Cake
  • Log In
  • Sign Up
    • Kara Swisher has a newsletter on technology news

      I know Kara very well. At one time we were going to work together on a story about patent trolls in Eastern Texas. She was tough enough to want to pursue the story but I got cold feet and dropped it.

      The trolls would have come for us with accusations of bias and distorting the truth and they would have won in the minds of millions of people because they have so much money and they don't mind making things up.

      I think it was an important story that needed telling but the price you have to pay as a journalist to tell it is too high.

    • I wonder how not why, professional media (if I may call them so vs. amateurs) arrived at this status.

      Unfortunately, the how is often soul-destroying. Here's a mild example:

      John Carreyrou worked for the WSJ covering medical companies. The hottest new company in the space was Theranos, led by the female version of Steve Jobs. They had revolutionary tech to deliver a whole suite of blood tests from a finger prick. It raised hundreds of millions from people as distinguished as George Shultz, the former Secretary of State.

      But John is a smart guy and could see this might be too good to be true, so he attempted to write his doubts about the company. Companies whose fortunes fall if a reporter writes a negative story unleash the hounds, and Theranos unleashed none other than attack dog David Boies, who defended Harvey Weinstein. They unleashed the same tactics against John as they did reporters who were trying to report on Weinstein.

      Boies uncovered that Tyler Schultz had messaged John on LinkedIn. Tyler was a researcher at Theranos who wanted to tell John anonymously that the Theranos tests didn't work. It was a matter of public safety and defrauding investors.

      Tyler had to defend himself, which cost him $400,000 in money he didn't have and caused him to be estranged from his grandfather, George Shultz. John and the WSJ had to go through Hell, but they eventually prevailed and were proven right, but not before John became a public enemy with a huge target on his back. Theranos investor Tim Draper, a widely admired figure here in Silicon Valley, went on TV whenever he could to discredit John and journalism.

      I think John and the reporters who hung in there through years of Hell investigating Weinstein and Epstein should be considered national heroes, not the scum most Americans think they are. They could have saved a lot more underaged girls and aspiring actresses sooner if their reputations weren't so successfully attacked.

    • It only takes one to poison the well for all. There are journalists (at newspapers and on TV) who poison the well at every opportunity.

      And I know there are many fine journalist honoring the craft. But, if they aren't in "the resistance" or backing the administration, then their articles are buried in Section E of the paper or on TV sometime around 2am; if provided an outlet at all.

    • Chris, this is so much for me to take all in, I didn't know how to "react" because I needed to use several emoji at once! Mind blown is one of them, but the "love" one won. Thank you so much for sharing such views and portraying such vividly the realistic events. So my take away on this bit is that it's everything about the view created about the subject topic of news, because uncovering uncomfortable truth hurts investors. I have an intrinsic aversion to investing because I do not understand and can't agree to the "Boiler Room" mentality, always wonder if stock markets aren't the evilest human creation.

    • another great example of investigative journalism, against fierce opposition, is the Boston Globe investigation into clerical abuse, and consealment of same, by the Catholic Church in Boston.

      Spotlight, a movie about above is well worth a look.

    • I know, it kills me. Trying to keep my Southern Utah family alive in the age of Covid when their go-to sources of expertise are Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity, who informed them that Hydroxychloroquine is a game changing drug — and Dr. Fauci has been continually wrong — is truly scary.

      Ingraham and Hannity are rich and famous whereas the journalists who report the science faithfully are lost in the noise. It’s not an exciting story to read that trials of Hydroxychloroquine are disappointing.

      But I blame us, not the journalists. We are the ones who elevated Ingraham and Hannity with our viewership. It’s the same way we made Coke rich and vegetable growers poor.

    • Thanks, Dracula. It’s so much for all of us to take in. The very hardest thing for me to understand for years has been when journalists or bloggers don’t just question or doubt experts — I think that’s normal and healthy — it’s when they go all the way to presenting themselves as experts, and experts as idiots. And then they amass huge audiences.

      But this morning I watched this interview with the author of The End Of Expertise and felt like hmmm, maybe there is a way I can finally understand some of the mindsets.

      I’d be interested in hearing what others think.

    • I think social media has amplified and strengthened this truth twisting phenomena allowing lies to propagate, until they became the norm. And now this technique of smearing truth and reputations, is the go to tool in the arsenal of politics. It's so easy for them to apply it anywhere a more than binary thought process is required from the audience, they made it so easy and comfortable for anyone to lie and deceive, whereas before all media was "official channels" or at least professional publications, hence my guess - was at those times thoroughly scrutinized by folks with their heads on their shoulders. Now everyone is a content producer, just as I am, now. More data is better than quality data, I forget where I saw that..

      I didn't grow up here and really value everyone's insightful input here, yet somehow I learned that when I need a quick hilarious and sarcastic yet to my mind quite to the point explanation about the American society, the archive of gems this man left us never fails to deliver!

    • And Chris Cuomo, Jim Acosta, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski...all rich because they market themselves to a specific audience (and marketing)! I long for the days when you could tune into any network or cable news outlet and hear the same reporting.

      Back in the early/mid 80s, I ran in the same SC/GA coastal sailing circle as Ted Turner when his son Teddy was at the Citadel. I have many fond memories of chatting with Ted back then.

      Ted's mentor for reporting and documenting was Jacque Cousteau. Perhaps the reason CNN had such high regard across many walks of life under Turner's ownership. Few could report the facts about the state of our oceans better than Cousteau in his documentaries. And Turner hired newsmen/women who could deliver the same type of reporting.

      One of Turner's biggest regrets was being forced out at CNN in a boardroom takeover after the sell to AOL Time Warner. He was so displeased with the course of CNN under AOL Time Warner ownership and with the closing of the Turner Environmental Division, he once quipped his tombstone should read..."Here lies Ted Turner, sponsored by Coca-Cola".

      I enjoyed many fine sailing outings with Ted/Teddy along the SC/GA coastlines and hunts on his Colleton and Beaufort County properties. I have met few men who live life as close to the edge, be it business ventures or sailing. And Ted/Teddy were tough to beat on a Hobbie 18, you had to be a good racer to challenge them! And could Ted throw a party to beat all parties post race!

      I wish Ted the best as he battles Lewy Body Dementia.

    • Wow. that’s amazing!! You’re really lucky to have had that experience. Back in the day I was quite obsessed with him like I am Elon Musk now.

      I was thinking, as I wrote about the other journalists, how ad and corporate sponsorships would never fund some of the investigative journalism I admire. Elon feels journalists have become ad salesmen, paid by the click.

      Of course, some people claim he has gone down the same path by breaking through the noise via sensational tweets.

    • If news is a product then it should be paid for like other products. On the other hand, when I am paying I expect to get what I am paying for, and none of the crap I did not pay for. This works reasonably well with Netflix, which so far managed to avoid inserting pre-rolls or post-rolls or any other ads into a stream. If they start doing this, I will immediately unsubscribe.

      Thus, when I am paying for a newspaper or a magazine, I expect it to not have any ads, but it usually does. I understand that my money covers only a portion of the expenses, still I cannot stand it.

      I sent money to the Guardian several times, because I felt the reporting they were doing on ecological catastrophe we, humans, are instilling on the planet, was important. I was reading the Atlantic while it was free, when it moved behind the paywall I just stopped reading it — nothing really earth-shattering there.

      Magazines like WIRED are usually not worth paying for, but the latest issue completely dedicated to ecological issues is good enough I bought a paper copy. By the way, if you have a library card, you can use a library app to read magazines that the library receives for free. My library receives WIRED, the New Yorker, National Geographic, Mother Jones, and a bunch of lifestyle pulp.

      I also use Flipboard and Google Newsstand. Some sources are free on Newsstand, but behind a paywall on Flipboard. Unless I really want a hardcopy I try avoiding paying for news. If this is something important, someone else will report it.

      I usually do not read/watch news from ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN/Fox. NPR? Sometimes. For TV/video I news I prefer BBC, DW, Al Jazeera, NHK. But, frankly, I don't watch news often. I prefer reading.

    • Fascinating stuff about Ted Turner! Wikipedia does not say that he was displeased with the course per se, but that because of the dot-com crash AOL dragged the performance and stock price of the combined company down, and Ted Turner, as the biggest individual shareholder, lost $7 billion. So, he resigned as Time Warner vice chairman in 2003 and then from the board of directors in 2006. But even before that, he was ousted from the head of cable networks position.

      Did not know all that. There have been a bunch of movies about Steve Jobs, but I haven't watched one about Ted Turner.

    • Everything "Ted" was long before the Dot Com and "You've Got Mail" era.

      Kind of like a friend's daughter asking, "Did you know Paul McCartney was in a band before Wings?"