The Irony of Amy Goodman

How's this for irony? I'm currently traveling so I'm consuming news and information somewhat out of order. When I got the opportunity last night, hearing Glen Greenwald analyze the media coverage of the Oslo massacre was high on the priority list. Greenwald was brilliant as usual:

AMY GOODMAN: Finally, the lack of coverage over the weekend in the United States was stunning, from Friday night, Saturday, Sunday, this story where so many young people were killed, massive terror attack, hugest terror attack in Norway in its history. Yet in this country, when you go to the networks, cable networks, known for covering a story for many hours at a time, this one almost fell from all the networks except the occasional headline.

GLENN GREENWALD: Well, that was completely predictable. I mean, on Friday, when the attack actually took place, there was quite substantial and intense interest in what had taken place. Everybody was talking about it. There were complaints that—on Friday, that CNN wasn’t running continuous coverage. But in general, there was a lot of media interest, because at the time people thought, based on what the New York Times and other media outlets had said, based on nothing, that this was the work of an Islamic—a radical Islamic group. And at the time, I wrote, when I wrote about the unfolding story, that if it turns out to be something other than an Islamic group that was responsible, especially if it turns out to be a right-wing nationalist who’s anti-Muslim in his views, that interest in this story was going to evaporate to virtual non-existence.

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/7/26/glenn_greenwald_norway_attacks_expose_us

I generally don't consume corporate sponsored "news," so I have no idea what the coverage has been like in the States (even if I were there, I wouldn't bother with that kind of mindless blather). But a couple of days later, as I got a little more time to catch up on the week's news,  I went to Democracy Now!  and lo and behold, Amy Goodman devoted almost the entire hour to an interview with Rosanne Barr, talking about her life and time in Hollywood. I didn't have TV growing up, so I didn't have much of a frame reference for the conversation (of course, I've heard of the show "Rosanne," but I don't know that I've ever actually seen an entire program.)  I'm glad to hear that Rosanne Barr has progressive politics. That's wonderful. But isn't it just a bit ironic that on Tuesday Amy would critique the corporate news for burying the story because it didn't fit the pre-approved tropes about "Islamic terrorism" and the like when she speny the whole show on Monday doing one of her infamous hagiographies of a "movement celebrity."

Sometimes that show really makes me wonder....

Here's a brilliant critique of Chris Hedges, that takes out Goodman at the same time (Hedges "erudition" is absolutely noxious):

Apocalypse Now?

The Strange Jeremiads of Chris Hedges

By MICHAEL UHL

http://www.counterpunch.org/uhl06102011.html