Archive for the ‘Media’ Category

Arianna Huffington

February 22, 2011

Silly me. All these years I assumed that people who wrote for the Huffington Post were getting paid. Now I find out that many of them haven’t received one plug nickel. And Arianna Huffington has just sold the HuffPost for $315 million dollars. The HuffPost’s writers are a little steamed about this, and I can’t say that I blame them. It’s kind of like volunteering for a soup kitchen, and then someone sells it to a restaurant chain. I must say, Huffington got an awful lost of surplus value out of these people’s labor. Perhaps not coincidentally, Huffington is considered an authority on corporate greed.

I’ve always been wary of Huffington. I highly recommend reading Peter Camejo’s account of Huffington’s shifty behavior during the 2003 California gubernatorial recall election in his memoir, North Star. She first tried to get Camejo to drop out of the race and endorse her. Then eventually she dropped out herself and threw her support behind the discredited Gray Davis. All of which merely facilitated Schwarzenegger’s victory.

I remember when Huffington went by the name of Arianna Stassinopoulos. She wrote a biography of Pablo Picasso, which I once made the mistake of trying to read. It takes a peculiar type of genius to make someone like Picasso seem dull. It was around this time that Graham Greene said of her, “So boring, you fall asleep half-way through her name.” I usually find her columns in the HuffPost soporific. She talks about self-help advice and about going on expensive vacations with her family. I guess you can afford to do stuff like that when you’re not paying people who work for you.

I think the HuffPost writers need to pull a Wisconsin.

CNN

February 7, 2011

I turned on CNN on Sunday. Don Lemon was interviewing one of the organizers of the Super Bowl half-time show. Lemon asked him if there was a danger of a “wardrobe malfunction” during the show. The organizer assured him there was no possibility of that happening, because they had managed to “merge fashion with technology”.

The night before I saw Piers Morgan interviewing a woman who claimed her mother had 10 exorcisms.

I’ve been told by some people that CNN is considered a serious news channel. Surely, they’re pulling my leg, aren’t they?

U.S. Media Finally Notice Tunisia

January 15, 2011

I’ve been wondering for some time when the news media in this country were finally going to take notice of the revolution in Tunisia. I figured they would have to say something if Bin Ali were forced to flee the country. Or perhaps it just took them this long to find Tunisia on the map. (The Huffington Post has helpfully posted a map of North Africa with a big red arrow pointing at Tunisia. Thanks, guys.)

I haven’t seen anything about Tunisia on CNN. Of course, they’ve been obsessed with the Tucson shootings. The media have a tendency to latch onto one story and cover it at the expense of other matters. A bizarre example of this occurred last year when the media nabobs suddenly decided that Tiger Woods’s sex life was the most important topic in the world.

I’ve been told that today there was a demonstration in Cairo in front of the Tunisian embassy. People were chanting “Mubarak next!”

There is always hope.

Julian Assange

December 6, 2010

The U.S. government has stepped up its campaign against Julian Assange, pressuring the Swedish government to issue a warrant for Assange’s arrest for an alleged sex crime.The international community has gotten into the act, with Interpol issuing a warrant for Assange’s arrest. No doubt this is because the release of diplomatic cables undermines the time-honored practice of secret diplomacy. Leftists are opposed to secret diplomacy as a matter of principle. People who live under “moderate” Arab governments have a right to know that their leaders have been urging the U.S. to attack Iran. The American people have a right to know that Hillary Clinton has ordered U.S. diplomats to act as spies. After the October Revolution, one of the first things the Bolsheviks did was publish the secret treaties. They believed that the people of Europe had a right to know how their governments’ planned to carve up the continent.

Assange is hated by the mainstream media, who believe in the government’s right to keep secrets from the people. The world has changed since the days when the New York Times published the Pentagon Papers. The Times and other media outlets have become willing participants in the government’s current imperial project. They helped the Bush Administration with its “weapons of mass destruction” deception during the build-up to the invasion of Iraq.

We should support Assange in his struggle to bring truth to the people.

Alexander Cockburn

November 7, 2010

Alexander Cockburn’s latest post provides further evidence that he is moving to the right. He starts off by making the surprising announcement that he voted against California’s Proposition 19 ballot initiative, which would have more or less legalized marijuana use. Cockburn says he did so because “I didn’t see legalization doing our local Humboldt economy any favors, and I never liked the way the Prop was written anyway.” I take it that what Cockburn is referring to here is that the measure would have allowed the state and local governments to tax and regulate the sale of marijuana. Well, I would rather have that than people being thrown in jail for possessing the stuff. The measure was not perfect, but it was a step in the direction of eliminating this country’s draconian anti-drug laws. Cockburn is apparently less concerned about this than he is that pot growers in Humboldt County might be inconvenienced.

Cockburn then announced that he voted for Jerry Brown, and he “felt good about that too”. Brown is a rabid supporter of California’s obscene “Three Strikes” law, which has resulted in people being given life sentences for petty, non-violent crimes, and which has helped turn California’s prison system into a vast warehouse of human beings. He justifies this by saying that Brown was not as bad as his opponent, Meg Whitman. Cockburn used to be a critic of this sort of lesser evil argument. During the 2004 election, he inspired me and many other people with his steadfast resistance to the “Anybody But Bush” hysteria that was sweeping the left.

Cockburn’s website, Counterpunch, still carries some good articles, such as one by his brother, Patrick on Al Qaida, as well as one by Joseph Ramsey that rightly skewers Michael Moore. Yet Cockburn himself has become increasingly problematic. What’s more, he has become increasingly quarrelsome towards the rest of the left, as when he lashed out at Louis Proyect, who had rightly criticized him for his global warming quackery. One can only hope that Cockburn doesn’t go off the deep end the way Christopher Hitchens did.

The Tillman Story

October 12, 2010

The Tillman Story tells the story of Pat Tillman, who left a career as an NFL player to serve in the U.S. Army and who was killed by “friendly fire” in Afghanistan. It also tells the story of Tillman’s family, who struggled against a government cover-up to find out the truth about his death. Although the film contains no new revelations, it does give an interesting and moving portrait of Tillman and his family. Tillman comes across as a complex character: a jock who liked to read books, an atheist who studied the world’s religions, a risk-taker and thrill-seeker who was also thoughtful and considerate of others. The most striking thing about Tillman, however, was his belief in keeping obligations. We learn that after his tour in Iraq, the Army offered Tillman the opportunity to return to civilian life, but he insisted on serving the full term for which he enlisted. This same sense of obligation seems to motivate the entire Tillman family in their quest to find out the truth about his death and its cover-up by the military, in the face of an uncooperative government.

The Tillman Story is not really an anti-war film, although it does mention that Tillman thought the Iraq War was illegal, and that he read Chomsky. The film does, however, paint an unflattering picture of the military. Immediately after Tillman died, the Army began covering up what happened. They lied to the media and to Tillman’s family. They invented a story about Tillman engaging in a firefight with the Taliban. They used Tillman’s death as propaganda for the war. They even posthumously awarded Tillman a Silver Star medal that he didn’t earn. Interestingly, the film tells how Tillman expressed disgust at the staged “rescue” of Jessica Lynch. Ironically he himself was later used in a similar campaign of media deception.

The Army grudgingly admitted after some time that his death was actually a “fratricide”. They became increasingly uncooperative as the Tillmans asked more questions. The film contains a radio interview with an Army colonel who mocks the Tillmans’ desire to know the truth about their son’s death. The Tillmans’ efforts culminate in a Congressional hearing. We see a group of generals, along with Donald Rumsfeld, dissembling in front of the committee, repeatedly answering “I can’t recall” to questions about the cover-up. The Congressmen listen and then thank these people for their cooperation. The Tillmans are left without answers to their questions.

The Tillman Story will serve to dispel any illusions that people may have about the military being an honorable institution or about our government caring about its citizens.

A digression: The film mentions that Tillman, who was 5’11” (the same height I am, as it so happens), was considered short for the NFL. This made me realize why I prefer college football to the NFL: the players look more like regular people.

Ted Rall

October 9, 2010

I went to see Ted Rall speak at the Eugene Public Library the other day. He was promoting his new book, The Anti-American Manifesto. Rall is an editorial cartoonist, a sometime war correspondent and President of the Association of American Editorial Cartoonists. He started off by showing some of his cartoons. This was nice, except that he insisted on standing in front of the screen. Then he asked each person in the audience to think of two things: what could the government help with, and what was the most important global problem. He then asked a number people what they had come up with. The most common answers were health care and the environment. He then asked that those people who believed that the government would address these issues to raise their hands. Out of an audience of roughly a hundred people, three raised their hands. He then said that people in Eugene are more cynical than people in New York are.

He then pointed out that revolutions always occur when a reformer is in power. The examples he cited were Louis XVI in France and Nicholas II in Russia. (Nicholas wasn’t really a reformer. It would have been more accurate if he had said Kerensky.) He then said that Obama is about as progressive a president as we’re likely to ever get. The only way we’re going to get real change is through revolution. Rall seemed somewhat ambivalent about this. He admitted that both the French and Russian revolutions were bloody, but he argued that France and Russia are better off today because they happened.

Rall believes there could be a revolution in the U.S. He claimed that 88% of eligible voters don’t vote. (Is this true? I will have to look this up.) He refused to speculate, however, on how this would come about. He said we should not become preoccupied with “the next step”. He said he refuses to put a forward a political program, because that would be “divisive”. Maybe so, but how do we move forward without knowing what the next step should be? It seems to me that he needs to think this through more.

Nevertheless, I find it significant that a mainstream media figure like Rall is actually talking about revolution.

Pernell Roberts 1928-2010

February 15, 2010

I know it’s a little late to bring it up, but Pernell Roberts died last month. He was a respected stage actor, but he was best known for playing the eldest son, Adam Cartwright, on Bonanza, a Western TV show that was hugely popular during the 1960’s. The show told the story of Ben Cartwright, who owns a huge ranch, the Ponderosa, next to Lake Tahoe. Cartwright has three sons by three different wives. The latter all met with untimely deaths. (This sounds suspicious to me. In the days of the Wild West, there weren’t any police around to ask questions.) I watched this show when I was a kid. I don’t remember much about it, except that every character seemed to wear the same clothes every day. I found this vaguely disturbing.

What I find interesting about Roberts is that he quit the show after six seasons. He complained about the bad writing and called the show “junk TV”. This was a gutsy thing to do, considering what an uncertain profession acting is. He also criticized NBC for not hiring minority actors. He took part in Civil Rights marches in 1965.

In the 1980’s, he did a TV medical drama series called Trapper John, M.D.. (The title character is supposedly the same Trapper John character in MASH.) I never saw this show, but I can’t imagine it could have been very good, considering that the writers were apparently unaware that the name, “Trapper John” is actually an off-color joke.

I guess there’s a limit to how principled and uncompromising an actor can be. He’s still got to pay his bills after all.

There’s Something Rotten in the State of Denmark

February 9, 2010

I went to the local Rite-Aid to buy some aspirin the other day. When I went to the check-out counter, there was the usual assortment of gossip and women’s magazines. However, there was an addition that I’d never seen before. It was a special edition magazine titled “Sarah Palin: The Untold Story”. It promised “100 pages of must-see photos”. Below that were the words “Faith, Family, Tradition” (Kinder, Kueche, Kirche). Below that was the question: “Can She Save America?” (Do pigs have wings?)

Experience has taught me to be wary of conspiracy theories. Still, I can’t help thinking that there is something fishy about this whole Sarah Palin phenomenon. Here is a woman who has failed to distinguish herself in any way, who was treated as a national joke when she ran for vice-president. Yet the media are constantly promoting her. And not just the right-wing media. Last year, Barbara Walters did a TV special called “The Ten Most Fascinating People of 2009”. Sure enough, Sarah Palin was one of them. Her speech at the Tea Party convention was broadcast by CNN, as if it were a major event. One really has to wonder if there is something behind all this.

Anyone, even a conservative, who thinks Palin is presidential material, must live in a cave. First of all, she’s clearly not very bright. It apparently never occurred to her that her comment about Obama reading a TelePrompTer might open her up to ridicule, since it is well known that she uses hand notes. Her lack of education is embarrassingly obvious. As a public speaker, she is just awful; she sounds like the most annoying teacher you had in grade school. What’s more, she’s prone to scandal. The real reason she resigned as Governor of Alaska is because the Republican-controlled state legislature found evidence that she abused her office. She tried to pressure the Public Safety Commissioner to fire a state trooper who was her former brother-in-law. This should have ended her career. (Blagojevich became a political pariah, even though what he did really wasn’t any worse than this.) It’s recently been revealed that she hasn’t paid property taxes for some cabins she owns.

Palin doesn’t alway seem to get along with her fellow Republicans. One of the more interesting moments during the 2008 election was when McCain criticized Obama for using the expression, “putting lipstick on a pig”. What does it tell us that he automatically assumed that Obama must be referring to Palin?

So, who, or what, is behind this big Sarah Palin push? And what are they trying to accomplish by this? We should start demanding answers.

So Long, Oprah

November 23, 2009

Oprah Winfrey has announced that she is bringing her long-running TV show to an end. One of the factors that apparently led to this decision was her discovery that her own father is writing a tell-all book about her. (Ah, the life of a celebrity!)

If you ask me, Winfrey’s decision doesn’t come a moment too soon. In recent years I’ve come to the conclusion that Winfrey is an evil influence on our society. Among other things, she started the media hysteria over the absurd New Age book, The Secret. This learned tome claims, among other things, that thinking positive thoughts will cause good things to happen to you. Conversely, bad things will happen to you if you have negative thoughts. I suppose Winfrey believes that all the people in Hiroshima were having negative thoughts just before the atom bomb was dropped on them.

Newsweek has documented Winfrey’s practice of featuring dubious “alternative” medical ideas on her show – including the unproven claim that vaccines can cause autism. I know, people will argue that she isn’t as bad as Montel Williams or Maury Povich, who have had all sorts of quacks and frauds on their shows. I would argue that Winfrey is worse than these two precisely because she has a patina of respectability. People are more likely to believe nonsense when it’s on her show.

Late night talk shows don’t pretend to be anything more than entertainment. (Dick Cavett was accused of taking himself too seriously when he began having writers and intellectuals on his show.) Yet there is a widespread assumption that daytime talk shows can’t be just about celebrity chitchat, they have to be in some way educational. (I have no idea why people think this.) The problem is that, for the producers of these shows, “educational” usually means self-help books, fad diets, “alternative” medicine, New Age sophistry, and, of course, “psychics”. Sylvia Browne is a popular guest on these shows. In earlier days, it was Jeanne Dixon. The claims of these people are always treated uncritically.

Mike Douglas, who was sort of the Oprah Winfrey of his time, would bring Criswell on his show. (Yes, that’s the same Criswell who will be forever remembered for his deliriously bombastic speech at the beginning of Plan 9 from Outer Space. “Some day we will all live in the future!”) Douglas enthusiastically promoted the book, Criswell Predicts, which, among other things, prophecied that the world would come to an end in 1999. I seem to recall that Criswell also predicted that World War Three would be fought using insects that drill through people’s skulls, and that the first human on the moon would be a pregnant woman. Truly, this man was uncanny.

One thing I will say for Douglas is that he didn’t take himself too seriously, at least not nearly as seriously as Winfrey takes herself. One thing that really always annoys me about Winfrey is the attitude of moral seriousness that she exudes. One of the silliest things I have ever seen was the contrived outrage that she showed when it was revealed that James Frey had embellished some incidents of his life in A Million Little Pieces. Of course, people often change details of their lives in their autobiographies. Yet Winfrey reacted almost as if Frey had committed rape. Interestingly, after Winfrey excoriated Frey on her show, sales of his book skyrocketed. Perhaps this shows that some people can recognize grandstanding when they see it.

To be fair, Winfrey did express reservations about the impending invasion of Iraq, which is more than can be said for the execrable Jay Leno. (I’m pleased to note that Leno’s new show is bombing. Heh-heh.) It’s unfortunate that Winfrey can’t show a similar skepticism towards pernicious trash like The Secret.

Update: on Counterpunch, Ishmael Reed has a revealing article about Winfrey’s association with the film, Precious. Worth reading.