Mathematics, art, and the drive to regression.

I

jhp59ccaa956d599.jpg

II

unfreedom-of-the-press-9781476773094_hr.jpg

III

Hey kids, my book came first.

Nice nod to my cover, n’est pas? Looks like a riff on a Zero Books read.

Yay, originality!

Not first time there was a funny echo coming from the Right.

533936.jpg
times_square2.jpg

But the lack of originality of many things these days comes from Western society encourage rote memorization.

Stick to the rules and you will not be whatever-shamed on the Twitter.

The worst thing is there are way too many people who don’t even know why something is getting shamed, they just join along with the shaming, never thinking that perhaps a rival or PR firm has been hired to get that ball rolling.

It does remind me of the old pot roast myth — daughter cuts the ends because mom did because her mom did, only to find out grandma did that because the pot was too small. Just follow what you see and don’t ask any questions.

And in all that lockstepping, we forget about the origins of things.

E.O. Wilson talks about Consilience, the unification of knowledge.

Yet this idea is something right out of the Renaissance when mathematicians and scientists were also artists.

Art Nouveau also it its share of architects who were also artists.

The separation of science and humanities is a fairly recent thing.

And it has a lot to do with people on both sides using the hack of avoiding the other in order to hide the fact that they are merely sticking to what appears easier. It is an intellectual hack.

The problem is that when you do not go beyond the comfort zone, you miss a lot of things. You have serious deficits in your thinking. Math develops logic. Writing develops empathy. You need both those qualities; otherwise you are either emotionally illiterate or rely strictly on sophistry, respectively.

And you can see it very clearly in modern thinking. You need a balance in order to get the right answers, and come up with solutions that work and innovations that progress society evenly.

Otherwise, you regress, and you cannot use tricks to hide the fact that your thinking lacks empathy or logic…

Yes, I am back...

I

II

But journalism isn’t.

News is dead.

Cable news is in a free-fall.

Newspapers have been cut down by a fifth since the early Aughts.

But they welcome press releases!

But then you have people who pretend they discovered something that I have been writing about for years.

Memo to Jeff Jarvis: I have been writing about the trouble with narratives in journalism for years. Why have you not given me proper attribution?

I went over it in my last book.

And on this website.

And in my first book that came out in 2005.

Do you want to know why journalism collapsed?

Because it has been choked to death by assholes. The end.

That is why I will keep working hard to do what I do best…

Mk2_mug_friendship2.jpg

Fourteen years ago today, OutFoxed: Rupert Murdoch's war on journalism was published.

Disinfo is no longer in business, but the book is still around.

of.jpg

As I am still toiling away, I would like to take a breather and point out some of the fuckery going on in the press.

Like this bullshit piece from Quartz:

A new Twitter account is outing shoddy reporting in science stories

You misogynistic motherfuckers, some white guy starts a Twitter feed, and you give him free publicity about showing shoddy reportage about science?

I wrote two books chronicling the same thing and showing how to spot it, and I did not get a mention.

Don’t Believe It!: How lies become news was published in March 2005 and I had an entire chapter on this problem.

When Journalism was a Thing also extensively went into this problem last year, and you ignored it.

The man posts five seconds on Twitter, and you drool and slobber all over his ass as if he did something original. Go fuck yourselves.

And speaking of fuckery, boy, someone with big boy pants must have taken over the propaganda arm of the federal Liberals.

The National Post are being dutiful little minions and are doing free propaganda for them:

'Inconsistent with democratic values': Internal conflict flared over Jody Wilson-Raybould's controversial last act as justice minister

An internal memo claims Crown lawyers were being overruled and told not to use certain defences to appear less adversarial toward Indigenous plaintiffs

Really? JWR was your pick, assholes. That was the culture of control you cultivated. She was well within the brand of political reasoning — and you wait until your little SNC-Lavalin scandal got this far away from you to try to take swipes at her?

You losers do realize the more you slag her, the worse you sound, right? You either mistreated her, which speaks poorly of your prime minister, or you picked and propped up a lemon for years, which speaks even more poorly of you. If you had class — which, by the way, you don’t — you would be better off copping to the former rather than the latter.

Do you idiots realize this has now gotten way, way bigger than two ousted female MPs? You are all going to get hit with a bigger scandal or three before October, and it won’t matter. It doesn’t even matter now. You all sound like vindictive spouses going through a divorce and come off as petty shits. Get a crisis management team and get over yourselves.

And as for the National Propaganda — stop being stenographers for the Man. No wonder you guys bleed money.

But it goes beyond the childish and psychopathically abusive nose-tweaking. The Grits are desperate and reek badly of it with their vast conspiracy theories of political interference being floated as a possible bogeyman for them to frighten the little people into voting for them.

Dumbasses, here is the memo: all countries meddle in the affairs of other countries. That is why Julian Assange had to be silenced by bribing the regime who gave him refuge with loans — who knows what drugs were given to the guy during his exile to discredit him, but WikiLeaks released information that showed the the “political interference” happened everywhere all the time, and the Left sound like Loopy Lous trying to make it sound as if meddling happened only with Trump, and we have people in the Liberal Party sound like paranoid potheads warning that other countries will meddle in our election.

Yeah, the way you stick your pointy little noses in theirs. Fuck you. For a group of blowhards who preach about globalization, why would this even bother you? Globalization precisely means the right to meddle in other countries’ affairs. That’s like wanting to fuck everybody and still be a virgin. Morons.

One last observation: Peter Mackay’s column in the Toronto Sun seems to have a very sly, but nasty jab to Justin Trudeau:

No one is fooled by the crafted image, stage-managed appearances, bold bromides, soaring rhetoric and flashy wardrobe; the stuff of an Old Spice commercial spoofing itself for effect.

The Old Spice reference doesn’t fit — unless you recall that Matthew Perry’s stepdad was the Old Spice guy in commercials…and that Perry boasted in public how he used to beat up Trudeau in school when they were kids.

Trudeau could never compete with Perry in the acting sphere, so go show up the guy in politics where you are completely unqualified. Take that, Matthew Perry!

That’s all for now. I am averaging a chapter a day, and I am picking up speed. Propaganda-busting gets my juices flowing. I could never stand liars because they are arrogant cowards to the core.

Ciao!

xoxo.

Russiagate did not destroy journalism. It was destroyed before then. What it did was show that partisan propaganda ain't what it used to be.

This was an interesting take on Russiagate:

It's official: Russiagate is this generation's WMD

The Iraq war faceplant damaged the reputation of the press. Russiagate just destroyed it

No, journalism was destroyed before that. Trump won the 2106 presidential election even though the press all marched lockstep against him.

He had Twitter, and he won.

And then social media and Big Tech became censors of the worst sort, but now that Robert Mueller, after months and months of having free rein to investigate — and he is a very, very good and thorough professional — found nothing.

The press and Big Tech rigged and stacked and manipulated to extremist and disturbing degrees.

And nothing.

giphy (1).gif

This was the industry’s last stand.

And they incited a populace and could not make an outcome happen.

They desperately wanted Trump to be led away in handcuffs as they cheered, and said, See! See! We were right! We are the heroes!

Why was this so important to the press?

Because they cannot come to grips that they collapsed.

It had to be the Evil Russians who rigged and stuffed ballots, not that they could not tell the little people how to vote and they would dutifully listen to them.

Hubris blinds the profession who refuses to admit it’s fubar.

I wrote about journalism’s collapse for Zer0 Books in 2018 in a book called When Journalism was a Thing.

Despite the publicity I should have gotten — and my publisher was supportive of my book and pushed it, knowing that I had ovarian cancer and was seriously out of commission, but did everything a good publisher should do without skipping a beat — managed to get me two interviews, and I managed to procure one on my own.

I was shut out.

I was ignored. Blacklisted.

All for speaking the truth and reality of the situation.

latestbbok.jpg

With 61 pages of references.

But all but two journalists were in denial. To those who interviewed me, and gave me a platform to express myself, thank you.

The rest are absolute hypocrites. They wrote about every bout of presidential flatulence, but when it came to examining and exposing their own shortcomings, they conveniently ignored me.

And now they can’t touch Trump.

But I am not going to stop. I have a laser-beam focus and a nuclear-level energy to keep going.

I have spent my entire adult life working on an alternative system, and I had to put up my proposal on Amazon in Kindle format — something no author should ever be forced to do — so if it comes to intellectual theft, I have a lattice of proof, and it was made clear to me that it was going to happen via email.

If journalists were all about truth and informing, they would have not just read the book — they would not run and hide from me like a bunch of conniving cowards — they would take my words to heart.

But they aren’t. They want to strut and vogue in superhero capes and mask pretending to save humanity.

No, you’re not. A big, fat super story you were all banking on to save you just went up in smoke.

You’re all Zero Risk, and your big, fat gamble just wiped you out.

8En6.gif

And not only am I still standing, teaching, and writing books, motherfuckers, I am still an ambitious visionary who is merrily living my life to the fullest as I never bank or leech on anyone’s demise to fill my belly or validate my existence…

11518666_bodyshot_300x400-879.gif

Doug Ford says more than the obvious. Social media has made journalism obsolete.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford says what Donald Trump knew when he won the US presidency in 2016: journalism is irrelevant.

It is also what I said in my 2018 book When Journalism was a Thing.

Newspapers are collapsing. Bailing them out is a wasted effort. The industry needs an alternative, and one that takes the realities of technology and audiences into consideration.

There will be a lot of people in the industry who will be livid about this observation. A little more honesty and humility would be a far better attitude to take…

The federal Liberals turned the dead corpse of journalism into its slave? You don't say!

Andrew Coyne has a very interesting and must-read column, and may be the only other person in Canada who sees something rotten in giving the dead profession of journalism government money:

Andrew Coyne: It's when you read details of media bailout that the chill sets in

If this goes through, everything will be subsidized: print, broadcast, the works — a whole industry of CBCs. You couldn’t do a better job killing the news business

You don’t say!

Beggars can’t be choosers, and what the beggars got was a chain around their necks. They are now the minions of the government who now will not only call the shots, but can make threats to take away designations on a whim.

The industry should have taken matters into their own hands, creating their own body of governance, and then reinventing themselves with radical empirical changes instead of being passive, arrogant, and whiny paupers looking for a handout.

John Honderich was hellbent on getting free government money, and if anyone in the business had an ounce of sense or survial instinct, they would have shown him the door, forget those self-aggrandizing “J-talks” and gotten down to serious work.

Now, you are all little propagandists shilling lies for the government — and you motherfuckers better do a good job of it, too. Look what happened to Jody Wilson-Raybould when she tried to follow the “Rule of Law” and not His Majesty’s Sketchy Decrees.

I cannot stress how needless the collapse of journalism was. I wrote books outlining the problems — and then offering very workable solutions.

When Journalism was a Thing was a book that showed where the problems were, and even then, how to break the shackles, but because I am Writing While Female and am not a Luxury Brand Name, not only do I get ignored, but people try to rip me off.

There is already a publisher who I found out is trying to pull off such a gambit, and it is the reason I put my book proposal up on Amazon. You will notice Amazon was kind enough to remove the “Look Inside the Book” function — something they don’t usually do, but they understood my plight and cooperated with me.

That’s the blueprint of the solution. That would be how to reinvent and resurrect that kind of profession.

The actual workings and details are not in there for a reason as well. Just the blueprints. I am not some deluded loon or some victim you can feast on at my expense. Fuck you. My entire adult life was researching this to the very last detail.

The profession had a choice: they could have listened to me, and give me credit and the outlet for me to do what I do best, or fellate the Jive Turkey so he can turn them into his worthless minions.

And guess what they chose?

Despicable-Me-Numerology.jpg

But I knew they would…

Are we brave enough now to admit that journalism is no longer a thing? Or am I still the only adult in The Room.

I

latestbbok.jpg

II

Aside from the intellectual theft I deal with on occasion, my other big problem is getting people to look at reality.

My latest book is ignored because in an industry filled with children, being the lone adult makes professional life difficult.

I am a reality. I don’t sugar-coat. I do not fellate. I tell things the way they are.

So, how is journalism these days?

Dead.

The AP is whining about it here:

Decline in readers, ads leads hundreds of newspapers to fold

Hundreds of newspapers? You don’t say!

The Wall Street Journal is kvetching about it here:

Facebook Wants to Feed Users More Local News. There Just Isn’t Enough of It. 

One-third of Americans live in a place where the social network can’t find enough local news to feed its aggregator

Facebook is corporate spookery and tyrannical oppression. They can go to hell.

Even the Intercept is losing steam:

The Intercept, a billionaire-funded public charity, cuts back

Why?

Because none of it is empirical. I have written about F.R.E.E.D. here and in my last book, an alternative to journalism for a very long time, and there is a publisher who seems to think they can just crib from me. I will not let that happen. I have been knocked about too much already.

But when a profession is corrupt and still thinks it can play the same games, it cannot see the obvious, no matter how hard they try to pretend that nothing is wrong…

Why did journalism collapse? Maybe because the whine the same old story.

I

ahughes-catwoman4.jpg

II

III

Boo hoo!

Apparently, journalists and no one else on the planet are capable of keeping governments accountable. I mean, fuck social media, and all those whistleblowers and activist and watch groups.

They don’t count!

As journalists bemoan their obsolete status, they really over-inflate their worth, and paint a very distorted picture of their contributions.

Once upon a time, when there was no other way to tell the world what was going down, there were many important stories disseminated, but as time progressed, it became cheap and easy filler.

And then Internet came, and gave other people an outlet.

But we still hear the same lofty whines. It get obnoxious, but instead of using resources to try new things, those in the profession prefer to hold to the same old scripts.

No trailblazers in the profession, thank you very much. No pioneers. No one riding the wavelengths of the ortgeist and zeitgeist to see better ways…

Wait, that’s what I am doing, ha ha.

I’m just being ignored…

Woe is us: Journalism died because it needed to be reinvented. Stop lamenting its demise.

The Associated Press has a silly article that whines:

Town by town, local journalism is dying in plain sight

To put this in perspective, imagine you having symptoms that hint that you’re not well, and the doctor tells you that you need to get tests to find out what’s happening, and you dismiss it.

Then your symptoms get worse and one day, you collapse, and they rush you to the hospital where they conduct tests and they say you have cancer, but if you go through treatment, you can be cured.

And you deny that you are sick and you walk away because you are in denial that you are sick.

That’s journalism.

Do not weep about how it is dying. You had over two decades to make changes. You didn’t. Stop the wallowing.

I wrote books on the problem. I get ignored. Too bad for them.

It wouldn’t have taken that much to reinvigorate the profession. That’s the kicker, but there is nothing you can do when a sick profession are sticking their heads in the sand…

It is always the unspoken things that reveal the truth.

Internationally speaking, journalism has been dogged by outright corruption for decades. For example, bribery for positive coverage has been an issue, and no, Outline, it is nothing new. Foreign newspapers went so far as to doctor coverage for cash to bolster false refugee claims in Canada. When I wrote When Journalism was a Thing, I had done thorough research on other kinds of journalistic skulduggery, but I confined my focus to Canada, US, and the UK because had I mentioned other nations’ practices, there would be indignant replies that Western journalism was much better in comparison, which it actually isn’t. They use the same scams, just manifest them in different ways.

Because there aren’t any rules, global standards, empiricism, governing bodies, or anything resembling professional discipline, you aren’t going to get the full story. It is not as if things cannot slip through tiny cracks, but when you have big gaps, anything can come crawling up to infect the information stream. To express opinion is one thing, and I am a firm advocate of free speech — even things that I do not agree with — but when it comes to facts, then no, here, it is responsible speech. All facts are fair game — but you can’t just puke them out with manipulative propaganda attached to it. Fuck that.

But most people do not understand the professional life of journalists. I am forever amused by the Middle Class stupidity when it comes to how they perceive journalism. They highly edit their own Facebook page, but think journalists don’t do the same. Just how stupid are you — or do you think that you have the monopoly on being sneaky?

Maybe if you were more truthful with your selfies and personal slumps, you could spot highly edited bullshit a mile away. That’s on you.

But when someone who writes a newspaper column misses the obvious, you just know that I will have to call it out.

The Toronto Sun has this instructive column about the Jive Turkey Scandal. Most of the column is by-the-numbers, and unremarkable, except for this little nugget:

This brings us to the media coverage of this issue. Too many reporters are acting like columnists. The hyperbole is ridiculous. Journalists have concluded that something criminal has happened without first reporting the actual news.

No one seems to understand what a deferred prosecution agreement is. I believe both the former attorney general and the prime minister are telling the truth.

Now this passage is missing the point. No one actually cares about deferred prosecution. It’s not even relevant. Why has the Jive Turkey — who has gotten more lavish media coverage than most people deserve save for those who risk their lives saving and helping others — suddenly had the press turn on him so gleefully?

This rage puke is a collective catharsis. It is just like when you have to go with your parents to the home of a mean family friend or relative who keeps picking on you and insulting you for hours and you have to sit and take it — and then second you are out the door, you let the entire planet know what a worthless piece of garbage said mean family friend or relative is (for the rest of your life!)

So what gives?

I can tell you as someone who worked as a journalist what it is — it is the same thing the happened when Harvey Weinstein got great press in the beginning, but then it turned around in a heartbeat — because reporters covered him dishonestly in the beginning: they saw all of the horrible things he did because they have to hang around in corridors, and they talk to underlings and staff who spill tea, but they do not report it because they can be sued, even if they report the truth. They saw all sorts of things and heard all sorts of rumours, but they don’t tell the public.

I witnessed this the first time when I was a j-school student covering one city hall meeting — all the reporters told me about the affairs the members of council had with one person and how this same individual got positions as a result. There is your tax dollars at work. No one uttered a word outside those corridors, let along aired them in public.

And these reporters would know the Prime Minister better than the general public. They see things and hear things that they cannot report.

They still cannot, but now here is a legitimate outlet to express indirectly the sentiment they have.

For example, during one former Prime Minister’s tenure, a television reporter merely asked for the English version of a response given in French — and this person was manhandled by the RCMP as a result. There was no need for this level of violence, and I had even interviewed this person about it to confirm it, but good luck trying to find reference to it in a database or online — because it’s not there.

Things happen that the public never hears about — such as the relationships between reporters and politicians — we may vaguely recall that a lot of reporters ended up working for former President Barack Obama — how neutral was their coverage? If you are angling for a job, you are not going to be critical at all.

Just as some reporters keep silent to get something lucrative in return, others keep silent because they do not want to be sued and/or fired and/or blacklisted. There are no protections for news producers. Jody Wilson-Raybould was a prominent cabinet minister and when she stood her ground and used her own judgment, she was kicked to the curb. And for all the bullshit stories about the PM wanting to save jobs, it was only one job — his own seat in the next election — that counted. The member for Papineau, Quebec may have worried about jobs — the one public sector one, and a potential private sector once out of office — but Wilson-Raybould’s job was completely expendable.

So for a columnist to make that kind of decree is baffling. I am absolutely critical of journalism — but I am not blind to the fact that the structure of the profession hampers and harms the foot soldiers. If media owners stood behind their troops, it would be different, but they don’t.

So I am not surprised that we have the unleashed downloading on this man. The coverage before this scandal was beyond unrealistic to the point of farce. I am a very nice lady, and very moral and sensitive, but if someone wrote a fawning article about me making me out to be the next messiah, I would be just as upset as if they wrote a hatchet job on me to demonize me. I am a human being. I am not perfect. I have a temper. I can be stubborn. I also have no filter and will tell you what I think, but I am also the one who’ll go looking for you if you have strayed too far for too long. I am eccentric, enigmatic, and I do not give one flying fuck what other people think about me. I can tell you off and save your hide at the same time.

So don’t trope me one way or another, but the press did nothing but deify this man from Day One. They saw him as some sort of urbane messiah where there was not a single thing in his history that would warrant such high praise. He is a political dilettante, even now. He has a perpetual smirk on his face, and needs an entourage to validate his existence. Had the press boxed his ears from the beginning and prove to him that he is not as cunning as he thinks he is, none of this would be happening.

The press in the US is completely negative about their president, making it that much easier for him to ignore them, but the press here until now was soft on our prime minister, making it that much easier for him to mistake their fawning for outwitting them.

No, they saw what you really are all along.

And now that all pretence is off the table, they can finally rage. It is the reason why it is so loud and deep — and long.

This primal scream has been a long time coming, but once it starts, it just never stops…

Actrivism, Part Nine: Immerse yourself in wavelengths. Learn to ride in someone else's soul.

I

6361070-Nikola-Tesla-Quote-If-you-want-to-find-the-secrets-of-the-universe.jpg

II

Nicola Tesla was a smart man. He’s #35 on the List of People Everyone Should Know.

And I took a lot from his ideas, particularly about understanding the deepest truths of the universe by understanding energy, frequency, and vibration.

Or, riding on the wavelengths of other people and groups.

When I decided to study the ways of journalism by becoming a journalist, what I was doing was riding on the wavelengths of this collective, how the justify their beliefs about themselves and how they process the world around them.

In-groups have their own little set of arrogant ideals, and they like to fancy themselves as superior, even when they are seen as underdogs or undesirables.

Look at CBC getting haughty because Fox News didn’t air someone who has gotten a lot of free press opining about the rich and their taxes.

CBC has conducted countless interviews that never made it to air.

When you interview a lot of people to make a narrative, some do not perfectly “fit” your pattern, and you will exclude it.

I have had editors cut out people I interviewed for articles, and I never found out until after publication.

But even in j-school, when one CBC producer came to lecture us, and we were given a real-life scenario, and we had to pick and choose which interviews made it and which ones were excluded.

So let’s not pretend. I have been interviewed for stories, and I never made it in the final product.

If you do not align perfectly with a narrative, you are removed.

I wrote OutFoxed: Rupert’s war on journalism, and I recount how the FNC is careful who they air, but it is not just the FNC.

Whenever you rely on narrative, you are going to do that sort of thing to keep the mindset in place.

Once it happened to me when I was writing about women who broke the law to appease a mate. I included a young woman who murdered a perfect stranger because her boyfriend asked her to do it.

The reason I included that case was to show it wasn’t some sort of romantic notion or that every woman was duped. I wanted a textured story, but the editor lopped it off, and the nuances of the story completely changed. I was not happy.

But that is the mundane reality of the newsroom.

I bet you do the same thing on Twitter and Facebook — cherry-picking articles and propaganda posters (that is what a meme poster is, kids) that fit perfectly with your beliefs with no dissenting perspective and stories.

But you take it for granted.

I didn’t.

I wanted to ride the wavelengths of the profession.

But once I began writing books about my findings, I wanted people to be able to immerse themselves the way I did.

So I did something very subtle: I presented the facts objectively through structure, but in such a way the mimicked the mindset of those I was writing about.

I did it with all of my books. You are going inside the mindset of the profession, feeling the same rhythms and frequencies as those working in it.

But a funny thing happened.

Some reviewers didn’t get it.

One was upset that I took the same “pot shots” at FNC pundits that they took on others, while completely missing the point.

The same goes for my latest book, When Journalism was a Thing.

The mimicry of the energy, frequency, and vibration completely went over some reviewers heads.

Not everyone was clueless, mind you. A lot of people understood the point.

I remember when I was a relationships columnist with the Hamilton Spectator, and I did the same immersion with a short 600-ish word column about money.

Someone wrote in, and got it. As in, felt it.

I set up a stage. I get into character — but not a fictitious character. It is Method Research, and I am a Actrivist.

I will upload the column and response another time.

But even back then, I would reflect the frequencies of those I was writing about.

That requires not being so me-centred. It is a you-centred exercise.

This is how you deal with the emotional aspect of covering people or events.

That’s how you walk through Infinity with someone else’s heart and soul to see their perceptions and go through their motions as if they were your own.

There is no Us Versus Them. You become the Them.

Outside and inside. You are both. Above and below. Left and right.

This method is the way of the Radical Centrist. You learn by becoming, and you gain energy by allowing its essence into the very stuff of your soul to see what are the problems and the core of their cause.

By becoming part of the problem before transmuting yourself into the solution…

Yes, it really is Fake News you are getting. I have been advocating and creating the alternative for a very long time.

I

Author Page.png

II

Screen Shot 2019-02-20 at 10.31.26 PM.png

III

th.jpeg
latestbbok.jpg

IV

The Jussie Smollett Fiasco is just the latest hoax to make mainstream news. No one in the mainstream press did their homework.

Worst of all, they knew it wasn’t true, and still ran with it, and this is not the first time this kind of skulduggery has happened.

And are still justifying it by pinning the blame on the Internet.

Screen Shot 2019-02-20 at 10.38.55 PM.png

We are way beyond “the age of the hoax”, Financial Times where narrative is the problem.

We are — as I have said numerous times on this web site, in An Age of Propaganda.

Stop cribbing from me, and then try to spin and downplay it as you shift the blame away from journalism.

Screen Shot 2019-02-20 at 10.44.53 PM.png

And, for the record, I am not a scammer. Speak for yourself.

I have written books on this subject.

I have written articles on the problems in journalism.

I went into journalism in order to study it.

And I have devised an alternative to journalism.

Because it is long overdue.

It is not just fake news, but also thieving news with people who steal ideas from others in order to make themselves look smarter, too.

Universities are useless in that they do not want to even hear about better methods of reinventing the profession.

And I know it personally.

Both my first and fourth books go over the problems in excruciatingly-researched detail.

I have spent my entire adult life on this problem, and discuss it here and elsewhere.

We are in a pathetic state of affairs, and it is time to say, time for a new way!

Long overdue.

There is no They, but there is me.

A lifetime spent working on it, and I will continue to work until I get my way.

I am not going away, and I am not going to keep quiet.

Oh, and Financial Times? Keep your eyes on your own paper…

Jill Abramson getting pummelled by corrupt hypocrites: Just another day in the trash can called journalism.

For a profession that criticizes people viciously, journalists certainly do not like when people criticize them.

Oh, what a shock.

They either suppress information or try to tear into someone if their profile is high enough.

So when former New York Times editor Jill Abramson dissed on the corrupt and dead profession of journalism, the book couldn’t be ignored; so journalists went to attack her credibility like a rapist attacks the victim, blaming her and saying she deserved it.

merchants-of-truth-9781501123207_lg.jpg

Make no mistake: the level of vitriol has more to do that a woman dared call them out for their sins than the actual content.

Also note, it was the white boys who instigated this very coordinated hit.

So before discussing the guts of the allegations, let me point out that Jill Abramson made it all the way to News York Times editor.

A very lofty position in the profession. That’s as prestigious as you can get. 60 Minutes correspondent or head of a network news outfit possibly trump it.

Back then, she was doing the basic same things she did for her entire journalistic career, and she was employed and got promoted.

And that was just dandy keen for years.

But then she was a cheerleader on Team Journalism.

Now she isn’t.

I wrote a book on journalism’s ethics last year and that book was exhaustively researched.

latestbbok.jpg

I had no assistant. I did the entire researching and writing all by myself up in a cottage in Selkirk right on Lake Erie in the winter in the middle of nowhere because it was always my dream to write a book that way.

20170113_094331.jpg

For five months, that is what I woke up to seeing every morning while drinking Turkish coffee. I wanted absolute solitude, but The Fabulous Ladies drove up every Sunday for brunch and mischief, and I am grateful. I did take some time out to go to Chicago to get semi-precious stones for my jewelry-making. I stayed at the fun and posh Virgin Hotel and dined at Miss Ricky’s and The Gage, but still brought my laptop to work on my book. I still have my little shower lamb from the Virgin Hotel

20170530_195640.jpg
20170531_075506.jpg
20170530_201258.jpg
20170530_200025.jpg

My book was ignored by journalists in public, though people are still buying it, despite the shut out. So much for free speech. As usual, word of mouth can break through any blacklist.

I still did an interview here and a funky one here.

But journalists couldn’t do that with Abramson. They had to stomp on her and stone her to discredit her work.

You cannot discredit mine, however. I did not go into journalism with stars in my eyes, and then turned into a bitter and disgruntled failure. I went in knowing exactly who they were, and wanted to study the profession by being a journalist for real. I conducted unprecedented and exhaustive experiments. My beat was the business of journalism and my audience were people in the profession.

When I had enough information to write an informed and empirically-sound exposé, I walked away.

th.jpeg

I also wrote one on Fox News, and then over a decade later came When Journalism was a Thing.

Abramson was in deep, and as much as she knows about the people in that sketchy profession, those in the profession know all about her.

So those trolls knew where to look and how to strike.

And then went batshit crazy on her in a frenzy tirade, hoping to nullify her revealing of their disgusting dirt.

They nitpicked on a few facts, but even that is under debate. Journalists fuck up on facts all the time. They do not use empirical methods.

But then came the “chargeofplagiarism! Oh, no! Run for your lives! Don’t listen to the scary woman with the book that exposes us!

giphy (2).gif

It is a pathetic ruse.

The poseur “journalists” at the garbage publication Paste really overplayed the melodramatics:

Jill Abramson Is a Disgrace to Journalism

Yeah, as if you grifters know what this “journalism” is. You are not fooling anybody, you twits. Stop using the movie Reefer Madness as a guide on how to behave. You come off as disingenuous nerds.

The only publication with any sense here is the National Review that has a more accurate take:

Jill Abramson Is a Hack, Not a Thief

I am currently reading the book. She knows who she is dealing with. It is kind of a stretch to call it “plagiarism” because the writing for both are so banal and unoriginal, that really, it is like writing, “Bob likes his new job” and then someone else writes “Robert has positive feelings toward his most recent career” and then make some over-the-top tirade because you both are writing about the same damn thing.

Seriously, no winners here. I would not classify it as a “sourcing error”, either. I would classify this as typical journalism nincompoopity, and it needs to be replaced with a more responsible alternative.

Vice is pure garbage. Sexist pretentious trolls with one who got nabbed for being a drug dealer, and Vice got Canadian government money to boot. What does Vice know about journalistic ethics?

I wrote about Vice in my latest book. They are to journalism what a soiled jock strap is to journalism.

And they’re ranting about Abramson?

And other outlets are parroting their meltdown?

I can tell you straight up my book is exhaustively researched, and I didn’t plagiarize. I don’t need to because my writing is superior to Vice hacks or anyone else in that dead profession. It would be a serious step down from my own abilities.

So yes, the pot is calling the kettle black, but who is the pot and who is the kettle is your choice.

If you want to read a book that tells it like it is that doesn’t pull any punches and fears no angry mob of hacks, read When Journalism was a Thing.

You can even read while enjoying a cup of Turkish coffee — because you haven’t lived until you had a cup…

Journalism's continued job implosion. All the old tricks and new stunts aren't working. It is time to face reality.

I

20190131_164841.jpg

II

I wrote the book on this collapse last year called When Journalism was a Thing, but since I am female, I get ignored. If you want a thorough, well-researched, honest, accurate, reliable, valid, useful, passionate, objective, and definitive answer to what is happening now, read my book.

The Washington Post is an outlet in perpetual denial. Journalism is dead. The end. If the Post cannot grasp or face the reality of their dead profession, they cannot see anything in front of them.

Let’s look at the headlines Drudge drudged up today:

McClatchy Follows BuzzFeed, Vice, and Others in Cutting Staff

Vice Media to Lay Off 10 Percent of Staff in Company Restructuring

And the partisan New York Times whining:

Digital Media: What Went Wrong

For years, BuzzFeed seemed to be leading the journalism industry toward a brave new future. Now that it has stumbled, the way ahead looks more old-school than ever.

Do not believe the New York Times for one millisecond: there was no promise of a “brave new future” with BuzzFeed. It was always garbage with filler, propaganda, and ignorance that never did journalism differently. It just has garbage quizzes and tacky propaganda with snark.

That’s not an actual thing to be proud of, even if you are completely stupid and without morals or common sense.

Notice that the only trick has been Trump-bashing and begging for money, and neither lazy hack is working — it is, actually, having the opposite effect.

No, nerds pretending to be hip and edgy isn’t going to save a dead profession.

And the ridiculous mantra that “the future is digital” has been dealt a deathblow.

Why?

When you use old tricks and stunts and never admit that what you are doing is not working, that’s what happens.

The medium is not the content. The medium is not the structure. The medium is not the mandate.

The medium is not the saviour.

The lazy ways of journalism have not saved them, and the fact that the new generation of outlets have collapsed the same way proves once and for all that the model is broken beyond repair.

Get the memo, children…

latestbbok.jpg

Memo to Journalists: Google and Facebook aren't responsible for your problems. You are.

Here is a headline of a piece of propaganda:

Media layoffs bring heat on Facebook, Google

Here is what it should say:

Journalists throw temper tantrums and blame others for their incompetence.

You want to know why journalism collapsed?

Read this book.

latestbbok.jpg

Journalism did not keep up with the times. They were irresponsible. Their damsel-in-distress act is not going to save them.

Isn’t funny that they cannot decide what contrived role they are?

Remember in December when Time painted them as valiant heroes?

And the world ignored it.

Now they are pretending to be victims.

They reported on Kardashians and ignored real abuses in the world. They reported on who got an Oscar nod instead of all the human trafficking going on. They glamourized the Beautiful People who are in bed with the criminal element, and then you wonder why your talents and hard work don’t pull you out of poverty — and then have to nerve to lie how great the economy is doing.

They act as if they are trained to verify information and then just spew partisan opinion.

And then want to force people to use a very bad product.

Facebook and Google liberated citizens by allowing them to find things for themselves and express things for themselves. Their whining is like a mobster whining because he can’t shake down people in a city because they have found a way to bypass him.

If any profession needed an invention and psychological intervention to deal with their toxic delusions, it’s journalism…

"Tech monopolies" didn't kill journalism. It killed itself.

I

latestbbok.jpg

II

You have to be way of ignorant politicians who pander:

Tech monopolies are killing journalism, Ocasio-Cortez says

What evidence is there to support this garbage statement?

None. Journalism was already in decline prior to the mainstream introduction of the Internet.

But don’t let facts get in the way of political skulduggery.

Circulation was in decline as were ratings. A lot of things killed journalism, but Big Tech did not. If journalism survived radio and television, it could have survived the Internet.

What happened was (a) people were liberated by being allowed to bypass traditional journalism, and (b) journalism didn’t reinvent itself to be relevant in a modern age.

“Tech monopolies” is a myth. It is a big, scary monster conjured to try to frighten people into votes.

And it is a manipulative and tyrannical political hack used to try to woo journalists who lost their clout — it is as if some older person is writing this script — and most likely is.

Journalism should have explored the Internet and experimented with it. It chose to pretend it wasn’t important.

But it is a way for people to have an outlet, and not just with journalism.

Once upon a time, if you wanted to have a TV show, you had to have an agent, and then make it through the national broadcasting food chain where competition is fierce. Your career would not last too long, either.

Then came cable television, and with it, more shows, but still inaccessible to the majority of creative talent.

Then came Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, and then more talent had a chance to break through.

Now we have something called Stareable.

If you want to have a show and access to an audience, there is a venue for you.

You have to keep changing. You have to progress, evolve, grow, learn, and accept that lines in the sand aren’t static.

Journalism died because it took the rigs that kept it in place as gospel truth and they weren’t.

The Internet could have transformed journalism into something far more useful and exciting for humanity.

But the profession opted to treat it as an enemy.

My book chronicles the downfall of journalism — and what an alternative needs to flourish.

Because you can either make excuses like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez always does, or you can make things happen and work for you.

Alexandra Kitty does not believe in excuses. There are always obstacles, problems, and what have you.

I had a mother with cancer in 2018 I had to look after while I had cancer at the same time. Guess what?

That didn’t stop me. I got cured, and I pushed through despite everything that would have crushed the spirit and soul of other people.

I wrote everyday. I wrote on the day of my surgery, and if I had computer access from the hospital bed, I would have wrote there, too.

I got my teaching certification from Harvard. I got another book deal. I resolved a lot of things.

I didn’t blame Big Tech. That’s for people who are just looking for excuses for failure.

And failure is not an option.

When you have a defeatist mindset, you lose because you don’t really want to win. You want to wallow and then guilt and shame others into working for you. Nice try.

I am not going to be your personal servant.

Journalism is throwing fits because people realized they have no use for them, and they are right.

I believe in innovation, invention, and creating exciting new things that are future-focussed.

I respect the past, but I embrace the future.

If you are truly capable, you make obstacles work for you. There is never any excuse, only puzzles to solve and triumph.

That’s the beauty of life.

It truly is what you make it…

The Old Narrative was that Legacy Media's Business Model was broken. Now Digital Media has collapsed.

I

ekcfcs7owsa21.jpg

II

220px-Sex_and_death101.jpg

III

ja6.gif

IV

CJR has a funny article about how digital journalism has imploded. Duh:

The digital winter turns apocalyptic

Yeah, no kidding.

Journalism collapsed.

Did you really think online versions of the archaic model would save that profession?

No.

A web site writing about 8-tracks is not going to take Internet by storm.

It does not matter which direction we look — Print, Radio, Television, Internet — journalism has collapsed.

beige-designer-stencils-stencils-fs040-64_1000.jpg

Because it is not about a faulty business model, Donald Trump, Russia, Facebook, white supremacists, being called “fake news”, or the other hundred and one things reporters always blame.

I outlined the reasons in my latest book, but whenever it’s mentioned, those who want to be in denial merely resort to gurning rather than thinking.

The delusions of grandeur do not play in a world where everyone else can indulge in delusions. They prefer their own delusions to yours.

The collapse of digital media is disturbing for the press because of their incessant mantra that “digital is the future.”

No, that was the case over twenty years ago.

If you cannot see your own reality, you cannot cover the reality of others.

That’s the heart of the problem and why the profession is no longer a thing no matter what medium it uses…

Method Research, Part Nine: Everything has a rig. That lesson came to me in high school.

I

20190126_111038.jpg

II

Are people in the press idiots?

Well, yes.

That’s what happens when you choose to be a follower.

I have been talking months about Trump’s Chaos Narrative, the press now finally clues in.

Trump is down, not out. For those of us who didn’t try our brains with cocaine in the 1980s, he has gone through this kind of thing before. His enemies think they have backed him in a corner, and he does something unexpected and rises from the ashes.

His Chaos Narrative is over. This is intermission. The Phoenix Enigma is a completely different rule book. His detractors are now clinging on to a script that just got burned.

You can turn over the rules in more than one way.

That I learned in high school.

III

When I was in junior high, we had a yearbook and I was on the committee for both years. We didn’t actually do anything, I noticed, other than make posters. The teacher actually did the entire book from all the photography to the layouts. I had the lone poem published in my Grade Eight yearbook, but the “committee” seemed to be in name only, and I found it frustrating.

Then I went to high school and was on the yearbook committee every year, and in my senior year, I was yearbook editor.

Unlike junior high, I was heavily involved in its creation. I took lots of pictures. I did the layouts and came up with the ideas. By Grace 11, I did more pages than the entire committee combined. I kept track of every page as I looked for events to cover.

I didn’t like it, however. The first teacher advisor spelled my first name wrong on my personalized copy, which was the alleged “perk” of working on the committee. Alexander instead of Alexandra? I typed out my name, and then she ruined my Grade 9 yearbook for me.

And then it happened again in my Grade 12 Yearbook, but the advisor didn’t give me a personalized yearbook. I was furious when I came back to pick it up the following year. I typed the sheet and handed it in, and I know how to spell my own name.

In my Grade 11 Yearbook, one of the members did a two-page spread with tiny writing crammed around artistically, with my advisor not paying attention to what a teenaged boy would try to sneak in — only after it was printed did her husband notice. I was editor of the current book and it took a lot of arguing to convince her not to tear out those two pages, but have him black out the offending parts every single book instead.

I caught a lot of attempts at people trying to get crap through. I was more eagle-eyed than what kids assumed I would be.

But as I said, I didn’t care much for yearbooks one way or another.

But I found being on the committee extremely useful and instructive.

For one, you know everything about everybody. The office would print out lists of everything from teachers and students and hand it over to us. I knew everyone’s credits, grades, and the like.

Second, I knew exactly how the year would play out right in September. Student life was predetermined. Everything was tightly controlled and scripted, and we’d get the playbook from Day One through the yearbook committee.

That way, I could plan my year knowing in advance what was the rigs with my roadmap.

And I don’t like scripts.

I was doing a lot of things off the script, such as finishing my studies one year early. I also did a literary journal. I wanted to do a short comedic play, but the only way I could do it was by presenting as advertising for yearbook. I had organized a simulation experiment that got serious local media play because there were parents throwing fits about it — but there was a lot of positive feedback from students, the press and the public who supported it. (It was a simulation of Apartheid in South Africa, for the record. Most students received a “black” passport and were forbidden from a lot things that the “white” passport students got to do. I didn’t invent the concept, but I got feedback from my friends who had it in their high schools, telling me what a flop it was; so I tweaked it just enough to get publicity and praise for it. It almost got derailed when Student Council got wind of it and went ballistic, trying to water it down. My advisor for that committee went ballistic in turn, and demanded an emergency meeting where I pushed and presented my case for it, and they backed down and had it go as is. Then parents went ballistic and called to complain because they thought watching racism and inhumanity on the news was enough, and then the principal cancelled it after half a day and students were upset because they actually wanted to feel the same loneliness as people who were oppressed as a show of support, but then that same principal turned around on graduation and used it in her speech about what a great school we were for having it because of the positive press and laurels they got for having the courage to do it.)

I had access to things because of that committee. I did fight for things, but if I couldn’t get them one way, I knew how to bypass it. When I suggested we have a small literary section in the yearbook, I was shot down by the advisor, but then I just made my own journal. I didn’t have a seat on Students’ Council, but I didn’t want it, either, because once you had a seat, you got tethered.

I did have a seat when I was yearbook editor. You could be elected by your fellow students or appointed if you were in charge of the committee. My seat came from the latter. I found it to be a real drag, but it was amusing nonetheless with students thinking they had control over their committee, when in fact, I knew that was coming up because I was on yearbook. It was all preset for us.

I had a peculiar reputation back then: one the one hand, I was seen as a Miss Goody Two-Shoes. I didn’t drink or do drugs. I was academically-focussed.

But on the other hand, I was seen as rebellious. My old yearbooks have inscriptions from friends who called me wild, gutsy, and even insane. I was repeatedly referred to as a “chick.” I dressed wildly. I often wore a beehive or flip to school. I wore leopard print and mini skirts with boots. Sometimes I wore a black stocking on one leg and a white on the other. Back then, everyone wore Polo by Ralph Lauren. I wore Mondi, Christian La Croix or something exotic my grandmother thought up for me.

Grandma’s designs were wilder by a mile. Some kids said I dressed like an alien. I didn’t care, but it was fun.

Child of the 80s who dressed more like she was from the 60s.

20190126_132746.jpg
20190126_132731.jpg

But not always.

20190126_132803.jpg

That was the other reason I knew about a rigged system.

Teachers had complained to me that I wasn’t behaving the way they expected someone like me to behave.

While other kids were trying to fit in, I was trying to expand my horizons. I didn’t want to box myself into something inauthentic.

And it helped by knowing how scheduled and choreographed the year was going to be.

Here are where all the hamster wheels are. This is the schedule when you are supposed to climb on them. Now, get to it, kids!

There was a reason for it.

If teens — who have just had their minds whacked with the novel thing called hormones — were left to their own devices, they’d dare eat other to eat dog shit and set fire to different chemicals in the science labs just to see what went bang the loudest.

I am not totally unsympathetic to the need of sublimate that new and nasty energy into something productive as students’ attention is being deflected from the real purpose and told a cock and bull story about how extracurricular activities were important for resumes, scholarships, and getting into “good schools.”

You see what happens when one is allowed to stray and wander unsupervised.

Covington-student-1024x612.png

Get the whippersnapper to worry about doing well at the next track meet and then spend hours running around in circles, and everything flies under the radar.

But if he’s left on his own, and some political and journalistic manipulators and exploiters will chew him up and spit him out whether they pretend to “oppose” him or “support” him.

I get it.

But when you have no intention of eating dog shit or blowing up the school, those rules can hurt you. You start believing in those invisible boundaries, and worse, take them as divine and natural truth and reality. You take them for granted.

You count on rigs to save you and make you adept at roaming out in the open to explore.

You don’t see that’s the cage to keep you locked up and then your senses and thinking become passive.

Creative thinking is thinking. Rote adherence is not, but can be confused for it.

I spent my high school years learning how to spot the rigs as well as how to turn them over, break them, and challenge them as I bypass them.

It wasn’t without incident, but even then, I learned how those rigs are reinforced and kept in place.

As I mentioned, I once put on a little skit for assembly. I cleared it with the yearbook advisor who told me to see the advisor for assemblies, a teacher who I had never spoken to or would have as a teacher as she taught subjects that weren’t going to be something I had to take. I never met her before. I just knew about her because teachers were all listed in the yearbook with their photographs. She seemed pleasant, approved, and then the play went without a hitch.

I ran into the next semester, and not on purpose. Here was a teacher I never had dealings with save for the one time. Now, here she is again, recognized me, and started to talk to me. I was polite, and as I didn’t know her very well, just asked when was the next assembly. She told me, and I said something benign that I am sure it would be interesting and good luck with it, and left.

The next day, my yearbook advisor sternly warned me that I couldn’t have another skit, shocking me. I said I didn’t want one. She said the other teacher said that I asked about the next assembly. I replied that I never made any comments about wanting another skit to her, nor did I have the time or desire to do something I already crossed off my list, and I had not approach my yearbook advisor, meaning that, obviously, that’s not why I asked. I was making small talk.

My yearbook adviser wanted to warn me again, and I flat-out said that I didn’t appreciate gossip or speculation about me in the teacher’s lounge, and if I was going to be interrogated because I was being polite, I wasn’t going to speak to any teacher for any reason for the rest of the year. Besides, usually, ideas were shot down ninety-percent of the time in this committee regardless of who asks; so the chances I would go to the trouble when it would likely be vetoed was close to nothing. She backed off but I could tell she was very displeased with me.

She thought she “got” me at something that veered off the sanctioned script, and in the process, revealed more of the behind-the-scenes goings-on than she should have. I was involved in more than one committee, and she knew it. If she was going to go on a fishing expedition, she could have asked if I had any other ideas for promotion. Another skit would not have been something that I would have recommended, and considering I wasn’t the editor at the time, I would have said that ship sailed. Sales wasn’t my department. That would have refuted the theory, and kept the inter-teacher intelligence-gathering under wraps.

But it got me thinking about a lot of things.

How many students get labelled because of loose talk in the teachers’ lounge. Students do it to teachers as well, but the power imbalance is there.

I changed my ways, but even silence brought certain collective assumptions. I didn’t talk to teachers about my personal and social life because it wasn’t their business, not because I didn’t have one.

I had teachers stop me in the halls — teachers I never had as teachers — tell me I should have “friends.” I would nod and thank them, and leave. This was a rude and unfounded. I wasn’t by myself. I went to events and socialized.

And then my senior year, my school held a “fashion show” over two days. In 2019, this school would have gotten in serious trouble for it by the neo-Victorian puritanicals eating prunes as they posted their disapproval on the Troll Scroll.

20190126_170723.jpg
20190126_170819.jpg

The high point was when the male students, teachers, and vice principal dancers stripped off to their skivvies and grandmas were shoving money down their speedos.

But it was all for charity, which makes everything okay!

(Oh, this wasn’t the most questionable sexually explicit thing to go down in my high school. A couple of girls in my gym class showed a hardcore porn video for about ten minutes in health class. The teacher got in a bit of trouble, but didn’t lose her job over it, even though everyone forgot that as I was the youngest in the class, I was actually underage. There was something else even more serious that went down there, but that was a year or so before my time; but that’s for another day).

I bought tickets for both nights — mostly because I invited my friends who went to other high schools to see my school’s cheery debauchery up close. It was not surprising that the day after the second night that I had more than one teacher comment that I never mentioned I had so many close friends from other schools, as if that was uncommon among teens. Give me a break. I just sighed, shrugged, smiled cherubically, and walked away, making me wonder what kind of gossip network was going down in the teacher’s lounge. Yay, live action reality show!

And I was the character without a trope-ish role.

Who was Alexandra? She was skipping grades and winning awards. She was on committees. She was a wild dresser. She was mouthy, rebellious, but knew just how subversive she could be without getting derailed. I did what I wanted, when I wanted, where I wanted, and how I wanted it. Peer pressure didn’t stop me. Teachers didn’t stop me. I used to get calls from dignitaries who’d call the school, and then I’d get paged to come to answer the phone. I gave a news interview that way. I had students quip that the principal was borrowing my office for occasions, and yet he barely knew of my existence because I wasn’t getting hauled to his office, and the one time I did, it was the teacher who had to apologize to me.

It was actually a very simple and straightforward matter of turning over all of the rules because I had the scripted year playbook via the yearbook committee.

There was no “conspiracy." There was no diabolical plot. There was an adherence to traditional rules and routine. Teachers didn’t want trouble. They got their marching orders from the Ministry of Education, and followed the rules. I got that.

But I wanted to learn more than just what the government thought I should. So I made my own playground.

I graduated, skipped the prom, and then went off to university.

And then a civil war broke out, and I decided to become a Method Researcher.

But I remembered about those rigs I used to ticker with in high school and wondered if the real world really was like high school — only with more money.

51sAItAlWsL._SX258_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

IV

J-school was my test-run of Method Research. By this time I had experience in real world journalism in short order, including a column in the Hamilton Spectator. I got the idea because I got the attention of 60 Minutes. I worked as a freelance reporter for the Burlington Post, and this is one year into my experiment.

Now I was getting a grad degree. I had enough under my belt to know what reflected the real world, and what was the academic-version of it.

So this would be my way of pushing and keeping notes of my results.

I didn’t have a yearbook committee to give me the crib sheet of the upcoming year, but for two of the three semesters, we were split in three groups for some classes on a rotating basis: one third would do radio, while third television, and one third print, then we’d rotate until we did assignments for all three media (no Internet at that time).

So what I could do was ask what the other two groups were up to, and then I’d say what I was doing. That would be sufficient.

As I was working on my assignments, I was lining up and planning for my upcoming assignments. I could actually work the phones and email and nab some high-profile newsmakers to give me interviews — some that usually didn’t grant media interviews at all, such as then controversial London police chief Julian Fantino.

By the time the first rotation hit, I had everything ready and sailed through. The second rotation went even better.

It didn’t always go to plan, but by then, I learned how to land on my feet, only one level above what my original plan was.

I had figured out to sit on my professor’s right side because when we were giving our pitches, he’d always start with the student on his right. One time, he decided to go the opposite direction, meaning I would give my pitch last.

And as my luck had it, the second to last student had the same pitch I did, and it was one of the rare times that I had no backup plan.

And it was my turn, and I said I didn’t want to say anything until I confirmed it, which was true. I promised I would check in within the hour.

I ran down to the bulletin board in the front lobby to see if anyone of note was speaking at the campus or anywhere downtown because you can’t just buy time unless you have a justification for it.

Peter C. Newman was promoting his new book — and one that I had bought and just finished reading. I called Maclean’s who gave me his secretary’s number, and he gave me an interview.

And he even autographed my copy.

20190126_185626.jpg

It was a high point for me on numerous levels. Newman was an excellent writer and researcher, but he was also an exceptional editor. I had written one essay on the history of Maclean’s and his notion of keeping a map of Canada with pins to ensure the entire country’s affairs were being covered was something that stayed with me, and something I used in my own work over the years, and, in fact, still do. When I wrote When Journalism was a Thing, I had my own map of the various parts of the profession, and made sure I covered it thoroughly.

It was a close call, and I learned a lot that day, from the contents of the interview to the importance of not getting complacent even when you figure out the rigs.

I interviewed a lot of different people back then, a lot who were reporters and editors of various media outlets, particularly after the Quebec referendum for a TV assignment about the media’s coverage of that watershed national event. I had set up an interview with one very popular radio host on a newstalk station that fired him and others and changed the format to music. He phoned me to let me know he’d still do the interview. He was gracious, and there are many times I wonder what happened to journalism because once upon a time, you could find humble and sensible people in the profession like him and Newman.

I often wonder if journalists realize how far down the rabbit hole they are. You had the twits, but you also had the square shooters. Eventually, the twits took over completely and their toxic mindset poisoned the industry beyond help.

I learned more about rigs in the real world. Some people tried to use them as fortresses and even silent weapons, but you also had people who challenged those rigs.

By the time I graduated, I had my hypotheses to test, my experiments I would conduct, my map of the landscape I vowed to explore, and the plan by which I would explore it. When you are an explorer and what you are exploring is a laboratory, you are part scientist, part detective, part cartographer, but also part rig detonator.

It was a fascinating way of being a journalist. It is like being a fictional character who suddenly realized she was in a comic book and then questioned the story structure, the plot devices, tropes, the author’s ideas, the illustrator’s choices, even the structure of the panels. There is something very meta about it, the way La Linea is.

But over time, I became very good at spotting and even predicting rigs.

We don’t need them. So many innovations are being denied because we think they give us power, and they merely take them away.

It is fear that keeps people holding on to them as if they were security blankets. It is irrational and counterproductive.

I understood that in high school. I understood it as a Method Researcher.

I still do, and it is the reason that I fight for a world without them…

The New Yorker spews sophistry about journalism...as usual, they are oblivious to reality.

Ramble, babble, spew:

Does Journalism Have a Future?

In an era of social media and fake news, journalists who have survived the print plunge have new foes to face.

No, journalism doesn’t have a future when you are puking sophistry and think you have an article.

This is pretentious bullshit. I could write a book about why journalism collapsed.

DM8FnHmXUAA8lfY.jpg

Wait a minute! I did write a book about it!

Go me!

giphy.gif

Notice in Jill Lepore’s long and tedious wallow-fest that she doesn’t look at what is archaic and wrong with journalism?

It is everybody else’s fault!

Let’s blame Craig’s List! And Chartbeat! And our Aunt Gertrude for not subscribing to more than one newspaper!

If only the world would stop progressing!

Journalists are the enfant stupide of the modern world. Bête would also be an appropriate word to describe them.

Journalists are like the student who does very well for a few years, but then gets in his head that is too smart to study and that he already knows everything.

And then doesn’t pay attention in class, doesn’t read notes, study, or do any real homework.

And then is shocked that he is starting to fail.

It can’t be! Didn’t he get great grades before?

As an educator, I have had real students pull this stunt. You can try to tell them that they cannot wing it, or merely use the stuff they learned before. You are learning new things and need different knowledge, facts, and skill sets.

And when you ask these students what is the problem, they have a list all good and ready, but nowhere on this list is their obliviousness and laziness.

Then they gripe to other students how “unfair” it is, only to find out they are bellyaching to those who study and work hard, and are getting sterling grades.

Journalism doesn’t have a future.

It has a past.

But an alternative does have a future because we need information, and the old guard think they are too good to change…

Why read the New York Times when this website has already said months before?

I

thief-of-thie4112012ves.jpeg

II

Calvinball.jpg

III

Gotta love those unoriginal thinkers at the New York Times when they have reruns such as this piece:

In Business and Governing, Trump Seeks Victory in Chaos

Gee, New York Times, where did you get this idea?

Perhaps from my last book?

latestbbok.jpg

Or maybe from my website, in countless entries?

Like this one in June of 2018?

For people who read this site frequently, you know the Chaos Narrative and that I have said here and in my book that Trump plays Go and thrives in chaos.

Yes, the New York Times obviously has to scrape my site for ideas.

I have been thinking about things very carefully, and what I am going to do with Chaser. Until tonight, I was at a crossroads; now, I have had a revelation, and combined with my intellectual transmutation, I have a very clear idea of what I am going to do next.

That means that now my third arc is coming first, and that should be in two weeks. It is a One Shot, and it has to do with a notorious case from another era that would be seen differently in a #MeToo era.

Then I will have something on Postmedia, and then comes a geo-political story. 

And then a hiatus for me to finish writing my book.

Come summer, I am taking a vastly different track. Journalism and old school elites play chess. Trump plays Go.

Alexandra Kitty plays something else entirely. It is a game called Chaser, and the object of the game is to turn over rules that shred scripts one page at a time.

And that is your message from…

Chaser.png