I read National Review On-Line every day for the same reason I read the NYTimes or the WaPo. It’s not that I share the outlook, it’s that I like to know what they are planning to do to me. Plus, there’s some entertainment value. This is a good example. The piece itself is the same swill they slop the warmongering hogs with on every other foreign policy issue. The war party has worn out their welcome with me. That’s not the important bit. What I find hilarious is the author of the piece.
National Review works closely with Fox News and Sky News. You see the same people turning up on all three places. The Weekly Standard also shares resources with these three, but not as much as National Review. Tom Rogan is the new toy on Fox and NRO prattling on about foreign policy issues. Fox loves using guys with British accents to play the role of foreign policy expert. Roger Ailes must be a James Bond fan. Unfamiliar with Rogan, I looked him up and found his LinkedIn profile:
Contributor
The American Spectator
January 2014 – Present (1 year 2 months)Contributor
Guardian News & Media
January 2012 – Present (3 years 2 months)http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/tom-roganhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/tom-roganMedia Contributor
Various
January 2012 – Present (3 years 2 months)London, United KingdomProviding commentary to various media outlets – including Al Jazeera America, BBC News, BBC World News, Sky News, Radio. http://www.tomroganthinks.com/2013/11/selected-writings-on-middle-east-and.htmlContributor
The Week
December 2012 – December 2013 (1 year 1 month)http://theweek.com/editor/articles/tom-roganhttp://theweek.com/editor/articles/tom-roganPlayer Escort Deputy Manager – Wimbledon Championships
G4S Security Services
June 2005 – July 2012 (7 years 2 months)Part time-In 2005, 2006 and 2007 I worked as a Player Escort attached to the primary escort team. In 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2012 I was the Deputy Manager of the Player Escort Division and Lead Escort Officer for Centre Court and Court 1.
Student Ambassador
Aspire South East London
October 2006 – December 2008 (2 years 3 months)Working part-time as a college student mentor to inner city students from years 11 – 13. Guidance on University, Career prospects, Assisting on Projects.Intern/Advisor
Humfrey Malins MP CBE
February 2005 – May 2005 (4 months)UNPAID – Producing speech writing, campaign material, research, constituent demands, scheduling, press in the Office of Humfrey Malins MP*.Intern
2004 US Presidential Campaign
July 2004 – October 2004 (4 months)UNPAID – Intern – US Presidential Campaign (July – October 2004)
The red part is what caught my attention. I was expecting, given his age, to see a bunch of college stuff. For paid work, I expected a stint at some ministry or possibly the UN. In other words I figured he was a hack in some foreign policy shop who decided to try his hand at TV. Maybe he married someone in the TV business or something, but he had something on his resume to qualify him to call foreign policy his specialty. Instead, he was essentially a mall cop.
This is why a guy like Brian Williams goes so long telling whoppers. In world where everyone is pretending to be something they are not, a world where low IQ blockheads with the right look are paraded on TV as experts, why not tell whoppers? It’s just a big show anyway. As long as a guy like Rogan does not start talking about how Blofeld is behind the Ukraine crisis, why not let the mall cop be the foreign policy guy?
Pingback: Evolution Versus Mass Media at The Z Blog
Sorry, Duck: I am not sure Hitchens (Christopher, i presume, not Peter) was ‘mediocre’ at all. If you search the internet for the youtube video of him explaining how islam was created and altered and generally pissed about with for the advantage of certain groups then I think you might not think he was quite so average. He could, and did, hold his own in arguments and wasn’t scared to face people.
Also… I have a view of Putin that hinges more on him doing what he thinks best for his country and not for the pleasure of ‘the west.’ That may irritate the EUSSR and the USASSR but in that light you can see why he does what he does.
Americans have been anti-Russian for a very long time. There’s no easy or obvious answer. Some say it is the Jew thing, but I don’t quite buy it. American communist movements were stocked with Eastern Ashkenazi Jews in the first half of the 20th century. German Jews were not exactly a bunch of libertarians so it is hard to fathom that split being the genesis of a general anti-Russian attitude in America. I suspect the driver here is unfamiliarity. Not a lot of Russian immigrated to the US in the great European wave of immigrants. Germans, Poles, French, Italians, etc fought as Americans in the great wars. Russians were on the other side.
I don’t think it is possible to under estimate how the Cold War warped American elites. The Social Gospel Movement flowed into anti-Communism as well as anti-Imperialism, anti-Colonialism and a whole bunch of domestic causes. You cannot be a respectable member of the ruling elite without having a cause. In foreign policy, that means always having an enemy. The fight with whom is defining. The Russians have been the perfect foil for close to 100 years now.
Thats why I like the internet. I can read my own news.
I see you why you don’t think much of his qualifications, since he doesn’t have any, but I’m not sure why you call the article “swill”.
He recommends honesty as a general policy instead of deceit, I think that’s probably wise.
On the other hand, he does seem to be suggesting that we get all confrontational over Ukraine, and I don’t see that we have any critical national security interest there. Is that the problem?
I have no issue with him working as a reporter. I’d put him on the local police blotter for a while before having him handle international relations, but that’s because I’m an old man and I prize experience. Having him pretend to be an expert is simply dishonest and it makes it impossible for me to take him seriously in any capacity.
My view on Ukraine is we have some obligation to fix it up, after having broken it. Team Obama let the State Department run wild and Ukraine is one result. That said, I reject the whole Putin as Hitler narrative. Ukraine is our mess. Putin is more a reactionary than an aggressor. The way to manage him is stop poking him. Since the bunglers in the White House and State Department are locked into this weird 1938 mindset, the world is safer if the Germans and French take over the Ukraine problem.
Remember Hitchens? Any mediocre British “Intellectual” can hit big in America by his accent alone.
National Review was created to promote Kosher Konservatism according to one of the founding members.
I used to know a guy, many years ago, who was a news anchor in a top 15 media market- he used to come to our parties; we invited him, not because he was a local celeb, (well, kinda because he was a local celeb) but because he was funny. He was also very good looking, and the sweet young things that gathered around him were all googly eyed at the prospect of the great “Mr. Anchorman” taking the time to talk to them. I remember one sweet young thing remarking “My, it must be interesting to be a journalist!” Mr. Anchorman cocked a wry smile and said ” Yes, I’m sure it must be. You should go ask one- I just read the news.” Not many of him around today!
I think the Brits have it right by calling them “news presenters” and “news readers.” I like the phrase “TV presenter” as well. It drains all the enchantment from the job. In America, we have allowed news reporting to turn into a religious calling with magical qualities. As a result I don’t think the typical American appreciates the dimness of most of these folks.