Austrian Journalist: US "Media Under Pressure"

(By Ray D.)

This past New Years Day, an editorial from across the Alps caught our attention. It was published in "Der Standard," Austria's self-described "leading quality newspaper": According to columnist Barbara Coudenhove-Kalergi, American journalism has been on the ropes ever since President Bush took office. And because of the President and his scheming corporate pals, American media have come under unparalleled "pressure" to censor themselves, refrain from criticizing the government, ignore topics involving the rest of the world and avoid domestic "social" issues such as single, homeless, oppressed, depressed, drug-addicted mothers. Coudenhove-Kalergi opens her commentary as follows:

"Media under Pressure
Since the Bush era, a further pillar of US democracy, American journalism, has begun to waver - Columns by Barbara Coudenhove-Kalergi

For over a century, American journalism was and is the unattained model for all European media people - independent, unafraid, the motto of the venerable New York Times requires "all the news that's fit to print." But that's how it used to be. Since the Bush era, a further pillar of US-democracy, American journalism, has begun to waver, according to a study from the New York Review of Books. Along with a hostile White House, increased political pressure from the right and media owners greedy for money, the study states that it is, above all, the self-censorship of journalists that is pressuring the standard. Experience teaches us that what happens today in the USA will happen tomorrow in Europe. At the beginning of a new year we all have reason to take this warning sign from America seriously.

The gravest defeat for the US media was naturally the gullibility with which they once believed the government lie on Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. But media critics count an entire row of other failings. The most important: Reporting from abroad is growing ever thinner and the reporting on domestic social questions as well."

A few initial observations. Throughout her editorial, Ms. Coudenhove-Kalergi fails to so much as mention the recent emergence of two significant new media fields in the United States: Blogs and talk radio. In fact, the only US media that she actually identifies by name are CBS, The New York Times and the New York Review of Books. This remarkably narrow understanding of "US media" may help to explain the author's acutely limited viewpoint. Of course it may also be that the author believes that blogs and talk-radio are all just a part of the vast right-wing conspiracy that is supposedly putting pressure on "objective" and "independent" media outlets like CBS News and The New York Times. It could also be that she's never heard of Daily Kos, Josh Marshall, AMERICAblog.com or Air America or any of the thousands of left-wing media outlets in the new American media landscape.

And perhaps Ms. Coudenhove-Kalergi has never considered the possibility that new media outlets, including blogs like this one, have dramatically increased overall coverage of foreign countries and domestic social issues for American news consumers. Perhaps that is because she is largely unaware of the shift taking place in the United States away from "traditional" media and towards "new" or "alternative" media. That may also be because the media landscape in German-speaking nations remains dominated by "traditional" forces and largely insulated from the dramatic changes taking place across the Atlantic.

Additionally, Ms. Coudenhove-Kalergi continues to assume, as many European journalists do, that the claim Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction was an intentional lie fabricated by the Bush administration to justify the war in Iraq. And although the idea of a fabricated "government lie" perpetrated by a sinister cabal surrounding President Bush may be emotionally satisfying and comforting to the readers of "Der Standard", it has precious little basis in fact or reality. What the author is conveniently forgetting to tell her readers is that many individuals, organizations and governments around the world, ranging from German and French intelligence to Bill Clinton to John Kerry, believed that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction shortly before the outbreak of hostilities in 2003. So does Ms. Coudenhove-Kalergi believe that they, too, were all part of a massive "right-wing conspiracy" to dupe the American media into silence?

Later in her editorial, Coudenhove-Kalergi continues with the following:

"No wonder that the inhabitants of the only superpower know so little about the rest of the world. They know equally little about the growing poverty in their own country, about working conditions in the under-classes, about the constantly growing power of corporations.

Here too the numbers speak volumes: The New York Times has 60 reporters for the "business" section, one single reporter for labor (union) questions. And the media corporations themselves are a part of the "business" world. They know that with articles on successful managers they can acquire a lot of advertising, but with articles on unemployed single mothers none at all. The result: Large segments of reality, from the many civilian dead in Iraq to unemployment in many cities of the American Midwest whose industries are being outsourced remain omitted in the media landscape.

Certainly, optimists see signs that the pendulum has, in the meantime, begun to swing back in the other direction. Hurricane Katrina and the misery of the residents of New Orleans opened the eyes of many American media people to the fact that there is another world beyond Hollywood and Wall Street about which the citizens ought to be informed. Since then, government and civil authorities are again being more critically questioned and self-criticism is being exercised in some opinion sections. The famous American journalism isn't going to die that quickly."

Of course! How could we have all been so blind and ignorant! How could we have all missed the obvious for so long: The New York Times and other mainstream media have indeed stopped reporting on homelessness, unemployment and civilian deaths in Iraq or anything beyond "Wall Street" and "Hollywood." How fortunate we are to have courageous, crusading journalists in Austria like Ms. Coudenhove-Kalergi to open all of our eyes for us! For three long years, no one in the media critically questioned the Bush administration and it took Hurricane Katrina and the brave European media elite to wake the American media from its long slumber! President Bush, corporate America and the vast "right-wing conspiracy" had the entire US media under their collective thumbs for far too long! Bush lied and people died! Drop Bush - not bombs! Make love - not war!

OK. Stop. Everyone take a deep breath. Let's get serious for a moment. Here is the sad, disheartening truth: A lot of people in Austria, Germany and Europe actually believe what Ms. Coudenhove-Kalergi is editorializing here. They honestly believe that American mainstream media have stopped reporting on unemployment, homelessness, poverty and civilian deaths in Iraq. They honestly believe that American media have withheld criticism of the Bush administration for years on end because they are allegedly under so much "pressure." They honestly believe that mainstream American media are being gravely threatened by corporate interests and a vast right-wing conspiracy. They honestly believe that American journalism and democracy are on the brink of collapse. They honestly believe the "gleichgeschaltet" lie to be true. They honestly believe that Americans are too ignorant and ill-informed to understand social problems in their own country. And, worst of all, they voraciously consume the steady diet of fallacious anti-American propaganda that journalists just like Ms. Coudenhove-Kalergi have been feeding them for years. Sadly, anti-Americanism has grown into a profitable industry with a sizable consumer base.

And then the same European "journalists" who write these cynical, mendacious propaganda pieces turn around and wonder why Americans and Europeans just can't seem to understand each other anymore. Must be all Bush's fault!

Addendum: Two More Postings on the Coudenhove-Kalergi Editorial

Stefan of Politically Incorrect deserves special thanks for bringing this piece to our attention. Stefan has his own write-up (in German) on the Coudenhove-Kalergi editorial in which he opines that mainstream media, including The New York Times and CBS News, are slowly losing market share because they have long been perceived by many as arrogant, elitist and biased towards the left, not because (as Ms. Coudenhove-Kalergi suggests) they have become too pro-Bush, too conservative or too self-censoring. Numerous studies conducted over the past few decades strongly support Stefan's position. Be sure to check out his site.

We also received an outstanding commentary on Ms. Coudenhove-Kalergi's editorial in the form of an email from our regular commenter Helian. (Please note that Helian has done his own translation work, which explains some minor differences with our article.) Here is his take:

"As regular readers of Medienkritik are aware, Germany’s mass media are not exactly paragons of disinterested objectivity. Compared to Austria’s however, they are as a great city of light to a provincial backwater. Anyone with doubts on that score need read no further than an article by Barbara Coudenhove-Kalergi (CK) entitled “Medien unter Druck,” which recently appeared in “Der Standard.”

The theme of the article appears to be...

...that the foundations of American journalism, which had, we are told, been passing through a golden age lo now these last hundred years and more, an “untouchable paragon” for the wondering scribes of Europe, have quite recently begun to shake. And who is at fault for this dreadful turn of events? All together now! BUSH!!

In CK’s words, “For more than a century American journalism was, and is, the untouchable paragon for all European media people – independent, fearless, dedicated to the motto of the honored New York Times, ‘all the news that’s fit to print.’” (No, I’m not kidding, that’s really what she wrote!) Now, when it comes to compliments from Europe, we Americans should hardly be looking gift horses in the mouth these days. Be that as it may, if CK really does believe the poppycock she has written about a “golden age” in American journalism, she might be well advised to look into the history of the “yellow press” around the time of the Spanish-American War, or read a biography of Hearst, or, perhaps, “Newspaper Days,” by the great German-American journalist H. L. Mencken. If she prefers fiction, she might find a copy of Evelyn Waugh’s “Scoop.” A number of old timers have described it as very true to life, and applicable to the trade on both sides of the Atlantic.

Never mind all that, we’ll take our compliments where we can get them. Sadly, as CK informs us, the Golden Age is now a thing of the past, and the journalistic “pillar of US democracy” has commenced to tremble and shake. Responsible for this sad state of affairs are “a hostile White House, strengthened political pressure from the right, and media owners who are greedy for money.” And how do we know that? Why, according to CK, it’s all right there in a recent “study” done by the New York Review of Books. Apparently the “study” CK refers to is an opinionated article by Michael Massing, a regular contributor with no scientific credentials who has churned out many similar “studies” in the past. I suspect it’s highly unlikely the author would have the temerity to describe his piece as a “study” himself. The kind of spin you’re likely to find in the NYRB is evident in the current lead article on their website, a hysterical, hand-waving chicken little piece on the imminent global warming “meltdown.”

You can’t really feel anything like indignation for the author as she trots out one hoary leftist talking point after another. She tells us, with wide eyed innocence, that “the worst breakdown of the US media was, naturally, the gullibility with which they fell for the Administration lie about Saddam Hussein’s WMD.” Thanks to the baleful influence of corporate bosses, “large pieces of reality, from the many civilian deaths in Iraq to unemployment in many cities of the American Midwest, whose industries have been transferred elsewhere, remain cut off from the media landscape.” The poor, benighted Americans “know little about the growing poverty in their own land.” Because such stories don’t pull in advertising dollars, “articles about single, unemployed moms” are in critically short supply, etc., etc. You get the idea.

It’s hard not to feel a sense of vicarious embarrassment for CK as she rattles off all these leftist “truisms.” For starters, she lifted most of them virtually word for word from Massing’s “study.” Far be it for us to accuse anyone of plagiarism, but “Medien unter Druck” reads like a truncated and bowdlerized version of Massing’s article, single, unemployed moms and all. Read them both for yourself and make up your own mind. Suffice it to say that it is painfully obvious that CK has not devoted a great deal of original study to the issue of whether Bush lied, unemployment in the US Midwest, poverty in America, or the fate of single, unemployed mothers in general. She is blithely unaware that there is even any debate on these topics, or any alternative viewpoints at all not motivated by “corporate greed.” She is simply uncritically parroting leftist talking points. And how, after all, should she know any better? From her fellow Austrian journalists, whose opinions conform to hers like so many peas in a pod? Not likely.

Apparently CK feels a deep sense of foreboding about how Europe might be affected by the wobbly condition of American journalism. She informs us that, “experience teaches us that what happens in the US today will happen tomorrow in Europe.” (We note with relief that, apparently, the converse does not apply.) All I can say is, “cheer up!” If Europe really does go the way of the US, it will mean that the virtually absolute conformity of the media there regarding the US, similar to the conformity that once existed in the US media on similarly important matters, will be a thing of the past. The arrogant and intolerant media elites responsible for CK’s brainwashing and for creating the fantasy world she lives in, for the malicious, greedy peddling of hate, and for the simplistic, ignorant, half-baked notions of the US that pass for “enlightenment” will be a thing of the past with it. Influential alternative media in the form of blogs, alternative cable channels, and talk radio will begin to slaughter the sacred cows of the left, and tear off the pompous, self-righteous mask of political elites cynically posing as the friends of the downtrodden while serving no one but themselves.

CK tells us that, “in recent years, many good, critical journalists have come of age” in Austria. One can only hope that is really true, because, as CK notes, “critical journalism is a precious commodity in every land, and one that must be nurtured and defended against corrupting influences of every kind.” Allow me to suggest, CK, that the most significant corrupting influence in Austrian journalism in particular and European journalism in general today is the pressure from the media elites to conform. Critical journalists don’t parrot the work of others that itself parrots the prevailing “wisdom” of media elites. They have the courage to think for themselves, to investigate for themselves, and to challenge complacency and conformity. Indeed, when the “prevailing wisdom” promotes systematic slander and hate peddling directed at another people or country, unconvincingly tarted up in the garb of “objective criticism,” they have a duty to do so.

I certainly don’t mean to cast aspersion on Austria in general. Who knows, she may lead the way out of the journalistic “quagmire” and “disaster” in which Europe currently finds herself. Any who doubt the possibility should read the history of the year 1683. In that year the citizens of Vienna stood alone against an overwhelming besieging army spawned by an earlier wave of Islamist expansionism, defending European civilization as a mother wolf might defend its cubs from the hunter, standing defiantly before her den with teeth bared against all odds. There was nothing antiseptic about war in those days. “Defending Western culture” meant standing in the breaches of walls shattered by Turkish mines and artillery, fighting desperately, toe to toe, hour after hour, day after day, paying in blood for the time it took for the relieving German and Polish armies to arrive and save the day in the nick of time. If Austria’s citizens could rise to such sublime heroic heights in rescuing European civilization, is it really such a stretch to suggest they might just rescue European journalism as well. I think not!

Update: After looking over the link Helian provides to Michael Massing's article in The New York Review of Books entitled "The Press: The Enemy Within", it would appear that Ms. Coudenhove-Kalergi has "borrowed" (or at the least paraphrased) entire segments of the piece for her editorial. If this isn't plagarism it is awfully close. Here is just one segment from the Massing piece:

"These contrasting tales suggest something about the changing state of American journalism. For many reporters, the bold coverage of the effects of the hurricane, and of the administration's glaring failure to respond effectively, has helped to begin making up for their timid reporting on the existence of WMD. Among some journalists I've spoken with, shame has given way to pride, and there is much talk about the need to get back to the basic responsibility of reporters, to expose wrongdoing and the failures of the political system. In recent weeks, journalists have been asking more pointed questions at press conferences, attempting to investigate cronyism and corruption in the White House and Congress, and doing more to document the plight of people without jobs or a place to live.

Will such changes prove lasting? In a previous article, I described many of the external pressures besetting journalists today, including a hostile White House, aggressive conservative critics, and greedy corporate owners."

Wow, those last few lines do sound awfully familiar...

Comments

[Pamela]

And the media corporations themselves are a part of the "business" world.

As opposed to being owned by the state, I imagine. No pressure there, no siree.

[grlzjustwant2havefun]

Boy, is she going to be in for a rude awakening.

There was just another study done on which way the media leans, I think from UCLA - haven't these people ever heard of google or research?

Oh, wait................

[grlzjustwant2havefun]

If only the NYT would stifle where national security is concerned......

Fascism is always descending on America but seems to land in Europe.............

[Scout]

Pamula, the real joke is that in Germany, about 30% of the press is owned by the Socialsts..er.. the SPD. How's that for guaranteeing objectivity?

[PacRim Jim]

Thousands of Americans died freeing western Europe from Hitler, Austria's native son, so Austria has no moral authority, as far as this American is concerned.

[ErikEisel]

Does Ms. C-K provide one example of intimidation?

Yes, some reporters have lost their jobs, like Dan Rather, but that had a lot more to do with bad ratings than bad journalism.

And, of course, Judith Miller. But, she was sacked by the NYT, not by the Bush administration.

[joe]

Niko,

You forgot to mention in your summary that all the world's great 'ism's have come from the heart of EUSSR too.

[Doug]

Well, I have to concede that this isn't exactly untrue; the media is under increased pressure from "the right". "The right" had 30 or so years of being marginalized, mischaracterized, and malrepresented by the MSM, and it's over. The liberal media can't so successfully present the right's position as being whatever will make the left's look best now, because the right can present its own case to the larger public. They now have to at least throw a token nod at the possibility that there's a valid alternative point of view to their own, that they may mot be the ultimate arbiters of truth. They now know that they can't relegate hordes of click guerillas and pajamhadin to non-existance by pretending that it's so, and the liberal establishment hates this like Gollum hates Bilbo. So yes, they're absolutely under pressure, and I say "more, and faster please."

And because of the President and his scheming corporate pals, American media have come under unparalleled "pressure" to censor themselves, refrain from criticizing the government, ignore topics involving the rest of the world and avoid domestic "social" issues such as single, homeless, oppressed, depressed, drug-addicted mothers.

You need to translate that out of medienese to truly understand the complaint:
Unparalleled pressure = audience demand
Censor themselves = don't speak irresponsibly
Refrain from criticism = make supportable allegations
Ignore the rest of the world = spend column space to defend what didn't need defending when we ruled unchallenged
Avoid "social issues" = avert risk of having the Marxist framework underlying "social issues" stories exposed to debate

Top it off with the fear that this could "infect" Europe - NOW it's much easier to understand, yes? She laments that her charade may have just about run its course.

[Pamela]

Scout,
>>about 30% of the press is owned by the Socialsts

Yeah, I know. About a year or so ago, Medienkritik posters gave me a thorough education on why Rupert Murdoch could not get a media outlet started in Germany.

I would like to ask a question of those living in Germany - or Austria, wherever. Do people in those countries really have no access to U.S. media? Would some of her assertions not be hooted down simply by virtue of Europeans' experience with U.S. media?

I got such a kick out of this.......

>>"Experience teaches us that what happens today in the USA will happen tomorrow in Europe."

Yeah. Like someday your audience will fact-check your ass.

But not to worry. The soft totalitarianism of the EU will protect you.

[grlzjustwant2havefun]

There's a skirmish going on between the WaPo and blogger Bill Roggio who was profiled - or a better term "hit piece" in the WaPo and they got a few things wrong and refuse to correct:

Via Instapundit:

UPDATE: Some related thoughts from Frank Wilson:

I have myself heard in the newsroom comments about blogs that actually did sound, in Michelle Malkin’s phrase, “thoroughly unhinged.”

But it really isn’t blogging in general that bothers the MSM. It’s only the political blogs. The MSM doesn’t care about lit blogs or cooking blogs or knitting blogs — or even tech blogs or science blogs (except to the extent they might be useful in advancing some editorial viewpoint).

Blogs have challenged the MSM’s self-designated right to shape political debate by choosing what to cover and how to cover it. The MSM claims it has resources not available to bloggers — and it does. So how explain the disparity between what was reported in the papers and on TV during Hurricane Katrina and what we have since determined was actually the case? This was, after all, the demonstration case for the superiority of the MSM.

NR link:

http://nationalreview.com/comment/roggio200601031233.asp

---

Barbara hears the footsteps.

[grlzjustwant2havefun]

Those who visit here - especially Europeans who might want to visit the American blogosphere for the free flow of info which the MSM is deathly afraid of -- might also want to visit Pajamas Media - more footsteps.

And I have no doubt coming to Europe, hopefully in time to give you more lively, thought-provoking conversations.

After all, News is a conversation - Jeff Jarvis - buzzmachine.

[Mitch]

Maybe we should all chip in and treat her to a subscription to The Nation. It would make her feel so much better. I heard Katrina vanden Heuvel, the publisher of that magazine, speaking on the radio. It sounded like she was reading bumper stickers in Cambridge, Massachusetts. To Ms. Coudenhove-Kalergi, this drivel would sound fresh, original, and profound. Hearing your own opinions presented to you as wisdom is like smelling your own farts – no matter how offensive, it is never as bad as smelling (or hearing) anyone else's.

[Ambrose Wolfinger]

I'll differ slightly with Ray's claim that US major daily newspapers and network news are losing share because of their bias. They're both facing extinction due to obsolescence. I'm not at all convinced that bias is hastening is hastening their demise. It may be that the increasingly shrill bias is helping them to retain their remaining readers/viewers until they pass away. I've not seen any data either way on this point, but when you have a dying product, maximizing current customer retention becomes the most important objective.

That's why I find Fr. Coudenhove-Kalergi's profundity about what happens in the US happening in Europe to be an interesting statement. I'm curious as to how far down the road to extinction newspapers and network news are in Europe. My impression is that that the same trend is occurring, although it's not as far along in Europe. Of course, European network news organizations can undoubtedly count on decades of coerced support from European taxpayers. But as an example, I do recall one of the Berlin dailies, I believe Der Tagesspiegel, a few years ago begging for someone, anyone to buy them and keep them afloat. So I do agree with Fr. Coudenhove-Kalergi's observation, although I doubt she would be pleased to know that.

[Motorhead]

That article from "Der Standard" is simply pathetic but so par for the course.

This quote caught my interest, "The New York Times has 60 reporters for the "business" section...."

Last time I checked, the New York Stock Exchange and the American Stock Exchange are located in NY....

[FranzisM]

On, the Great Defender of the House of Habsburg has spoken.

Go and look into the face of aristocratic rule. :-)

[Helian]

>>"On, the Great Defender of the House of Habsburg has spoken."

Nice pickup, FranzisM. By the way, just out of idle curiosity, what's the penalty for lese-majeste in Austria these days?

[Mitch]

EU = Holy Roman Empire redux? Everything is much clearer now.

[James W.]

For over a century, American journalism was and is the unattained model for all European media people...

I think the European msm has done a damned good job of becoming what the American msm has been for a couple of decades...and it has little to do with journalism.

[amiexpat]

EU = Holy Roman Empire = Heiliges Römisches Reich?

NOO!!!

EU = SCHEINHeiliges Römisches Reich

[grlzjustwant2havefun]

-- I heard Katrina vanden Heuvel,--

A little explanation -

Limousine liberal trustafarian.

Lots of money, little contact w/the little people, heapload of white guilt, but not enough to give away most of her money.

Ever notice that????

[grlzjustwant2havefun]

Ambrose, I don't watch the big free 3 or CNN, too biased, why throw things at the TV?

[James W.]

Pam, just to expand on Niko's comments, Fox News can be received on sat (I believe from a British provider---I think you'll be able to buy ice cream in hell before Fox News is available in a German cable package). IMO CNN Europe is even further left than CNN in America.

As far as printed media goes, you get NYT, USA Today, Wallstreet Journal, and maybe a few others. But, when it comes to political books, don't expect to find anything on the bookshelves that portrays the Bush administration in a positive light...I've been searching for a couple of years now (thank god for the internet and Amazon). It's as if the people who select the books to be sold here used a "liberal best seller list" as their reference.

[joe]

Pamela,

One of the points of interest here is the CNN tour.

During the tour, you come upon a section about Ted. You can watch all the channels he started except CNN (I). When asked about this you should see the CNN PR people tap dance.

In addition to not being able to see it during the tour, there is no source for it in the US. It is not licensed to any cable or satellite carrier. It truly is a non-US only channel.

There is a very good reason for this. It is a bit to the left of the BBC on coverage of the US. In fact, some of the more interesting anodal evidence of this is when you are able to catch the same CNN story in an airport outside the US and then pick up coverage again when you land. It truly is amazing in how it is presented.

CNN(I) would make Aljazeera proud. This is why at the end of the day CNN made the decision to toss Eason Jordan over the side for his comments at Davos. CNN could not stand the spotlight of the American people focusing on them and by extension Time Warner.

The bottom line is yes much of the world gets CNN(I) but it is not anymore of a reflection of reality than what the BBC and Algazeera fill the air with. This is part of the reason so many things seem to surprise non-Americans about America and Americans.

[Pamela]

Joe, my cable provider does give us CNN Europe. What a hoot! I don't watch it too often - horse races in Romania or something don't hold my interest much. We also get MHZ & BBC and every evening around 7 pm I watch the French newscast Le Journal on MHZ. I expect them all to announce the imminent impeachment of Bush any day now.

Interesting perspective on the Eason Jordon flap. So close upon the heels of Dan rather & Jason Blair, I just figured CNN didn't want to play in that sandbox.

Some of us here have begun to notice problems with Border's bookstores. Conservative titles can't be found or if they can, they're on the floor in boxes, etc. I had a problem at Barnes & Noble also. The clerk told me the title I was looking for 'Eurabia' wasn't in the database. I couldn't see the monitor. I hung around, found another clerk. The book was in the database, listed first, actually, since it is the most recently published by the author. The first clerk just didn't want me to have it. She wasn't a happy camper when I hauled her in front of the manager - who happened to be the 2nd clerk.

[James W.]

In fact, some of the more interesting anodal evidence of this is when you are able to catch the same CNN story in an airport outside the US and then pick up coverage again when you land. It truly is amazing in how it is presented.

Exactly joe! I've had a very similar experience when I visited my family in Colorado last September. I caught some coverage of CNN (US) for the first time in years at the airport. I had to look twice, to make sure I wasn't watching Fox News (of course, relative to CNNI).

[John F. Opie]

Hi -

As an American married to an Austrian, who spends several weeks a year in Austria, who models the supply side (160 industrial sectors) of the Austrian economy, and who subscribed to the Standard for almost 6 years, I think I can provide *some* insight into what is going on here.

First of all, the Standard is indeed the highest quality newspaper in Austria. There are others with higher circulation, but they all share party affiliations that severely color even their basic reporting: they are nothing better than party rags, and fairly bad ones at that. You can discount most Austrian newspapers as being on par with the smaller regional newspapers in the US, at best. At very best.

That said, the Standard has gone through significant changes over time. When I first started forecasting Austria, it had just started up and provided a refreshing change from the other papers, since there wasn't a political agenda being pushed. What editorializing there was was directed largely at domestic concerns, and they were generally receptive to at least report objectively on US affairs, largely in a typically Austrian sort of bemused perplexity about how strange the Americans could be.

Subtly, over the last four years, things have changed. What started the change?

Of course, Sep. 11th.

The journalists working for the Standard did an adequate job covering the Austrian reaction to 9/11, but had a fatal expectation: they expected the US to roll over and behave like Europeans. There is at least one editor there - Eric Frey - who is, bluntly, a man who has built his career on being Anti-American. He has published a "Black Book" on the purported crimes of the US. He was born in 1963 in Vienna, has an MA in International Affairs from Princeton and is the head of Der Standard and the Austrian correspondent for the Financial Times and the Economist.

But no less than Jeff Gedmin has described him as "Michael Moore with footnotes": he's the Austrian version of Noam Chomsky without the linguistics, equally unable to think for himself, but instead relying on dogma and sheer chutzpah to argue sophistically that white is black and black is white.

I remember how Frey started at Der Standard: someone who spent many years in the US, even taught at the University of New Orleans, yet all he knew were the standardized cliches that we all know so well. There were too many editorials with too much shaving of the truth: he almost got it right, but usually missed the point, and has been not only intellectually dishonest, but has also gotten the facts simply wrong too many times to deserve his reputation as "Amerika-Kenner" that he enjoys in Austria.

You need to understand the insularity of Vienna within Austria to understand what is going on there. Austria is a small country - 8 mn and declining - and over 1 mn live in Vienna, which is the only big city in the whole country. Anyone who wants to become anyone in Austria must spend time in Vienna, and the whole country is very conscious of social standing, one of the negative inheritances of the Austro-Hungarian empire (the Austrians are real freaks when it comes to titles...). Here's a guy who does what no proper Austrian does: he spends time overseas. No proper Austrian does this, since it means that there is something more important than the petty squabbling that passes for intellectual life in Austria. In order to re-enter this, he's gotta have some bonafides, and being Mr. Anti-America is perhaps the best ticket he can punch in order to get back into the good side of Austrian intellectual life after having been away for so long.

And the other Austrians, those who actually want to do something with their lives outside of this parochial world, leave and rarely come back (exception: Frank Stronach, the man behind Magna, who is one of the world's largest automotive parts makers, who came back to Austria in triumph to almost single-handedly build the Austrian automobile industry), and almost always never, ever regret getting the hell out of Dodge (there's a reason why the best hotels on this planet are almost invariably run by Austrians).

So Eric moves up on the publishing world, gets his books published and has his party friends to cover his back. He ends up, by pandering to that base anti-Americanism that makes him so popular, moving up from mere reporter to running the paper. And there are other changes: Gudrun Harrer comes along, who has a degree in Islam studies from the Uni Wien and loves to go on about how fascinating Iran is and what a terrible idea the Iraq war was, and who personifies for me the dangers of losing objectivity and loving the idea of multi-culti whilst ignoring the problems (she actually thinks that Muslims are well integrated into Austrian society: 'nuff said). Only Hans Rauscher actually thinks before putting words down on paper, and he's largely been marginalized.

But more fundamentally what changed were the comments to the articles. I read them regularly on-line, and more often than not you'd think they're translated from Democratic Underground, or Kos. And that has ruined the paper for me: you can't argue with true believers who are completely and totally incapable of doing basic research.

At that point I stopped subscribing. I still read the online version each and evey day, since it has to do with my job, but I stopped paying them money to read their clueless opinions.

And if you take a close look at what C-K is actually saying, you can see the false pride and conceit: she is claiming the mantle of good, critical journalism for people like herself and Frey, who in reality are neither critical nor even very good. Frey, C-K and the others that have been grown like Dutch tomatoes (i.e. artificially) are the future of Austrian journalism: purporting to be the real thing, but without any nutritional value and lacking any substance, let alone taste.

Sorry to have gone on for so long, but it needed to be said...

[John F. Opie]

PS: Hans Rauscher is the one to read when reading Der Standard: he regularly infuriates the on-line community there by pointing out the obvious.

I'm post something about him on my blog this evening... take a look at:

http://21stcenturyschizoidman.blogspot.com

:-)

John

[pst314]

"Some of us here have begun to notice problems with Border's bookstores"

In 2004 Borders Union employees were not only "losing" conservative books, they were also "accidentally" damaging them. And they were boasting of it on their Union website. I think those postings got pulled when their antics were reported on Little Green Footballs and in the Wall Street Journal's "Best of the Web" in September 2004.

No surprise that they're still at it. But as you note, management does not like such behavior and will not be kind to such employees.

[Helian]

@John F. Opie

Thanks for the very interesting comment. Seems like the evolution of Der Standard has mimicked that of many larger publications in Germany. Ideals have nothing to do with that evolution. The editors simply discovered that anti-Americanism sells. The fact that C-K didn't put any original thought into her article is obvious if you read the original article by Massing. On the other hand, her choice of which "study" to parrot shows she is very well aware of her editor's agenda when it comes to America.

[joe]

@John F. Opie,

Is this one of the newspapers which get a government subsidy?

I know there are many which do.

[Pamela]

John Opie
>>Sorry to have gone on for so long, but it needed to be said...

You, Sir, may go on as long as you like. That is fasciniathing stuff. Your blog is bookmarked.

Note to David and Ray: HIre him - or something.

[grlzjustwant2havefun]

Joe, I can get CNNI on DISH.

I just don't watch it.

[grlzjustwant2havefun]

If you guys really want to be radical, start listening to US talk radio over the net.

wlsam.com, you can hear Rush from 11-2 CST.

I don't know if 560 (WIND, I think) can broadcast over the net, but Michael Medved has such thought-provoking guests, love his show. Google him and you'll probably be able to link via 1 of the radio stations.

There's also the Hugh Hewitt show, Dennis Prager, and loads of others if you want to be subversive.

[Doug]

Laura Ingles, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, G. Gordon Liddy and Neal Boortz to name a few more. Some of them want you to pay a subscription, some let you listen free but only live when they air, and a few might still loop the show around the clock (several used to, but this seems to be falling out of favor). Check their web sites.

[James W.]

If you guys really want to be radical, start listening to US talk radio over the net.

I've been radical for a few years now. :-)

WABC out of NY has an excellent talk radio line-up starting at 6pm CET...Rush, Sean, Mark Levin, Drudge, Laura Ingraham, and others. You can listen through the entire night if you can't get enough.

850 KOA out of Colorado runs Rush 2 hours later for those who get home from work a little later.

[EABinGA]

While we are all plugging our favorite talk radio hosts, allow me to plug my favorite little known conservative network.

http://rightalk.com

They offer very in depth original programming on five channels, offer about two dozen shows. There probably is something for everybody there. Shows are also offered as downloadable podcasts. Enjoy!

[FranzisM]

@Helian - "just out of idle curiosity, what's the penalty for lese-majeste in Austria these days?"

You have to read the effusions of Mrs. Coudenhove-Kalergi...

[playertwo]

great stuff john!! isnt that what blogs are all about?!!!

newspapers are now nothing but ads and commies. theyre for old boomers to have a feel for yesterday like rotary phones and black and white tv..

the left is slowly turning into a desert island in the middle of a sea of conservatives. ooooh well!!;)

typical european extortion politics. they leave yo with two choices; live under the boot or kill innocents with collateral damage they can blame on you. all the while feathering their nests with euros.

whores.

we are in the model "a" era of the computer after the model "t" era has passed. they know its over, soon they will all get their "lifetime achievement" awards and be put out in the pasture. as very new innovation from america hits their little orts they will be more mortified and contorted. soo what!!

i'd rather hear what a capitalist from syria india mozambique has to say than any effing eurosnob.

jurassic park was based on a european mountain range right? great job you all. inspiring!!

[Cousin Dave]

@Niko: The really sad thing is, apparently the influence of post-modern journalism (or maybe I should call it "post-logic" journalism) is so pervasive that it succeeds in corrupting even people in technical publications who, because of the fields they are connected to, ought to know better. I was a member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) for over a decade. But I dropped my membership in 1998 in protest over the moonbattization of their flagship magazine, Spectrum. Once upon a time, Spectrum was a great roundup of everthing that was happening in electronics and computers. But right after Clinton won his first term, they changed their tone: they started lecturing their audience about "social responsibilities" and the supposed evil technologies that IEEE members were creating. Then, a few years later, they fell head-over-heels in love with electric cars, and started working up articles attempting to shame every engineer who didn't buy a GM EV1.

And the same sort of thing has happened to Scientific American. Once it was a fine magazine covering current science in a way that was not too academic, but still rigorously fact-based. But the moment Martin Gardner left, the whole thing went to hell. Now the rag is one of the leading global-warming and "suburban sprawl" alarmists. I don't know what it is about recieving a writing assignment for a magazine that turns even good technical people into apologists for Marx, but inevitabily it does.

[George M]

There are two amazingly positive news items this week.

First, Fox did their anual poll to find out "Who the most admired man in America" was. George Bush is #1. Bill Clinton is #2.

They did a separate poll for "most admired women." The order, 1 through 3, was Hillary Clinton, Operah, and Condi Rice.

The Second great news, (cause for Americans to gloat), the U.S. unemployment rate went down past 5% to 4.9%.

I checked Die Welt, Stern, Spon and Focus for any references to these two great stories. The crickets are chirping!

[John F. Opie]

Hi -

Sorry, got delayed.

I've got a brief comment now up at

http://21stcenturyschizoidman.blogspot.com/2006/01/small-detour-in-austria.html

on Rauscher with a couple of small links.

Thanks everyone for their kind comments to my comment... :-)

Happy belated new Year, everyone!

And no: Der Standard doesn't get a government subsidy, it's one of the very, very few that don't.

And Cousin Dave: I, too, used to be a member of IEEE, but dropped it because my job changed. I didn't like the preaching, though...