Likelihood of Success

Ron Coleman’s pretty good blog

Archive for the ‘Medialites’ Category

Fool’s gold

Posted by Ron Coleman on March 4, 2009

Why is the never-ending campaign of President Obama elevating Rush Limbaugh’s profile?

Top Democrats believe they have struck political gold by depicting Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the Republican Party, a full-scale effort first hatched by some of the most familiar names in politics and now being guided in part from inside the White House.

The strategy took shape after Democratic strategists Stanley Greenberg and James Carville included Limbaugh’s name in an October poll and learned their longtime tormentor was deeply unpopular with many Americans, especially younger voters. Then the conservative talk-radio host emerged as an unapologetic critic of Barack Obama shortly before his inauguration, when even many Republicans were showering him with praise.

October?

Gee, has anything changed for Barack Obama, and that praise shower, since… October?

Somethings changed

Something's changed


UPDATE: Still looking golden?

Posted in Medialites, Politics and Poker, Stragety | 13 Comments »

The coronation

Posted by Ron Coleman on February 24, 2009

That’s right:  We’re coronating the hitherto unknown M.A. Lamascoloas as i-knight-theepundit king for this gem sent to Glenn Reynolds in response to Insty’s observation that, gee, whaddya know, Chris Matthews is having his doubts about the Black JFK — about six months too late:

Matthews has himself to blame. I want Obama to succeed. I want our country to succeed. I disagree with 85% of Obama’s positions, but I want him and our country to succeed. He can’t do that if he hasn’t been tested. One of the best tests is a campaign. But he didn’t have one of those, he had a coronation. Matthews and his colleagues across the media let our country down. They gave Obama no vetting whatsoever. Now Matthews wants to complain? It’s a little late for that.

How knavish to say such a thing!  Of royalty you have no share; you are no knight, nor gentleman nor decent commoner.

Off with your head, M.A.!

Posted in Medialites, Narcissus Rex, Past is prologue, Politics and Poker | 2 Comments »

Buchanan Ingersoll, Above the Law and the art of contemptible doublespeak

Posted by Ron Coleman on February 23, 2009

The Right Staff is Key

The Right Staff is Key

I have to excerpt almost this entire posting from Above the Law, because you have to read it to believe it.  This might just make a good comment at the blog, but unfortunately the comments section at ATL — which is still, in many respects, a remarkable thing, as David Lat himself will always be — is not a respectable place to be found.  So, check this out.

Back in November, Buchanan, Ingersoll & Rooney cut 15 to 25 staffers (though the firm declined to call them “layoffs”). Last week, it appears that the firm made additional cuts to its staff — and this time the firm is being clear about what is going on. Buchanan’s executive director Nolan Kurtz told Above the Law:

The firm eliminated about 25 to 30 administrative operations positions last week. Given the overall economic climate, we believe that it’s more important than ever to ensure that we have the right staffing in place firmwide.

The firm also announced the news directly to associates, on Friday. According to a tipster:

[Buchanan Ingersoll] announced Friday another round of cuts after several Harrisburg corp. and Philadelphia IP lawyers resigned…. Kurtz Buchanan told the [attorneys] that laying off staff was not because of the economy but good planning.

Will attorneys soon follow staffers into unemployment? Maybe. . .

Kurtz’s statement to ATL was far more diplomatic than our tipsters’ reports:

[W]e are also in the final stages of our annual attorney review period, which looks at work load, pro bono commitment, skill set and the overall needs of the firm. Much like any other firm or business, we continually review our personnel to ensure we have the best lawyers with the right skills and experience to deliver results for our clients.

We’ll let you know if the guillotine falls on Buchanan attorneys.

Good luck to former Buchanan Ingersoll staff.

No, really.  That is the entire journalistic commentary.  It could very well be that it has reached the point that ATL writers are utterly jaded, hopeless, and frazzled by the whole thing.

But I’m not.

Let’s take official statement number one:

The firm eliminated about 25 to 30 administrative operations positions last week. Given the overall economic climate, we believe that it’s more important than ever to ensure that we have the right staffing in place firmwide.

“The right staffing”?   Let’s get this straight:  In the previous economic climate, did Buchanan Ingersoll believe it needed to ensure that it had the “wrong staffing in place firmwide”?  Or only in certain cities?

Have you ever seen such a cynical, dishonest characterization of layoffs?  It’s not even “right-sizing” — which acknowledges, “We want to be the right size for now.  Last year’s right size is no longer right”  Rather, this is, “The right staffing needs be in place” — as if not only were this a qualitative change — no, a qualitative improvement! — but that the “staffing” of before… in other words, the staff, the people who worked on the staff, who supported their families by being Buchanan Ingersoll staff members — was, now that we can see clearly… WRONG.  It was the WRONG STAFF.  Ing.

Above the Law calls this “being clear about what is going on.”

That’s the first one.  Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Americana, Lex scripta, Medialites, Style | Leave a Comment »

Me on TV!

Posted by Ron Coleman on February 17, 2009

video-call-snapshot-1

Not really. It’s Pajamas Media TV. Not the same thing.

But it looks the same on your computer!

I think we’re getting better at this. Here, take a look.

OK, back to work now.  This stuff doesn’t pay.

Posted in Blogophilia, Medialites, Narcissus Rex | 2 Comments »

Through a glass, darkly

Posted by Ron Coleman on February 14, 2009

Instapundit:

TRANSPARENCY: An “Off-the-Record speech” at the National Press Club? It’s a tribute to Dr. Strangelove: “You can’t do reporting here! This is the press club!”

Well, I followed the link and I was pretty confused.  Isn’t the National Press Club’s most famous event — the Gridiron Dinner — famously “off the record,” at least “on the record”? [“Reporting” fail!  Ironic, yeah.  See comments. — RDC]  What’s the big deal here?  I eventually figured it out, though, and the below is a comment I left at the linked-to story at the Knoxville News Sentinel.

I wish the blog reporting on this issue were a little more clear here, actually. Lots of events involving reporters and people involved in media are off the record, including events of the National Press Club. So the way this was reported, and the comments here, don’t really add up. There’s nothing inherently offensive about that; in fact, a lot of good can come from people being able to talk off the record from time to time.

This really is a story, however, and it really is a problem — although you wouldn’t know it to read this item, or Instapundit’s. Here’s an excerpt from Donna Leinwand letter that, first, sets up the procedural issue:

As you know, the National Press Club is hosting but not sponsoring this event. Georgetown University’s School of Continuing Studies is renting a room at the Club for the conference. As such, it is the prerogative of Georgetown, Mr. Plouffe and your bureau to impose whatever ground rules you prefer for his remarks.

Right. It’s their ball. She goes on in her letter to complain, along the lines of commenters here, about the hypocrisy, etc., which is all well and good. It’s true, but it’s dog bites man, you know? But to my mind, the pointy edge of this story is this:

Plouffe, who has been on the speaking circuit promoting his forthcoming book, “The Audacity to Win”, was the keynote speaker on Thursday at a public policy luncheon sponsored by Georgetown University and Politico. Every event at the two-day program had been promoted as open to media coverage, but Georgetown on Wednesday told media representatives that Plouffe’s speech would be off the record.

Both quotes are from here.

Now you can understand the problem. It was a bait and switch whereby not only attendees but even sponsors were told, a day before the speech and after people had taken the trouble to set up the event, promote it, get access to it, travel to it, etc., that no less than the keynote speaker himself was changing the ground rules. That’s dirty pool, and that is what elevates this story from more media- enabled media-evasion (for is this administration not to be a replay of Camelot, without of course the unhappy ending?) to a particularly cynical and nasty show of arrogance.

Posted in Medialites, Politics and Poker | 2 Comments »

It’s good to be the King of All Media

Posted by Ron Coleman on February 11, 2009

Howard Stern made hundreds of millions of dollars to “legitimize” Sirius satellite radio.  If you ever wondered how such numbers could be justified as a business matter, well, guess what — they couldn’t.  At least not with that business’s own money:

Sirius XM, which never turned a profit when both companies were independent, is laden with $3.25 billion in debt. Its business model has been dependent, in part, on the ability to roll over its enormous debts — used to finance sending satellites into space and attract talent like Mr. Stern (who was paid $100 million a year) — at low rates for the foreseeable future until it could turn a profit. . . .

Sirius XM owes about $175 million in debt payments at the end of February that it is unlikely to be able to pay.

$100 million for Stern.  Of course that can’t be justified, unless the only risk being taken is taken by someone else. Like a bank.

And, of course, that bank isn’t really risking all that much. If it fails, or threatens to, why Uncle Sam will just bail it out, right?

Guess who’s $100 million that ends up being?

UPDATE:  “I remember my dad looking at the stocks a few years ago and saying that Sirius’s only viable business plan was to be bought by XM, and XM’s only viable business plan was to hope for some kind of miracle.”

Posted in Gelt, Medialites | 3 Comments »

Obama versus the press?

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 23, 2009

Not really.  That’s what I’m supposed to write, right?  Based on this little gem of a story:

President Obama made a surprise visit to the White House press corps Thursday night, but got agitated when he was faced with a substantive question.

Asked how he could reconcile a strict ban on lobbyists in his administration with a Deputy Defense Secretary nominee who lobbied for Raytheon, Obama interrupted with a knowing smile on his face.

“Ahh, see,” he said, “I came down here to visit. See this is what happens. I can’t end up visiting with you guys and shaking hands if I’m going to get grilled every time I come down here.”

Pressed further by the Politico reporter about his Pentagon nominee, William J. Lynn III, Obama turned more serious, putting his hand on the reporter’s shoulder and staring him in the eye.

“Alright, come on” he said, with obvious irritation in his voice. “We will be having a press conference at which time you can feel free to [ask] questions. Right now, I just wanted to say hello and introduce myself to you guys – that’s all I was trying to do.”

So because I’m a conservative I’m supposed to jump on this, right?  “Ah the honeymoon’s over!  Let’s see how the Chosen One handles the real spotlight, eh!”

I’m with Obama on this.  If this had been my guy, I know I’d be saying, “Give ’em hell!  Screw those self-appointed wiseguys!”  That’s what we’d say every time the Gipper pretended not to hear the loaded questions Sam Donaldson would shout out at him.  Why is this different — because it’s more sincere?

Not every moment in life has to be political, contentious, adversarial.  Not every reaction has to be spun.

He’ll have to answer the question.  It’s a fair one.

But he hasn’t even been on the job two full days.  Can’t he find his way to the water cooler before he has to start with the gotchas?

Can’t we have a little just plain humanity, just a little bit?

Posted in Medialites, Politics and Poker | 1 Comment »

We’re from the press and we’re here to help

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 11, 2009

The  International Herald Tribune promises us it’s only telling us the top-secret stuff about Israeli – U.S. exchanges about Iran’s nuclear program that it thinks it’s okay to reveal:

Several details of the covert effort have been omitted from this account, at the request of senior United States intelligence and administration officials, to avoid harming continuing operations.

Good to know.

I suppose it’s better than some possible alternatives — at least they acknowledge there could be a defensible interest in not undermining the good guys.  And that there still could be such a thing as good guys.

Posted in Medialites, Orient | Leave a Comment »

Dear John

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 3, 2009

Instapundit:

It’s interesting to me that we see far more anger from Old Media folks aimed at bloggers, etc., than at Craigslist, even though Craigslist has done far more economic harm to the newspaper industry than bloggers, who probably add eyeballs rather than (as Craigslist does) subtracting them.

Very interesting indeed.  Craigslist hasn’t only destroyed conventional classified advertising, which was inevitable — a more natural use of the Internet is hardly conceivable.  It’s probably really done in giveaway papers such as the Village Voice, whose recent layoffs of franchise players indicate nothing so much as the classic death spiral, that lived above all on (increasingly politically incorrect anyway) backpage ads for sleazy “exotic” services.  These supposedly generated $80,000 a month for the Voice in the good times.

For such outfits, the highly publicized “crackdown” at Craigslist is too little, too late.  Too bad.

Posted in Gelt, Medialites, O Mores! | Leave a Comment »

Gored oxen, oxen and Gores

Posted by Ron Coleman on December 21, 2008

Instapundit:

The real question, given the way the press covered for John Edwards, Barack Obama, et al. is whether the press would cover a Watergate if it happened under a Democratic administration.

They would.  Have we forgotten Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky?  The Clintons felt from almost Day One that the press was their bitter enemy, but with Monicagate the dogs were loosed.  While overall, cultural elites swooned over Clinton — churning out several thinly-disguised valentines in Hollywood, naming him (how embarrassing now!) our First Black President, and of course running down the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy when the time came for that — “the press,” which we now call the mainstream press , went in for the kill once their cheese was moved by Matt Drudge.

Media on media on media

Media on media on media

It’s not a paradox.  The MSM will never forgive a Republican for being elected to audience, and will pull out the stops to do everything they can to insure that it doesn’t happen again.  Democrats do get a honeymoon, and no matter how badly received their efforts are they will always receive, for example, the endorsement of the New York Times — as bad as they are, after all, they’re not Republicans.

But within that limiting principle, their ambition, especially when Election Day is close by in the rear view mirror, overrides their loyalty to the individual.  After all, if you bring down Bill Clinton, what do you get?  A Pulitzer, editorial tenure for life, book contracts and hefty speaking fees — and, hey, President Al Gore.

What’s not to like?

Posted in Medialites, Politics and Poker | 4 Comments »