Government

OPINION — Why Give Absurdities Ink & Prominence?

Elon Musk owns a communications company (and so much more), and if he wants to promote an idea, surely he is free to do so. That’s the epitome of free speech…. Unchecked, unregulated, and uncensored.

And when he suggests that a media company’s employees deserve a “long prison sentence” for a story that he disagrees with, again, he is free to shout that from his platform and bask in the glow of his X echo chamber, maganified by the Prince of Mar-a-Lago.

Musk has long criticized CBS for a Kamala Harris interview during the November election. Most recently, following a critical story about Musk’s closure of USAID, the DOGE boss wrote, “60 Minutes are the biggest liars in the world! They engaged in deliberate deception to interfere with the last election. They deserve a long prison sentence.”

Seriously… “a long prison sentence” for? What would be the legal charge? What is the offense? What is the rationale, other than perhaps currying favor with prominent politicians? Evidently, Musk didn’t learn about the American value of free speech in his South African school system.

While Musk can and should be allowed to say anything, why does other media give him any credence by repeating his nonsensical mutterings?

Deciding what to include on any media platform is the province of editors who, one hopes, make their decisions based on what is newsworthy, the prominence of the person speaking, and the likelihood that what’s said will be impactful.

On any responsible calculus, in my nearly 50-year experience in media, I believe even repeating silly ideas or promoting individuals who are so out of touch with inherent American values is, in itself, irresponsible.

Just Because He Says It Doesn’t Make It True

In retaliation for not changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, a decision Present Trump appeared to make on the spur of the moment, the AP – the Associated Press – one of the world’s preeminent news services – is banned from covering the White House.

On what level does that form of censorship make any sense?

No one should ever have the sole authority to rename the map of the world.

And if a news organization pauses on accepting an unsubstantiated, unauthorized edict, it appears that our government has determined that failure to comply is a punishable offense.

Presidents once relied on news services to reach the people, but today, the White House and President Trump are their communications companies. They no longer need the media. This communications machine no longer faces the hurdle of a gatekeeper or fact checker interfering with the ‘company line.’ This media empire now reaches a global audience in the space of a nanosecond.

Not long ago, government-dictated media was considered propaganda.
Sure, there has been anger from the press corp, and even the appearance of moral and professional outrage, but then, crickets.

Encouraging or enabling any dictatorship or accepting muzzling is a frightening harbinger of what may come next.

Throwing the Baby Out with the Bathwater?

As Musk and his army of ‘techno-children’ run rampant among U.S. government computers with security and safeguards removed, is anyone else worried that classified material is going to wind up on private servers, if kept only as souvenirs, and ultimately find its way to the Black Web and our national enemies?

Personnel records, private data, addresses, and more are of incalculable value.

What is the risk to U.S. intelligence… and that of foreign allies who thought it was once safe to share with us?
What is the real risk of compromising U.S. agents overseas and their missions?

Why do so many in the media seem giddy whilst acting as cheerleaders at the prospect of indiscriminately destroying decades of work and billions of dollars of investment?

Government reform is a good thing, and even here, it may be overdue. But are we being thoughtful—or just capricious?

This may seem like a macro-question putting the historic, longview lens to current events.
But, I suggest, a major screwup now may be irreparable for decades to come.

Just musing and wishing my media colleagues would pose this concern.

The Media is the Last Bulwark Against Ignorance

The effects of restructuring the government with a crowbar and jackhammer are tumultuous, akin to feeling as if we are trapped riding on a roller coaster with the wheels teetering and about to fly off.

It is far easier to break and destroy something wholesale than to preserve what works strategically, reform what doesn’t, and refine what needs to be fixed.
Based on polls, some people joyfully embrace this upheaval as long overdue and is a good thing. Time, and history, will decide that.

As there seems to be no loyal opposition to this administration, it must fall to the media to offer guidance and caution, and to raise objection.

The media is the only bulwark remaining, even as it comes under assault.

Take into consideration two recent foreign policy ideas: reclaiming the Panama Canal and the resettlement of Gaza.

Our starting point? Remember George Santayana said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Take the assertion that the U.S. must reclaim its Panama Canal. First, it is not ours. It never was. We built and managed it, but it was not owned.

While beating up Panama is a wonderful political rallying cry affirming North American superiority, remember the Panamanians threw out the United States Army in nationalist anti-imperialist and anti-American riots.
History recorded that. You can look it up.

And we think they are going to welcome us back? In what universe? Maybe some file footage of those pitched battles between Panamanians and the U.S. military would be worth replaying as a reminder of reality?

Two other salient facts ought to be reported. First, the U.S. built, trained, and equipped the Panamanian armed forces (army, navy & air force) with highly sophisticated weapons. What would a war cost in terms of lives and resources – theirs and ours? And what would a war with a nation in the Southern Hemisphere portend for our allies? And enemies?
Second, just imagine the impossible if the U.S. prevailed? How would the United States preserve and protect the hundreds of miles of waterways, roads, access points, and territory? Have we already forgotten how difficult it was to govern our recent military conquests in the Middle East? And our failures?

And then there’s Gaza.
Even apart from the mounting global outrage over this idea, its proposed cost and the unrealistic, Herculean challenge of moving an entire nation – there is history here too to offer guidance. For instance, the Partition of India in 1947 is worth recalling, as was its death roll, estimated at about 2 million lives lost. History recorded that too. You can look it up.

And recent expressions of Pax Americana throughout the world have been met with armed resistance, political upheaval, unrivaled financial losses, and ultimately failure.

And there’s even a suggestion to try this again? That it might work, now?

Look – these ideas seem aimed for headlines in a news cycle. They are trial balloons for an adoring crowd on social media.

The media has a responsibility not just to report today’s news but to offer context and perspective, especially to an audience that seems to be ether too young or disconnected from history to remember it on their own.
Even when these wild ideas seem as if we are playing whack-a-mole.

Mr. Justice Louis D. Brandeis wrote, “Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.”

Paraphrasing his 1913 essay, publicity and notoriety stemming from media scrutiny are essential to light and expose flaws, offer alternatives to identifiable faults, bolster the backbone of critics in opposition, and offer navigational corrections through turbulent waters.

The media’s job is not going to be welcomed by many; yet, it is essential for our country and its future.

Is the Fentanyl Crisis a Red Herring?

Is U.S. drug treatment both so insufficient and inefficient that higher guacamole prices are the only solution to the Fentanyl crisis?

President Trump has claimed 3-hundred thousand (300,000) Americans die of fentanyl overdoses annually.

But – huh? A question: Where is this mountain of corpses? Is this certified by any coroner, anywhere?

The official number of deaths (73,654 in 2022) reportedly dropped in 2023, and the data from 2024 is not yet available.

So, a discrepancy prompts this question: Is the media buying and perpetuating this crisis without raising proper doubt and inquiry?

The second question?

And so, it is worth asking again: Is raising the cost of an avocado, much less disrupting world trade, sufficient to stem this epidemic?

Maybe a third question?

Is U.S. drug treatment both so insufficient and inefficient that higher guacamole prices are the only solution to the Fentanyl crisis?

It is an indisputable fact: There have been catastrophic drug epidemics in the United States dating back to the Civil War, featuring a rotating menu of morphine, heroin, cocaine, barbiturates, and marijuana, again and again, over and over.

Another fact, courtesy of AI: “The U.S. federal government spends significant amounts annually on drug treatment and substance abuse programs. Key figures include:
Federal Substance Use Treatment Spending: The federal government allocates over $1.1 billion annually for drug treatment programs, excluding spending by the Department of Veterans Affairs1.
Opioid Epidemic Funding: Congress has approved $10.6 billion in discretionary spending between 2017 and 2028 to combat the opioid epidemic, with $1.5 billion allocated in 2023 alone for the State Opioid Response program to expand treatment and recovery services3.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA): In FY 2022, SAMHSA received $6.6 billion for substance use prevention and treatment activities, including $3.5 billion for block grants to states and territories7.
These figures highlight the multifaceted approach to addressing substance abuse through healthcare, prevention, and justice system initiatives.”

Let’s take a deeper dive into the avocado dip: Is the assertion that the only way to stave off the fentanyl crisis is to change world tariffs?

Is the fentanyl crisis being hyped for political gain?

Is there no better alternative to helping addicts than to penalize everyone’s wallets?

Is the administration selling a fear – and the media not investigating that sufficiently?

Those seem to be questions worth asking.

Tiffany Network At Risk of Losing Its Luster

It is being reported that CBS News is entering negotiations with the F.C.C. because a settlement with the Trump administration is politically expedient.

Expedient for the parent organization, Paramount? Apparently.

As reported in the NY Times, “But in the wake of Mr. Trump’s election, CBS’s parent company, Paramount, has begun settlement discussions with representatives of Mr. Trump, according to several people with knowledge of the talks. Many executives at Paramount believe that settling the suit could help pave the way for the F.C.C. to approve Paramount’s planned multibillion-dollar merger with another company.”

Expedient also to avoiding any negative relations or a loss of access with the Trump White House? Perhaps true, but most likely a calculated decision based on fear of retribution from the press office.

The proposed settlement stems from a $10 billion lawsuit from President Trump over allegations of misleading editing in a CBS News 60 Minutes story from October 7, 2024.

Business settlements and political decisions based on real or imagined ramifications are one thing. But it is quite another for a major broadcaster to cave so willingly and early in the legal process. More alarming to veteran news people is the apparent surrender and kow tow to a personality.

If a story has been properly produced, vetted by experienced and senior editors, and scrubbed for accuracy, then the network should stand by the work. Stand by your reporters and editorial team. One presumes the experienced team at CBS 60 Minutes, the premier news magazine show on CBS, did their jobs properly and professionally. It would be a sad thing for risk-averse managers at the television network to scuttle the work and settle for the expedience of a new business deal.

President Trump’s Hiraeth

Again and again, Ameican’s are promised a return to a life, a universe, a world of glorious ‘agains.”
But, just when was this: again?

I want someone in the press to ask, when was ‘again’?

When was America strong, again?
Was that in the post-WW2 era when our military and nuclear might were unmatched? Again here certainly can’t be Vietnam… a war from which the President excused himself, and what’s more, we lost.
Was it 1959 when President Eisenhower warned of the unchecked military-industrial complex rampantly growing to unsustainable proportions?

Was when America safe, again?
It certainly couldn’t have been the 1960s and 70s which saw dramatically higher crime spikes. But maybe it was before cameras in Portland, Oregon, and Seattle, among other cities showcased poverty and injustice directly into our living rooms, and Black Lives Matter was splashed on downtown DC streets?

Was safe again when people who made us uncomfortable were compelled to hide in the shadows?
Was that the 1950s and 60’s when sexual repression castigated fags, queers, and dykes in even the most polite conversations, if they were recognized at all? Sniggers and condemnations… Shall we return to that? Again?

Was safe before desegregation? Before the Freedom Rides? Before Selma and Montgomery? Before Little Rock? Or Boston even in the 1970s?
Before the riots of the late 1960s which burned American neighborhoods to ash? Before blood was spilled in the streets; when was that again?
Was that when America was safe? Or when white people felt safe?
Is that the ‘again’ to be sought?

When was America at peace, again? Surely not in my 7 decades of life… from Korea to the Iron Curtain, to the Bamboo Curtain, to Vietnam, to the innumerable battles and terror of the Middle East and the armaments provided by the U.S., Kosovo, to civil wars and revolutions (Argentina, the Congo, Sierra Leone, Syria, Yemen, Iran, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Senegal), to the Iran Contra affair… and what about Afghanistan, Iraq? Kuwait? Wars all – again, and again.

AI calculates, “As of 2024, there are 56 ongoing conflicts worldwide, with 92 countries involved in conflicts outside their borders. This represents the highest number of countries engaged in conflict since World War II, highlighting the continued prevalence of armed conflicts in the modern era.” It calculates today 160,000 active duty military personnel are assigned to foreign posts in 80 countries at 750 bases. Again? Is that safe again?

So when was there peace, ‘again’?

When was America good, again? Was it again before the Poverty Program which lifted the living standard and fed so many impoverished Americans? Was it before a health safety net – perhaps before Medicare? Before LBJ? Certainly, it must have been before the Obama Affordable Care Act, but just when was it healthier, ‘again’?

Was America better before desegregation – in schools, hotels, restaurants, and public transport? Or even baseball? Surely, better must be before DEI – so what are we returning to, ‘again’?

Was America better and stronger in the world when U.S. corporations ran entire governments? When the CIA choose who would rule and who would fall in a coup? When we determined who would be bribed, regardless of the consequences to their citizens, but always to our advantage — think oil prices or bananas… and so much more. When was that ‘again’, Pax America?

And what about some of the poorest of the poor – the American farm worker? Is returning to the era of Harvest of Shame what is meant by again? When prices at the market were at a low because the pickers on American farms were treated as slaves.

Just when was ‘again’?

I am puzzled.

America is not a Norman Rockwell painting – a romanticized distortion of life years ago, a saccharin reminder of a supposedly gentler time that was never completely accurate but has become a political symbol of a supposedly better life then.

Thomas Wolfe wrote you can’t go home again for what was has surely changed and evolved, just as we have individually.

Is ‘again’ really better? Is ‘again’ even realistic?

Where is “again” anything more than a political rallying cry? And for what?

Is your again my again? And are you sure? I’m not.

Mr. Trump’s oft-repeated word ‘again’ is, still, once again, undefined, unasked, and unanswered.

Who in the media will ask, yea demand, and ask, and ask again until he defines his ‘again’… and then we can see if there is a consensus for that destination or if are we just being taken for a ride?

Quick! Multiple Choice Quiz

CNN management told their top journalists not to editorialize or ‘express outrage’ during the inauguration coverage.

What’s MOST wrong with this?

CNN management had so little faith in the reporting skills of their journalists to be impartial observers and reporters that they needed to be muzzled by the bosses?
CNN’s stable of journalists is so unprofessional and unskilled expecting to wax poetic and share their opinions under the guise of news coverage, and they didn’t know that’s not their responsibility?
CNN ‘leaked’ their instructions from a presumably, professional and private meeting to curry favor with the new administration watchdogs, eager to pounce on any misstep or misdeed by a bona fide news organization?

From the NYPost story, “During the meeting, Thompson “made it clear that he did not want the coverage to relitigate the past,” according to Status reporter Oliver Darcy — an allusion to CNN’s historically hostile relationship with Trump.” (Italics mine)

What’s wrong with a historically hostile relationship between politics and the press? Did mean reporters hurt the feelings of the Trump 45? Did those nasties in the press room cause him a boo-boo for challenging his words and deeds?

And continuing from the Post, “Instead, he urged CNN staffers to focus on Trump’s second term and to be “open-minded” about the next four years.” Is that code for playing lovey-dovey or footsie from a corporate viewpoint?

It seems to me that a new cautiousness, perhaps a fear or threat of reprisal, and a growing timidity is setting the course for the next 4 years.

If the public prefers unchecked, unvarnished, unfiltered propaganda over the truth… that’s a dark choice.

From CNN’s Reliable Sources – Media & Trump Day 1

AN insightful window in to how people see their news coverage

The Capitol Transformed – Reimagined & Enhanced for the Inauguration

What if this was true…

We have heard tales that workers putting the final touches on the Inside-the-Capitol-Inaguration have completed improvements just in time for Monday’s ceremony.

The famous marble and bronze statutes have been reimagined as animatronics showcasing leading cabinet nominees and contributors, including Pete, Stephen, Marco, Kristi, Pam, Elon, Mark, JD, Vivek, and Kristi, among others.
There is even one for wanna-be and almost-weres like Matt, his shown cowering just aside the entrance to the Ladies room.
Demonstrating politically inspired internationalism, Chinese businessmen Shou Zi Chew, Vladimir, Viktor, and Bibi are also presented in the rotation. As a nod to media and entertainment, Sean & Tucker will look down benevolently thanks to a projection illuminating the Capitol dome and sponsored by a national news broadcaster.

The marble walkway, used by tourists gathering on January 6th, 2024, in what will be henceforth only be remembered as a celebration of love, has been repaved with gold nuggets, thanks to Hollywood and Silicon Valley titans eager to pay homage to the Wicked king.

All guests will be handed ballots for next year’s Nobel Awards which they can deposit in specially festive ballot boxes located conveniently at the exits and protected by armed Capitol police.

The historic 12×8 foot, oil portraits featuring iconic scenes of American history, including the signing of the Declaration of Independence, the surrenders of Burgoyne and Cornwallis, the Landing of Columbus, and others, are updated with more contemporary imagery featuring President Trump:
Teeing off for yet another hole-in-one at Mar-a-lago
Descending the golden escalator at Trump Tower
Clandestinely tallying his score on the 19th hole at Bedminster
Hurling rolls of paper towels to victims of the hurricane in Puerto Rico
Introducing Elon at a campaign stop in Pennsylvania
Straddling the Korean DMV with Kim Jong Un
Musing in his Moscow hotel room at the Miss Universe Pageant
Locking metal gates at the southern border as tears stream down the cheeks of the Statute of Liberty weeps

Of course, while the mainstream, lame-stream media will most likely not include these artistic improvements in their coverage, but a fawning press corps eager to show allegiance will be briefed in the White House press room shortly after the ceremonies are concluded. Stay tuned.