Political correctness in the Lexington Herald-Leader (Part 2)

As we noted in Political correctness in the Lexington Herald-Leader? something, something I attributed to being so #woke and #BlackLivesMatter and politically correct that the editors did not want to show the picture of a black man accused of murder, Juanyah Jamar Clay, because he is black. If there was another reason, I couldn’t think of it, because the Herald-Leader was willing to expend the bandwidth to include a useless article illustration of crime scene tape.

Well, Mr Clay has been apprehended, and, once again, the paper decided against posting his photo on their website:

Lexington teen arrested, charged with murder 1 day after police name him as a suspect

By Jeremy Chisenhall | March 31, 2021 | 8:55 AM EDT | Updated 9:07 AM EDT

Juanyah J Clay, from the LEX18 website. Click to enlarge.

A Lexington homicide suspect was arrested Tuesday after police publicly identified him just one day earlier.

Juanyah Jamar Clay, 19, was arrested and booked at the Lexington-Fayette County Detention Center Tuesday evening after police said he was wanted for the alleged murder of 26-year-old Bryan D. Greene. Greene was found shot to death in January inside his residence at Eastridge Apartments, police said.

Clay was concealing three handguns on him at the time of his arrest, according to an arrest citation. He also had nearly 3.7 ounces of marijuana, more than 10 Percocet pills, cash and a digital scale with him. The officer who filled out Clay’s arrest citation said all the items were indicative of drug trafficking.

According to jail records, Clay faces eight charges: murder, carrying a concealed weapon, giving an officer false identifying information, receiving a stolen gun, tampering with a prison monitoring device, trafficking in less than 8 ounces of marijuana, trafficking in opiates, and violating conditions of release.

Clay had previously been charged with burglary and violating conditions of release in 2019, according to court records. That case remained open in court, but Clay had been released on a $15,000 surety bond.

Translation: Mr Clay is a bad dude!

He was already out on bond, so he was already facing criminal charges. He knew that carrying illegal drugs, and a firearm — in this case, three handguns — and tampering with an ankle monitor were all additional crimes, but he did it anyway.

As in yesterday’s article, the current one has an illustration, albeit a different one, of a Lexington police officer stringing yellow crime scene tape. The Herald-Leader obviously had no concern with using the bandwidth for a photo, but, once again, chose not to use Mr Clay’s picture. The illustration added exactly nothing to the story, where using Mr Clay’s photo would have qualified as newsworthy. Given that I had notified both the herald-Leader in general and the article author, Jeremy Chisenhall, specifically, by Twitter, of the lapse of responsible journalism here, it doesn’t seem likely that this was a simple omission, but a deliberate decision.

I have previously noted that we should simply stop printing the dead-trees editions of newspapers, but if newspapers really want to survive into the digital age, they need to do something really radical like practice journalism. The Lexington Herald-Leader is failing to do so.

Political correctness in the Lexington Herald-Leader?

I recently wrote about the death of print newspapers, lamenting their one-foot-and-three-toes-on-the-other-in-the-grave impending demise, and hoping for a more positive future in the digital and internet world. I noted one major advantage of digital newspapers: they aren’t stuck with print deadlines, but can continually update stories, and they have much more room to publish photographs.

That was in my mind when I read this one in the Lexington Herald-Leader:

Suspect named after Lexington man found shot to death in his apartment, police say

By Jeremy Chisenhall | March 29, 2021 | 12:49 PM | Updated March 29, 2021 | 3:45 PM

A 19-year-old has been named as a suspect in the killing of a Lexington man shot to death in his apartment earlier this year, police said Monday.

Juanyah J. Clay, 19, was wanted on a murder warrant, Lexington police said.

Clay is accused of killing 26-year-old Bryan D. Greene, a man police found dead at the Eastridge Apartments on Alumni Drive on Jan. 30.

There’s a bit more at the original, including where anyone who spots Mr Clay can notify the Lexington Police Department of his whereabouts.

But while there’s a wasted photo of a Lexington Police Department crime scene, with an officer stringing yellow crime scene tape around a site, what there isn’t is a photograph of the suspect.[1]I checked the site again at 1:10 PM EDT, about ten minutes prior to publication of this article.

Juanyah J Clay, from the LEX18 website. Click to enlarge.

Naturally, I wondered: was there no photograph of Mr Clay available to the Herald-Leader? So, naturally, I checked, with a simple Google search for juanyah j clay, and shazamm! not only was his photo available, it was available in other Lexington media. WLEX-TV, Channel 18, the local NBC affiliate had the story with Mr Clay’s picture, in an article dated six minutes before the in in the newspaper, and updated three hours after the LEX18 article. WKYT-TV, Channel 27, the local CBS affiliate, also had an article, with the same photo. WTVQ, Channel 36, the local ABC affiliate had the story, and the photo, as did WDKY, Channel 56, the Fox affiliate.

The Lexington city government website had the photo, as did the Lexington Police Department’s Facebook page.

It seems that everybody had Mr Clay’s photo, everybody except the Herald-Leader. And every story, including the one in the Herald-Leader, had a very similar statement to that on the newspaper’s site:

Police asked anyone with information on Clay’s whereabouts to contact Lexington Police by calling (859) 258-3600. Anonymous tips can be submitted to Bluegrass Crime Stoppers by calling (859) 253-2020, online at www.bluegrasscrimestoppers.com, or through the P3 tips app available at www.p3tips.com.

Now, if people who might happen to spot the suspect are asked to call it in, including in the newspaper’s article, and the newspaper’s website had enough bandwidth available for a generic crime story photo, why didn’t the Herald-Leader include Mr Clay’s photo instead? Wouldn’t Mr Clay’s photograph be much more useful to people who might just happen to see him on the streets than a picture of crime scene tape?

That’s the big question, why? And being the very politically incorrect observer of media bias that I am, one answer springs immediately to mind. Having written about the horrible damage the #woke and #BlackLivesMatter activists have done in the newsrooms of The New York Times and The Philadelphia Inquirer, I instantly thought: to have published the photo of a murder suspect who happens to be black might be seen as racist by the reporter or his editors.

Is there another explanation for this egregious failure of journalism? If there is, it hasn’t occurred to me. Perhaps someone else can give me a better answer, but right now, I’m calling it the way I see it: the newspaper cares more about political correctness than it does journalism.

References

References
1 I checked the site again at 1:10 PM EDT, about ten minutes prior to publication of this article.

18th Century Technology: It’s time to stop printing newspapers

The Washington Post, which was saved by Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos in 2013, is cheering on the offer by Stewart Bainum Jr. to but Tribune Publishing:

Bainum hopes to offer $650 million for Tribune Publishing Co.

By Elahe Izadi and Sarah Ellison | March 24, 2021 | 6:00 PM EDT

Maryland business executive Stewart Bainum Jr. wants to purchase Tribune Publishing Co. for $650 million — 10 times the amount he agreed last month to pay for one of its newspapers, the Baltimore Sun.

It’s an effort to edge out an already agreed-upon $630 million offer for Tribune from Alden Global Capital, an investment fund known for acquiring and slashing newspaper operations.

Details of Bainum’s plans surfaced in a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing submitted Tuesday.

It once seemed as if the Alden deal was all but wrapped up; in Tuesday’s filing, the board recommended that shareholders approve Alden’s offer but also released Banium from a confidentiality agreement he made to negotiate to buy the Baltimore Sun so that he can talk with potential investors about going in together on a counter-offer for all of Tribune.

Alden is a hedge fund that likes to buy up newspapers, cut them to the bone, and make a profit by selling off their real property. But it should be noted that it doesn’t have to be a hedge fund to do that stuff.

Philadelphia Inquirer to sell printing facility, lay off 500 plant employees in bid for long-term economic stability

Proceeds from the sale of the plant will be used to enhance severance packages for laid-off employees beyond the company’s obligations under union contracts.

by Andrew Maykuth and Juliana Feliciano Reyes | Updated: October 9, 2020

The Philadelphia Inquirer and Philadelphia Daily News Printing Plant in Conshohocken.JESSICA Griffin / Philadelphia InquirerStaff Photographer

The Philadelphia Inquirer will close its sprawling Montgomery County printing plant and shift production of its newspapers to a New Jersey contractor. The cost-cutting move will put as many as 500 employees out of work, but is aimed at ensuring the survival of the media company as consumers turn to digital platforms for their news.The company on Friday told employees that it plans to close and sell the Schuylkill Printing Plant in Upper Merion Township, perhaps by the end of the year. The Inquirer is negotiating with a buyer for the 45-acre River Road property, which includes a 674,000-square-foot manufacturing facility that opened in 1992. The buyer’s identity and plans were not disclosed.

“While the sale is not yet final, we recognize how deeply unsettling and distressing this is to employees at the printing plant,” Lisa Hughes, The Inquirer’s publisher and chief executive officer, said in an internal memo Friday to employees.

“They have served our readers tirelessly, with dedication and devotion to the craft,” Hughes said. “Many of them have spent decades with the company — and all performed their jobs valiantly when the pandemic arrived.”

They may have served valiantly, but that doesn’t mean that they aren’t going to get canned.

Look at that photo, which you can enlarge by clicking on it. There are a lot of expensive-looking vehicles in that parking lot, the parking lot of a building filled with, as the left like to say, people with good paying union jobs. That the Inquirer is now owned by the Philadelphia Foundation, a non-profit ‘public benefit’ corporation. Gerry Lenfest, a billionaire who liked to give away his money, bought out the Inquirer and its companion tabloid, the Daily News, in 2014. While Mr Bezos paid 250 million for The Washington Post, the amount Mr Lenfest had to spend was a fraction of that. Mr Lenfest then turned around and donated the Inquirer to the non-profit.

But even non-profits have to pay the bills, and thus the printing plant got sold, and all of those “valiant” employees, with their good-paying union jobs, got pink slips. The $299.5 million state-of-the-art printing plant that the Inquirer had built in 1992, just sold for $37 million. In one of the bigger ironies, the time capsule buried at the plant in 1992, and scheduled to be opened in 2092, was instead opened on Friday.

It was sometime around 15 years ago, and perhaps longer, that I read an article which pointed out that it would have been less expensive for The New York Times to buy and provide each of its print subscribers with a Kindle, and send distribute the paper online instead, than it was to print the thing. Today, I get my subscribed newspapers — and I admit to liking newspapers far more than broadcast media sources — on my desktop, on my iPad, and on my iPhone.

Before I retired, I used to stop at the Turkey Hill in downtown Jim Thorpe on the way to the plant. I got my coffee, and picked up a copy of the Inquirer, to take to work. Some of the guys used to combitch that they’d have preferred the Allentown Morning Call, as it was closer to local news for them, but I was paying for it, so I got to choose. At any rate, there were many, many times in which, in the sports section, there would be a notice, “This game ended too late for inclusion in this edition.”[1]“Combitch” is a Picoism, not a typo. You should be able to figure out the etymology on your own.

That is the problem with print newspapers: the news is not always that new. Events happen quickly, and print newspapers are hours old before people ever get to read them. Online, corrections and updates can, and are, made frequently.

Why do I appreciate newspapers? Being mostly deaf, it is far easier for me to read the news than listen to it. More, the broadcast/cablecast media give us just the bare bones, not the meat of the stories, and their biases are far more blatant. Even with the biases of the #woke in the newsrooms, the longer treatment of print medium stories usually lets the truth get out.

The old Lexington Herald-Leader building, on Midland Avenue. Now sold, the building logo has been removed.

I was, about the time that Johannes Gutenberg invented the movable type printing press, a paperboy for the old Lexington Herald and Lexington Leader. Alas! The current merged paper, the Lexington Herald-Leader, now part of the bankrupt McClatchy company, outsourced its own printing to a plant near Louisville in 2016, ceased issuing a Saturday edition in 2019, which meant the end of printing Friday night high school sports stories, and recently sold their own building on Midland Avenue to the Fayette County schools.

And let’s be honest: the print editions of virtually every major, and mid-sized, newspaper in this country, are horrible. The physical size has been reduced, even in as august a paper as The Wall Street Journal, and newsroom staffs have been cut not just to the bare bones, but into the bone as well.

It’s time to simply end the print editions. As much as some people will hate to see them go, they are dying anyway. For newspapers to have any chance to become profitable, they have to cease being newspapers, and adapt to the digital, internet model. No matter how much they try to modernize, newspapers are still 18th century technology, and the 18th century ended a long time ago.

References

References
1 “Combitch” is a Picoism, not a typo. You should be able to figure out the etymology on your own.

The Washington Post dances around the right question, but never actually asks it, because that would be too politically incorrect! If you are not courageous enough to ask the right questions, you will never get the right answers.

We have been saying all along that the credentialed media have been ignoring the soaring homicide rates in our major cities.

Well, it took the mass shootings in Atlanta and Boulder to focus their attention, but it looks like The Washington Post finally got around to noticing as well:

Shootings never stopped during the pandemic: 2020 was the deadliest gun violence year in decades

By Reis Thebault and Danielle Rindler | March 23, 2021 | 11:42 PM EDT

Until two lethal rampages this month, mass shootings had largely been absent from headlines during the coronavirus pandemic. But people were still dying — at a record rate.

In 2020, gun violence killed nearly 20,000 Americans, according to data from the Gun Violence Archive, more than any other year in at least two decades. An additional 24,000 people died by suicide with a gun.

The vast majority of these tragedies happen far from the glare of the national spotlight, unfolding instead in homes or on city streets and — like the covid-19 crisis — disproportionately affecting communities of color.

Last week’s shootings at spas in the Atlanta area and Monday’s shooting at a grocery store in Boulder, Colo., killed a combined 18 people and rejuvenated a national effort to overhaul gun laws. But high-profile mass shootings such as those tend to overshadow the instances of everyday violence that account for most gun deaths, potentially clouding some people’s understanding of the problem and complicating the country’s response, experts say.

OK, they are starting to identify the problem. A bit further down:

“More than 100 Americans are killed daily by gun violence,” Ronnie Dunn, a professor of urban studies at Cleveland State University, said, using a figure that includes suicides. “The majority are in Black and Brown communities. We don’t really focus on gun violence until we have these mass shootings, but it’s an ongoing, chronic problem that affects a significant portion of our society.”

Of course, the article and the interviewees are all using the currently politically correct phrase, “gun violence,” as though firearms just pick themselves off the shelf and start shooting people. No one seems to be willing to point out that these shootings are being done by bad people!

Dr Dunn noted that the majority of these homicides “are in Black and Brown communities,” but seems quite unwilling to note that while the majority of victims “are in Black and Brown communities,” it is also true that the majority of their killers are part of the “black and brown communities.[1]Note that The Washington Post is using the Associated Press Stylebook, which capitalizes ‘black’ when referring to race, and now capitalizes ‘brown’ as well. The First Street … Continue reading

Overall, most homicides in the United States are intraracial, and the rates of white-on-white and Black-on-Black killings are similar, both long term and in individual years.

Between 1980-2008, the U.S. Department of Justice found that 84% of white victims were killed by white offenders and 93% of Black victims were killed by Black offenders.

In 2018, the Federal Bureau of Investigation reported that 81% of white victims were killed by white offenders, and 89% of Black victims were killed by Black offenders.

In 2017, the FBI reported almost identical figures — 80% of white victims were killed by white offenders, and 88% of Black victims were killed by Black offenders.

Back to the Post. Dr Dunn, as you might expect, tried to place the blame on the increased killings on all sorts of things, including increased gun sales:

Researchers say the pandemic probably fueled the increases in several ways. The spread of the coronavirus hampered anti-crime efforts, and the attendant shutdowns compounded unemployment and stress at a time when schools and other community programs were closed or online. They also note the apparent collapse of public confidence in law enforcement that followed the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis.

Covid-19 and the protests over police brutality also led to a surge of firearm sales. In 2020, people purchased about 23 million guns, a 64 percent increase over 2019 sales, according to a Washington Post analysis of federal data on gun background checks.

Dunn pointed to this flood of firearms as the most detrimental factor in the fight to curb gun violence. When shootings become “the soundscape of inner-city neighborhoods,” he said, “it increases anxiety and stress and creates toxic stress.” Dunn compared the effect to post-traumatic stress disorder akin to what war veterans experience.

What didn’t you see in that? You didn’t see Dr Dunn point to any research which shows that the legally-purchased firearms surge, as a result of the #BlackLivesMatter “Mostly Peaceful Protests™” were at all related to the killings in our inner cities.

When riots and violence are spreading through our cities, and the images and news of that are being purveyed over the network and cable news day in and day out, it’s perfectly natural that some people would believe that they needed additional protection; that’s why gun sales increased. Dr Dunn wants you to believe that it why homicides spiked, but offers no proof that those increased gun sales had anything to do with it.

Have the police linked any of these additional forearms sales to the increased homicide rates? If they have, I’ve managed to miss that story.

One recent study, from the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence, called gun violence “a public health crisis decades in the making.” An analysis of data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found Black males between the ages of 15 and 34 accounted for 37 percent of gun homicides, even though they made up 2 percent of the U.S. population — a rate 20 times that of White males of the same age.

Here Dr Dunn provides the test. If black males between 15 and 34 account for 37% of homicides by firearm, while making up just 2% of the population, if the increased firearms sales have significantly contributed to the increased homicide rate, then we should see a heavy predominance of black males in that age group making up the increase in applications to purchase a firearm legally. Such would, if perhaps not prove what Dr Dunn is saying, at least provide a strong inference of it.

On average, there was one mass shooting every 73 days in 2020, compared with one every 36 days in 2019 and one every 45 days in 2017 and 2018. The slowdown interrupted what had been a five-year trend of more frequent and more deadly mass shootings.

That gun violence increased overall even as mass shootings declined underscores the fact that those high-profile events account for a relatively small share of firearm deaths. It should draw more attention to the victims and survivors of gun violence across the country, (Mark Barden, a co-founder of the gun violence prevention group Sandy Hook Promise) said.

So, while homicides have increased, mass shooting events have decreased. It’s almost as though the random events of nuts going off and committing these high-profile crimes has nothing to do with the increased homicide rate.

But, of course, it’s the mass shootings which make the news, because, let’s face it: a couple of gang-bangers getting killed in Philadelphia isn’t even news anymore.

If black males between 15 and 34 are the victims of homicide at a rate twenty times that of white males of the same age, then we need to ask why that is, but one thing is certain: it’s not guns. There is something different in the education, culture and experiences of white and black males that is causing black males of those ages to kill each other at such rates, and until we start asking what those differences are, we will never honestly address the issue.

But in our age of political correctness, we cannot ask the questions, without being accused of being the world’s most horrible racist, an accusation which shuts down the questions, and shutting down the questions means shutting off all hope of coming up with the right answers.

Me? I’m less than a month from my 68th birthday, and I’m retired. I have no job from which I can be fired for asking politically incorrect questions, have nothing from which I can be #canceled. I can ask the uncomfortable questions, when no one else seems to be willing or able to do so.

But if other people don’t step up, if other people won’t ask the right questions, we might as well face it: we’ll never have the right answers. But, sadly enough, our friends on the left already know that. They have had the choice between asking the right questions, and hoping to find the right answers, or ignoring the right questions, because by doing that they risk far less for themselves, and the only real price for that is more dead black people on the streets of Washington and Chicago and Philadelphia.

We know what choice they have taken.

References

References
1 Note that The Washington Post is using the Associated Press Stylebook, which capitalizes ‘black’ when referring to race, and now capitalizes ‘brown’ as well. The First Street Journal does not go along with that.

Virtue must be signaled!

Robert Aaron Long, 21, a guy with some serious, serious mental problems, shot up three Atlanta metropolitan area ‘massage parlors,’ killing eight people, six of whom were of Asian descent. Four were Korean. Naturally, it’s being called a hate crime by the left, though the details don’t quite match up.

But that doesn’t matter; the Usual Suspects are all over this as a hate crime, as though any deliberate murder isn’t an act of hate. From The New York Times:

Why Some Georgia Lawmakers Want Last Week’s Shootings Labeled Hate Crimes

Violence that left eight dead, including six women of Asian descent, will be the first stress test for a Georgia hate crime law.

By Astead W. Herndon and Stephanie Saul |March 21, 2021

A year ago, Georgia was one of four states that had no hate crime legislation.

But the deadly rampage last week that left eight people dead, six of them women of Asian descent, is now providing a test of a law passed last year — and a window into the way that the state’s increasingly diverse electorate has altered its political and cultural chemistry.

Georgia, after earlier false starts, passed its legislation following the shooting death of a young Black man, Ahmaud Arbery, who was stopped, detained and then shot to death by white residents in a South Georgia suburban neighborhood.

Now last week’s shootings, in which Robert Aaron Long, 21, has been charged with eight counts of murder, are providing a major stress test for when the legislation can be applied, what it can achieve and how it plays into the state’s increasingly polarized politics.

Political leaders, civil rights activists, and national and local elected officials condemned last week’s attack as an act of bigoted terror, drawing a connection between the majority-Asian victims and a recent surge in hate crimes against Asian and Pacific Islander Americans.

Mr Long has already been charges with premeditated murder. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, Georgia not only has capital punishment, but carries it out, having executed 76 people since the restoration of capital punishment in 1976. An obvious question is: why bother to charge Mr Long with ‘hate crimes’ if there’s really nothing more they can do to him?

Law enforcement officials and some legal figures have shied away from labeling the killings a hate crime, saying there is insufficient evidence of motivation. Prosecutors in two separate counties are still weighing whether to invoke the hate crimes law.

If the evidence for a hate crime is weak, charging under the hate crime stature becomes problematic. It adds to the length and expense of any trial, and runs a serious risk of acquittal on such charges.

But that has not stopped the shootings from resonating as bias crimes for many in Georgia, a state that has been at the forefront of the demographic changes coursing through the South.

“I don’t want to draw any conclusions, but it’s obvious to me that if six victims were Asian women, that was a target,” said Georgia State Representative Calvin Smyre, a longtime Democratic lawmaker who helped shepherd the hate crimes bill through the General Assembly.

And there it is: it’s just obvious to Representative Smyre that, because women of Asian descent were killed, they must’ve been targeted because they were Asian. But sometimes, just because someone thinks that something is obvious doesn’t make it true.

Eight people are dead, and Mr Long has been charged with their murder. He is facing life in prison without the possibility of parole or perhaps even a capital sentence on those charges. If he is convicted on those, there’s nothing more a hate crimes rider can do to him.

But virtue must be signaled! My question is: if the killings of the six Asian women was so horrible, and must be charged as hate crimes, does that make the deaths of the other two victims somehow less significant, less important? Are the two non-Asian victims somehow less dead than the six Asian ones?

The credentialed media want to muzzle Glenn Greenwald They're finding out just how well that works

I have never been a particular fan of Glenn Greenwald. Born in the United States, he now resides in Rio de Janeiro with his “husband,” and has been a mostly left-wing journalist throughout his career. His participation in helping the odious Edward Snowden reveal classified documents was repugnant.

But if there is one thing I definitely do appreciate about Mr Greenwald is his devotion to Freedom of Speech and of the Press.

Journalists Start Demanding Substack Censor its Writers: to Bar Critiques of Journalists

This new political battle does not break down along left v. right lines. This is an information war waged by corporate media to silence any competition or dissent.

by Glenn Greenwald | March 11, 2021

Glenn Greenwald

On Wednesday, I wrote about how corporate journalists, realizing that the public’s increasing contempt for what they do is causing people to turn away in droves, are desperately inventing new tactics to maintain their stranglehold over the dissemination of information and generate captive audiences. That is why it journalists have bizarrely transformed from their traditional role as leading free expression defenders into the the most vocal censorship advocates, using their platforms to demand that tech monopolies ban and silence others.

That same motive of self-preservation is driving them to equate any criticisms of their work with “harassment,” “abuse” and “violence” — so that it is not just culturally stigmatized but a banning offense, perhaps even literally criminal, to critique their journalism on the ground that any criticism of them places them “in danger.” Under this rubric they want to construct, they can malign anyone they want, ruin people’s reputations, and unite to generate hatred against their chosen targets, but nobody can even criticize them.

Any independent platform or venue that empowers other journalists or just ordinary citizens to do reporting or provide commentary outside of their repressive constraints is viewed by them as threats to be censored and destroyed. Every platform that enables any questioning of their pieties or any irreverent critiques of mainstream journalism — social media sites, YouTube, Patreon, Joe Rogan’s Spotify program — has already been systematically targeted by corporate journalists with censorship demands, often successfully.

Back in November, the media critic Stephen Miller warned: “It’s only a matter of time before the media tech hall monitors turn their attention to Substack.” And ever since, in every interview I have given about the success of Substack and every time I have written about journalist-led censorship campaigns, I have echoed that warning that they would soon turn their united guns on this platform. Miller’s prediction was prompted by a Columbia Journalism Review article entitled “The Substackerati” which claimed that Substack was structurally unfair because “most” of “the most successful people on Substack” are “white and male; several are conservative” and “have already been well-served by existing media power structures.”

I will admit to having little contact with Substack. I knew that Patrick Frey, who has blogged for free as Patterico since 2003, and Bari Weiss, who was forced out at left The New York Times by the hatred of the young #woke in the newsroom. Mr Frey is an educated, (mostly) conservative, his hatred for Donald Trump notwithstanding, heterosexual married white male, but Miss Weiss is a mostly liberal lesbian.[1]A couple of commenters I consider to be anti-Semitic on The Other McCain have sought to educate me that she can’t be white, because she’s a Jew.

Thus, I never realized that Substack is a bastion of conservative white males. Mr Greenwald continued to note that most successful Substack writer is a somewhat obscure female History professor at Boston College.

In fact, looking at the list of ‘Substackerati’ Mr Greenwald used, Matt Taibbi, Andrew Sullivan, Matt Yglesias, Heather Cox Richardson, along with Messrs Greenwald, Frey and Miss Weiss, I find three who are homosexual, and the majority liberal.

Mr Greenwald continues to note what has really bothered the currently credentialed media:

That is precisely why they are so furious. They cannot stand the fact that journalists can break major stories and find an audience while maintaining an independent voice, critically questioning rather than obediently reciting the orthodoxies that bind them and, most of all, without playing their infantile in-group games and submitting to their hive-mind decrees. In fact, the more big stories you break while maintaining your independence from them, the more intense is the contempt they harbor for you: that explains, among other things, their willingness to watch Julian Assange (who has broken more major stories than all of them combined) be imprisoned for publishing documents.

That they are angry and upset is irrelevant. It only matters because these resentments and fears that they are losing their monopolistic power over public thought are translating into increasingly concerted and effective censorship campaigns.

The credentialed media heaped scorn on the recently deceased Rush Limbaugh, virtually celebrating in his death due to cancer, because he was the one who began the breaking of the ‘gatekeeping’ function of the media. When the only way for a contrary voice to be heard was if an editor approved, the editors had the power (mostly) to restrict the terms of debate. Mr Limbaugh, by virtue of his tremendous talent — “talent on loan from God,” he used to say — expressed to an audience of as much as thirty million the things that many people already believed, but rarely heard outside of their circle of friends. Then Al Gore invented this internet thingy, and debates started in America Online chatrooms, and then moved to independent blogs. Powerline and Little Green Footballs, working solely from images on low-definition television screens, were able to expose how CBS News used forged documents to try to turn the election of 2004 against the younger President Bush, and were able to get their findings out to millions of people. They went around the gatekeeping function of the credentialed media.

The older editors of major media sources realized, albeit grudgingly, that their power was lost. But as the young #wokes forced out older and wiser heads like James Bennet and Stan Wischnowski, even though they were liberal themselves, the young #woke lost that institutional memory which should have informed them that the gatekeeping function is gone.[2]From Wikipedia: Woke (/ˈwoʊk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from … Continue reading

And now they think they should somehow get it back. Their success in using #CancelCulture to cow others into silence seems to have emboldened them.

But it’s an effort doomed to failure. As we previously noted, the HuffPost was bought out by BuzzKill BuzzFeed, and now Verizon Media has laid off about 30% of what was supposed to have been HuffPost’s independent newsroom. BuzzFeed has had its own financial problems, cutting salaries a year ago due to COVID-19 and having laid off 15% of its workforce in 2019.

The First Amendment to the Constitution protects the Freedom of the Press, but all that means is that the government cannot control the press, cannot censor it, and cannot punish people for printing things the government do not like. Unfortunately, far too many in the media believe that it confers on them some sort of special status, that it means they are somehow beyond criticism. Mr Greenwald, and a few of the other ‘Substackerati,’ have had the temerity, the unmitigated gall to criticize other reporters, so naturally the credentialed media are striking back. There’s nothing they can do about The First Street Journal and me, and my frequent criticisms of what I sometimes call The Philadelphia Enquirer, because, sadly, 🙁 there’s no one paying me to write and publish what I do.

But Substack? The media know that Mr Greenwald and others are making money due to their Substack affiliation, and they can put pressure on Substack to rein in those horrible, horrible free voices.

The fictitious Police Commissioner of New York City, Frank Reagan of Bluebloods, once said on his show that the freedom of the press is limited to those who actually own a press. In a way, that’s true enough, but with the internet, almost anybody can now own a printing press. Writers on the internet are successful or failures based on their individual merits as writers and self-publicists, and not upon the judgements of newspaper editors.

References

References
1 A couple of commenters I consider to be anti-Semitic on The Other McCain have sought to educate me that she can’t be white, because she’s a Jew.
2 From Wikipedia:

Woke (/ˈwk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from the African-American Vernacular English expression “stay woke“, whose grammatical aspect refers to a continuing awareness of these issues.
By the late 2010s, woke had been adopted as a more generic slang term broadly associated with left-wing politics and cultural issues (with the terms woke culture and woke politics also being used). It has been the subject of memes and ironic usage. Its widespread use since 2014 is a result of the Black Lives Matter movement.

I shall confess to sometimes “ironic usage” of the term. To put it bluntly, I think that the ‘woke’ are just boneheadedly stupid.

The HuffPo is biting the dust

While I have often noted that print newspapers are 18th century technology, the contraction of media outlets isn’t restricted to print.

BuzzFeed Announces Deep Cuts To HuffPost Staff After Acquisition

BuzzFeed acquired HuffPost from Verizon Media in February.

By Sara Boboltz | March 9, 2021 | 12:31 PM EST

BuzzFeed announced layoffs for the HuffPost newsroom on Tuesday, three weeks after acquiring HuffPost from Verizon Media in February.

Hillary Frey, the site’s executive editor, and Louise Roug, the executive editor for international, will be departing in the restructuring effort.

HuffPost Canada will also shutter operations later this month.

A deal between BuzzFeed, HuffPost and Verizon Media was first made public in November. Verizon Media stated at the time that BuzzFeed and HuffPost would operate as “separate, distinct news organizations” with their own websites and editorial staff while BuzzFeed CEO Jonah Peretti led the combined company.

Translation: Verizon Media lied to them!

The HuffPost Union, organized as part of the Writers Guild of America, East, slammed the restructuring effort in a statement:

Today, we learned that 33 of our colleagues — nearly 30% of our unit — will be laid off. We are devastated and infuriated, particularly after an exhausting year of covering a pandemic and working from home. This is also happening less than a month after HuffPost was acquired by BuzzFeed. We never got a fair shot to prove our worth. These layoffs reiterate the importance of forming a union and advocating for our colleagues. We are glad that we are protected by a collective bargaining agreement and that our colleagues will receive severance. Our union will continue fighting to make HuffPost a more just and equitable workplace, including pushing for clear and accountable commitments to hiring and promoting more people of color and for transparency around pay equity.

It really is just so exhausting working from home! 🙂 It means that you have to make your own coffee in the morning rather than having a $7.25 per hour clerk at 7/Eleven doing it for you.

Now let me be clear here: I don’t like seeing anyone losing his job, but let’s be honest here: the HuffPost was as #woke and biased a ‘publication’ as any around. There was no special reporting there, and nothing you can see on their website front page is not available elsewhere — frequently with better writing — for free. And given the contempt the media have for working class men and women in ‘flyover country,’ it’s difficult not to feel some schadenfreude.

Way to promote that “unity,” Lexington Herald-Leader!

I have previously noted how the Associated Press surrendered to political correctness on language, saying that, when referring to race, it will capitalize “black” but leave “white” in lower-case.[1]Note that while the Associated Press and many media outlets will capitalize “black” but not “white”, The First Street Journal maintains its own published Stylebook, and does … Continue reading

After changing its usage rules last month to capitalize the word “Black” when used in the context of race and culture, The Associated Press on Monday said it would not do the same for “white.” The AP said white people in general have much less shared history and culture, and don’t have the experience of being discriminated against because of skin color. Protests following the death of George Floyd, which led to discussions of policing and Confederate symbols, also prompted many news organizations to examine their own practices and staffing. The Associated Press, whose Stylebook is widely influential in the industry, announced June 19 it would make Black uppercase. In some ways, the decision over “white” has been more ticklish. The National Association of Black Journalists and some Black scholars have said white should be capitalized, too. “We agree that white people’s skin color plays into systemic inequalities and injustices, and we want our journalism to robustly explore these problems,” Daniszewski said. “But capitalizing the term white, as is done by white supremacists, risks subtly conveying legitimacy to such beliefs.”

I found the whole thing not only obviously silly, but poor grammar. The use of “white” or “black” is simply shorthand for large racial groups, Caucasian and Negro, which are properly capitalized. Irish or French should be capitalized, as they refer to the inhabitants of countries as well as ethnic groups, while white should not be. Similarly, I would capitalize Kenyan or African, but not black. That the Associated Press would treat the words differently is just not very bright.

So now we come to the Lexington Herald-Leader, a McClatchy publication, and this sentence in a story about extending the COVID-19 vaccinations to Tier 1C:

Seventy-seven percent of people vaccinated are white, 6 percent are Black, and only 2.3 percent are Hispanic.

“Black” is capitalized, and “Hispanic” is (properly) capitalized, but “white” is left in lower-case. Yeah, I know: that’s the Associated Press Stylebook in action, but I cannot be the only person who noticed how the Herald-Leader has treated races differently. I have no idea how many readers of the paper will be familiar with, or even heard of, the AP Stylebook, but if the readers match the city’s demographics, 75.7% of them are white, and I would guess that some of them will have felt that they were slighted. Given just how out-of-touch the editors of the Herald-Leader are with their readership, perhaps those readers who feel slighted by that one sentence will have been right about how the editors feel about them.

Then again, anyone who notes that 77% + 6% + 2.3% = 85.3% might be wondering more about the math of the Beth Musgrave, the article author, and whichever editor checked her story before publication! 🙂

The newspaper does still have editors, right?[2]Well, maybe not, given that McClatchy filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection a year ago, and Chatham Asset Management now owns the McClatchy newspapers. The Herald-Leader’s Contact page … Continue reading

The left have spent the last five years decrying Donald Trump, claiming that he is very divisive and a racist, the editors of the Herald-Leader among them. But in going along with the Associated Press Stylebook in the manner they have, they are promoting the same “racial . . . intolerance” about which they complained concerning Mr Trump.

References

References
1 Note that while the Associated Press and many media outlets will capitalize “black” but not “white”, The First Street Journal maintains its own published Stylebook, and does not go along with such divisive foolishness.
2 Well, maybe not, given that McClatchy filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection a year ago, and Chatham Asset Management now owns the McClatchy newspapers. The Herald-Leader’s Contact page lists 15 non-sports reporters, deputy editors for digital, presentation and accountability, an executive editor and general manager, an editorial assistant and a news assistant. From those titles, I’m not sure that anyone actually reads and corrects reporters’ news stories. The days of the blue pencil are long gone, and there are times I think that editing itself has departed as well.

The editors of the Lexington Herald-Leader and their one-sided OpEd pages

In a short letter to the editor of the Lexington Herald-Leader, Jeffrey Bradford of Nashville, Tennessee, said:

I’m a Lexington native who moved to Nashville many years ago. Recently, while visiting family in Lexington, I read the opinion section of your paper and was astounded by how completely one-sided it is (Jan. 31, 2021 edition). Entirely from the left. Yours is the only newspaper I’ve read in recent years — with the possible exception of the New York Times and Washington Post — that completely excludes views from the right. This is odd on two levels: 1. I’m sure your readership is not so monolithic in its political views. 2. You lose all credibility by only publishing one side of the story. That is, your views carry no weight.

I encourage you to strive for a more balanced approach in the future, as I used to read in my hometown paper when growing up here. Not only would it be more intellectually honest, but you might sell more papers.

Reading just one print edition isn’t much of a sample, but a perusal of what my, sadly late, best friend used to call the Herald-Liberal’s website doesn’t show much diversity of opinion. There is a real question of how in touch the editors are with their readership. I would point out here the Editorial Board’s recent political endorsements:

  • 2020: Joe Biden for President, Amy McGrath Henderson for Senate, and Josh Hicks for 6th District Representative;[1]Notably, the editors endorsed Charles Booker over Mrs Henderson in the Democratic primary, saying that he was the more progressive candidate. Mrs Henderson once said, “I am further left, I am … Continue reading
  • 2018: Amy McGrath Henderson for 6th District Representative
  • 2016: Hillary Clinton for President, Jim Gray for Senate, and Nancy Jo Kemper for 6th District Representative
  • 2014: Alison Lundergan Grimes for Senate, and Elisabeth Jensen for 6th District Representative

All Democrats, and all defeated in Kentucky and in the 6th District. It seems that the Herald-Leader Editorial Board isn’t exactly in tune with the voters of the Commonwealth. Note that the 2016 and 2014 Democratic nominees for the 6th congressional district were political novices, and the editors struggled to find much good reason to endorse them. Representative Andy Barr (R-KY 6th District) beat them both by landslide margins.[2]Dr Malcolm Jewell, one of my political science professors at the University of Kentucky during medieval times, defined a landslide margin as 10% or greater.

In fact, with the exception of the 6th district race in 2018, the editors’ endorsed candidates lost by landslide margins. Even in 2018, with Mrs Henderson outspending Mr Barr $8,274,396 to $5,580,477, she lost 51.0% to 47.8%.

In her Senate campaign, Mrs Henderson raised $94,120,557 and spent $90,775,744 compared to Senator Mitch McConnell’s $71,351,350 and $64,787,889, only to lose 38.2% to 57.8%. As it happens, Mrs Henderson had the lowest percentage total against Mr McConnell of any of his opponents save sacrificial lamb candidate Lois Combs Weinberg in 2002.

Simply put, the editors are completely out-of-touch with their readership. Voters in Lexington are closer to the editors’ views, but once you get outside Fayette County, nope, nowhere close, and the Herald-Leader is a regional newspaper for most of eastern Kentucky.[3]I delivered both the morning Lexington Herald and afternoon Lexington Leader in Mt Sterling, just a few years after the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock.

I do not expect the editors to change their views. But perhaps, just perhaps, they might consider that their readers are not all from the city, and provide a bit more content for them.

References

References
1 Notably, the editors endorsed Charles Booker over Mrs Henderson in the Democratic primary, saying that he was the more progressive candidate. Mrs Henderson once said, “I am further left, I am more progressive, than anyone in the state of Kentucky,” while at a fund raiser in Massachusetts.
2 Dr Malcolm Jewell, one of my political science professors at the University of Kentucky during medieval times, defined a landslide margin as 10% or greater.
3 I delivered both the morning Lexington Herald and afternoon Lexington Leader in Mt Sterling, just a few years after the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock.