(via Brian Ledbetter at Snapped Shot)
Here is the story of the glorious resistance of the Palestinian people. Headshots courtesy of Reuters and the AP:
(updated with links)
(updated with yet another link)
I meant to post this mash note yesterday, after I read two or three outstanding posts on Eat the Press, about which more later. Then I forgot.***
This is the best disclosure statement I’ve ever read (preceded by the necessary setup):
NB: [new Village Voice film editor Allison] Benedikt moved [to New York] this summer with her husband, Radar senior writer John Cook. For those who may wonder, Benedikt is a graduate of the University of Michigan. Requisite disclaimer: I wrote this month’s Voice cover story on Saturday Night Live; Voice editor-in-chief David Blum is a HuffPo contributor, as is Reeler founder Stu VanAirsdale; I have a jolly email relationship with Cook and have warmly corresponded with Benedikt. But, I hate movies.
Reading it today reminded me why I wanted to post my valentine to Eat the Press yesterday. It’s got the best selection of stories (across a broad range of subjects, from very serious to deeply unserious but seriously amusing); the sharpest eye for inconsistencies in words and deeds; great headlines; and pretty serious, non-partisan criticism (as in analysis) of the media.
For example, there was this excellent piece—”The New Most Dangerous Man in Iraq“–a critique of Newsweek’s recent breathless storytelling-style framing: two weeks ago Abu Daraa was the “bogey man”; now it’s al-Sadr. [emphasis in original]
This would be a great time to look back at those Zarqawi questions and take a gestalt look at the cycle of violence in Iraq but instead Newsweek just focuses on a one-man enemy in a country where clearly there is a whole lot more to the problem. Again, as stated above I am not disputing that al-Sadr is every bit as dangerous as Newsweek claims (this week), but after the splashy, showy coverage of Zarqawi’s death it seems critical for the news media not to fall into the trap of speculating forward without looking backward.
A final point: This may be criticism but it goes hand in hand with appreciation for Newsweek’s correspondents and all the other media outlets who have reporters over there getting these stories (take a look at the list of contributors at the bottom of the story from Baghdad to Amman to Beirut to Cape Town) — we depend on then for this information, and are appreciative of what it’s costing to get it. But it’s precisely because we’re depending on them for the information that it’s so important that they provide it with context. Otherwise we’re depending on Tony Snow. And that’s probably not ideal, either.
I couldn’t agree more, because context is everything.
Bravo, Rachel Sklar, for underscoring this point. [I'm assuming this was written by Rachel Sklar. My one quibble with ETP is that we don't know who writes of the unsigned pieces. Am I missing something?]
This Borat story is good, too.
There are two interesting issues raised by the LAT’s article on how the Borat lawsuits will affect the Bruno movies. One is how the Borat lawsuits will affect the Bruno movies. The other is how the LAT misleadingly titles some of its articles. …
Interesting questions, but all hypothetical, as the LAT itself confirms: “Universal declined to comment for this story, but studio officials have indicated they plan to move forward with “Bruno.” Yet they still stated that Borat “could mar” the deal. This implies that the deal is in danger, a suggestion which is wholly unsupported by the facts in the article.
By the way, the long knives are out for Sacha Baron Cohen. Most amusing is Joe Queenan’s rage on behalf of all the Americans Baron Cohen supposedly attacked in his film—particularly those Americans in Queenan’s crowd:
Similarly, most of the people who have made Borat such a monstrous hit were young men. But eventually the women will be heard from, and a lot of them will not be fawning Baron Cohen groupies. To the women I know, when you ridicule redneck racists, you are a hero. But when you go out of your way to humiliate middle-aged feminists and harmless socialites and hapless hotel employees and office workers on their lunch breaks, and use plump black women as a running sight gag, you expose yourself not as an iconoclastic wit, but as a pig.
And here’s George Saunders in the New Yorker:
Dear Ken:
Got your note, deeply honored. Being new to the company, really appreciate opportunity to outline some ideas for “Borat” DVD. As Josh mentioned, we do indeed have a wealth of footage that could be put to good use as DVD extras. In other cases, have taken liberty of suggesting some reshoots:
OPENING “VILLAGE” SECTION: How about a high-speed montage of the actual difficult, brutal lives of the villagers in Romania—the hours of debilitating toil, their oppression at the hands of their corrupt government, premature loss of teeth, death of infants, etc., etc.—culminating in a panning shot of the village on the morning of the day when they first realize they’ve been had, and that, as far as posterity goes, they will always be remembered, if remembered at all, as savages, rapists, prostitutes, etc., and they stumble out of their little sheds or whatever, looking traumatized? (Would be good if one or two could fall into depression/commit suicide as a result = confirmation of their “subhuman” status? Rich social commentary.)
——
*** I forgot because since I lost access to my Furl archive, I’ve been going crazy trying to figure out where to store items I might want to post about. I’ve got bookmarks scattered all over the place. Aaaaargh.
Everybody’s blaming the Jews anyway—why not Sudan’s “leader”?
Sudan’s President Field Marshal Omar Hassan Ahmed al-Bashir claimed Tuesday that reports in western newspapers of hundreds of thousands dead in his country’s brutal civil war are all part of an Israeli-led worldwide conspiracy. …
In statements that appeared to be more in keeping with 1920s anti-Semitism than statesmanship, Field Marshal al-Bashir added that Israeli influence was at the center of the conflict, and all the world’s disputes.
Not very effective, those Jews. Despite their best efforts, they only managed to get 9,000—not 400,000, as reported by the world press—killed in Darfur.
Read the rest of his appalling lies here.
In the Washington Post, Anthony Shadid writes about a poignant, ironic ad campaign in Beirut that was born of the chaotic political/social/confessional/economic climate in beleaguered Lebanon—which one of the campaign’s creators called “a country on the verge of ‘absurdistan.’”
Here’s one of the posters:
 Farcical signs list doctors by sect. “If we keep thinking like this, the future is going to look like this,” said ad agency’s Kamil Kuran. |
| |
| Photo Credit: Courtesy H& C Leo Burnett Agency |
It was born out of fear:
Manal Naji, a 27-year-old senior art director, had glanced at a r?sum? tucked underneath another piece of paper. “Christian,” it read. “We were so shocked,” she recalled. In the end, it turned out it was the name of the applicant’s father, but it gave Naji an idea. “What if it actually existed,” she said. “What if it reached the point of putting it on your job application.”
“We wanted the same shocking effect,” added Reem Kotob, a 25-year-old member of the creative team.
And now it has gotten people to think.
Many have praised the ads for asking uncomfortable, even taboo questions about a system in which sectarian affiliation determines everything from the identity of the president to loyalty to sports teams. Some have mistaken the campaign for reality. Across the capital, one in six billboards was torn down, prevented from being put up or splashed with paint, usually the tactic of choice for conservative Muslims irked by lingerie ads.
