|
Paul Waldman@paulwaldman.bsky.social |
A proposal: What if we just don’t interview campaign flaks at all? Do they ever add anything useful, or interesting, or informative? Of course not. So why do news outlets keep talking to them?
paulwaldman.substack.com/p/what-if-we...
5 replies 9 reposts 46 likes
|
Matthew Budman, book guy
@matthewbudman.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Thanks for this, Paul. Would love to see campaign flacks—or their auditioning-for-a-job relatives, "party strategists"—never quoted again either in print or on TV. But partly that's because I'm forever irritated at how juiceless & convoluted articles' Democratic response quotes inevitably are.
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
JeannetteBlue
@jeannetteblue.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Thank you! And never a “That topic is outside my area of expertise”. A flack will answer a question about space technology or AI as fast as one about political polling.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Alex (he/him) 🇺🇦
@tsrhg.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Political flaks are one of the reasons I don't miss cable news because I can't stand listening to them.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
@bjkeefe.bsky.social
[ View ] |
My apologies for answering a rhetorical question, like a nerd, but to your last question: Because it fills time in the 24/7 hole, at about the lowest cost possible, while still keeping up a facade of WE ARE SRS NEWS PROGRAM. There are many reasons why my TV was banished, years ago. This is one.
1 replies 0 reposts 4 likes
|
Are You Being Detained
@sailbarque.bsky.social
[ View ] |
A proposal: We also get rid of cable "news" show hosts as well. They add hardly any information more useful than the flacks anyway.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes