Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Protesting Google's Cooperation with China

From Michelle Malkin's site, a gaggle of Google Protest logos.

Free speech for me, but not for thee, huh, Google?

Monday, January 30, 2006

Another OOPS

A curious correction from The Guardian
In an article about Chinese censorship of the internet, Backlash as Google shores up great firewall of China, page 3, January 25, we described Falun Gong as a cult. In doing so, we should have made clear that we were giving the Chinese government's official view of the movement.
As is Google.


From the Star Tribune on their error corrections.   [Bolding mine]
In 2005, we published 611 corrections and clarifications, which seems an enormous number until you remember the newspaper comes out every day -- which means we averaged fewer than two per newspaper.  That wasn't too different from the totals some of my ombudsmen colleagues reported.  At the Oregonian in Portland, they published 800 corrections.  At the Hartford Courant, it was 666.  The Rocky Mountain News had 577 and the Fort Worth Star-Telegram printed 656.
The late David Shaw, media critic for the Los Angeles Times, once pointed out the difference between bloggers and journalists was that newspapers usually had 4-5 editors to vet every piece.   He was trying to demonstrate how much more accurate newspapers are than bloggers.

It isn't just facts the MSM get wrong.   Factual errors we can deal with.  It's the deliberate distortion that most readers find objectionable.   Who cares whether a picture of Elmer Fudd was mislabeled when Yassir Arafat and Fatah are consistently misidentified as "rebels" or "revolutionaries" and not the terrorists he was and they are.

Friday, January 27, 2006

Truth triumphs

An article in the Toronto Star by Mitch Potter was posted at Lucianne.com. It included a description of Jimmy Carter as "At 81, clear-eyed and calm, America's most beloved ex-president..." In one of those wonders of the Internet, Ldotters emailed the author, challenging him on "most beloved" and, apparently, he found their ridicule so deflating that he accused them of defaming him. (See entry 30) He emailed to tell them that he did not write that Carter was "beloved." It was added by an editor at the paper.

Reply 33 - Peter Martyn, Deputy Foreign Editor, The Toronto Star confirmed that "beloved ex-president" was added during editing and decried "personal attacks - flaming" on "our writers". Reply 38 from the Toronto Star Public Editor called it the "offending phrase" and accused "someone on the desk" and asked Lucianne to post her correction. Lucianne did, but would not remove any posts.

I suspect that thin-skinned journalists and writers at the Toronto Star will be, like those retards at the New York Times, behind a subscription wall soon.

In the end, however, the Toronto Star removed the "offending phrase."

Thursday, January 26, 2006

Davos Ho Hum

Deutsche Welle weighs in on The World Economic Forum in Davos.
And when in you're in Davos, despite the fact that there are very many dedicated and hard-working people taking part -- among them the big United Nations aid agencies and several non-governmental organizations -- it's still hard to escape the feeling that what's really going on is a club meeting of the world's elite.
Substitute "parasites" for "elite" and I think they got it about right.

Queen of something

Apparently, in a choreographed show with a bizarrely cooperative James Frey, Oprah had second thoughts and attempted to salvage her reputation.

Truth didn't matter a week ago.   One wonders if, in the meantime, Oprah discovered she and Frey shared a common interest there somewhere.   Nothing else explains an unrepentant Frey allowing himself to be publicly castigated by a posturing Oprah Winfrey.   Makes you wonder how concerned both the liar/author and the preening/talkshow host worried about being deluged by readers with demands for their money back.

Just wondering.

Tamil Tigers and leftwing media

Another sue-for-peace-while-we-re-arm-and-reorganize, aided and abetted by, who else?

The Tamil Tigers - a terrorist organization, although they are not so described in this article - are stalling in "peace talks" in Switzerland.   The talks were brokered by Eric Solheim, described as "a Norwegian envoy."   Clearly, the Globe and Mail and our American Associated Press should Google Solheim, who had, for a number of years been, "chairman of the Socialist Left Party in Norway." Bio

Even Wikipedia could have educated the AP and the Globe somewhat on the Socialist Left Party whose party program for 2005-2009 is "the United States is the greatest threat to world peace".

Google Tamil Tigers terrorist and see if you think the Globe and Mail, like other leftwing media, are ignorant or just hauling water for terrorism.   If you had any doubt that the Tamil Tigers were Lenin Left, the leftwing World Council of Churches is urging peace talks.   And this is the reality of the Tamil Tigers.

Outrage works

Who says outrage doesn't work?   The Vermont judge who sentenced a man to jail for 60 days for sexually assaulting a child from age 6 to age 10 has agreed to increase the sentence to three years.   The judge is up for election this year.   In his initial sentencing Cashman said he "no longer believed in punishment."   In other words, he no longer believed in the law or the consequences of crime.  

Judge Edward Cashman.   Remember the name.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Disney and Pixar

More like a merger than an acquisition despite the headline: "Disney to Acquire Pixar for $7.4 Billion" It's a stock deal = Disney will issue 2.3 shares for each share of Pixar stock. Steve Jobs will be given a position on the Disney board. Pixar Exec. VP will become chief creative officer of the animal studios and -- more importantly -- principal creative advisor at Walt Disney Imagineering. Pixar President will serve as president of the combined Pixar and Disney animation studios. Steve Jobs who owned 50.6% of Pixar will now own 6% of Disney - one of the largest single stockholders.

A Reuters story put it in perspective. "Disney also will surrender control of its world-famous animation studio, the birthplace of Mickey Mouse, to Pixar creative chiefs, Ed Catmull and John Lasseter."

Canadian Elections

Great overview of Canadian politics from Paul Jackson writing in The American Thinker.

Monday, January 23, 2006

Canadian Elections

What to say about the Canadian elections? It is long past time the Liberals were rebuked for their corruption. They were not, however, reprimanded by the media. Not the Globe and Mail, not the Toronto Star, not the CBC, not the self-professed seekers of truth - journalists. The Liberals probably could have won this election if it weren't for the ineptness of Paul Martin, a man of extraordinary ordinariness, who barely won his last election, and that, only because of a defector crossed the aisle. Certainly the Globe and Mail, who endorsed Stephen Harper, did not make a difference. They just read the tea leaves (thru their daily polls) and decided they didn't want to be on the wrong side of history, unlike the Toronto Star (publishers of Harlequin romance books) who help keep Toronto on the Third World status column.

No, Liberal will go jail for the $2 billion gun registry scam. No Liberal has been sent to trial for the Adscam scam. Nope. The Canadian media will not press for accountability. Nevertheless, the Liberals did not win this election. Paul Martin will not be Prime Minister. And that is a very good thing. If, like me, you strongly suspect that poor, inept Paul Martin was really promoted by his party to the PM office in order to try to clean up the financial records from the Chretien administration, he was a complete and utter dunce. His only real danger was that he was prey to every halfwit anti-American in his party. But anti-Americanism did not win the election for Schroder and it did not win the big one for Martin either.


Freed German hostage may not have been. A hostage, that is.

Suspected pirates surrender to U.S.

Another thing G.W. Bush nor the U.S. military will not get credit for achieving. Here

Thursday, January 19, 2006

The Dutiful People

Michael Barone on "The Beautiful People vs. The Dutiful People" comparing Alito's experience in growing up in Hamilton Township, N.J. and Princeton and makes this observattion.
Our universities today have become our most intellectually corrupt institutions. University administrators must lie and deny that they use racial quotas and preferences in admissions, when they devote much of their energy to doing just that. They must pledge allegiance to diversity, when their campuses are among the least politically diverse parts of our society, with speech codes that penalize dissent and sometimes violent suppression of conservative opinion.
And he makes this observation of Judge Alito.
Judge Alito, I think, is a better example of the things that American universities before his time stood for: intellectual excellence, free inquiry, civility in the face of disagreement, commitment to patriotism.
You only have to consider Ward Churchill to know that that civility, that love of intellectual inquiry, and the decency that used to be found at our universities has been replaced by intolerance and dishonesty and a depressing cult of anti-Christian, anti-American bigotry.

Wednesday, January 18, 2006

Northern Bloggers

David Warren in his essay "Pinged" on how the Internet and bloggers have transformed Canadian elections.
In short, the Internet has broken the stranglehold the Liberal Party had over sympathetic media, and created an information environment in which you had better be darned sure what you are saying is the strict truth, because there’s an army of fact-checkers out there. Moreover, an army that cannot easily be intimidated by off-the-record threats from Party lawyers, or made to desist by peer pressure. For even when (as we saw in the delayed release of Gomery testimony) a legal ban on publication can be obtained, the information simply passes through electronic space across the border, and we can all read the banned material on such sites as Captain’s Quarters from the USA.
This is, he writes, ". . . the Canadian election in which our “blogosphere” came of age."

Even if the Conservatives don't prevail in the upcoming election, the environment has changed enormously. Canadian media pretty much published the ad and gun registry scandals in a neutral fashion. It is bloggers who provided the outrage and indignation. You can say that media pretty much failed in their self-appointed role as guardians of the public trust. The word that comes to mind is "accomplice."

Monday, January 16, 2006

Globe explains endorsement

The editorial page editor of the Globe and Mail explains why the paper endorsed the Conservatives in an online question and answer session. [bolding mine]
Democracy doesn't mean much unless you have a change of government from time to time. If Canada were to keep re-electing the Liberals -- for a fifth time? a sixth? -- it would risk becoming a sort of one-party democracy like Mexico once was and Japan still is to an extent. The result is usually stagnation and corruption; witness the sponsorship scandal, which sprang directly from the sense of entitlement that develops when a party considers itself the only one truly fit to rule: a natural governing party.
He might have mentioned the other one-party democracy -- in the U.S. -- where Democrats consider themselves the only ones fit to rule and corruption has become the de facto standard, not the exception. The fact that he didn't shows willful disregard for the truth and very selective memory.

To some extent we all have selective memory, but the glaring omission was noteworthy.

UPDATE: On Tues, Jan 17th, the Globe and Mail released results of a poll conducted for them on Jan. 14th and 15th, that found that 55% would welcome a Conservative majority. On the face of it, it looks as if they conducted the poll at about the time of their endorsement but not before the endorsement could have affected the results. But in fact, another article in today's edition says that Strategic Counsel conducts daily polls for them so they knew how badly Martin was doing. Today's article merely marks a release of information that may not have been revealed had they not endorsed Harper. And it confirms that they endorsed Harper because they knew Martin is likely to lose.

Sunday, January 15, 2006

Gay radio in Toronto

Gay marriage. Polygamy. Now 24/7 gay FM radio for Canadians lucky enough to live in multicultural Toronto. That is, if a current application is accepted by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission.

Not to worry, the commission was incensed when a Montreal FM station broadcast "hate speech" - a talk show host mocking gays. The commission also approved Al-Jazzera for cable broadcast in Canada.

There is simply no telling how far their tolerance will go. But I am betting it isn't going to extend to Christian broadcasting.

Saturday, January 14, 2006

Time for a change

The Globe and Mail has, astonishingly, backed Steven Harper for the election in this editorial.

It isn't a change of heart. Entitlement and corruption haven't bothered them in the last twelve years. And Paul Martin's ineptness has not been a source of concern for them either. The fact is, the Liberals are undoubtedly going to lose the election. The Globe and Mail folks just don't want to be on the wrong side of history.

Had they expressed any of their fears or disgust at the Liberals any time in the past it would have been a clear sign for Martin to reign in the greed and push for accountability. The Globe and Mail didn't. It's only when it is clear that the Canadian public has had enough that the paper can posture, calling, for example, for a steadying of relations with the United States that boggles the mind. There isn't a day that the Globe isn't rabidly anti-American, so this new desire for better relations is remarkably cynical. And to accuse Canadian ministers of waving a Kyoto agreement mimicking their own excuse to bash the U.S. is nothing short of laughable.

I do not believe, as does Peaktalk, that the media were just disallusioned idealists. They would dearly like to so describe themselves as victims as much as we were of corruption. But in the last 20 years, the media in Canada, like the media in the U.S., have not sheltered the Leftists who dominate the Liberal party in Canada and the Democrat party in the U.S. They have driven the parties in that direction, eschewing the input of constituents, assigning to them the role of the Governed. It takes a peculiar mindset to create law from an unelected judiciary. Call it what it is. Totalitarian media who have been, up to now, unopposed. Victims? I don't think so! Disallusioned idealists? No. Just hacks with brown shirt aspirations to browbeat anyone who disagreed with them whether they were Boy Scouts, parents, the religious, or elected government. In short, they were and still are, enemies of the state, enemies of democracy.

In case any of us have forgotten. Did you ever think you would see such pictures in the United States?

Friday, January 13, 2006

Polygamy for Canada

This could be an April Fool's joke, but Canadian politics transcend that. Having blessed, so to speak, gay marriages, now polygamy is on the table.

A new study for the Canadian Justice Department suggests that Canada should "get rid of its law banning polygamy, and change other legislation to help women and children living in such multiple-spouse relationships." This study cost the Canadian government $150,000.

Look for child-adult marriages next. And then we can look forward to Canadians marrying their pets.

What liberal media?

If you are not convinced that the MSM is liberal, consider how journalists are rewarded when they leave their jobs.

A veternal Nightline correspondent, Dave Marash, will be chief anchor and correspondent for Al-Jazerra International. The supposedly-unbiased Nightline host Ted Koppel will produce documentaries for Discovery (ownership - 50% New York Times and 50% DCI) and will be a contributing columnist for the New York Times.

Thursday, January 12, 2006

Guilty as charged

"Time magazine featured his case in a cover story titled 'Must This Man Die?'" It appears that he did die. And should have.

Roger K. Coleman was executed claiming his innocence. DNA testing conducted by the state of Virginia, however, confirmed his guilt. Not that that will embarass Time. He failed a lie detector test the morning of his execution as well. That won't convince the anti-death penalty crowd either. These are, after all, the un-electable Left whose ideas can't win them a single seat. Come to think of it, the Left wasn't elected in ANY country in which they prevailed.

Literary Fraud

"The book is about drug addiction and alcoholism," he said. "The emotional truth is there."

- From James Frey, the discredited author of A Million Little Pieces, the Oprah Winfrey book selection that became a best seller based upon her endorsement.

She is still defending Frey in a "surprise phone call to CNN's Larry King" who happened to be interviewing Frey.

The publisher, Random House, however, is convinced it is a fraud. They are offering "unprecedented" refunds to readers who bought the book from them, according to the Washington Post and Reuters. A Financial Times story says Random House denied they were offering refunds. A day later, Reuters is still reporting, despite Oprah Winfrey's support on Larry King, that Random House is giving refunds to those who bought the book directly from the publishing house.

This is not the first literary fraud. JT LeRoy, supposedly a fragile HIV-positive teen prostitute, turns out to have been a 40-year-old woman named Laura Albert with an active imagination. Only Laura Albert doesn't have Larry King and Oprah Winfrey fronting for her.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006


Cindy Sheehan is writing a memoir. To be published by Simon & Schuster. Published by, Guess Who?

Who also published
Our Endangered Values: America's Moral Crisis by Jimmy Carter
Living History by Hillary Clinton

Terrorists in Europe

Spain has arrested 20 Islamic extremists who were recruiting terrorists to fight in Iraq. Last year, Spain detained a total of 90 suspected Islamic terrorists.
Spain understands, as perhaps France and Germany do not, that if they allow the recruitment of terrorists for Iraq, they risk the recruitment of terrorists to work inside Europe.

Monday, January 02, 2006


TigerHawk has some proposals for ethics reform for journalists. But, first, the need: From TigerHawk:
I am appalled that the press has gone ahead and published stories that palpably undermine our security in time of national peril over the specific request of the President of the United States. Yes, it is their lawful right to do so, but it is, frankly, disgusting that they have exercised that right. That the leak came through the same newspapers that thought that the outing of Valerie Plame was the worst affront to national security since Aldrich Ames exposes their political agenda in stark relief.
You can't put it any more succinctly than that. As for the proposal for reform, all are very good. But, they only beggar the question: why would the media want to reform? They don't.

The MSM, like Mainstream Television (MSTv,) don't really make money from subscribers. They make a profit from advertising, which makes their reputation moot to the discussion. What do they care? The advertisers are in the business of selling advertising to clients. There is no connection between readers and advertisers except in really egregious situations when viewers and readers have gotten up in arms on a single issue/program/editorial/story etc. And there is no compelling reason for newspapers to want to reform.

Newspapers are about power. For over forty years they have dominated the Democrat party, driving it ever Leftward, so much so that mainstream Democrats don't exist. Any that protested the left lurch have left the party years ago. Media campaigns against the death penalty, the promotion of gay "rights", and their anti-war biases have offended mainstream Democrats and effectively eliminated grassroots Americans from the scene.

They aren't going to reform. Like the old Communist party, it was never about belief or the desire to do anything but grab power and keep it. Reform was never an option in the Soviet Union. It isn't one with newspapers.