Category: Celebrities

Credit Where Credit Is Due: Breitbart, Beck and the Dana Loesch Lawsuit

Posted on Comments

Back in the Day: Andrew Breitbart was a guest on Glenn Beck’s Fox News show

In April 2011, Matthew Boyle of the Daily Caller reported that Glenn Beck had been accused of using bloggers’ content without attribution:

Mandy Nagy, a conservative blogger known online as Liberty Chick, spent untold hours last fall creating a chart that tracks left-wing billionaire George Soros’s influence over media organizations, only to see it appear, in its exact form and without any attribution, on Beck’s famous chalkboard. “We were laughing that he went to all the trouble of [recreating] the visual on the blackboard,” Nagy said, not sounding entirely amused.
John Sexton, who blogs at VerumSerum.com, has provided Beck with material several times, and has sometimes received credit for it. But in several other cases, Sexton says, “he’s used our stuff without any hat tip at all. I don’t understand that.” According to Sexton, in one instance even famously liberal CBS News credited VerumSerum.com for content it used, while Beck, who lifted the same material, did not.
Pamela Geller of AtlasShrugs.com recalls watching Beck use a story she wrote about campaign contributions the Obama campaign received from donors in Gaza. Many other publications referred to the story, Geller says, but only Beck refused to give her credit for it.
“I went through thousands of pages of FEC documents and it was an enormous task to uncover the campaign contributions from Gaza, a Hamas-controlled area, to President Obama,” Geller says. “It’s in my book and it wasn’t a secret that I wrote the story. I don’t know how to describe such outrageous and proud thievery. I like his work, but he’s a thief.”

You can read the whole thing. Let’s be clear that Glenn Beck is certainly not the only broadcaster or journalist who has been accused of failing to give adequate credit to the work of others, and bloggers especially get used to being shortchanged by the big shots.

That April 2011 article, however, was sort of an Empire Strikes Back episode in what became a widespread backlash against Beck after he had a falling-out with Andrew Breitbart. And this is relevant now because, as I reported Christmas Eve, “people are telling me that it was Glenn Beck who wanted to hire Dana Loesch away from Breitbart.com,” and Dana has filed a federal lawsuit against Breitbart.com.

Let’s be clear (a) there’s a whole lot of backstory to this, which may never be entirely known, and (b) I cannot verify that there were actually any negotiations between Dana and Beck — it’s just what “people are telling me.” Obviously the plaintiff in a lawsuit can’t talk about it, and nobody at either Breitbart.com or Beck’s operation has said a word about it. Then again, I haven’t gotten any angry e-mails denying it, so . . .

In order to understand why Breitbart.com might take especial umbrage at the idea of Dana Loesch leaving to join Glenn Beck’s rival New Media operation, it helps to listen to a podcast interview Andrew Breitbart recorded in December 2011 with Stephen K. Bannon.

Because Bannon is now executive chairman of Breitbart.com, this is a very important interview. Becca J. Lower and Danielle Saul have provided a full transcript, which I briefly excerpt here:

Breitbart: [T]here are a lot of Beck supporters. In the past, Beck has made a lot of mistakes and his supporters come out and try to defend him, because Beck is a coward and will not defend himself when he makes a mistake or lies about a person or steals content —
Bannon: Hold on, I want to go back over this: you’re saying that Glenn Beck’s a coward, Glenn Beck’s a liar, and you’re saying that Glenn Beck steals material from people?
Breitbart: Oh yes, and this is well-documented. And whenever he does it, he never answers to the charges. He’s a coward. He won’t have me on the radio show, he won’t have himself [and] me on GBTV, refused to have me on Fox when he threw me under the bus. During the Sherrod thing, I asked to be on TV or radio to explain why he had it wrong. Months later, we found out why he wouldn’t have me on is because he lied to his audience on television that he didn’t do the Sherrod story. . . . In order to rectify the situation, he went on TV and tried to pretend like he was above the fray and told O’Reilly, to his face, a lie . . .
He also has historically been found to take countless bloggers’ content, to turn it into book gold, to turn it into chalkboard gold . . .He will not answer to the charges, and his minions online like to defend him. . . .

You can — and certainly should — read the whole thing.

 

PREVIOUSLY:

 


#Metaphor: Academics Sign Their Own Death Warrants by Defending Loomis

Posted on Comments

Professor Erik “Head on a Stick” Loomis has established a new precedent in Online Civil Discourse: Any epithet-strewn obscene rant full of violent language against political opponents is acceptable, as long as you explain that it is a Metaphor Right-Wing Morons Can’t Understand.

We thank our enlightened progressive overlords for this blessing.

It has furthermore been established that if you are engaged in metaphor, and sympathizers of your political opponent quote you in such a way as to suggest that your sentiments are deranged, menacing and offensive, this is a “witch hunt,” and anyone who calls attention to this is “orchestrating a campaign” against the user of metaphor.

Such is the essential syllogism of “Statement on Erik Loomis“:

[W]e must stand by Loomis’s side and speak up and out on his behalf, for he has become the target of a witch hunt, and as an untenured professor at the University of Rhode Island, he is vulnerable. Loomis needs our solidarity and support, and we must give it to him. . . .
Glenn Reynolds is now accusing Loomis of using “eliminationist rhetoric.”
Other conservative voices have joined in. The Daily Caller says Loomis “unleashed a flurry of profanity-ridden tweets demanding death for National Rifle Association executive Wayne LaPierre.” Townhall put Loomis’s tweets in the context of NRA members and leaders getting death threats. And just this morning, Michelle Malkin wrote at National Review Online [a column critical of Loomis] . . .
We do not expect any better of the orchestrators of this campaign—this is what they have done for many years, and doubtless will be doing for years to come. We do expect better of university administrators. Rather than standing behind a member of their faculty, the administration has sought to distance the university from Loomis. . . .

In other words, if Professor Wobbly-Gay-Lumberjack Dissertation fails to gain tenure at the University of Rhode Island, the haters win, and the academic right to use fucking bloody hate speech metaphor in Online Civil Discourse will be destroyed.

(Damn it, why did Ace of Spades have to take a vacation this week? How can this douchebag not receive the full-on AOSHQ treatment?)

Nevertheless, in order to show “our solidarity and support” for the unalienable right to employ violent obscene rants metaphor in Online Civil Discourse (and still get tenure at the University of Rhode Island), I will list the signatories to the “Statement on Erik Loomis“:

  1. Chris Bertram, University of Bristol
  2. Michael Bérubé, The Pennsylvania State University
  3. Henry Farrell, George Washington University
  4. Kieran Healy, Duke University
  5. Jon Mandle, SUNY Albany
  6. John Quiggin, University of Queensland
  7. Corey Robin, Brooklyn College
  8. Brian Weatherson, University of Michigan

Perhaps readers can offer appropriate suggestions for what should be done to these subversive Bolshevik intestinal parasites metaphors!

UPDATE: I’ll have to provide the dog-whistle translation for Professor William Jacobson’s eliminationist rhetoric here:

I don’t think Loomis should be fired

Instead, he should be castrated with pruning shears

but that doesn’t mean he should be free from criticism.

And by “criticism,” I mean “Birther lynch mob rage”

And he certainly is not a hero of anything.

Except to the Marxist traitors who voted for the Kenyan usurper!

He’s just a guy who

should have his eyes gouged out with rusty nails because he

wanted to deprive others of the rights he claims for himself.

Right-wing morons don’t understand metaphor, but our ears perk up quick when we hear that secret lynch-mob dog-whistle.





 

PREVIOUSLY:


‘Through a Plate Glass Window’: How Liberal Media De-Legitimize Dissent

Posted on Comments

Patterico did a post yesterday about the “Accuse the Accusers” strategy that I meant to link and discuss at length, but I didn’t get around to it because new outrages were piling up quicker than I could keep track. In just the past couple of days:

  1. Stephen Crowder got sucker-punched in the head by Michigan union goon Tony Camargo;
  2. Hot dog vendor Clint Tarver was called the “n-word” when the Americans for Prosperity tent in Lansing was attacked by allies of the same goons who punched Crowder; and
  3. The son of Virginia Democrat Rep. Jim Moran pleaded guilty to an assault charge after police say Patrick Moran broke his girlfriend’s nose and fractured her skull during an argument outside a D.C. bar.

Perhaps you see a pattern here: Democrats and their political allies engaging in thuggish violence which no one could possibly defend or endorse. And in each case, liberals used a variation of the same distracting “Accuse the Accusers” defense: Whatever wrong was done by Democrats was minimized or dismissed as irrelevant in comparison to some greater wrong that liberals alleged had been done by the conservatives involved in calling attention to these incidents.

Call it “Wheelerization,” in tribute to the way Marcy Wheeler deliberately smeared Crowder as having somehow faked his own beating, simply because . . . well, James O’Keefe! Breitbart!

This magic incantation automatically de-legitimizes any story. Also, “selective editing,” as if there is such a thing as non-selective editing.

Today, the Left decided that Patrick Moran’s brutality toward his girlfriend was not a legitimate story because . . . Ace of Spades!

Leftwing Blogs Discover The Real Culprit
Behind Pat Moran’s Woman-Beating: Me

This Wheelerization of the Moran story was expertly performed by the ridiculous Tommy Christopher:

It’s a horrible story that highlights an important, serious issue, but shortly after the news was reported, Michelle Malkin‘s Twitter repository, Twitchy.com, had decided that the real villains were Rachel Maddow, Sandra Fluke, the media, Rep. Moran, and, somehow, me, while using Ms. Hoffman’s injuries as inspiration for pop-culture riffs. . . .
Finally, the folks at Twitchy chose to highlight a series of tweets that featured domestic violence-related riffs on Meadowlark Lemon, Star Wars, and even the headline from one of my columns.

Seriously, notice how this works: The story is not about the heinous brutality of Patrick Moran or the preposterously lenient sentence handed down to the son of a Democrat congressman (who, of course, has his own lengthy history of brutality). Nor is the story about the hypocrisy of liberals who routinely ignore or excuse such misconduct by Democrats while simultaneously accusing Republicans of being anti-woman.

Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment.

Because the story can never be about the wrong done by Democrats, when Democrats do wrong, the media need some excuse to ignore it, or some pretext to make Republicans the bad guys: “Ken Starr is on a witch hunt! Everybody lies about sex! McCarthyism!”

And, unfortunately, Fox News functions as a foil for this tactic: As soon as Media Matters, Crooks & Liars, Firedoglake, DailyKos and others in the merry band of disinformation blogs find some connection between a story and Fox News — “Crowder and Malkin are both hired stooges of the Murdoch empire!” — then no journalist at CBS, NBC, ABC or the New York Times can possibly treat the story as serious and important, or else his inbox/Twitter feed will blow up with angry messages accusing him of betraying the cause by repeating right-wing lies.

Did I ever mention that studies have shown journalists vote Democrat by margins of at least 7-to-1? And that most reporters, editors and producers are therefore emotionally predisposed to tell stories that favor Democrats and avoid stories that favor Republicans?

This is why, in the Patrick Moran case as in so many other cases, the Left endeavors to distract from the facts of the story by focusing on the political orientation of those telling the story: “Twitchy is run by Malkin and Malkin works for Fox — not a legitimate story!”

Also, Twitchy quoted Tweets by Ace of Spades in which he made sarcastic reference to Tommy Christopher, and therefore Tommy’s a victim, because conservatives hate Legtimate Journalists.

Logic so sharp it could split atoms.

We are watching the Spencer Ackerman idea of smashing conservatives “through a plate glass window” — never mind the truth, just win.

This brute-force approach to Narrative Management is astonishingly successful. Allahpundit is in such a fugue of despair about it that he has resorted to linking me to prove his case:

If you’re a reporter and you’re taking conservatives seriously, you’re doing it wrong. [Chris] Matthews goes so far as to identify Romney’s utterly benign aside in the second debate about “binders full of women” as one of the reasons the media should move, en masse, even further to the left. That’s not a serious critique; it’s a fig leaf of outrage designed to apply pressure towards the desired political outcome. And it works.

You should read the whole thing because, after all, it’s not every day year I get linked by Allahpundit. Meanwhile, returning to the original model of Wheelerization, Patterico recounts this colloquy:

Wheeler: You said Crowder shouldn’t report the assault!
Me: Except I didn’t say that. Prove I did!
Wheeler: Incredible that an ADA doesn’t think crimes should be reported!
Me: Except I didn’t say that. Prove I did!
Wheeler: Wow. I think I’ll tell your boss that you don’t believe in reporting crimes.
Me: Except I didn’t say that. Prove I did.
Wheeler: Sheesh. A law enforcement officer saying crimes shouldn’t be reported. Can you believe it?
Me: Except I didn’t say that. Prove I did.
Wheeler: Looks like it’s time to ask your boss why their ADA thinks crimes should not be reported.
Me: Except I didn’t say that. Prove I did.
Wheeler: [more of the same, ad infinitum]

Marcy Wheeler’s narrative involved the argument that Crowder should have filed an assault charge against his attacker before reporting it as news, and she got it in her mind — an idée fixe — that Patterico had somehow discouraged Crowder from filing charges. Because he is by trade a prosecuting attorney, it might somehow be construed as wrongful for him to be “saying crimes shouldn’t be reported,” and so Wheeler began repeating this allegation as if the repetition proved it was true, and as if Patterico had an obligation to prove himself innocent.

“Accuse the accusers,” see?

As for Marcy Wheeler’s absurd claim, let me offer this example: Hunter S. Thompson was once brutally stomped by the Hell’s Angels, and never reported it to the police. Thompson was a journalist writing a book about the Hell’s Angels, and it might not have been altogether ethical for him to be trying to put several of them in jail for assault as a complainant while he was also being paid to tell their story.

And let’s face it, Thompson was on shaky ground from a legal standpoint, because he witnessed a good deal of other criminal behavior by the Angels that he never bothered reporting to police.

The story you’re covering is more important than whatever hassles you suffer as a consequence, and if those hassles involve getting your head bashed in — well, hey, that’s part of the coverage, too. In that sense, Crowder’s big day in Lansing was totally gonzo.

Speaking of hassles and important gonzo stories, I was intrigued yesterday by that Pastebin file in which Ron Brynaert mentioned Marcy Wheeler in connection with Neal Rauhauser and Patterico and SWATting and the Anthony Weiner scandal. Just happened to find that when, on a crazy hunch, I Googled “Marcy + Wheeler + Rauhauser.”

Maybe just a coincidence. Maybe not.




 


Naked Celebrity News Update (Or, the Parable of the Prodigal Upskirt)

Posted on Comments

Because I’m trying not to offend the Pope — he’s on Twitter now, and I’m still hoping to get a “Follow Friday” shout-out — I resisted the temptation to headline this item “Anne Hathaway Upskirt,” although I decided it wouldn’t hurt to use that as the URL. It seems that at this week’s premiere of Les Misérables, Anne accidentally displayed for paparazzi what the New York Daily News calls “the Full Hathaway”:

“I was getting out of the car and my dress was so tight that I didn’t realize it until I saw all the photographers’ flashes,” she told Vanity Fair writer Ingrid Sischy.
“It was devastating. They saw everything. I might as well have lifted up my skirt for them.”

If this incident was important enough to be reported by the New York Daily News, why shouldn’t a Hayekian public intellectual notice it? Meanwhile, in important news from the tech sector, Google has made it somewhat more difficult to search for porn photos, including the suddenly popular “Anne Hathaway Upskirt” photo. (No, that link won’t show it. I’m just linking back to this post to Google-bomb myself.)

Here’s my thought: Guys are going to be searching for that photo anyway, and why shouldn’t some percentage of that traffic lead to my site, where maybe these sick freaks will be inspired to feel some twinge of regret for wanting to see what Anne Hathaway’s naughty parts look like.

Because the Pope’s on Twitter now, guys, and don’t you feel ashamed that you have nothing better to do with your pathetic lives than to Google “Anne Hathaway Upskirt” photo? Continue reading Naked Celebrity News Update (Or, the Parable of the Prodigal Upskirt) →

Why Does the IRS Hate Redheaded Celebrities With Large Breasts?

Posted on Comments

Stop the hate!

Add an IRS seizure to the problems taxing Lindsay Lohan.
Uncle Sam has taken control of all of the “Liz & Dick” star’s bank accounts in an effort to recover $233,904 in unpaid taxes from 2009 and [2010] and an unspecified amount from 2011, TMZ.com first reported.

Well, what’s a young celebrity damsel in distress to do? Have no fear — Hef and Charlie to the rescue!

The 26-year-old Hollywood star has already been helped out by her friend Charlie Sheen, who gave her $100,000 to help her get back on track with her finances, but sources tell website TMZ she’s still falling dramatically short, as she also owes money for 2011.
Lindsay has spent most of this year trying to get her career back on track, and after filming roles in TV movie Liz and Dick and The Canyons as well as stripping off naked for a Playboy photo shoot, she is set to earn more than $2 million by the end of this year.

Such chivalrous gentlemen they are. Now that the IRS has begun cracking down on redheaded celebrities, it’s probably just a matter of time before they go after Christina Hendricks.

Kim Kardashian, Alanis Morissette and the Creepiest Pop Trivia Fact Ever

Posted on Comments

Kim Kardashian went to Bahrain to open a milkshake shop and police used tear gas to disperse a mob of Islamic extremists, one of whom held up a sign proclaiming “‘none of our customs and traditions allow us to receive stars of porn movies.”

Meanwhile, singer Alanis Morissette arrived in Israel for a concert in Tel Aviv, which sparked calls for a boycott from anti-Israel protesters.

On the subject of Alanis Morissette, Ben Howe informs us:

So I Googled it, and it’s true: When Morissette was a young singer in Hollywood, she dated Coulier, who is 15 years her senior and who was then starring as goofy “Uncle Joey” Gladstone on the family sitcom, Full House. And, yes, it seems her infamously angry song was about him:

When he first heard the song, “I said, ‘Wow, this girl is angry,’ “ he recalled. “And then I said, ‘Oh man, I think it’s Alanis.’ … I listened to the song over and over again, and I said, ‘I think I have really hurt this person.’ “

Let me remind you of a few choice lyrics from “You Oughta Know”:

An older version of me.
Is she perverted like me?
Would she go down on you in a theater? . . .
It was a slap in the face,
How quickly I was replaced.
Are you thinking of me when you f–k her? . . .
And every time I scratch my nails
Down someone else’s back, I hope you feel it.

Ouch. And she wrote that about the loveable clown from the wholesome TV comedy who did those silly Bullwinkle voices. Creepy.

 

I haven’t been this creeped out since I saw Mary-Kate Olsen’s boyfriend.

Capitalization and Heteronormativity?

Posted on Comments

There’s probably no connection. On the other hand, maybe my insistence on proper spelling, punctuation and grammar — even in such informal contexts as Twitter and text-messaging — is evidence of a traditionalist predisposition. And then there is the transgressive stance:

While it would be politically incorrect to be judgmental about some things, I do not accept bad grammar as an “alternative lifestyle.”

Mary-Kate Olsen’s French Boyfriend

Posted on Comments

Say hello to Olivier Sarkozy, half-brother of former French president Nicolas Sarkozy and managing director of the Carlyle Group’s global financial services division. He’s 42 and Mary-Kate is 26, so they’re both adults but . . .

Well, there’s just something very wrong with this picture, isn’t there?

This photo of the two lovebirds publicly cudding at a New York Knicks basketball game was No. 6 on Buzzfeed’s list of “Top 7 Creepiest Pictures Of Mary-Kate And Her Boyfriend” and No. 1 is extra-creepy, but perhaps not quite as creepy as the photo People magazine published of Mary-Kate strolling with Sarkozy and his daughter.

It has been reported that the couple are “head over heels” in love and Mary-Kate — who, with her twin sister Ashley, has a $1.5 billion fashion empire — told the Wall Street Journal about their relationship: “Everyone has an  opinion. . . . I find it’s better to focus on what’s in front of you  and to keep putting one foot in front of the other.”

“Grotesque” is the word Sarkozy’s ex-wife Charlotte used. Why didn’t the Doug Hutchison-Courtney Stodden marriage creep me out this bad?