Waiting and Take a Guess

what is this?

   In keeping with the confusion of these times we begin with a game. Can you tell us what is the image pictured above?

   There have been no edit tricks, what you see is an unedited photo.

    As you keen your eye and wrack your brain you will receive a couple of minutes of reprieve from our contemporary absurdity.

wistful

    Spring comes to central California with color.

the o'really? factor

     Reigning Fox pompous star Bill O'reilly got some bad news as a couple of blue chip advertisers dropped him. The New York Times discovered that 5 women brought sexual harassment charges against the TV yacking head. 

     Reportedly the women received $13 million to go away. O'Reilly is not the first at the conservative propaganda mill, the founder of Fox News was thrown overboard when his sexual harassment problems became epidemic.

life imitates art?

    More than a few people have seen scruff master and  zealot/ideologue Steve Bannon in the Brett O'Keefe character in season 6 of Homeland.

    The O'Keefe character is an alt-right conspiracy wacko who holds forth in new media. O'Keef is played by character actor Jake Weber. Weber is semi famous because as an 8 year old he smuggled cocaine into Mick and Bianca Jagger's wedding. Weber's father was one of Keith Richard's and Jaggers drug suppliers. Weber does a good job with the Bannonesque slob.

    The real scene stealer this season is Rupert Friend who portrays the damaged CIA agent Peter Quinn. Friend's work as a stroke victim has been masterful and riveting. 

what about the peanut gallery?

    How is it all going to end for this looney tunes administration?

     Heaven only knows where the Russian trail may lead but it's become consuming. The Senate and FBI probes will be revealing. Rep. Devon Nunes has compromised the integrity of the House investigation. It's another sideshow.

     The Trump budget may be its own road to a larger Trump Slump. Some of those "ignored" and disaffected who voted for Trump are wising up. His budget proposal is a slap in their face. Vital programs in low income and rural areas and those hit with large job loss would lose programs and subsidies targeted to help economic recovery. The Trump White House is on the road to joining the Taj Mahal, Trump Airlines, Trump Steaks, Trump University, Trump Vodka and the other failed business ventures. The great deal maker huh?

      Some still hold out hope that Ivanka will be a good influence on daddy, but her security clearance and office in the White House is a flap. Is she part of the business oversight, or is she part of the government? How can she have clearance and an office and not be an employee? These related questions are yet one more distraction.

      The bozos are on the romp. 

down these trails...

faces of big sur

     Big Sur remains cut off and isolated though Cal Trans and state officials are working to repair slides, closures and to replace the Pfeiffer bridge. 
     Periodically we are accessing the archive to present scenes many await seeing in person again. Today, hiking trails.

    

       Before you click on, take a guess at what is the first frame in today's post and leave it below.  Thanks

       See you down the trail.

THE LIBERATION OF FOX NEWS & TIDE POOLS

washed up

     From Pacific detritus to a world apart, tide pools offer a kaleidoscope. We go there, just ahead.

how will America's conservative voice survive the slime?

      The future of Fox News is the serious speculation in media and financial circles now that its creator and driving force has been dumped for being a sexual miscreant and bully. This is a story larger than the offenses of a dirty old man and sexual extortionist, Roger Ailes.

      Fox News is a huge cash cow, the largest money maker in the 21st Century/Rupert Murdoch empire and a key to it's market value. Fox is also the principle mouth piece for a brand of Republicanism and conservatism. The king of Fox News's culture of sexual harassment is offender number one, creator Ailes and that raises yet another question, the integrity of anything you see on Fox News. More about that quandary in a moment.

not a journalist

      In serious journalistic discussion, Roger Ailes is considered a propagandist, despite being the brains behind the successful Fox News empire. 

      Ailes concocted the notion of a propaganda network when he worked for Richard Nixon. Before Fox News Ailes was a political word smith and hack.

He was a partisan in the employ of Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George HW Bush, plus other candidates. His specialty was spin, selling a candidate and their position. There was nothing fair or balanced about his work ethic. He did not care about facts or truth other than what a campaign or administration wanted the public to know and or think. He was a shill, and if the reports are to be believed he was an abusive sexual predator all the while.

      Ailes was outed by high profile Fox News talent. Since then victims of his harassment from past decades have come forward and the Murdoch family canned him, albeit with a multi million dollar severance. Ailes made them billions, still the younger Murdochs do not like Ailes and so Fox must now manage a future without the dirty old man and coverage tyrant.

fox news is big money

      Fox News with it's conservative to arch conservative personalities and the Ailes spin on news has amassed an audience of devotees. To abandon it's current format risks a huge financial loss. But it has become clear Ailes directed the tone, nature and content of Fox News-both it's personality programs and it's "news coverage." Ailes decided what and who got on the air. He hired the talent and directed coverage.

      Ailes was not a journalist, remember. He was a propagandist but he found an audience of true believers and he made the network a profit center, a huge winner of cash while he advanced political agendas of his own choosing while also harassing, intimidating and extorting women who worked for him.  He set a tone and in the last few days we've learned there were other men who emulated the boss. Conservative America had no idea who was playing them for a chump.

saying no to miles

      My problem with Fox News has always been Ailes. Years ago a well respected political operative and now a former Governor suggested I might reach out to Ailes as he was building Fox News. This public servant knew Ailes because they had worked for the same President. I passed on the option because of my sense of Ailes. He was not out to create a new brand of journalism, he was out to create a clearly tilted perspective on news with the sole purpose to feed a conservative political audience it's own view of things and to make billions of dollars in the process. Some will tell you Ailes created a response to a liberal bias, to balance things. Poppycock! Ailes poisoned the well of journalism by politicizing it in an overt and obvious way. Obvious to those who care about real balance and no slant. But it is the nature of the poisoning. Everything at Fox was according to Ailes. He was a dictator.

      If the New York Times has a liberal bias it is the product of an editorial page and even that is the enterprise of many voices and input. At Fox News it was all Roger Ailes. Hannity and O'Reilly would not exist if they did not tow the Ailes line.

      I don't believe the swill that some spew that CBS, NBC, ABC or even CNN are liberal media. It is just they are not conservative and that alone condemns them to being "liberal." MSNBC is indeed liberal, the antithesis to Fox News, but for the most part the other networks traditionally were simply equal opportunity offenders. A good news organization will tow no line and will in all likelihood irritate left and right, republican and democrat. 

the credibility crisis at fox news

       So here's a hard point. Fox was created by Ailes in his image and to his own designs. He was a manipulator, a political propagandist who dreamed of having a network to sell a party's point of view. That is not fair or balanced and it is not journalism. Any real reporting that was done on Fox was probably done by virtue of enterprise and professionalism of those who worked there. Obviously not everyone drank the Ailes cool-aid. And finally women with courage came forward and exposed the lecherous political hack who posed as a news executive. How can a network that took it's marching orders from a sexual offender who emotionally brutalized employees and who's purpose was to sell a particular political point of view, and who ran the place with an iron hand not be ashamed, embarrassed and exposed for being what it is, a mouthpiece and the tool of a jerk. 

       Bill O'Reilly should put this in the no spin zone. Sean Hannity is a perfect Roger Ailes creation, but O'Reilly is different. I don't think O'Reilly cares much at all about anything that he blathers about.  It's an act. He's a television player and good at it. His real concerns are his ratings and his bank account. He's living a good life with the elite and he played the Ailes game for the big dollars. In that way he is a symbol of Fox News. It is not real, it is spin. But now that Ailes is on the trash heap, Fox has a chance to prove it can be something else, not a Roger Ailes project and not under his menacing regime of an old boy world where white men ruled, where they could sexually intimidate women, where a narrow point of view was spread as truth even if it was not so. So in the months and years ahead it will be interesting to see how Fox News might care more about news than Roger Ailes did.

        Oh, there is a lot of speculation that Ailes might be an advisor to Donald Trump. They are long time friends. How does that sit with you?

a private world

a visit to pacific coast tide pools

    See you down the trail. 

SOUND THINKING

WHAT'S A REPUBLICAN TO DO

      An advantage of a life in journalism is friends from every political persuasion.  My Republican friends have been singing the blues, but one fellow in particular says the party is likely to be locked out of the White House for many years.  I'm not so sure of that, but I agree that some of the self loathing is on target.

      Recent polls show most Americans blame Republicans for the self imposed flagellation called a fiscal cliff. Business people worry the Republicans will refuse to budge and will be the reason for another recession. The sequestration mean massive cuts to defense spending, some of which could have negative impact on national security. He says the party will be blamed for that.

      My friend believes the public impression is that Republicans are sore losers.  President Obama's re election validated his economic view of the future.  He notes that before the election the Fox News Analysts were predicting a Romney "landslide."  Ironically the numbers they cited were less than the Obama "mandate" in both popular and electoral college votes.  He also talks about the "Fox effect."

      The Fox News right of center tilt and punditry post, amplifies everything.  The Republican and Fox position was rejected by a majority of Americans, but they appear to be unable to bend to the will of the majority and accept defeat.  

      What about all of the Republicans returned to the house where they maintain a majority I asked?  First he said, the House is a "joke" populated by "dimwits" and "bull shit artists" of both parties.  As for the double message of an Obama win and a re-election of a Republican majority-  some of that is just the way districts are drawn but "even the biggest fool should understand that."  Or he adds, "it's like the voters say we like you and what you've done for us, but pay attention to the big picture."

      I've noticed that he and a handful of other long time-I call them centrist Republicans-are not against changes in our tax code.  

      We are at the lowest tax rate in decades. Back when the rate was higher "people were still making money, corporations were earning, investments were being made."

      I asked him about who the Republican constituency is or should be.

      "That's the trouble.  We don't have one. Being the lap dog for the richest percentage of Americans won't work any more.  We need a connection with real working Americans. And we need to quit watching Fox News."

      And I would add to that tell Grover Norquist to take a long walk off a short pier.

                                    DAY FILE

HINT OF IMPRESSIONISM

   See you down the trail.

TRANSPARENCY & NAKED LADIES

WHICH MEDIA CAN YOU TRUST

     If you consider yourself well informed, interested and a user of any form of news media link here to James Asher's piece on Washington journalism.

        Asher is the Bureau Chief of the McClatchy newspaper chain.  Their record of hard nosed and investigative reporting is impressive, despite being in smaller and mid sized markets. Asher deals with a dirty secret of Washington reporting.  

        In other postings you may have noted I find a lot that is wrong with contemporary reporting-print and broadcast.  Standards have declined. So much clap trap is packaged and presented as news when it is promotional hype, celebrity gossip, spin, opinion and shallow content.  

       I started in a large city news room where  the standard was at least two sources to confirm something before we went with it.  We were drilled, and edited, to keep opinion and speculation out of the copy.  We established ground rules with sources.  Later when I directed news teams I insisted that before we used an anonymous source, I knew and vetted the source and in some cases insisted they sign a statement to be used only if it came down to our reporter being jailed for contempt or the company being sued in an action where our counsel thought disclosure of the source would be a good defense tool, but only as a last resort in seeking a dismissal, summary judgement or negotiated settlement. It was a tool for a rare and last stop decision. One must operate  within codes of conduct and cannons of behavior.  The Dirty Secret that Asher writes of is offensive to how journalism should be practiced. One more instance of a slide toward the swamp.

       Many dispute the value of journalism and, sadly, it is hard to defend so much of what we have today, including the partisan FOX News, and MSNBC. However this nation is best served by a non partisan, non ideological journalism that asks hard questions of everyone, demands honesty of everyone, verifys information scrupulously, and does it in a transparent and honorable way, according to canons and codes of conduct.  Anything else is rotten.

    Asher nails the rot that is rampant in Washington journalism. Let me know what you think.

      

DAY FILE

NAKED LADIES
That is what they call these beautiful wild flowers
that just pop up this time of year.

You just never know where a naked lady may show up.
Wow!
See you down the trail.

A SEA OF EXPERTS

WATCHING IT PLAY

    The ruling by the Supremes put all news organizations through the drill.  I was fascinated by watching how it was covered.  

    The challenge was an old one-get the essence, then get the info out of the court room and to the viewers or online readers or listeners.  It was a kind of fire bucket brigade.  The first of the info was handed along, while reporters and analysts in the Supreme Court building continued to listen to Chief Justice Roberts, gather the actual ruling, opinions, copy them, get them to the news headquarters and to the field correspondents waiting outside. It was a massive operation, like a 100 yard dash with copy machines and text books while deciphering a code.

   I've covered court rulings and appreciate the logistics of getting the story right, and getting it on and in a competitive environment. All news groups want to be first. 

   While there is no shortage of talking heads and experts, the smoothest and most concise of the morning was Ted Ruger, constitutional law professor at the University of Pennsylvania who provided succinct and helpful analysis on CBS.  As a former anchorman, that is the kind of analyst I would like to have along side. Scott Pelley, who handled it nicely, benefited from Ruger's polish.

    The next chapter is to now watch the spin, the spinners, the straight networks and newspapers and the partisan media like Fox and MSNBC and all of the yacking heads who'll try to make you think their perspective is the only correct one. 

     And we can't forget the candidates.  There is a presidential election into which all of this will factor.  Do you know how that will play out?   Well, Someone on one of the networks or blogs will try to convince you, he or she does. Let the game's begin. 

DAY FILE

RANDOM SCENES
eclectic and well, random

This is the kind of "hot" issue I now prefer to deal with.

See you down the trail

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY OFFENDER

KEEPING THE CUSTOMERS SATISFIED

THAT'S NOT THE WAY TO DO IT

The View from Here

      Hall of Fame and legendary radio news man Fred Heckman was my news director as I was breaking into a major metropolitan news scene.

      "If Democrats and Republicans are both bitching about you, if liberals think you're a conservative and conservatives think you're a liberal then you're doing a good job. We are an equal opportunity offender."

       Long before Fred's advice I'd read the wisdom of the

old "Sage of Baltimore" H.L. Mencken.  The journalist, editor, essayist said the role of a journalist was to "comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable."

       Those formed my creedo in all of my years in journalism.

ENTER THE NEW AGE OF "NEWS"

       I took delight in the story that university research finds that Fox News viewers are the least well informed.

        You can link to the story here.

           Delight, I say, because Fox introduced deliberately staking out a political/philosophical position as a foundational rationale to their approach to news coverage.

       Now some will argue "the liberal media bias" already existed and that Fox News was at least honest about where they were coming from.  You might recall however they made their mantra "Fair and Balanced."  In all honesty they were neither, but it was a brilliant positioning and marketing strategy developed by Roger Ailes.  It immediately created the perception the other media was not fair or balanced.  

      Ailes started developing his idea when he was a partisan employee of Richard Nixon, the President with an enemies list, less than a harmonious relationship with the media, trouble with the truth and that little think called Watergate. Yes, that's when Ailes first started babbling about creating a network with a point of view.

      My gripe is not so much with the politics as with the idea 

of creating a "my side vs. your side" approach to news.

Back to the admonition of my old mentor.  Doing it right has everyone angry at you.  Conservatives, Republicans and right wingers probably find little to be upset with about Fox.  But

perhaps now they should be.  By adopting a "perspective" and hewing to a "party line" you destroy your claim to credibility

and damage the overall process.  I'm not ignoring MSNBC.

They have responded by taking a liberal perspective. 

      Maybe in this age of satellite, cable, Internet and broadcast offerings there is room for networks who are lackeys for an ideology or point of view.  Maybe, but they should not call themselves news or journalistic enterprises.

      Bravo to the academics who are willing to test, measure and survey issues like quality of information, knowledge and such.  Of course I can hear a few Fox viewers saying "well what do you expect from liberal academia?"

     Roger Ailes is like putting draino in a wine bottle and calling it a well aged vintage. This report is a bit like a consumer taste test.  Truth is just that.

DAY BOOK

A VISIT TO THE SHORE

How's that for a change of pace?
See you down the trail.

A BAD SOURCE COULD HAVE IT RIGHT

A CONTRADICTION IN A TIME

OF FAILING MEDIA

Something to remember about the confused media today is that just because it comes from a source with a point of view, does not mean that it is not right.  Fox gets things right.  MSNBC gets things right.  So do all of the nets and even many on line sources despite the fact that some, too many  to my liking, have staked out a political or philosophical skew. Amongst the chaff is some real wheat but you must discern.

It used to be easier when journalists cared about

information first, before the tyranny of ratings

and the need to be a "profit center."

Objectivity used to matter.

Unless you only read the Economist and watch the BBC, about the only way you are going to get "the straight news" is to consume information from all over the spectrum.  We should be doing that anyway, but most of us rely on the same old...

Glass-Stegall ?  Remember your history?  Here's something the OWS has done well. Regardless of the "commercial like" close consider the historic clips and the point they make about banks.

Here's the wikipedia paragraph that lays it out.  Look what the repeals did and consider those in light of credit default swaps and other such scams.  The point is, we had strong economic growth without devastating recession UNTIL we began "repealing" and de-regulating.

The Banking Act of 1933, Pub.L. 73-66, 48 Stat. 162, enacted June 16, 1933, was a law that established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in the United States and introduced banking reforms, some of which were designed to control speculation.^[1] It is most commonly known as the Glass–Steagall Act, after its legislative sponsors, Senator Carter Glass (D–Va.) and Congressman Henry B. Steagall (D–Ala.-3). Some provisions of the Act, such asRegulation Q, which allowed the Federal Reserve to regulate interest rates in savings accounts, were repealed by theDepository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980. Provisions that prohibit a bank holding companyfrom owning other financial companies were repealed on November 12, 1999, by the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, named after its co-sponsors Phil Gramm (R, Texas), Rep. Jim Leach (R, Iowa), and Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R, Virginia).^[2][3]

The repeal of provisions of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933 by the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act effectively removed the separation that previously existed between investment banking which issued securities and commercial banks which accepted deposits. The deregulation also removed conflict of interest prohibitions between investment bankers serving as officers of commercial banks.

We may not always like the source, but we are served by

remembering that sometimes the truth can come

in thorny packages.  Very few of the Old Testament

prophets would have won a popularity contests.

Political dialogue in the US has been hijacked by ideologues, zealots, hacks and cable news "personalities."  While most of it is bilious and not worth your time,

some of it is necessary to fully understand all points of

view, even those with which you disagree.  And

some of it is probably right, from time to time.

Even if the media is less objective than it should be

you can be as objective as you allow yourself in

considering, really considering, honestly considering,

all points of view.  You can always rest in your

 view, and if you've allowed opposing thoughts to

cross your mind and it has not nudged you a bit,

then you can take solace in the knowledge.

An open mind wont hurt.

See you down the trail.