Category Archives: Media

What was Nick Offerman drinking on The Late Show?

According to YouTube, “hilarious couple” Nick Offerman and Megan Mullally appeared on the Late Show with Stephen Colbert December 15 to “battle for the Smooshed title in this Christmas-themed edition of Late Show’s signature cooking competition.” The competition is as follows: each contestant has about a minute to, well, smoosh together available ingredients — Colbert is the judge.

In keeping with his public persona, St. Nick surveyed said available ingredients and decided to “use that bourbon to fuel my creativity” by taking a couple of long swigs before he started any smooshing:

Continue reading What was Nick Offerman drinking on The Late Show?

Advertisements

What John Oliver got wrong about Donald Trump’s post-Brexit speech

Back in June, Mr. Brexit celebrated the event from which he took his name during a visit to Scotland. No one summarized Trump’s take on the referendum better than John Oliver (link to full segment):

Continue reading What John Oliver got wrong about Donald Trump’s post-Brexit speech

The very lamest excuse of the 2016 Presidential election

Since November 8, we’ve been treated to no end of explanation for Donald Trump’s triumph over Hillary Clinton. Certain segments of the media have branded these “excuses” “lame“, and point to their own preferred explanations. But I’m not here to evaluate the validity of various claims that are essentially unprovable; I’d rather focus on lame excuses that are more verifiably so: ones that self-evidently lack explanatory power to the degree that they could have only been offered to the public in bad faith.

It is difficult to produce an excuse for the race’s outcome that fell unambiguously into this category; political scientists and pundits may debate what actually happened for years to come. So, without further ado, I would like to focus your attention on a slightly different category: the lamest excuse offered by the Hillary campaign for something other than the race’s final outcome.

A few weeks ago, the New York Times treated its readers to a strong contender for the title:

Continue reading The very lamest excuse of the 2016 Presidential election

New York Times, please do your job

I’ve been trying to follow recent developments in the deliciously-named* Whitefish, Montana. Of course, I am concerned for the health and well-being of my co-religionists and other wonderful people who have been targeted there. But also — given that the town is less than a nine-hour drive from Seattle — it has occurred to me that the same skinheads bussing themselves in from as far away as the Bay Area** could probably also find their way here. Which is why I find it so frustrating when the esteemed journalists of the New York Times are derelict in their duty to, you know, journalize.

Continue reading New York Times, please do your job

The irony of Trump’s “locker room talk”

As has been well-documented, our dearly beloved President-elect — the one with an ironic penchant for safe spaces — repeatedly took refuge during his election campaign in the proverbial locker room. Every time he did, I could not help but recall a semi-prescient New Yorker cover originally published back on June 1, 2015:

Continue reading The irony of Trump’s “locker room talk”

Sometimes, the corrections just write themselves

Now that the President-elect elected to select the unelectable Rick Perry to direct the Department of Energy — the very agency he infamously  tried, and failed, to inform voters he would shut down if they made him President of these United States — I thought now might be a good opportunity to instruct the media on word choice.

Back in May, Grist published an article about Trump’s erstwhile plan to totally abolish the Environmental Protection Agency, and detailed Republican animosity toward that agency more generally:

Continue reading Sometimes, the corrections just write themselves

A simple proposal to normalize fact-checking

Here’s a simple rule reputable media publications should follow, with absolutely no exceptions: If you’re going to reproduce a third party’s factual assertion, you must provide immediate clarification whenever said factual assertion is false.  The alternative – that is, current practice – makes it far too easy for the subject of a news story to hijack the vehicle you provide for his or her own ends.

Because I don’t want to turn the hunt for truth into a partisan issue, I’ll give an innocuous example of how this ought to be done. On Saturday morning, the Seattle Times published an editorial by columnist Larry Stone that touched on what a potential Sounders victory in the MLS Cup could do for the franchise in its home city:

Continue reading A simple proposal to normalize fact-checking

Setting the record straight on BART’s updated color scheme

In its article describing the new trains designed for Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), a Bay Area Publication (BAP) felt the need to assure its readers that any similarity between the cars’ interior color scheme and Santa Clara‘s erstwhile nemesis from the north was purely incidental: “This is no homage to Russell Wilson and gang.”

But this should have gone without saying. Not because deliberate homage would have garnered few fans, or because — as BART marketing and research manager Aaron Weinstein told WIRED — “any combination of hues would run into sports allegiances,” but simply because the magazine mixed up its Seattle sports teams.

Continue reading Setting the record straight on BART’s updated color scheme

The failing New York Times may be taking this whole “post-truth” thing a little too seriously

The New York Times reported Tuesday on the installation of a cross at the St. Nicholas National Shrine beneath the World Trade  Center. The Times’ article included a most curious assertion:

Continue reading The failing New York Times may be taking this whole “post-truth” thing a little too seriously

Why the Seahawks’ rejoinder to Jimmy Fallon came up just inches short

Earlier this month, the Seattle Seahawks hit back at Tonight Show host Jimmy Fallon with their own take on his recurring segment “Tonight Show Superlatives“. This was actually their second crack back at the late night host. In the first go-around, the Hawks went with their own version of that exact segment and titled it, oh so cleverly, “Seahawks Superlatives“. This time — almost exactly one year later — they instead spoofed Jimmy Fallon’s “Thank You Notes“.

Both Seahawks responses were cute enough — though nobody seems to have told Russell Wilson that his thank you note should be addressed to Jimmy Fallon — but both also left me thinking the Seahawks blew their huge opportunity to dunk one through the goal posts (like Jimmy Graham).

Continue reading Why the Seahawks’ rejoinder to Jimmy Fallon came up just inches short