Morning Ed: Media {2018.04.17.Tu}

[Me1] Once upon a time Ted Kennedy objected to a Reader’s Digest article and had them investigated.

[Me2] This corresponds with what I’ve been saying, which means it is likely correct.

[Me3] A magazine that styles itself Vice fretting about the unsettling excesses of free speech is Peak Current Year.

[Me4] Fox News is the least trusted cable news network, reports Fox News. (For the record, they planned to and did show the graphic in question. It was just apparently out of order.)

[Me5] Tanya Gold has an unusually good – perhaps the definitive – look at Milo Yiannopoulos.

[Me6] Ben Smith’s autobiographical piece on his stint in Eastern Europe during the fall of the Iron Curtain is a really fascinating read.

[Me7] One of the unfortunate side effects of the rise of Trump is how it elevated Sarah Kendzior, who was not a credible perspective before Trump and didn’t magically become one just because she hates Trump a lot too.

[Me8] I think there are places for paid and unpaid contributions and both models are fine, but when you advertise pay you need to pay.


Editor-in-Chief
Home Page Twitter Google+ Pinterest 

Will Truman is a former para-IT professional who is presently a stay-at-home father in the Mountain East. He has moved around frequently, having lived in six places since 2003, ranging from rural outposts to major metropolitan areas. He is also on Twitter. ...more →

Please do be so kind as to share this post.
Share

10 thoughts on “Morning Ed: Media {2018.04.17.Tu}

  1. Is there something peculiar happening with the Morning Ed articles? On Monday we got one titled for Tuesday (although the date was right), and now we have one titled for Thursday the 19th.

    Report

  2. Me1: Is this a repeat from last week?

    Vox interviewed the makers of the new Chappaquitik movie. The film makers are deeply ambivalent about how conservatives are reacting to the film because they describe themselves as die-in-wool liberals.

    Me7: I never heard of her before this link.

    Me8: Yeah, I think if you advertise pay you need to pay. I wonder if we are going to see more and more stories like this though.

    Report

  3. I read stuff like Me1 and wonder how many future stories were squashed by this. Or kicked down the road to wait until after the person featured were dead.

    As for Me2, deep fake technology has only been around for… what? a handful of years? I’m trying to think of the first time they put somebody’s head on someone else’s body… Captain America: The First Avenger can’t be the first example, can it? That’s 2011. (And it’s probably cheating because the deep fakes as they exist now use non-green screened faces.)

    And now people can do stuff on their computers to swap celebrity faces with their favorite adult film stars. I’ve heard that such amateur work is still down in the uncanny valley somewhere… but that means that people with their home rigs are capable of pulling off what it took millions and millions of dollars to do in Rogue One.

    Buckle up.

    Report

    • Regarding your point on Me1: It isn’t just everything covered up by this specific story. Those same people kept the secrete for 50 years, including some defending/excusing him even now. What else has been buried, excused, and covered for in that time span for some warped version of “greater good” in that time…

      Report

      • While the “greater good” of 1969 is now known to be pretty dang problematic, we can take comfort in that the opponents of 1969’s “greater good” remain just as odious today as they were back then.

        So we can take comfort in the right people being opposed, even if we have to use flawed clay to make the vessels that opposed them.

        Report

Comments are closed.