Don't call it journalism

A great read from Jim Geraghty at National Review.Don't Call it Journalism:

Those of us who don't espouse the mainstream media conventional wisdom have a responsibility to set a better standard. Let them sink into their echo chamber, and write for the audience that prefers to believe the disproven lie to the uncomfortable truth. This would be the same readership that audaciously calls itself the -- reality-based communit -- and dismisses those who disagree as the easily-fooled rubes of -- Jesusland -- , then applauds the line, - only a Sith deals in absolutes.

We're writing for the audience that actually wants to know what's going on, that doesn't always assume that Pentagon officials are lying, that has a healthy skepticism of the word of a captured al-Qaeda terrorist, and that gives our guys in uniform the benefit of the doubt. (They've earned it.) When some of our guys foul up big-time, like Abu Ghraib, we want to know. But we don't want the gruesome abuse photos hyped into endlessly displayed news porn. We know it;s a horrible sight, but it's not quite as horrible as what we saw on an autumn Tuesday morning a few years ago.

and,

The Isikoff story – and the inevitable coming deluge of in-depth investigative journalism of additional tales of abuse from those utterly trustworthy al-Qaeda prisoners – are a return to the “good old days” of last spring. When Teddy Kennedy could compare the U.S. military’s handling of prisoners to Saddam’s torture chambers with a gleeful, hearty grin. When our guys on the front lines could be portrayed as sadistic, black-hearted villains. When the face of our guys wasn’t the stoic loyalty of a Pat Tillman, the pride and dedication of a Jeffrey Adams, or any other one of our heroes but the nauseating sneer of Lynndie England.

Boy, did those days feel good to the media.

Call that whatever you like. But don’t call it journalism.

Exactly.