Newsbusters reports on “Stealth Fanboy Journalism”
By
I just love Newsbusters. When Newsbusters reports on Colbert, it makes my whole day. They’re so wacky! They reported on the AP article about Colbert today, and of course slammed the Liberal Left-Wing Media for reporting on Colbert’s antics as opposed to the “real” authors. Here’s what they had to say:
AP Ignored NYT Bestselling Author, Focused on Host Stephen Colbert at BookExpo America
Posted by Lynn Davidson on June 4, 2007 – 22:45.Someone at the AP must really like Stephen Colbert. A bait-and-switch June 3 article was supposedly about a new book by Afghanistan-born author Khaled Hosseini, but gave readers stealth fanboy journalism that wrote a play by play of Colbert’s shtick without discussing the book. From the reporting, the BookExpo America breakfast was more like a segment of the “Colbert Report” than a national book fair discussion. Instead of any information about the book, it was line after line of Colbert coverage, "That Stephen Colbert sure is funny, and he sure has some funny ideas about books. Just ask "The Kite Runner" author Khaled Hosseini."
It wasn’t a profile of Colbert’s comedy, and it didn’t have any details about the reason Hosseini was at the BookExpo in the first place—to promote his latest book, “A Thousand Splendid Suns.”
The article ignored the content of the book, which graphically illustrates the brutality of the Taliban, as does "The Kite Runner." The new book spotlights the horrors that girls and women experienced under the Taliban. Writing about the violence and oppression of the Taliban or even the Al Qaeda torture manuals would question the media meme that the War on Terror is largely made up, so instead the AP focused on comedy.
…
From the article, it sounded as if Hosseini was not happy with his treatment, but the AP did not explain that point and left the reader wondering if he was playing along:
…
That last line seemed to be the AP writer remembering what the assignment was and trying to justify the rest of the article. If this had been a piece on Colbert’s humor, it would be fine, but this article looked as if it was supposed to highlight a respected author who was showcasing his new book at an important book fair and instead ended up with poorly disguised tribute to a TV comedian. If it was a highlight of Colbert, then why report from the BookExpo and set it up to appear as if it concerned literature?
They say “poorly disguised tribute to a TV comedian” as if it’s a bad thing.
Related posts
6 Comments
June 5th, 2007 at 8:10 am
Geez, how many ways can I say “completely off-base”?
It’s certainly true that the article didn’t cover the substance of the panel — but trying to turn that into a left/right thing is just ridiculous. If the article failed to cover Hosseini in sufficient detail to satisfy NewsBusters, it also completely ignored the other panelists, Lisa See and Ken Burns (whom NB presumably opposes since he’s from the “Politburo Broadcasting System,” as an in-character Stephen put it), but you don’t see them even mention that. The real fact is, the article was just a bit of fluff in general.
Rage on against inappropriate targets, NewsBusters. You’re the online equivalent of Stephen’s character.
Reply
June 5th, 2007 at 8:24 am
Actually, as an author myself, I was a bit sorry that most of the attention went to two tv personalities (counting the pbs guy), but as a Colbert fan, I didn’t mind.
Reply
June 5th, 2007 at 11:04 am
Oh Boo Hoo newbusters. I’m sure Hosseini enjoyed himself and will appreciate the Colbert “bump” to his book.
Reply
June 5th, 2007 at 11:26 am
From the linked blog: “If this had been a piece on Colbert’s humor, it would be fine, but this article looked as if it was supposed to highlight a respected author who was showcasing his new book at an important book fair and instead ended up with poorly disguised tribute to a TV comedian. If it was a highlight of Colbert, then why report from the BookExpo and set it up to appear as if it concerned literature?”
Okay what am I missing? I see nowhere that it specifies that the article was supposed to be about or in any way “highlight” Hosseini. From where does Ms. Davidson get that idea? Nor does it sound like it was originally intended to be piece on the BEA overall and somehow got sidetracked into “All Stephen All The Time.” It sounds like it was supposed to be, and was, an article on Stephen’s appearance at BEA. I don’t see how it was “set up to appear that it concerned literature” either. The title of the article is Stephen, and the whole thing is Stephen and what happened to Stephen. There’s no disconnect that I can see. If Davidson doesn’t agree with the focus of the article in the first place, fine … but there is no bait-and-switch here. Except maybe the presentation of a blog entry that is supposed to be yet more evidence of the liberal media bias but instead only offers that the author of said blog is a bit clueless.
Reply
June 5th, 2007 at 11:43 am
Another thing: she says “That last line seemed to be the AP writer remembering what the assignment was” – how does she know what the assignment was? Could it maybe have been “Give me 300 words on Stephen Colbert’s appearance at BEA, light tone, suitable for the Lifestyle section.” Is that possible? Or would that not make so … interesting … a blog entry, if it were true?
Reply
June 5th, 2007 at 2:21 pm
FWIW, I was so impressed with Hosseini (and not only because he made Stephen laugh!) that I went out and bought both of his books on Saturday. A friend’s been telling to read The Kite Runner for ages and I just hadn’t gotten to it. The Colbert bump indeed.
Reply