Older, Not Necessarily Wiser

A quotable quotes column. 

Image by Brigitte Werner from Pixabay

This is a weekly column consisting of letters to my perspicacious progeny. I write letters to my grandkids — the Stickies — eventual selves to advise them and haunt them after they've become grups and/or I'm deleted.  

Trigger Warning: This column is rated SSC — Sexy Seasoned Citizens — Perusal by kids, callowyutes, or grups may result in a debilitating meltdown.  

About 

Glossary 

Featuring Dana: Hallucination, guest star, and charming literary device 

"Old age isn't so bad when you consider the alternative." -Maurice Chevalier

Dear Stickies and Gentlereaders,

Wisdom is alleged to be a side effect of old age. 

Oscar Wilde said that "With age comes wisdom, but..." (the writer emphasizes but, and then pauses for effect).

{But what?}

The second half of the quote is, but sometimes age comes alone. 

H.L. Mencken said, "The older I grow the more I distrust the familiar doctrine that age brings wisdom."

Kurt Vonnegut said, "True terror is to wake up one morning and discover that your high school class is running the country." 

I'm currently 69 (the new 39) years old and recently discovered that the average age of the members of the U.S. Senate is only 64, which means that many of them weren't even old enough to be freshmenpersons when I was a senior and everyone knows how uncool freshpersons are. 

However, I also discovered that 34 of 'em are older than I am and that a personal favorite of mine, Chuck Grassley, a friend of corn farmers everywhere, is 89 and tied for first place with Danne Feinstein. Ms. Feinstein, as you may have heard, was recently surprised to discover she was retiring. 

The average age of the members of the House is a youthful 57, which means that when I was a senior in high school, the average Congressperson was only in second grade. However, 87 are my age or older, 36 are 75 or older, and 12 range in age from 80 to 86.  

   

{What's your point?}

When I become king, Dana, I'm going to decree that 75 is the mandatory retirement age for congresspersons. If they wish to continue to serve the people they can always get jobs as lobbyists.

As of 2020, the average H. sapien was dead by the age of 73.7. Currently, there are 60 lucky members of the 118th Congress who are beating the odds. As of 1/23, the congressional approval rating stood at 21%. Your question answers itself. 

Sylvia Garcia, 72 (D.-Tx) who represents "much of eastern Houston" according to Wikipedia, has only been a congressperson since 2019 but has been a politician for roughly 40 years. Recently, she was (semi) famous for (almost) 15 minutes. 

Ms. Garcia is a member of the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, details here if, unlike me, you have a life and find following politics and/or current events boring and would like a briefing. 

Bottom line: The Red team says The Fedrl Gummit has been stepping, treading if you will, on the rights of the people it's supposed to serve. The Blue Team says nuh-uh.  

Journalists Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger were called in front of the committee to testify about their role in publishing the details of what appears to have been a, um, unhealthy relationship between Twitter and The Fedrl Gummit (TFG) prior to its purchase by Tony Stark, a.k.a. Elon Musk.  

If you're unfamiliar with that kerfuffle... take care, and I'll catch ya later. It would take a column or two to even begin to adequately explain that particular he said, she said, they said.

    

In the following YouTube clip, Congressperson Garcia is beating up on Messers. Taibbi and Shellenberger for refusing to reveal what she wants to know about the stuff they've published that reveals some shady connections between Twitter and TFG prior to Mr. Musk's purchase.  

While this would seem to prove that getting on the wrong side of TFG can get ya stepped on, Ms. Garcia, at 72, is as focused and relentless as Jack McCoy on Law & Order back in the day.

Until...

At about five minutes in she reveals that she doesn't know who Bari Weiss is. 

Ms. Weiss (apropos of nothing, a fellow former Yinzer) is a journalist who's had important jobs at the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. Nowadays, like Mr. Taibbi, she's gone out on her own, via Substack, in order to practice traditional (i.e. real) journalism, with no one to answer to but her readers.

Musk turned to her and Taibbi for that very reason. They have led the charge to get the story, stories (Pl) actually, out into the world. Congressperson Garcia, with a straight face, asks Mr. Shelleberger if he, Taibbi, and Weiss are "...in this as a threesome?"

Cue grins and suppressed laughter. 

Garcia, apparently oblivious, continues her attack as if nothing happened, instantly losing all credibility. The head of the committee, Congressman Jim Jordan, then provides a succinct epilogue to the performance. 

       

                                                The End 

Poppa loves you,

Have an OK day

Scroll down to share my work or access oldies. Buy an old crank a coffee? Extra content is available to members of Cranky's Coffee Club.    

Comments? I post my columns on Facebook and Twitter where you can love me, hate me, or try to have me canceled. Don't demonize, seek a compromise. 

A Narrative About Narrative Journalism

                                         Image by Steve Buissinne from Pixabay 

This is: A weekly column consisting of letters to my perspicacious progeny. I write letters to my grandkids and my great-grandkids — the Stickies — to advise them and haunt them after they become grups or I'm deleted.

Warning: This column is rated SSC — Sexy Seasoned Citizens — A Perusal by kids, callowyutes, or grups may result in a debilitating intersectional triggering. Viewing with a tablet or a monitor is highly recommended for maximum enjoyment.

Please Note: If ya click on an Amazon ad, thus opening a portal to Amazon, and buy anything, Lord Jeffrey will toss a few pence in my direction and you won't have to feel guilty about enjoying my work — well, hopefully — for free. Win/Win.  

About 

Glossary 

Erratically Appearing Hallucinatory Guest Star: Dana — A Gentlerreader

"One of our worst traits in journalism is that when we have a narrative in our minds, we often plug in anecdotes that confirm it." -Nicholas Kristof

Dear (eventual) Grandstickies and Great-Grandstickies (and Gentlereaders),

Narratives, the word itself as well as what it describes, are popping up here, there, and even over there. They are currently trending (as is, come to think of it, the word trending).

A narrative, according to Merriam-Webster definition 1-b, is "a way of presenting or understanding a situation or series of events that reflects and promotes a particular point of view or set of values."  

This is a scholarly way of describing a story that has a particular spin, just one of the reasons modern journalism is a mess. 

[Could you be a little more vague.]  

Bear with me, Dana, I'm working my way towards a very specific example of what I'm talking about. 

[That's refreshing.]

Very long story short, 

Wokism (Social Justism + Neo-Marxism) + Postmodernism = Faux News. 

[Justism? Wokism? Faux news?] 

Much to my surprise, I discovered that justism is considered to be an actual word by some people. As to its meaning... well, it refers to seeking justice for everyone... all the time... in all things... constantly. If ya don't have a higher power in your life find a rigid ideology to fill in the hole in your soul. 

Wokism is considered to be a religion by at least one guy other besides me, and Faux News is... everywhere. The equation above requires its own column, make that a lengthy essay, to unpack. 

Suffice it to say that the current version of Progressivism, more accurately called Wokism — now considered to be divinely revealed dogma at no shortage of colleges/universities — has climbed over the ivy-covered walls, is spreading across the real world, and is choking off Journalistic Ethics.

[You capitalize words that aren't s'posed to be capitalized like...]

You should know by now that I'm a firm believer in Situational Capitalization. 

[That's not even a thing...]

Maybe, maybe not, but: 

It's my column and I'll Capitalize if I want to

Italicize if I want to...   

(The writer clears his throat) Sorry, folks, your humble correspondent also has a thing for obscure cultural references.  

Anyways, there's no shortage of alleged journalists loose in the world that think that so-called facts are always a matter of interpretation and striving for objectivity is silly (postmodernism), particularly given that the end (social justice) not only justifies the means it's the whole point of journalism and everything else. 

[Huh?]

Screw the Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists — for example: "Label advocacy and commentary" (my emphasis)  — Justism must be served!  

[Didn't you say something about a specific example?]

As I've stated elsewhere, The Wall Street Journal is my personal paper of record. The WSJ reports the news, for the most part, objectively and factually although not quite as well as they used to and now I know why. More on that in just a sec'.

I pay a relatively hefty subscription fee because relying on social media and/or other "free," and often revenue starved advert-supported sites, for accurate news is another one of the reasons journalism is a mess. 

The primary reason I pay the fee is for access to the staff columnists (and guest writers) on the world's best op-ed page. The Journal's paywall permits sharing these columns via social media which I do regularly on Mr. Cranky's Facebook page.

I wonder if any of my regular readers take the trouble to share my columns?

[When pray tell, can we expect the specific example you mentioned.]

I'll be right back, I'm going to pour myself a fresh cup of coffee. 

[Speaking of ethics...] 

Now, I've been aware of tinges of leftish, narrative journalism appearing in the WSJ for quite some time. Maybe it's just me? Perhaps it's just the editors slightly indulging newly minted journalists while simultaneously subtly steering them towards real journalism?  

However, there was a tempest in a teapot last summer that most of you, having actual lives, may not have heard about. 

A group of "more than 280 reporters, editors, and other employees" -WSJ, (the paper employees about 7,000 people) signed a letter objecting to how the editorial pages are run. 

F.Y.I., news and opinion constitute two different divisions of the paper and are run by different people. The letter calls for the paper to go to more trouble to point out the difference between the news and opinion articles. 

In my semi-humble opinion, anyone reading the WSJ that can't tell the difference between the clearly marked opinion pages and news articles is probably not smart enough to remember to...

[Hey! Choose to be the gentleperson!]

Also, they want to Unleash the Fact-Checkers! on one of the few surviving unabashedly and unashamedly conservative/libertarian op-ed departments in a mainstream newspaper.

Although the quality of the writing is world-class, click-baiting headlines virtually unknown, and pieces by left-wing guest writers are commonplace they want the page, three pages actually, "fact-checked." 

I smell a rat. 

In case you're unaware (that have an actual life thing again), a bit of googlin' will reveal that alleged fact-checking is often just editorializing by a different name, and that fact-checkers nowadays are fact-checking fact-checkers. 

That is to say, Narrative Journalism, on steroids.

Poppa loves you,
Have an OK day

Share this column, give me a thumb (up or in my eye), and/or access older columns below. If my work pleases you you can buy me some cheap coffee with PayPal or plastic.

If you do your Amazon shopping by using one of my Amazon ads as a portal to access Amazon, Lord Jeffrey will toss me a few pence if you buy anything.    

Feel free to comment/like/follow/cancel/troll me on Cranky's Facebook page.

Cranky don't tweet.

   

 

Purple Journalism (Vol. 2)

Photo by Orlova Maria on Unsplash

Please note: This column has been rendered gender-neutral (& should be read accordingly) and approved for publication by the City Council of Berkely, California. All personal pronouns that would unfairly presume to indicate the gender identity of the H. sapiens mentioned (he, she, etc.) without their approval have been rendered as they or them to avoid the unintentional infliction of triggering or verbal violence upon their persons.    

However, my use of the term BIG BUT, twice in the same column, has been referred to the sub-committee for the investigation of thought crime and hate speech because of the potential offending of the calorically challenged community. Being a member in good standing of said community, I've referred myself to a psychiatrist to determine if I have self-hate issues -- and in the hope of scoring some good meds.


If you're new here, this is a weekly column consisting of letters written to my (eventual) grandchildren (who exist) and my great-grandchildren (who don't, yet) -- the Stickies -- to haunt them after they become grups and/or I'm dead.

[The following column is rated SSC (Sexy Seasoned Citizens). If read by grups and callowyutes it may result in psychological/emotional/etceteralogical triggering.]

                                                
                                                  Glossary  

                                         Just who IS this guy?


Irregularly Appearing Imaginary Guest Star: Dana -- A gentlereader

"When I was a child I had wax in my ears. Dad didn't take me the doctors, he they used me as a night light." -Les Dawson


Dear (eventual) Grandstickies & Great-Grandstickies (& gentlereaders),

"Purple Journalism: journalism as currently perpetrated by many news outlets that claim to be professional, unbiased, and factual. In reality, they are partisan, prone to sensationalism, and motivated primarily by the bottom line." -me

I'm not a fan of the Donald. Not now, not then. I voted for the goofy libertarian guy because I couldn't vote for either the Donald or the Billary. After all, I am a wild-eyed libertarian and free marketer with a bleeding heart and conservative impulses.

[Not then?]

Dana, you've been showing up a lot lately, not that I mind you understand I...

[Hey, I'm a creation of your subconscious, it's not like I have control over...]

Point taken. I guess I'm just missing Iggy and Marie-Louise.

[Not then?]

What? Oh, I mean when they first entered my personal infosphere, when they published their (and some ghostwriters) bestseller, The Art of the Deal, and the Orange One was turning up here, there, and this one time even way over there.

I tried reading it and found it to be lighter and fluffier than my mum's pancakes. And yet it was a bestseller, so whaddaiknow? P.T. Barnum lives? And they did manage to get themselves elected president of the United States of America without even spending much of their own money.

For the record, I've always thought that claiming that the Pooteen played the role of the man behind the curtain was goofy... although they are more powerful than the Wizard of Oz turned out to be ("Oz never did give nothin' to the Tin Man"). And they are, no doubt, a world-class bully and dick-tater.


The paragraphs above are a preface to the actual subject of this semi-humble missive, Jake Tapper, well-known employee of one of the all Trump all the time news networks, CNN.

If you set aside the occasional exceptions that prove the rule -- so that they can claim/pretend to be objective news sources that carefully separate fact from opinion -- CNN, like most of its brethren, is in the biased infotainment business.

For example, CNN is (mostly) all anti -- the Donald -- all the time. FOX is (mostly) all pro -- the Donald -- all the time.

There's good money to be made promoting polarization and pathos. Infotainment = current events + a reality show ethos. 

While I know what (and who) I believe and where I stand, I go out of my way to reject promoting polarization and creating conflict for entertainment. I try to avoid sexing (and violencing) up reality to capture the attention of jaded, entertainment obsessed Americans (like me).

Making fun of everybody and calling out naked emperors is more fun, and ultimately I suspect, more useful.


The Tapper, if you're not familiar, is the CNN White House correspondent semi-famous for their performances at White House press briefings -- staring the Tapper.

I fully support pain in the ass journalists in search of the truth for truth's sake.

BIG BUT,

Self-aggrandizing journalists with an ego as big as their agenda who believe that once they've decided the object of their wrath is the work of/spawn of Satan and they should shift into End Justifies the Means Mode and abandon objectivity and the ethical norms of their profession for the sake of justice/resistance/mom's apple pie (made with locally sourced organic apples)...

I've got a problem with that.

Particularly if a given reporter, like the Tapper, for example, writes a book in which they come back down from the mountain to declare that "Purists in the field of journalism and academics opining from the safety of the classroom can lament the downfall of neutrality. But neutrality for the sake of neutrality doesn't really serve us in the age of Trump."

I have not and will not read the book. The passage above is quoted all over the place and the Tapper is not claiming it's taken out of context. Call me biased if you like but as far as I'm concerned that's as much as I need to know. 

Another BIG BUT... 

Common sense would seem to indicate that, of course, no journalist is actually capable of being truly neutral. This is not a characteristic of H. sapiens generally, or your average Joe/Joan Bagadonuts -- not traditional donuts, of course, I speak of healthy, gluten-free donut alternatives (if there is such a thing) -- specifically. 

A journalist should strive to gather as many relevant, objective facts as possible and present the customer (us) with what they honestly believe to be the objective truth to aid us in making our way through another difficult day in the Information Age. 

I myself would love to be guided by the Tapper's wisdom and personal opinions but I would prefer them to labeled as such, that is to say, as commentaries, for the sake of clarity.


Bonus! And you won't be charged extra. I found this (disturbing) story on the Fox News website a while back but never got around to passing it on. It's both a (lump of) News That You Can Use and an outstanding example of pure Purple Journalism. 

It's an article about a two and a half centimeter long lump of ear wax with pictures and video. 

Earwax clump clogging entire ear canal removed from patient: 'Look at that!' 

By the way, only the wax was removed, not the entire ear canal, the headline is easily misconstrued.

I gotta go or I'm going to late for an appointment with my otolaryngologist. Poppa loves you. 

Have an OK day. 
Please scroll down to react, comment, share, assuage guilt, or shop at Amazon.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains. Just click here or on the Patreon button at the top or bottom of my website. 

If you do your Amazon shopping by clicking on an Amazon link above or below Amazon will toss a few cents in my direction every time you buy something.

Or, you can just buy me a coffee.  

Your friendly neighborhood crank is not crazy about social media (I am a crank after all) but if you must, you can like me/follow me on Facebook. I post an announcement when I have a new column available as well as news articles/opinion pieces that reflect where I'm coming from or that I wish to call attention to.

©2019 Mark Mehlmauer As long as you agree to supply my name and URL (Creative Commons license at the top and bottom of my website) you may republish this anywhere that you please. Light editing that doesn't alter the content is acceptable. You don't have to include any of the folderol before the greeting or after the closing except for the title. 



  

  


 

Journalism, Purple:

Journalism as currently perpetrated by many news outlets that claim to be professional, unbiased, and factual. In reality, they are partisan, prone to sensationalism, and motivated primarily by the bottom line. (No. 1)


If you're new here, this is a weekly column consisting of letters written to my (eventual) grandchildren (who exist) and my great-grandchildren (who don't, yet) -- the Stickies -- to haunt them after they become grups and/or I'm dead.

[Blogaramians: Blogarama renders the links in my columns useless. Please click on View Original to solve this problem and access lotsa columns.]

                                                 Glossary  

                                  Just Who IS This Guy?

Irregularly Appearing Imaginary Guest Stars 

Dana -- A Gentlereader
Iggy -- A Sticky (GT*)

Marie-Louise -- My Muse (GT*)

*Currently Grand Touring 

"Ideology, politics, and journalism, which luxuriate in failure, are impotent in the face of hope and joy." -P.J. O'Rourke


Dear (eventual) Grandstickies & Great-Grandstickies (& Gentlereaders),

It's my protologism, sung to the tune of It's My Party (and I'll cry if I want to).

It's my protologism, I'll define it the way I want to
Define it the way I want to, define it the way I want to
I love inventing words or phrases, don't you?

[Apropo of nothing much, Wikipedia has a very interesting entry about It's My Party. I'll betcha a bottle-a-pop you didn't know it was Quincy Jones first hit single.]

I wrote a three-column series about journalism last summer wherein I proposed that our new millennium has seen a revival/update of yellow journalism and I named the phenomenon Purple Journalism.

At the time I created this clever concatenation of words (cough, cough) it was my intention to occasionally write a column illustrating my concept with an example of exactly what I mean.

You can stop holding your breath now because a headline posted on a recent Drudge Report reminded me of this and inspired this column. If you're not familiar with the Drudge Report it's an extremely popular website consisting mostly of news stories gathered from outlets from all over the planet Earth 

Matt Drudge is a genius who posts links to outright Purple Journalism, purple tinted more or less straight news, and straight news stories whose subject matter is either gruesome or prone to induce anxiety -- purple tinted content.

The result is world-class clickbait without the downsides of ordinary clickbait (endless linking, endless advertising, and links that have little or nothing to do with the headline that lured ya in the first place). 

[Tell me, oh windy one, are you ever going to tell them about the actual story? The one that allegedly is a good example of whatever the hell it is you're on about?]   

Background is important, Dana, and yes, I am.


The following headline is from an article in The Guardian, a UK newspaper that's not one of the United Kingdom's (in)famous tabloids.

Heavily processed foods like ready meals and ice cream linked to early death

Below it is the following subheadline.

Two major studies add to the body of evidence against food made with industrial ingredients

Scary shtuff, huh? No need to purple it up, really, so Mr. Drudge opted for simplification to achieve maximum impact.

Heavily processed food linked to early death...

[This is the sort of news that cries out for public attention! For the love of God, people are dropping dead! I wonder if Congress is looking into this? Why isn't this all over the news? I'm gonna throw all my beloved bacon away, right now!]

Dana, I would call your attention to the fourth paragraph of this declaration of existential apocalypse, which reads as follows.

"The study, published in the British Medical Journal, does not prove that ultra-processed foods cause disease. Nor does the effect appear particularly large, even in the most enthusiastic junk food consumers. The results suggest that 277 cases of cardiovascular disease would arise each year in 100,000 heavy consumers of ultra-processed foods, versus 242 cases in the same number of low consumers (my italicizations and emboldenizatons).

[Wait... what?]


If I may, some interesting things I noticed as a result of a careful reading of this 12-paragraph article, with "...an accompanying editorial...", for ya sunshine.

"... industrial ingredients may have had a hand..."

In another study of 20,000 college graduates in Spain, 335 subjects dropped dead over the course of 15 years of various and sundry causes.

"The top quarter consumers of ultra-processed foods – who had more than four servings a day – were 62% more likely to have died than those in the bottom quarter, who ate less than two portions a day. For each additional serving, the risk of death rose 18%." 

Sounds scary, huh? Read it again. We're not told how many of the unfortunate 365 had more than four servings of "ultra-processed foods" daily. Which means that we have no way of knowing how many "were more likely to have died" from eating them. 62% of ? = ? 

And wouldn't you like to know how they figured out how many of these meals of death were consumed daily by 20,000 people over the course of 15 years? Or how they figured out the same thing from the other study, of 105,000 people over the course of five years. 


Hey kids! You too can easily spot Purple Journalism and cut back on your Xanax consumption. Always remember, the scarier the headline the greater the need for a careful reading of the text. 

Helpful hint: when obvious questions occur to you that a professional journalist failed to ask you may have stumbled into [insert dramatic music here] The Purple Zone. Poppa loves you. 

Have an OK day. 

Please scroll down to react, comment, or share.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains. Just click here or on the Patreon button at the top or bottom of my website.

Your friendly neighborhood crank is not crazy about social media (I am a crank after all) but if you must, you can like me/follow me on Facebook. I post an announcement when I have a new column available as well as news articles/opinion pieces that reflect where I'm coming from or that I wish to call attention to.

©2019 Mark Mehlmauer As long as you agree to supply my name and URL (Creative Commons license at the top and bottom of my website) you may republish this anywhere that you please. Light editing that doesn't alter the content is acceptable. You don't have to include any of the folderol before the greeting or after the closing except for the title. 


   

Journalism (Part 3)

If you're new here, this is a weekly column consisting of letters written to my grandchildren (who exist) and my great-grandchildren (who aren't here yet) — the Stickies — to haunt them after they become grups and/or I'm dead.

[Blogaramians: Blogarama renders the links in my columns useless. Please click on View Original to solve this problem and access lotsa columns.]

Irregularly Appearing Imaginary Guest Stars

Marie-Louise -- My beautiful muse and back scratcher 

Iggy -- My designated Sticky

Dana -- My designated gentlereader

"Purple journalism is not a new form of journalism, it's just a name for journalism as it's actually practiced nowadays." -me


Dear (eventual) Grandstickies & Great-Grandstickies,

[Before I forget, King Crank's impending law that will require all news media outlets of a certain size to make a declaration of honesty, will also be expanded to cover the entertainment industry (primarily Hollywood) as well. Details will be worked out by my Privy Council.]

There wasn't supposed to be a part three but a licensed practitioner of the purple press helpfully/recently supplied a perfect example of exactly what I've been on about. Leigh Ann Caldwell, a reporter for NBC News, tweeted out a song that was horribly off key.

["Twitter is the marriage of full-tilt narcissism and full tilt voyeurism that has finally collided in 140 characters." -Adam Goldberg (prior to the 280 update)]

Ms. Caldwell informed the world that the Donald's choice for the newest Supreme, according to the ubiquitous unnamed source, was the result of a secret deal between the Donald and retiring justice Antney Kennedy. (Antney (ant-knee) was how I learned to pronounce Anthony when I was a kid living on the sou'side a Pittsburgh, with an h.)

See, Kennedy agreed to retire while the Donald was in power if he would hire Brett Kavanaugh, one of his former law clerks. She deleted the tweet in short order and then, via yet another tweet, explained how she screwed up, sort of -- without bothering to apologize. Deep purple journalism.

Hoo-boy.

I know it's hard to believe, but the original claim spread like wildfire. Then, of course, the phony/false/mistaken? tweet became a news story unto itself because purveyors of purple journalism delight in attacking other purveyors of purple journalism.

And...

All sorts of kids who hang out on the left side of the playground, who posted the now deleted tweet as factual, didn't risk injuring themselves by running to their keyboards to correct what turned out to be pure bonkercockie.

And then...

An obscure group of kids that call themselves Ultraviolet put out a six-page memo requesting that Senate Democrats investigate the fact that Mr. Kavanaugh once clerked for a Judge Alex Kominski who recently retired after being accused of being a serial groper.

Mr. Kavanaugh clerked for Judge Kominski... for about a year... about two decades ago. So hey, he's probably guilty of something. Let the investigation begin!

That kind of story is the sort of story that would've been perfect for a News That You Can Use Letter. It wound up here because the McClatchy News Service (allegedly professional, objective journalism) reported on the somewhat less than well known Ultraviolets six pages of mudslinging (bright yellow journalism) as if it was an actual news story.

Geez, if I didn't know better I'd think McClatchy was trying to sling mud at Mr. Kavanaugh without getting their hands dirty. That's practicing purple journalism with (semi)plausible deniability. For the record, I read about all this on the PJ Media website.  I'm merely passing along the good work of one Debra Heine. 


Now, given that we're treading water in the Dizzinformation Ocean and that any news that floats by is potentially bogus, the media (and Hollywood) would be performing a public service by declaring their bias up front. 

They could then openly practice advocacy journalism (and entertainment) and commence/continue saving the unenlightened from themselves without the added burden of pretending to be objective. Or, in Hollywood's case, pretending to tell the truth.  

If they were honest and clear about where they are coming from and where they think we should be headed, and why, and admit they're as motivated by profit/regular paychecks as we mere mortals their credibility would improve. Of course when you've got nowhere to go but up... 

[Sorry, sometimes the obvious joke is worth telling.]   


Two more thoughts. First, once the gloves come off they can attack each other, as well as whichever politician/celebrity/freak from the fringes they currently regard as Satan (which they like to do anyway) with unmitigated savagery. No shortage of Citizens of the Republic seem to be able to get enough of this sort of thing. Keep the mob happy and perhaps save a newspaper or two. Win/win. 

Also, just for the fun of it, to make the game more interesting, let's make it illegal to quote unnamed sources of any sort while simultaneously permitting the release of any sort of document -- as long as the H. sapien that leaked it is identified -- while enforcing any and all laws concerning the release of classified information.

Wouldn't that make things interesting... Poppa loves you.

Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2018 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to comment — or react (way cooler than liking, and Facebook doesn't keep track) — please scroll down. 
    


 

Journalism (Part 2)

If you're new here, this is a weekly column consisting of letters written to my grandchildren (who exist) and my great-grandchildren (who aren't here yet) — the Stickies — to haunt them after they become grups and/or I'm dead.

[Blogaramians: Blogarama renders the links in my columns useless. Please click on View Original to solve this problem and access lotsa columns.]

Irregularly Appearing Imaginary Guest Stars

Marie-Louise -- My beautiful muse and back scratcher 

Iggy -- My designated Sticky

Dana -- My designated gentlereader

"The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made." -Groucho Marx

Dear (eventual) Grandstickies & Great-Grandstickies,

Last week's letter ended thusly:

"When I become king I'm going to require that all news media of a certain size or larger (metrics to be determined) must declare that they are partisan, in what way, and provide a simple, short, clear statement explaining their approach to the news. If they're about lurid pictures/video, lurid stories, and making as much money as possible that's fine -- as long as they acknowledge it." -me

Since Journalism is both an institution and a profession with deep historical roots, and I've taken it upon myself to drag it into the new millennium (kings can do stuff like that), I thought I'd explore the who/what/when/where and whys of...

[Can I ask a question, Poppa? What exactly is purple journalism? Ain't that what you called it?]

I'm flattered and honored you were paying attention, Iggmeister. I credit Marie-Louise for purple; the word popped into my psyche unbidden and I knew instantly it was what I wanted.


Purple journalism is not a new form of journalism, it's just a name for journalism as it's actually practiced nowadays. Take the New York Times. It claims to practice objective journalism but they have an obvious left-wing ethos that bleeds through on every page (traditional, partisan journalism).

However, they're hardly a tabloid. One can also find much in the way of good writing and quality coverage in any given edition (objective, professional journalism).

However, they're not above sensationalism and publishing obvious hit pieces about their ideological enemies. For example, anyone truly familiar with Jordan Peterson, fan or foe, could spot the obvious hatchet job written by Nellie Bowles and published on 5/18/18, that as best I can tell, is about Dr. Peterson's evil twin, it's clearly not about him. The article is pure, bright yellow journalism.

Clang! Fox News, fair and balanced  

No, it ain't, and everyone knows it. It's by conservatives and for conservatives. Rupert Murdoch identified a wildly underserved segment of the TV news market, conservatives, and gave 'em a news network of their own. They're happy and he made another gazillion bucks. Win-win.

Discussion panels with one liberal and multiple conservatives aren't fair and balanced. Ironically, all he did was reverse the ratios that CNN and PBS use. They claim to be fair and balanced as well.

Inviting political hacks, one (R)epublicrat and one (D)epublican, to throw bonkercockie at each other, preferably while behaving like Jerry Springer guests, isn't fair and balanced news, it's showbiz.


Now,

Given that it's widely acknowledged H. sapiens can and do strive for objectivity when it's called for (well, sometimes), but by nature are biased creatures, and

Given that most of the mainstream media are obviously partisan in nature, and

Given that what mainstream actually means is a relatively large audience and content that's not considered too far out there and

Given that, because of the internet, there's no shortage of content that is indeed far out there and much that's even farther out there than that...

Let's label this the era of purple journalism. Let's abandon hypocrisy (fair and balanced) and declare that honesty is the ideal of purple journalism. Not necessarily honest content, honesty about what sort of content.

"While we don't usually publish outright lies, we're not above it if we think we won't get caught, or even if we do that it won't actually matter. We're in it for the money and it sure beats having to get a real job."


While King Crank's Declaration of Honesty will be required for mainstream media outlets, my hope is that any outlet that offers content that it claims to be journalism will do so voluntarily.

For example, imagine The Drudge Report admitting declaring that "We're politically conservative but thrive on sensationalism. Many of the headline links you find on our site will turn out to be nearly as deceptive as clickbait links. We like to sex things up to get you here, keep you here, and keep you clicking."

I'll betcha a bottle-a-pop that Facebook's declaration would be as convoluted, confusing, and deceptive as their explanations of how to use their privacy settings.

[Whatever... but how would you enforce this law? Who or what determines what should be included in a Declaration of Honesty?]

Thanks, Dana, this is the best part. It doesn't matter what's in the statement.

The public, and a given outlets competition, will be the judge of that. If it's been determined that an outlet is large enough to be required to make the declaration, failure to do so will result in the CEO spending an hour in the royal pillory. Media coverage will be encouraged and facilitated.

A useful law that doesn't require bureauons or some sort of police to enforce, if I do say so myself, is a very cool law. Poppa loves you.

Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2018 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to comment — or react (way cooler than liking, and Facebook doesn't keep track) — please scroll down. 
















  

Journalism (Part One)

If you're new here, this is a weekly column consisting of letters written to my grandchildren (who exist) and my great-grandchildren (who aren't here yet) — the Stickies — to haunt them after they become grups and/or I'm dead.

[Blogaramians: Blogarama renders the links in my columns useless. Please click on View Original to solve this problem and access lotsa columns.]

Irregularly Appearing Imaginary Guest Stars

Marie-Louise -- My beautiful muse and back scratcher 

Iggy -- My designated Sticky

Dana -- My designated gentlereader

"With freedom comes responsibilities."  -Eleanor Roosevelt

Dear (eventual) Grandstickies & Great-Grandstickies,

When I was a callowyute several thousand days ago when the Black&White ages were drawing to a close, the world, and how it worked, was presented to me in a black and white fashion by the Sisters of Mercy at my Catholic grade school.

It occurs to me, although it was probably a coinkydink, that the good sisters dressed in black and white.

I was recently reading an allegedly straight news story that was an editorial wearing a clever disguise. It reminded me of what I was taught journalists do for a living.

As objectively as possible, they try to discover the who, what, when, where and why of a given news story so that we all might know what's going on in the world and conduct ourselves accordingly. Let's label this professional journalism.

A noble calling, yes?

Of course, this was a black and white and simplified version of reality -- grade school. At some point down the road, it was revealed that this version of journalism, the one that strives for objective truth, was a relatively recent upgrade.

For example, the phrase yellow journalism, and its meaning, was at least cursorily discussed. Remember the Maine! The hell with Spain! I was not taught that The hell with Spain! was the second half of the famous slogan. I offer this fun fact as a public service, in case you were also unaware.

Wikipedia: "Yellow journalism and the yellow press are American terms for journalism and associated newspapers that present little or no legitimate well-researched news while instead using eye-catching headlines for increased sales."


The two versions of journalism presented above are logical opposites, black and white. Another version, let's call it traditional journalism -- proudly, frankly, openly, and unashamedly partisan -- was the norm in America till the early 1900s.

Now that I'm a sexy senior citizen I realize that no H. sapien is capable of pure objectivity. Also, that truth is provisional and subject to modification.

However, when objectivity is called for objectivity is worth striving for. Truth that stands up to objectivity, reason, open debate and an open mind is good enough, close enough, and absolutely necessary if we're to survive and thrive.

Please check your postmodern nihilism at the door.


At the moment, my Dear Stickies, journalism is a mess. What do you get when you combine professional journalism, yellow journalism, traditional journalism, infotainment, propaganda, public relations, etceterations, and the internet?

Purple journalism.

Purple journalism: a form of journalism combining multiple elements. The purpose varies depending on the source. Most common motivating factors are profit, fame, and ideology.

Journalism, like everything and everyone else, is subject to the high-velocity disruption that is a hallmark of the age I'm living in. I wonder if you will take high-velocity disruption for granted and regard me as quaint?

At the moment, we're treading water in the Dizzinformation Ocean, including those young enough to take this for granted. Any given trusted, go-to source for news (brand name or otherwise...) may be currently featuring a story that's been tainted by professional trolls whose job it is to do so.

While everyone's aware of the blurred and ever-shifting lines between the components of purple journalism mentioned above and...

Nope, don't think so, not everyone. Not even close...
No way, Poppa.
Non-non-non. I don't think so either. 

I've just been the victim of a collective interruption by Dana, Iggy, and Marie-Louise -- in that order. Fine, point taken. The question is, what, if anything, can/should we do about it?


Assuming you prefer living in a country with free speech and a free press (my personal preference) your options are limited if you wish to avoid stepping on other people's right to run their mouths.

Another of those black and white notions imparted to me by Sister Mary McGillicuddy and her... well, sisters, was that with rights come responsibilities. Same coin, different sides.

One of the primary responsibilities that comes with any given right is acknowledging that the other kids on the playground have the same rights as you do and that you're gonna have to find a way to share the swings. I may have mentioned this ten or twenty times before.

How To Get a Clue & Maintain Your Bliss

Select a limited, cross-section of information sources that you can comfortably keep track of and ignore the rest.

Make sure that at least one of them pisses you off and that at least one of them is a bit over your head.

Fire up your cynicism, skepticism, experience, and knowledge.

Never forget we've evolved (or were created) to be tribal and that confirmation bias never sleeps.

Maintain (try to anyway) an open heart and an open mind.


When I become king I'm going to require that all news media of a certain size or larger (metrics to be determined) must declare that they are partisan, in what way, and provide a simple, short, clear statement explaining their approach to the news.

If they're about lurid pictures/video, lurid stories, and making as much money as possible that's fine -- as long as they acknowledge it. Easy peasy, right? Poppa loves you.

Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2018 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to comment — or react (way cooler than liking, and Facebook doesn't keep track) — please scroll down.