The search for America's worst campaign journalist has begun.

[dumpster_baby]

A contest to determine America's worst campaign journalist has begun.




>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
By Matt Taibbi


....

It is hard to imagine anything more meaningless, underhanded, vapid, shameless, pointlessly vicious, embarrassing, uninspiring, degrading and even unentertaining than this billion-dollar daily exchange of sneering teenage accusations between the Bush and Kerry camps. And it is hard to imagine anything more galling than the unspoken media subtext of the election—the idea that this slime-fest somehow represents an important moment, a landmark memory, in our own lives. The implication that we're such losers that we would actually want to watch this crap 24 hours a day for 15 or 16 months is almost more appalling than the behavior of the candidates themselves.

Though we're tempted to blame the politicians, it's time to dig deeper. It's time to blame the press corps that daily brings us this unrelenting symphony of horseshit and never comes within 1000 miles of an apology for any of it. And it's time to blame the press not only as a class of people, but as individuals. We must brand anyone who puts his name or his face on credulous campaign coverage an eternal Enemy of the State. Hopefully, over time, this will have a deterrent effect.

To begin this important process of collective healing, we must find that first person to mark with our scorn. That is why New York Press has launched the First Quadrennial Election Hack Invitational—a tournament, to be held between now and the week after the election, which will answer the question: "Who is the worst campaign journalist in America?"

The rules are very simple. We have chosen 32 of the country's leading campaign reporters, mostly from the world of print, and bracketed them into pairs. Each week, the pairs will square off against one another. Whoever writes worse, advances. It's that simple.
...

To determine a winner in each match-up, the contenders' articles will be examined by a three-person panel of drug-addicted judges culled from the editorial ranks of this newspaper. Our decisions are completely subjective and cannot be appealed. In fact, one of our rules is that any appeal from a contestant, whether in private or in public, results in automatic advance through to the next round.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

more here:
http://nypress.com/17/40/news&columns/feature.cfm

[PATRICK]

1. Must read

It's like The Daily Howler on steroids and the merciless cremation of each and every pundit is breathtaking.

The process is more fun than picking the eventual "survivor".

[dumpster_baby]

2. yeah, I will post this in GD forum as well. n/t