Showing posts with label Media Morans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Media Morans. Show all posts

11.14.2018

Hillary Demanded, Hillary Supplied

Of course they demanded one. As for the previous version, GOP Central Casting has worked for years on supplying her.Broadcast "journalists": the blankest slates in America. How could they possibly be expected to remember that it's merely every fucking election that Republicans across this great and exceptional land run against Nancy Pelosi...

11.03.2018

Fox Viewer-in-Chief

9.24.2018

Today in Media Strategy

7.29.2018

Today In Palace Stenography


But isn't it simply the case that it was time to do this again?
Updated...

6.12.2018

Speaking Truth To Money

"New York Times bad takes"? An institution now gets its own richly deserved production number.

4.10.2018

Short-sighted Meet Weak-minded

The leading questions are part of an instinct to gin up drama. And, in response to the Trump creature, they undertake this effort to shape his babbling into a narrative that fits how a president is believed to behave.

The questions serve as lifelines; the worst offenders toss them to Trump, as he flails in his special blend of grandiosity and incoherence. And they are not well-intended lifelines, but assists intended to make him talk tough. Like their subject, these journos betray a public trust.

4.08.2018

Back To The Old Pivot

In other words, in the eyes of pundits, ready to again be presidential.

8.27.2017

Is Our Medias Learning?

Our NYT? Sadly, never...



5.27.2017

Today In Enablers

Bloomberg...
Easily refuted by a non-Villager...

ABC...
Not ABC...
Furthermore, JFK was already president; RFK had government experience; the backchannel served nuclear disarmament efforts. To build trust, both sides had agreed to speak away from the interference of hawks in their respective countries. Now being used to justify secret self-dealing expected from Kushner-TrumpCo.
Washington Post...
Simple reporting? It advances a concocted story line, when in fact—

4.10.2017

Today In Historical Press Agentry

On the other hand...

3.20.2017

Eyes Off The Ball

Meanwhile, in the Senate a matter of some import quietly went by ...

... Requisite charm offensive launched. It may be convincing only in showing Gorsuch has been rehearsed by his handlers, yet it's sure to satisfy the media.

Narrative Accomplished


Begun over three months before the election; could take at least another four years?

Backup is in place...

3.05.2017

Kindred Soulless

Paul Blumenthal and JM Rieger, in HuffPo today: This Stunningly Racist French Novel Is How Steve Bannon Explains The World
Bannon has agitated for a host of anti-immigrant measures. In his previous role as executive chairman of the right-wing news site Breitbart — which he called a "platform for the alt-right," the online movement of white nationalists — he made anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim news a focus.

But the top Trump aide's repeated references to The Camp of the Saints, an obscure 1973 novel by French author Jean Raspail, reveal even more about how he understands the world. The book is a cult favorite on the far right, yet it’s never found a wider audience. There's a good reason for that: It's breathtakingly racist.

"[This book is] racist in the literal sense of the term. It uses race as the main characterization of characters," said Cécile Alduy, professor of French at Stanford University and an expert on the contemporary French far right. "It describes the takeover of Europe by waves of immigrants that wash ashore like the plague."

The book, she said, "reframes everything as the fight to death between races."
Um, somehow it seems familiar, this "fight to the death" against "plague" caused by foreign defilers ("The plot... follows a poor Indian demagogue, named 'the turd-eater' because he literally eats shit..."). True to previous models, the "invaders" are more fertile than the endangered species that is white Europe. Moreover, they are (natch) sexual deviants, engaging in orgies which the author seems rather impelled to dwell upon. These perverted foreigners
... lead an "armada" of 800,000 impoverished Indians sailing to France. Dithering European politicians, bureaucrats and religious leaders, including a liberal pope from Latin America, debate whether to let the ships land and accept the Indians or to do the right thing — in the book’s vision — by recognizing the threat the migrants pose and killing them all.
IOW: turncoat liberals will be the death of white culture.
The Camp of the Saints — which draws its title from Revelation 20:9 — is nothing less than a call to arms for the white Christian West, to revive the spirit of the Crusades and steel itself for bloody conflict against the poor black and brown world without and the traitors within. The novel's last line links past humiliations tightly to its own grim parable about modern migration. "The Fall of Constantinople," Raspail's unnamed narrator says, "is a personal misfortune that happened to all of us only last week."
Tellingly, the HuffPo piece notes the book's lack of any real audience, when first published in the early '70s (a US translation appeared in 1975). But then—
The book received a second life in 1983 when Cordelia Scaife May, heiress to the Mellon fortune and sister to right-wing benefactor Richard Mellon Scaife, funded its republication and distribution. This time it gained a cult following among immigration opponents.
The authors add valuable background about May's endowing this propaganda, in particular, through her funding of John Tanton. "The godfather of the anti-immigration movement in the U.S.," Tanton started under the guise of environmentalism. His work and May's money laid the foundation for what expanded to become today's anti-immigration infrastructure.

A period connection the article doesn't make: by 1978 this kindred oeuvre had first appeared.

At the time, it was another book that few people would have heard of—until April 19, 1995. Some of us remember the immediate aftermath—when national media ran with the unfounded assumption, "Muslim terror attack strikes Heartland!" Even if learning about fringe groups was harder in those pre-Internet days, it was blindingly obvious that plenty of government hating white men dwelt in The Heartland.

Since then, what once seemed a lunatic fringe has done nothing but re-brand, and extend its influence. That it's now represented at the highest level of government will not end well.

3.01.2017

Wheel Of Fortune

One day, Enemies of The People. Next day, fans.

Sure, Trump's speech wasn't ad lib gibberish about his vote totals and inauguration attendance—he fucking read from a teleprompter. And what he read was dystopic immigrant-scapegoating.

He reads calmly, from teleprompter...


The usual applies.


Mere hours earlier, he had publicly trashed military brass, blaming them for the disaster he had authorized—to show Obama just who "knows more than the generals". With pundits like these, it works.

Grieving widow as the perfect prop.

Yes,

In other words,

Theater criticism of a performance perfectly calibrated to this crowd's tastes. That, and relief that things are now "normal"... Since it won't affect them, content of the speech is of no importance.

VOICE... For when it might not play, leaving the concept in the original German.



1.12.2017

Reviews Are In

Had PEEOTUS jokes not forced him to show up yesterday, for the previously scheduled "press conference," Boss Tweet would have canceled this one, too.

No cancellation? No problem; stage managing the event was easy enough. Safe space secured, supplicant journos went to Trump Tower. The place was packed with The Help, who'd been assembled to cheer the boss. Transparent props were also on hand—though strictly hands-off, to journalists.
"Not only are they blank, but if this were my set I would fire the propmaster for lack of realism. They are that fake."
In what seems to have been another unpresidented first, the "press conference" was preceded by warmup speeches from supporting cast members.

The Star's subsequent ramblings (three paragraphs' worth, in the NYT transcript) were full of extraordinary tells ("...I have a no-conflict situation because I'm president, which is — I didn't know about that until about three months ago, but it's a nice thing to have. But I don't want to take advantage of something. I have something that others don't have, Vice President Pence also has it....")

Then Trump interrupted his own riffing on I can run my company plus the country with my hands tied-but I don't want to do that- my sons will run my company and they won't discuss anything with  me... he interrupted himself (or was it an attempt at questioning?) to introduce someone he pays to make this "credible." A previously unseen lawyer (not the lawyer who's never been in Prague). This particular mouthpiece soon was found to be a partner in an award-winning firm...
To that, Adam Khan adds, "Sherri Dillon of Trump's law firm Morgan Lewis forgot to mention Trump + her firm were hit with $1B fraud lawsuit by Holocaust survivors."

Alexey Kovalev's review is in—
A message to my doomed colleagues in the American media

Congratulations, US media! You’ve just covered your first press conference of an authoritarian leader with a massive ego and a deep disdain for your trade and everything you hold dear. We in Russia have been doing it for 12 years now — with a short hiatus when our leader wasn't technically our leader — so quite a few things during Donald Trump's press conference rang my bells....

Vladimir Putin's annual pressers are supposed to be the media event of the year. They are normally held in late December, around Western Christmas time... Which probably explains why Putin's pressers don't get much coverage outside of Russia, except in a relatively narrow niche of Russia-watchers. Putin's pressers are televised live across all Russian TV channels, attended by all kinds of media — federal news agencies, small local publications and foreign reporters based in Moscow — and are supposed to overshadow every other event in Russia or abroad.

These things are carefully choreographed, typically last no less than four hours, and Putin always comes off as an omniscient and benevolent leader tending to a flock of unruly but adoring children. Given that Putin is probably a role model for Trump, it's no surprise that he's apparently taking a page from Putin’s playbook. I have some observations to share with my American colleagues. You're in this for at least another four years, and you'll be dealing with things Russian journalists have endured for almost two decades now. I'm talking about Putin here, but see if you can apply any of the below to your own leader.

Welcome to the era of bullshit.

Facts don't matter. You can't hurt this man with facts or reason. He'll always outmaneuver you. He'll always wriggle out of whatever carefully crafted verbal trap you lay for him. Whatever he says, you won't be able to challenge him. He always comes with a bag of meaningless factoids (Putin likes to drown questions he doesn't like in dull, unverifiable stats, figures and percentages), platitudes, false moral equivalences and straight, undiluted bullshit. He knows it's a one-way communication, not an interview. You can't follow up on your questions or challenge him. So he can throw whatever he wants at you in response, and you'll just have to swallow it. Some journalists will try to preempt this by asking two questions at once, against the protests of their colleagues also vying for attention, but that also won't work: he'll answer the one he thinks is easier, and ignore the other. Others will use this opportunity to go on a long, rambling statement vaguely disguised as a question, but that's also bad tactics. Non-questions invite non-answers. He'll mock you for your nervous stuttering and if you're raising a serious issue, respond with a vague, non-committal statement ("Mr President, what about these horrible human rights abuses in our country?" "Thank you, Miss. This is indeed a very serious issue. Everybody must respect the law. And by the way, don't human rights abuses happen in other countries as well? Next question please").

But your colleagues are there to help you, right? After all, you're all in this together?

Wrong.

Don't expect any camaraderie.

These people are not your partners or brothers in arms. They are your rivals in a fiercely competitive, crashing market and right now the only currency in this market is whatever that man on the stage says. Whoever is lucky to ask a question and be the first to transmit the answer to the outside world wins. Don't expect any solidarity or support from them. If your question is stonewalled/mocked down/ignored, don't expect a rival publication to pick up the banner and follow up on your behalf. It's in this man's best interests to pit you against each other, fighting over artificial scarcities like room space, mic time or, of course, his attention....
...

Also, some people in the room aren't really there to ask questions.

Expect a lot of sycophancy and soft balls from your "colleagues"...
...

This man owns you. He understands perfectly well that he is the news. You can't ignore him. You're always playing by his rules — which he can change at any time without any notice. You can't — in Putin's case — campaign to vote him out of office. Your readership is dwindling because ad budgets are shrinking — while his ratings are soaring, and if you want to keep your publication afloat, you'll have to report on everything that man says as soon as he says it, without any analysis or fact-checking, because 1) his fans will not care if he lies to their faces; 2) while you're busy picking his lies apart, he'll spit out another mountain of bullshit and you'll be buried under it.

12.13.2016

Pay No Attention To...

Kurt Eichenwald story: How Donald Trump's Business Ties Are Already Jeopardizing U.S. Interests
.

But, in more important news: Trump meets with incoherent rich guy who is black.

And genius—for reasons not understood by punier intellects—compares him to JFK.

12.12.2016

Mainstreaming The Rewrite

LA Times forced to apologize, after readers objections followed a Travel section article on former internment camp National Parks (Tule Lake and Manzanar). This because the paper published wingnut troll complaints about the Parks' "anti-U.S. remake of history." Complete with the usual tropes about "loyalty to Japan," and families living high-hog off the government, while GIs fought for their freedom.

Who knows if publication was OK'd by an ignoramus, or if it was because we need to understand the minds of the poor downtrodden Trump voters. The less than vigorous apology—
Davan Maharaj, editor-in-chief and publisher of The Times, said the letters did not meet the newspaper's standards for "civil, fact-based discourse" and should not have been published.

12.08.2016

Extra Helpings Of Delusion; Hold The Mental Health Care

Three days ago: Florida woman who believes Sandy Hook was a hoax, arrested for threatening the father of a child killed in the 2012 school massacre.

Yesterday, the NYT devoted quite a bit of real estate to letting another threat speak.

Below, I've had to add emphasis—the original is oh-so-genteel, the kid-gloves so soft and soothing as they stroke the interviewee, Edgar Maddison Welch—
...arrested Sunday after firing a gun inside a pizza restaurant in Washington as he investigated false claims in online articles that the pizzeria was at the center of a child sex slave ring, the police said. No one was injured by the gunfire, and Mr. Welch surrendered peacefully. The pizzeria, Comet Ping Pong, had been swept into a conspiracy theory...
The rest is equally awful; arranged under headings, which are italicized below
What was his original plan?
Mr. Welch, the father of two daughters, said he woke up Sunday morning and told his family he had some things to do. He left "Smallsbury," a nickname for his hometown, for the 350-mile drive to Washington with the intention of giving the restaurant a "closer look" and then returning home. He wanted to "shine some light on it." As he made his way to Washington, he felt his "heart breaking over the thought of innocent people suffering." Once he got to the pizzeria, there was an abrupt change of plans. Mr. Welch would not say why he took a military-style assault rifle inside the restaurant and fired it. According to court documents, Mr. Welch said he had come armed to help rescue the children.

What did he think when he discovered there were no children at the pizzeria?
"The intel on this wasn't 100 percent," he said. However, he refused to dismiss outright the claims in the online articles, conceding only that there were no children "inside that dwelling." He also said that child slavery was a worldwide phenomenon.
...

What was he like?
Mr. Welch was soft-spoken and polite, and said he liked the outdoors....
No commenting open, as the Times offered this apology for its previous elitist failure to understand such fine, upstanding Real Americans.

11.15.2016

Sticking To A Media Diet

More than ever, it's a cinch to avoid consuming anything from the usual suspects. What I do take in comes via those bloggers with strong stomachs, and with the talent for evisceration that the major outlets offerings deserve.

Shakezula, for instance; all her stuff is must-read, in full.

This, on Nick Kristof's post-election column—
Abusers are horrible people, but their enablers are almost as bad, and with the I like to watch vibe thrown in as a nightmare bonus.

And on that topic, here's the NYT's human rights, women's rights, health, global affairs concern troll to explain why we'll feel so much better if we give our lunch money to the class bully.
Yet, like it or not, we Americans have a new president-elect, and it's time to buck up. I've seen past elections that were regarded as the end of the world — including, in many Democratic circles, the Reagan triumph of 1980 — and the republic survived. This time as well, our institutions are stronger than any one man. We are not Weimar Germany.
We are not Weimar is an awesome rallying cry. If you're a moron. And it is not a comfort to be reminded various concepts survived Reagan. Unlike the NYT's human rights columnist, I'd don't think that makes up for the many living, breathing human beings who didn't survive Reagan, in part because Smilin' Ron was one of the many malicious homophobes who convinced themselves that there could be such a thing as a virus that only killed gay men.

As an aside – when talking about actual human beings, the verb survive is a very chilly one. Thanks in part to people like Trump, we know human beings can survive – that is still have vital functions – all sorts of horrible things. Torturers rely on the durability of the human body. In America, people have developed bizarre, psuedo-evolutionary theories about the mental and physical durability of African-Americans that combines with a number of other biases to lower the quality of health care they receive, even when they can afford it. That people will survive should be so basic an assumption that it doesn't warrant mentioning. When it does warrant mentioning, it should be a cause for alarm.

Or to put it in terms Mr. Attitude of Platitude might understand, at least explain why the standard dropped from Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness to You'll live.
Here, she's only getting warmed up in delivering the "Buck you, Nick Kristof" the column deserves.

This. If it is still publishing David Farenthold, the WaPo is nevertheless poised for its most natural role: shamelessly floating along in the whirl of a pussy-grabbing new Gilded Age.

11.10.2016

They-a Culpa

Mea culpa is indeed appropriate, but not the kind instinctive for the NYT. That is, "How did we get this so wrong?" hand-wringing, along lines of, Perhaps we really are a liberal, elitist media who were uncomprehending of The Heartland.

It could so easily be dispensed with—if the editors bothered to look at their own goddamn reporting, of four months ago.