I wonder if they've offered this sort of advertising/editorial synergy-bonus to conservative groups?

Posted by: Ace at 10:48 AM | Comments (5)
Post contains 39 words, total size 1 kb.

Not just a dinky little newsletter like TNR. ABCNews, which certainly has the resources to fact-check, apparently doesn't even bother to see if its reporters have even met the interview subjects they quote.

Now, in fairness, it seems these made-up interviews occurred after he'd been fired by ABCNews -- though he of course still worked in the media, publishing pieces in French journals and the Times of London. But they had previous suspicions about his stories and determined, after (TNR-like) "re-reporting" on his reports, claiming "they absolutely checked out" and giving his reportage a clean bill of health.

Obvious points:

1) They did not check before publication.

and

2) Given he simply invents interviews wholesale, it is extremely unlikely that everything he "reported" for ABCNews was true, and hence their claims that all his reports "absolutely checked out" seem rather naive. If someone isn't looking for evidence of a cheating spouse, and wants to believe that spouse is faithful, obviously they're not going to come with quite the level of skepticism needed to reveal the infidelity.

At any rate, here are your Intellectual Superiors, The Deciders, in action again. Proving once again why only they are qualified to evaluate information for newsworthiness, reliability, and "context."

ABC News said yesterday that it would begin a second investigation into more than five years of news reports that relied on information from a consultant, Alexis Debat, who has been revealed to be the author of faked interviews.

The interviews, published in a French journal, were said to have been done with prominent political figures, including former President Bill Clinton and Senator Barack Obama. [They deny the interviews -- ace.]

“We going at this again with a vengeance,” said Brian Ross, the ABC correspondent who was involved in most of the reports that used information provided by Mr. Debat, whom ABC hired in November 2001.

ABC fired Mr. Debat in June after discovering that his claims of having earned a doctorate from the Sorbonne were false. The network then investigated the reports Mr. Debat had participated in and found “they absolutely checked out,” Mr. Ross said.

Now, however, ABC is taking a further look into information Mr. Debat provided. Mr. Ross said ABC had dispatched an investigator to Pakistan to go over details of reports in which Mr. Debat provided information. At the same time, The Associated Press reported last night that it also was investigating three news reports that relied on Mr. Debat for information.

The renewed scrutiny has been driven by revelations about Mr. Debat after a French news Web site, Rue 89, reported this week that an interview supposedly with Senator Obama was entirely made up. Mr. Debat, who could not be reached last night, sent an e-mail message to ABC yesterday saying the allegations against him “are slanderous.”

He told The Washington Post Wednesday that an intermediary had spoken with Mr. Obama. But representatives for Mr. Obama denied that he spoke with anyone connected to Mr. Debat.

Subsequently, other figures whose interviews appeared under Mr. DebatÂ’s byline in the French magazine Politique Internationale have come forward to say they never spoke to him. These included Mr. Clinton; Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg; Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairman; Bill Gates, the chairman of Microsoft; and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Since his departure from ABC News in June, Mr. Debat has continued to work as a senior fellow for national security and terrorism at the Nixon Center in Washington. He was quoted as a knowledgeable source in an article in The Times of London this month, saying that American military forces were planning attacks that would demolish “the entire Iranian military.” He has also been quoted by many newspapers and news services.

Thanks to Chad.

Posted by: Ace at 10:45 AM | Comments (8)
Post contains 654 words, total size 4 kb.

The Petraeus kabuki was important, but I think predetermined. Bush had won this crucial round weeks ago, and Democrats knew it.

But this story from a few days ago is news of the biggest sort. German cold feet and economic self-interest may have forced us to the next phase of the Iranian conflict. more...

Posted by: Open Blog at 10:20 AM | Comments (19)
Post contains 416 words, total size 3 kb.

In-kind contribution.

Jason wrote earlier:

Since we now know that the NYT charged MoveOn one rate and a pro-war
group another. Have they been doing this same thing for some
time. Did they give John Kerry discounted ad rates versus George
Bush in 2004, what about Dem. Congressional candidates versus Republicans?

I wouldn't think that the NYT would be so stupid as to discount one
group over another in their ad rates based on their political
affiliation, but unfortunately now we know that they are in fact that stupid.

The question is: How long has this been going on for, and how does
it relate to in-kind political contributions.

Is this phenomenon limited to just Pinch and the NYT or does it
extend to other newspapers. Has the fourth estate become so corrupt
and failed so badly at their mission that they are openly taking
sides with not only their editorial policy but now their advertising
policy as well? I'll leave the News policy for another debate.

Is the cost of accessing the media now dependent on the content of
our message? Do we need a fairness doctrine for print advertising
as well as the Democrats claim we need it for radio content?

Tip of the iceberg, I'm thinking.

Posted by: Ace at 10:20 AM | Comments (26)
Post contains 249 words, total size 2 kb.

Not to be paranoid, but sometimes I think the media isn't being completely straight with me.

Posted by: Ace at 10:13 AM | Comments (10)
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.

Any takers? It's not that I'm not around, I am, I'm just declaring one early.

Honestly I'm kind of mesmerized by this OJ deal.

Posted by: Ace at 09:47 AM | Comments (23)
Post contains 30 words, total size 1 kb.

I'm on my lunch break, reading the latest edition of National Journal, when I saw something that I thought would be good grist for the moron-mill. National Journal polled their stable of Washington insiders (76 dems, 82 GOPers) to determine who the "experts" thought would make the strongest general election candidate in the 2008 Presidential election.

The results were as follows:

Democrat Nominee

Dem Experts

Hillary! 55%
Obamessiah 21%
Edwards 11%
Biden 5%
Richardson 5%
Dodd 3%

GOP Experts

Hillary! 52%
Edwards 18%
Obamessiah 18%
Richardson 6%
Biden 2%
Dodd 1%

GOP Nominee

Dem Experts

Rudy! 37%
Romney 28%
Thompson 14%
McCain 11%
Huckabee 9%

GOP Experts

Rudy! 37%
Romney 32%
McCain 18%
Thompson 9%
Huckabee 2%
Fox News' Miss Suzanne Sena 1%*
Ron Paul 0%

*OK...so I cast a write in vote that wasn't part of the official tally. It should have been though.

Make of these what you will. Do the Dems fear the Fred? Is the GOP gay for Edwards? Based on their relative standings, you might think so. I report, you decide.

Posted by: Jack M. at 09:44 AM | Comments (17)
Post contains 192 words, total size 1 kb.

Google has teamed up with the X-Prize Foundation to stimulate interest in an unmanned return to the moon.

The two are offering $20 million to the private company that manages to land a moon rover that can move 500m over the lunar surface and gather images and data. Second place gets $5 million and there is a $5 million bonus for any firm which manages to find water-ice or remnants of the Apollo landings (shades of conspiracy theory there, no?).

That's all well and good; everyone from my generation just said "Who cares?" What we're really interested in knowing is: what do Google shareholders think about their company giving $30-or-so million dollars away?

Sadly, it's unlikely that they have a good lawsuit against Google. Corporations are allowed to make charitable contributions and gifts to promote the public welfare or for scientific or educational purposes so long as the contributions are "reasonable" in light of the financial status of the corporation. So I guess the real question is: how many millions does Google have to give away before it's giving becomes unreasonable?

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 09:30 AM | Comments (17)
Post contains 189 words, total size 1 kb.

ItÂ’s not exactly the plot for OceanÂ’s 24 or whatever number they are up to but itÂ’s pretty odd and if it gets him behind bars, itÂ’s all good.

September 14, 2007 -- Investigators questioned O.J. Simpson and named him a suspect Friday a break-in at a casino hotel room involving sports memorabilia.

The break-in was reported at the Palace Station casino late Thursday night, police spokesman Jose Montoya said. He said the break-in involved sports collectibles, but he declined to elaborate.

Simpson was released and is believed to be in Las Vegas, Montoya said.

"We don't believe he's going anywhere, " he said.

Hopefully this means the Fred Goldman squeeze on the JuiceÂ’s finances is working and this is what he is resorting to.

Posted by: DrewM. at 07:44 AM | Comments (47)
Post contains 149 words, total size 1 kb.

Well, not a few. Ten thousand.

PHILADELPHIA (AP) -- The city's embattled police chief, acknowledging that police alone cannot quell a run of deadly violence, has called on 10,000 black men to patrol the streets to reduce crime.

Sylvester Johnson, who is black, says black men have a duty to protect more vulnerable residents. He wants each volunteer to pledge to work three hours a day for at least 90 days.

"It's time for African-American men to stand up," Johnson told the Philadelphia Daily News, which first reported the story Wednesday. "We have an obligation to protect our women, our children and our elderly. We're going to put men on the street. We're going to train them in conflict resolution."

A noble sentiment, and we all understand the frustration that leads to these kinds of ideas. But: you can add all the patrols you want. You can ask for black men, white women, or hispanic trannies to offer their help.

The only way to revitalize a city is to carefully and methodically dismantle the network of social services which have created a persistent underclass of useless and hopeless people. Only then will the conditions for security and commerce (the bare necessities for social uplift) be created.

OH GOD. Did I say that out loud?

Posted by: LauraW. at 07:35 AM | Comments (50)
Post contains 232 words, total size 1 kb.