It’s read and it’s viewed. But it needs watching.
*Susan Eisenhower, granddaughter of the former president, in the documentary film “Why We Fight”: “On a least one occasion (President) Eisenhower was heard to say by those in the room, ‘God help this country when somebody sits at this desk who doesn’t know as much about the military as I do.'”
*Bear Bryant, the late, legendary Alabama football coach, when asked to contribute $10 to help bury a down-and-out, deceased sports writer: “Here’s $20. Bury two.”
When Tampa Tribune Managing Editor Duke Maas was asked by a deputy editor how he felt about having “damn” and “s—” in a given story in the next day’s paper, he was properly taken aback. In fact, it would have been understandable had he used one or both of the potentially offending words to express that very surprise.
But then he heard the context, one that we’re all familiar with by now.
In an unguarded moment, President Bush had engaged in some candid, open-microphone guy-talk with British Prime Minister Tony Blair at the Group of Eight summit in Russia. His saltiest observation was: “See, the irony is that what they (U.N.) need to do is get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this s—, and it’s over.”
This isn’t stop-the-presses stuff. We all know Syria (and Iran) are Hezbollah supporters and suppliers; we all know that President Bush has a rhetorically earthy side; and we all know his frustration wasn’t based on Syria getting Hezbollah to stop doing this, uh, soup. But it is a teachable moment.
Mainstream daily newspapers – as opposed to, say, alternative weeklies – don’t usually run expletives. The St. Petersburg Times , for example, ran the controversial Bush quote as “
When you only have one screen, as is the case with Tampa Theatre, you can’t afford many – maybe any – misses. Most movies go a week, maybe two. Rarely more. Among the exceptions: “Capote,” “March of the Penguins” and “Brokeback Mountain.” Now add “The Lost City,” the film based on the work of the late novelist Guillermo Cabrera Infante that nostalgically chronicles the end of an era in Havana.
It recently completed a three-week-plus run.
As a market with strong Cuban roots, it was thought that “The Lost City” could draw well here, explained Tara Schroeder, Tampa Theatre’s community relations manager. Local Hispanic media and the Cuban Club helped get the word out. And actor-director-co-producer Andy Garcia agreed to do print and radio interviews with local Tampa media.
The first weekend’s gross was $14,300, which is roughly four times a good weekend. That kind of box office prompted Tampa Theatre to extend the run.
“We started getting calls and e-mails early on,” says Schroeder. “A lot of people had personal ties. Some came to see it more than once.”
And some lingered long after one Friday showing for an animated “cinema chat” that was equal parts pre-Castro reverie and post-revolution revulsion.
“I was getting teary hearing people’s stories,” recalled Schroeder.
She was not alone.
The case can certainly be made that the “Doonesbury” comic strip has long belonged on the op-ed page. The case gets even stronger when creator Garry Trudeau uses his Sunday comics forum for an otherwise admirable “In Memoriam” salute to U.S. soldiers killed in “Operation Iraqi Freedom.”
The solemn dedication to America’s fallen deserves better than being juxtaposed next to “Blondie” and underneath “Marmaduke.” It just does.
“Doonesbury” is an editorial call. For most newspapers, it continues to be the wrong one.
You don’t have to be a linguistics professor to know that as a “living” entity, language is always subject to change. Hence Latin is a “dead language.”
But a problem arises when language starts to fast forward – not evolve. Notice how accepting mainstream culture has become of pop parlance? I propose a modest moratorium:
*the verbal “sucks” is out — except for t-shirts and tattoos. No further comment.
*”Notoriety” is not the same as fame. Any more than notorious means famous.
*Unless a reference to awe-inspiring is intended, pass on the empty hyperbole that is “awesome” for the most mundane of contexts. “Those (skateboards, boxer shorts, American Idol contestants) are awesome.”
*”Swagger”: Walking around with an air of conceit and insolence used to be rather ill thought of. Now – at least in the athletic arena – it’s a quality seemingly worth courting. As in: “We need our guys to play with more of a ‘swagger.'” Do we really need to up the ante further on boorish, braggadocious behavior?
*”No problem.” Still not the politely correct response to “thank you.” It’s “you’re welcome.” Thank you.
The changing of the White House press secretary guard – Fox News’ smooth Tony Snow for the beleaguered Scott McClellan – underscores the reality of being the president’s point man to the Washington press corps. To be effective, that person has to be a performer – and an insider. McClellan was neither.
Ari Fleischer, McClellan’s predecessor, did it fairly well. He took his lumps, but he was nobody’s piñata. Mike McCurry, one of Bill Clinton’s press secretaries, did it even better.
The job is about more than “briefing.” It’s about having a presence and being able to give as well as you get from the often preening, gotcha crowd always on the prowl for conflict. A disarming wit is a prerequisite for the performance. As is the intuition to know the difference between a self-serving sound bite sure to make the evening news shows – and a red-flag comment sure to cost the administration globally. There’s good reason to assume that everybody who matters is paying attention.
But you can’t be all sizzle and no steak. The press secretary has to be more than just a better jouster. He has to be obviously in command of the facts. That only happens if he’s a player behind the scenes. He can’t just be a flack sent out to stay on rote message.
Especially now, with the president’s poll ratings and credibility tanking to Nixonian depths. Let’s just say that Snow, a proven performer, had some leverage to assure he would be an insider with all the access he needs.
There’s no denying that “Dateline NBC” is getting a lot of May sweeps ratings’ mileage out of its “To Catch a Predator” series. Good for “Dateline.” It set up a sting operation with Perverted-Justice.com volunteers that lures those looking to use cyberspace to seduce kids — and delivers them to police. It makes eye-opening, if disturbing, TV.
The series has become controversial. Has “Dateline” turned into tele-vigilantes? Is its arrangement with Perverted-Justice a form of check-book journalism? Was it reporting the news or making it?
But, candidly, none are the right questions.
The only question that counts is a rhetorical one: Haven’t they performed a societal service by helping to identify and take out of circulation would-be predators?
That’s not to say, however, that “Dateline” hasn’t crossed that journalistic threshold on occasion. In 1993, it was caught staging an explosion to dramatize rear-end collisions in General Motors’ trucks. And as recently as this March it sent a group of Muslim men to a NASCAR event in Virginia to see if that would provoke some fan reaction. Had it, Al Jazeera, not just “Dateline,” would have had quite the coup.
That’s a prime example of trying to “make” – not report – the news. NASCAR officials had a right to be outraged.
Here’s hoping “Dateline” doesn’t get any ethically-challenged ideas about whom to send to see “United 93” – or just hang out in the multiplex lobby afterward.
The hot media question has been: “Will Katie Couric revive the network nightly news?”
The obvious answer: No.
Not even Ed Murrow and Walter Cronkite could rebottle the genie of the internet, 24-7 cable and a demographic that didn’t grow up with the evening news ritual.
What’s truly intriguing, however, is CBS’s announced promise – as part of its Couric-wooing strategy – to significantly beef up its news budget, including a major upgrade of its roster of correspondents. It begs the obvious question: Why did it take Couric-courting to prompt CBS chief executive Leslie Moonves to finally make such a commitment?
It took “perky” to induce that?
Finally, the Deborah Lafave case is over. And aside from Court TV and Marion County Circuit Judge Hale Stancil, everyone seems pretty much satisfied. Or just tired of hearing about it.
Lafave, however, should have quit while she was ahead. She should have passed on the self-serving press conference. She used the forum to prattle on about being happy to be “out of the spotlight” – and then expressed a desire to write a book, one that would ostensibly put sex with a 14-year-old student into a bi-polar context.
Lafave also used the opportunity to criticize a media that “totally took it out of proportion.” She then indicated that with her previous career as a teacher forever precluded, she planned to take online courses in journalism.
Perhaps she will be back in the tabloids some day.
You used to be able to say this about Sean Hannity. He is what he is: a high-profile, conservative commentator. He’s ideologically driven and successfully irks those on the other end of the spectrum. He also runs rings around his liberal foil on the Fox News Show “Hannity & Colmes.”
But what’s this with being Katherine Harris’ personal media conduit? He even plans a campaign bus tour with her in May.
Is part of that $10 million that Harris plans to spend on her Senate campaign going to Hannity? It should. He’s earning it.