from NYTimes.com
Oh, Tucker Carlson. No sooner do you win us over by agreeing to wear very tight spandex on "Dancing With The Stars" and posing for pictures like this than you lose us utterly by endorsing Top Ten Most Wanted Man Warren Steed Jeff's right to enjoy sexual relations with girls aged 13 - 16. Newsbusters has the details:
On his MSNBC show of this afternoon, Tucker was outraged that Jeffs had been placed on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted list:"His crime was wanting to enter into life-long arrangements with women, or facilitating that between a man and . . . was this guy trying to undermine America, destroy our way of life or murder our citizens? No! What the hell was he doing on the Top Ten list?"
Carlson wouldn't back down even when guests A.B. Stoddard of 'The Hill' newspaper and Republican Frank Donatelli pointed out that Jeffs has been accused of sexual assault on a minor and other crimes.
Alas, Tucker missed the opportunity to refine his position on the Top Ten list ("murder our citizens" is pretty clear cut but the murky "undermine America" and "destroy our way of life" are wide open to debate in this instance). Instead, he tried to make a case for the defense of "the alternate lifestyle that is plural marriage." Democratic strategist Steve McMahon stepped neatly over the hole in Tucker's logic by pointing out that "Pedophilia, Tucker, is not an alternate lifestyle that's recognized anywhere as a legitimate one." Tucker still didn't stop, pointing out in his defense that the "women" were 16 (our quotes, not his). When McMahon pointed out that some of the girls were "as young as thirteen" Tucker still didn't recant, saying "It's a hard-nosed group here today!" Damn, some people are uptight about statutory rape.
This is the second time Tucker has been dangerously glib and cavalier about matters relating to sexual assault; he previously referred to the alleged Duke rape victims as "crypto-hookers." Charming.
It's official: Richard Armitage is Robert Novak's mystery source on the Plame leak. Over three years after unwittingly blabbing to Novak that Joseph Wilson's wife was in the CIA and Novak wittingly publishing said blabbery, the mystery that launched a Grand Jury, a vow from President Bush to track down those lawbreaking leakers and run 'em out of the White House, a stream of embarrassing denials from Scott McClellan, all sorts of baseball metaphors and at least one delightful musical parody has finally been solved.
Novak, who took a lot of heat during the Plame investigation for having outed Plame and for refusing to reveal his source (given that the leak was perceived to have been deliberate and a felony), gave a little back on Sunday's Meet The Press, saying that "I think the time has way passed for my source to identify himself." The moral highground sits so comfortably on someone nicknamed "The Prince Of Darkness," doesn't it?
from TVNewser.com
Unbelievable catch by Brian Stelter at TVNewser, courtesy of an eagle-eyed tipster: CBS visibly altered Katie Couric's photo in its "Watch" Magazine, slenderizing her waist, arms and neck. Yowsers! TVNewser id's the first photo as Katie's official CBS photo, taken at the upfronts in May. Let's hear it for transparency and accuracy in the news! Paging Adnan Hajj...
Michelle Pilecki
When USA Today reported earlier this month that "Congress appears ready to slash funding for the research and treatment of brain injuries caused by bomb blasts," the media outcry was... nearly non-existent, outside of military newspapers. Few news outlets followed up on proposals to cut in half the $14 million budget for the Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center, which specializes in traumatic brain injury, which center co-founder George Zitnay calls "the...
Byron York, reporter/pundit/general flack for the White House for the National Review, took reporters Michael Isikoff and David Corn to task today, charging that for their new book on the Plame case, they didn't contact anyone from the Rove or Libby teams.
York's source for this allegation? The Rove and Libby teams, of course.
Now, this seems to ring a bell: where have I heard about Rove and Libby, or maybe a spokesman for Rove and Libby, denying, Scout's Honor, that they had ever talked to reporters?
Oh, that's right:
Q Scott, earlier this week you told us that neither Karl Rove, Elliot Abrams nor Lewis Libby disclosed any classified information with regard to the leak. I wondered if you could tell us more specifically whether any of them told any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?MR. McCLELLAN: Those individuals -- I talked -- I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this. And that's where it stands.
Q So none of them told any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?
MR. McCLELLAN: They assured me that they were not involved in this.
And what do you know? Turns out York's sources may not have been telling the truth; shortly after the article was posted, he appended an "author's note" with an email from Isikoff, who wrote that he had, in fact, contacted the Rove and Libby teams.
You know, Byron -- There's an old saying in Tennessee (I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee) that says, fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again.
- Alex Koppelman
http://knowledgeisbeing.com/
Somewhere, Keith Olbermann is sticking pins in a Bill O'Reilly voodoo doll: Fox News' ratings, TVNewser reports, are down since August of last year. Like, way down. Like down 28 percent in primetime among all viewers, down 20 percent in primetime in the "money demo" (viewers aged 25-54) and down 7 percent in daytime viewership overall. In fact, the only place Fox is up is during the day, when they managed a ratings increase of just 2 percent, and even then only in the money demo.
And lest you think this is an industry-wide trend, consider this: over the same time period, CNN and MSNBC are up. CNN's up 35 percent during the day -- 46 percent in the money demo -- and up 21 percent in primetime overall, 25 percent in the money demo. MSNBC's ratings increases aren't quite as impressive -- up 6 percent in primetime overall, 8 percent in the money demo, and up 36 percent in the money demo during the day, 26 percent overall.
We, of course, are Fair and Balanced here, so there won't be any celebrating later tonight. Certainly we will not be opening any champagne. That would be wrong.
Peter Lance
In the fall of 2005 I was approached by Jonathan Towers, producer of Inside 9/11, a four-hour documentary on the road to 9/11 in which I was one of 60 journalists and government officials interviewed. I told Towers that I was working on a new investigative book exposing FBI negligence in its nine year failure to stop Ali A. Mohamed, al Qaeda's chief spy who infiltrated the Bureau, the CIA and the Green Berets at...
The newest issue of Foreign Policy has just come out, and it's got quite the cover.
Rather poignant, no? We're sure the good folks at The Village Voice would agree, too, since they did virtually the exact same thing on their cover five years ago -- just after the attacks on September 11th.
We haven't seen the print edition of Foreign Policy just yet. But somewhere in there we hope there's a decent explanation for this. A homage, perhaps?
UPDATE: Having just stopped by a bookstore and seen the print version (you see what we do for you people?), we can rule out the possibility that there's an explanation in there. What you can't tell from the image of Foreign Policy's cover, however, is that it appears to be an actual picture rather than something created on a computer. So think what you will: This was either an intentional ripoff of The Village Voice (seems unlikely), simple ineptitude on the part of Foreign Policy's editors, or a testament to The Village Voice's dwindling relevance. We report, you decide.
UPDATE 2: The people at Foreign Policy respond: "Rest assured; the similarities are a complete coincidence."
FINAL UPDATE: David Butow, the photographer who took the picture on the cover of Foreign Policy, has informed us that, contrary to what we thought, his photograph was in fact digitally manipulated. He also writes that he "took the original picture on assignment for US News and World Report about two weeks after 9/11//01. I own the copyright to all my work and after an assignment, my pictures go to my agency where the pictures are digitized and stored for sale to books, magazines etc. FP magazine bought the photo from Corbis, my agency at the time."
- Ankush Khardori
It's as if National Review Media Blogger Stephen Spruiell woke up last Thursday morning, turned on his computer and thought to himself, "Look at these silly women bloggers, up in arms because some article in one of the most influential (despite a little number-fluffing) business publications in the country classified them all as unmarriageable slobs who waste their ovaries in the workforce (so to speak).
So what's a National Review reporter to do? In Spruiell's case, lay on the sarcasm in an apparent attempt to both discredit those who've denounced the article and egg them on even more. Last week he quipped that indignant responses from sites like Gawker, Salon and Huffpo were "everything we've come to expect: civil, rational and open-minded," and that the Forbes editors were forced to remove the piece "[a]fter a few hours of hearing such thoughtful objections." Ok Steve, we get it. Even "thinner skin[ned]" females glued to their computers instead of tending to domestic duties can figure out the whole sarcasm thing. Later, he snarked at the Times piece questioning the accuracy of Forbes' web traffic and revenue statements, calling it a "a thinly disguised shot at the competition."
Now he's calling on the latest reports that taller individuals have greater intelligence as proof that objections to the Book of Noer were misplaced and hypocritical. Buried in his gooey tarpit of sarcasm, he may actually have a point on this one; the studies concluding that greater height equals greater smarts are as full of holes and unanswered questions as Noer's cited Social Forces journal, among others, and should be identified as such. But likening reports of recent study results to an opinion piece declaring "Don't Marry Career Women" falls pretty short. Sure, if ledes for the height study were screaming "Don't Hire Short People," we'd have evidence that members of the media were relying on uncertain data to negatively influence public opinion and deepen existing stereotypes (though, for the record, I've known some pretty impressive smarties under 5'7"). But as we can see, that's not the case. Just for future reference, Steve, here's some advice: relying on faulty parallels and snarky insults isn't quite what we gals need to convince us once and for all to quit complaining and head back to the vacuum cleaner.
— Melissa Lafsky
Harry Shearer
EDINBURGH--Yes, even the BBC. BBC News 24, the network's commercial-free version of CNN, has been covering the memorial service at New Orleans St. Louis Cathedral, when its reporter, standing on Canal Street, referred to Katrina as a "category three storm". According to the updated assessment of the National Hurricane Center, Katrina was a weak 2 or a strong 1 by the time it passed New Orleans.
Gawker tells us all the time that the media is one big Ivy League reunion. In the dog days of summer, the month-old gossip blog IvyGate thought entry-level fact-checkers stuck at the office might appreciate a field guide to their bosses around town.
The shocking result? Ivy League graduates only hold 40% of top editorial positions in national media.
The new "IvyGate Index" lists Ancient Eight degree-holders at the top of 25 media mastheads. If striped blazers and half-restrained sneers make you hot, it's good, clean, status-conscious, Six Degrees of Graydon Carter ("no college") fun. And we just loved the introduction:
Flip through The New Yorker and wow, there was that time you and Phil Gourevitch stayed up after that party in Risley, had a lot of wine, really just talked, and one thing led to another and it's not like it makes you gay, it was just college, you know?N.B.: Gourevitch's baby, the Paris Review, wasn't prestigious enough to make the site's "10 best magazines" breakdown.
Harry Shearer
EDINBURGH--Already having sampled a little of the American network offerings, and anticipating more of the same today as we hit K-day plus one, I'm humbly suggesting you turn off the box, ignore the newspapers, and pick up some heavy reading. Purpose: to understand why New Orleans flooded. Read "The Storm" by Dr. Ivor van Heerden of the LSU Hurricane Center. Read "Path of Destruction" by Mark Schleifstein and John McQuaid, two of the reporters who...
