Hi, Eric. I recently shared this newsletter in comments on Facebook, and I was asked about the publication date. In responding, I did clarify that it was just the "view in browser" version of your latest newsletter, but I agreed that, in general, it's annoying when one clicks a link and doesn't see a dateline/timestamp on the article. So, I encourage you to add this to your newsletters -- just a plain text thing, right at the top, would be great.
update: it turns out Substack, which hosts the newsletter, automatically adds the date, one day after the column runs. that's why on the day-of you don't see a date. thanks again
After your last comment, acknowledging my suggestion, I looked at a couple of your older newsletters, and wondered if you had gone back and "fixed" all of them! But now I know. Okay, thanks for your attention on this matter. When I next post one of your newsletters, I'll say "from today's," if necessary. Keep up the good work.
In 2011 CBS hired David Rhodes to head their news division. He was in charge when Lara Logan did her Benghazi infomercial on Sixty Minutes, basing her entire presentation on the testimony of one “eyewitness” who turned out to be a con man. If my memory serves the reaction at CBS over that was a lot quieter than the outrage over Dan Rather’s Bush National Guard story. There was one document of questionable authenticity in that story but the facts presented were supported by other evidence.
It drives me nuts that some liberals dismiss the possibility that Rhodes would be biased because his brother is Ben Rhodes. Apparently they don’t have family members who are Trump supporters like many of us do. But trusting a man whose career was created at Fox News under the odious Roger Ailes is beyond naive. There is no way that Rhodes could have worked for 12 years at Fox and risen to the level of VP of News without doing Roger’s bidding. And now it turns out that Rhodes is again working for the Murdoch’s but in the UK.
I'm glad you brought this up. I think it's too easy to blame Fox for all that ails (no pun intended) the media. Oh, Fox is a blight on humanity for sure. But another problem is how the other so called "mainstream" outlets enable and facilitate Fox by "reporting" Fox's right wing propaganda stories because, well, "they're out there" and both sides etc. Also, remember how Jake Tapper had a hissy fit because Obama observed that Fox was not a real news outlet? How dare The Black President attack "Freedomzzz Of The Press"!
And it was the Washington Post and the New York Times who bought the book Clinton Cash, which responsible journalists (none of them on TV I'm sure) characterized as a right wing hit piece.
There's plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the Propatainment Complex.
I would add that he is president because of the NY FBI leaks to the media that pressured Comey into making his statement right before the election about finding more of HIllary’s emails. The IG report made it clear that pressure from the NY agents was a major factor in Comey’s decision to go public. There is credible evidence that that was the nail in her coffin:
During his Senate testimony this past December IG Horowitz told Senator Leahy that he was still investigating those leaks. The media has buried this important story. Are those agents ready to interfere in this election on Trump’s behalf? That is as important a story as Russian interference but the Russians don’t leak to the Times.
What they really fail to admit is that HIllary had really high approval ratings when she stepped down as Secretary of State - above 60% in some polls. That changed in the spring of 2015 after the NY Times and WaPo allowed themselves to used to mainstream Steve Bannon and Peter Schweitzer false accusations against the Clinton Foundation. From what I have read that is when her approval ratings tanked, particularly on the quality of trustworthiness and they never really recovered because of the media’s email hysteria.
Revive the Crossfire format, and let's see propagandists like this sad excuse for journalism defend their nonsense.
Hi, Eric. I recently shared this newsletter in comments on Facebook, and I was asked about the publication date. In responding, I did clarify that it was just the "view in browser" version of your latest newsletter, but I agreed that, in general, it's annoying when one clicks a link and doesn't see a dateline/timestamp on the article. So, I encourage you to add this to your newsletters -- just a plain text thing, right at the top, would be great.
ah good idea. thanks for suggestion
update: it turns out Substack, which hosts the newsletter, automatically adds the date, one day after the column runs. that's why on the day-of you don't see a date. thanks again
After your last comment, acknowledging my suggestion, I looked at a couple of your older newsletters, and wondered if you had gone back and "fixed" all of them! But now I know. Okay, thanks for your attention on this matter. When I next post one of your newsletters, I'll say "from today's," if necessary. Keep up the good work.
great thanks
Sorry to Ray, who is excellent, but Lou Barlow and j mascis are and have been the pride of Western mass since the 80s.
ha. but can’t there be more than one? I’m big fans of all of them
Don't forget Aztec Two-Step; one of them was a counselor at my camp in Great Barrington Mass; they came back and sang for the staff late one night ….
Of course they did the OWNER is like the other 2* of the wealthy who want the money and power of this new FASCIST OLIGARCH that is coming to age
Another reason to distrust the Conservative B.S. Network.
yes, hopefully CBS will never live down that Les quote
In 2011 CBS hired David Rhodes to head their news division. He was in charge when Lara Logan did her Benghazi infomercial on Sixty Minutes, basing her entire presentation on the testimony of one “eyewitness” who turned out to be a con man. If my memory serves the reaction at CBS over that was a lot quieter than the outrage over Dan Rather’s Bush National Guard story. There was one document of questionable authenticity in that story but the facts presented were supported by other evidence.
It drives me nuts that some liberals dismiss the possibility that Rhodes would be biased because his brother is Ben Rhodes. Apparently they don’t have family members who are Trump supporters like many of us do. But trusting a man whose career was created at Fox News under the odious Roger Ailes is beyond naive. There is no way that Rhodes could have worked for 12 years at Fox and risen to the level of VP of News without doing Roger’s bidding. And now it turns out that Rhodes is again working for the Murdoch’s but in the UK.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/01/business/media/fox-news-david-rhodes-murdoch.html
I'm glad you brought this up. I think it's too easy to blame Fox for all that ails (no pun intended) the media. Oh, Fox is a blight on humanity for sure. But another problem is how the other so called "mainstream" outlets enable and facilitate Fox by "reporting" Fox's right wing propaganda stories because, well, "they're out there" and both sides etc. Also, remember how Jake Tapper had a hissy fit because Obama observed that Fox was not a real news outlet? How dare The Black President attack "Freedomzzz Of The Press"!
And it was the Washington Post and the New York Times who bought the book Clinton Cash, which responsible journalists (none of them on TV I'm sure) characterized as a right wing hit piece.
There's plenty of blame to go around when it comes to the Propatainment Complex.
agreed. Trump is president today, I’d argue, bc of the NYT not bc of Fox News
I would add that he is president because of the NY FBI leaks to the media that pressured Comey into making his statement right before the election about finding more of HIllary’s emails. The IG report made it clear that pressure from the NY agents was a major factor in Comey’s decision to go public. There is credible evidence that that was the nail in her coffin:
https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/1/11/14215930/comey-email-election-clinton-campaign
During his Senate testimony this past December IG Horowitz told Senator Leahy that he was still investigating those leaks. The media has buried this important story. Are those agents ready to interfere in this election on Trump’s behalf? That is as important a story as Russian interference but the Russians don’t leak to the Times.
What they really fail to admit is that HIllary had really high approval ratings when she stepped down as Secretary of State - above 60% in some polls. That changed in the spring of 2015 after the NY Times and WaPo allowed themselves to used to mainstream Steve Bannon and Peter Schweitzer false accusations against the Clinton Foundation. From what I have read that is when her approval ratings tanked, particularly on the quality of trustworthiness and they never really recovered because of the media’s email hysteria.
https://www.mediamatters.org/new-york-times/after-forming-clinton-cash-exclusives-ny-times-washington-post-fail-report-books
Mr. Walker, I suggest you miss the point of the quote.
The point is that Trump generates “news”. Whether pushing untested “medicines”, berating reporters, or praising his latest whatever; Trump is news.
Trump sells papers. Trump generates traffic. Even, I dare say, for Our Gracious Host. Would Mr. Boehlert be here absent Trump? Would we?