TVNewser Show TVNewser FishbowlDC AgencySpy TVSpy LostRemote PRNewser SocialTimes AllFacebook 10,000 Words GalleyCat UnBeige MediaJobsDaily

Posts Tagged ‘Jack Shafer’

Top Five Quotes from Jack Shafer’s Takedown of Rupert Murdoch over the Phone-Hacking Scandal

If you haven’t heard, News Corp. has been deeply mired in a phone-hacking scandal that came to a head earlier this week when Guardian‘s Nick Davies and Amelia Hill reported that News Corp.’s News of the World journalists may have hacked into the voicemail of a 13-year-old girl who went missing in March 2002. Jack Shafer at Slate pens an entertaining column that provides a big picture look at the scandal for those who want to catch up, and makes Shafer’s feelings toward Rupert Murdoch, the beleaguered head of News Corp., very, very clear.

If you’re no Murdoch fan yourself, here are our favorite of Shafer’s gleeful takedowns of the media mogul for your reading pleasure:

1. If Rupert Murdoch could be slain by a mere scandal, he would have been embalmed and entombed long ago.

2. We expect the worst from Murdoch, and he lives up to our expectations.

3. The genocidal tyrant has successfully swept away every scandal—major and minor—he has ever faced because of his special skill at normalizing his malefactions.

4. Murdoch’s instinct, of course, will be to sacrifice [Rebekah Brooks], but I doubt that the mob that is gathering will be satisfied with one body. They’ll want strong, tough, old meat, too. Something that’s fit for grilling on the barbie.

5. Send recipes for grilled Murdoch to slate.pressbox@gmail.com and monitor my Twitter feed for a prayer for Rupert’s soul.

The Best Angry Goodbye Notes from Fired Journalists

“Only when a journalist is fired or quits does the complete fury he feels for those quacking mallards who have made his life miserable begin to surface,” writes Jack Shafer at Slate. He’s collected a few of the best kiss-off notes from fired journalists on his blog, and some of them are truly amazing.

“Jesus spent three days in Hell. … I could only handle one,” —wrote Richard Morgan, who quit Gawker after one day in January 2008.

And another favorite: “Don’t worry about me; I’ll land on my feet. I don’t regret coming here, even though I’ve been laid off now. In fact, my only regret is that you haven’t come to visit the Beacon Journal. I would have loved to piss on your shoes,” wrote Mark Schlueb, in a letter to Knight Ridder CEO Tony Ridder, in April 2001

Unsurprisingly, Tina Brown gets a few mentions. Who knew she wasn’t popular?  “If some ditzy American editor went to London, took over the Spectator and turned it into, say, In Your Face: A Magazine of Mucus, there would be a big uproar, but here in America, we expect turnover,” wrote Garrison Keillor, after Brown replaced Robert Gottlieb as editor of The New Yorker in April 1995.

And after his Newsweek blog was canceled by incoming editor Brown in 2011, Mickey Kaus wrote, “The people at the Daily Beast seem to be having a desperate sort of faux-fun as they try to madly generate paying hits before Barry Diller‘s money runs out subsidizing Ms. Brown’s big bucks staff.”

The whole collection, well worth the read, is at Slate.

The Controversy over Harper’s Win for Best Reporting at the Ellie

On of the major upsets at the National Magazine Awards this week was the “Reporting” award, which went to Harper’s for Scott Horton‘s “The Guantanamo ‘Suicides’.” The piece had a mixed reception when it was published; moreover, it was up against two standout articles — not just of this year but of any year — the Rolling Stone article “The Runaway General” by Michael Hastings (that led to the resignation of Gen. Stanley McChrystal), and The New Yorker exposé of the Koch brothers by Jane Mayer.

Horton’s piece begins with the premise that not only has President Obama failed to close Guantanamo, he may be more implicated in horrors that have occurred there than has previously come to light. It begins:

[N]ew evidence…suggests the current administration failed to investigate seriously—and may even have continued—a cover-up of the possible homicides of three prisoners at Guantánamo in 2006.

Joe Pompeo at The Cutline gathered up some of the reactions around the media. Slate’s media critic, Jack Shafer, had the most biting criticism over the win:

I am dumbfounded. The Harper’s piece is a souffle of conjecture. Did the judges actually read it? Do they really think the Obama administration is covering up murders committed during the Bush administration?

Read more

Former LA Times Editor Off to Bloomberg

Michael Kinsley, who spent just more than a year as the LA Times‘ editorial-page editor back in 2004, has a new job–columnist at the soon-to-be-launched Bloomberg View. Kinsley was most recently at Politico, where he stayed for about 30 seconds or so. As Jack Shafer notes in Slate, Kinsley has a habit of leaving jobs almost as fast as he lands a new one.

Just last September, he took a columnist job with Politico. One year before that, he joined the Atlantic crew. For a brief moment in 2006, he worked for the Guardian, and before that he spent a year and some change as the editorial-page editor of the Los Angeles Times. And, from 1996 to 2002, he edited the website you just clicked on and was also its founding editor. I won’t delineate his prehistoric career path but will only mention that it included positions at CNN and Harper’s and several stints at the New Republic, not to mention his freelance positions.

Read more

Slate’s Jack Shafer Dismantles The New York Times Public Editor

Over the weekend Arthur S. Brisbane, the Public Editor of The New York Times, wrote a piece lamenting the way the Times has attacked other media companies. The choice quote from Brisbane was this:

In recent months, The Times has slipped a shiv into others on several occasions. Some readers don’t like it when that happens, and I can understand why. It’s unseemly and makes The Times, which is viewed as journalism’s top dog, look like a bully.

FishbowlNY’s reaction to the article was that there’s no need for the Times to stop attacking others, in fact, we sort of enjoy it when the newspaper goes on the offensive. Jack Shafer at Slate echoes our thoughts in a post today, but he does it in a much better way:

What would Brisbane prefer? That the Times view the Murdoch papers’ conduct, the Gannett pay packages, and the frat-boy shenanigans at Tribune from the perspective of a guidance counselor? That the Times pussyfoot while composing its stories? Give me the bully treatment any day—even though I don’t think any of the pieces cited by Brisbane comes remotely close to bullying. Or would Brisbane prefer that the Times recuse itself from covering all critical stories about the press and publish only positive ones?

Click through to Shafer’s article and see if you don’t come away with a newfound respect for shivs.

Arianna Huffington Responds to Lawsuit

Arianna Huffington has issued a reply to the lawsuit that she and The Huffington Post are facing, and in true HuffPo style, gathers some of the best articles that condemn the case, then adds a little more herself.

Huffington brings up Jack Shafer saying “We’re becoming a nation of Winklevosses who file legal motion after legal motion every time a pot of money is spotted,” repeats a comment from a New York Times article that asks “So, does this mean when YouTube was sold to Google that all the people who posted videos on YouTube should have been compensated?” and she even cites a lawyer explaining that there was no contract broken.

She then sums up her feelings with this:

It seems that AOL’s purchase of HuffPost suddenly opened his eyes to the fact that we are a business. I guess he’d missed the ads that appeared on the same page as his blog posts the 216 times he decided, of his own free will, to post something on our site.

We certainly wish that all writers would get paid for their work, but the more we think about it, the more the lawsuit really doesn’t make any sense. Filing a lawsuit after you’ve already agreed to work for free isn’t going to get you anything other than angry replies like Huffington’s.

Great: Andrew Breitbart and James O’Keefe Have Both Returned to Media Darling Status

Looks like James O’Keefe‘s latest prank has not only gotten NPR‘s president to resign, it’s gotten Andrew Breitbart back in the national spotlight. Breitbart was on Piers Morgan‘s show last night talking about his protege’s capers, and the left wing bias that prevents them from being properly acknowledged. We thought the Shirley Sherrod incident would finally send Breitbart to the media glue factory, but now he’s back galloping around like nothing happened–saying calculated, counterintuitive things like “the best coverage on this incident has been NPR. It’s been impeccable…I respect NPR more than you would actually think.” And he’s actually right about the bias against this latest O’Keefe prank.

Read more

Vanity Fair Probes Julian Assange

Sarah Ellison, former reporter for the Wall Street Journal, has a sprawling, in-depth look at Julian Assange and his relationship with The Guardian and other media entities in Vanity Fair, and it just went online. Naturally the Internet is buzzing with reviews of the piece, so instead of giving of our take (we could be bribed though – think king-size Snickers), below are a collection of views from places we like to read:

More Posner Plagiarism Uncovered and Suspected Wikipedia Scrubbing

posner-plagiarizes-again.4818105.40.jpgExcuse us while we cringe over our coffee. Ugh. This story is like eating a rotten peanut while watching a lemon and paper cut contest. Gerald Posner, journalist, “writer” of 11 books including one that was a Pulitzer finalist was busted for plagiarism earlier this year by Slate.com’s Jack Shafer. He was fired from the Daily Beast because of the offense.

Now he’s hired a lawyer and is claiming the Miami New Times “interfered” with Posner’s relationship with his publishers.

Anyway, more and more episodes of outright plagiarism are coming to light.

New Times reports:

Now a new review of Posner’s work shows much more. A 48-year-old Wisconsin doctoral student named Greg Gelembiuk has discovered Posner lifted 35 passages in two books: his 2003 take on the 9-11 attacks, Why America Slept, and Secrets of the Kingdom, a 2005 tome about Saudi Arabia.

To make this all worse there is an indication Posner has been trying to delete the scandal from his Wikipedia page. Geez – is there nothing sacred?!

Photo credit Bill Cooke

Previously on FBLA:

  • And There’s Still More Gerald Posner Plagiarism Turning Up
  • Gerald Posner Out at Daily Beast for Plagiarism
  • Chief Investigative Reporter for Daily Beast Suspended for Plagiarism

  • And There’s Still More Gerald Posner Plagiarism Turning Up

    Gerald Posner was canned from his position of Chief Investigative Reporter for the Daily Beast last month for plagiarism. Now new reports of even more instances are coming in.

    New Times Miami reports:

    Back on March 16, Riptide broke the news that South Beach-based author Gerald Posner’s latest book, Miami Babylon, had stolen eight passages from Frank Owen’s 2003 work Clubland.

    New Times and a doctoral student have found more than a dozen new instances of plagiarism in Gerald Posner’s latest book.

    Posner had already resigned as chief investigative reporter at the Daily Beast after Slate’s Jack Shafer busted him for lifting sentences from the Miami Herald, Texas Lawyer and others in his work for Tina Brown’s website.

    After Shafer exposed his Daily Beast thefts, Posner blamed the “warp speed of the Net.” When New Times published his Miami Babylon thievery, he pointed toward a new system of “trailing end-notes.”

    It just makes us cringe and cringe.

    Previously on FBLA:

  • Gerald Posner Out at Daily Beast for Plagiarism
  • Chief Investigative Reporter for Daily Beast Suspended for Plagiarism

  • << PREVIOUS PAGENEXT PAGE >>