Kerfuffle

Assassination of abortion doctor brings out the worst of the right wing radicals... but not on every righty blog

The assassination of George Tiller, an abortion doctor in Wichita, Kansas has dominated the media today.  Tiller was gunned down as he served as an usher inside his church.  (Local news account here if this whole story slid by you.)

The story has also dominated the blogosphere.  The President weighed in, and so did the founder of Operation Rescue, the anti-abortion group loosely tied to the murderer. (In fairness, the current president of the organization is trying hard to contradict the founder and back far away from this.  Good luck with that). 

Lots of commentary in lots of places.  One place I checked had this to say:

Some right wing blogs are closing comments on threads about the murder, and judging from the vile, sick stuff you see above, that’s probably a good idea.

This is very, very bad craziness, at its worst. Shame on all you people who are gloating and partying over a murder that took place inside a church. And you call yourselves “Christians?” What the hell is wrong with you?

I’m pleased to say that LGF did not join in this orgy of murder celebration; we had a few over the top comments, but they were quickly deleted, and a couple of people lost their accounts.

LGF is Little Green Footballs, a pretty respectable blog that is on the other side of the fence from Daily Kos and AMERICAblog... meaning right of center.  To LGF's credit, they tried to avoid the incredible ugliness that can bubble up in comments from readers.  Comments on big sites don't necessarily represent the views of the site itself, just individuals.  But LGF took steps to delete hateful entries and, they also claim to have kicked out a few members along the way today.  Good on them.

Meanwhile, at the hate-fest that is Free Republic, a pretty heinous blog if there ever was one, the vitriol was flying.  I won't bother to publish any of the hateful, violence-inciting or otherwise incredibly asinine commentary, and I will break with Kerfuffle protocol by not linking directly to it.  You can get there via LGF if you must.

Frequently, sites like Daily Kos are called out by the likes of Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh as being lunatic left purveyors of lies, nastiness and distortions.  (O'Reilly once called Daily Kos a hate site on par with Nazis and the KKK.)  I wonder if wither of those two men will have anything to say about what's going on in their own blogosphere backyard right now.  I doubt it.  Just like I doubt the right wing punditocracy will see Tiller's assassination as domestic terrorism, which by their own standards it most certainly is.

There's no shortage of hate, that's for sure.  Left, right, whatever; it's unfortunate that it seems to be one of the ingredients in the exchange of views and information via the Internet.  Mostly it shows up in the form of comments by readers, but it can also come from the publishers/owners of sites as well.  It would be nice to think that eventually that part of blogging and forums will be cleaned up.  It would also be nice if everyone in the world sent me five dollars.  Neither pipe dream will happen. 

Free speech isn't always pretty.  Or nice.  Or articulate.  But everyone gets their say, such as it is.

As old media (i.e. newspapers) cut staff and/or fail altogether, new media (i.e. online news sites) move to fill the void

When the Huffington Post was launched in May of 2005, it was primarily a news aggregator and source of liberal commentary.  As it developed, HuffPo found itself at the center of controversy at the hands of exemplary journalists like Bill O'Reilly, but fortunately not only survived but grew its audience and its quality of content.

Over time, HuffPo developed into more than just a repackager of links and loose collection of commentaries.  The site staffed up with reporters and editors, polished the appearance and presentation of the site, and becamean online newspaper... for lack of a better term.  Like newspapers, it joined up with the Associated Press, gained credentialed access to major news events, and built an impressive list of columnists. 

Sites like HuffPo continue to rely on traditional news sources in part for core content and reporting... for which, of course, the news sites get nothing other than the obligatory links and source credit.  Most often the most solid investigative reporting comes from newspapers... the very medium sites like the Huffington Post seem to most closely resemble.  Unfortunately, the very newspapers that are doing the heavy lifting when it comes to reporting -- providing online news sites and blogs with solid sourced material -- are failing.  In the last few months, venerable papers like the Rocky Mountain News in Denver have folded, while others like the Seattle Post-Intelligencer have moved their operations to online-only editions.  The Ann Arbor News will shut down in July, but plans to relaunch as a web product before year-end.  My local afternoon newspaper, Madison's Capital Times made the move almost a year ago to an online-only product.  The Christian Science Monitor is heading that way next month.

Newspapers that remain are cutting editorial staff right and left.  The same is true for most broadcast news operations, especially in the national television and radio networks.  Someone is going to have to pick up the slack.  That's why I find the Associated Press article (via the Washington Times) by David Bauder very interesting...

NEW YORK (AP) - The Huffington Post said Sunday that it will bankroll a group of investigative journalists, directing them at first to look at stories about the nation's economy.

The popular blog is collaborating with The Atlantic Philanthropies and other donors to launch the Huffington Post Investigative Fund with an initial budget of $1.75 million. That should be enough for 10 staff journalists who will primarily coordinate stories with freelancers, said Arianna Huffington, co-founder and editor-in-chief of The Huffington Post.

Work that the journalists produce will be available for any publication or Web site to use at the same time it is posted on The Huffington Post, she said.

This is a rather significant investment, but it is also very encouraging.  It stands to reason that this is where the future of investigative journalism is headed.  In the past few years, online news sources have distinguished themselves as much more than just overgrown blogs.  The current administration has taken note, with President Obama calling on reporters from the Huffington Post and Politico in recent prime time news conferences.  The president recognizes journalism's brave new frontier.

Cool.  Very cool.

Two years of blogging at Kerfuffle; So far no book deal, no pundit invitations from MSNBC or CNN, no endorsement deals.

Plenty of typos, unsupported opinions, and likely unlawful exploitation of the Fair Use doctrine.

Two years ago today I decided to join the growing number of people who felt what they have to say is worth some form of publication.  I had been dumping a lot of comments on Daily Kos, plus the occasional diary, but felt there needed to be an even bigger opportunity for me to bloviate.  I always liked the word "kerfuffle," and it seemed an appropriate title for this stuff.

Truth be told, I wrote here for maybe two months before I mentioned it to anyone.  I wanted to see if I could put stuff up that was reasonably meaningful (using a very low bar) at a rate of at least three times a week.  I eventually went public with it, using a live-blogging marathon from Brandworks, my former employer's annual branding conference in June 2007, as the first thing I actively promoted.

The more I read other blogs, the more I liked blogging.  And the closer we got to the 2008 general election, the more political this space became.  I occasionally got into trouble, and did end up offering to resign from my job over one particular post.  I've reflected on the unexplainable death of a friend and former coworker, and the loss of my biggest fan.  In the home stretch of the presidential election, I probably took a little too much joy in beating Sarah Palin like a pinata... a guilty pleasure that continues even now.

Kerfuffle went over a thousand views in a single day for a piece I wrote that was more journalistic than most and ended up getting picked up by a high traffic blog.  Some of the posts that required the least effort brought a lot of hits, thanks to some clever headline-writing.  Curiously, the throw-away rant I wrote about the incompetence of the Illinois Tollway Authority last year has turned out to be my most enduring Google link, generating at least five hits a week every week since it went up.  All in all it's been a fun experiment that eventually turned into a regular activity, not to mention becoming an element of my area of research and study in grad school.  Who knew?

For those of you who drop by regularly or even occasionally, I sincerely thank you.  It's not like there are a lot of you -- bringing just over 17,000 page views since this got going.   On a great day maybe 100 people stop by; on a slow day maybe we pick up, umm, maybe five hits.  But I appreciate them all.  Even more, I value comments. 

Stop in any time.  We're always open.  And if there's nothing new, there's always some Pulitzer-quality writing in the archives you can enjoy.  Of course, that's the stuff I "borrowed" from real writers.  But still...

Obama's WaPo OpEd: "The Action Americans Need"

Under the byline "By Barack Obama," this appeared on page A17 of today's Washington Post:

By now, it's clear to everyone that we have inherited an economic crisis as deep and dire as any since the days of the Great Depression. Millions of jobs that Americans relied on just a year ago are gone; millions more of the nest eggs families worked so hard to build have vanished. People everywhere are worried about what tomorrow will bring.

What Americans expect from Washington is action that matches the urgency they feel in their daily lives -- action that's swift, bold and wise enough for us to climb out of this crisis.

Because each day we wait to begin the work of turning our economy around, more people lose their jobs, their savings and their homes. And if nothing is done, this recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.

That's why I feel such a sense of urgency about the recovery plan before Congress. With it, we will create or save more than 3 million jobs over the next two years, provide immediate tax relief to 95 percent of American workers, ignite spending by businesses and consumers alike, and take steps to strengthen our country for years to come.

This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending -- it's a strategy for America's long-term growth and opportunity in areas such as renewable energy, health care and education. And it's a strategy that will be implemented with unprecedented transparency and accountability, so Americans know where their tax dollars are going and how they are being spent.

In recent days, there have been misguided criticisms of this plan that echo the failed theories that helped lead us into this crisis -- the notion that tax cuts alone will solve all our problems; that we can meet our enormous tests with half-steps and piecemeal measures; that we can ignore fundamental challenges such as energy independence and the high cost of health care and still expect our economy and our country to thrive.

I reject these theories, and so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change. They know that we have tried it those ways for too long. And because we have, our health-care costs still rise faster than inflation. Our dependence on foreign oil still threatens our economy and our security. Our children still study in schools that put them at a disadvantage. We've seen the tragic consequences when our bridges crumble and our levees fail.

Every day, our economy gets sicker -- and the time for a remedy that puts Americans back to work, jump-starts our economy and invests in lasting growth is now.

Now is the time to protect health insurance for the more than 8 million Americans at risk of losing their coverage and to computerize the health-care records of every American within five years, saving billions of dollars and countless lives in the process.

Now is the time to save billions by making 2 million homes and 75 percent of federal buildings more energy-efficient, and to double our capacity to generate alternative sources of energy within three years.

Now is the time to give our children every advantage they need to compete by upgrading 10,000 schools with state-of-the-art classrooms, libraries and labs; by training our teachers in math and science; and by bringing the dream of a college education within reach for millions of Americans.

And now is the time to create the jobs that remake America for the 21st century by rebuilding aging roads, bridges and levees; designing a smart electrical grid; and connecting every corner of the country to the information superhighway.

These are the actions Americans expect us to take without delay. They're patient enough to know that our economic recovery will be measured in years, not months. But they have no patience for the same old partisan gridlock that stands in the way of action while our economy continues to slide.

So we have a choice to make. We can once again let Washington's bad habits stand in the way of progress. Or we can pull together and say that in America, our destiny isn't written for us but by us. We can place good ideas ahead of old ideological battles, and a sense of purpose above the same narrow partisanship. We can act boldly to turn crisis into opportunity and, together, write the next great chapter in our history and meet the test of our time.

The writer is president of the United States.

[Apologies to the Washington Post for violating the Fair Use Doctrine by lifting the entire thing this one time.  Please don't sue me.]

Don't let the door hit you on your ass on the way out: A look back at the Worst Presidency Ever

Sure, Keith Olberman's a little biased against George W. Bush.  So are most all decent, thinking people.  I mean, c'mon.  Look what he and his comrades have done to the the United States of America.  Sad but true. 

From MSNBC via FDL...

Jeez, what a schmuck.  Tuesday can't come soon enough.

As conservatives abandon the Republican party's presidential ticket, major newspapers explain McCain's biggest endoresement-costing FAIL: Sarah Palin

No need to continue to point out how newspapers are overwhelmingly breaking for Obama in terms of endorsements.  Editor & Publisher, the newspaper trade publication has that covered.

But one of the Koz Kids, as frequent Kerfuffle conservative commenter David Behrel likes to call them, has an enlightening summary of quotes from some of the endorsements.  The selection of Governor Palin as his running mate was a catastrophic mistake, and a glaring example of bad judgment...

DK's DemfromCT summarizes...

Note how they all feel the need to comment on Palin's inadequacy as a viable candidate in making the choice for Obama. No surprise there; it was a key and obvious McCain error in judgment to pick such a spectacularly unvetted and unqualified individual for VP. She's done so badly, in fact, that her future political career is very much in doubt, no matter how much K-Lo loves her.

If conservatives can't come to grips with what a poor choice Palin has turned out to be – anti-intellectual, uncurious, know nothing, unqualified and unserious – they will never understand why they are about to be out of power, let alone how to get back from out of the intellectual wilderness Palin is leading them into. [emphasis mine, as if you didn't know]

You will find the whole post here.
....................................................................................

[Note:  I chose to post this as I have so that our conservative comment-leaver, my friend and fraternity brother DBehrel, can see how things are sourced.  He had some difficulty understanding the difference between credible news sources and op-ed sources...

[from the comments last week]

RE: Michelle Malkin. Accusing someone of not being "credible" because you don't agree with them does not an opened mind and enlighted view point make. And this from someone who reads the Koz Kids and thinks Keith Olberman is a journalist?

Since I value his participation in the comments, I thought this would be instructional.  I could have just lifted the key phrases from the individual newspaper's sites, which is what I usually do.  But note how the DK diarist used direct links for each newspaper citation.  This is a good example of a blogger putting up an opinion but citing news (not other opinion) sources.  This is not to say that citing and linking to the Malkins and the Olbermans of the world is wrong... just recognize them for what they are:  opinionists and/or entertainers and not journalists.  And when the DK diarist cites and links to Brooks and some other columnists, its as a discussion point, but not a citation of a credible news source. 

As for Sparks, I'm not sure who you are but at least DB puts some reasoning and thought in his comments.  Give it a try. 

I criticize because I love.  I'm a helper that way.]

I wanted to be a journalist, but that was a long time ago.

As soon as I had a camera and a darkroom, I was chasing fire trucks.  I watched a two hour block of national and local news every weekday evening when I was in junior high. I saw All The President's Men, four times.  I was editor in chief of my high school paper, and got one of my stories picked up by the local news/talk radio station.  I wanted to be a journalist.  I got a BA from Drake University's School of Journalism and Mass Communications.

So what happened?

The more I got into journalism school, the more I was captivated by the "mass communication" part and how it intersected with my minor, sociology.  As I moved through my four years of college, I migrated to advertising, ultimately graduating and getting a media job with a big ad agency.  Still, I held a candle out there for my inner journalist.  When one of my bes friends gave up on advertising after a year and took a job as a lowly desk assistant at CBS News in New York, I thought about doing something similar.  But it was media and communication, and not the gathering of news, that really was and still is my key are of interest.  So I have been content to live vicariously through my CBS pal (now chief of one of their domestic bureaus) and another good friend who is a state bureau chief for the Associated Press. 

Because of the connection I feel toward CBS News and the AP through these two good friends, I found  two media-related stories more than a little disappointing:

• McCain's Interview on CBS

When CBS's Katie Couric interviewed John McCain on Tuesday, her producers edited one exchange to include part of McCain's answer to a previous question on Iraq -- and, in the process, deleted comments that have touched off a controversy.

The "CBS Evening News" interview began with Couric quoting Barack Obama as saying that "there might have been improved security even without the surge. What's your response to that?"

But what viewers saw next was not what the Arizona senator said next, an out-of-order sequence that news organizations generally do not allow. It was McCain's earlier comment that "Senator Obama has indicated by his failure to acknowledge the success of the surge that he would rather lose a war than lose a campaign." That was spliced into the second part of his subsequent answer, the editing break covered by a still photo of McCain with Gen. David Petraeus.

• The AP has a Ron Fournier problem

...

But Fournier, now the wire service's D.C. bureau chief, shrugged off the embarrassing revelation, conceding only: "I regret the breezy nature of the correspondence."

Of course, Fournier wasn't simply being breezy. "Have a great weekend" -- that's "breezy."

Instead, Fournier was declaring sides. That was the implication of Fournier's note: "Karl, you might think the media are liberal, but you can trust me. And give me access and return my emails. Because I'm on your side."

The Fournier revelation came as no surprise to anyone who has read his recent campaign work, which has routinely been caustic and dismissive of Democratic contenders. In two "Analysis" pieces and a column, Fournier questioned whether John Edwards was a "phony," announced the Clintons suffered from "utter self-absorption," and claimed that Barack Obama was "bordering on arrogance." That's the right of a pundit. But at the same time, Fournier avoided raising any doubts about Sen. John McCain, and in fact rushed to his aid in print during the senator's time of campaign need.

You really do have to read the stories n full to get the whole picture.  But, in a nutshell, CBS News essentially fixed yet another significant brain fart for John McCain in the form of re-editing an interview to use an answer given for one question as the response for another... the one he screwed up.  And AP's Ron Fournier, the Washington Bureau Chief, has pretty much been exposed as seriously partisan.  Of course, that's just my interpretation (and the interpretation of others if you care do do some Google work).

I'm the first to agree that there is inherent bias in nearly every corner of the news media.  Bias is basic human nature.  But good editors, good reporters and good management can overcome a great deal of the bias is straight news reporting. What's more, any news media outlet is entitled to its own opinion.  Op Ed pieces are an important part of the public dialog.  The thing is (talking to you, Mr. Fournier) that there is supposed to be some sort of identifying element for opinion.  Presenting opinion as fact is, well, unethical.  Smae goes for cutting and pasting questions and answers.  The answers are meant for the specific question that was asked. That's what i learned in journalism school.  To do otherwise is a violation of the readers' and viewers' trust.  Silly me.

CBS News and the AP are both good organizations for the most part, and their reporters should be just as bothered by these two stories as I am.  It's not just Fournier's and Couric's credibility (she had credibility?) that is tarnished.  Every CBS News producer and every AP reporter is splattered with this manure.

I wanted to be a journalist.  If rules and ethics are going out the window in that profession, I'll stick with being a blogger.

There's more here than I thought

When I started this blog, it was actually the second attempt. The first, horribly titled Newf Droolings, was really a beta, and a bad one. But some friends and a few blogger pals from DK recommended I give it another shot. I went to Typepad because their platform is pretty flexible and a lot easier than, say, Blogspot... at least for me.

Although I hadn't set out last evening to do it, I ended up reading this entire body of "work" in reverse chronology. And I did it without the several beers I had initially intended on consuming. Before I realized it, I had spent about three hours reading old posts. I came away feeling pretty good about all of this. Here are few observations, if I may:

I need to proof posts better. When I get going on the MacBook in my hunt and peckish typing method, I go pretty fast and leave a lot of typos in my wake. Spellcheck gets most of them, but not all. You are your own copy editor in the blogosphere.

Some of the things that I might have thought funny at the time are not that funny later. I honestly don't drunk-blog. Well, there was that live-blogging from Howard Dean's speech at Yearly Kos last August where it got a bit sloppy, but I fixed most of it the next day. Sometimes I will riff on something and think it is fucking hilarious. Welcome to Tom's world at home.

That brings me to another thing I knew but was reinforced by rereading this stuff. I drop F-bombs. A lot of them. Sometimes I opt for "freaking" of the clever "f***". But I lost count. No matter to me, as I think the F word has become much more of a euphemism than it's original "for unlawful carnal knowledge" origin. George Carlin, by the way, does a great bit on this from back in the 70s. Prescient. I can be like that with language. (See the post entitled "That's so Retarded".)

Some of my best writing, in my not-so-humble opinion, is found when I am writing about family. It's from the heart, and I suppose that shows. Next to those, other posts like the recent one about the poor woman walking her bike along the highway during a brutally cold night or my thoughts about gay pride week are my favorites. I guess I like writing about people.

That gets me to politics. Early on, the majority of my posts were political. I think this came from the fact that Kerfuffle came out of a need to practice political writing so I could do a better job as a DK diarist. I eventually figured out that the front-pagers and other top diarists at DK had politics covered pretty well, as do a zillion other blogs. so I turned more in the direction of human-interest for the stuff I cross-posted between here and there. And what do you know? Those diaries, about gay pride, the woman in the cold night, and watching 9/11 unfold with my dog are the ones that got picked up and promoted as diary rescues (a way of getting a second, more prominent listing) on DK. Gratifying and informative both.

Some stuff never should have made it up at all. If too many days go by, and I haven't posted something, I've taken the lazy route and grabbed something off YouTube or Stephanie Miller's site and made a throw-away comment. Other times I might have shown a little better judgement when tossing something out there that was just one the edge between snarky and caustic.

All in all, I'm really glad I started doing this. My love of writing is what directed me to get a degree in journalism. That led me to a great career in advertising that, unfortunately, did not offer much opportunity to write. I've suggested at work several times that we start a blog on our website, but so far that has not happened. Maybe it will, but who knows.

The bottom line is that I really like doing this. Like so many bloggers, I only wish there was a way to be handsomely paid to type away at ones own site. With few exceptions, especially for this kind of writing, there isn't. I am very protective of this work none the less. Not all that many people even read it. But, apparently, its popularity is growing. Welcome new people!

Thanks for reading this. If you really like some of it, for jeebus' sake feel free to leave a comment. It's easy and it's free!

I've got to go now. I have 100 pages in Kuhn's History of Scientific Discovery to read and notate for class on Monday. Hooboy, what a life!

dw

The Capital Times Bytes the Dust

Capital Newspapers, Inc. announced today that its Capital Times, Madison's afternoon and very progressive newspaper will cease its daily publication on April 26th. Like so many other metro afternoon papers, it could no longer publish as circulation declined steadily to the current 17,000. I'm personally pretty sad about this, but I've had time to get used to the news. I had reason to know this was coming. It was a hard secret to keep among my progressive friends. I made sure to give my Cap Times carrier a really nice holiday tip because I knew well before he did that he'd be out of work.

This is not all bad news. The paper intends to live on as a twice-weekly supplement to the Wisconsin State Journal, Madison's much larger morning paper. Wednesday's tab-sized supplement will be chock full of the op-ed content that has made the Cap Times beloved by a lot of people and loathed by just as many. Thursday's supplement will provide coverage of arts and entertainment, replacing the Rythms section that the Cap Times produced for both Madison papers for many years.

Perhaps the most encouraging thing is that the Cap Times intends on remaining a vital and timely news source by stepping up its digital edition in a huge way. (Thus the headline pun. Clever, huh?)

At least that's the plan.

"Moving our resources to the web is the wave of the future," [editor Dave] Zweifel added. "Thousands of readers are already using captimes.com and, frankly, we're often blown away by the volume of responses we get to columns and stories at a time when we're devoting limited resources to the site. Putting the full force our newsroom on the site will extend the reach and relevance of The Capital Times for years and years to come."

It didn't take long for the paper's online message board to begin reflecting the reaction of both readers and detractors. (link; scroll down a ways.) Indeed, those who viewed the venerable daily as the "Crapital Times" are dancing on its grave. Even though it's not going away completely, that's the way many are taking the news.

As both a newspaper fan and a media strategist, I have to wonder how successful the Wednesday supplement will be. Generally, there's not a whole lot of duplication between the two Madison papers' readership. To be sure, there are those like me who subscribe to both. But a great many readers of the State Jouranl (or State Urinal for non-fans) may well be unhappy that some of their subscription money is now going to fund the writings of people like John Nichols and Doug Moe. Tough shit, I say. The Cap Times is a lone voice of progressive thought among old media. One of the things that impressed me about Madison when I moved here was that it was a rare two-newspaper town where although the two papers were jointly operated, they were totally at odds editorially.

So, as the newspaper industry continues to lose readership as its audience base grows older and dies off, we mourn the passing of another fine newspaper. Sure, it will be around in a different form, and I am happy about that. The viability of a metro paper focusing on daily... hourly... digital editions is exciting. And it should be a glimpse of the future. I hope it makes it, and not just for selfish reasons. I also want to see it succeed because of the important progressive voice it provides.

Pardon me while I plug someone else's site

OK, I know. Not a lot of people read Kerfuffle on a regular basis. That may be because a number of my posts are pretty self-invovled. Why not? It's my bog, after all.

When I sit down and write a diary of what I'd call significant import, one that is somehow deserving of a larger audience, I post it on Daily Kos. I also spend a significant amount of time, as a DK "trusted user" (most of the time) adding comments, fixing tags, recommending diaries, and chasing the occasional troll... using the screen name "newfie53523." Daily Kos is one of the leading political sites in the blogosphere, and for good reason.

In the past week, a new blog called Docudharma has launched. Site proprietor "buhdydharma" is a long-time DK diarist who has branched off to drive a site that is, perhaps, a little more relaxed. That's my take, based on readiing it and reviewing the mission statement.
Anyway, give it a look. I (as newfie53523) plan on posting there from time to time and most certainly wish buhdy all the best with it. And, O-M-G, he's brought back Armando. If you don't know about Armando, and his Daily Kos diaries and cat fights in the comment section before he left last year, well, let's just say I think you'll find his occasional missives quite interesting.