Friday, November 24, 2006

NYT: Attempting to calm things in print

In the deadliest sectarina attack in Baghdad since the American-led invasion, explosions from five powerful car bombs and a moartar shell tore through crowded insterctions and marketplaces in the teeming Shiite district of Sadr City on Thursday afternoon, killing at least 144 people and wounding 2006, the police said.
The coordinated bombings followed a two-hour siege by dozens of Sunni Arab insurgents against the headquarters of the Shiite-run Health Ministry in northeastern Baghdad, about three miles west of Sadr City according to ministry officials. The gunmen, shooting from nearby byildings and surrounding streets, pelted the ministry with mortar shells and gunfire, though they fled when Iraqi troops and American military helicopters arrived, the officials and witnesses said.

The above is Kirk Semple's attempt to make order out of chaos, "Bombings Kill 144 In Baghdad Slum; Siege at Ministry" in this morning's New York Times. Won't work, it will require expressing shock that military helicopters flying in doesn't lead to some sort of David & Goliath stance. Semple's body count is wrong and was wrong yesterday. More so today (see snapshot later today). But it's the best the Times offers today. Edward Wong takes dictation and the paper runs an article it can't verify.

B-b-but those days are over! Remember Judith Miller died for all their sins! No, she was public stoned and nothing at the paper changed. Scott Shane writes an article that will sail over many heads but it's the sort of thing that makes Rebecca hate one organization.

Turning to e-mails. Kayla knows what Ava and I are reviewing for The Third Estate Sunday Review and passes along something by the idiot Bellafante that "truly allows stupidity to shine." While I don't doubt it, I'm hoping not to read it. Ava and I worked several hours last night on the TV reviews. As we did last year (which is how Kayla guessed), we decided to review two music specials. While noting what needed to be addressed in each, we decided to make them two reviews instead of one. We also wrote the one Bellafante's weighing in on (or maybe just gushing over the star of the special -- only a certain type of woman gets Bellafante's gushing -- they trade in sex and never have a thought deeper than their nail polish). We spent a healthy chunk of time writing that review and to read the idiot Bellafante might mean that we go back and start reworking the review. (We note two idiots on the Stunted Girl's 'art' -- both from the 80s, one of whom is quoted. Two should be more than enough.)

We use the word "cock" twice but the f-word is noted as the "f-word." Due to 15 e-mails, we did try to make it welcoming to everyone.

In other e-mails, there's a whiner noting that his e-mail was answered in last night's entry and then the answer was pulled. He got his answer, why he has a problem is anyone's guess. I made the decision to pull that paragraph about three hours after the entry posted. (It's been covered in Polly's Brew in the column "'Sins' of the flesh.") He further whined about other sites being on vacation and "no one" posting. That's not true, Elaine posted last night.

For this site, the only one I'm responsible for, we had three entries up yesterday. I had a houseful of guests (about half of which are still here), a number of us participated in a round-table for today's gina & krista round-robin last night.

To the indymedia no-star who wrote in objecting to commentary offered last night, poor baby. Shine on, not whine on, we all shine on, that's what John Lennon sang. Try applying it to your own work. I'm informed that I don't even cover anything but Iraq!

Uh, yeah, here, at this site, that was the community's decision. Guesting for Kat and participating at The Third Estate Sunday Review, I have covered other things. At this site, the community voted that the emphasis would be on Iraq.

The e-mail informs of 'student' coverage as well and that's laughable because we've noted more students here (just here) attempting to end the war then the laughable student coverage the e-mail refers to. It's also true that if you want to claim you cover students, you damn well should have covered the longest student protest of 2006. It was one day or one week. And the students were successful.

Now maybe you see "deaf" and get squeamish? Maybe it's too much in your little faux world to note that? I have no idea. Many people run from people deemed 'different.' In earlier times, that mean only covering White males. Today, it apparently means ignoring the disabled community.

If you wanted to be quoted here, you should have noted it. If you still do, e-mail again and it will be, believe me, I would love to go to town on you and your idiotic points. Till then, you can refer to "The students of Gallaudet University are standing up." And you can ask yourself why, with all the people on the payroll, neither you nor any co-worker made the time or space to cover that? Spare me the lecture on student coverage which appears to exist only in relation to whether or not their goal is to elect candidates.

And I just got the title for the piece we're doing Sunday at The Third Estate Sunday Review!

So thank you to the Whine On because we tossed around idea over dinner yesterday and couldn't find the right title for the mock magazine intended to be a combination of three independent magazines serving the left.

Whine On also takes issue with the fact that on Wednesday, Wally's "JUDITH REGAN: BORN TRASH, DIE TRASH AND STINKING UP THE WORLD IN BETWEEN" and Cedric's "Trashmouth Judith Regan" dealt with News Corp.'s attempt to enrich O.J. Simpson, grab attention for itself (via the book company and Fox 'entertainment') and further debase the public.

If Whine On doesn't grasp that it's offensive to turn over millions to a man who beat his wife, well domestic abuse is an issue that some still don't grasp. When you add in that Simpson is believed to have killed Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman and further add in that the money- making scheme is nothing but O.J. Simpson profitting from that belief, it's rather disgusting.

It's also exactly what Fox 'entertainment' has done all along. 24 sells the Bully Boy's torture policies to America more than the idiot Dershowitz ever could. They popularize torture. That Whine On doesn't grasp the damage Fox 'entertainment' has done to the country is only surprising if you fail to realize that for all the attention given to big media right now, there was no charge led by Whine On's outlet when Fox 'entertainment' could have and should have been stopped. The strongest critique came not from the pages of Whine On's outlet but from Mike Nichols' Working Girl. 20 years from now, the outlet will probably be focused on undoing the things that happen right now (and that they ignore currently) as well.

They offer a laughable watching-the-media beat that really doesn't. They're under some mistaken belief that what Bill O'Reilly says has more impact than the abuse Jack Bauer heaps on while the audience cheers.

That's the e-mails, that's the entry. It's called a 'talking entry,' Whine On, and before this week rolled around, members were polled (by Gina and Krista) to be sure all were fine with that. They are. If you're not, well at least you didn't have to fork over any money to read this.

The e-mail address for this site is