Tag Archives: publisher

Apparently Keith Olbermann Is a Fan of NB Publisher Brent Bozell

Lefty blogs have been having a field day with a tweet that showed up on Glenn Beck’s “favorites” list – a list of tweets bookmarked, in a sense, by the user – directing followers to a white supremacist message board. Keith Olbermann picked up on the line of attack last night, crediting a website called “Stop Beck,” which he says noticed the tweet. Stop Beck came as close to stating that Beck was endorsing white supremacy as it possibly could, without actually saying it (“Why is Glenn Beck associating himself with white nationalists and white supremacists?”). Since Olbermann is endorsing the notion that a Twitter “favorite” denotes a positive association, we at NewsBusters must thank him for extending that courtesy to our publisher, MRC President Brent Bozell. This tweet , from @themick1962, showed up at the top of @KeithOlbermann’s favorites  (click the preview at top right for a larger image): “Brent Bozell’s Open Letter to WaPo Ed. Re: JournoList http://bit.ly/cnWvL0 Mandatory reading for ALL media types @KeithOlbermann #p2 #tcot” (h/t Tommy Christopher ). We agree wholeheartedly that Bozell’s open letter should be read by anyone with a vested interest in journalistic fairness and transparency. But we were a bit surprised to see that Olbermann feels the same way, given his usual disdain for NewsBusters, the MRC, and Brent Bozell. We’re glad to see he’s finally coming around. We were also somewhat surprised to see a Twitter user with the following bio appear among Olbermann’s favorites: “Unhyphenated American. Constitutional Originalism. Goldwater Con. Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.” But perhaps we’ve got this all wrong. Maybe Olbermann wishes to qualify the notion that a “favorite” tweet on Twitter represents any sort of endorsement of a political position.

See the original post here:
Apparently Keith Olbermann Is a Fan of NB Publisher Brent Bozell

HuffPo Celebrates ‘Great’ Novels Giving Teens Gay Role Models

Do you know what your teens are reading? The folks at the Huffington Post do, and they’re happy to report the emergence of gay role models in teen-focused literature.  In a July 19 post, contributors Jessie Kunhardt and Alexandra Carr highlighted 13 “great” novels for gay teens who want to explore teen homosexuality or find “fictional role models.” Kunhardt and Carr praised the books as “worth a read” despite many of the books having generated complaints from parents and bans from schools and libraries. The list included brief summaries and, in some cases, excerpts of positive reviews from mainstream publications including Publisher’s Weekly and Booklist. The reviews praised the books for themes like “celebration of human differences,” “be proud of who you are” and “love can lead to acceptance.” One highlighted book, “Kissing Kate,” was written by Lauren Myracle, an author whose “TTYL” series topped the American Library Association’s list of Most Challenged Books in 2009. The books, written in “instant message” format, have been criticized for offensive language and nudity, according to the ALA. Another book, “The Perks of Being a Wallflower” by Stephen Chbosky, was celebrated as a teen literature “classic” by the HuffPo writers. “Perks” was the ALA’s third most-challenged book for its depictions of “homosexuality, sexually explicit, anti-family, offensive language, religious viewpoint, unsuited to age grou, drugs, [and] suicide.” The Huffington Post is a vocal advocate for the mainstreaming of homosexuality through teen literature. Last June, the liberal blog posted an Associated Press article noting that there were “finally” books offering gay role models to teens. And despite the ALA’s list of Most Frequently Challenged Books, the organization has repeatedly shown its approval of the LGBT agenda in children and young adult novels. A report by the Culture and Media Institute found that in 2009 alone, more than 40 pro-gay books were given ALA awards.

NY Times Departing Public Editor Hoyt: We’re Not the Fox News of the Left

Clark Hoyt filed his last column as the New York Times’s Public Editor: ” A Final  Report From Internal Affairs, ” praising the cooperation of Times reporters and editors during his term and fending off accusations that the paper is a “liberal rag.” Hoyt admitted the editorial page and columnists are liberal and that the paper “shares the prevailing sensibilities of the city and region where it is published,” but denied the Times was “really the Fox News of the left,” citing scandalous scoops that hurt prominent Northeastern Democrats like New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer. Hoyt was the paper’s third public editor in an experiment that had its roots in the Jayson Blair catastrophe . In retrospect, the paper’s first ombudsman, Daniel Okrent, was probably the toughest critic of the paper’s reporting. Okrent famously asked the rhetorical question in a July 2004 column: ” Is the Times a liberal newspaper? Of course it is .” His successor Barney Calame was far too much a corporate yes-man; he initially defended the paper’s exposure a U.S. terrorist surveillance program involving international bank transfers, though he later recanted . Hoyt was somewhere in the middle, and perhaps the least predictable when it came to which controversies he considered worth writing about. Each of my predecessors, Daniel Okrent and Byron Calame, faced some degree of resistance from the newsroom, and I do not think anyone thought it would go down easy for me. On my first day on the job, Arthur Sulzberger Jr., the publisher, sat opposite me in a little room off his office, clapped his hands on his knees and said with a laugh: “Well, you’re here. You must be dumber than you look.” But my reception by the newsroom turned out to be accepting and unfailingly professional, in large part, I believe, because Okrent and Calame persevered, established the position and made it matter. Times journalists have been astonishingly candid, even when facing painful questions any of us would want to duck. Of course, journalists don’t relish being criticized in public any more than anyone else. A writer shaken by a conclusion I was reaching told me, if you say that, I’ll have to kill myself. I said, no, you won’t. Well, the writer said, I’ll have to go in the hospital. I wrote what I intended, with no ill consequences for anyone’s health. …. For all of my three years, I heard versions of Kevin Keller’s accusation: The Times is a “liberal rag,” pursuing a partisan agenda in its news columns. There is no question that the editorial page is liberal and the regular columnists on the Op-Ed page are heavily weighted in that direction. There is also no question that The Times, though a national newspaper, shares the prevailing sensibilities of the city and region where it is published. It does not take creationism or intelligent design as serious alternatives to the theory of evolution. It prints the marriages and commitment ceremonies of same-sex couples. It covers art and cultural events out on the edge. Hoyt next defended his paper’s balance by focusing on the Times breaking political scandals against Democrats in its backyard. While not quite denying the paper’s liberal slant, Hoyt said the Times was definitely not the Fox News of the left. But if The Times were really the Fox News of the left , how could you explain the investigative reporting that brought down Eliot Spitzer, New York’s Democratic governor; derailed the election campaign of his Democratic successor, David Paterson; got Charles Rangel, the Harlem Democrat who was chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, in ethics trouble; and exposed the falsehoods that Attorney General Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, another Democrat, was telling about his service record in the Vietnam era? Of course, as the Times is always reminding us, the Republican Party has been decimated in the Northeast in recent years, meaning the region is dominated by Democrats, meaning most political scandals will involve Democrats. Hoyt also announced a new public editor from outside the paper would be named soon.

View post:
NY Times Departing Public Editor Hoyt: We’re Not the Fox News of the Left

FIFA 2010 World Cup South Africa Penalty Kick Trailer [HD]

Click Here to Watch the FIFA 2010 World Cup South Africa World Cup Trailer: www.youtube.com FIFA 2010 World Cup South Africa Penalty Kick Trailer [HD] Developer: EA Sports Release: 4/2010 Genre: Sports Platform: PS3/X360 Publisher: EA Website: fifa.easports.com FIFA 10 has a few new upgrades from last years version including refinements in responsiveness and intelligence, also more than 50 improvements in the Manager Mode. Follow Machinima on Twitter! Machinima http Inside Gaming twitter.com Machinima Respawn twitter.com Machinima Entertainment, Technology, Culture twitter.com FOR MORE MACHINIMA, GO TO: www.youtube.com FOR MORE GAMEPLAY, GO TO: www.youtube.com TAGS: FIFA 10 World Cup South Africa Penalty Kick Trailer [HD] machinima video game xbox360 playstation3 ps3 yellow card red playstation nintendo soccer goal field usa world cup david beckham ball freddy adu landon dovovan tim howard keeper yt:quality=high

http://www.youtube.com/v/zK73N9NjSFA?f=videos&app=youtube_gdata

Read this article:
FIFA 2010 World Cup South Africa Penalty Kick Trailer [HD]

Tyra Banks Inks Book Deal, Will Publish First Novel in ‘Modelland’

HOLLYWOOD, Calif. — Tyra Banks is added another title to her already huge r

DICE Content With Never Charging For DLC

Infinity Ward and DICE both released downloadable content packs for their respective military shooters yesterday. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 ’s Stimulus Package hit Xbox 360, while Battlefield: Bad Company 2 ’s VIP Map Pack released for PC, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. The biggest difference between the two batches of DLC? Price. While the MW2 Stimulus Package cost 1200 Microsoft Points ($15), DICE released their DLC for free (unless you buy Bad Company 2 used in which case you have to throw down $15 to buy a VIP code to download the DLC). Ultimately, the pricing decision is the publisher’s call; in this case, EA and Activision. But as DICE senior producer Patrick Bach told Xbox World 360 magazine (via Computer and Videogames ), the free DLC approach initially came from DICE. “We don’t ever want to charge for our maps and insisted to EA that this attitude was crucial when it came to keeping our community happy and playing together,” said Bach. DICE has said they have more DLC plans in the works, and, clearly, if they have their way, it will continue to be free. However, despite Bach’s insistence that “We’re owned by EA but we’re still very much DICE,” if EA calls for a price tag for DLC, it’s hard to imagine DICE really being able to do anything about it. Thankfully, DICE has the fans love on their side, and that is always the most desirable shield to have when it comes to dealing with major publishers eyeing that bottom line. If DICE decided to charge for Bad Company 2 DLC, what would you be willing to pay for it? Do you think the MW2 DLC is overpriced or worth every cent? Source: CVG

Mario Turns Into A Rock In Super Mario Galaxy 2

Nintendo released a brand new trailer for Super Mario Galaxy 2 that shows off the cool and different powers Mario can obtain in the game, including the power to become a boulder to smash those Koopas away. Rock on, Mario. Rock on. Check out the trailer below: Watch Larger Version | Watch HD Version

Excerpt from:
Mario Turns Into A Rock In Super Mario Galaxy 2

Tea Partiers Once Again Attacking Congress With Crazy Signs [Teabaggers]

There was another independent, nonpartisan ” Tea Party ” on Capitol Hill today! Just a buncha regular folks with funny signs that aren’t at all racist but are a little bit provided by the RNC. Then they met a mean congressman. This congressman was so mean that when an actual angry mob showed up outside his office screaming “LIAR” at him, in unison, he shut his door , rather than trying to engage this angry mob in some sort of rational discussion of… whether or not he’s a liar, I guess. Then this angry mob sort of hung out outside his office for a while, being angry. If they had been Code Pink they would’ve been dragged out of there by armed guards. Hooray for America. Once the House passes the health care bill someone’s gotta get shot.

Excerpt from:
Tea Partiers Once Again Attacking Congress With Crazy Signs [Teabaggers]

Meet the Generation That Will Save and/or Destroy the New York Times [Dynasties]

The only way the New York Times can escape the clutches of a Mexican billionaire is by successfully instituting a paywall. Who has it chosen to manage this treacherous path? The publisher’s nephew. He used to run a DJ school. The Times is a publicly traded company, but the heirs of its modern founder Adolph Ochs and his son-in-law, Arthur Hays Sulzberger, own the voting shares. And in an effort to inculcate all the far-flung cousins—there are 27 fifth-generation descendants of Sulzberger—with a sense of responsibility for the newspaper and its various holdings, the New York Times Company likes to rotate them through the place from time to time. The company’s latest proxy statement , released earlier this week, brought news of yet two more Sulzberger cousins signing up for duty at the mother ship—in this job market, no less! And one of them was particularly momentous: Thirty-three-year-old David Perpich , nephew to Times publisher Arthur “Pinch” Sulzberger Jr., who is himself son to his predecessor Arthur “Punch” Sulzberger, who was himself son to his predecessor Arthur Hays Sulzberger, has been hired as the executive director of paid products at NYTimes.com just as the site prepares to wring desperately needed money out of its 17 million monthly users by limiting the number of stories they can read without subscribing . So here’s a handy guide to what Perpich—as well as his various kinsman and -women spread throughout the New York Times Company—brings to the table. David Perpich, 33, fifth generation Perpich’s claim to fame is his role in helping run the Scratch DJ Academy, a rigorous institution of higher learning co-founded by Jam Master Jay that offers an ” incredible opportunity for amateur and aspiring music enthusiasts to learn how to DJ, from mixing and blending, to scratching and beat juggling .” Among Perpich’s duties at the Academy was “handling all marketing initiatives,” and he was really good at it: He managed to get the school mentioned a whopping nine times in the paper his family owns ! After leaving academia around 2007, according to this excellent 2008 New York rundown of the Sulzberger clan , Perpich briefly entertained an offer to join the family business, but he turned it down in favor of a technology consulting gig at Booz Allen. For whatever reason, that didn’t work out, so he figured he’d head over to his uncle’s shop and shepherd the most crucial business initiative that the Times has ever undertaken. He’s up for it, though: He’s a digital wizard who’s thoroughly mastered Twitter , having limited his posts to one heartbreaking online memorial for Michael Jackson made all the more moving by its singularity: Samuel Dolnick , 30, fifth generation Also reported in the most recent proxy statement was the hiring of Samuel Dolnick, the grandson of Arthur Sulzberger’s sister Ruth Holmberg (who herself served as the publisher of the Chattanooga Times ). Dolnick, who previously toiled as a reporter for the Associated Press, was hired at the Newspaper Guild Minimum staff reporter’s salary of $90,500 in September, and has been writing for the Metro desk. According to the New York Observer , Dolnick is no dilettante: His AP gig took him to New Delhi, and before that, he interned at the Village Voice under the estimable Wayne Barrett. He’s settled down in New York for the new gig, having just purchased a home in Brooklyn with a $300,000 mortgage at the discount-window interest rate of .57% from his grandmother, according to New York real estate records. A. G. Sulzberger, 30, fifth generation Arthur G. Sulzberger, Pinch’s son, joined the paper last March, also at the Guild minimum salary, and since then he’s been cold huntin’ snipers , writing about bus stops and light bulbs for the Metro desk, and fending off obscene propositions from Gawker readers . Before that he wrote for the Portland Oregonian . Rachel B. Golden, 31, fifth generation Rachel is the daughter of Michael Golden , Holmberg’s son and vice chairman of the Times Company. She makes a cool $82,136 as a marketing associate for the Times web site, where she’s responsible for promoting the Style, T, and Travel sections . James Dryfoos , 45, fifth generation Dryfoos, the grandson of Arthur Sulzberger’s sister Marian, is a systems analyst for the Times Company, where he analyzes systems for $144,673 a year. He married a lady named Reagan Rexrode and is a homebrew enthusiast . Michael Greenspon , 40, fifth generation Also a grandson of Marian’s, Greenspon is, according to New York , “quietly competent but not an obvious candidate to lead the paper.” He’s a project manager in strategic planning and served last year as the interem general manager of the New York Times News Service, which laid of some 25 to 30 people in November . He makes $176,961 a year. Michael Golden, 61, fourth generation Golden, father to Rachel and son of Ruth, is Arthur Sulzberger Jr.’s chief rival in the family. He’s currently vice chairman after a stint in Paris as the publisher of the International Herald Tribune , which the Times Company wrestled away from the Washington Post Company in 2002. Golden shepherded the company’s move from its old Times Square headquarters to a bright shiny new $500 million building, which worked out like this: The old building was flipped at a $350 million profit three years after the Times sold it, and the Times started selling off pieces of the new building for cash two years after it was built . For this he made $1.8 million last year. Arthur O. Sulzberger, Jr., 59 Arthur is the publisher of the New York Times . He makes $5.1 million, and is primarily occupied with insuring that none of the aforementioned fifth-generation Sulzbergers have jobs in five years. SPECIAL BONUS HIDDEN SULZBERGER: New York ‘s look at the Sulzberger clan noted that a “spokesperson for the Times said there are two additional fifth-generation descendents, but they have never appeared as beneficiaries in the company’s SEC filings.” We’ve found one of them: In addition to providing a mortgage to Dolnick, Holmberg is also listed in New York real estate records as having made a $265,000 loan to a Sharon Skettini of Brooklyn. And according to public databases, Skettini once shared an address in Arizona with Ruth’s son Stephen Golden, a lawyer in Tucson. Skettini appears to have once been employed as a literary agent for Sterling Lord Literistic , a New York agency, but she’s not currently listed on the firm’s site. She doesn’t appear to have any public relationship with the Times .

Excerpt from:
Meet the Generation That Will Save and/or Destroy the New York Times [Dynasties]

Knopf Editor Makes Excellent Case for Needing Editors in Poorly Written Post About Needing Editors [Fuckups]

If you wrote a piece for the Huffington Post entitled Do You Really Need an Editor at a Publishing House? , you’d make a strong case, right? The answer, as evidenced by Knopf editor Carole Baron , is a resounding absolutely . Besides the fact that no good editor in their right mind would tell someone trying to make a coherent argument for their job to write a post so explicitly arguing for their job , they wouldn’t let them title it Do You Really Need an Editor at a Publishing House? nor would they let them publish it on the Huffington Post . Where content mostly goes to die. Unless someone else picks it up for being extraordinary in some way, which Baron’s post most certainly is . Clunky Prose: It starts in the lede. Do you really need an editor at a publishing house? I am really annoyed. All this talk about digital. Not to nitpick, but why not? Besides the fact that the text itself is pretty misshapen on the site —a good web editor would’ve taken care of that—the first sentence is also the title of the post (redundancy), the second sentence is a wooden declarative that could simply be spiced up by making a contraction out of “I” and “am,” and the third sentence is a jagged fragment that doesn’t explain what the “talk” is nor what kind of “digital” she’s referring to. Yet most of you are cognizant individuals, and you know she’s referring to digital media, and that the “talk” of which is some idle chatter we’re probably going to learn about. Assuming readers can make it past the first three sentences. Clunky Pronouns : The writer said: “Why not? There is no editing anymore.” Not only is that not true, but it certainly didn’t understand the complex role of the editor in a publishing house. First of all, what kind of braindead company is Baron keeping? Jesus. Also, I know editors often think of writers less as people and more like book-writing-creatures who cost money, but referring to one as “it” seems mildly unnecessary. That is, of course, unless Baron was talking about the writer’s statement, which can only “understand” something in the figurative or poetic sense. Which she already lost credit for in the first sentence, regardless of which, that intention just patently isn’t the case. Finally, who refers to their own job as complex ? Lady, you’re not a machinist. Misspellings and Title Form : Jonathon Gallassi’s: “There Is More to Publishing Than Meets the Screen” in the New York Times, January 2, 2010, expressed it logically and eloquently. “Jonathon Gallassi” has a name, and it isn’t spelled like that. It’s Jonathan Galassi . He’s not exactly a name you want to spell wrong, as he’s the the President and Publisher of Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Also, New York Times should be italicized, and from a later sentence in the piece, “short changed ” is one word. WTF? : “And I am happy to say that as many as there are who complain, there are just as many who acknowledge the good work that editors can and do for a writer.” As many what, exactly? People? Penguins? If they’re penguins, they don’t acknowledge what an editor “can and do for a writer” so much as they acknowledge what an editor can do for a writer. Credit where credit’s due: we cribbed this item from a tipster…who wrote “makes the care for” instead of “makes the case for” in their original tip. And please , like we don’t have our fair share of typos on this site even with an editor. There’s probably one in this post! The difference between Baron and I, though, is that I’m not trying to make a case for an editor. My life is a case for editors. Ryan Tate put it best earlier this evening via email: Who will edit the editors? And who will edit the people who call for editing of the editors? Everything must eventually be published via wiki, is my point. A wiki that no one is qualified to edit. Then again, she could just be playing with our heads, as this might be part of an elaborate “meta” campaign for her job, in which case: golden. But that probably isn’t the case. She’s probably just an editor who needs a good editor. Or a good writer.

Continue reading here:
Knopf Editor Makes Excellent Case for Needing Editors in Poorly Written Post About Needing Editors [Fuckups]