Inkwell: Authors and Artists

    
<There's no fight over what Jan. 6 meant. There's the truth and
there's the disinformation campaign to distort and suppress the
truth>

That's the fight they're referring to:

In Dueling Pardons, an Intensified Fight Over the Meaning of Jan. 6

President Trump’s grant of clemency to those who assaulted the
Capitol in his name four years ago clashed with his predecessor’s
decision to shield from retribution those who had sought to hold him
to account.

By Luke Broadwater

The dueling pardons issued Monday by the outgoing and incoming
presidents were the latest and perhaps clearest reminders of how
Donald J. Trump’s efforts to rewrite the history of the Jan. 6,
2021, assault on the Capitol have gradually worn down the consensus
that the riot marked one of American democracy’s darkest days.

There has never been any doubt about who was responsible for the
violence: Mr. Trump’s supporters attacked the building, fought
police and ransacked offices as they attempted to block the
certification of Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s 2020 victory. Republicans and
Democrats alike condemned the violence and Mr. Trump’s role in
summoning an angry crowd to Washington.

But four years later, many Americans now view the events of Jan. 6
as a choose-your-own-reality narrative. 

More:
<https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/20/us/politics/biden-trump-jan6-pardons.html>
  

    

The papers I worked for could be lazy and money-fat and smug, but they also
published the Pentagon Papers and revealed the crimes of Watergate. And the
families that owned them had a commitment to journalism that played out,
over time, in the creation of things like the family trust that protected
the NYT from outside investors, and which led to regular briefings for
Sulzberger family members that emphasize the obligation to produce a great
newspaper year after year, in good times and bad, resisting outside pressure
and "putting more tomatoes in the soup" when financial pressures have other
news organizations pulling back. The results aren't always great —
headlines can make me wince, too — but the family has stuck with its
principles through a system that has created a multi-generational attention
span. Compare that to Bezos and the Post, or the rapacious hedge funds and
their acquisitions.

   I'll take imperfect over utterly craven, thanks, and will continue to
urge people to complain when they see something that falls short.
  

    
I've given up on getting upset about online headlines.  Their job is
to get you to click and read the story, not to accurately and fully
represent the contents of the story.
  

    
And they are often of the click-bait form:

This famous person did that!
  

    
> Their job is to get you to click and read the story

Which doesn't work, when readers are scanning headlines to get a
sense of the news and rarely clicking through to the story.
  

    
I know it's hard for news junkies like us to understand just how
little news most people consume at all. The headlines on the NYT
just don't matter that much any more.
  

    
It also doesn't  work if you subscribe to the free headlines
newsletters but not to the news.
  

    

Re "meaning of Jan. 6": I submit that perhaps it was a bad idea for
a story from the outset. 
  

    
I think the attempted re-writing of history and re-naming of natural
bodies to suit the tastes of a budding authoritarian are important
stories and should remain closely reported until he's finally gone. 
  

    
The British satirical (and investigative reporting) magazine Private Eye has
skewered US media nicely on its latest front cover:
<https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:26tsf647wqnoo7umh4ywwz7a/
bafkreif6k3m4jcktyplnqmmnhltebpbloconus65rg4g75kgf5btjlklsy@jpeg>

wg
  

    
Ouch! Warranted.

I agree with you, Ron, about reporting closely and accurately on how
Trump is trying to rewrite history, but this week too many major
outlets — which we have to remember means the reporters, editors and
upper management — are the news equivalents of cold-stunned turtles.


It's not rising to the moment to devote front-page or above-the-fold
inches or pixels to arms-length nattering about politics or
disinformation. 

A "dueling versions of the meaning of January 6" article is far,
far, far from being a fresh story.

I'm wary of using The New York Times as a stalking horse, however,
even though it's arguably become the most important and influential
legacy news outlet in the United State. 

So, even setting aside the overall ultra-light coverage of the
ultra-right over the past several decades among centrist news
outlets — they have had nearly a decade to adjust their working
methods to covering Trump as a budding authoritarian rather than as
an aberration.

Rolling Stone, which is a far cry from Democracy Now!, seems to have
figured this out. 
  

    
Cute, Private Eye.

Not true. But cute.
  

    

Argh, I'm not going to scribble my latest post, but I am going to
try and make fewer blanket statements.
  

    

So, let's flip this around: 

Whatever did or didn't happen during the election campaign, now
Trump's president and he's rolling out the shock-and-awe
stress-testing of the system. 

He's flooded the zone with terrible executive orders, overturned the
criminal convictions of 1,600 rioters and racist seditionists who
are on his side, nominated a crew of largely unqualified and
unquestioning sycophants to run the federal government. And even
with all this, there is still more, like his war-mongering, tariff
threats and climate denial.

So, what do folks here think journalists should be doing at this
point to help prevent the United States from becoming the next
Singapore, Hong Kong or Nicaragua?
  

    
One thing would be to keep reporting "without fear or favor" despite
the too-real possibility of retribution - if not from officials,
then from the army of MAGAs who cheerfully make death threats, and
possibly militias that will do worse than threaten. I think it's
going to take real courage to sustain the "free press." The 4th
amendment won't stop a Proud Boy type from planting a bomb in your
basement.
  

    
They could start by calling balls and strikes again. Calling a nazi
salute a nazi salue, e.g. In an authoritative mode. Not speculation,
picking the flyshit out of the pepper, and sanitizing for the
middlebrow salarymen and soccer moms. Call a fascist a fascist and
defend the inevitable defamation suit with vigor and defiance.

This is what the right wing media has been doing, and why they are
beating the Vichy Press so goddamned always. But the good news is
the legit media don't have to lie to do it, and the truth is the
ultimate defense against defamation. I know it's expensive, but you
count on getting the fees back in the judgment.

I was so discouraged to hear Rachel Maddow of all people calling
Musk's Seig Heil a "Roman salute". That dictum must have come down
from Legal, and she probably had to throw up in her mouth a little
to do it. Time to get the litigators out of the newsroom.
  

    
A CBS affiliate in Milwaukee has fired a meteorologist for accusing
Musk of giving a nazi salute on her own IG account. This is such
chickenshit. They should be ashamed of themselves for pretending to
be journalists.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2025/01/22/cbs-58s-sam-kuffel-is-
out-after-criticizing-elon-musk-arm-gesture/77883983007/
  

    

   Ann Coulter said she wished the OK City bombers had driven up to the
NYTimes headquarters instead. When I worked there, they did regular bombing
and active shooter drills.

   They are still there, and they are working their asses off.
  

    
The guardian (?) pursuaded me it's not a Nazi salute, but a
Mussolini Fascista  salute. 

Adapted from a fake silent movie "Roman"  dramatic invention 
  

    
Oh, well, it's just Fascist, then, not Nazi. What a relief.
  

    
Whew!
  

    
I think not getting distracted by things that don't much matter would be a
good response. Muek's "awkward gesture" being an example: run the picture,
move on to the money he's hoping to extract for his businesses...

wg
  

    
Disagree, Wendy. Musk's Nazi salute was an expression of his fascism
-- and powerful given the nearly universal distribution (surely his
intent) it received. 
  

    
I would bet serious money that people at major news outlets,
including the NYT and ProPublica, are doing big investigative
projects on Musk's business holdings, ventures and practices as we
speak. 
  

    

Allowing that I have no idea what goes on at MSNBC, legal reviews
are very important for guarding against defamation lawsuits.

Bring on the legal reviews and fact checkers, sez I!