn't.

[Plane]

Reporting every fact would be rediculous, no one can write or read that much.

Every sort of reporter and collumnist chooses the bits he thinks most pertinent and constructs his narritive around it , of course these choices are colored a lot by how the reporter understands the working of the world.

The best answer we have ever had has been competeing viewpoints, what one leaves out , his opposite will include. The currency of this competition is credibility, reporting uncredably spends creadability away ad the audience becomes incredulous . The reporting that gets the best reputation for being reliable and right can expect better audience, this gives cash value to good judgement.

[sirs]

I don't see how they could if they actually read his columns instead of being told by someone else what to think.

Soooo.....who's telling who what to think?  About to adopt the Rush-like complaints that his listeners are a bunch of mind numb robots??  Anyone that posts an op-ed is incapable of agreeing with the point and not every specific?  Can't think for themselves, without an op-ed in hand??

[BT]

There is nothing anyone can do about dishonest journalism if standards are nonexistent within media operations.

I believe the bolding is yours.

Is Milbanks a journalist?

[Xavier_Onassis]

It is pretty obvious to tell the difference between a reporter and an editorialist. The reporter seeks to explain the facts of an issue, and offers either no opinion of several opinions. The editorialist writes articles that begin with a specific opinion and cites facts and details to justify that opinion.

I find it bizarre anyone would consider an ideologue like Krauthammer anything but an editorialist. You can say the same thing for Noam Chomsky. It is obvious by thr third sentence what sort of article it is, and of course, the location in the paper on the editorial page is also a dead giveaway to even the densest of readers.

I do not suffer from Fox-o-phobia, just like I do not suffer from American Idol-o-phobia or So you think you can dance-o-phobia, or Grown men who play with balls-o-phobia: I just do not watch any of these things, as they do not amuse me.

If I am not in a mood to be annoyed, I do not read Krauthammer, either.

[sirs]

Is Milbanks a journalist?

It would seem no longer.  Now, back to my original questions, if you don't mind

[BT]

There is nothing anyone can do about dishonest journalism if standards are nonexistent within media operations.

Then I am curious why O'Reilly wrote that line and you bolded it.

Do you think he was deliberately blurring the lines?

[sirs]

Apparently the main point of O'Reilly's piece & my questions can't be bothered with.  Why am I not surprised, at this point

[Xavier_Onassis]

Your question is vague. I doubt that anyone but you even knows what you are talking about.

Perhaps you could Google the answer.

[BT]

Is it appropriate for editorialists to behave like editorialists?

Absolutely.

Is it appropriate for reporters to cross the line and behave like editorialists?

No.

Is it the readers responsibility to know the difference?

Yes.

[sirs]

Your question is vague.

Actually the questions were pretty specific.  The answers are likely to be made vague.....on purpose, by those who wish to not acknowledge the bias being hilighted, yet again

Perhaps you could Google the answer.

Then a debate forum is unnecessary

[BT]

Actually the questions were pretty specific.  The answers are likely to be made vague.....on purpose, by those who wish to not acknowledge the bias being hilighted, yet again

You questions are vague absent working definitions of each component of your question.

Give me an example of a reporter. Give me an example of a columnist. Where does Debkafiles fit on this spectrum?