BY DAN
KENNEDY
Serving the reality-based community since 2002.
Notes and observations on
the press, politics, culture, technology, and more. To sign up for
e-mail delivery, click
here. To send
an e-mail to Dan Kennedy, click
here.
For bio, published work, and links to other blogs, visit
www.dankennedy.net.
Friday, October 31, 2003
Blame it on Drudge. Just got
back from a field trip to Nashua, New Hampshire, only to find bad
news on Drudge.
-- Liberal comedian turned pathetic
Bush apologist Dennis
Miller is getting a talk
show on CNBC, which shows the idiots at NBC have decided that what's
not working on MSNBC can fail just as miserably on the sister
station.
As soon as Barry
Crimmins, a former writer
for Miller, weighs in on this distressing development, I'll put up a
link.
-- Microsoft wants to swallow
Google, the best damn search engine there is. According to
this
New York Times article,
Google would rather go ahead with its planned IPO, but what Bill
Gates wants, he eventually gets. If he succeeds, the question is, how
will he ruin the experience?
Earlier this year Google acquired
Blogger, the Web-based software that powers Media Log. It's Bill's
world, and we're all just visiting.
Disingenuous bishops. Leave
it to a conservative, independent Catholic to call the bishops'
bluff.
Today's Herald quotes Phil
Lawler, editor of Catholic
World News, on the
bishops' claim that the media got it wrong recently when they
reported that the Church was softening its stance on benefits for gay
and lesbian couples.
The Herald's Eric Convey and
Elisabeth Beardsley write:
Phil Lawler, editor of
Catholic World News, a conservative Web site focusing on church
affairs, and a former editor of The Pilot, defended the secular
media.
"The way it was played in the
media is pretty much the only logical way to play what was out
there," he said.
Asked why church leaders would
challenge that interpretation, Lawler said: "Plausible
deniability."
Here
is the Globe story on the same subject.
Little People, Big
Apple. I'll be talking about Little
People tomorrow from
noon to 1 p.m. on Simply Put, on Bloomberg Radio, which is
heard in New York City on WBBR (AM 1130), on all three satellite
networks, and in streaming audio at Bloomberg.com.
The hosts are two Boston guys --
Democratic political consultant Michael Goldman and MetroWest
Daily News columnist
Tom Moroney.
posted at 2:52 PM |
|
link
Thursday, October 30, 2003
Crony capitalism, continued.
I've heard it said that Halliburton is the only company in the world
with the expertise to rebuild Iraq's shattered oil infrastructure. It
may be true.
But stories like this
front-page exclusive, by
the Boston Globe's Stephen Glain, can't help but raise
questions of crony capitalism. Dick Cheney's former company is doing
very well indeed, and the worse things get, the better they are for
Halliburton's shareholders.
If a Democrat were in the White
House and the independent-counsel law were still on the books, what
do you suppose the headline would be this morning? Certainly not the
deceptively bland head you'll find in the Globe: "Projected
Iraq Oil Costs Up Sharply."
New in this week's
Phoenix. It's time for the Phoenix's annual "Best"
issue, which features -- among other things -- our "Local
Heroes."
Mine is Tom
Birmingham, for being
unafraid to use a parliamentary maneuver to stop a hateful amendment
to the state constitution aimed at lesbians and gay men.
Also, union employees at the
Globe boycott
NECN.
posted at 9:17 AM |
|
link
Wednesday, October 29, 2003
Subtle indeed. I'd like to
think I have a good eye for these things. But last week, I found
myself scratching my head several times while flipping through the
New York Times.
What's different? I asked
myself. Has the headline type changed?
I decided it hadn't.
It had.
On the Media has the
story.
Shameless self-promotion.
I'll be talking about Little
People today from 3:15
to 3:45 p.m. (local time) on Total Health, on KCTE
Radio (AM 1510) in Kansas
City, and -- locally -- tonight on New England Cable News'
NewsNight
sometime between 8 and 9 p.m.
posted at 10:23 AM |
|
link
Islam and terrorism in Boston?
(Part II). The Herald is back with the second
half of its piece on the
Islamic Society of Boston and its alleged ties to Muslims who support
terrorism.
Today's installment draws the
circle a little tighter than yesterday's, reporting that Osama M.
Kandil, who chairs the society's board of trustees, "is allegedly
linked to a network of Muslim companies and charitable groups in
Virginia suspected by federal investigators of providing material
support to Islamic terrorists."
But the report is frustrating,
because it's impossible to know whether Kandil is truly aiding and
abetting terrorists, or if he's been caught up in some unfortunate
second-hand affiliations.
Kandil himself denies all, and
tells the Herald that the mosque and cultural center the
society intends to build in Roxbury will promote "the moderate,
sophisticated view of Islam."
The smartest comment comes in the
sidebar.
US Representative Michael Capuano, whose district includes Roxbury
and who took part in the groundbreaking for the new mosque, says,
"The allegations are pretty serious. I'm going to do my best to learn
more. Having said that, the Islamic Society I know is an active,
responsible group ... I will not indict a whole group because of a
few people."
The Herald has unearthed
some important facts. But we need to know a lot more.
Gammons on Grady. You know
what you want. You want to know what Peter Gammons thinks of Grady
Little's firing, and of what comes next.
Here
you go.
Joe Maddon? Well, the
Globe's Bob
Hohler mentions him today,
too. So does the Herald's Michael
Silverman.
So it's officially a
trend.
posted at 9:04 AM |
|
link
Tuesday, October 28, 2003
The housing market is hot! No,
it's cold! The Wicked
Good Conference has picked
up something I missed completely. The Globe today reports that
home sales last month soared
through the roof; the Herald says they cratered
through the floor.
"Shoddy reporting or what?" asks
Beso at the WGC.
Actually not, at least by my quick
read of the two stories. The problem is that the papers relied on
different experts. The Globe led with Wayne Ayers, chief
economist at FleetBoston Financial Corporation. The Herald
leaned mainly on Karl Case, an economics professor at Wellesley
College.
The Globe also bases its
optimism on a comparison of September's sales figures with those of
September 2002. The Herald's gloomy assessment comes from
comparing September's sales to the August numbers.
The question is, don't economists
agree on which is the more valid comparison? Why are Ayers and Case
so far apart in their assessments? And whom is the reader to
trust?
The Herald provides a clue
at the bottom of its report, noting the improvement over September
2002 and quoting Massachusetts Association of Realtors president
Peter Casey as saying, "It's a very, very positive market for both
buyers and sellers."
That leads me to suspect that the
optimistic view is the more valid.
posted at 4:15 PM |
|
link
The business of baseball is
business. The Globe's Steve Bailey or the Herald's
Cosmo Macero should have been put on the case. Because the day-after
reaction to Grady Little's firing is supremely unsatisfying. The
Herald's Steve
Buckley (sub. req.) and, no
kidding, Gerry
Callahan (ditto) have the
smartest takes this morning. But what this story really needs is
someone who understands business.
Looking at this from afar, it
appears that what's really happened is that the Red Sox' newish
owners intend to run the franchise as a business, not as some old
boys' club dedicated to their own post-adolescent amusement. In the
business world, executives have to manage both down (i.e.,
handling employees, in this case players) and up (working with the
senior executives in carrying out the business plan).
Little did a good job of managing
down, but he evidently was lousy at managing up. He openly disdained
the ownership's numbers-based approach to the game -- an approach
that has become increasingly popular and successful at other
franchises in recent years. The Globe's Gordon Edes has a
mind-blowing anecdote
this morning:
The Sox no longer want to
discover, to their dismay, that the manager, according to a team
source, failed to hold a hitters' meeting before the Oakland
playoff series, wasting countless hours of traditional scouting
work and sophisticated video and statistical analysis that was
done ostensibly to give the Sox an edge.
This is just derelict. No CEO
should put up with this from one of his front-line
managers.
Stories like this put Little's
idiotic decision to send Pedro Martínez out for the eighth
inning -- and to leave him out there while he got his brains beaten
in -- into perspective. But Little's self-immolation robbed the team
owners of a certain degree of maneuverability, too.
Because despite his flaws, Little
might have been better than anyone else the Red Sox could get for
next year. In a perfect world, the Sox would have strung Little along
for a few weeks to see who became available. If they couldn't get a manager who would be obviously better, they might have signed Little for one
more year.
Adrian Wojnarowski,
writing
for ESPN.com, is
irrationally pro-Little, but he is correct when he observes that the
Red Sox let him go without having a backup plan in place.
That's Little's fault. He could
never have managed here again after what happened in Game
Seven.
Islam and terrorism in
Boston? The Herald's investigative team breaks through the
Bennifer haze this morning to weigh in with a major piece
on a Boston-based Islamic organization.
According to the report, the
Islamic Society of Boston, which plans to build a mega-mosque in
Roxbury, has ties to two men who are virulently anti-American and
anti-Israel, Abdurahman Muhammad Alamoudi and Yusuf Abdullah
al-Qaradawi.
Both men have praised terrorist
organizations such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Alamoudi has been
indicted on allegations that he illegally accepted money from Libya.
Al-Qaradawi has been banned from the US for his pro-terrorist
views.
The problem is that it is unclear
whether Alamoudi and al-Qaradawi really do have close ties to the
Islamic Society. The society itself denies it, and supporters say
that it preaches a moderate, tolerant brand of Islam.
There's no doubt that the
Herald's findings are of some significance. But how
significant? It's hard to say.
Part two, coming tomorrow, promises
some answers: "A current trustee of the Islamic Society of Boston has
been named in a federal Islamic terrorism financing
investigation."
posted at 9:04 AM |
|
link
Monday, October 27, 2003
Kerry's fading candidacy.
Last week I ran into someone who described himself as a strong John
Kerry supporter, a politically savvy guy who used to work for the
senator. He urged me to investigate those polls that showed Howard
Dean trouncing Kerry in New Hampshire.
It's not real, he insisted.
He especially wanted me to check in with pollster John Zogby, whose
methodology, he claimed, showed that Kerry was doing far better
against Dean in New Hampshire than the other polls
suggest.
Well, on Friday, Zogby
reported
that Dean had opened up a 40 percent-to-17 percent lead over Kerry in
New Hampshire. "This is stunning," Zogby quoted himself as saying.
"This qualifies as juggernaut status. Can he be stopped?"
Yesterday, the Boston Globe
published poll
results that showed Dean
leading Kerry in New Hampshire by a margin of 37 percent to 13
percent.
It's still early, of course, but
it's not that early. In a large field in which no one has
really broken through, Dean has simply done more things right than
anyone else. He has managed the contortionist's trick of establishing
himself as the frontrunner and the insurgent simultaneously, and he's
raising a ton of dough -- meaning that, unlike past early surprises
such as John McCain (2000) and Gary Hart (1984), Dean will have no
problem capitalizing on a big New Hampshire win, if that is indeed
what lies in his future.
As for Kerry ... well ... he
remains the establishment's choice, a solid, stolid, intelligent
person with deep foreign-policy credentials and a mainstream liberal
voting record. But you have to ask: is this someone who is capable of
making up a lot of ground in a short period of time? He's not
exciting or flashy. He is incapable of explaining his complicated
position on Iraq in a soundbite. In other words, Kerry -- after
enjoying a brief moment as the consensus frontrunner earlier this
year -- may now be the fallback candidate: the guy voters turn to if
Dean implodes. And there's no sign that Dean is going to
implode.
I watched some of last
night's debate (confession:
I passed out cold about half-way into it), and thought Kerry got off
a few good lines -- especially his zing at Dean, who said he would
surround himself with good foreign-policy advisers. "We're electing a
president of the United States, not a staff," Kerry said.
But Kerry was, as usual, too quick
to cite his military service, as he did when defending himself
against Joe Lieberman, who had criticized him for voting against the
$87 million package in aid for Iraq. And there is the continued
logistical impossibility of breaking through at a debate when there
are nine candidates on stage.
The Boston Herald's David
Guarino and Andrew Miga think last night's debate was
a
good moment for Kerry. He's
going to need a lot more such moments.
The Great Savior, Wesley Clark,
appears to be going nowhere fast, but his presence does make it less
likely that the media will give Kerry a second look. And Dean keeps
doing his thing, and doing it well.
But first, are you experienced?
The Globe's Gordon
Edes yesterday on potential
Red Sox managerial candidate Bud Black: "[H]e has zero
managing experience, and Boston is no place for your first
job."
A few paragraphs later, on Willie
Randolph: "He hasn't managed before, but there's nothing wrong with
raiding the Empire, is there?"
Local the way Mr. Potter was
local. It's pretty hard to get worked about about the impending
demise about Fleet Bank, isn't it? The Globe's
Steve
Bailey breaks another big
story.
posted at 9:19 AM |
|
link
Thursday, October 23, 2003
Come on, Wired.com, take it
down. Media Log does not wish to become known as a bastion of
overly sensitive political correctness.
But still. As I write this,
Wired.com has a story with the headline
"The Case for Coolie Labor."
My informant tells me that the
headline was supposed to have been taken down by now, and perhaps it will be
gone soon. But what were they thinking?
posted at 4:04 PM |
|
link
A measured take on "partial
birth" abortion. Reader J.S. sends along this
statement from the American
College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists explaining why Congress
erred in banning intact dilation and extraction (D&X) -- a
procedure labeled by its critics as "partial-birth
abortion."
(To be totally accurate, the
statement was actually released a couple of weeks ago, in
anticipation of the congressional vote.)
The college refers back to a 1997
policy statement that found that, in some instances, intact D&X
may be the best option available:
The policy statement notes
that although a select panel convened by ACOG could identify no
circumstances under which intact D&X would be the only option
to protect the life or health of a woman, intact D&X "may be
the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular
circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman,
and only the doctor, in consultation with the patient, based upon
the woman's particular circumstances, can make this
decision."
This is a far more solid argument
than the hapless prochoice Democrats were able to make earlier this
week. Here's what the college is essentially saying: if it's legal
for a woman to have an abortion, then lawmakers have no right
dictating what particular type abortion she must have --
especially since intact D&X may be safter than the
alternative.
Hersh, rampaging again. In
case you haven't heard yet, Seymour Hersh is back in the New
Yorker this week with a
long, horrifying piece on
the intelligence failures of the Bush White House -- failures that
stemmed directly from its keen desire to believe what it wanted to
believe regarding Iraq's non-existent weapons of mass destruction.
Dick Cheney comes off particularly
badly. And wait till you read one of the leading theories as to who
forged those documents purporting to show that Iraq had sought to
obtain yellowcake uranium in Niger.
New in this week's
Phoenix. The Atlantic Monthly -- if not its
heartbroken staff -- has recovered
from the death of editor Michael Kelly. But questions about its
future remain.
Also, a novel
idea for improving local TV
news: quality!
posted at 9:14 AM |
|
link
Wednesday, October 22, 2003
Media Log goes conservative!
I'll try to avoid going off on any Gregg Easterbrook-style benders.
But three stories in the news this morning put me on the "wrong"
side, and as we all know, three makes a trend.
1. Good for Jeb Bush.
Florida's governor reacted promptly to legislation authorizing him to
order that Terry Schiavo be fed. Here's
the Miami Herald story; but the New York Times actually
goes deeper,
reporting on concerns that Bush and the Florida legislature have
interfered with the separation of powers by superseding a court
order.
So what? This is a nasty, nasty
case. Schiavo, though profoundly brain-damaged, is not in a coma and
not on life support. Her husband claims she would want to die under
her current circumstances, but he has no proof. Moreover, her parents
desperately want her to live.
I'm not sure this breaks down
cleanly on liberal-conservative lines, but for the most part it
appears that the conservatives are with Bush and the liberals are
not. Well, here's one liberal who's with Bush.
2. A messy abortion-rights
debate. Congress yesterday finished work on legislation to ban a
late-term abortion procedure that opponents call "partial birth"
abortion. Click here
for the New York Times story.
There's no question that intact
dilation and extraction, as the procedure is more accurately known,
is gruesome. The real question is one to which I have no answer: is
it true, as opponents claim, that it is never medically
necessary for a physician to resort to this procedure, even to
protect the life or health of the patient? If they're right, I'm for
a ban; if they're wrong, then I'm not. Analyses I've seen over the
years tend to depend on the political orientation of those who are
offering them.
But it strikes me as absurd and
offensive for liberals to stake their reputations on a full-throated
defense of this particular type of abortion. Senator Tom Harkin went
way overboard yesterday, saying, "Congress has turned its back on
America's women, their right to privacy, the right to choose.
America's women are now second-class citizens."
Those who voted against the ban,
like Harkin and Senator Barbara Boxer, probably did the right thing.
But there are enough moral qualms around this issue that they ought
to be lowering the rhetoric.
3. "Givers and takers."
Governor Mitt Romney yesterday distanced himself from remarks by his
chief budget aide, Eric Kriss, that the state's money woes are being
exacerbated by the presence of too many "takers" and not enough
"givers."
I didn't hear Kriss give his
speech, so the nuances and full context are not available to me. But
according to an account
in this morning's Boston Globe, it seems that Kriss's remarks
were entirely analytical and, if he's right, go to the heart of a
real problem.
Here are three key paragraphs from
the Globe story about Kriss's remarks, which he made at a
meeting of the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce:
"Of course, all of us
receive some benefits -- like the roads and rails that brought us
all here this morning. But we all know that some -- most in this
room probably -- are net contributors, while others are net
beneficiaries. The ratio between givers and takers turns out to be
a critical variable of government," said Kriss, who was not
available yesterday to elaborate on his remarks.
"What ratio is sustainable?"
Kriss asked. He noted that when President Lyndon Johnson launched
his Great Society programs in the 1960s, the "sustainable" ratio
of givers to takers was thought to be 9 to 1 -- that is, 90
percent of the population should pay taxes to help the bottom 10
percent rise up by receiving government services.
"Forty years later, our ratio at
the state level is more like 3 to 1 -- 75 percent net contributors
and 25 percent net recipients -- and edging towards 2 to 1," Kriss
said, adding later: "And the trends are unsettling."
Why would Democratic legislators
and social-services advocates be "enraged" by these observations, as
the Globe reports? Why would Romney think he needed to disavow
them in any way? Kriss identified a real problem -- the carnage that
results when there are not enough people paying taxes and too many
people receiving benefits that are paid for through taxes.
The only way such a problem can be
solved is through growth -- a healthier economy and more jobs. That's
what liberals ought to be saying.
John Dennis's non-apology
apology. Why did WEEI Radio (AM 850) talk-show host John Dennis
even apologize? He now claims he never said what he said.
He and co-host Gerry Callahan were
back on the air yesterday, and the Globe quotes
Dennis as saying in part:
"There is my least favorite item of all -- that is, the constant and
inaccurate repeating of the phrase that John Dennis compared black
schoolchildren to a gorilla. I did no such thing. That reference
makes me sick to my stomach."
He did "no such thing"? Roll the
tape, one more time. Remember, Dennis was talking about Little Joe,
the gorilla who had escaped from the Franklin Park Zoo.
Callahan: "They caught him
at a bus stop, right -- he was like waiting to catch a bus out of
town."
Dennis: "Yeah, yeah -- he's a
Metco gorilla."
Callahan: "Heading out to
Lexington."
Dennis: "Exactly."
If Dennis doesn't understand that
he was comparing black schoolchildren to gorillas, well, everyone
else does.
Meanwhile, Herald columnist
Howard Bryant today has a fine, tough piece
(subscription required) on the hypocrisy of Callahan, who wrote a
Herald column a few days ago calling for Grady Little to be
fired, but who, personally, served just a two-week suspension for
pouring gasoline on Dennis's racist explosion. Maybe two weeks is sufficient -- but only if they change their race-baiting, gay-hating, women-mocking ways. Dennis's remarks, sadly, suggest that they still don't have a clue
Bryant's closing remarks: "As a
former Metco gorilla myself, I thank you, guys. To paraphrase your
old friend Louise Day Hicks, we know where you stand." (Bryant
apparently wrote these words before news of Hicks's
death became
public.)
posted at 9:19 AM |
|
link
Tuesday, October 21, 2003
The irony of foolishness (or the
foolishness of irony). Gregg Easterbrook has a piece
in the Wall Street Journal today on Garrett Hardin, a
philosopher who -- along with his wife -- committed suicide last
month.
The op-ed is unremarkable until you
get near the end, where Easterbrook writes: "And Hardin's ability to
be wise, caring and accomplished, yet to say foolish things, reminds
us all of our humanity."
Mickey Kaus has the best
explanation
for Easterbrook's own foolishness.
posted at 2:59 PM |
|
link
Gregg Easterbrook's
Jewish problem. I've been watching Gregg Easterbrook's ongoing
implosion with some distress over the past few days. This is one of
those weird, inexplicable stories that is difficult to comment on
intelligently.
Easterbrook, if you don't know, is
a journalist -- a very good one -- who recently began writing a
blog
on the New Republic website, and who almost immediately used
it to blast Jewish film executives such as Harvey Weinstein and
Michael Eisner for producing violent films such as Quentin
Tarantino's Kill Bill. Here's the offending
paragraph:
Set aside what it says
about Hollywood that today even Disney thinks what the
public needs is ever-more-graphic depictions of killing the
innocent as cool amusement. Disney's CEO, Michael Eisner, is
Jewish; the chief of Miramax, Harvey Weinstein, is Jewish. Yes,
there are plenty of Christian and other Hollywood executives who
worship money above all else, promoting for profit the adulation
of violence. Does that make it right for Jewish executives to
worship money above all else, by promoting for profit the
adulation of violence? Recent European history alone ought to
cause Jewish executives to experience second thoughts about
glorifying the killing of the helpless as a fun lifestyle choice.
But history is hardly the only concern. Films made in Hollywood
are now shown all over the world, to audiences that may not
understand the dialogue or even look at the subtitles, but can't
possibly miss the message -- now Disney's message -- that hearing
the screams of the innocent is a really fun way to express
yourself.
It's hard to figure out exactly
what point Easterbrook is trying to make, but his item reeks with the
language of those who loathe money-grubbing
Jews. There's nothing in Easterbrook's background to suggest that
he's an anti-Semite, but he clearly has some unhealthy thoughts
rattling around his head that find expression when he's not being
edited.
Here
is Easterbrook's original item; here
is his apology, which to my mind makes it worse by wallowing in
self-pity; and here
is an apology from TNR's editors, who observe, "The spectacle
of this magazine defending itself against the charge of anti-Semitism
would be funny if it were not so sad."
Because of his outburst,
Easterbrook has lost a gig writing about sports for ESPN.com.
Josh
Marshall thinks it's
because ESPN is owned by Michael Eisner's Disney, but I doubt it. Rather,
ESPN, having just dumped Rush Limbaugh for making remarks more
defensible than Easterbrook's, couldn't afford to be seen coddling a
liberal -- or, at least, someone we had all thought was a
liberal.
Jack
Shafer has a smart take on
all this in Slate, although he seems not to know that Easterbrook
is so obsessed with movie violence that, a few years ago, TNR
film critic Stanley Kauffmann felt obliged to devote an entire column
to an earlier Easterbrook screed against Natural Born
Killers.
So this is not a new subject for
Easterbrook. The only new twist is his dark mutterings about Jewish
businessmen. This is ugly and unexpected, and I suspect he's not done
having to explain himself.
posted at 7:30 AM |
|
link
Monday, October 20, 2003
Gordon Edes has questions.
Media Log has answers! The Boston Globe's Red Sox beat
reporter was in full
defend-Grady mode on
Sunday. Trouble is, he only served to underscore the idiocy of Grady
Little's non-decision to bring Pedro Martínez back out for the
eighth, and to leave him in while the Yankees took batting
practice.
So let's roll the tape.
EDES: "Would people be as inclined
to fire Little today if the Sox had been blown out in Game 7, if
Pedro Martínez had been knocked out of the box in the first
inning instead of the eighth?"
MEDIA LOG: Of course not! You don't
get fired for losing a game. You should get fired for
gift-wrapping it and handing it to the opposition, which is what
Little did last Thursday.
EDES: "What if Jorge Posada's broken-bat
popup is caught by Todd Walker on the infield dirt instead of falling
in shallow center field? Does Little get fired then?"
MEDIA LOG: Nope. Luck plays a role.
However, most fans, after getting over their heart palpitations,
would still have thanked their stars that the Sox had escaped from
Little's incompetence.
EDES: "What if Posada had gotten
his game-tying hit off Alan Embree or Mike Timlin?"
MEDIA LOG: Then Little would have
been following the plan! Yes, some would bitch -- especially since,
as Edes points out, Posada was hitting only .191 against
Martínez. But nearly all fans know that the Red Sox got as far
as they did by bringing in Timlin and/or Embree in the eighth and a
closer -- increasingly, Scott Williamson -- in the ninth.
Again, you don't get fired for
losing. You get fired for stupidity. Martínez, at this stage
of his career, is a seven-inning, 100-pitch guy. He was clearly
running out of gas in the seventh. Little sycophants who say
otherwise are lying out of loyalty.
EDES: "What if Little had played it
by the book in the eighth, and Embree and Timlin and Williamson can't
hold the lead?"
MEDIA LOG: See previous
answer.
EDES: "Call me a Little
apologist."
MEDIA LOG: Okay.
Grady Little seems like a pretty
decent guy. The most difficult job of the modern manager is to get
his overpaid charges to play hard, and Little has done a good job of
that.
But the Red Sox can't possibly
bring him back after he -- all by himself -- blew the biggest game
since the 1986 World Series. One senses that Larry
Lucchino understands: he
wouldn't be as reticent with the Globe's Dan Shaughnessy today
if Little were staying.
The difference between Clinton
and Schwarzenegger. Globe columnist Cathy Young today
blasts
Bill Clinton defenders for
hypocrisy in their full-throated denunciations of Arnold
Schwarzenegger's can't-keep-his-hands-to-himself style of interacting
with women.
I'm not even going to try to parse
whose behavior was worse. You could say that Clinton's philandering, unlike Arnold's groping,
was consensual, but that would overlook Juanita Broaddrick, whose
unprovable claim that Clinton had raped her in the late 1970s strikes
me as at least passing the threshold of credibility.
So -- Broaddrick aside, since one's
view of Clinton depends on how you view her story -- let's just agree
that both men have behaved in a piggish manner toward women. "Double
standard," as Young calls it?
No. With a few exceptions,
Clinton's conduct was roundly, heatedly condemned by Democrats as
well as Republicans when the Monica Lewinsky matter became public
knowledge in early 1998.
The difference -- which eludes
Young entirely -- is that the allegations about Clinton's sex life
were fueled by a $50 million government investigation, which led to
his impeachment and near-removal from office. Independent counsel Ken
Starr's official abuse of his powers was one of the factors that led
to the law that created his office being repealed.
In Schwarzenegger's case, the
allegations were driven only by a few newspaper stories. He won the
election anyway. And the groping and other humiliations he visited
upon women are already fading into the woodwork.
If Young would really like to
eliminate the double standard, perhaps she could push for California
attorney general Bill Lockyer to spend a few million taxpayer
dollars investigating Schwarzenegger's peccadilloes.
Tune in tonight. I'll be on
Greater
Boston this evening
talking about Little
People. (WGBH-TV; 7
p.m. on Channel 2, midnight on Channel 44.)
posted at 8:38 AM |
|
link
Saturday, October 18, 2003
A clear signal from the first
President Bush. The most fascinating column you'll read all
weekend is this
one in the Boston
Globe, by veteran journalist Georgie Anne Geyer, on George W.
Bush's break with his father on one issue after another.
Bush Sr. will soon present his
Award for Excellence in Public Service to Ted Kennedy in a ceremony
at -- get this -- Texas A&M, right in George W.'s
backyard.
Kennedy, of course, has had
a
few things to say about the
younger Bush's foreign policy in recent days. Yet Bush Sr. doesn't
seem to be the least bit offended.
Writes Geyer:
Now it's all out. Father
Bush has done it in his own preferred nuanced way -- the way
Establishment gentlemen operate -- but he has revealed the depth
of his disagreement with his impetuously uninformed son.
It's going to be hard for Karl Rove
and company to dismiss this as the ravings of the anti-Bush left.
Could make family get-togethers at Kennebunkport mighty
uncomfortable.
posted at 3:21 PM |
|
link
Friday, October 17, 2003
The Fox Misinformation Channel.
I'm late to this, but it's too amusing -- and relevant -- to let
it pass by.
According to a University of
Maryland study of seven nationwide polls, those who rely on the Fox
News Channel as their primary source of information are the most
likely to believe at least one important misperception about the war
in Iraq.
The misperceptions:
- That weapons of mass
destruction have been found in Iraq. (Sorry, David
Kay fans -- precursors,
abandoned trailers, twigs, and seeds don't count.)
- That evidence has been found of
a link between Saddam Hussein's regime and Al Qaeda. (Even George
W. Bush had to correct Dick Cheney on this one.)
- That world opinion favored the
US going to war with Iraq. (It's hard to believe that
anyone believes that.)
According to the study, 80 percent
of Fox viewers believed one or more of those untruths; between 55
percent and 71 percent of those who relied on CNN or one of the Big
Three broadcast networks were similarly misinformed; and only 47
percent who rely mainly on print, and 23 percent who rely on NPR
and/or PBS, shared those misperceptions.
Here's a story
on the study in the Washington Post by Harold Meyerson. (Guess
he's not at the American Prospect anymore.) You can read the
study itself here.
Turning on Romney.
Globe columnists Scot
Lehigh, who is certainly
not hostile to Governor Mitt Romney, and Brian
McGrory, who could be
considered a fan, have both had it up to here with Romney's
transparent political posturing.
Specifically, they're disgusted
with Romney's absurd bid to name the depressed Central Artery the
Liberty Tunnel rather than honor the late Tip O'Neill.
Turning on Grady. There is
nothing I can add to what has already been said about last night's
horror show.
The early nomination for the
smart-commentary award goes to Dale
Arnold and Bob Neumeier on
WEEI Radio (AM 850) this morning. (Caveat: others may have said this
before them, but the fill-ins on Dennis & Callahan seemed
mainly interested in constructing a gallows for hapless manager Grady
Little.)
Arnold and Neumeier argued that
from a pure management point of view, Little probably deserves to be
rehired because of what he's accomplished during his first two
seasons, and because his players not only like him, they play hard
for him.
But -- and this is the but on which
everything turns -- they added that, logic aside, Little can't
be rehired. The fans will never stand for it. They're right. After a
decent interval (say, until right after the World Series), Little
will be gone.
And let me add my voice to those of
millions of other Red Sox fans: Little's decision not to start the
eighth with Mike Timlin was the single most bone-headed managerial
move I have seen in 35 years of watching baseball games. My heart
sank when I saw Pedro Martínez stroll back to the mound after
his outstanding night's work was apparently over.
Of course, that blunder was only
compounded by Little's refusal to get off his ass and rescue
Martínez after he gave up a hit, then two, then three.
There was no Curse last night. Just
sheer, unmitigated stupidity.
posted at 11:23 AM |
|
link
Thursday, October 16, 2003
Mush from a wimp. Boston
Globe columnist Ellen
Goodman today derides
herself and other liberals for showing too much sympathy for Rush
Limbaugh, who admitted last week that he's addicted to prescription
pain-killers. "This is the curse of liberal wimpathy," she
writes.
Among the fellow wimps she
identifies is Joe Conason, the author of Big
Lies, who writes a
column for the New York Observer and a weblog
for Salon. Her evidence is this Conason sentence: "It's hard
not to feel sorry for anyone whose suffering causes them to hustle
narcotics."
I was surprised, because I'd
recalled Conason's being pretty tough on Limbaugh. I looked it up,
and I was right.
Not only did Conason quote from an
e-mail suggesting Limbaugh's pill-popping might have caused his
deafness, but Goodman took Conason's sentence out of context. Here's
the context from Conason's October
3 blog entry (subscription
required) -- written before Limbaugh had even come clean:
From what I've read, it
seems that Limbaugh may have been overmedicating himself for pain.
That's no excuse, as he would surely have said of any liberal
caught doing likewise, but it's hard not to feel sorry for anyone
whose suffering causes them to hustle narcotics. Perhaps he and
his hard-hearted dittoheads might begin to understand addiction
differently now.
Now that Rush has gone public,
Conason is even more unstinting. Here's a choice bit from
his
column in this week's
Observer:
So whatever punishment Mr.
Limbaugh must endure will be handed down in the court of public
opinion. He enjoys the support of millions of character witnesses,
including prominent fellow hypocrites such as his close friends
William Bennett and Newt Gingrich. But they would all be
hard-pressed to describe the mighty radio mouth as someone who has
earned great sympathy. This is, after all, a man who earned
millions by lampooning the plight of AIDS victims, spreading
rumors that implicated Hillary Clinton in murder and Bill Clinton
in cocaine abuse, and mocking the physical appearance of their
young child. His brilliant career was founded on daily
"entertainment" of this quality.
This casts Conason's "liberal
wimpathy" in a rather different light, doesn't it?
New in this week's
Phoenix. I talk with Peter
Dinklage, the star of
The Station Agent. Dinklage's portrayal of the lonely railroad
enthusiast Finbar McBride may be the most important role a dwarf
actor has ever had.
Also, the last
days of Al Giordano's
Narco News Bulletin.
posted at 8:23 AM |
|
link
Wednesday, October 15, 2003
Could the sale of the
Globe have been prevented? That sobbing sound you hear is
from William and Benjamin Taylor, the last two publishers from the
Boston Globe's former ruling family, who this week must be
asking themselves, "Why didn't we think of that?"
Freedom Communications, parent
company of the Orange
County Register, has
found a way to keep the paper within the Hoiles family and
simultaneously pay off what the New York Times
describes
as "dissident family members."
Freedom owns 28 daily newspapers
and eight TV stations, which these days qualifies as small potatoes.
So this is a huge victory for independent media.
Among the rejected suitors are
Gannett and MediaNews, whose chief executive, Dean Singleton, is
pissed, according to both the Times and this
report in the Wall
Street Journal.
I have no idea whether the Taylors
could have pulled off a deal like this rather than selling the
Globe to the New York Times Company for $1.1 billion in 1993.
The times and circumstances were different, and perhaps there was no
way of preventing the sell-off.
But even though the Times Company
has been a reasonably good steward of the Globe (from a
reader's perspective; certainly many employees feel differently), the
psychological impact continues to loom large.
Boston today is largely a franchise
town, as Globe columnists such as Joan Vennochi
bitterly
lament from time to time.
Nothing has contributed to that status more than the transfer of New
England's dominant media organization to out-of-town
ownership.
We interrupt this home run to
bring you another commercial. I missed Manny Ramirez's home run
yesterday -- some of us have to work, you know -- but it looks like
Fox's commercials-up-to-the-last-possible-second policy claimed a
victim: the viewers.
The Boston Herald has
the
story.
Please come to Amherst. I'll
be reading from my
book, Little People:
Learning to See the World Through My Daughter's Eyes, tomorrow
from 4:30 to 5:30 p.m. at the UMass Amherst Campus Center, Room
904-08.
If you're going to be in the
neighborhood, come on down.
posted at 9:00 AM |
|
link
Tuesday, October 14, 2003
Loyalty oafs. It hasn't
gotten much attention -- the Boston Globe, the New York
Times, and Long Island's Newsday all ran this
AP story inside -- but
Common Cause has issued a devastating report on influence-peddling
within the Bush White House.
Titled "Prospecting for Access: How
the Bush Pioneers Shaped Public Policy," the report meticulously
documents favors granted to the so-called Pioneers -- Bush
contributors who gave $100,000 or more in his 2000
campaign.
The press release is
here
(ignore the typo that says "2002"); the full report, in PDF format,
is here.
The report takes the form of a
Pioneer-by-Pioneer look at contributions made and goodies
received.
To take a random example, consider
James H. "Buck" Harless, the founder and chairman of International
Industries, in Gilbert, West Virginia. Harless raised and contributed
at least $355,000 for Bush's campaign, for the Florida-recount
effort, and for the Bush-Cheney inauguration.
So what did old Buck get for his
generosity? Here's what the report says:
The Bush administration
retracted a campaign pledge to require power plants that use coal
to sharply cut carbon dioxide emissions, rejected U.S. endorsement
of an international agreement to curb global warming, weakened
federal clean water regulations related to coal mining and
proposed investing substantial federal dollars in "clean coal"
technology.
The cost: "$2 billion over ten
years in federal subsidies to encourage clean coal technology;
degradation of air and water quality."
Of course, the White House might
have been inclined to do these things anyway. But that makes Common
Cause's findings no less repulsive.
Overall, the report is a litany of
regulations loosened or abolished, Colombian pipelines protected at
taxpayer expense, and secret meetings with Vice-President Dick Cheney
held.
It should have gotten a lot more
attention. Perhaps it will in the days ahead.
So, David, why do you think
Zimmer apologized? No, Pedro Martinez certainly doesn't deserve a
good-conduct medal for his disgraceful antics in Saturday's playoff
game.
But he did not "grab a
72-year-old man by the head and toss him to the ground," which is
New York Times columnist David Brooks's alternate-universe
description of the
Martinez-Don Zimmer confrontation.
Besides, doesn't Brooks realize
that the New York Times Company is a part-owner of the Red Sox, and
that its editorial
page last week actually
called for a Sox victory over the Yankees?
Brooks needs to get with the
program.
posted at 9:09 AM |
|
link
Monday, October 13, 2003
Not even a mini-scandal, as it
turns out. Media Log reader K.W. points me to this
InstaPundit item.
Apparently the
identical letters started
with one soldier who asked his buddies to sign it.
InstaPundit Glenn Reynolds writes
that "it seems that the letter isn't bogus after all." Uh, well, not
so fast. When a bunch of newspapers receive a form letter that's not
labeled as such, purporting to be from their hometown soldier when it
really isn't, that's still pretty bogus.
But it does seem that there's no
organized campaign behind this.
By the way, Reynolds pleads guilty
to reading-comprehension problems. That's what led me astray,
too.
posted at 1:06 PM |
|
link
This week's scandal. It will
be interesting to see how far up this one goes.
The Gannett News Service reports
that newspapers around the country have been receiving identical --
and apparently fake -- letters from US soldiers stationed in Iraq.
The message: the reconstruction is going great, Iraq is returning to
normal, and God bless the USA.
Here's a report
from USA Today.
Thanks to Michael Goldman for
passing along word of this sleazy campaign to demonstrate fake
support for George W. Bush.
It's hard to muster much outrage --
this is too pathetically transparent for that.
Pox on Sox. While you were
watching all hell break loose at Fenway on Saturday, I was huddled
around a radio with about a half-dozen other fathers at a Boy Scout
camping trip. The signal kept fading in and out. So you know more
than I do.
What strikes me, though are two
things:
- The "Cowboy Up" crapola aside,
this is a distinctly unlovable team. Yes, of course I'm glad the
Sox are doing well, but these are not the Sox of '67, '75, or '86.
There are too many crybabies and bullies.
- Pedro Martinez seems to be one
of those athletes whose very intensity makes him a far better
teammate when he's doing well than when he's not. He just can't
stop the frustration from boiling over when things are going
against him. He's got to grow up, especially as he looks at the
future. He may have some good years ahead of him, but his days as
the dominant pitcher in baseball are almost certainly
over.
There's been a lot of smart
commentary in both dailies. One of my favorites was Michael
Gee's column (sub. req.) in
Sunday's Herald. His conclusion:
Winning is always the best
PR. Ask Gov. Schwarzenegger. But the Sox didn't win. In the
process of losing, they struck millions of neutral observers as
childish boors.
Way to go, Pedro. That's quite
an accomplishment, making the Yankees America's sentimental
favorite.
Let judges judge. Today's
Globe has a
must-read column by Judge
Mark Coven on the folly of mandatory minimum sentences for drunk
drivers.
Coven's unassailable logic could be
extended to mandatory sentences in general.
posted at 11:54 AM |
|
link
Friday, October 10, 2003
The end of Narco News.
Today is a sad day for independent media. The Narco
News Bulletin, produced
by my former Phoenix colleague Al Giordano, will
soon be no more.
For the past three and a half
years, Narco News has offered an idiosyncratic, comprehensive
look at the misguided US "war on drugs," told from a Latin American
perspective. It's an issue that's not on all that many radars --
indeed, it's not on mine as much as it should be. But I always knew
that Al and his "authentic journalists" were out there telling the
truth.
Giordano writes:
It's been quite a ride. In
these 1,275 days that shook América, we've witnessed,
reported, translated, and participated in the growth of a visible
drug legalization movement in Latin America where there previously
was none. We've blown the whistle on attempted coups d'etat in
Venezuela. We've walked side by side with, and reported from the
fronts of, the growing social and indigenous movements that, from
Argentina, to Bolivia, to Brazil, to Ecuador, to México, to
Perú, to Venezuela, and elsewhere, have reawakened
Simón Bolívar's dream of a Latin America united
against impositions from above.
In December 2001, Giordano and
Narco News won a precedent-setting First Amendment case when a
New York judge threw out a libel suit brought by the head of Banamex,
a powerful Mexican bank. Here is a piece I wrote on Giordano's
victory; and here's an
earlier
piece that discusses the
lawsuit in detail.
Giordano will continue to write his
weblog, Big,
Left, Outside, "Al
Giordano's countercoup for authentic journalism, democracy and a free
press."
Narco News will be missed,
but I suspect Giordano will continue to be heard from, soon and
often.
posted at 11:28 AM |
|
link
Thursday, October 09, 2003
More on Der Gropenfuhrer.
Blogger Elisabeth Riba reports that I put up the wrong link to my
Phoenix piece on Arnold Schwarzenegger and the LA
Times. Here's
the right one.
And here is Riba's
take on why the tabloids
went easy on Schwarzenegger during the recall campaign. It's not
personal -- it's business!
posted at 11:13 AM |
|
link
That's Mister Ed to you,
pal. The Globe Spotlight Team today has one of those long
packages on an obscure topic that you wouldn't think you'd much care
about: financial
abuses at private foundations.
This one, though, is pretty
sprightly, mainly because the paper has found some rather colorful
characters with their hands in the till.
My favorite is Edward Lake, whose
story is told in a sidebar
by Francie Latour. A retired $20,000-a-year government clerk, Lake,
through a chance encounter some six decades ago, lucked into serving
on the Florik Charitable Trust, paying himself -- at most recent
count -- $230,000 a year to look at the mail.
Latour's kicker:
"A lot of people thought I
couldn't do this, see? I don't appear to be slick enough," Lake
said. "But I fooled them. I fooled them all. When they say Mr.
Lake, that means Mr. Lake. Nobody calls me Ed."
Urine trouble. Both the
Globe
and the Herald
give front-page treatment to yesterday's regional drug summit at
Faneuil Hall.
The Herald's Thomas Caywood
runs hard with the most disturbing angle: White House drug czar John
Walter's outrageous proposal for random school drug
testing.
As the ACLU's Nancy Murray says,
"It's just putting the emphasis in the wrong place. We don't need our
schools to be more like prisons."
New in this week's
Phoenix. The Wilson
affair is potentially an
enormous scandal that could endanger lives and national security.
Will the media keep the heat on -- or just pass it off as a typical
Washington kerfuffle?
California
voters show the LA
Times that they don't care about Governor-elect (imagine that!)
Arnold Schwarzenegger's groping and humiliation of women.
And the Phoenix
editorial calls on WEEI
Radio to declare that Dennis & Callahan has completed its
long-running engagement.
posted at 9:08 AM |
|
link
Tuesday, October 07, 2003
Peter Meade, class act.
Apparently it took an old pro from a different, better era of talk
radio finally to knock some sense into the management at WEEI Radio
(AM 850).
Both the Globe
and the Herald
report today that the station suspended John Dennis and Gerry
Callahan for two weeks without pay on the same day that Peter Meade,
the executive vice-president of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of
Massachusetts, was yanking $27,000 worth of advertising off the
air.
If you've just tuned in, this all
arose last week, when the morning-drive-time hosts yukked it up over
Little Joe, the gorilla who escaped from the Franklin Park
Zoo.
Observing that Joe had hung out for
a while at a bus stop, Dennis referred to him as "a Metco gorilla";
Callahan chimed in that he was "heading out to Lexington."
Though both papers mention Meade's
action, neither points out that Meade was a talk-show host at WBZ
Radio (AM 1030) during the 1980s. (He continues to do political
analysis for the station from time to time.)
A moderate liberal, Meade hosted a
show that directly preceded conservative David Brudnoy's. More often
than not, they would kick issues around together during the
crossover. It was a model of enlightened, civil talk radio of the
sort that's almost impossible to find these days.
As for Dennis and Callahan, two
weeks sounds about right -- provided the station is serious about
changing its gay-bashing, misogynistic, and (in at least this one
instance) racist tone.
Then again, we're living in an era
when the likes of Michael Savage trash gays and lesbians on the air,
and when even a reasonably intelligent host like Jay Severin refers
to illegal Latino immigrants as "wetbacks" and Muslims as
"towelheads."
No doubt that Dennis and Callahan
crossed way, way over the line. But the line itself needs some
heavy-duty recalibrating.
posted at 11:12 AM |
|
link
Monday, October 06, 2003
It's not what's in his heart,
it's what comes tumbling out of his mouth. The Globe's
Adrian
Walker has a smart column
this morning on suspended WEEI Radio (AM 850) host John
Dennis.
Dennis wants us to know that he's
not a racist. Well, I've never met the guy, and have no idea whether
he's a racist. But what he said was racist, and that's the
issue.
Cohost Gerry Callahan is on the air
today, despite the revelation on WGBH-TV's Greater Boston on
Friday that Callahan was in on the so-called joke.
Meanwhile, 'EEI hasn't changed the
Dennis
& Callahan website
since this all began. The motto: "Home of Repeat Offenders."
Nice.
Many zeroes. I've always
enjoyed Michael
Wolff's media column in
New York magazine.
But I doubt I'll ever be able to
read it again without remembering that Wolff is making
$450,000
a year.
Call and response.
Globe ombudsman Christine
Chinlund has a meaty
analysis of whether the paper gave former State Senate president Tom
Birmingham a fair chance of responding to charges that he'd
blown
his budget -- thus putting
his successor, Bob Travaglini, in an awkward position.
Chinlund rarely lets her colleagues
have it, but in this case her conclusion is clear: what Birmingham
had to say would have cast the story in a different light; and though
he had been difficult about making himself available, in the end,
reporter Raphael Lewis didn't try hard enough.
posted at 9:32 AM |
|
link
Saturday, October 04, 2003
Okay, lock Rush up and throw
away the key. I now believe that the Limbaugh quote I cited on
Thursday may have been the only sane thing he ever said about the war
on drugs.
Here's a
1995 quote from Limbaugh
dug up by Newsday columnist Ellis Henican:
Let's all admit something.
There's nothing good about drug use. We know it. It destroys
individuals. It destroys families. Drug use destroys societies.
Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have
laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing
drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to
people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by
them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs,
they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they
ought to be sent up.
Henican's got lots of other good
stuff, too, so read the whole thing.
Here's a teaser
from the National Enquirer, which broke the story.
Unfortunately, you'll have to buy it to read the article. Just find a store where they don't know you.
posted at 12:53 PM |
|
link
Callahan, too. The Boston
Herald's got a problem with one of its own. The paper deals with
it straightforwardly today.
Dean
Johnson reports that the
alleged monologue by WEEI Radio (AM 850) blabber John Dennis about
gorillas and black schoolchildren was actually a dialogue involving
Dennis and his cohost, Herald columnist Gerry
Callahan.
For the past few days, everyone
(including me) has been reporting that Dennis -- commenting on Little
Joe, the gorilla who escaped from the Franklin Park Zoo -- had said
that he was "probably a Metco gorilla waiting for a bus to take him
to Lexington."
But Greater Boston, the
public-affairs program of WGBH-TV (Channel 2), obtained an audio
tape, and it turns out that it actually went like this:
Callahan: "They caught him
at a bus stop, right -- he was like waiting to catch a bus out of
town."
Dennis: "Yeah, yeah -- he's a
Metco gorilla."
Callahan: "Heading out to
Lexington."
Dennis: "Exactly."
(Disclosure: I was a panelist on
Greater Boston yesterday, and was on the set when the tape was
played.)
Meanwhile, pressure continues to
build for Dennis either to quit or be fired by WEEI. I'm not going to
call on Dennis specifically to go. The problem is the genre of
idiotic, racist, homophobic locker-room sports-guy talk more than it
is any one individual.
But it sounds like, during a call
to WEEI yesterday in the midst of his two-day suspension, Dennis said
all the right things, admitting that not only did he say something
"stupid," but that he's got "sensitivity issues" to deal with as
well.
And now WEEI (and the
Herald) has to decide what, if anything, to do about Callahan,
too.
Today's
Globe, by the way,
buries the Callahan revelation in a long piece about Boston city
councilor Jim Kelly's refusal to call for Dennis's firing, and fails
to credit Greater Boston's exclusive.
Arnold, not getting
it
"It's too bad nobody came
up to me before and sat down and said I still feel hurt about what
you said," he said Friday, "and I could have apologized right then
and there. I never got the chance."
-- Arnold
Schwarzenegger, quoted
in the New York Times today
The waitress said she told
Schwarzenegger at the time: "If you're ever some place and some
woman throws hot coffee on your head, it will be me." He laughed,
she said.
"He thought it was the funniest
thing. And then the whole table laughed because, if Arnold
laughed, the whole table laughed."
-- Los
Angeles Times,
October 2 (The woman said Schwarzenegger had told her, "I want you
to go in the bathroom, stick your finger in your [vagina],
and bring it out to me.")
Limbaugh: a hypocrite after
all? I've gotten a number of critical comments regarding
my
Thursday item, in which I
absolved Rush Limbaugh -- accused of having a serious pill problem --
of the charge of hypocrisy when it comes to the war on
drugs.
Several Media Log readers say the
one quote I found is more than counterbalanced by numerous other
comments the Formerly Rotund One has made over the years.
They may have a point. On Friday,
Washington Post media reporter Howard
Kurtz noted that, in 1999,
Limbaugh said that "by legalizing drugs, all you're going to do is
define further deviancy downward."
Here's
what Limbaugh said about
the drug story on his radio show yesterday:
Now, here's the nub of it
at the moment. The story in Florida is -- it really is an emerging
situation. I watch what's being reported on television and it
changes from morning to morning, hour to hour, day to day. I don't
know yet what I'm dealing with there, folks.
I really don't know the full
scope of what I am dealing with. And when I get all the facts,
when I get all the details of this, rest assured that I will
discuss this with you and tell you how it is, tell you everything
there is, maybe more than you want to know about this. You can
believe me and trust me on that. I don't want to answer any
questions about it now, as I say, until I know exactly what I'm
dealing with, and at that point I will fill you all in.
Pretty weird, huh? To say that it's
not exactly a denial is almost beside the point.
posted at 10:37 AM |
|
link
Friday, October 03, 2003
More on the WEEI story.
Gorillagate is about to get bigger. Watch Greater Boston today
at 7 p.m. on WGBH-TV (Channel 2).
posted at 4:14 PM |
|
link
If you've seen one black
columnist named Howard ... If you take a look at the
main
sports website of the
Boston Herald right now, you'll see a hype that reads "Manly:
No bash by the Bay."
The column, in fact, is by Howard
Bryant. Both Bryant and Manly are African-American.
Media Log reader M.L. tells me this
is the second time this has happened recently. No, it's not racism.
But it does make you wonder whether someone at One Herald Square
really does think they all look alike.
Whoever that someone is ... he or
she needs to be more careful.
posted at 11:16 AM |
|
link
John Dennis's simian
stupidity. Yesterday I described John Dennis as the
luckiest
man in the media (second
item): he made a grotesquely racist remark comparing gorillas to
black school kids, and he got away with having to issue nothing more
than an apology.
Today, he's a little less lucky.
The management of WEEI Radio (AM 850), under pressure from the city
council and the community, suspended
Dennis for two days. Will
that be enough? Stay tuned.
This is really a mind-blowing media
scandal. It's hard to imagine what the thought process was that led
Dennis to blurt out that Little Joe, the gorilla who briefly escaped
from the Franklin Park Zoo, was "probably a Metco gorilla waiting for
a bus to take him to Lexington." Yes, Dennis has apologized, but why
did it even enter his head in the first place?
Dennis -- a former sports anchor on
Channel 7 -- is one-half of the Dennis & Callahan morning
team, which specializes in lowbrow and offensive humor. I'm not a
frequent listener, but I'm familiar enough with it. Their speciality
is crude jokes about gays and lesbians. Until now, I wasn't aware of
their having indulged in racism, but maybe I just haven't been
listening at the right time.
Callahan, a columnist for the
Boston Herald, comes across like a guy totally within his
element -- that element being cruel locker-room humor for dumbass
white boys. Dennis is more like the nerdy kid who can't believe he's
being allowed to hang out with the jocks.
Loathsome as Callahan's act can be,
I suspect his instincts are such that he would never make this kind
of mistake. Dennis, by contrast, comes across as way, way too eager
to ingratiate himself with his new buddies.
What should happen next? I don't
know. More than anything, WEEI management should stop acting like it
wants to get away with as little as possible -- an apology here, a
two-day suspension there, some public-service announcements for Metco
-- and deal with this in a serious and public way.
A Boston Globe
editorial
today argues that Dennis got off "far too lightly." I can't disagree
with that.
Meanwhile, over at the
Herald, it looks like it's going to be columnists Howard Manly
and Callahan, in the parking lot, right after work: Manly
today (sub. req.) refers to
Callahan as Dennis's "reactionary sidekick."
This isn't over. Nor should it
be.
posted at 11:06 AM |
|
link
Thursday, October 02, 2003
Rush on drugs. The media
world is going wild today over a
report in the New York
Daily News that "Rush Limbaugh is being investigated for
allegedly buying thousands of addictive painkillers from a
black-market drug ring."
What would appear to be delicious
about this scandal is that Limbaugh is a big-time conservative who's
hung out for years with the just-say-no crowd. What could be better
than learning that the "moralizing motormouth" (the News's
phrase) has a thing for Oxycontin, a/k/a "hillbilly
heroin"?
Okay, had your moment of
schadenfreude? Me too. Now, calm down. It appears that Limbaugh may
not be such a hypocrite after all. For quite some time, Limbaugh has
advocated an end to, or at least an easing of, drug
prohibition.
Here's a transcript
of some comments he made in 1998 on his radio show. An
excerpt:
It seems to me that what
is missing in the drug fight is legalization. If we want to go
after drugs with the same fervor and intensity with which we go
after cigarettes, let's legalize drugs. Legalize the manufacture
of drugs. License the Cali Cartel. Make them taxpayers and then
sue them. Sue them left and right and then get control of the
price and generate tax revenue from it. Raise the price sky high
and fund all sorts of other wonderful social programs.
I'm no Limbaugh fan, and I'm glad
that he
quit ESPN under pressure yesterday
after making racially insensitive remarks about Philadelphia Eagles
quarterback Donovan McNabb.
But though Limbaugh may indeed have
a substance-abuse problem, at least he's got his head screwed on
straight about society and drugs.
Under the sheets with John
Dennis. The luckiest man in media today is John Dennis, co-host
of the execrable Dennis & Callahan show on WEEI Radio (AM
850).
According to this
item in the Boston
Globe (scroll down a bit), Dennis has apologized for comparing
escaped gorilla Little Joe to black Metco students.
Dennis reportedly said that the
gorilla, who hung out for a while at a bus stop before being
recaptured, was "probably a Metco gorilla waiting for a bus
to take him to Lexington."
Obviously what Dennis said was far
worse than the remarks that got Limbaugh into trouble at ESPN. You
could also make a case that Dennis's little joke was worse than the
anti-Palestinian diatribe that got John
"Ozone" Osterlind fired
from WRKO Radio (AM 680) in August.
Of course, Limbaugh is a ratings
monster in political radio who was out of his element doing sports on
TV, and Osterlind was not considered vital to the future of
WRKO.
Dennis, by contrast, is one-half of
a hit show. It just demonstrates that if you've got the numbers, you
can get away with just about anything.
Dylan on the Man in Black.
Bob
Dylan has posted a
wonderful tribute to Johnny Cash. (Thanks to P.C. for the
link.)
Understanding dyslexia. I
worked with the Boston Globe's Gareth Cook from 1996 through
'98, when he was the Phoenix news editor. I never would have
guessed that he's got dyslexia -- certainly not from the blistering
edits he sent back to me.
Anyway, Cook has written
a
terrific column about his
lifelong struggle with this learning disability. It should be a
must-read for teachers and parents.
New in this week's
Phoenix. Former Republican political operative
Virginia
Buckingham settles in at
the Boston Herald; some thoughts on the death and life of the
Palestinian-American scholar Edward Said; and things are looking up
for Democratic political consultant Michael Goldman, recovering from
a serious leg infection.
Also, Herald employees are
offered
a buyout, but no one can
answer the question everyone's asking: Can layoffs be
avoided?
posted at 8:16 AM |
|
link
Wednesday, October 01, 2003
It's Karl Rove. Those White
House spinners who insist that Bush political guru Karl Rove had
nothing
to do with leaking the name
of Joseph Wilson's wife, then-CIA operative Valerie Plame, to Robert
Novak and other journalists ought to get themselves over to
the
Guardian's audio website.
Click on "White House blamed for
naming CIA agent," which will open up an audio file of
Guardian reporter Julian Borger explaining the leak story for
the benefit of British listeners. Among other things, Borger says:
The finger has so far
pointed at Karl Rove, who is the political maestro in the Bush
team, and there is no one closer in political terms to Bush than
Karl Rove. And several of the journalists are saying privately,
yes, it was Karl Rove who I talked to. Now the thing is that
the journalists are not going to name Karl Rove publicly, because
you don't name your sources, and to do would discredit them as
journalists. So the White House is safe for the time being. But
Karl Rove's name is very much out there.
So why doesn't Rove publicly
release journalists he may have spoken with from any promises of
confidentiality that were made? I think we know the answer to
that.
Thanks for Media Log reader J.D.
for the link.
Al Gore, cable mogul. It
looks like the former vice-president is about to take his first step
toward building a
liberal alternative to the
Fox-Rush axis. And thanks to Y.H. for that. (I see that Drudge has it, too.)
posted at 12:53 PM |
|
link
MEDIA LOG ARCHIVES
Dan Kennedy is senior writer and media critic for the Boston Phoenix.