Jeez, Somebody Tell Him!

I subscribe to the oxymoronically-named Ethics & Journalism newsletter. After the featured piece in today’s edition, I will be reconsidering that commitment.

Here is the beginning of the essay titled “Fostering a Culture of Newsroom Independence: How to fight anticipatory compliance,” authored by the director of this NYU project, Stephen J. Adler. Hold on to your head!

Media self-censorship, anticipatory compliance, capitulation, bending the knee. Whatever you call it, it represents one of the most insidious means by which people with power can squelch news reporting that doesn’t serve their interests. You don’t have to arrest or fire reporters—you just have to make them increasingly afraid that you will.

Donald Trump’s second term—and the ascendancy of billionaire press antagonists—has already created an environment in which journalists feel more pressure than ever to self-censor or soften their coverage to ensure that they stay on legally and politically safe ground. How does a reporter, or a newsroom full of them, guard against sheltering in such truth-killing safe harbors?

To some degree, long-standing newsroom ethical guidelines can help stiffen reporters’ spines. The Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics has it right: journalists should “deny favored treatment to advertisers, donors, or any other special interests, and resist internal and external pressure to influence coverage.” I also like this from the Boston public media station WBUR:

“Decisions about what we cover, how we do our work, and what we report are made by our journalists. We are not influenced by those who provide WBUR with financial support.… We are not swayed in our journalistic mission by those in power or those who attempt to manipulate our journalism.’”

But even more important than adhering to ethics guidelines, I believe, is preserving the culture of journalistic independence that thrives at countless successful newsrooms and has shone at some of those now under the most pressure, such as the Associated Press, Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, and CBS News. Maintaining such a culture—and thus summoning the courage to practice independent journalism in the face of any threats—has been a hallmark of these institutions for generations….

Continue reading

I LOVE This Unethical Quote of the Eon From LA Mayor Karen Bass!

“No one said you shouldn’t have gone on a trip.”

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass in a local TV interview, explaining why she  flew to Ghana as the disastrous wildfires in her city had already started.

In addition to being a spectacularly desperate excuse for irresponsible and incompetent conduct, Mayor Bass’s statement is such a poor use of the English language that it is almost undecipherable. What she was trying to say is that nobody told her not to leave the city she is supposedly in charge of running to go on a junket to Africa as a life-and-death threat loomed.

Still, isn’t that statement great? First, it’s an easy Unethical Quote of—what, the month? The year? The millennium? Second, it is the equivalent of wearing a blinking neon sign that reads, “I am an incompetent!” as if the residents of her city that have two brain cells to rub together haven’t figured that out yet. Third, it’s a rationalization so desperate, impotent and moronic that one has to be about six to try it. (And yes, I must add “Bass’s Lament” to the list.) Let’s see:

Ken Lay, asked why he oversaw the Enron scam: “Nobody told me not to!”

Lance Armstrong, asked why he used banned doping techniques to win all those races: “Nobody told me not to!”

Richard Nixon, asked why he allowed the Watergate cover-up: “Nobody told me not to!”

Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, asked why he organized the attack on Pearl Harbor: “Nobody told me not to!”

Bass’s excuse works for serial killers, rapists, cheating spouses, arsonists, and playground bullies. It’s so versatile!

The context of Bass’s instant classic was a recent interview on LA’s Fox 11 in which she explained Bass explained that the Biden administration asked her to go to the Ghana to represent the U.S. “It was going to be a very short trip – over a weekend and two business days.” Now, she told the outlet, she is mounting an investigation into why she was MIA when the city needed leadership most. We need to look at everything about the preparation and all of that for the fires… I think when we evaluate that, we will find that although there were warnings – that I frankly wasn’t aware of.” “I think our preparation wasn’t what it typically is,” the mayor continued, apparently unaware of the axiom, “When you are in a hole, stop digging.”  “That level of preparation really didn’t happen. If it had, I wouldn’t even have gone to San Diego, let alone leave the country…it didn’t reach that level to me.”

If you are wondering whether there is any chance that voters in single-party California will reconsider their knee-jerk political affiliations after the horrible performance of Bass, considered a star on the Democratic Party’s representatives of-color Congressional team (she was on Biden’s short list to be Vice-President), the answer is probably not, in part because Bass’s apparent unawareness of the concept of “accountability” is barely being publicized. I had to learn of it from the British tabloid “The Daily Mail.”

________________

Pointer: Old Bill

Tough Call: Who Is the Greater Ethics Dunce, David Hogg or the Democrats Who Elected Him Vice-Chair of the DNC? [Corrected]

David Hogg, had he not been a student at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School when a mass shooting occurred, might have grown up to be a useful, ethical, productive and emotionally healthy human being. Unfortunately, he is likely to be a lifetime victim of the shooting, for it propelled him into the career path of being a professional single-issue fanatic, America’s Greta Thunberg but on the issue of gun control rather than climate change. In an example of the chaos PTSD can wreak on the vulnerable, Hogg has been transformed into a cynical grifter by a mass-murderer’s bullets. It’s tragic, but that doesn’t mean his unethical conduct should be tolerated, much less rewarded.

Barely two weeks after his election as a Democratic National Committee official, Hogg began using DNC contact lists to solicit donations to his own political action committee, “Leaders We Deserve.” That PAC pays his salary of more than $100,000 a year, according to Federal Election Commission records. “David Hogg here: I was just elected DNC Vice Chair! This is a huge win for our movement to make the Democratic Party more reflective of our base: youthful, energetic, and ready to win,” reads one the texts he sent out to the DNC’s vast database. The texts include a link to his PAC.

Continue reading

Ethics Dunces: The World Anti-Doping Agency, the International Tennis Integrity Agency & Professional Tennis Generally

I rate this episode as pure King’s Pass misconduct by both organizations and professional tennis.

Jannik Sinner, the top-ranked men’s tennis player in the world, just got a three-month ban for testing positive for a banned anabolic steroid last March. He says he “accepted” the short ban, and why wouldn’t he? It means he won’t miss any Grand Slam tournaments. The French Open, the season’s next major, starts May 25 and the ban ends May 4. This is like baseball banning a starting pitcher for throwing a doctored ball for three games so he doesn’t miss any starts.

The International Tennis Integrity Agency had decided earlier not to suspend Sinner by buying his excuse for why he tested positive: the clostebol in his doping sample was due, see, to the player getting a massage from a trainer who had used the substance to help a wound on his finger heal quicker. Never mind that virtually every athlete caught using steroids has claimed “accidental” contamination. It is why baseball went to a strict liability system after its steroid scandal.

Ah, but professional tennis is more dependent on its big stars than baseball for its gate income and TV ratings, so suspending the #1 ranked player in the world has unpleasant ripple effects.

This convenient resolution of Sinner’s violation, however, is also causing some rippling. After the settlement was announced, three-time major champion Stan Wawrinka posted on X: “I don’t believe in a clean sport anymore …” # 8 ranked Daniil Medvedev, said, alluding to double standards (Ya think?), “I hope everyone can discuss with WADA and defend themselves like Jannik Sinner from now on.”

Continue reading

Ethics Quote of the Week: Christian Toto

“‘SNL’ became hyper-partisan and abandoned bipartisan satire. ‘SNL,’ like the legacy media, mostly ignored President Joe Biden’s obvious mental decline, the most stark example of its liberal bias. Show founder Lorne Michaels pretends the show remains nonpartisan. Reality says otherwise. Screams it, to be precise.”

—“Hollywood in Toto” blogger Christian Toto as tonight’s much hyped “SNL50: The Anniversary Special” looms.

My sock drawer organization is in true crisis, so I had programmed my schedule to handle that task tonight long before I knew of the special. Otherwise, I would have certainly wa…oh, who am I kidding? No I wouldn’t have watched the show if my Roku was malfunctioning and the only alternatives were re-runs of “Rosanne” and “Hart to Hart.” As Toto correctly explains, the show betrayed its mission, its origins, its original fans (like me), the culture, and the tradition of political humor, satire and comedy itself.

Toto points out that “Saturday Night Live” had the power, influence and ability to be at the forefront of a counter-culture revolution. In doing so, it would have been a national unifying force, holding the excesses—and it has been almost all excesses—of the extreme progressive capture of the Democratic Party to the public ridicule and derisive finger-pointing it deserved and needed. James Carville recently ranted that “It’s like, there’s a plant somewhere in quote–progressive—unquote America, that just to seize how many jackass, stupid things that they can embrace. It’s stunningly stupid.”

But apparently not stupid enough to be funny.

Continue reading

Factcheck Ethics: It Is High Time We Decide Factcheckers Are So Biased and Stupid That They Should Be Ignored

A social media jokester used AI to create the “painting” on the left, and implied on “X” that it was an eerie premonition of the Trump administration, writing “This 1721 painting by Deitz Nuützen predicted the Trump-Elon-RFK McDonalds dinner.”

How dumb and gullible would someone have to be not to instantly realize that this was a gag? If the whole thing weren’t enough, there’s the name of the artist, “Deitz Nuützen,” as in “Deez Nutz,” web slang for testicles. Never mind, though. The Axis media is so wary of anything that might enhance the image of Trump and his team that even an obvious silly joke had to be factchecked.

Continue reading

So Apparently “Dick” Is The Newly Approved Axis Term For Trump Allies. Interesting!

Democrats are apparently seeking the youth vote by talking like vulgar teenagers. Hey, it might work!

I noted that Anderson Cooper, without any serious objection from his employers, CNN, called guest Chris Sununu a “dick” on live TV. Now Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Ca.) has escalated by calling Elon Musk a “dick” during a House hearing on DOGE, aka. the Department of Government Efficiency. Then he went on CNN to smugly defend his uncivil conduct with a string of rationalizations. (Incidentally: talk about “punchable faces!”)

During the hearing, Garcia noted that the subcommittee’s chair, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) had displayed Hunter Biden’s “dick pics” at a July 2023 House Oversight Committee hearing: “I find it ironic, of course, that our chairwoman, Congresswoman Greene, is in charge of running this committee. Now, in the last Congress, Chairwoman Greene literally showed a dick pic in our oversight congressional hearing, so I thought I’d bring one as well.”

Garcia showed a photo of Musk in a tuxedo. Musk is a dick, get it? Then he launched into the current ad hominem talking points the Axis is using to denigrate Trump’s waste, fraud and abuse delegate.

Continue reading

Comment of the Day: “Interestingly, Being an Idiot Does Not, In The Eyes Of The Florida Bar, Make One Unfit To Practice Law”

This Comment of the Day from the stellar Harkins household—this is from Ryan Harkins–was just posted three days ago and it seems like eons. It responds to another one of my arguments that sufficient demonstrations of stupidity by lawyers even outside the practice of law should be grounds for disbarment—a suspension isn’t enough, because such a lawyer will not become smarter after a professional “time out.” I think the first time I suggested this reform to legal discipline was when “The View’s” token lawyer, racist Sunny Hostin, suggested that eclipses and earthquakes were caused by climate change. It upsets me just think about the fact that this idiot has a law degree.

Here is Ryan’s Comment of the Day on the post, “Interestingly, Being an Idiot Does Not, In The Eyes Of The Florida Bar, Make One Unfit To Practice Law”

***

A basic and important rule of gun safety, perhaps the preeminent rule, is that you should never point a gun at anything you don’t intend to shoot. Playing around with a gun in the fashion that Medina did shows a disturbing lack of gun safety in particular, but of the principal normalization of deviance in particular.

To delve into a little bit of brain science, in following the cognitive-emotive-behavioral model, we start with a desire. Perhaps in Medina’s case, it was simply to have fun. But how would he possibly conclude pulling the trigger of an unloaded gun is fun?

There are a large variety of ways we can try to satisfy our desires. In the case of hunger, we could seek satiation from a myriad of venues. In the case seeking stress relief, we could seek out a movie, a game, exercise, or any of a host of other options. But there are options we can choose from that are unhealthy, dangerous, or even illegal. When presented with all these options, our brains experience a byplay between thought and feeling. Does this option satisfy? The emotions clamor for a particular avenue, and cognition weighs the risks and benefits. If I eat a salad, I might not feel satiated, but if I eat a Hardee’s Monster Burger, I’ll be consuming far too many calories. But the salad may not be very tasty, and the Monster Burger is delicious. Whichever way I choose, my brain will record the success or failure of the endeavor, and the next time I am hungry, I will have a precedent to fall back on. They byplay between cognition and emotion in subsequent encounters proceeds much more quickly. The Monster Burger was indeed delicious, filled me up, and I didn’t seem to suffer any negative consequences. So the next time, my brain is patterned to lean toward the Monster Burger because of the positive experience.

Continue reading

Unethical Quote of the Month: Pope Francis [Expanded]

The Pope has issued a letter (It’s in larger type at the link than what you’ll see below) to the “Bishops of the United States of America.”

Ethics verdicts: Abuse of position, abuse of authority, grandstanding, hypocrisy, breach of responsibility and intellectual dishonesty.

Nice job, Your Holiness.

Because you are likely to be semi-conscious or have your brains splattered on the ceiling from serial head-explosions after reading this thing, I’ll make my other ethics observations now:

1. I’ll pay attention to the Pope’s dictates about how my country handles illegal immigration when the Vatican lets anyone who feels like it move into Vatican City because it will give them “a better life.” Instead of sending the “worst of the worst” to Guantanamo, let’s send them right to the Pope. Based on this screed, I’m sure he’ll welcome them with open arms in the spirit of recognizing the inherent human rights of “the most fragile and marginalized.”

2. Anyone who uses the migration practices that existed in the Middle East over 2,000 years ago as an analogy to 21st century policy issues in the United States of America is either a con artist, a liar or an idiot. The same goes for comparing Jesus to fentanyl smugglers. Fans of the Pope can take their pick. It’s an indefensible, insulting, reductive argument. Nobody should make such comparisons who are over the age of six; for a major world figure revered by millions to stoop to it is signature significance for demagoguery.

3. The Pope admonishes Americans not to equate illegal conduct with criminal conduct. Funny, I just looked up “criminal conduct” and the definitions all boil down to “Criminal conduct is an unlawful act that breaks the law.” Call me a nit-picker, but it sure seems that  breaking our laws to come into and stay in the U.S. is the equivalent of a criminal act.

Maybe it’s a language thing. Does “not criminal” in Italian mean “lawbreaking that the Pope regards as excusable if one is ‘poor and marginalized’? Continue reading

Stay Classy, Anderson Cooper!

Ah, yes, journalistic professionalism! Those were the days! Walter Cronkite may have been a Democratic party mouthpiece when he wasn’t slamming the Vietnam war, but he never called Spiro Agnew a “dick,” at least in public. Neither did Chet Huntley, David Brinkley, Howard K. Smith or Barbara Walters. But that cute Anderson Cooper on CNN, he’s the face of broadcast journalism today and one of the cool kids, so he can talk like this while he was arguing about DOGE attacks on FEMA on a news show that airs coast-to-coast (this happens right before the two minute mark in the video above)…

COOPER: Some of the details, like millions for hotels, it’s actually not…

CHRIS SUNUNU: You mean the FEMA money for migrants? That’s OK now?

COOPER: I’m not saying it’s OK, don’t put words in my mouth. Don’t be a dick!

Continue reading