Morning Ethics Warm-Up, 10/14/22: Bruised And Embarrassed Edition

The above is as close as I can get to the approximate predominant color of the bruise that runs from just above my left hip to below the back if my left knee. The thing is about ten inches across at its widest point. Then there’s the swelling, which reminds me of a joke in “City Slickers.” Thanks to everyone who has sent good wishes, both here and off site. I’m just embarrassed and frustrated, while metaphorically kicking myself for not buying that standing desk I was considering a few years ago. Right now, I’m just going to try to catch up a bit…

1. Apparently the Axis is really  going with the “threat to democracy” narrative. I was watching the News Mix channel on DirectTV. Fox News is nestled between CNN and MSNBC, so you can watch all three channels at once. In the time that Fox was covering rising crime rates (and WaWa pulling stores from Philadelphia after a mob ransacked one outlet), police officers getting shot, the latest inflation numbers, the border mess, and the Justice Dept. being sued to force an explanation for why it allowed illegal protests in front of SCOTUS justices’ homes, the other two networks never budged from reports on the Jan. 6 Star Chamber, backed by films of the riot that occurred 21 months ago. News! Nah, there’s no mainstream media bias… Continue reading

The Return Of David Leavitt, Ethics Villain [Corrected]

Actually, when we first heard of David Leavitt, a gaming writer with delusions of grandeur, the Ethics Alarms verdict was not that he was an ethics villain, because the particular misconduct that sparked that 2020 post wasn’t quite dastardly enough (or maybe I was in a charitable mood). That was after he had found a mislabeled electric toothbrush (priced at $0.01 rather than $100) at Target, and when the checkout employee refused to sell the item at what was obviously an erroneous price and the store manager backed up the clerk, David went on a full-bore campaign of vengeance on Target.

“This [Target] manager Tori is not honoring the price of their items per Massachusetts law,” tweeted Leavitt, including the young manager’s photo. He called the police on the manager, and said he was prepared to take her and the store to court. Recognizing an ethically-dead progressive determined to harass evil corporations, disgusted observers started a GoFundMe page that raised $28,000 to cover the victimized manager’s inconvenience. The law Leavitt cited but never bothered to check in fact says that an obvious pricing error, one that qualifies as “gross,” isn’t enforceable. I wrote in part:

Leavitt is being an asshole, in technical terms. He knows the price posted was a mistake. A decent, fair, rational citizen would accept that, alert the store that it needs to fix the label, and stop at that. Maybe such a citizen will get some kind a reward from the store (this once happened to me). Instead, this epic jerk goes, in the immortal words of Marsellus Wallace in “Pulp Fiction,” “Medieval on Target’s ass,” and its poor manager too. His rationalization for his appalling behavior, and this is rich, is that he can’t afford to go to the dentist, so, presumably, he believes this entitles him to steal an electric toothbrush from Target…

I also wrote that I almost felt sorry for David because he had made a national fool of himself. I don’t feel sorry for him after his latest example of ethics rot. He obviously learned nothing, and indeed has decided to step a notch, several, in fact, from asshole to Ethics Villain.

Continue reading

Emergency Open Forum! (Injured Ethicist Edition)

I really hate to do this, because there is a lot to write about, but I’m going to have to open up the blog to reader commentary early this week. I took a nasty fall in a (poorly lit, dangerous) hospital parking lot two days ago, and now have a bruise the approximate size of South Dakota in my sitting area, bowling ball-level swelling, and skinned fingers on both hands. In order of painfulness, I’d rank them sitting, bending over (I had to get my son to tie my shoes), getting into the car, lying down, walking and typing. Standing still isn’t too bad. Plus I’m commuting back and forth to that hospital.

I hope I can figure out a way to get out some posts—you would not believe how long this pathetic entry took and how many times I had to re-arrange the pillows.

Here’s One Way Websites Lose Credibility On Ethics Alarms…

…Publishing ignorant “pit bull” hysteria.

I like “Not the Bee,” an oddity-collecting, usually political website that up until today sent me a daily bulletin. Today, however, the site decided to join the ranks of those who spread ill-informed anti-pit bull breeds propaganda. I saw a new wave of this coming: a recent news story had recounted how two “pit bulls” in Tennessee had killed a five-month old and a two-year-old and attacked the mother, wounding her grievously. “Not the Bee’s” appeal to authority is conservative pundit Michael Knowles, who as far as I can determine, has no special expertise about dogs whatsoever. Nonethless, NTB quotes a Knowles tweet [“I know some people like them, but we should obviously kill all the pit bulls.”] and headlines its irresponisble (and damaging) story, “Michael Knowles is 100% correct about pit bulls and I could care less how much you think I’m a monster for saying so.”

No, I don’t think the NTB writer (Jesse James) is a monster; he just doesn’t know what he’s talking about. His screed relied heavily on this chart…

Continue reading

Stay Classy, Michelle!

Former First Lady Michelle Obama’s voting promotion group “When We All Vote” has partnered with the BLK dating app and is doing “voter registration activations” with the company.” The BLK dating app is aimed at Black singles looking for hook-ups.

Last week, BLK released a video encouraging Black voters to go to the polls for reasons other than civic responsibility. It’s title: “No Voting No Vucking.” Vucking! See, that’s not vulgar, like, say “fucking.” Former First Ladies can approve of “vucking” for votes. Sample lyrics:

“No voting, no vucking, no voting, no touching,” rapper Saucy Santana sings in the video. “You wanna hit this booty, gotta do your civic duty!”

Continue reading

The Times Asks: “Is There a Future for Late-Night Talk Shows?” Ethics Alarms Asks: “Is There A Future For News Media That Has Been Made This Stupid By Bias?”

The New York Times John Koblin and apply all of their skill and experience to examine the apparent phenomenon of late night talk shows facing massive changes, and perhaps even extinction. “[A]s streaming has ascended, and network TV audiences and advertising revenue has dwindled, worries that late-night shows could be the latest genre affected by sweeping change are hitting virtually every corner of the entertainment world,” they write.

What’s going on here? Well, these career-long TV analysts conclude,  viewers no longer have a “deep bond” to single late night hosts. Ratings have been sinking because of streaming, and so many alternative options for late night viewing. The cost to produce some late-night shows”is no longer feasible in an era of sinking ratings.”Late-night shows have also struggled to make the transition to streaming video, another consideration weighing on executives,” we are told, in part because “the topical opening monologue, a staple of the genre, has virtually no shelf life in streaming libraries.” Current  late-night network hosts “don’t seem to want a lifetime appointment” unlike their predecessors like Johnny Carson, jay Leno and Letterman. “I think the Carson playbook of 40 years talking to celebrities is probably a thing of the past,” a former late night producer told the Times.

Is that it? I guess so: this long examination of factors and trens couldn’t find any other reason for the genre’s decline.

Funny…the reason I haven’t watched a late night talk show in almost eight years must be unusual: these media reporters don’t detect it. Funnier still, a substantial percentage of the readers who commented on the story seem to see the main reason for the rejection of such talks shows—the same reason I have—very clearly.

A sampling: Continue reading

Columbus Day Ethics Voyage, 2022: What The Heck Did Chris Get Us Into?

Thoughts...

  • That Columbus sketch was recorded in 1961. Was Stan Freberg ahead of his time , or what?
  • Boy, Paul Fries did a great Orson Welles impression!
  • Ethics Alarms has blown hot and cold on Columbus Day; you can read (or reread) the negative take from nine years ago here. Still, he was a brave man and a visionary, and attention must be paid.
  • And yet in the daily feature “This Day in History” for today, Columbus isn’t mentioned, perhaps because the “New World” was sighted on October 11. The stupid Monday holiday rule makes no sense when it is linked to an actual event with an established date. Columbus’s big moment at least deserves the right date.

1. Elon Musk can’t take over soon enough for me. Twitter, right on cue, proved its totalitarian inclinations by banning this tweet on the pretense that it was “misinformation”:

It wasn’t misinformation, just information that upsets a progressive, vaccine Nazi narrative. Eventually Twitter was shamed into reinstating the announcement, but it doesn’t matter: again, this is signature significance. A trustworthy platform doesn’t do this, not even once. Prof. Turley on his blog was astute enough to remind us that years ago, Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal was asked how Twitter would balance its efforts to combat misinformation with wanting to “protect free speech as a core value” and to respect the First Amendment. He responded that the company is “not to be bound by the First Amendment” and will regulate content as “reflective of things that we believe lead to a healthier public conversation.” Agrawal said the company would “focus less on thinking about free speech” because “speech is easy on the internet. Most people can speak. Where our role is particularly emphasized is who can be heard.” Got it. [Pointer: Steve Witherspoon]

Continue reading

What’s The Ethical Response To Totalitarian Big Tech Companies Like PayPal?

PayPal added a new term of service to its fine print stating that on November 3, a user will incur a fine of $2,500 when any of the 429 million of them dare to express what the Dark, Woke Lords of PayPal deem to be “misinformation.” You know, by now, how that goes.

This deservedly caused what the media likes to call a”firestorm of protest,” so the mega-company quickly said they didn’t mean it, and that it was all due to an innocent mistake—you know, like by a pimply-faced intern who somehow was allowed to craft the new Acceptable Use Policy (AUP). Who believes that? There’s a Nigerian Prince I want to introduce them to.

If the company was that careless and incompetent, then nobody should trust them. If they intended the levy fines for WrongThink, then nobody should trust them. If they have such contempt for the public that they would float a lie like that and expect anyone to buy it, then nobody should trust them.

Conclusion: PayPal can’t be trusted.

Continue reading

Derek Chauvin Has Appealed His Conviction, And If The Justice System Has Any Integrity, He Should Win

Unfortunately, I doubt that the justice system today has such integrity when it involves racial issues.

The lawyers for Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer convicted of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter after his white knee appeared to be the proximate cause of black petty hood George Floyd in May 2020, have filed an appeal brief.

Let’s see, what have they got…

  • His lawyers argue that Chauvin never had a chance to receive a fair trial. Ya think? How could anyone claim otherwise?
  • They argued that the nationwide riots poisoned the jury pool. Yes, they did. How could they not?
  • The well-publicized threat that the rioting would resume and escalate Chauvin were found not guilty virtually guaranteed Chauvin’s conviction. Well, I know I assumed it would. Didn’t you? The brief argues that no circumstance could be “more prejudicial … than that of a juror discovering that the City he or she resides in is bracing for a riot … in the event the defendant on whose jury you sit is acquitted.”
  • The brief says that the news media and law enforcement tainted the proceedings by glorifying Floyd and demonizing Chauvin. That’s a fair description.
  • The brief  condemns the state’s expediting the legal process against Chauvin instead of permitting a “cooling period.” “It is not mere speculation to anticipate that allowing a longer, reasonable duration of time would allow the community to feel less of the pressure from fallout from the Floyd riots,” the brief states. That states the obvious. It is also obvious that Black Lives Matter, activists and anti-police groups wanted Chauvin’s head on a pike so they could claim a victory. (No one ever had produced any evidence that Floyd’s death arose from racial bias.)

  • The brief objects to the fact that juror Brandon Mitchell lied on the pre-trial jury questionnaire “regarding his views of the case and the extent of his activism.” Mitchell checked “No” when asked whether he had ever advocated for police reform or demonstrated “about police use of force or police brutality,” but Mitchell actively participated in at least one George Floyd-themed demonstration and was photographed wearing a t-shirt that read, “BLM : Get Your Knee Off Our Necks.” Mitchell says he “forgot.” Right.

I have no liking for Derek Chauvin, but he was railroaded and sacrificed to a national race freak-out. It was an outrageously unfair trial, and he deserves a new one. Unfortunately, that one will be unfair too, and if he were to be acquitted, naturally there would be riots.

Ethics Observations On Biden’s Mass Marijuana Pardon

The pardon is irresponsible, cynical and unethical. It is also transparent: like the college loan forgiveness stunt (which is unconstitutional and a good bet to be knocked down), this is another sop to the Democratic base showing that Biden is keeping his promises made on the 2020 campaign trail. If it does serious damage to the Rule of Law, society, cultural ethics and developing young brains, hey, it’s worth it. Maybe getting more pot-heads to vote will keep the Democrats in power.

The pardon certainly doesn’t reflect any deeply-held convictions by the President, who doesn’t have such convictions. (This is a man who, please note, says he is a devout Roman Catholic who believes that the unborn are human lives from conception, but who champions abortion.) Biden opposed pot legalization until he became the Democratic nominee for president in 2020. Integrity? What’s integrity?

The pardon is guaranteed to lead to an increase in crime. The people with federal convictions for marijuana possession who Biden pardoned broke the law because they felt like it. They don’t respect the law, and Biden’s move endorses that disrespect. Such law-breakers will break other laws, and probably have.

Continue reading