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.
… but if you’ve been charged by the SEC with playing “a key role in an alleged scheme that allowed a ring of brokers, investment advisers and their clients to profit from the deaths of terminally ill patients“, then you may not want to think twice before you select one that both touts the position that enabled you to play this exact role, and effectively summarizes the nature of said scheme:
A cafe in London intent on living up to a name that otherwise makes little sense for a coffee shop — Nin Com Soup — drew some attention last month when it introduced a new flavor of smoothie, decorated it with a swastika, and called it “Nutzy”.
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:
During the election, media organizations were forced to create new and inventive ways to communicate Donald Trump’s new and inventive relationship with the truth. Here’s one famous example:
Such efforts went over so well that some people have clamored for the networks to deploy such correctives on a more regular basis:
Now that erstwhile campaign manager Steve Bannon helped make the White House white (nationalist) again, President-Elect Donald Trump graciously decided to let him stick around. Unsurprisingly, the announcement that Bannon would fill the role of chief strategist in the Trump administration caused consternation in the Jewish community due to his ex-wife’s allegation that he is an anti-Semite.
Although said ex proffered several bits of evidence to support her claim, only one has been corroborated by independent sources: that Bannon wanted to know why the Westland School’s library stocked so many books about Chanuka. In context, the fact that Bannon singled out Chanuka suggests an unseemly level of concern over Jewish representation at the school.*
On Tuesday night, Stephen Colbert hit Mel Gibson hard: “Hey, Mel-Mels? When you look back on your life, do you think you’ll have any regrets?” (Mel-Mels’ reply: “No. Not one.”) And had Gibson asked Colbert the same question in return, I’m sure Stephen could have come up with at least one regret of his own: going soft on erstwhile interviewee Donald Trump.
About a year ago, back before even one episode of the Late Show with Stephen Colbert ever aired on CBS, the network wanted to introduce its shiny new host to a broader audience. And so journalists like Dave Itzkoff found themselves with behind-the-scenes access as Colbert & friends frantically readied for their big launch. What they produced, generally speaking, was not journalism. Here’s a sample I found particularly objectionable:
On Friday, after Hillary announced via txt that Tim Kaine would join her on the Democratic ticket, the Forward published an article boldly titled “5 Reasons Tim Kaine Will Be the Jewiest Vice President Pick for Hillary Clinton“. Those five reasons (spoiler alert): He supports the two-state solution “even when others don’t”, is a religious Catholic, helped Sabra attract a factory to Virginia, has hosted several Passover seders, and once set up a Rabbi’s daughter.
Without getting into whether even one of these five things suffices to make someone — politician or otherwise — “Jewy” to any degree (or, as in the case of #2, seemingly rules that possibility out entirely), let’s consider something the article sorely lacks: context. After all, the ‘iest’ in “Jewiest” implies Kaine is “Jewy” compared to at least one someone else. So we shall proceed by process of elimination.
[Editor’s note: As should be clear from the very first sentence, the following post was originally written well over a year ago. I can offer no explanation for my delinquency in publishing it other than I have been delinquent in publishing just about everything around here.]
I wrote a post last week complaining about an extremely misleading headline over at Treehugger. But upon further reflection, I don’t know what about the #fail it discussed exercised me so. After all, I’ve been aware that Treehugger jumped the shark for quite some time.
My suspicions were aroused back in September, when I came across an unusual “Photo of the Day”. Treehugger has long periodically posted photographs culled from reader contributions. The pictures — how do I say this without sounding like a snob? — typically portray attractive subjects, but the photographer’s execution can sometimes leave quite a bit of room for improvement.