This piece is written by Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix, Kat of Kat's Korner, Betty of Thomas Friedman is a Great Man, Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz, Ruth of Ruth's Report, Marcia of SICKOFITRADLZ and Wally of The Daily Jot. Unless otherwise noted, we picked all highlights.
"I Hate The War" -- The most requested highlight from last week. Ty also passed on a question from reader Ben Pierson who wanted to know about this regular Thursday night entry by C.I. Ben writes, "It's my favorite thing online each week and I love the humor and frustration C.I. lets rip in it. It's at a much higher level than normal for The Common Ills and I was just wondering why that is?" Rebecca, Kat and Wally are on the road with C.I. and Ava each week and they can explain first-hand what's going on. 1) C.I.'s already done the usual three entries at The Common Ills that day. 2) "Dinner" is the roundtable for the gina & krista round-robin. After that, Ava and C.I. are rushing off to two more speaking engagements. When those are over, C.I.'s usually dashing off the column for the gina & krista round-robin and then starting "I Hate The War." Wally, "That's why it's more of a grab bag. It can zoom in on how Panhandle Media wasted time with this or that topic and cover a wide variety of topics. By the time C.I. writes 'I Hate The War,' it's exhaustion time and Thursday, last Thursday, C.I. didn't think it was going to get done. I was talking to Kat and Ava and C.I. was at the laptop and, twice, I looked over and C.I. was asleep at the computer. That's why the tone is the way it does. The jokes are sharper, the observations are less likely to include C.I.'s 'in fairness,' etc. It is written quickly and the only goal is to finish it, get it posted, get it cross-posted and get some sleep." Kat: "The way it's structured, like Wally pointed out, is a grab bag of topics. Why aren't we getting anything on the illegal war from Panhandle Media? Well, last Thursday, we were getting Barack and Michelle's love life from The Nation, that's one example. That crap doesn't belong in any periodical outside People magazine. So C.I. can focus on that nonsense and just let it rip. Like Ben, it's my favorite regular feature as well." Rebecca: "The only thing I can add to what Wally and Kat said is that it is panic time. This is when Ava and C.I. first really realize/acknowledge that they're going to have to do a TV commentary shortly. They ignore that fact all week. This is when, as 'I Hate The War' is being written, they're throwing out ideas to each other and also calling friends and asking, 'Any ideas on what we should cover?' This week, they knew what they were going to cover but they were still ticking off topics to each other as C.I. wrote. When I'm on the road, Kat and I right next to each other with our laptops as we blog each night at our site. We talk to each other and generally stop typing when we do. 'I Hate The War' is a steamroller post. There is no time to stop. C.I.'s talking to us, talking on the phone and, like Wally said, the only real goal on C.I.'s part is to get it written and get it posted." We're answering Ben's e-mail here because Ty passed it on and did so because Ty doesn't think there will be a mailbag this week. Thanks for writing, Ben.
"Katrina makes a visit" -- Betinna makes the mistake of opening her door to Katty-van-van. Read it and find out why. Then share in Betinna's disappointment.
"Squash with Pasta in the Kitchen" -- Trina's covering (along with food) the weak letter some members of Congress wrote 'supporting' war resistance.
"Socialist Worker, Ralph Nader" -- Marcia speaking for all of us though she was just trying to speak for herself. An amazing post.
"World Can't Wait! calls for action" -- community member Zach requested Marcia's post above be highlighted and that this one by Kat be as well. He calls them both "exciting" and says you read them nodding along and asking, "Did she just say that!" :D We agree that these are very strong posts. And, yeah, they did just say that.
"adolph reed jr. takes on katty-van-van" -- If you haven't guessed, Adolph Reed Jr. is in the running for a truest this week. Here Rebecca savors his take on Katrina vanden Heuvel. She also addresses how to scare away voters when you need them the most.
"It's such a pity, I bought a camisole 2 day" -- C.I. and hugely popular with African-American community members. Betty explains why, "I saw the title and gasped. I had forgotten the song and reading along I could see how it fit but when C.I. finishes it up, you really get the 'click'." Cedric says, "Betty always asks, 'Is there any song C.I. doesn't know!' I know this song. Most African-Americans of a certain age will. It's from Apollonia 6 which was a Vanity 6 replacement when Vanity bailed on the Prince experience. I checked the charts. Never placed on pop's Hot 100 but it did make it to number 19 on the R&B charts. 'Blue Limosine' is the title." Marcia adds, "It was a wonderful flashback to 1984. Betty calls me at work and says, 'Listen.' I do and you've got people in her office singing 'Blue Limosine.' And, yes, the line 'It's looking dirty, I guess he's up to his old tricks' really does describe Barack." Still no sign of my baby's blue limosine . . .
"John Pilger; Rosa Clemente caught lying" & "Kiss my Black ass, Rosa Clemente" -- Kat and Marcia address Clemente -- who insists she's not a Latino -- going on to speak for the Latino community and getting it wrong. Rosa, take a seat, you're as tired as your lies.
"Ms. Magazine and Michele Kort -- backstabbers" & "THIS JUST IN! MICHELE KORT RUINS MS.!" -- C.I. asked us to note, "I did know about this before it posted. Wally read me the entry he and Cedric came up with. I had no problem with it and found it very humorous. I wanted to highlight it and the thing they did the day before but I never had time. A number of e-mails came in asking if I 'approved' of this joint-post? I love this joint-post. It's very funny." Wally explains, "We have Michele Kort insult C.I. in our post and we thought that would be funny, Cedric and me, and never thought anyone would think, 'That's what they really think of C.I.!' But a few e-mails came into me on that, Cedric got even more and C.I. heard from a lot. We think Michele Kort is a joke and we think her lack of support of women is disgusting. Her dialogue in this, that we created, is based on those two things."
"Barack distracts from sexism" & "THIS JUST IN! HOS FOR BARACK!" -- This was other joint-post by Cedric and Wally that C.I. wanted to highlight. Read it and see why. (And Ava and C.I. touch this topic this week in their TV commentary which is why they held the topic all week. They weren't ignoring it. It just fit in with this week's TV article.)
"Ralph Nader, NYT, Third" -- Jim's pick. Mike breaks down the latest edition of Third and covers Nader and NYT as well.
"alegre, ralph nader, robin long, pennsylvania," "Ralph Nader, Robin Long," "Democratic dirty tricks kept Nader off the ballot," "Robin Long deported," "Robin Long deported" and "Robin Long, Pham Binh" -- Rebecca, Ruth, Kat, Marcia, Elaine and Mike cover Canada's eviction of Robin Long.
"The silence on Bonusgate" -- Mike covering Bonusgate -- where Democrats conspired to keep Ralph Nader off the ballot in 2004 and actually got rewarded for it.
"ehren watada" -- Rebecca covers Ehren Watada. This was left off Wally and Cedric's joint-post Saturday (under recommended) by accident. If you look, you'll see they noted Thursday and Wednesday by Rebecca. They'll note this on Monday.
Ruth and Elaine only wanted one highlight (and didn't want that until we pointed to their pieces on Robin Long). Since this is shorter than normal, we asked C.I. to name six pieces worth highlighting last week from outside the community.
1) Ian Austen's "U.S. Soldiers No Longer Find Haven In Canada" (New York Times, last Sunday).
2) Ian Austen's "Canada Expels an American Who Deserted During the War in Iraq" (New York Times, Wednesday).
3) Adolph Reed Jr.'s "Where Obamaism Seems to be Going" (Black Agenda Report, Wednesday).
4) Mark Larabee's "Soldiers still go over the hill even in an all-volunteer Army" (The Oregonian, July 16, 2007). Larabee broke the news in the US on the kill teams. This article on James Burmeister was especially important last week because Burmeister was court-martialed. And it was no where to be found at The Oregonian. Thursday, they reposted it at the paper's blog (which is where the link goes to). If you missed it in real time, go back and read it now.
5) Free Speech Radio News' "War Resisters Seek Sanctuary in Canada" which, at nearly five minutes and thirty seconds, was a lengthy report and it was also the only thing Panhandle Media really did. (Amy Goodman's nonsense is covered by Ava and C.I. in this week's TV commentary.) That aired July 16th should the link stop working and someone want to listen to the report.
6) The first report on Friday's Bill Moyers Journal (here for transcript) which did what everyone covering the housing crimes forgot to do, (C.I.) "Cover the human costs. Susan Faludi won her Pulitzer for covering the Safeway buyout. But she won because she covered the human impact. Numbers tossed out leave the mind reeeling. You have to go beyond the numbers, you have to put a human face on it. That's what Bill Moyers Journal did and did very well on Friday. They deserve tremendous praise for that segment."
And Elaine wants to comment! That's rare for her, she's usually, "Can we just finish this and go to bed?" Elaine says, "Ava and C.I.'s opinions are just opinions. They'd be the first ones to tell you 'You can disagree.' But what needs to be remembered is that they both grew up in media families -- broadcast and print. Elsewhere, all this 'media criticism' that so many blather on about and do a bad job with. But for Ava and C.I., this was the dinner conversation growing up. It was shop talk and they heard from their early childhood all the way through today. My point here is that their opinions have a great deal more validity than the bulk of 'media critics' because their opinions are based on what they were trained to observe. Often Ava and C.I. are the first to call something out but you better believe that their opinions aren't exceptions in the actual working press. When Moyers did that ridiculous interview with Jeremiah Wright, there was a feeling -- when Jim read Ava and C.I.'s commentary to us -- of 'Wow.' If you paid attention the Monday, Tuesday, etc. after that interview aired, you saw others in the working media express similar criticisms. That happens very often and the reason goes to the fact that Ava and C.I. grew up in media families, were drilled to critique coverage from a very early age and the only difference today is that they're writing it and not just participating in a 'shop talk' conversation at the dinner table. To cite one example, there was a fraud that Ava called us on to ignore back in 2006. We all did. Her father told her working media -- Big Media -- wasn't touching him and wasn't touching him because he lied repeatedly. Big Media has still shut him out. Panhandle Media went through a phase of treating him like a rock star. Ava stated, in a roundtable here, very clearly, that we weren't not going to have his problems blow up in our face. That's something that our current day Panhandle Media 'watchdogs' never grasp. They'll put on any crackpot or criminal -- I'm not talking political prisoners like Mumia -- and treat them as respected sources. Ava and C.I. know what Panhandle Media should but doesn't: It's one thing to build coverage around someone you know nothing about, to go out on the limb for an unknown, it's another thing to utilize known liars. In terms of the Bill Moyers segment Friday, which was very strong, Ava and C.I. have pointed that over and over -- here for most recently -- that the housing crimes were not being covered correctly, that it was all numbers with people trying to out egg-head one another by tossing out even more numbers. Numbers are not homeless. Numbers are not struggling to get by. People are. As Ava and C.I. noted, you have to put a human face on the story. That is so basic and yet look at how many have refused to do that. Ava and C.I. are not just gas bagging and they are not uninformed. You can disagree with their opinions and conclusions, but you should not discount the fact that those opinions are formed from life experience having grown up in media families. In college, Rebecca give me a look if I can't tell this story, okay, no look so I'll continue, she and I went to C.I.'s for dinner and Rebecca -- this was her first time meeting C.I.'s family -- made the mistake of saying, 'I really liked that article' -- about some piece being discussed. She was immediatly hit with 'Why?' and she had no answer. She was more or less blown off and that's how it was in C.I.'s home. You had to know what you thought and why. And then you argued about everything that with the story, the headline, a photo if there was one, etc. You could disagree -- and disagree strongly and disagreement was welcomed -- with whatever the opinion was, but you had to know your facts.
And the facts included the way the story was presented, who was quoted, who wasn't quoted, what was the narrative, etc. This was not, 'I disagree with the opinions expressed in the article.' This was about reporting. If I'm not clear, think of that lame Michael Gordon article that Panhandle Media, including Amy Goodman, jumped on board with. All these months later and it never panned out. It was never going to pan out. C.I. avoided it because it was (a) from Gordo, (b) unsourced and (c) pure speculation presented as fact. But Panhandle Media like the opinion they could run with from it so they pushed the hell out of that story. They never bothered to analyze the article. That's why they have egg on their face today. And it says a great deal about their lack of standards and training that -- long after Gordo's been discredited -- they're advancing one of his 'reports.' I know Ava's family less well -- I've known her aunt for years, but I only met Ava in 2005. But it's true of Ava's family as well. In 2006, C.I. was getting ragged on by friends and family in real media for not criticizing Panhandle Media. The biggest complaint was C.I.'s critiques of Damien Cave -- whom C.I. has praised and torn apart. A friend at The New York Times expecially was furious with C.I.'s critiques of Cave. C.I.'s attitude prior to these constant criticisms from friends and family was that Panhandle Media didn't need to be criticized because it was struggling media. But the gloves came off because friends and family were able to point repeatedly to the lack of standards in Panhandle Media. And they take offense to that. Panhandle Media screams and ridicules Real Media every day. That's fine if they apply the same standards to themselves. But they don't. When that point was made repeatedly, C.I. agreed to take on Panhandle Media. Let me add one more thing there because I was present for a very long conversation with a producer at CBS and he pointed out, rightly, he wasn't talking about IMC or do-it-yourself media. He was talking about these 'independent' 'leaders' and look at their backgrounds, they've gone to what are considered some of the finest colleges in the country and are trained professionals so why are they getting a pass? That's when CounterSpin and others started getting called out regularly by C.I. Panhandle Media tries to present as 'we're just like the average person in the country.' Well the average person in the country didn't go to Stanford, didn't go to MIT, didn't go to Radcliff or Harvard or Yale. When that context was presented to C.I., it was obvious that these passes needed to be revoked. Let me sum up by noting those dinner conversations, those visits to the office from when they were children, were never just 'shop talk,' it was always about making sure that somewhere in the family, there was someone who could step into the family business when needed. Ava and C.I., and their siblings and cousins, were all being trained for the family business. When Ava and C.I. are critiquing 'news,' they are doing so from a lifetime of training that was passed on because it was thought that they might need to take over the family business at some point in the future. You don't have to agree with them, but you do have to accept that they have a basis for their opinions. Last week I got another reporter whining about something Ava and C.I. had written. I didn't write it, why whine to me? But I asked Sunny to reply to him for me that Ava and C.I. don't present as reporters and but, yes, they could do that job. However, their training is not for reporter, they're training is for higher up, well above a reporter. Their comments may strike some reporters as 'mean' but what you're getting is the reality of the way things are discussed at the top."