The Marprelate Tracts
Web-log for political, social and media commentary.
Last updated:
11/1/2003; 12:13:20 PM


October 2003
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  
Sep   Nov



Subscribe to this blog in Radio:
Subscribe to "The Marprelate Tracts" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.

E-mail this blog's author, Martin Marprelate:
Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.
 

Saturday, October 04, 2003

…the Los Angeles Times reported Thursday that six women claimed he [Schwarzenegger] groped or sexually harassed them between 1975 and 2000.

 

After the story was published, five other women came forward to report similar incidents, including two who said Friday the actor harassed them on the set of the 1988 film "Twins."

 

Another woman said she was an intern at CNN in the early 1980s when Schwarzenegger groped her buttocks and made untoward remarks about her anatomy as she was escorting him to a set.

 

This stuff is going to keep coming out. Let’s face it, Ahhnuld’s life is like the underside of the proverbial rock – full of oozing, slimy details that grow ever more disgusting the more daylight that is thrown on it.

 

That’s why he thought a recall would be perfect – lots of distractions, no need to attract a majority of the electorate, and very little time to examine the candidates. That’s why the desperate flailing to try and depict these as “last-minute slurs” when in fact, if we had a proper campaign season there would still be another six months to air these facts out. But there isn’t time and people are already experiencing campaign fatigue and so most are likely just tuning the stories out, even if they are factual.

 

Note to the attempt to change the topic regarding Ahhnuld’s regard for Hitler… his folks want to turn it into a question of whether he is anti-Semitic or not, when that was never in question. Rather the true question hinges on Hitler’s and Ahhnuld’s equally egomaniacal love of power, disdain for the truth and disregard for other people--and democracy to boot.

 

PS. And you've got to love th damage control run by the Schwarzenegger people, the best this side of the Catholic diocese of Boston: "these allegations are lies, lies, lies" -- "I'm guilty, I apologize!" -- "these allegations are lies, lies, lies."


5:14:16 PM    

The recipe is simple: lie, then repeat. See?

 

The news media is particularly susceptible to this because despite what the free marketers want you to believe, when it comes to the immediate distribution of news in our society, there really is not much of a free market – it is still filtered through roughly four TV networks, one increasingly monochromatic and propagandistic radio medium, and shrinking number of influential dailies (3?--5?), that for the most part have made their deal with the devil and are content to allow stenography (passing on verbatim and unquestioned the views of the powerful) to pass as “reporting” and “objectivity.” What ever happened to truth?

 

Combine that with very powerful interests in the country who fundamentally disagree with the premises of democracy and the rule of law (incarnated within their chosen political tool—the GOP as run by Dubya and his cronies) and is it any wonder that folks don’t know the truth about crucial life-and-death matters affecting out nation?


5:01:28 PM    

AKA the news media… the more you know about how the news works, the less appetizing it becomes.

 

Check out this story about how Ahhnuld got a free ride. The article chalks it up to his economic importance in the bodybuilding subculture has essentially scotched any of the aggressive “reporting” that characterized the news laundering cycle that the GOP employed to plague the Clintons with unfounded smears.

 

Yet, despite the toss-away line in the middle of the article, there really does seem to be two set of rules: one for Dems (Clintons, Gore, Gray Davis, Kerry, Dean and now Wesley Clark) and another for GOoPers.

 

For the former it seems that is always--like with Valerie Plame (the wife of Ambassador Joe Wilson)--“open season,” whereas the latter are always protected by “economic interests” of some sort.

 

I’d be interested to know why the tabloids laid off John Ellis Bush (JEB!) – somehow I don’t think it has to do with his economic impact within the bodybuilding industry…

 

It's a Tab Tale! Arnie Vanishes!

 

One of the less ennobling secrets of the mainstream media in recent years is its reliance on the tabloid press to launder seedy but irresistible stories about celebrities and politicians. Once the story is baptized in the tabloids, it's not long before it's fodder for TV talking heads and late-night comics. Then, more often than not, it's regarded as fair game for the elite media.

 

This symbiotic wash cycle went into high gear during the O.J. Simpson trial, and it was commonplace in time for Clinton's impeachment (with added suds from tab-like Web sites like the Drudge Report). Gennifer Flowers and Dick Morris both made a splash in the tabs before hitting the mainstream.

 

So there was a reasonable expectation that the tabloids would be having a field day with candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger. After all, in his 1977 Oui interview he spoke of his vast sexual conquests and a predilection for orgies; a Premiere magazine article in 2001 depicted him as an aggressive womanizer and a bully; and the same year, the National Enquirer "documented" his alleged seven-year affair with a young actress. Given the film community buzz about his vanity, marital woes and plastic surgery, it seemed the tabs would be wallowing in their good fortune.

 

All of which has made Schwarzenegger's tabloid disappearing act something of a mystery. Last week, the San Jose Mercury News turned over a few pieces of the puzzle when it reported that, in January, Schwarzenegger's mentor and early business partner, Joe Weider, had sold his publishing empire — including Muscle and Fitness, Shape and Men's Fitness magazines — for $350 million to American Media, the tabloid conglomerate that owns the Enquirer, the Star, the Globe and the News of the World.

 

The story also disclosed that although American Media's tabloids had been virtually "Arnold-free" since the recall race began, they just published a 120-page glossy one-off titled "Arnold, the American Dream," without identifying it as one of their publications. It's on newsstands for $4.95, and one cover line reads: "Camelot's Future." To complete the coronation, the News of the World ran an "exclusive": "Alien backs Arnold for governor!"

 

On another front, the New York Daily News reported that American Media owner and CEO David Pecker had assured Weider that the tabloids were going to "lay off" Schwarzenegger. "We're not going to pull up any dirt on him," Weider said Pecker told him. (American Media spokesman Richard Valvo calls the conversation "unfounded rumor"; Weider reconfirmed it Wednesday.)

 

Though some Democrats have begun whispering about the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy, the motives and agenda behind the Schwarzenegger tabloid blackout appear to be more about commerce than politics.

 

Two sources at American Media confirmed that it was no accident that the tabloids had been Arnold-free, pointing to the Weider sale as an explanation.

 

"They cannot afford to [anger] Arnold because he is an icon in the muscle magazine world," one said, adding that Schwarzenegger writes a column in one of the publications. The other American Media employee explained that Schwarzenegger's influence in the bodybuilding world is such that his disapproval could nix everything from advertising to content: "If they [antagonize him], that huge sale is money down the drain."

 

Both also pointed out that Schwarzenegger was not the first to get the kid-glove treatment. "We took a pass on Jeb Bush [when the Florida governor held a press conference to quell rumors about his alleged infidelity] also," said one of the longtime employees.

 

No doubt the tabs are aware that Schwarzenegger aggressively protects his image. According to published reports, his employees and campaign staffers must sign confidentiality agreements that prevent them from disclosing anything about the star or his family, in perpetuity.

 

Schwarzenegger also purchased the rights to "Pumping Iron," the 1977 documentary that chronicled his rise to bodybuilding stardom. Several scenes in the original film seem less than helpful to an aspiring politician. In one, Schwarzenegger smokes marijuana, and in another, he speaks of missing his father's funeral in order to attend a bodybuilding contest. Sightings of the original film are now rare — it's out of print, said one video store owner, "impossible to get legally" — though a DVD version is set for release in November, in which, an ad says, Schwarzenegger "shares his parents' values with the press."

 

Whatever the motives of the tabloids, it's clear they won't be doing any Arnold preelection spadework. As Slate blogger Mickey Kaus pointed out: "The tabs have taken a dive." Which means that now the mainstream media have to roll up their sleeves and do their own work.


4:51:04 PM    

Anyone who has read Judith Miller, the NY Times WMD guru and frequent conduit for Ahmad Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress disinformation, will not be surprised by the following story. But still, like any story, it is one thing to suspect the truth and another to be confronted with the true ugliness of it. I urge you to read the whole story by clicking on the headline, but I’ve included a few choice quote here that demonstrate how powerful forces can end up rationalizing and even defending propagandistic exploitation of the news medium simply on the basis of the notion that she (in this case) “produces.” It doesn’t seem to matter that what is produced is actually false and misleading, to the point where it helped contribute to a national mood that enabled a false and costly war. This story is about Judith Miller’s ideological abuse of her employers’ and readers’ trust, but it is also more than that: it is but one small example of what happens daily in the “news” media today: lies are peddled because they are easier and more “productive” than truth – it is easier to push the lies of the powerful than it is to expose how such lies are manufactured and sold, and it will remain so as long as the editorial “culture” within the news media remains confuses practicing stenography for the powerful with “impartially” reporting the “facts” – no matter how false.

 

Miller's Star Fades (Slightly) at 'NY Times'

Jackson: Is More Objective WMD Coverage Coming?

 

...But Miller is not a neutral, nor an objective journalist. This can be acceptable, if you're a great reporter, "but she ain't, and that's why she's a propagandist," stated one old Times hand to me.

 

…One major rule that she consistently violates, when she is not sharing a byline, is that of "protecting the paper's neutrality." The editors know, of course, that she is an ideological neo-conservative, close to the Bush administration neo-cons, and thoroughly identified with them. She had called for the overthrow of Saddam's regime in non-Times publications and had also spoken out before the war in public speeches for which she was paid.

 

She is known inside the paper to be very pro-Israel. She has had an extensive relationship with Daniel Pipes' Mideast Forum. Benador Associates lists her as a speaker. She has participated in conferences funded in part by departments of the Israeli government. Israeli security services funnel information through her, sources she occasionally cites.

 

…Times' editors have maintained that Miller has given the paper many "exclusives," and still deny that many of them were seriously flawed. But when her work is examined systematically, it is frequently found to be simply wrong on the facts. She has quoted sources and identified specific weapons, many of which did not pan out. What becomes of the injunction of "our duty to our readers" under the Times code?

 

…There is a widespread perception among staff that her work has brought dishonor on the newspaper. The perception that she's protected at the top is widespread, and the reluctance of editors to penalize her adds to that, one of my sources said.

 

…Miller's modus operandi is described by several Times sources as the following: She cultivates senior officials using the importance of the Times. The officials give her a story, she reports it uncritically (she may note opposing views, which she overrides with friendly sources without reporting out the discordant objections), and it appears prominently in the newspaper of record. Miller's happy, her editors are happy, her sources are happy.

 

Thus, she continues to prosper, the sources keep calling her back, she keeps getting published, and the editors like her because she "delivers." This system was summed up for me by a Timesman as: "a neat little eco-system of corrupt journalism."

 

This systemic problem at the Times was also described to me as "journalistic materialism." Miller has delivered "exclusives," even if in a prosecutorial, hyperventilated voice. And now no one wants to admit that those exclusives were in the main part wrong.

 

Jayson Blair was only a fluke deviation. Miller strikes right at the core of the regular functioning news machine.


4:37:13 PM    



© Copyright 2003 Martin Marprelate. Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.
Last update: 11/1/2003; 12:13:20 PM.
Powered by