First off, yes, I may be a day late, but this is definitely not a dollar short! I wanted to make sure this post was as perfect as I could make it, like I do with all others.
Of course, it’s just a coincidence that Martin Luther King Day, which commemorates the birthday of the slain civil rights leader, happens to fall near Inauguration Day in certain years, and thus the Women’s March.
(Read through and see another coincidence. It involves an Israel-hater and what her name really means. Then tell me Gd doesn’t work in mysterious ways!)
But the calendar coincidence is now a damn shame to Dr. King’s memory.
I’ve said time and time again all decent people are for equality, and luckily there were alternatives for marchers who wanted to avoid the Women’s March and its leaders’ anti-Israel, anti-Semitism and pro-Farrakhan mentality.
Sad that fallout from the anti-Semitism of #WomensMarch leaders impacted local marches across the country, which are grappling with how to respond. Thank you to those who chose to change their names and #MarchOn instead! True #equality for all! https://t.co/GC7gZeteok
Wrong decision after wrong decision. See my previous #TweetsNow for lots of other examples. History shows it'll be easier for #Republicans to gather around one candidate than "unorganized" #Democrats. Of course, the decisions are made by people who don't know or respect history. https://t.co/9xFODZFAlB
Don’t forget what Will Rogers said: “I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.”
Early Saturday, Linda Sarsour posted a link to this article on Facebook:
“While the first set of Unity Principles written by members of the Women’s March steering committee, which itself included prominent Jewish leaders, focused specifically on those most vulnerable, it did not mention Jews, which raised unnecessary suspicion. White supremacy and fascism endanger all of us, but we are not all equally in danger at all times, and while some communities in the United States feel unsafe for the first time in a very long time, others, such as communities of color and immigrants, have lived with danger for this country’s entire history. Centering the most vulnerable means exactly that: focusing first on the most vulnerable, through which we all benefit. (The 2019 Unity Principles now explicitly mention Jewish women.)”
My thoughts: Afterward, I also read Latinx women and Asian/Pacific Islander women, who were also previously excluded from the list, are also now on it. Why such division?
“Tamika Mallory … refused to ‘condemn’ Black nationalist and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan for his anti-Semitic views. She has since been asked to do this over and over, irrespective of the fact that his words are not her words, she is not responsible for him, and that asking her to do so means effectively condemning her ‘family’ and community—the people who were there for her and her son after the death of her husband.”
From me: So she can’t use the magic word “condemn” for the sake of society, and obviously considers Farrakhan above the rest of us, meaning unequal. In the meantime, she’s getting asked about this over and over, taking far more time to not say it than to actually say it! Is she achieving her objective or trying to keep her 15 minutes of fame?
“In theForward (Your racism is showing when you tear down the Women’s March),Nylah Burton, a Black Jewish woman, writes that the attacks on Mallory and other Women’s March leaders are not only based in racism but make Jews of color more vulnerable. While ‘Mallory’s public embrace of [Farrakhan] was inappropriate to begin with … the sheer amount of racism and Islamophobia that defines much of the criticism against Linda Sarsour, a Palestinian Muslim activist, Tamika Mallory, a black gun control activist, and Carmen Perez, a Latina activist, has become more toxic and harmful than the actions that spurred the protests [against Trump].’”
Me again: So now we’re comparing who has been more inappropriate and when? Perhaps Sarsour, Mallory and Perez are more than they were just described. They need to personally address that supposed amount of racism and Islamophobia reserved just for them, plus if and how they made Jews of color more vulnerable. Anybody going after a woman for being a woman is the outsider!
“No form of anti-Semitism is acceptable,” writes Burton in a different Forward article, Why do Jews keep tearing down Black leaders? “But not all forms of anti-Semitism are alike. White anti-Semites are motivated by a hatred of Jews and a desire for power. Black anti-Semites are motivated by anger over gentrification, police brutality, and slavery.”
“And the entire conversation has been turned from focusing on the most vulnerable, i.e. communities of color, to focusing on the angst of white Jews.”
Maybe they should’ve just stuck to equality for women. Instead, they got off their message and supporters are STILL blaming others! (More on this from someone who knows more than me on that subject, coming up right after this next prejudiced thought.)
“Zuckerberg and Sandberg have money and power, and we allow white people with money and power, no matter who they are, to get away with things no one should and that people of color certainly can’t.”
I won’t defend Facebook but the writer of this article, some Jodi Jacobson, is off the rails.
An article Monday morning reported what happened next: “Former Women’s March leader upbraids ‘antisemite’ Linda Sarsour for posting article claiming Jews are waging war on black people.”
She’s Mercy Morganfield, the daughter of famed American blues singer-songwriter Muddy Waters. This is just some of what she posted on Facebook less than three-and-a-half hours after Sarsour on Saturday. (Language warning!)
“Tamika is not the problem. Tamika is the symptom. Tamika symbolizes everything wrong and deeply problematic about second-wave feminism. A white woman’s movement. Just like the first wave feminism was a white woman’s movement in the sixties. ‘March with one of them. But March,’ was Gloria Steinem’s advice just yesterday. This rhetoric by a 1st Wave Feminist is indicative of the mentality of the March itself. Let me translate: ‘March because optics are more important than inclusivity.’
“And Tamika is providing the optics. … The other co-chairs sit back and watch while Tamika says all the incendiary things. They push her to the front and let her believe she is their leader when in reality she is their fall guy.
“And her allies outside the WM are problematic. She has other black people chasing celebrity and the limelight riding on her coattails. They don’t have her back; they are riding her back but she can’t tell the difference. They say amen and egg her on while she doubles down on ignorance and xenophobia. She is mistaking their obsequiousness for support. She cannot recognize an opportunist right now because she is so deeply mired in her own opportunism. Tamika, you in danger, gurl.”
“She is not faultless; she is thoughtless. She is hapless. She is aimless and gameless. She is riding around butt naked and everyone is admiring her beautiful clothes.
“For the past two years, issues that impact black women and girls in the U.S. have taken a backseat to issues that impact Palestinian women. Awareness of ignorant religious dogma has replaced awareness around issues impacting black women in the black community. People are now more aware of the dumb shit Farrakhan says than they are the plight of missing black girls in Chicago. This is deeply problematic.”
“The only people quicker to stab you in the back than a white woman trying to cover her white supremacy in a blanket of liberalism are the black elite who serve up their own version of white supremacy by looking down their noses at their own people. They are also using Tamika.”
… (This is my favorite part of this Morganfield post. –Lenny)
“I wouldn’t have to denounce Farrakhan because I wouldn’t have been sitting there praising him in the first place. Academic rigor is required to get an advanced degree. A part of my Master’s thesis was to research the slave trade in the United States. Jewish people were not a huge part of the slave trade, dumb asses. Yeah, I said it. Dumb, fucking, asses. There are two prominent figures floating that theory, Louis Farrakhan and David Duke. What do those two men have in common? They both peddle hate. It is their business model. I think it is brilliant that white people got black people blaming Jewish people for slavery. Fucking Brilliant!”
“So Tamika becomes the face of antisemitism, while the enablers of antisemitism don pink pussy hats and march. She becomes their warrior. In a street brawl, she once said, ‘You don’t know me, baby. I will tear your motherfucking ass up.’ Unfortunately, we do know you Tamika. You are every black person who has ever had a once in a lifetime opportunity and lost it because of hubris. You are that black person with all that damn potential who allow your ego to rule your actions. We know you, Tamika. We wanted nothing more than to see you win, I know this black woman did.”
Morganfield followed it up Sunday with this post:
But back on Thursday, Morganfield – to her credit – had more strong words over this, and here are most of them:
“This is what is so troubling about associations and about liberals and progressives. This shameful woman, Sonalee R.—a therapist, someone who is respectful of transgender people—somehow believes the world would be better if millions of Jewish people weren’t in it. And the head of a woman’s movement is a friend of hers. They keep showing up in photos with antisemite after antisemite but they need us to believe they don’t have these deep-seated issues about Jews. Here in the U.S., Palestine and Israel conflicts took a more prominent seat and more prominent role in what the WM chose to throw their weight behind than did: the Flint Water crisis, the missing girls in Chicago, #metoo as it affects black girls, high infant mortality rate in the black community, high incarceration rate of black families, economic empowerment for the black community, voter suppression targeted at blacks, gun violence in our community, the increasing mortality rate of black women due to disparities in medicine—Linda Sarsour made Palestine issues take precedence over all of those other issues.
“Do you know how that looks? It looks like us defending comments made that are antisemitic more than raising awareness of all of those issues I just mentioned.”
… (This is my favorite part of this Morganfield post. –Lenny)
“Linda has not pushed money and support toward Fighting the Muslim Ban—she pushed it toward Palestinians who are fighting Israel. Where was Linda, Linda’s mom or dad—when we were fighting to desegregate schools, water fountains and lunch counters in the 1960s? And she comes in and sells black women a bill of goods that she is fighting for women of color and that simply isn’t true. She is fighting for Palestinian women and God bless her, she should. I agree that she should fight for the rights of Palestinian women, but should that take precedence over black girls in the U.S.—why? Why, again?
“Black people, we have to start being more woke and questioning the status quo. Ask these four co-chairs what they did for black women this year and you will find they did nothing. You are whispering and standing up for people who’ve done NOTHING—for black women. Being a black woman and telling white women to shut up and listen to black women makes a nice sound bite but does nothing to move the needle. Especially when you are saying that over and over again to a sea of white faces who are happy to exclude all marginalized women as long as they get to march and as long as they have an outspoken black, brown and Muslim token to legitimize them. Spreading false and ignorant information about Jewish people that have black folks nodding their heads in agreement is simply peddling hate. The same way Trump peddles hate. And hate is a destructive energy not a redemptive one.
“If a white woman was featured in a picture on social media with David Duke and the message read, ‘It would have been better if black people didn’t exist.’ Would you be okay with that white woman heading the women’s movement? You would be calling for her head and you know it. But you’re okay when a brown woman does that to a Jew? Please check your hypocrisy at the door of the church. You know that place you go every Sunday and act share the love of Jesus. A Jewish man who taught the world to love. Huh? What would Jesus do? If Jews didn’t exist as this asshole in the picture hopes–who would you worship on Sundays, Boo?
“You are okay with this because they are talking about people some preacher in a church you don’t even belong to—spewed off some uneducated bullshit about Jews and you ate it up hook, line, and sinker. What the hell is wrong with you, black people? This is not who we are. If it is we might as well grab a tiki torch and flame up—we’re no better. Do you understand how destructive the energy of hate is? Do you understand Dr. Martin Luther King Jr would be so ashamed of black people for supporting this while you celebrate his legacy this weekend?”
“Linda is a woman of color when it suits her—but I guarantee you this—her parents would never have allowed her to marry a Muslim of African descent. Chew on that while you are taking up for her.”
It takes a real leader to police one’s own people, and Mercy Morganfield didn’t just start this week, so thank you to her for that.
Alexander started writing about the speech Dr. King gave at New York’s Riverside Church, exactly a year before his assassination.
“Many of King’s strongest allies urged him to remain silent about the war or at least to soft-pedal any criticism. They knew that if he told the whole truth about the unjust and disastrous war he would be falsely labeled a Communist, suffer retaliation and severe backlash, alienate supporters and threaten the fragile progress of the civil rights movement.
“King rejected all the well-meaning advice and said, ‘I come to this magnificent house of worship tonight because my conscience leaves me no other choice.’ Quoting a statement by the Clergy and Laymen Concerned About Vietnam, he said, ‘A time comes when silence is betrayal’ and added, ‘that time has come for us in relation to Vietnam.’
“It was a lonely, moral stance. And it cost him. But it set an example of what is required of us if we are to honor our deepest values in times of crisis, even when silence would better serve our personal interests or the communities and causes we hold most dear. It’s what I think about when I go over the excuses and rationalizations that have kept me largely silent on one of the great moral challenges of our time: the crisis in Israel-Palestine.”
Is she saying The New York Times never discussed article topics before hiring her last year, and how she might offer thoughts on topics different than other Times writers, and now she has gone rogue?
Alexander then launches into an attack on pretty much everything Israel with these one-sided, distorted phrases and sentences that make you wonder what a Jewish person must’ve ever done to her, and whether she had a Jewish friend in law school who wasn’t on the fringe left:
“Israel’s political lobby holds well-documented power”
“Many civil rights activists and organizations have remained silent … because they fear loss of funding from foundations, and false charges of anti-Semitism”
“compromised or discredited by smear campaigns”
“blacklists those who publicly dare to support boycotts against Israel, jeopardizing their employment prospects and future careers”
“And so, if we are to honor King’s message and not merely the man, we must condemn Israel’s actions: unrelenting violations of international law, continued occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza, home demolitions and land confiscations. We must cry out at the treatment of Palestinians at checkpoints, the routine searches of their homes and restrictions on their movements, and the severely limited access to decent housing, schools, food, hospitals and water that many of them face.”
“We must not tolerate Israel’s refusal even to discuss the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes, as prescribed by United Nations resolutions.”
“We must, with as much courage and conviction as we can muster, speak out against the system of legal discrimination that exists inside Israel.”
Talk about real hate! Don’t tell me Dr. King would’ve ever spoken like that. You’ll hear his “I Have a Dream” speech soon, and he didn’t use language like that – even when referring to racists in power.
I don’t know why Michelle Alexander feels the way she does and question whether her views belong in The New York Times (too many people are clicking onto the article), butyou get the drift. Let her talk about this picture, especially the sign.
Then, she mentioned Dr. King.
“King found himself conflicted. Like many black leaders of the time, he recognized European Jewry as a persecuted, oppressed and homeless people striving to build a nation of their own, and he wanted to show solidarity with the Jewish community, which had been a critically important ally in the civil rights movement.
“Ultimately, King canceled a pilgrimage to Israel in 1967 after Israel captured the West Bank. During a phone call about the visit with his advisers, he said, ‘I just think that if I go, the Arab world, and of course Africa and Asia for that matter, would interpret this as endorsing everything that Israel has done, and I do have questions of doubt.’
“He continued to support Israel’s right to exist butalso said on national television that it would be necessary for Israel to return parts of its conquered territory to achieve true peace and security and to avoid exacerbating the conflict. There was no way King could publicly reconcile his commitment to nonviolence and justice for all people, everywhere, with what had transpired after the 1967 war.”
I’ll stop there and remind you – or teach you – the Six Day War happened because Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping and mobilized its army along its border with a much-smaller Israel. The U.N. was absolutely ineffective at avoiding war by running away. (Nobody talked about the West Bank or Gaza back in those days, did they, Ms. Alexander?)
Then, Nasser induced Syria and Jordan to begin attacks on Israel by using the initially confused situation to claim that Egypt had repelled the Israeli air strike, when it really destroyed the country’s air force.
The Arabs were big losers. What happens when a country loses a war? What has happened throughout history, Ms. Alexander, and why should this case be any different?
In fact, keep reading!
Israel didn’t ask for the war, the territories, definitely not the people there, and negotiated with anyone whenever possible. Egypt and Jordan are success stories, even if not wildly successful.
Who is available today? Dictator Mahmoud Abbas with his corruption and net worth of $100 million, or Hamas terrorists? More importantly, who do Palestinians support? Do they want peace with Israel? Look the the polls.
And demanding a right of return 70 years after 1948, or even 50 years after 1967, is preposterous and isn’t coming from anybody who wants peace!
Instead, Israel is making friends all over, or reestablishing friendships. Just Sunday, Israel and Chad restored relations. (Now would be a great time for Ms. Alexander to use the word “apartheid!”) Mali’s Prime Minister will be visiting soon. We don’t even know exactly what’s happening with the Gulf states, but relations are improving.
The war happened in the beginning of June and the Arab League Summit attended by eight Arab heads of state ended less than three months later with the Khartoum Resolution on Sept. 1. It became famous for the “Three No’s” in the third paragraph: “no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it.”
Would somebody tell me how the hell Israel, wanting land for peace, could deal with that?
Until I get an answer (comment section below) – if The New York Times, Michelle Alexander, Linda Sarsour, Electronic Intifada, and the folks at the United Nations don’t get it – Dr. King really admired Israel, and there’s no better evidence than his own words.
“The whole world must see that Israel must exist and has a right to exist and is one of the great outposts of democracy in the world.”
Here, he goes further, saying even if it wasn’t necessary, he’d speak out against anti-Semitism because it’s wrong, unjust and evil – and he’d do the same for Catholics.
In this speech, he says he knows white people who believe in justice and humanity are going to stay with the civil rights movement because it’s just and right.
Dr. King repeating some of what he said above, but I learned how much he really knew about life for Jews under the Nazis and Soviets.
This video from Christians United for Israel is to “discover the forgotten history of how the civil rights movement and Christian Zionism have united Christians and Jews to fight racism and anti-Semitism for over 50 years.”
Even The Young Turks (no friend of Israel) has advice for the Palestinians to get what they want, because they’ve been doing things wrong (terrorism, I suppose?), using quotes from MLK!
Finally, a longer video from Dumisani Washington, founder of the Institute for Black Solidarity with Israel, speaking about Dr. King’s true pro-Israel legacy, Israel’s diverse multi-ethnic community, and the racism of BDS. (Worthy of you watching as much as you can. That goes double for Michelle Alexander!)
“It troubled King that Jerusalem was divided, the western part controlled by Israel and the eastern part by Jordan. ‘And so this was a strange feeling to go to the ancient city of God and see the tragedies of man’s hate and his evil, which causes him to fight and live in conflict,’ he recalled.”
“The details of King’s only visit to the Holy Land, which has nearly been forgotten by history, are contained in a sermon he delivered at Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, AL on Easter Sunday, 1959.”
“I must say that when you say ‘landing in Jerusalem’ you must qualify what you are saying and tell what part of Jerusalem. That is because men have not solved their social problems, and we’re still banned because in their Jerusalem, that ancient holy city has been divided and split up and partitioned. And before you can enter one side of the city, it must be clear that you will not enter the other because one side is Jerusalem, Israel, the other side is Jerusalem, Jordan. Because of the Arab-Israeli conflict this city has been divided. And if on your visa it is revealed that you are going into any Arab nation, you can only go to Israel without being able to ever go back to an Arab country in the life of your passport; the hate is intensified. And so this was a strange feeling to go to the ancient city of God and see the tragedies of man’s hate and his evil, which causes him to fight and live in conflict. …
“This is always one of the interesting things about traveling, that you learn to know people. You meet people of all races and of all cultures, and you tend to be lifted above provincialism, and chauvinism, and what the sociologists call ethnocentrism. You come to see a unity in mankind. … I think this is the greatest education that can ever come to an individual. I think if more of our white brothers in the South had traveled a little more, many of our problems would be solved today.”
About being in Jerusalem, and when Jesus was there:
“And he entered this gate, and we walked around and through there and pretty soon, about fifty feet from the gate, we came to a spot and the guide said, ‘This is where the old temple stood, the Temple of Jerusalem.’ (Keep this in mind when someone lies to you and says there is no Jewish history in Jerusalem. Then ask them where the Muslims were at the time. –Lenny) You remember that temple fell in 70 A.D. The Roman Empire came to stop an uprising in Palestine, and they destroyed the temple. But the spot is still reserved, and there is a big stone in the middle of that point where all of the sacrifices used to take place on the altar.”
But King stayed on the Jordanian side of Jerusalem, where the Old City and Western Wall were, even though he visited Jewish holy sites that Jews were not allowed to visit. (We can’t let it go back to the way it was for those 19 years, 1948-67, under Jordan. –Lenny)
Back the My Jewish Learning article:
“He would later call the trip ‘one of the most important occasions of my life.’ …
“Prior to the Six Day War, King was an outspoken supporter of Israel, which he famously called ‘one of the great outposts of democracy in the world.’ After the war, in which Israel reunited Jerusalem and captured the Sinai Peninsula, Gaza Strip, West Bank, and Golan Heights, King expressed reservations about travelling to the country and having to defend its actions during the war. He feared doing so would alienate his supporters in Africa and the Arab world. ‘I don’t think I could come out unscathed,’ he fretted to an adviser in a phone conversation recorded by the FBI.”
“Even Dr. King occasionally struggled with acceptance and tolerance issues.
“One of those struggles was when it came to Bayard Rustin. Rustin was an indispensable force behind the civil rights movement in the 1960s. He was also openly gay. Many have called him King’s right-hand man.
“And, while King needed Rustin for the movement, he did not immediately embrace Rustin and his sexuality (many labeled it ‘promiscuity’ then), which at times became a liability to the movement.
“Even Dr. King succumbed to fear and a desire to keep the movement on track, and the two parted ways a few times.
“Eventually, King evolved, realized Rustin’s worth and defended him.
“If King hadn’t, the movement would most certainly have been different and likely more violent and less effective.”
BACK TO THE STORY from My Jewish Learning:
“Israel had extended several invitations to King during the 1960s to visit the Jewish state as part of a wider effort to strengthen ties with the African American community. King accepted at least two official invitations but backed out both times. He also agreed to lead an interfaith pilgrimage of 600 to Israel in November 1967, but that didn’t pan out either. He was assassinated the following year.”
Click here for many more details about what happened behind the scenes in this article “Why Martin Luther King never visited Israel” from historian Martin Kramer.
Click here for the full story of how Kramer solved the mystery of this quote attributed to Dr. King – “When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews. You’re talking anti-Semitism!” – even though so many don’t want to recognize it.
“Ultimately, King’s failure to step foot in the State of Israel did not diminish his legacy in the eyes of most Israelis. His leadership during the civil rights movement has inspired generations of Israeli activists, from the Mizrachi Jews (those from Iraq, Syria, Bahrain, Kuwait, Dagestan, Azerbaijan, Iran, Uzbekistan, the Caucasus, Kurdistan, Afghanistan, India and Pakistan – but never mentioned in any right of return or compensation. –Lenny) who fought for better housing and jobs during the 1970s to the Ethiopian Israelis who, more recently, have demonstrated in the streets of Tel Aviv against police brutality and discrimination. The Knesset has recognized Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and there is a forest in the Galilee that was planted in his honor.”
What’s especially interesting is that part of the forest had been destroyed over the summer of 2006 when Hezbollah in Lebanon launched Katyusha rockets into northern Israel. The terrorists from a neighboring country destroyed two million trees in the one country that had more trees at the end of the 20th century than it did at the beginning! That’s not what the Kings would’ve supported.
I don’t think the Israelis would have any major problem with how the Kings would’ve thought of them today.
“One can’t help but wonder, if King were alive and visited Israel today, what would he think?
“One hint comes from Clarence B. Jones, one of King’s lawyers and closest advisors. Jones has said that he believes King would not shy away from criticizing Israel over specific policies, but that he would not stand for efforts to delegitimize the Jewish state. ‘No African-American leader of national stature was more passionate, privately and publicly, in fostering a working coalition with the Jewish community and his support for the State of Israel,’ Jones said of King in 2014. …
“No doubt, King would be disappointed that peace between Israel and the Palestinians still has not been achieved. And he would likely be troubled by the poor treatment of the thousands of African refugees who were denied asylum, held in detention centers in the Negev, and are now being told to return to either their home countries or a third country by April or face jail time. (The government considers the refugees to be economic migrants who entered the country illegally.)
“But he would be amazed at the diversity of the country’s population: that Jews from Morocco live next to Jews from Yemen and India and Ethiopia and Iran and France, among other places. And he would marvel that Arabs, Druze, Bedouins, Hebrew Israelites, Samaritans, and Circassians have also found a home in Israel—a place that one day might truly be, in King’s words, ‘an oasis of brotherhood and democracy.’”
I find this pretty positive when you look at the entirety. I think my point has been made.
Just one more: Ever the scholar, one thing I learned after Louis Farrakhan referred to Jews as “termites” is that Linda Sarsour’s last name means “cockroach” in Arabic.
And this brings me to MLK’s “I Have a Dream” speech, especially “the content of their character” part. I played this video every year as a teacher – not just so my students could see and hear Dr. King, but also for its meaning, and how to properly give a speech – including speaking clearly, knowing your audience, and using inclusiveness, repetition, etc.
This is always worth a listen, for so many different reasons. So enjoy, as my students and I always have.
This is the statement from the president of Cox Media Group, known as one of the best owners of TV stations in the country.
Notice it gives a very tentative timetable of “six months to a year to complete.”
And this is the statement from the president/CEO of parent company Cox Enterprises.
It seems every letter of this type addresses uncertainty by encouraging employees to keep up the good work.
Cox Media Group owns TV stations, radio stations and newspapers. The parent company also owns Cox Communications, the largest private telecommunications company in the U.S., the nation’s third-largest cable company, advanced digital video, Internet, phone, and home security and automation services. Plus, there’s Cox Automotive, which helps dealers, manufacturers and car shoppers.
There’s no question Cox decided it would try to sell out because Sinclair Broadcast Group – arguably one of the dirtiest and definitely the largest company to own TV stations – seems to have unexpectedly lost its 14-month try for approval to merge with one of the most iconic as well as largest broadcasters, Tribune Media.
Everything had seemed set. The price of $3.9 billion had been agreed upon.
The Federal Communications Commission – with pro-business Republicans in the majority – even went out of its way to make it happen by reinstating rather than ending a rule!
It brought back the UHF discount in April 2017, less than a year after it was eliminated, paving the way for Sinclair and Tribune combined to meet national ownership limits. The merger was announced the next month.
— UPDATE: The FCC inspector general cleared Chairman Ajit Pai of being unfairly biased in favor of the Sinclair Broadcast Group–Tribune Media merger. —
The combined company was supposed to own control a whopping 233 TV stations and make a move into big cities like New York (WPIX), Los Angeles (KTLA), Chicago (WGN) and Philadelphia (WPHL). Sinclair stations would’ve reached 72 percent of U.S TV households.
Unfortunately for it, the limit was just 39 percent, so Sinclair decided to sell 23 stations – 14 of Tribune’s and nine of its own – to stay under the national TV ownership cap.
So what went wrong? A lot, even though it looked like nothing was going to stop the unfortunate merger.
Sunday, The Baltimore Sun named several things: Sinclair was already too big; it forced its owners’ conservative views on local news around the country; the company’s ego grew, “assuming it would get its way;” and even behind-the-scenes influence from rival Fox Broadcasting owner Rupert Murdoch.
What finally did the deal in was,
“FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, an appointee of President Donald J. Trump who has been viewed as friendly to Sinclair and such a merger, raised ‘serious concerns’ (last) Monday about whether the deal would serve the public interest.”
It’s nice to see the public interest mentioned. Doesn’t happen nearly as often as it should!
Stay with me because if you haven’t realized, there are many aspects to this story. Let’s recap, as more and more information was revealed, to see where we are tonight.
“allegedly airing news programming that was paid for by a sponsor. … The two Democrats on the five-member FCC pretty much called the Sinclair fine peanuts because Sinclair aired the sponsored content 1,723 times on 77 stations, has had trouble with the FCC before and grossed $2.7 billion in revenue last year. The fine could’ve been $82 million. … I think Sinclair should consider itself lucky. Very lucky.”
By then, it had already bought Bonten Media Group’s stations including WCYB in the Tri-Cities of TN/VA, where I’d been digital media manager.
“Click here and see how the WCYB website’s look seemed to change overnight. It’s like everything is becoming the same and there’s no need nor room for creativity.”
“Sinclair requires conservative commentaries sent from its Maryland headquarters to air during its stations’ local newscasts. That causes viewers to think the biased people they see every night, tossed to by their local anchors, are local as well.”
Bottom line: I admitted “with more competition, a broadcast license is no longer a license to print money as it used to be. But the airwaves belong to the public. TV stations have special responsibilities.” Yet rules were being loosened and I referred to that as, “You give them an inch and they ask for a foot!”
I called my Feb. 22 post “Got cable, satellite? You’ll foot the bill for Fox’s Thursday Night Football” and showed how Fox’s enormous bid of $3.3 billion for the rights for five years
“is going to trickle down to you and me.”
I traced the skyrocketing cost of sports TV rights over the decades but explained overpaying isn’t always bad because,
“These days, Fox doesn’t have much of a regular Thursday night lineup. The NFL would draw viewers.”
“That means Fox stations can expect a call from the network demanding more money for providing better programming – especially in cities with NFL teams – and that may not be so bad, considering what Fox airs on Thursday nights these days? (Do you know?) … And where will these stations get that extra money? Sure, selling ads for higher prices, but also demanding to charge your cable or satellite company more when its contract is up — Fox will insist they do — and that will raise your bill.”
That was part of Fox’s plan to air as many live events as possible and buy more stations. Which brought up Sinclair.
I did note Philadelphia-based Comcast/NBC had “offered substantially more” for Fox at that point.
“Media watchdog groups have long criticized Sinclair for using shared-services agreements to control stations without owning them, which they see as a loophole around the FCC’s ownership rules.”
“People strongly opposed to the mega-deal argue it would reduce the number of voices in media and diminish coverage of local news.”
“The (New York) Times learned from New Jersey Rep. Frank Pallone and two congressional aides, ‘The top internal watchdog for the F.C.C. opened an investigation into whether Mr. Pai and his aides had improperly pushed for the rule changes and whether they had timed them to benefit Sinclair.’”
“When any number of companies outside the broadcast sector can reach the entire country with the same programming, the national cap becomes a fiction that limits, and applies only to, broadcasters.”
I disagreed, saying,
“Those other companies — cable, satellite and the internet — don’t use our public airwaves and broadcasters do, so the rules should be different.”
Also at that point, the plan was
“for Tribune’s WPIX-New York (CW) and WGN Chicago (independent) to be sold, but still operated by Sinclair, which wants its stations to be seen all over the country and is how it has operated around the rules for years.
“Really gone will be Tribune’s Fox affiliate KSWB-San Diego. Expected to be gone are Tribune’s Fox affiliates in Seattle (KCPQ), Denver (KDVR, which Fox once owned), Salt Lake City (KSTU, which Fox once owned), Sacramento (KTXL) and Cleveland (WJW, which Fox once owned). Let this show Fox owned but sold three of those five stations, which shows a lack of commitment to those communities.
“Plus, there’s Tribune’s CW Miami-Fort Lauderdale affiliate (WSFL-Channel 39). Imagine the Fox network buying Miami’s WSFL. I’m sure Fox affiliate WSVN’s owner Ed Ansin would have something to say about that.He has more experience than anyone in that situation because NBC did it to him twice: in Miami in 1989 and Boston in 2017.”
“WSVN without Fox? It’s possible if….” ran through many examples from over the years of networks dumping their affiliates in certain cities because they wanted a station of their own. It was because of “the possibility WSVN-Channel 7 in Miami-Fort Lauderdale may lose its Fox affiliation” if Fox buys the competing CW affiliate, which was one of the stations that was going to be spun off from the Sinclair-Tribune deal. Fox hadn’t owned too many stations compared to other groups.
“What would happen to programming on both stations?” and “Would (Fox) give up WSVN’s good ratings and help from its large news department, just to have a station of its own?”
But in 1989, NBC bought CBS affiliate WTVJ when Ansin wouldn’t sell. CBS bought independent (Fox still just airing on a couple of nights) WCIX with a small news department and signal 30 miles south of all the other stations.
In San Francisco, NBC demanded longtime affiliate KRON for a very low price, when the owners decided to sell. When KRON was sold elsewhere, NBC pulled its affiliation and moved former ABC affiliate KNTV up from San Jose.
In Boston, NBC wanted affiliate WHDH – owned by Ansin – for a very low price. Once again, he refused so NBC dropped WHDH and started a new station using New England Cable News; bumped the Telemundo signal on WNEU-Channel 60 in New Hampshire, which it owned, to a sub-channel, and put NBC on the main channel; bought WBTS-LD (low-powered) Channel 8; and leased a sub-channel of WMFP (virtual channel 60.5) in Lawrence, Mass. Then, after a year, it decided the station should be called NBC 10!
In Raleigh/Durham, NBC dumped its weak affiliate and affiliated with a new station that was owned by a company that owned successful NBC affiliates, but it had to start up a news department from scratch.
In Charlotte, Fox dumped one of its strongest affiliates that had a news department just to affiliate with the former UPN station, and start up a brand new news department, so it could carry Carolina Panthers football games.
You could say viewers in lots of the country got confused and there are no more partnerships, since companies will do whatever it takes to make more money.
Looking ahead, had the Sinclair-Tribune deal gone through, some CW affiliates owned by Tribune probably would’ve lost their affiliations to CBS-owned stations.
And separately, there was the channel 4-channel 6 swap in Miami.
I noted in the Miami market,
“Putting WSFL on the block goes against Sinclair trying to buy up stations in every city around the country – or just make a deal with the owners to operate them, to get around the rules. That’s because neither Sinclair nor Tribune have any other stations in Miami.”
And don’t forget Miami has the Dolphins NFL team.
I ended by showing,
“There are also examples where networks own stations but don’t put their own programs on those stations, because affiliating with competing stations makes more sense.”
“announced it would sell several stations to stay under a new cap, but the deals it reached would let it continue to control the New York and Chicago stations it sells, so those big cities won’t count. (Is there ANYBODY who thinks that’s OK?)”
“Sinclair (was supposed to) sell WPIX-New York for a measly $15 million to Cunningham Broadcasting. More than 90 percent of that company’s stock is controlled by trusts owned by the estate of Carolyn Smith, the late wife of Sinclair founder Julian Smith and mother of Sinclair chairman David Smith. So the Smith children own it. Talk about a shell corporation! Cunningham owns 20 stations but at least 14 of them are run by Sinclair!
“And it (was supposed to) sell WGN-TV Chicago for just $60 million to Steven B. Fader, chairman of Baltimore-based Atlantic Capital Group and business partner of David Smith in Atlantic Automotive Corp.
“Those stations are each worth hundreds of millions of dollars, maybe a half-billion.”
“Sinclair would not only continue to operate the stations and receive the lion’s share of their revenue, but the sale agreement with both buyers gives Sinclair an option to buy the stations back within eight years. That’s seen as a marker for the company to bide its time in the hopes that the FCC relaxes its station ownership restrictions in the near future.”
TVNewsCheck‘s editor Harry Jessell reported he spoke to Ansin who said Fox hasn’t mentioned anything about “moving into the market and no expression of interest in WSVN.”
I mentioned several other cities where the networks got rid of affiliates they didn’t want. Some cases were nicer than others.
On a national level, Disney’s bid beat Comcast’s for Fox in the U.S., but it wasn’t over.
In Europe, Comcast outbid Fox to buy the 61 percent of Sky PLC Fox didn’t already own. Fox is still trying to consolidate ownership of the powerful British pay-TV company in order to turn it around and sell Sky to Disney.
“getting rid of the cap would threaten diversity, competition, and localism, and cites Sinclair Broadcasting, whose Tribune deal would benefit from lifting or eliminating the limit, pointing out that it distributes news stories that must run in its newscasts.”
The attorneys general included the ones from Illinois (home to Tribune) and Maryland (home to Sinclair), who opposed the takeover because
“the combination would decrease consumer choices and diversity in the media marketplace.”
According to The Sun, Sinclair claimed
“the merger would allow the new company to better serve local viewers with expanded local coverage, better facilities and more programming, delivered in part by operational efficiencies.”
“Call to action: Help stop Sinclair from taking over Tribune” went into detail about why the deal was bad and showed you how to contact the FCC, your Congressional representative and your senator.
This was when Sinclair started ordering hundreds of its local news anchors around the country to recite a script using President Trump’s talking points against the rest of the media.
“I’m [we are] extremely proud of the quality, balanced journalism that [proper news brand name of local station] produces. But I’m [we are] concerned about the troubling trend of irresponsible, one sided news stories plaguing our country.
“The sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media. More alarming, national media outlets are publishing these same fake stories without checking facts first. Unfortunately, some members of the national media are using their platforms to push their own personal bias and agenda to control ‘exactly what people think’ … This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.
“We understand Truth is neither politically ‘left or right.’ Our commitment to factual reporting is the foundation of our credibility, now more than ever.”
“Promo messages, like the one you are referring to, are very common in our industry. … “This promo addresses the troubling trend of false stories on social media [Livingston’s emphasis], and distinguishes our trusted local stations as news destinations where we are committed to honest and accurate reporting. This promo reminds our viewers of this mission.”
CNN also went into great detail about how the promos were supposed to “look and sound.”
“Talent should dress in jewel tones — however they should not look political in their dress or attire. … Avoid total red, blue and purples dresses and suits. Avoid totally red, blue and purple ties, the goal is to look apolitical, neutral, nonpartisan yet professional. Black or charcoal suits for men…females should wear yellow, gold, magenta, cyan, but avoid red, blue or purple.”
“At the end of the promo, viewers are encouraged to send in feedback ‘if you believe our coverage is unfair’ and ‘Corporate will monitor the comments and send replies to your audience on your behalf,’ so ‘In other words, local stations are cut out of the interactions with viewers. Management will handle it instead.’”
I gave my opinion on the whole propaganda problem:
“TV stations should be run by their general managers who live in and are part of the community. And this is exactly the opposite. … It shouldn’t matter much whether GMs come from the sales side or the news side, as long as they’re serving the public interest. There should be hardly any interference from a major corporation’s headquarters.”
I reminded readers, “Sinclair ordered all of its ABC stations not to air April 30, 2004’s episode of Nightline in which Ted Koppel read the names of the more than U.S. troops killed in action in the Iraq war,” how Sinclair said the Nightline program
“appears to be motivated by a political agenda designed to undermine the efforts of the United States in Iraq. … Mr. Koppel and Nightline are hiding behind this so-called tribute in an effort to highlight only one aspect of the war effort and in doing so to influence public opinion against the military action in Iraq,”
and how the company’s lawyer Faber confirmed his company told its ABC affiliates not to air the program because,
“We find it to be contrary to public interest.”
Vietnam veteran and prisoner of war, Sen. John McCain (R-Arizona) disagreed. He wrote in a letter to David Smith:
“Your decision to deny your viewers an opportunity to be reminded of war’s terrible costs, in all their heartbreaking detail, is a gross disservice to the public, and to the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. … It is, in short, sir, unpatriotic. I hope it meets with the public opprobrium it most certainly deserves.”
Regardless of politics, whose opinion on “public interest” would you support, John McCain’s or David Smith’s?
Of course, Sinclair stations not airing the program with the rest of the country got many complaints.
So much for localism!
Speaking of David Smith, I had to mention The Baltimore Sun reporting he was arrested “and charged with committing a perverted sex act in a company-owned Mercedes” in August, 1996. It happened “in an undercover sting at Read and St. Paul streets, a downtown corner frequented by prostitutes.” Smith and Mary DiPaulo “were charged with committing unnatural and perverted sex act.” Police said “they witnessed the two engage in oral sex while Smith drove north” on Baltimore’s Jones Falls Expressway. Neither Sinclair nor its local flagship station WBFF-45 would comment. People in the media have lost jobs over less.
Is this someone who deserves a public broadcast license?
But back to politics. CNN also reported,
“According to campaign finance records, four of Sinclair’s top executives each have given the maximum campaign contribution of $2,000 to the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign. The executives have not given any donations to the campaign of Sen. John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic nominee, the records showed.”
“Most notoriously, the company ordered its stations to air a documentary critical of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry right before the 2004 election. … After an uproar, the stations ended up airing just a few minutes of the documentary, Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal, as well as excerpts from a pro-Kerry documentary and interviews with veterans.”
The article continued,
“In 2010, several Sinclair stations aired an infomercial about President Obama intended to sway voters in midterm elections. The 25-minute piece, funded by a Republican political-action group, said Obama “displays tendencies some would call socialist” and claimed the president had accepted campaign donations from Middle Eastern terrorist organizations.
“In 2012, on the Monday before the election, viewers in some swing states found their nightly news or other programs replaced on Sinclair channels by an ‘election special’ produced by Sinclair that was biased against Democrats.”
Therefore, I wrote,
“It appears Sinclair’s owners are far right-wingers using their assets (and our airwaves) to get what they want politically. That’s not the public interest.”
Neither is Sinclair being the king of the “must-runs,” which The New York Times reported in May arrive every day at its TV stations. The paper defined them as
“short video segments that are centrally produced by the company. Station managers around the country are directed to work them into the broadcast over a period of 24 or 48 hours.”
Again, so much for local control over content! The Times gave these examples:
“Since November 2015, Sinclair has ordered its stations to run a daily segment from a ‘Terrorism Alert Desk’ with updates on terrorism-related news around the world. During the election campaign last year, it sent out a package that suggested in part that voters should not support Hillary Clinton because the Democratic Party was historically pro-slavery. More recently, Sinclair asked stations to run a short segment in which Scott Livingston, the company’s vice president for news, accused the national news media of publishing ‘fake news stories.’”
And it described a Seattle station the company bought less than five years earlier,
“Eight current and former KOMO employees described a newsroom where some have chafed at Sinclair’s programming directives, especially the must-runs, which they view as too politically tilted and occasionally of poor quality. They also cited features like a daily poll, which they believe sometimes asks leading questions.
“The journalists at KOMO described small acts of rebellion, like airing the segments at times of low viewership or immediately before or after commercial breaks so they blend in with paid spots. They all spoke on condition of anonymity, citing fear of reprisal from the company.
“Those interviewed said that being on the other side of the country from the corporate headquarters outside Baltimore gave them some breathing room. But not always.
“In late 2013, for instance, after The Seattle Times wrote an editorial criticizing Sinclair’s purchase of KOMO, Sinclair ordered KOMO to do a story critical of the newspaper industry, and of The Seattle Times in particular, according to two of the people interviewed.
“KOMO journalists were surprised in January when, at a morning planning meeting, they received what they considered an unusual request. The station’s news director, who normally avoided overtly political stories, instructed his staff to look into an online ad that seemed to be recruiting paid protesters for President Trump’s inauguration. Right-leaning media organizations had seized on the ad, which was later revealed as a hoax, as proof of coordinated efforts by the left to subvert Mr. Trump.
“Only after reporters had left the room did they learn the origin of the assignment, two of them said: The order had come down from Sinclair.”
Livingston, the company’s vice president for news, told The Times,
“We work very hard to be objective and fair and be in the middle. … I think maybe some other news organizations may be to the left of center, and we work very hard to be in the center.”
I interpreted that to mean Sinclair works very hard to be to the right of other news organizations.
At least the Seattle station, an ABC affiliate, carries news.
Sinclair owns a Fox affiliate in Pittsburgh, WPGH-Channel 53. It used to produce its own newscast but no longer does. Instead, it runs a newscast produced by a competitor. That’s one less local television voice.
Sinclair pretty much closed up shop in Toledo, Ohio. Its NBC affiliate there has a few people left in news but production is done out of its CBS/Fox stations in South Bend, Indiana. That includes its anchors and weather people. Who knows if they’ve ever been to Toledo, know anything about it, its history, what’s popular there, etc.? The weather person is supposed to know the nuances and micro-climates of that area. Sinclair has shown none of that matters.
Sinclair had its former Vice President for Corporate Relations Mark Hyman give “must air” right-wing commentaries for years and then hired former Trump campaign spokesman and advisor Boris Epshteyn as its chief political analyst, a month after he left the White House.
Sinclair does not offer commentaries from the other side, but tells you the news programming their network-affiliated stations air is left-wing liberalism.
Plus, don’t forget President Trump’s son-in-law and advisor Jared Kushner said Sinclair executives worked with the campaign to spread pro-Trump messages in Sinclair newscasts.
“Sinclair’s top lobbyist, a former F.C.C. official, also communicated frequently with former agency colleagues and pushed for the relaxation of media ownership rules. And language the lobbyist used about loosening rules has tracked closely to analysis and language used by Mr. Pai in speeches favoring such changes.”
Then I scrutinized prices for Tribune stations Sinclair was buying versus past station sales and wrote,
“I think the FCC should insist Sinclair itemize every TV station it plans to buy from Tribune, tell everyone how much it values each and how it adds up to $3.9 billion.”
Back on March 23, we thought we’d learned the fates of seven more TV stations that would’ve had to be divested.
They were to go to political commentator, entrepreneur, author of a nationally syndicated conservative newspaper column, and host of the daily radio show and the nationally syndicated TV program, The Armstrong Williams Show. Williams is also the largest African-American owner of television stations in the U.S.
Williams had been in business with Sinclair – a corporation with overtly and pushy conservative leanings – before, but this time looked different.
The backstory is that Williams helped Sinclair buy Barrington Broadcasting. He got NBC affiliate WEYI-TV in Flint-Saginaw-Bay City, Mich., and CW affiliate WWMB in Myrtle Beach-Florence, S.C., BUT according to Wikipedia,
“Both stations remain operated by Sinclair under a local marketing agreement, which resulted in allegations that the company was simply acting as a ‘sidecar’ of Sinclair to skirt FCC ownership rules. Williams defended the allegations, noting that he had full control over their programming, and received the majority of their revenue.”
He did buy five other stations, three from Sinclair.
No price was announced in this deal.
Funny thing is, according to White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders, President Trump attacked AT&T’s $85.4 billion bid for Time Warner. However, he even spoke to Fox owner Rupert Murdoch in December and congratulated him on his Disney deal!
Maybe that’s because Fox owns Fox News Channel, which Trump likes, and Time-Warner owns CNN, which the president does not like.
Don’t forget Comcast had originally even offered more than Disney for all those Fox assets but was rejected! That may have been a good thing, since a federal judge let AT&T get Time Warner but the government is appealing. A Fox-Comcast deal would’ve been similar, with a content creator and a content provider.
Then I went over the FCC’s broadcast ownership limits and the reason a combined Sinclair-Tribune could not have simply kept the two highest-rated stations in a big city, or more than one in a smaller city.
“a series of Form 314 filings have been made with the FCC indicating the divestiture of up to 23 broadcast television properties by Sinclair.”
The stations – from both Sinclair and Tribune – were put in the trust “for the purpose of removing them from the licensee” – in other words, to be sold off.
According to RBR+TVBR, Sinclair noted stations were placed in the divestiture trust
“in order to retain flexibility, based on the outcome of Sinclair’s request to own two top-four stations in this market, to determine which station, if any, will be placed in the Trust.”
That’s because FCC rules would not have let the proposed controversial combination simply decide to hold onto the two highest-rated stations in a city.
I really wrote a lot because on March 30, I discussed how unionizing could’ve helped those news anchors at Sinclair-run stations who didn’t want to look into a camera and read that corporate promotional nonsense during newscasts. I think a union would’ve helped the journalists keep the business people in their place, which is out of the newsroom.
“The claim of balanced reporting is undermined by must-run segments like the one about the ‘Deep State’ that ran during KOMO’s 6pm newscast last week. In the March 21 segment, former Trump adviser Sebastian Gorka parroted a Trump talking point regarding the existence of a ‘Deep State’ attempting to undermine the U.S. government.
“That segment was produced by Sinclair’s Kristine Frazao, who before coming to Sinclair was a reporter and anchor for the Russian-government funded news network RT, described as ‘the Kremlin’s propaganda outlet’ by the Columbia Journalism Review.
“Sinclair also requires stations to run segments from Boris Epshteyn, a Russian-born former Trump adviser who now serves as Sinclair’s chief political analyst. Epshteyn recently produced stories with titles like, ‘Pres. Trump deserves cabinet and staff who support his agenda, yield successes’ and ‘Cable news channels are giving way too much coverage to Stormy Daniels.’”
I ended with New York magazine publishing a piece titled “Local news is turning into Trump TV, even though viewers don’t want it” describing — without repeating what’s above — how
“Trump’s handpicked FCC chair, Ajit Pai, spent much of last year dismantling regulatory obstacles to media consolidation — including two rules that stood in the way of Sinclair’s desired merger with Tribune Media.”
Then it presumed “Sinclair has repaid this favor with interest” and asked “Why has Sinclair’s programming become more right-wing, even as it has expanded into more left-leaning media markets?”
According to Bloomberg, the day before, the statement takes “aim at the integrity of other U.S. media outlets.”
That left many – myself included – wondering why some of the company’s journalists with credibility didn’t just quit doing what they’re told, despite the fact they hate everything about it, personally and professionally? Wouldn’t you have more respect for someone who uses their conscience and just says no, regardless of the consequences?
“The short answer is the cost may be too steep. According to copies of two employment contracts reviewed by Bloomberg, some Sinclair employees were subject to a liquidated damages clause for leaving before the term of their agreement was up: one that requires they pay as much as 40 percent of their annual compensation to the company.”
Can you imagine?
And that right to enforce the liquidated damages clause isn’t just a scare tactic. I gave an example and later learned, a Sinclair assistant news director who left for a job in another city less than two months before her contract ended had to pay too much to leave.
With Sinclair, some employees who never appeared on television were still required to sign such contracts.
Want to fight? Then there’s forced arbitration which means no sympathetic jury for the employee.
No reasonable person can feel anything but resentment if they know how the company operates.
But don’t forget journalists are natural storytellers.
Despite what you read, President Trump tweeted twice he’s a fan of Sinclair.
So funny to watch Fake News Networks, among the most dishonest groups of people I have ever dealt with, criticize Sinclair Broadcasting for being biased. Sinclair is far superior to CNN and even more Fake NBC, which is a total joke.
The Fake News Networks, those that knowingly have a sick and biased AGENDA, are worried about the competition and quality of Sinclair Broadcast. The “Fakers” at CNN, NBC, ABC & CBS have done so much dishonest reporting that they should only be allowed to get awards for fiction!
Actually, this isn't funny at all. None of it. When media giants gobble up local news stations, there are repercussions. And since you brought it up first this morning, will your admin green light the Tribune buyout? https://t.co/9Udm54LLOx
Another Sinclair station, WMSN in Madison, Wisc., was dealing with record snowfall (even for them!) and an important state Supreme Court election. Sounds a lot more local, important and even life-saving than the bullshit Sinclair demanded.
In response to the Sinclair message aired: "WMSN/FOX47 Madison did not air the Sinclair promotional announcement during our 9pm news this weekend. Rather, we stayed true to our commitment to provide our Madison area viewers local news, weather and sports of interest to them." pic.twitter.com/9rcpliT7tD
“Some employees have spoken out about their frustration at having to parrot the conservative politics of their employer,” but also, “Others say they’d like to do more, but they’re wary due to what they say is Sinclair’s policy and practice of closely monitoring its employees.”
Also, “There’s a lot held over us,” a journalist at a Sinclair affiliate told HuffPost on the condition of anonymity. “They pay attention to what websites we’re on.”
“Sinclair employees say their parent company often pays especially close attention to its affiliates’ editorial activities, meddling in how they present their stories and graphics, and sometimes going so far as to delete offensive comments on an affiliate’s online articles before that station’s own web editors have a chance to do so.”
So a huge THANK YOU to everyone who has done their part to fight for what’s right. I hope they all still have their jobs, or moved on to something better. Unfortunately, I don’t think that was the case in Portland, Ore.
“many TV local news stations are focusing more on national politics and have taken a rightward slant over the past year. And that move is stemming from ownership of the stations, not the demands of a local audience.”
The researchers examined 7.5 million transcript segments from 743 local news stations and saw huge differences between other stations, and outlets owned by Sinclair.
“The authors found Sinclair stations, on average, carried about a third less local politics coverage and a quarter more national politics … (including) commentaries the stations are forced to run by former Trump official Boris Epshteyn.”
Again, how can they claim they’re good for localism?!
“a call from an Ohio broadcaster who said his plans for a Saturday morning news program were ‘derailed’ by the need to make way for children’s programming.”
I don’t know which station but will go to go out on a limb and say the news program would be much cheaper using a set already in the studio and an announcer already on staff. And where was the required children’s programming anyway? That’s just my two cents.
Also from Jessell:
“Pai also patted himself on the back for helping broadcasters secure an additional $1 billion from Congress to insure that they will be fully reimbursed for moving to new channels in the wake of the FCC incentive auction.”
So much for helping the poor and the children! Ain’t government great?!
On May 4, I published the massive “Media mega-merger may be moving closer, impacting Miami” because we learned the biggest news for a local TV market if Sinclair and Tribune would’ve merged would’ve been Miami/Fort Lauderdale (of course!).
A week earlier, TVNewsCheck‘s Harry Jessell noted,
A number of stations would have to be sold and I’d already explained TV ownership limits, with four rules in play: 1. national TV ownership, 2. local TV multiple ownership, 3. the number of independently owned “media voices” – 4. and at least one of the stations is not ranked among the top four stations in the DMA (that’s the “designated market area” or city, and ranking based on audience share), and at least eight independently owned TV stations would remain in the market after the proposed combination.
“The Smith family, which includes brothers David, Robert, Frederick, J. Duncan and a flurry of family trusts, is worth a combined $1.2 billion, Forbes estimates, based on the family members’ ownership of stock in publicly traded Sinclair Broadcasting, share sales over the past 15 years, dividends and some private assets,” it read.
“Revenues have increased 281% over the last decade to $2.7 billion in 2017, while Sinclair’s share price has increased 367% over the same period, pushing its market capitalization up to a recent $3 billion. All of this growth has occurred under the control and oversight of David Smith, 67, the chairman and former CEO of the company, as well as the son of the company’s founder Julian Sinclair Smith,” it continued.
Forbes quoted Daniel Kurnos, an analyst at Benchmark Capital, as saying, “Sinclair plays some of the hardest ball of anyone,” from acquiring stations to negotiating advertisement pricing and retransmission fees, which are some of the highest in the business.
Under David Smith, who wouldn’t comment for the article, Sinclair went from three cities – Baltimore, Pittsburgh and Columbus – to what it is now.
“To ‘purely make money’ in a scale-oriented business, David bought up as many broadcast stations as possible. First he concentrated on secondary markets, like Memphis, St. Louis and San Antonio, where operation costs were cheaper than in places like New York or Chicago.
“I believed that certain things were going to happen in the television industry, the most important being consolidation,” David told Forbes in 1996.
So much for public service!
Then came the controversial Cunningham, arguably rigging the system.
“In the 1990s, the company pioneered a technique to circumvent an FCC rule limiting ownership of more than one TV station per metro area. David’s mother, Carolyn Smith, started another business, Cunningham Broadcasting. Following Carolyn’s death in 2012, most of the ownership of Cunningham Broadcasting shifted to a family trust, which is included in the overall Smith family valuation.”
So Cunningham really isn’t independent, as its website claims!
“The Rainbow/PUSH Coalition is raising questions at the FCC about whether Sinclair Broadcasting is exercising control over a minority-headed TV group with which it has struck a series of local marketing agreements (LMAs).
“In a July 1 filing at the FCC, Rainbow/PUSH said it plans to study whether the LMA deal between Sinclair’s KABB(TV) San Antonio and Glencairn’s KRRT(TV) Kerrville, Tex., violates the commission’s prohibition against common ownership of two local stations. (The rules were more strict then.)
“‘Rainbow/PUSH has not had an opportunity to fully research this matter, and thus preserves here the question of whether Glencaim is the alter ego of Sinclair,’ the group told the FCC.”
So we know Cunningham, set to buy Tribune stations in Dallas and Houston, appears to be a shell company, and we can make bets who will operate and control it if the Sinclair-Tribune deal ever comes to fruition.
“Cunningham Broadcasting owns the FCC broadcast licenses and operates through various management agreements with Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. WNUV-TV in Baltimore, Maryland; WTTE-TV in Columbus, Ohio; WMYA-TV in Anderson, South Carolina; WRGT-TV in Dayton, Ohio; WVAH-TV in Charleston, West Virginia; WDBB-TV in Bessemer, Alabama; WBSF-TV in Flint, Michigan; WGTU-TV in Traverse City, Michigan; KBVU-TV in Eureka, California; KCVU-TV in Chico-Redding, California; WEMT-TV in Greeneville, Tennessee; WPFO-TV in Portland, Maine; WYDO-TV in Greenville, North Carolina; and KRNV-TV & KENV-TV in Reno, Nevada.”
“For years (before 2012), Fox Television Stations’ WUTB Baltimore gave Fox considerable leverage in its sometime contentious affiliation negotiations with Sinclair Broadcast Group.
“If Sinclair ever got out of line, Fox could threaten to yank its affiliation from Sinclair’s flagship station WBFF Baltimore and move it to WUTB.
“But last May, Fox relinquished that leverage when it extended its affiliation with WBFF and 18 other Sinclair stations for five years starting Jan. 1, 2013, and granted Sinclair an option to buy WUTB.
“Sinclair is now exercising that option by assigning it to a third party, Deerfield LLC.
“According to an FCC filing seeking approval of the deal, Deerfield is buying WUTB and allowing Sinclair to run the MNT affiliate through joint sales and shared services agreements.
“The deal gives Sinclair a virtual triopoly in Baltimore where it also operates CW affiliate WNUV, which is owned by Cunningham Broadcasting, Sinclair’s longtime duopoly partner that is controlled by trusts for the children of Sinclair’s controlling shareholders.”
But Sinclair and Deerfield were already in cahoots.
“to buy six television stations from Newport Television LLC for $412.5 million and agreed to buy Bay Television Inc. for $40 million. … Sinclair also agreed to sell the license assets of its San Antonio station KMYS and its WSTR station in Cincinnati to Deerfield Media Inc. Sinclair will also assign Deerfield the right to buy the license assets of WPMI and WJTC in the Mobile/Pensacola market, after which Sinclair will provide sales and other non-programming services to each of these four stations under shared services and joint sales agreements.”
“Sinclair Broadcast is getting six stations in five markets for $412.5 million:
— Cincinnati (DMA 35) — WKRC (CBS)
— San Antonio, Texas (DMA 36) — WOAI (NBC)
— Harrisburg-Lancaster (DMA 41) — WHP (CBS)
— Mobile, Ala.-Pensacola, Fla. (DMA 60) — WPMI (NBC) and WJTC (Ind.)
— Wichita, Kan. (DMA 67) — KSAS (Fox)
“Sinclair is also acquiring Newport’s rights to operate third-party duopoly stations in Harrisburg, Pa. (CW affiliate WLYH), and Wichita, Kan. (MNT affiliate KMTW). Those rights include options to buy the stations. …
“While Sinclair was buying, it was also selling.
“It said it would spin off its CW affiliate in San Antonio (KMYS) and its MNT affiliate in Cincinnati (WSTR) to Deerfield Media Inc., presumably to comply with the FCC ownership limits. In the deal, Deerfield also picks up an option to buy two of the stations it is acquiring from Newport, WPMI-WJTC Mobile, Ala.-Pensacola, Fla.
“Sinclair said it intends to ‘provide sales and other non-programming services to each of these four stations pursuant to shared services and joint sales agreements.’
“In yet another deal, Sinclair said it is buying WTTA Tampa-St. Petersburg from Bay Television Inc. for $40 million. Since 1998, Sinclair has operated WTTA pursuant to a local marketing agreement.”
And that was the start of the Deerfield connection!
So for those of you in Baltimore, do you need to reach the newsroom, are you looking for a job (Would they hire me for my investigative work?), or interested in inspecting the FCC public file of any of the three stations? All the information is the same, from address to phone numbers, and we already established three stations in one city are not allowed!
Why was the FCC the last to find out? Or did it know and ignore the facts for political reasons?
“The FCC, backed by the Obama administration Justice Department, argues that broadcasters have used the shared-service, or “sidecar,” arrangements to circumvent long-standing rules against owning multiple television stations in a single market, allowing them to raise ad prices and weaken market competition.”
It seemed every article in HSH’s News section mentioned Sinclair or those joint sales agreements designed to get by without abiding by the FCC’s ownership rules!
In other words, he was a great partner for Sinclair since he’s a minority (but without the views of most other minorities) and they’re both making money by using each other!
But I found it eventually gets somewhat better.
Wikipedia said Williams helped Sinclair buy Barrington Broadcasting in late 2013, so he got stations in Flint, MI, and Myrtle Beach, SC, but they remain operated by Sinclair. They’re actually his only stations run by Sinclair and remember, at the time, his company was accused of “acting as a ‘sidecar’ of Sinclair to skirt FCC ownership rules.”
But that was then.
A year later, he actually, really bought three stations from Sinclair: one in Charleston and two in Alabama. So they’ve been in business several times, and it may not be over.
That means as of now, Howard Stirk Holdings owns seven stations. Two are in the same Anniston-Tuscaloosa-Birmingham, Ala., market, and Williams’ first two are still run by Sinclair. Now, after other purchases, he’s expecting to buy three more if the Sinclair-Tribune merger happens.
Then there’s Standard Media Group. I hadn’t heard of them either. Its website says Standard General was founded in 2007 and is pretty much an investment adviser, but getting into the broadcasting business. I was skeptical since investment firms are more likely to sell than others with broadcasting in their blood, especially ones who invest in their communities.
However, I learned it’s owned by Soohyung Kim, who started Standard Media to buy nine of the 23 stations. He was a hedge fund manager involved with Media General, Young Broadcasting and LIN before Media General bought them, and Nexstar bought Media General. He owns no TV stations now, and he’s bringing his winning team from years ago with him.
Standard said if the deal goes through, it’ll fulfill its “goal of swiftly building a substantial broadcast television group with a strong and diverse voice” that includes four state capitals.
Sinclair already owns KDNL (ABC) and would also own Tribune’s KTVI (FOX). Great for owners’ synergies. Bad for the number of independent voices in such a big city. Which do you care more about?
We mentioned New York and Chicago, and those plans have changed.
Politico reported on a potential Sinclair news channel, even though Sinclair execs gave denied it. The channel may be just a few hours in the evening to challenge Fox News for conservative viewers. Fox News is carried in more than 90 million homes, compared to 80 million for WGN America which Sinclair would own if regulators approve, and 55 million for the Tennis Channel which Sinclair already owns. It would be based in Washington, DC, where the company already owns local station WJLA-7 and produces some of its national content.
Fox wasn’t on the list of buyers while negotiations were taking place.
Jessell of TVNewsCheck was more direct, saying all Sinclair
“has to do now is wrap up its negotiations with Fox. I don’t know what’s delaying that deal, except that neither Fox nor Sinclair is famous for making concessions. Once Sinclair does that, it can finalize its application and the FCC can complete it long-stalled review.”
That’s where I wrote,
“Those greedy bastards are going to end up screwing everything up for themselves (which I’d love to see happen), and you’ve only read about half of the plans, so far!”
Fox wanted stations in football cities so badly, it got its hands on Cox’s KTVU in San Francisco (with an NFC team, the 49ers, and the AFC Oakland Raiders across the bay will now be moving to Las Vegas in 2020) and gave Cox its own stations in Boston (the New England Patriots are AFC) and Memphis (no NFL team).
Football teams have moved, but the cities Fox wants are Seattle (especially because it’s NFC), and Cleveland, Denver and Miami (because they have AFC teams). San Diego and St. Louis no longer have teams, so Fox isn’t interested in Tribune’s Fox affiliates in those cities.
Seattle, Cleveland and Denver should be easy. The stations are already Fox affiliates so prime-time programming and the amount of news shouldn’t change. And Fox has leverage because it can threaten to take away its affiliation from those stations, lowering their value, if they’re sold to another company.
Miami is a different story. Fox has a very good affiliate, WSVN-7, owned by Ed Ansin’s Sunbeam Television. The ratings are great, the Miami Dolphins play there, and as an AFC team, they show up on Fox on a few Sundays and may also now be seen on Fox on Thursdays.
But the station that’s available is Tribune’s WSFL-39, a CW affiliate without a news department despite a few morning attempts. Should Fox dump WSVN and start from scratch with WSFL? Would it be worth the effort?
“Sinclair is telling the FCC that its coverage after spinoffs from its merger with Tribune will be just 58.7%. But that’s for regulatory purposes. (In other words, with the revived UHF discount that only counts channels 14 and up as half the audience of the market.) In the real world, where it matters, Sinclair’s national reach will be 66.3% — a full two-thirds of TV homes.”
But he said Sinclair is telling the FCC
“the coverage of the group will be just 58.7% and, with the UHF discount, below the statutory 39% cap. But those percentages are for regulatory consumption, not the real world.”
So there’s a 7.6-point disparity, the difference between 58.7% and 66.3%. How’d that happen? And don’t forget about the part,
“with the UHF discount, below the statutory 39% cap.”
Jessell explained Sinclair
“is claiming 58% because it is not counting stations in three big markets — WGN Chicago, KDAF Dallas, KIAH Houston — that it is spinning off to closely affiliated companies. Without those markets and the discount in effect, Sinclair’s reach will be just 37.39%, safely below the 39% cap.”
Plus, with Dallas and Houston (but not Chicago),
“Sinclair has put additional distance between itself and Cunningham” but will “have an option to buy the stations should the FCC ever ease the rules to allow it.”
So this is Jessell’s bottom line:
“So, again, for regulatory purposes, Sinclair’s reach will be 58.7% without the discount and 37.39% with it.
“But I don’t think that is reality. Those are not the numbers that Sinclair will be showing national advertisers, MVPDs, vendors and others with which it does business.
“In the real world, Sinclair will have a lot of control over Chicago and some control over Dallas and Houston, and its effective national reach will be 66.3%. (For the record, its reach with the UHF discount will be 41.1%, two points over the cap, but that will not matter because regulators will not be counting the three markets.)”
So the company hasn’t been doing itself any favors.
On May 8, I showed you how the FCC had just published a letter from FCC Chairman Ajit Pai’s response to Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) regarding the proposed Sinclair-Tribune merger. Sen. Durbin and others have been especially concerned about Tribune’s WGN-TV9 in Chicago.
“21st Century Fox today announced a definitive agreement with Sinclair Broadcast Group and Tribune Media Company to acquire seven television stations for approximately $910 million. The transaction will grow Fox Television Stations’ (FTS) coverage to nearly half of all U.S. households, and its market presence to 19 of the top 20 DMAs, including the addition of key markets that align with Fox’s sports rights,” it said.
Six of those seven are Fox affiliates, so not much would’ve changed for viewers in those cities.
Yet, the Miami/Fort Lauderdale station is a CW affiliate. What would become of it, and also Sunbeam-owned Fox affiliate powerhouse WSVN? We may never know since the merger looks dead.
The CEO of Fox Television Stations, Jack Abernethy, said,
“This transaction illustrates Fox’s commitment to local broadcasting and we are pleased to add these stations to our existing portfolio. With this acquisition, we will now compete in 19 of the top 20 markets and have a significantly larger presence in the west, which will enhance our already strong platform. This expansion will further enrich our valuable alignments with the NFL, including our new Thursday Night Football rights, MLB and college sports assets. We are also happy to add many talented Tribune employees to our group, some of whom we know well.”
That’s because Fox actually used to own the Cleveland, Salt Lake City and Denver stations but sold them to a company called Local TV which sold itself to Tribune. So much for Fox actually caring about those communities when it owned those stations, sold them, and now wants them back. I hope the people of Cleveland, Salt Lake City and Denver will challenge Fox’s proposed buy with the FCC.
Also, Fox entered into new network affiliation agreements with Sinclair and the stations it doesn’t own but still operates.
Of course, where would Fox find that approximately $910 million to buy the stations? By selling off most of its assets like its movie and TV studio, cable networks FX and National Geographic, and regional sports networks to Disney – keeping just its network, TV stations, Fox News Channel, Fox Business Network and FS1/FS2 cable sports channels.
Remember, a much leaner “New Fox” network plans to concentrate more on live events, specifically NFL football.
But it may not matter due to this point from the Fox news release:
“Completion of the stations acquisition by 21st Century Fox is anticipated for the second half of this calendar year, subject to the satisfaction of customary closing conditions, including regulatory approvals, and is expected to be coordinated with the closing of Sinclair’s proposed acquisition of Tribune.”
And that’s not so likely anymore.
Since the merger announcement, there have been many holdups. Most notably is opposition from people who hate Sinclair’s conservative leanings, must-run commentaries on its local stations and its history of forced network preemptions. There are also those who think Sinclair was already too big of a company and adding Tribune to it would make it much larger.
WSFL was supposed to be spun off and not take part in any Sinclair-Tribune merger, since Fox was concentrating on cities in the NFL’s NFC conference. The Miami Dolphins are in the AFC, and WSFL is a CW affiliate without a news department.
I suggested Fox look at CBS, making money while owning CW affiliates (it owns half of the CW) and also independent stations, while letting outside companies with either stronger reach or good news departments have the CBS affiliations.
I predicted WSFL losing its CW affiliation since CBS owns two stations in the market. There’s the CBS station WFOR-4, and WBFS-33 which became a MyNetworkTV affiliate to please CW partner Tribune, since CBS got the CW in so many other cities back when the WB and UPN combined.
If Fox ever gets WSFL, it would make perfect sense for CBS to move the CW affiliation to WBFS. WSFL would be a MyNetworkTV affiliate which is perfectly fine, since Fox owns MyNetworkTV.
Fox would have a place to air any network programming WSVN preempts, its Fox News would have access to WSVN’s powerful news coverage like it does from any other affiliate, it could say it owns a station in Miami/Fort Lauderdale to give advertisers more scale, and it could program and promote WSFL and its MyNetworkTV shows any way it wants.
That’s how I saw the perfect solution.
Of course, nobody is perfect and Fox doesn’t always make the right decisions.
It could start news at WSFL. That would give viewers another choice for news but be a kick in the face to WSVN and confuse the viewers, since the market is already splintered with popular stations in two languages.
Instead, it looks like there will be no Sinclair-Tribune merger. The FCC’s administrative judge could take a year to make a decision, and these companies – not to mention their employees – have ants in their pants.
Part of Sinclair’s statement last Monday, July 16, said,
“During these discussions and in our filings with the FCC, we have been completely transparent about every aspect of the proposed transaction. We have fully identified who the buyers are and the terms under which stations would be sold to such buyer, including any ongoing relationship we would have with any such stations after the sales. … At no time have we withheld information or misled the FCC in any manner whatsoever with respect to the relationships or the structure of those relationships proposed as part of the Tribune acquisition. Any suggestion to the contrary is unfounded and without factual basis. … As a result and in light of the ongoing and constructive dialogue we had with the FCC during the past year, we were *shocked* (my asterisks) that concerns are now being raised.”
And with Cox coming in and putting its stations up for sale, the dynamics may have completely changed.
I’m going to call it a night and return tomorrow with all the details of what went wrong (or right, if you saw things my way).
Each of the articles above came with details and pictures, and some with videos.
Please leave your comments in the section below, and don’t miss out. If you like what you read here, subscribe to CohenConnect.com with either your email address or WordPress account, and get a notice whenever I publish. I’m also available for writing/web contract work.
It was about being attacked on Facebook by someone who was angry I don’t think Barack Obama is my favorite president and made nasty knee-jerk comments when I simply asked my friend who’d made the post, “Favorite? Really?”
I didn’t see or refer to anything this crazy person had written, but she was obviously too thin-skinned and took it as a personal assault, and lazy and dumb because she couldn’t refute anything I wrote. She resorted to claims of “disrespect” and name-calling.
I’m glad someone commented on that Facebook exchange with a radical liberal after I’d already published the post. That’s when I learned about the new group #WalkAway. It’s called #WalkAway Campaign and it’s no more than a few weeks old.
The group describes itself this way:
I wouldn’t go as far as the group describes itself – it was founded by a New York hairdresser – but I hope it becomes a place for moderates to respectfully discuss issues, because I’m so tired of the extremists on both sides and also both political parties. (I have to say I wish money was out of politics.) They seem so dirty to me and I don’t like the idea of politicians having to choose sides, to be aligned with one side and work against the other. We’re all independent with different subjects important to us, and different views on them.
I don’t know if this will lead to a third party, and we know those haven’t worked in America, but I think most of us are sick of holding our noses and voting. That’s not how it should be. Neither should it be voting down either party’s line because there are good people on both sides.
Notice I said “voting” and not staying home because if you stay home, then you have no say. Remember “No taxation without representation?” Americans fought a war for independence. Much later, women and blacks finally got the right to vote, even though blacks had to wait another hundred years to do so without fear of violence or a poll tax.
Voting is not a right to be taken for granted.
President Trump may have been elected by people on the left who didn’t like Hillary Clinton. I’m not judging but simply stating what I believe to be fact. (I don’t know if anyone but the insiders know enough about Russian influence to make a firm decision. I’m certainly not.)
Tell me, looking back, if all the people who stayed home on the day of the election rather than vote for a flawed candidate (and they were both flawed), would Trump be president? Do those people I’m referring to regret what they did (or didn’t do)?
The hand print after a name in the photo above is supposed to mean the person joined the group within the past two weeks. (I had one yesterday but not today, for what it’s worth.) The shield with the check mark means the person is one of 18 who manages the membership and posts. Something doesn’t sit right with me on all that.
I was told to put my story in the “Random Stuff” section, which is already on Part Three, which contains almost a thousand posts like mine.
My comment was probably not noticed by the rulers of the page but besides my story, I let them know they’re probably shooting themselves in the foot if they’re going to continue being so strict. They’ll alienate possible supporters and there are many, considering how many signed up to join the group and had to be accepted. Hopefully they’ll get that right.
Speaking of radical liberals, there are some in the transgender community and their supporters who didn’t think Scarlett Johansson should play a transgender role in the movie Rub & Tug.
The dissenters claimed the role should’ve gone to a transgender actor instead, and said it proved how limited opportunities are for transgender actors (male-to-female or female to male) – as if casting people are allowed to ask.
“A television show inspired by the life of Dan Savage encountered a snafu when it sought to cast a gay actor for the part of a gay teen.
“Todd Holland, a producer of The Real O’Neals, was alarmed to learn that he is prohibited from asking actors about their sexual orientation.”
That’s California law, meant to protect everyone of all genders, gender identities and orientations. Unfortunately, if you can’t ask, there’s also research and word-of-mouth.
Remember, this is acting and there shouldn’t be discrimination in any form. (Actually, it would probably matter in the adult film industry but I’ll leave that to the lawyers.)
Holland got lucky.
The Advocate reported,
“It was very important to me [to cast a gay actor], and I was in a panic,” Holland said.
“Ultimately, the ABC show … did find a gay actor for the role: the 21-year-old Noah Galvin. The AP reports that Holland had a ‘sense’ that Galvin was gay and that he overheard the young man speaking about coming out to his parents.”
By the way, Galvin is half-Jewish (on his mother’s side, which makes it absolutely certain if you’re Orthodox or Conservative) but his character comes from a strictly Irish Catholic family. And Jay R. Ferguson plays his father, but he’s not, and he plays a police officer, which he’s also not.
But back to reality.
Johansson was cast in Rub & Tug as a mob-connected massage parlor owner who was a woman but lived as a man.
According to the Associated Press,
“Johansson was initially quite defiant and told anyone who had a problem with her casting to speak to the director.
“She said in a statement: ‘Tell them they can be directed to Jeffrey Tambor, Jared Leto, and Felicity Huffman’s reps for comment.’”
All three are cisgender but played transgender characters.
“I’ve learned a lot from the community since making my first statement.
“While I would have loved the opportunity to bring Dante’s story and transition to life, I understand why many feel he should be portrayed by a transgender person.
“I am thankful that this casting debate … has sparked a larger conversation about diversity and representation in film.”
And for the bean-counters out there, Variety reports bisexual actress Evan Rachel Wood (who I never heard of) is in talks to take on a voice actor role for the sequel to 2013’s Disney film Frozen, and some fans hope Wood will play Elsa’s girlfriend.
This scriptwriter (and radical liberal, if you read her Twitter posts) is even demanding it!
She just proved my earlier point, “if there’s any way to please them,” and I suggest she spend a very long time quietly counting the number of LGBTQ+ roles versus the number of LGBTQ+ actors. I want specifics on L, G, B, Y, Q and +, so nobody can say they’re left out. We wouldn’t want to hurt anybody’s feelings. And if there aren’t enough roles to go around, then she should stop writing on Twitter and do her job.
By the way, “Frozen 2” is supposed to hit theaters Nov. 27, 2019. The original hit nearly $1.3 billion in box offices worldwide and won the Academy Award for best animated film in 2014.
Also, something to think about: The many roles of straight, cisgender characters in TV, the movies and the stage.
What if no sexual minority actors were offered any of those roles because they’re not straight, cisgender people? And you have to admit, numerically, characters without any love interest would probably be assumed to be straight and cisgender, since they’re the majority.
Does anyone have an answer to that?
Just know the earlier issues are being discussed and things are getting better. No whining or demanding necessary.
Please leave your comments in the section below, and don’t miss out. If you like what you read here, subscribe to CohenConnect.com with either your email address or WordPress account, and get a notice whenever I publish. I’m also available for writing/web contract work.
Father’s Day is upon us again and I wanted to get this post out before the holiday because I just read a lot of interesting things about how one family celebrates it.
Actually, it’s the family of a person who’s pretty famous: Mayim Bialik.
It used to be things seemed easier in people’s lives. (Notice the word seemed.) Parents raised children together, only one had to work, etc. Everything was like Leave it to Beaver (1957-63). I think you know what I mean.
But that was TV so it may have contained shades of reality for many in America then, but was imaginary for a large number of others including minorities in every possible way.
David Letterman was my favorite for observing differences from the traditional in the 1980s. Here, he and Biff showed some cards.
And this is one of Letterman’s Top Ten Lists.
Of course, no good idea goes unrepeated. Here is Jimmy Fallon’s take. He has the pros and cons of Father’s Day.
And perhaps Father’s Day jokes started or became mainstream with the king of late-night, Johnny Carson.
But enough of “baby daddy” jokes. I hope what you’re about to read and watch conjures up positive feelings.
Mayim Bialik is best known as an actress, these days on The Big Bang Theory, but earlier on Blossom with Joey Lawrence.
But she also is the mother of two boys and, oh — has that PhD in neuroscience. With that education on that subject, she would probably agree she’s a zillion times smarter than me.
But she’s also a pleasant voice of moderation, and worth reading and watching — both on her website and Facebook page.
I noticed that a few days ago, Bialik posted,
“#FathersDay is on Sunday. Father’s Day presents some challenges when your father has died…I reflect here on the pictures and the memories my father and I created through some special photographs of us. These moments make up an ‘us’ that will never be again but they also bring comfort.”
I should also say, this is meant to be egalitarian, including for men and for all parents and children.
Then, she showed this video:
You can see almost 63,000 video views above. Click here to add your thoughts to the 300+ comments, if you’d like.
I know it’s early and this post is coming just over an hour before the actual holiday, but I thinks there’s something in here for everyone. I hope the thoughts (if not earlier comedy videos) help you enjoy your entire Father’s Day even more! A lot was new for me. It’s easier having cats!
And to my own father, and brothers Josh and Daniel, I have here a little warning: your gifts will be arriving late!
P.S. As has become my habit, here is a bonus for reading all the way through! It’s about a holiday from earlier this week that Mayim Bialik’s TV show has associated her with: Flag Day!
Please, if you like what you read here, subscribe to CohenConnect.comwith either your email address or WordPress account, and get a notice whenever I publish.I’m also available for writing/web contract work.
First, happy Mother’s Day to everyone to whom that applies. I hope you’re having a great day!
Second, today is also the celebration of Yom Yerushalayim, or Jerusalem Day. It’s the Hebrew anniversary of when the Israelis recaptured the eastern/holy part of the city in the Six-Day War of 1967. It’s where no Arab country’s leader had visited except Jordan’s King Hussein, who’d “occupied” it 19 years earlier in 1948.
But then it suddenly became so important to them.
There is lots and lots to say about President Trump, but this post isn’t about him. Still, he is making the embassy move from Tel Aviv happen and no other American president has done so, despite being able. So thank you, President Trump.
Shapiro, who is much more liberal, described the situation with a question:
“Why hasn’t the US ever recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital? Some people date it to the controversy that arose in 1967, when Israel captured East Jerusalem from Jordan in the Six-Day War and unified the city, describing it as a US protest against the Israeli ‘occupation’ of East Jerusalem. That’s wrong.
“The truth is that US policy on Jerusalem derives from events 20 years earlier, when the United Nations passed the Partition Plan for Palestine in November 1947.”
The two differ on many things but as my friend Andy, who pointed the article out, published:
“Good to see President Trump’s ambassador positively sharing an article by President Obama’s ambassador. Let’s keep support for Israel bipartisan.”
In the article, Shapiro described a day in the life of a U.S. Ambassador to Israel:
“Jerusalem had always been Israel’s capital, and we have always treated it functionally, if not formally, as such. When I served as the US Ambassador at our embassy in Tel Aviv, nearly every day I would be driven to Jerusalem to conduct affairs of state with the Israeli government at the Prime Minister’s office, the Foreign Ministry, and the Knesset.”
Then, he goes into a brief history of the complicated situation with Jerusalem at the center of it, describes a possible step towards solving an issue that has been delayed too many times over too many decades, and then how the embassy move could help end the century-old conflict. Let’s hope!
Also, Donald Trump’s face is featured on a ceremonial Israeli coin marking the 70th anniversary of the country’s rebirth.
Why does the other side try to claim there’s no Jewish history in Jerusalem? Who are they trying to fool? The answer is gullible haters who don’t want to believe it.
And onto the subject at hand, since I rarely write about myself and even more rarely write about personal subjects rather than professional ones.
Last week, I got a message on Facebook from someone I hadn’t seen in at least 30 years, and probably more like 40.
Technically, I’ve seen him on Facebook. We have several mutual friends, so we’ve seen each other commenting on their posts. (I’m speaking for myself, but can’t imagine the opposite not being true.) We were never really friendly growing up, even though we certainly knew each other.
The message went:
“Hi Lenny, I’m not sure of you remember me, but we grew up together. My memory may be off here, but I feel like I wasn’t always the nicest person to you and I really just want to apologize If I ever did or said anything to make you feel bad. You may not even recall this and maybe it’s more in my head. Anyhow, I just wanted to reach out and say hello. I hope you and your family are doing well. I remember your father very well. … He was always a really nice guy. Again, I know this is very random, but I saw your comment on _____’s post and just to reach out and say hello. Regards, _____”
Wow! Takes guts and a good person to write something like that. Very impressive!
I responded with a quick,
“No worries. I only remember good things. Hope you’re well. Thanks for writing!”
And we connected a few more times.
The truth, as I remember it, is I was not happy growing up in Florida. Early on, I felt most of the people simply couldn’t make it in civilization, like New York.
You know what Frank Sinatra sang:
“If I can make it there, I’ll make it anywhere.”
It was almost always too hot and humid. I wanted to stay inside and watch TV. I was a loner until high school.
Meanwhile, more people moved in to die. The area got more spread out and there was still traffic everywhere. Just Thursday, a friend posted this picture. It’s not downtown Miami but west of the airport.
The goal was to move to New York, which luckily – thanks to my parents – I didn’t do during college and never took on debt.
And instead of moving to New York, once I had enough career experience, I lived on both sides of it: almost two years in Connecticut and eight years in Philadelphia.
When I visit Florida, which hasn’t happened in more than a year, I feel even more like an outsider because of the language barrier. It’s a right-to-work state. Wages are low. So are taxes, even for people work in much better places and spend just 183 days a year there. On the other hand, insurance rates are sky high because of hurricanes and the water level will soon be, too.
Plus, having the career I had and never letting up, I’ve become more of a homebody in recent years.
The writer, who was nice enough to contact me on Facebook, was not a jerk or bully or anything like that. There were some people like that and always will be, even though the world has changed and adults are supposed to be looking for more signs, these days.
And count on the politically-correct police, out in force, to make sure nobody ever feels bad, ever:
People are going to feel bad. That’s a fact of life. It’s not fair. I suggest you fight for what you believe most and try not to sweat the less important stuff. Forget about it, especially if you’re not sure it actually happened decades ago.
And I thank Facebook for the information above. I would not have had it otherwise.
But if it helps you reconnect with people from your past, parents see pictures of their kids in college, grandparents see pictures of their grandchildren, and lets people celebrate their moms on Mother’s Day, and see the excitement of Israelis thrilled about their capital city being reunited and what’s to come this week, then get on board and sign up.
You don’t have to use every function or app, or even a few – but you’re missing out if you’re too stubborn to say you won’t miss good things if you’re not on Facebook.
Please, if you like what you read here, subscribe to CohenConnect.comwith either your email address or WordPress account, and get a notice whenever I publish.
Last night, I did something I rarely do: open a Facebook post to the public, rather than just friends.
Today, I’m blogging about the online battle that followed, something I hadn’t planned to do.
The story was about one of the hosts of a show on the DIY Network — part of Scripps Networks Interactive and sister to HGTV, the Food Network, Travel Channel, Cooking Channel, Great American Country, TVN, Fine Living and the Asian Food Channel.
You’re certainly familiar with some of them unless you’ve been living under a rock.
Unfortunately, it has since been reinforced to me that too many Americans have been living under figurative rocks.
Texas Flip N Move host Toni Snow — who along with her sister Donna — are “real estate entrepreneurs” who “compete head-to-head in a fast-paced and thrilling real estate flipping competition,” according to the show’s website.
It goes on, if you understand flipping, “Our flippers are under the gun to buy low, work fast and sell high.”
And in a recent episode that was shot, produced and edited, Toni Snow asked a participant who was willing to pay full asking price for a refurbished school bus, “You’re not even gonna bicker a little bit, Jew us down?” according to CNN and People magazine.
I’m not a regular watcher of that channel nor show, although I think I once saw part of an episode that was shown on HGTV.
I could say things about people from Texas but I won’t.
The network told CNN in an apology, “An inappropriate comment unfortunately made it past our team” and that they “immediately pulled the episode to edit it for future broadcast.”
My original point was that Toni Snow needed to be edited out. In other words, she should be fired and the episode should never be shown again.
This is an embed of the Facebook post. Be warned, not all is polite.
I have to note how hateful some Toni Schroeder Schwind comes across like those quotes politicians used above, just clinging to the past. I don’t know her but her profile pictures indicate she’s not Jewish, yet she insisted more than once,
“This comment has been around for ages and I think somewhat over reaction was an over reaction. Get over it.”
(Yes, her words.)
I’d say to ask a black person about the N-word, or another minority about slurs about them. Who is she to judge what’s offensive to most Jewish people?
And I wrote “most Jewish people” because some of my friends say it’s no big deal, or it’s the intent that matters.
I also originally angrily posted, “Only #Jews! What other group would tolerate that?”
Seems liberalism has replaced religion for many non-Orthodox Jews and that bothers me. Their thoughts and practices are certainly up to them, but it leaves me with a bad taste. I wonder what will be in the generations to come.
Others would say I should be doing more. Again, that’s their opinion. Most of us know stereotypes like “two Jews, three opinions” carry a bit of truth.
As for the speaker’s intent, who knows? I’m not a mind-reader. I did write in a private message off Facebook,
“I find people who say things like that about Jews and prices to have bad intent. The reason is simply, one side wants the price higher and the other wants it lower. It’s adversarial by nature.”
One friend wrote there are worse words and phrases.
I responded late last night,
“Look at the reaction from the post at this hour, and also all the news articles. It’s not exactly like the president using SHole because he’s the president. Besides, if people hear it on TV, they think it’s acceptable. Don’t give the public too much credit.”
“Are slurs against any minority group tolerable in 2018? After I left the Tri-Cities, a member of the local synagogue – the only one between Knoxville and Charlottesville – contacted me after the station I worked for did a story about a guy holding an auction and using the same phrase, just like his father taught him! It aired at 5:30. At 11, there was an apology. But he was just white trash and not on the payroll. What gets me is that it’s missed in the editing process. Of course, so do curse words on signs at anti-Trump rallies.”
Yes, I used a phrase where the stereotype fit (and not about somebody from Texas, as I promised earlier). I’m certainly not perfect. I tend to be middle of the road politically, but absolutely not politically correct. Society needs civilized discussion.
I’m guessing a photographer who grew up locally shot the interview, wrote the script and edited it. That’s what happens in small non-union markets.
I have files of both the original piece and the apology but won’t show them publicly because the anchorwoman on air had nothing to do with putting together the story. She just read it, along with having to read the apology hours later with her face on air. Her co-worker who should’ve known better caused her to suffer enough embarrassment, and she was simply subbing on someone else’s newscast while that person was on vacation!
I had this last thought while trying to fall asleep last night:
“This conversation reminds me of an episode of All in the Family. It definitely was not my favorite because there was more drama than comedy. Archie and Meathead were locked in the basement and opening up to each other while drinking. Mike tried to convince Archie their fathers were very similar, but wrong as it turned out. Mike had changed completely, becoming a leftist. Archie, his older father-in-law, was more defensive and blindly insisted his father could do no wrong. Most of us have (had) relatives like that, even those who came to this country as immigrants. They lived among each other (in shtetels?) and had no way of understanding anybody else’s feelings or experiences until getting out in the real world. That’s the way things were then. Today, whether traveling a few blocks or watching TV, most people become exposed to others and realize it’s wrong to use and perpetuate stereotypes.”
I also thank the 21 Facebook friends from all over the country, with different backgrounds and different political views, who shared the link — which I’m sure Facebook’s algorithm, whatever it may be these days, used to help me come across it. I really don’t spend a lot of time on Facebook, outside of work. I may click and see the first few personal posts, and check for birthdays. So please don’t feel bad if I don’t comment or “like” something you put on there.
Besides, I’m grateful for the opportunity to get some deep thoughts out, once and for all, since everything stays on the internet forever. And I’m about to pay for another year of having this site.
(I should add, I spent most of Thursday writing this. Then I slept on it. Now, Friday, I’m adding two brand new items that occurred after the author published her original article.)
Since I figured out how to post again, I won’t say I agree with the article 100 percent, nor would I expect to, but I’ve studied, read, traveled, worked in several newsrooms in different cities with different managers with different companies, and noticed over two decades:
First, what everyone wants answered.
We are definitely aware of and have access to the latest ratings, so we know what you choose to see, when you change the channel, and when you turn your TV off. Online, we know what you click on and what you don’t. Plus, what you comment about and react to. The numbers we get cannot be perfect but they are the best available and the only thing the industry plus advertisers have to go by. They are certainly not the Bible, but we and our bosses certainly look at what works, what doesn’t, and try to please you. Honestly.
At the same time, while we have the responsibility to report the issues, the public has the civic duty to pay attention to what’s going on. If the people choose fluff, nonsense and BS, then it’s their fault and the industry will ultimately provide more. It’ll end up being society’s loss. So please stay away from that. Besides, I don’t feel fulfilled writing it.
Nobody is perfect. Experience as an employee taught me when to ask questions, when to bother people, and when to know when something is going wrong, or could be about to go wrong.
Even if you’re perfect, you can’t please everyone. People will always complain, way too many thrive on it, and often the people who bitch and moan have different opinions for opposite reasons. (One: “You’re too liberal.” The other: “You’re too conservative.” My reaction: We were probably fair.)
Sometimes the people who complain are right and we learn from whatever we did wrong, or could’ve done better, or what to think about the next time the situation arises. (And it will.) Sometimes it’s an accident and sometimes it’s technical. We apologize and correct. And every industry has a few bad apples. Hopefully they don’t last long.
We do the best we can to provide the best content, often under difficult situations. It doesn’t matter whether you’re in a big city or small town. Recognize that. Say something nice and encourage, rather than complain. This article just came out TODAY.
Computers are slow or break down. Programs have bugs that providers have to fix. Not every day is everyone’s best. And I can’t even begin to talk for my colleagues who have to travel far out in the field, despite weather conditions, and gather information, get a signal out, be completely accurate while getting both sides across, and perform calmly while making their slot in the newscast.
These days, it’s a shame there are so many cowards who hide behind their keyboards and tell us we are wrong. They should grow up and make themselves known, provide evidence of the error and a suggestion to make it better. Then, they would earn people’s respect and be the real influence they supposedly want to be.
In the newsroom, I frequently take opportunities to walk up to higher-ups, knock on doors, and email others at home when necessary to ask questions or get clarifications. And never has anyone taken sincerity badly in any way. I actually like it when people ask me to explain myself, because there is always a reason for what I do. Everything should be done professionally, not randomly.
At least in America, when you make yourself famous by running for office, or powerful for running a company that does big business, or rich for having a contract with the government, or even by receiving a paycheck from taxpayers, you are putting yourself out there and the public has the right to reasonably scrutinize you for answers. Those people don’t always like it and have tried lots of ways to avoid publicity. Public relations people know that getting ahead of a situation honestly is often the best course. People respect others coming clean, asking for forgiveness and showing improvement over time, because they tend to like underdogs and are usually willing to give second chances.
In this case I just learned about, did the commentator ask a follow-up to an untruth? Or tell her he’d never heard of what she was talking about on his broadcast? Or become adversarial, play devil’s advocate because it never happened? Or was he just happy one of his producers booked her and she showed up, so she got to say whatever she wanted?
That’s a media error by not challenging the person on the media’s air, and that goes for public call-in shows and comments on social media sites, as well. It this case, it’s ironic because it started with a prominent member of a team that has been criticizing the media.
So besides knowing our stuff and being well-rounded, we in the media have to be good, honest people, and above the board on everything. No appearances of any dishonesty, ulterior motives, etc. Always open with the highest standards.
We are often a diverse group in every sense of the word, and I don’t mean the automatic liberal, bean-counting way many would first assume. Consider so many different backgrounds, hometowns, families, experiences, friends, connections, etc. But we all tend to be curious, ask questions and tell stories. And everywhere, I’ve quickly learned who to defer to for background information on a subject. We should all listen more to each others’ stories.
I agree with the part of the article about news happening too fast. With technology these days, and the 24-hour cable world, decisions have to be made faster. That means there’s less time for thinking, planning, asking other opinions, and other important tasks. We’re not just TV or radio or newspaper people. There are also the websites and the social media that goes along with it. Like it or not, it’s social media that gets people to the web. Don’t automatically believe something if you don’t know the source.
Unfortunately, it costs money to run a newsroom and I wish that was out of the equation. News directors would love to have the best coverage and most crews on every story, especially the most important, yet they also have budgets and bosses to answer to. Unlike the past, we’re on most of the time from morning to night, and always on call for emergencies. There is never enough of something, but the results are usually darn good.
We have journalistic ethics and responsibilities. Journalists should be trained and reminded about these regularly, like politicians should reread the Constitution now and again, but that takes time and money. There are also specific procedures, which vary by station. But, as a former boss put it, there should be guidelines rather than rules, since every situation, story, and circumstance is different.
Like the public, journalists should know who to trust, in and out of the newsroom. People and organizations earn their reputations over time and often generations. Of course, things change. Organizations that were once good are sold, or there is other turnover. And newer organizations can bring in the right people. Look at everything and be skeptical.
The FCC loosening regulations over the decades led to most TV stations being owned by out-of-town corporations. There used to be a limit of five stations per company, and only one in a market, and not in the next city, because people living in between can watch you in both places (a grade B overlap). But the government loosed the rules, companies slowly started to own or run stations in 100 places, and local decisions about public airwaves are made and enforced by layers of strangers, who lack of knowledge of certain communities, and require paperwork be sent (electronically), profits rise every quarter despite local conditions, etc. Whose fault is that and what would any business do?
Still, we are responsible for the public airwaves in the areas our stations are licensed to cover. Deregulation and relaxing the rules created a lot more sharing between stations, and blindly relying on others, rather each station doing its own independent work. Not to mention vertical integration and controlling both the means of getting the signal (cable, satellite, internet), plus providing the original content and perhaps denying the competition a fair shot.
Budgets mean sacrificing the best, the experienced, and the most connected. This past year, one of the biggest media companies offered the bulk of theirs golden parachutes and nearly everyone accepted, knowing their contracts will eventually end and likely not be renewed, so they’d work longer and leave with much less. Instead, cheaper, inexperienced replacements are doing their jobs. Hopefully, they have potential and are getting great mentoring.
It would be nice if hard workers could grow old in the industry. I learned early on to respect my elders and their staying power. These are the folks who have been there and done it many times before, learned from long-ago mistakes and earned their respect. Yes, the technology always changes but gathering the facts to put on the news has not. Media corporations seemed to get rich with last year’s election, even if Donald Trump didn’t spend as much money as they would’ve liked during the primaries. NBC stations did especially well with the Olympics. Playing poor in 2017 doesn’t cut it and the public should know and be angry about it.
On the other hand, all other industries play the same game. Shareholders invest to make money, and that’s not helping the product. Times have changed and there are so few sole-proprietors or family-owned businesses. Another bad thing about that is not knowing where the buck stops. Huge corporations have layers upon layers of managers, in-house, regional and at headquarters. We need another Harry Truman.
It’s always good to check out the competition, but just out of curiosity. There are good folks on every team. Some of what another station does may be better and some not. Everyone has good and not-so-good days. We can learn from each other and each other’s mistakes. But every organization has to be true to itself, its values and its audience. It’s another reason why more independence for stations would be a good thing.
The author’s views on breaking news are correct. It seems to take too much time to get to the truth. We want facts and video as soon as possible, before anyone else, and we’re doing it faster than ever before. Almost anyone can send pictures with their smartphones. We can describe what we see. We can discuss the area around it because we should be familiar with all parts of our region. We can call neighbors around the situation to ask what they see and hear from their homes, because we should have contacts around the region we are responsible to cover. However, there are time, coordination, and safety issues to consider before arriving at a breaking news story. Sometimes we are lucky to be in the right place at the right time, and sometimes the competition is. That’s life.
I’m blessed to be working on the web and not going out, meeting new people in person and having to remember their names. I stink at that and also did as a teacher. (“Is that kid one of mine?”) I’ve come to dislike being in the spotlight, and love learning new stuff every day.
I usually like what I do and want to keep doing it indefinitely, but I also regret I can’t do more. I’m pretty fast, but there are only a certain number of hours in a day and too many stories to do correctly, at least where I live. Nobody can be everything to everyone and trying is impossible and detrimental. Right now, I’m doing what I like best and learning other skills that support it, my organization, and also others should the need ever arise. In this business, you never know, and that’s also unfortunate.
As I mentioned at the beginning, I haven’t blogged in months. Actually, it’s getting close to a year. Between moving and working, I haven’t had time to fully explain myself. But spending most of my day off on this is worth it. I thank the author of the article for writing, also my friends who shared it on Facebook for arousing my thoughts, and of course everyone over the years who taught me something. I hope you know who you are because I have recognized you for it.
I’m going to stay in the middle, avoid extremes and remain questioning while keeping an open mind. And I’m going to end by stealing the author’s last line, which I think may be the best and totally sums up this imperfect industry: “The truth is, we don’t even have time to create an agenda if we wanted to… and if we found extra time, we’d eat!”