A Deceitful, Indeed Despicable Headline From Drew Curtis'”Fark”

I like Drew Curtis’ Fark a lot; it may be my favorite news aggregator. Drew and his staff devise often clever captions to dozens of news items off the beaten path every day. It’s a left-leaning site: it frequently engages in gratuitous Republican-bashing, and has all of the predictable biases you would expect. Nevertheless, it’s different, amusing and usually benign.

Not this time.

Here was the NBC News headline FARK linked to: “A college professor called the police on two students who were late for class…”

Here is the story.

Now here is the Fark headline: “College professor calls police on two black students for being a) violent, b) drunk, c) late.”

In dozens of subtle and not-so-subtle ways, all across the news media, the web and Big Tech, writers, reporters, pundits and others work to maximize racial suspicion, hate and conflict, typically to ensure Democratic constituency animus towards whites and conservatives. This is a particularly revolting example. At best, the FARK headline is unethical, ruthless clickbait misrepresenting a non-racial incident as racist mistreatment of blacks by white authorities, in order to trick readers into clicking through and inflate traffic.

At worst, it is a deliberate deception to further the Left’s systemic racism narrative.

If you read the story, the students were black and the professor was also black. The NBC headline was fair and accurate: what was newsworthy was that a professor treated tardiness as a criminal matter. Race was irrelevant to the incident. FARK’s headline, in contrast invited the reader to think that a white professor was abusing black students because of their race.

Somebody should be fired for this, and FARK owes its readers, and the nation it is trying to divide down racial fault-lines—just like its favorite party and its current President— an apology.

As for me, I won’t be using FARK again for the foreseeable future.

“Rob Reiner, Are You That Smart?’

Yes, Rob Reiner, son of the late, great Carl and director of some of my favorite movies (“The Princess Bride,” “Stand By Me”…) as well as a serviceable character actor when he’s got good material, and one of the most combative and seemingly immune from reality of all Hollywood progressives, tweeted that today.

I was, earlier today as I watched the chaos at the border start exploding again,  saw the latest price of coffee at the CVS, and reflected on Joe Biden’s sage recommendation to deal with the gas prices that he is at least partly responsible for (get a $60,000 electric car) going to again express my amazement on Ethics Alarms regarding the people on my Facebook feed, in polls, and a few other locales where Facts Don’t Matter, who still adamantly claim that President Biden is doing a wonderful job. At what? What is it they are so pleased with? The crime? The inflation? The worsening societal divisions? The government’s embrace of sexualizing and racializing education below the age of 12? His government using agents in the private sector to chill free speech and the freedom of association?  The looming nuclear war? The mask mandates? The casual racial and sexual discrimination? The exploding national debt? Something else? Which?

And then I saw “The Meathead’s” tweet, as well as the 52.7 “loves” it attracted, and all I could think of was poor Dana..

This is April 1. The tweet would be a deft April Fool’s joke, except that the tweeter is  Reiner, who never says a cross word about any Democrat (except Senators Manshin and Sinema, whom he views as traitors), especially Joe Biden. Do those “loves” come from people who think he’s being satirical, and thus slyly critical? Do they come from people who actually agree that Biden is having a successful—SUCCESSFUL??—Presidency? (You know…Morons.)

All I could hear was Wilford Brimley’s voice echoing through my brain, in his iconic scene from “Absence of Malice”: “Mr. Gallagher, are you that smart?” Except in this case, it’s “Mr. Reiner.” Is he so smart that he sent off this tweet knowing that could plausibly claim it was an April Fools joke if someone made the easy case that the tweet was idiotic, and made many of the people who read it even dumber than they are, yet at the same time he could pander to the hopelessly biased knee-jerk partisans in Hollywood and elsewhere who will cheer anything Biden does, thus maintaining Carl’s son’s woke credentials?

Could he possibly be that smart?

I don’t think so. I think he’s a deluded, Trump-deranged, fool.

The Herschel Walker Fake Credentials Scandal: Beyond The Fact That It’s Lying, Why Do Public Figures Do This?

I don’t understand this kind of thing at all.

CNN did a deep dive into the educational boasts of Trump-backed Republican Senate candidate Herschel Walker, the former NFL star and college running back legend, and discovered that he had been inflating his scholarly achievements to a ridiculous degree. He has said for years (and had the claim on his campaign website) that he graduated in the top 1% of his class at the University of Georgia. Nope. He was a B student or worse. He didn’t even graduate, though that’s the norm for pro athletes. Continue reading →

Friday Ethics Fries, 4/1/22: April Fools-Free Edition

Way back when Ethics Alarms was just beginning, I got flamed by a bunch of nasty lawyers for suggesting that it was unethical for a criminal defense lawyer to use his website to perpetrate a hoax on April 1. You see, it wasn’t technically unethical because 1) it was April Fools and 2) the Rules of Professional Conduct prohibition against lawyers lying only applies to lies that would justify an ethics complaint. Obviously punishing a lawyer for an April’s Fools gag, even a bad one, wouldn’t be grounds for professional discipline, so I apologized and pulled the post. As a legal ethicist, I should have been clearer.

But I still believe it is unethical for lawyers to lie in public, whether it is sanctionable or not. And I still hold that April Fools posts and articles on platforms and sites that the public has been led to trust that are not obvious to all but complete mutton-heads are unethical, as in “wrong.”

In another realm, I just learned that my Wuhan-phobic sister has been exposed to the virus while on a cross-country trip. Now she doesn’t know what to do, since her destination is a home just as pandemic-phobic as she is, and if she is tested, as she will be required to be, and tests positive, they won’t let her inside the house. Nobody has taken more extreme precautions than my sister. Now she says that she hopes al the masks and shots and social distnacing that had made her live like a leper the past two years will protect her from infection, though she says there is no guarantee. Be proud of me: I didn’t say, as I desperately wanted to, “If you don’t have confience that all of that will protect you, why the HELL did the U.S. cripple its society, economy, education, social structure, politics, families, culture and trust based on politically-fueled and mainstream media-promoted hysteria?

1. Pssst…ethics dunces! It doesn’t matter. Now some sources are disputing the Oscars’ statement that Will Smith was asked to leave the ceremony after his slap-fest and refused. So what? Smith’s conduct isn’t mitigated either way. He should have left the auditorium without being asked immediately after battering Chris Rock and embarrassing the Academy. But he wanted to get his Oscar, because he’s a sociopath, or plays one at award ceremonies.

One more Will Smith note: Fellow Hollywood asshole Jim Carrey floated this excuse for his pal:

“I also think that people not unlike Will, or myself, we live in a lot of pressure. We set up a lot of pressure for ourselves, [and] we’re encouraged by this country to never stop and never be satisfied and never look at our lives and going, ‘You know what? I’m enough. I have enough. I’ve done enough…It’s beyond our bandwidth. And we’re starting to see the symptoms of what it’s like to be living beyond your bandwidth and cracking under the pressure. That’s what that was.”

Was it? It’s called being a grown-up and dealing with life, Jim. Normal people who don’t have millions in the bank and are adulated for making movies don’t get any sympathy from the law or society when they “snap.” The “little people” have a lot more pressure on them than Will Smith, and those who have grown up learn that they have to deal with it  without beating on whoever is nearby.

2. I confess! Schadenfreude! The Los Angeles Times, reports that Rep. Maxine Waters (Is she the worst Democrat in Congress? The amazing thing is that she isn’t, not even close )requested that the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority show up in her district  to provide assistance to her homeless constituents. However, “an unofficial social media post erroneously promised that those who showed up would get rare vouchers for permanent, subsidized housing” resulting in homeless people showing up in packs while “heated arguments broke out among the hundreds of people who turned out for assistance.” Overwhelmed and surprised, the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority workers “were unable to meet more than a small fraction of the need and left while throngs of people were still waiting for help.”

 Waters, quick-thinking as ever, tried to take control of the situation by telling the group that they needed to “go home.” Ha! The crowd of mostly homeless people responded to that angrily. As one participant shouted at Waters, “We don’t got no home, that’s why we’re here. What home we gonna go to?”

I’m sorry, but I have to laugh. Imagine what Waters would have said (or Don Lemon, or Nancy Pelosi, or “The Squad,” or Charles Blow, or Joy Reid, or Hillary Clinton, or Stephen Colbert…) if a President Trump had told a homeless group to “go home.” Waters’ response was pure Waters: she indignantly told the crowd, “There’s nobody in Washington who works for their people any fucking harder than I do!”

This is the ethical equivalent of “Do you know who I am?”

Finally, when The L.A. Times tried to interview Waters about the fiasco, she  threatened the reporter by saying “you’ll hurt yourself” if he proceeded to publish a story. “I don’t want you to start trying to write it, you won’t understand it,” she said.

Oh, I think we understand Maxine perfectly by now. Continue reading →

“Transgender Day of Visibility” Ethics Duncery

Did you know yesterday was “Transgender Day of Visibility”? That’s funny, it seemed to me that this tiny minority in the U.S. has been disproportionately visible for years. Here’s the Presidents’ obsequious pander:

“To everyone celebrating Transgender Day of Visibility, I want you to know your president sees you, Jill, Kamala, Doug, our entire administration sees you for who you are. On this day and every day, we recognize the resilience, strength, and joy of transgender, nonbinary, and gender nonconforming people. We celebrate the activism and determination that have fueled the fight for transgender equality. We acknowledge the adversity and discrimination that the transgender community continues to face across our nation and around the world. Like never before, they are sharing their stories in books and magazines; breaking glass ceilings of representation on television and movie screens; enlisting — once again — to serve proudly and openly in our military; getting elected and making policy at every level of government; and running businesses, curing diseases, and serving our communities in countless other ways. Despite this progress, transgender Americans continue to face discrimination, harassment, and barriers to opportunity…I call upon all Americans to join us in lifting up the lives and voices of transgender people throughout our Nation and to work toward eliminating discrimination against all transgender, gender nonconforming, and nonbinary people — and all people.”

Continue reading →

Abused And Abusing: The Bruce Willis Ethics Scandal

I was not surprised when Bruce Willis’ daughter announced this week that he was “stepping away” from acting because of what she called “aphasia.” For actors, that can be a convenient technical term for “I can’t remember my lines, and it’s not my fault,” but in Willis’s case—he’s only 67—many believe it may mean more, like that he is suffering from the after-effects of a stroke or head injury. The reason I was not surprised by the announcement is that the “Die Hard” superstar’s movie appearances have been embarrassing to him and painful to watch for at least 3 years, and there was no discernible reason, other than the fact that he appeared to be not fully engaged.

During the pandemic, when my wife and I were forced to watch far more movies we had never heard of than we wanted to, we quickly learned to avoid any Willis movie of recent vintage, and there are a lot of them. It was puzzling: Willis would be named up front as one of the stars, but he frequently had nothing to do. He looked okay, except that the spark was gone, and Bruce Willis’s spark is most of his justification for being on screen. He showed no energy, moved slowly, seldom changed expression, and delivered his lines flatly. It was suspicious. And it wasn’t our imagination. One tweeting movie fan wrote in February,

While I wasn’t paying attention Bruce Willis became the king of crappy, low budget, direct to video action films. 32 of them since 2014. Apparently he gets most of the film’s budget to show up for a day or two of filming then they build the rest of the movie around that. Nice.

Continue reading →

Closed Mouth, Open Forum…

Well, I can’t talk today. Celebrations in multiple venues are planned. Whether I can think or write is still to be determined, but that has been the case for a very long time.

So time to call up the Reserves, as we do here on Ethics Alarms every Friday when I remember to do it. Enlighten us with your analysis of anything, as long as anything involves ethics.

I’ll be here, watching, reading, and suffering bravely, sort of.

Observations On The Unethical Tweet Of The Month

I wasn’t exaggerating when I noted in the morning ethics horrors round-up today that March, 2022 was an ethics catastrophe speeding up, if anything, in the month’s waning hours.

The above revolting tweet was authored by Kychelle Del Rosario, a fourth-year medical student at Wake Forest School of Medicine. In answer to a tweet by someone complaining about “transphobia,” the future doctor—you know, “First, Do No Harm”?—appeared to admit—with pride!—that she deliberately caused pain and discomfort to a patient because he had mocked her (obnoxious) “preferred pronoun” pin. Then, when her despicable tweet was seen, circulated and justly condemned on social media, she courageously deleted the evidence in an attempted cover-up.

Continue reading →

Ethics Extraction, 3/31/2022: Ethically, March Is Not Going Out Like A Lamb

I just had a very infected tooth pulled, but it was considerably less painful than the ethics news of late. For example, the Oscars producers finally admitted that they asked post-slap Will Smith to leave the ceremony, and he refused….so they shrugged and let him stay. All righty then! One-way tiresome late night host Stephen Colbert told his audience that Fox News’ Peter Doocy should be “slapped” for daring to ask President Biden what he meant by the U.S. “responding in kind” if Russia used chemical weapons against Ukraine. Colbert and his allied Democrat propagandists claimed any Trump criticism of the news media, like Jim Acosta’s partisan and unprofessional harassment, was an attack on the First Amendment proving that Donald was “a threat to democracy; now Colbert wants to see journalists who ask Biden legitimate questions physically punished. And it was a legitimate question: what the heck does responding “in kind” mean? With more chemical warfare? With illegal weapons? Doocy’s question properly highlighted the unfortunate truth that Biden himself doesn’t know what he means much of the time. There would be a joke there, but comics like Colbert only mock Repubicans, apparently because they are terrified that a progressive will run up and slap them if they don’t follow the battle plan. More pain to come…

1 The words are “unprofessional,” “disrespectful,” and “irresponsible.” Country music superstar Eric Church announced this week that he was canceling his upcoming sold-out arena show on Saturday night at the AT&T Center in San Antonio. Is he ill? In mourning? No, the singer just wants to attend North Carolina’s Final Four basketball game against Duke. He wrote, through Ticketmaster,

“This Saturday, my family and I are going to stand together to cheer on the Tar Heels as the team has made it to the Final Four. As a lifelong Carolina basketball fan, I’ve watched Carolina and Duke battle over the years but to have them matchup in the Final Four for the first time in history of the NCAA Tournament is any sports enthusiast’s dream. This is also the most selfish thing I’ve ever asked the Choir to do: to give up your Saturday night plans with us so that I can have this moment with my family and sports community. However, it’s that same type of passion felt by the people who fill the seats at our concerts that makes us want to be part of a crowd at a game of this significance.”

What an asshole. He’s counting on The King’s Pass. He thinks he is owed the right to abandon his commitments. (As a professional stage director, I had several occasions when a performer asked to skip a performance to attend some event. In each case I said “No,” and added that if the performer abandoned the show for a single night, he or she would not be welcome back, to that production or any other.

The email is offensive: he isn’t asking the fans to do anything, its a fait accompli. The last sentence is really smarmy dodge. But that wasn’t all he ended his non-apology with a quote from UNC announcer Woody Durham: “Go where you go and do what you do,” an unethical motto if there ever was one. [Pointer: JutGory]

Continue reading →

Maryland Leaps On The Deadly Abortion Slippery Slope

When you think about it, this shouldn’t surprise us, as horrible and unethical as it is. The steps from abortion, to late-term abortion, to legal infanticide have always been smaller than abortion advocates have been willing to admit.

In one of the efforts underway in several Democratic-controlled legislatures to protect abortion rights if the Supreme Court alters or strikes down Roe v. Wade, Maryland is considering Senate Bill 669. The bill’s language states, in addition to protecting abortions themselves from prosecution, that no person can be investigated or charged for “experiencing a miscarriage, perinatal death related to failure to act, or stillbirth.”

The perinatal period consists of “the period shortly before and after birth, from the 20th to 29th week of gestation to one to four weeks after birth.” Mark Tapscott concludes,

In other words, it’s anywhere up to four weeks after the birth of the child you and your sexual partner conceived, and you decide you really don’t want the child, hey, no problem, just don’t feed it, don’t get medical care, don’t do a thing. Eventually, the child will die.

And that, under the meaning of the bill’s text, is OK.

The bill, which Tapscott believes is certain to pass and withstand a veto by Maryland’s Republican governor, also bans any investigations into perinatal infant death while creating the private right the right to sue for civil damages if one is investigated for causing a perinatal death through neglect. Continue reading →