The Wall Street Journal Generates Faux Controversy on Zero Dark Thirty

A new low for the Wall Street Journal happened today, which will no doubt inject the neocons with yet more mouth-frothing fury against anything that might point to, gasp, Obama’s successes. So you’re going to see a lot of articles like this. The Wall Street Journal is continually being called out by Media Matters for having undisclosed Romney advisors writing op-eds for their site. But it’s probably a new low to have them actually use some dumbass comment as legitimate news – I guess the beast must be fed.

The badly written article, Could ‘Zero Dark Thirty’ Boost Obama’s Campaign?” doesn’t even do the research on what Kathryn Bigelow and Marc Boal have said about the film. Any good reporter would have done this. A simple google search is all he needed to do. And yet – it’s 2012. Who cares about the truth.

Christopher Farley writes:

On the movie website Comingsoon.net, one user posted “Propaganda film…nothing more.” Bill Weir, an ABC Nightline anchor, tweeted that the trailer was “the best campaign ad Obama 2012 didn’t have to pay for.” Several conservative commentators have also complained that the movie–even thought it’s still unreleased–could boost Obama’s image.

Director Bigelow is one of the most critically-acclaimed directors in Hollywood, and became the first woman to win the Oscar for best director for her 2008 movie “The Hurt Locker.”

So let’s see. Sourced by an anonymous comment on a website and a tweet by a news anchor. Where’s the beef? You expect a story like that on a website like this. But not on the Wall Street Journal. Sure, it’s just a blog entry on the Wall Street Journal but to me it matters.  A headline is a headline and soon to become another blowhard lecture by Rush Limbaugh.

It’s a shame that the media is so timid when it comes to accommodating a shrill and hysterical political party of whiners. They whine and everyone has to offer them a new piece of candy to shut them up.