Month: October 2011

Ethics Quiz: Who is the Most Incompetent Elected Official—the DA Who Doesn’t Care If A Convicted Prisoner Is Really Guilty, Or The Assemblywoman Who Doesn’t Know About The First Amendment?

/ Jack Marshall / 15 Comments

California Assemblywoman Fiona Ma. " First Amendment? Where the heck did THAT come from?"

For this weekend’s Ethics Alarms quiz—the blog’s 2000th post!—I am asking readers to help me determine the Incompetent Official of the Week, when two unusually qualified candidates are running neck and neck.

Candidate A is McLennan County (Texas) District Attorney Abel Reyna:  Defense attorney Walter M. Reaves has filed a motion asking for DNA testing as part of his efforts to exonerate Anthony Melendez, currently serving a life sentence for the 1982 slayings of three teenagers in Waco.  Reaves says the test is needed because DNA analysis was not available when Melendez was convicted, and Melendez still maintains that he is innocent. D.A. Reyna, however, opposes the test. Why? He argues that such testing shows a lack of faith and support of the jury system, and what the jury has decided usually ought to be free of such post-trial attempts to discredit the verdict.

In other words, the D.A. believes that it is better to honor the jury system by letting an incorrect verdict stand than to use newly available scientific evidence to set an innocent man free.  Continue reading →

The Korean President’s Dinner: President Obama, I Owe You This One

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

Funny...you don't LOOK Japanese!

Having joined reflexive Obama-bashers by assuming the worst based on an unjustified reading of a leaked diplomatic cable and subsequently criticizing the White House for something it did not do, allow me to continue my contrition and repentance by flagging another example of the same phenomenon, also involving Asian diplomacy and equally unfair, being trumpeted by some of the same sources that led me astray.

The headlines: “ANOTHER WHITE HOUSE STAFF SCREWUP”  (Instapundit) …“Obama Honors South Korean President With Japanese Food” (The National Review)

Where did this come from? USA Today reported the fare for the upcoming  White House dinner honoring South Korean President Lee Myung Bak: Continue reading →

Unethical Website—and Readers— of the Month: The Spearhead

/ Jack Marshall / 12 Comments

Ironically, the site's typical reader is better described as "The Cement Head"

I don’t want to seem ungrateful: it is usually a welcome discovery when I find a popular website sending readers to Ethics Alarms, as has been the case the last two days with a site called The Spearhead. Nor do I have any ethical objections to The Spearhead’s theoretical mission, which is to stand against “misandry,” the mistreatment, cultural denigration of and discrimination against men. The phenomenon The Spearhead and its various bloggers rail against certainly exists in the U.S., as Ethics Alarms most forcefully pointed out after ABC’s Christiane Amanpour led a male-bashing roundtable on her Sunday show and did so as if she was having her guests name the state Capitals.

Unfortunately, the tone of most of the articles on The Spearhead is decidedly paranoid, misogynist or worse, echoing the dialogue in old movies and TV comedies in which rejected (and often repulsive) men would band together in a “Woman-Hater’s Club.” Its article (“Waitress Reacts to Insult With Online Lynch Mob”) that linked to Ethics Alarms, for example, weighing in on the Victoria Liss affair in which an aggrieved waitress used Facebook to invite Internet Avengers to heap abuse on a cheap and insulting customer but carelessly fingered the wrong man, took this from the episode:

“How many men would be so petty, so vindictive, and so morally depraved that they would launch a personal vendetta over a minor slight suffered in the course of a day’s work? Very few, obviously — such men would be instantly fired, and likely castigated by the courts (if not jailed) for harassment.”

Thus Victoria, in the view of the author, isn’t merely one inept Facebook user and an unusually vindictive waitress, but a typical representative of her gender and proof of the fairer sex’s inadequacies when compared to men. This is bigotry.  But the real ugliness arrived in the comments to the article, most of which heaped abuse on Liss and hatred on women generally, condemning the waitress not only for what she did, but for her appearance. Thanks to the site’s like/dislike feature, it was  possible to gauge which of the comments were representative of the majority. The verdict does not speak well for The Spearhead. Here is a representative sample:

  • “In today’s America, it is assured one will get undeserved shit, for speaking Truth.The customer spoke truth about her fatness, and now, the fat one is the one indignant…with a crowd of supporters defending her uncontrolled behavior. America = truth avoidance”

This endorsement of gratuitous rudeness and cruelty was approved of by the readership by a margin of 56 to 9. Continue reading →

The 9-11 Photo And A Columnist’s Character

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

One thing I have learned about personal ethics: they are imposible to hide. Ethical individuals eventually show their values in grand style, and those without ethics, or whose ethical values are corroded, frayed and rotting, show their true colors as well. Thus it was no surprise to me when Frank Rich, once one of America’s most unfair drama critics who turned into one of the media’s most vicious opinion columnists, exposed the content of his character in grand style with a New York Time column last month about 9-11. Continue reading →

Now THIS Is A Conflict of Interest!

/ Jack Marshall / Leave a comment

The news is that negotiations between the Boston Red Sox and the Chicago Cubs over what the Cubs will pay the Sox as compensation for nabbing their tarnished boy genius General Manager Theo Epstein are not going smoothly, and no wonder. The situation as it stands is a conflict of interest classic, with no obvious solution. You don’t have to know a thing about baseball to love it: this was designed by the Ethics Gods as an exam question.

Consider: Continue reading →

Integrity, Politics, and Medal of Honor Ethics

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

The Medal of Honor

Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, a Marine veteran who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, is leading an effort to loosen the standards being applied to the awarding of the Medal of Honor for combat in Afghanistan and Iraq.  In an Oct. 4 letter to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Hunter argued that Medals of Honor are being denied in cases where they appear to be well-deserved and that the process of approving awards takes too long. He asked the Defense Department to conduct a review of hundreds of such cases. “Properly recognizing these actions through the awards process is not just important to the individuals involved, but it is also essential to upholding the tradition of the armed forces and inspiring others to step forward,” Hunter wrote.

Great: now we have an advocate for heroism inflation. Continue reading →

Comment of the Day: “Follow Up and Clarification On The Hiroshima Apology Cable: I Was Wrong, I Apologize…and More”

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

Rick Jones, whose blog is a constant source of information, provocation and thoughtfulness, generously contributes his analysis to the botched Hiroshima apology story in this Comment of the Day.  To summarize: here and elsewhere, a Wikileaks-released diplomatic cable from 2009  prompted a stampede of mostly conservative news sources to report that President Obama had suggested the possibility of apologizing for the atom bombing of Hiroshima in World War II.  I encountered the story, tracked it in several sources that have proven reliable in the past, and commented on it, critically. About 24 hours later, a friend with impeccable diplomatic credentials and inside information properly chastised me for taking the bait, and offered conclusive evidence that the cable had been misinterpreted. You might want to read my post of last night apologizing to readers and the President that also raises the issues that Rick addresses in his Comment of the Day. I have a follow-up comment at the end:

“While I admire your acceptance of responsibility for what appears to have been a misinterpretation, your commentary raises other issues. Continue reading →

Follow Up and Clarification On The Hiroshima Apology Cable: I Was Wrong, I Apologize…and More

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

This is my indignation going up in smoke.

There are certain advantages that come from making an incorrect conclusion and publicizing it: sometimes you learn something valuable.

Here’s what I have learned about the diplomatic cable discussed in my post, “How Do I Write A Measured Ethical Analysis When I Am Shaking With Indignation and Rage?“:

1. The officer was reporting a hypothetical situation that the Japanese government official raised during the planning stage of the Obama’s visit.

2. The White House never proposed an apology. The fear of the Japanese was that if he went to Hiroshima, some groups within the country would expect an apology.

3.This key paragraph contains the officer’s assurance to the American Ambassador that the Japanese government would prevent any call, from the Japanese, for a public Presidential apology.

I have all of this from a reliable, credible diplomatic source who I know personally and who was in Japan at the time the cable was sent. This is no credit to me: I received an e-mail that said, in effect, “You Moron! You have no idea how to read diplomatic cables!!! Here’s what really happened…” Continue reading →

A Tip For Victoria Liss—In Fact, Two: Read the Golden Rule, and Don’t Use The Internet For Revenge

/ Jack Marshall / 26 Comments

The right Victoria Liss...I hope!

Victoria Liss was tending bar at Bimbo’s Cantina in Seattle last week, when a customer named Andrew Meyer not only refused to tip her on his $28 bill, he added insult to injury by scrawling on his credit card receipt that she “could stand to lose a few pounds.” Liss, outraged, decided to employ the full power of the internet against the unmannerly cad. She posted a picture of the receipt and the customer’s name, Andrew Meyer, on her Facebook page. 

Soon angry web-Furies were gathering to exact their revenge on Meyer, whom Liss called “yuppie scum.” Andrew Meyer’s photo and Facebook page were located and posted around the web like it was a Post Office wall. News sites, including the Seattle Weekly, the Stranger, Gawker and Jezabel, used the photograph. Soon Andrew Meyer was being flamed by thousands, and receiving vicious e-mails from strangers intent on carrying on Victoria Liss’s vendetta.

One problem: Liss had the wrong Andrew Meyer! The photo she posted was of a different Andrew Meyer who lived in Texas, not Washington, and it is his face and reputation she sent to web perdition. Continue reading →

Ethics Alarms Two Year Report

/ Jack Marshall / 12 Comments

This month marks the second anniversary of Ethics Alarms, and by the end of the week, I will have posted its 2000th article. In that time, the blog has had…

  • Over 500,000 visits
  • 15,687 comments
  • 67, 487 spam comments

In addition, this month will have the most traffic of any month so far, twice as much as a year ago. And…

  • The most commented upon recent post was the contentious “Baby Emma” story, with 121 comments so far.
  • The posts that have been read the most are, yes,  “A Commercial for Liars: Tide..with Acti-lift!”, with “Texas Cheerleading Ethics: Cheer Your Rapist!” close behind. (Maybe I should use exclamation points more often.)
  • The current standings among recent commenters are, in order, tgt, Eric (Erik?) Monkman, Tim LeVier, Chase Martinez, Elizabeth, and Bill, finally pushing Mr. Fusion, who came, annoyed me, and vanished, off the charts.

This is as good a time as any to thank all of you who come here, and especially those who add your own perspective and opinions to the content. That was always the objective in starting the blog—on The Ethics Scoreboard, I usually felt like I was taking to myself— and you have responded magnificently, beyond my expectations. I am proud and honored that the discourse inspired by Ethics Alarms posts  is civil, pointed, well-written, perceptive, funny, and sometimes genuinely eloquent. Ethics is a continuing inquiry, and I have leaned much from all of you, even, and perhaps especially, when you tell me that I am, as my Dad liked to say, “talking through my hat.”

Again, thank you. I am more grateful than I can ever express.

And I will continue to work on those typos.