Posts filed under: ‘Scandal‘
La Toya Jackson, sister of deceased superstar Michael Jackson, has told Britain’s Daily Mail newspaper that the King of Pop was the victim of foul play, or so she believes.
“I believe Michael was murdered, I felt that from the start,” the newspaper quotes LaToya Jackson as saying. “Not just one person was involved, rather it was a conspiracy of people.”
Jackson cited no evidence to substantiate her story, but did indicate that the “shadowy entourage” surrounding her brother was responsible for his death.
Quoting the Daily Mail:
She believes her brother was fed addictive drugs by handlers who wanted to control his moods. She says they regarded him as a ‘cash cow’ and exploited him at every turn. It was this, she believes, that led directly to his death.
La Toya summed up the situation saying, “”Michael was a very meek, quiet, loving person. People took advantage of that. People fought to be close to him, people who weren’t always on his side.”
1 comment July 14, 2009
Q: Why does NYTimes Book Review editor Sam Tanenhaus wear that shit-eating grin?
A: Because he really does eat shit!
Last week’s post on the nepotism/conflict-of-interest scandal at the New York Times book review seems to have gotten picked up (without attribution!) by a bunch of right-wing wacko bloggers who have recast the story as a case of liberal media bias. These guys only know one tune and they whistle it all day long, so it’s worthwhile to revisit the facts to set things straight.
For those of you who don’t remember last week’s post:
Gawker reports that Lynn Dolnick, a member of the ruling Sulzberger family and a director of the Times corporate board, appears to be receiving more than her share of deference from the supposedly independent editors of the book review. They’ve gone into overdrive promoting a mediocre biography of an art forger by Lynn Dolnick’s husband Edward Dolnick even though everyone from The Chicago Tribune to the New Yorker says that another new book on the same subject–totally unmentioned by the Times’ book reviewers–is far better.
Now the issue here, as far as I can tell, has nothing to do with liberal bias. Having done a little research (much as I hate work in any form) it turns out that the other book is called “The Man Who Made Vermeers” by an author named Jonathan Lopez, and it is not particularly more conservative or liberal than Dolnick’s book. It’s just deeper and better written, at least according to Peter Schjeldahl of the New Yorker, who cites the Lopez book for its “profoundly researched, focused, absorbing depth.”
So, the point isn’t that the Times is run by a bunch of liberal sacks of shit. The point is that it’s run by a bunch of pompous, lying sacks of shit. And therein lies the critical difference.
For instance, consider the case of well-known pompous sack of shit Sam Tanenhaus, editor of the Times book review. In a recent interview in – where else? – the Times, he held forth on how great and important the NYTBR really is:
Our mission is very simple: to publish lively, informed, provocative criticism on the widest-possible range of books and also to provide a kind of snapshot of the literary culture as it exists in our particular moment through profiles, essays and reported articles. There are many, many books published each year – hundreds stream into my office in the course of a week. Our job is to tell you which ones we think matter most, and why…
How many people reading this self-important crap would know that the real reason Tanenhaus thinks a book “matters” is that it was written by the dilettante scribbler husband of his boss’s cousin, who just happens to own a couple million shares of NYT Company stock herself, personally? Is there a footnote to Tanenhaus’s interview that tells us, uhm, that he’s actually just a corporate lackey who does what the fuck he’s told? Or maybe we’re supposed to assume that anyone who looks like such an obvious a-hole has to be full of shit…
In any case, liberalism has got nothing to do with it.
11 comments July 7, 2009
Bloomberg News reports that “Bernard Madoff was sentenced to 150 years in federal prison for masterminding the largest Ponzi scheme in history, a penalty six times longer than those meted out to the chief executives of WorldCom Inc. and Enron Corp.”
And in the year 2159, people will still line up around the block to kick his sorry thieving geriatric butt. (Not reported by Bloomberg)
Add a comment June 29, 2009
Blatt also revealed that the footage features a younger Meester performing a striptease for a boyfriend.
“It’s very playful, actually. It’s not shot in high definition and looks like it has been shot using a video camera while they are both fooling around,” said Blatt.
Add a comment June 26, 2009