Category Archives: media news

No longer missing the sniping from left and right

I once posted a blog item about two fellows with whom I had a sort of professional relationship.

One is an ultraconservative firebrand; the other is an ultraliberal firebrand. I offered the notion that I must be doing something right to have angered both of them for essentially the same reason: I tilt too far the other way.

Here is what I wrote in July 2010.

https://highplainsblogger.com/2010/07/barbs-from-the-left-and-the-right/

I was working full time at the Amarillo Globe-News then, as editor of the Opinion pages. I would leave that job about two years later. I’m still blogging my brains out.

What I find refreshing about blogging in this context — as a retired former journalist — is that I no longer have to argue with critics who say I tilt too far in the opposite direction.

I tell people now — and I’ll reiterate it here — that I am now free to speak without apology. It’s not that I ever apologized for what I wrote when I was a working print editorialist. It’s just that I felt the need to correct whatever misinterpretation a critic would level at me.

“Your paper is too liberal,” they might say. “That rag of yours is too conservative,” others might say. No one can say that about this blog.

As the sayings go: “It is what it is,” and “What you see is what you get.”

As time marches on since my departure from daily print journalism I find myself separating myself more easily from the regular occurrences that would develop, such as the one noted in that July 2010 blog post.

I love telling friends with whom I cross paths that these days I am: unfettered, unchained, unrestrained, unleashed, uncaged, untethered, unrestricted … you can put the prefix “un” in front of any descriptive term you want.

That’s me. I’m having a blast, man.

Here is a seriously valuable public service

I invite you to read this item from today’s Amarillo (Texas) Globe-News.

You cannot make this stuff up.

It comes from the paper’s weekly “food inspection report” collected from Amarillo municipal code enforcement officials. It’s part of the public record. It’s available for anyone to see upon request. The newspaper has for a number of years been publishing this report as a form of public service. It lists eating establishments and watering holes around town. This particular joint is a strip club in southwest Amarillo.

This feature is enormously popular among readers of the newspaper.

I don’t read the newspaper regularly. In fact, I rarely have read the paper since resigning from the AGN in August 2012. Many of you know the story about that, so I won’t go there; I’ll save it possibly for another day.

I do like this feature and I admit that I miss seeing it.

This item might be the most bizarre complaint I’ve seen.

The media are getting their share of hits from disgruntled Americans who’ve taken the bait dangling from politicians who accuse them of offering “fake news” and other such things.

This inspection report isn’t fake anything. It’s real and it highlights the serious public service that the media can — and do — provide on a regular basis.

But seriously? “Breast implants found inside bar utensil holder … “?

Happy Trails, Part 29

We have spent the past two days peddling some of our worldly possessions.

Retirement has given us time to do these things.

It’s also allowed us to catch up with friends and former colleagues who have stopped by to say “hey” while we’ve been sitting under the hot sun on our driveway.

Three of them came by today and my wife and I took time to visit and to learn about their lives and to tell them about ours.

One particular exchange is worth retelling here.

It went something like this …

We were talking about blogging. I told my friend that blogging occupies a good bit of my retirement time these days. “It’s what I do,” I told him, repeating a mantra I often give to friends who inquire about the things that occupy my time.

I told him the name of the blog likely will change once my wife and I pull up stakes and relocate down yonder, somewhere in the greater Metroplex region.

Then I mentioned how, since 9/11, I was able to live the editorialist’s dream. When I was working for a living at the Amarillo Globe-News, I faced the prospect of having to fill a large bit of empty space on the Opinion page. The editorialist’s dream that came true on 9/11 was that the pace of events became so frantic and so relevant that I never had to worry about how I was going to fill that space.

Indeed, the ideal situation for someone who writes editorials is to grapple with deciding which issues I could set aside for the next day — or beyond.

Since that terrible day on Sept. 11, 2001, I have had zero trouble finding issues to comment on.

That trend has continued every year since then. Now that I’m no longer employed, am retired and writing this blog, I find myself with an embarrassment of riches in topics to discuss. The cool part about it as well is that this blog has many wings to it: I call it a blog that comments on “politics, public policy and life experience.”

As I told my friend this morning, ever since the most recent presidential campaign, my list of discussion topics has grown seemingly exponentially.

It’s the “life experience” topics — such as this “Happy Trails” series of blog posts — that give me the most pleasure.

Retirement also has unshackled me. I’m now free to speak my own mind, lay my own bias on those who read this blog.

Much more to come. I promise.

Declaring war on this overused cliche

I am declaring a state of war with a phrase that is driving me stark raving mad … I’m tellin’ ya.

“At the end of the day” has emerged as the most annoying cliché in the modern English language.

I just watched an interview on MSNBC’s “Last Word” show hosted by Lawrence O’Donnell, one of my favorite TV pundits/commentators. He didn’t use that phrase. O’Donnell apparently knows better.

Oh, no. It came from his guests: foreign policy wonk John McLaughlin and Nicholas Kristof, a New York Times columnist who is known for his expertise on Far East issues.

I heard Kristof drop “at the end of the day” twice in the span of about 15 seconds while responding to a question from O’Donnell. It’s particularly disappointing to hear it come from Kristof who, as a journalist, I am quite certain would never write that cliché in one of his NY Times columns.

(As an aside, I want to share with you that Kristof and I are “homeys” of a sort, as we both grew up in Oregon. I came of age in the Portland suburbs; Kristof grew up in the Willamette Valley.)

Here’s my theory on “at the end of the day” and its purpose for those who keep using it. It’s a setup phrase. I’ve concluded that whoever uses the phrase to preface a conclusion, it is to lend credence — a sort of gravitas — to whatever point the individual is trying to make.

“At end of the day, I am quite certain you have to stay hydrated during the hottest periods of the summer.”

Do you get it?

I do not yet know how this war I have declared will develop. I don’t have a strategy for waging it. I guess I’ll just start by pledging never to use it in this blog — except to call attention to its annoying quality; I also will pledge never to be caught dead saying it out loud.

If only these talking heads would toss the phrase into the crapper.

NPR sought to pay tribute, and then …

National Public Radio has this tradition of delivering the words of the Declaration of Independence to its listeners.

Its intent is to pay tribute to the very foundation of this great nation. Ol’ Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration to inform King George III of the many grievances the colonies had against his ham-fisted rule.

Well, this year, NPR’s tweeting of the Declaration met some angry response. Some fans of Donald J. Trump thought NPR was calling for insurrection against the government led by the 45th president of the United States.

Seriously, I do not know whether to laugh, cry, scream, slap the side of my noggin, just throw up my hands in disgust … or just, well, throw up.

Check out the reaction

Some supporters of the president flipped out. They didn’t recognize the words of Declaration of Independence.

You’ve heard the saying about how “No good deed goes unpunished”?

Well. There you go, NPR.

 

Keep yammering about ‘fake news,’ Mr. President

I used to have mixed feelings about Donald Trump’s use of what is becoming an-almost hackneyed term.

“Fake news.”

The president tosses it out there with utterly no self-awareness, that he is the King of Fake News.

Barack Obama was a foreigner; thousands of Muslims cheered the Twin Towers’ collapse; Obama wiretapped the Trump campaign office; millions of illegal immigrants voted for Hillary Clinton.

There’s more. It’s all fake news.

Yet the president persists in using that term to hang around media organizations that report actual news that he deems to be too negative.

Negativity equals “fake news.” You got that?

Thus, the president has established a mantra that plays well among the media-hating base of American voters who more than likely — as then-candidate Trump once famously said — would still vote for him even if he were to “shoot someone on Fifth Avenue.”

Do I want him to stop using the “fake news” dodge?

Not really. It just demonstrates that this president doesn’t know a single thing about the difference between what’s “fake” and what’s real.

POTUS redefines response strategy

Donald Trump’s communications team is defending The Boss by repeating a troubling dodge.

It is that the president is a human being and that he shouldn’t have to endure constant attacks without responding to his critics as he has done.

Deputy White House press aide Sarah Huckabee Sanders was called out the other day by White House reporter who skewered her for the White House’s constant yammering about “fake news.” He said the media are simply “doing their job.” Sanders objected to the gist of what he said and implied that the media, in effect, are conspiring to concoct reports designed to put the president in a negative light.

Sanders is as wrong as wrong gets.

As for Trump’s human instincts, I feel compelled to remind the young press flack that the president’s recent predecessors all avoided the kind of petulance exhibited by the current leader of the free world.

Barack Obama also was hammered repeatedly during his two terms in office. Did he say anything even remotely similar about his critics that we are hearing from Donald Trump? Umm. Nope.

George W. Bush his share of fire from opponents as well. Did the president respond in kind? Did he go on social media to portray the media as “the enemy of the people”? No once again. Instead, President Bush understood what all presidents have known, which is that the media perform a valuable service in keeping public officials accountable for their deeds and statements.

Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford all knew as president that criticism goes with the territory. Even Richard Nixon, who came closest to the Trump model of media response, knew better than to say out loud that the media were the enemy.

I no longer have any serious hope that Donald Trump will grasp what his most recent predecessors all knew about the media and their relationship with the president.

I do, though, expect better from his spokespeople, who should cease insulting Americans with the idiocy that the president is reacting like any normal, run-of-the-mill human being.

The men who preceded him were human beings, too.

Trump has been called out by, um, the best

I almost don’t know how to react to this item.

Joy Reid is a TV talk show host. Her MSBNC show is called “AM Joy.” This morning she welcomed a guest to discuss Donald J. Trump’s tweet storm, namely the hideous nature of his attacks on the media.

Reid’s guest was none other than Jerry Springer, the king of daytime trash TV. Springer — of all the people on Earth — said that the president’s tweets are beneath the dignity “of any decent man.”

Roll that one around for a moment. Springer, of course, is correct. Part of me wants to applaud Springer for speaking out. Another part of me cannot get past the supreme irony of such a message coming from this guy.

I need to mention, though, that before Springer made his fortune playing host to TV guests accusing each other of engaging in behavior that boggles any reasonable mind, he once was mayor of Cincinnati, Ohio.

So, Mr. President? Take a bow. You’ve been called out by the best.

Check it out here.

Trump changes presidency … not for the better!

Here’s another broken campaign promise from Donald John Trump.

He said he would change his approach if he were elected president of the United States, that he would become “more presidential.”

It hasn’t happened. The 71-year-old man who now is president isn’t going to change. He has demonstrated with graphic clarity his unwillingness to lend dignity to his comportment.

Indeed, this individual is changing the office he occupies.

Think of this for a moment. He goes to war with his foes, critics — and, yes, the media. He does so via Twitter. He has elevated a certain social medium to the level of venue for his policy pronouncements. The Trump White House acknowledges that his tweets become the official word of the president of the United States, our head of state, our commander in chief, the most powerful man on the planet.

Do you get it? He is lowering the office to his level! Rather than elevating his own standing to that of the exalted office to which he was elected, Trump is reducing the office a sort of playground, one populated by an overaged juvenile delinquent.

The president has disgraced his office. I would rue the day that he disgraces the great nation he is supposed to lead. However, the rest of us are better than the man who purports to be our leader.

Violence against reporters? Hmm … you be the judge

The hits just keep on comin’.

The president of the United States — the man with the itchy Twitter finger — has done it again. He has tweeted a video depicting him punching out someone from CNN.

Is Donald John Trump promoting violence against the media?

Take a look right here.

Trump has failed to keep a number of campaign promises. He said he would act more “presidential” were he elected to the office. He promised to unify a nation divided badly by a rancorous political campaign. He vowed to “make America great again.”

The first two pledges have been abject failures; the third one, the “make America great” pledge was empty, as the nation already is great.

He has vented repeatedly on Twitter. He is using the social medium to — in effect — articulate presidential policy. It’s coming to us in the form we are witnessing now with the then-entertainer tackling an individual who he has portrayed as a member of a cable television news network.

What will happen if someone actually acts on what he or she has just seen on Twitter? Is it right to hold the president responsible for such action?

You be the judge.

This individual is a disgrace.