What Are They For?
I’m sure most readers know why I
highlight the absurdity that is Joe Klein on a regular basis, but maybe
I should explain. The institution of Elite Punditry is premised on the
notion that there are smart people with good judgment who have the
unique ability to distill the complexity of the world, and nuance which
is potentially not present in straight news stories, into an
understandable narrative. Their role isn’t simply to opine, but to
provide guidance and analysis – tempered by that supposed good judgment
– for people who presumably have less time than they do to sort through
the all of the news of the day. And, at times, especially when they go
on the teevee on roundtable or other situations when there are a
variety of viewpoints being expressed, they are there to represent, if
not parrot, an ideological position. So, when Shields and Brooks go on
the Newshour every Friday their role is, in part, to represent the
liberal and conservative viewpoints at least in broad terms.
Klein
has failed on all of these counts. On Iraq, he failed to have, or at
least express, good judgment. On the teevee where he plays “the
liberal,” he not only didn’t take the anti-war position, he actually
took the pro-war position.
Even worse than that, he wants to
absolve himself of any responsibility, undermining the entire premise
of Elite Punditry – That Words Mean Things and They Matter. If Joe
Klein thinks there should be no accountability for the positions held
by Elite Pundits, that their influence is unimportant and irrelevant,
then it isn’t clear what exactly they’re for. His judgment sucks and
that doesn’t matter, Klein seems to think. He had a chance to take a
stand when it mattered, and he didn’t, and that doesn’t matter, Klein
seems to think.
Fine. So why the hell should anyone listen to him?
::Tullycast:: 