Saturday, April 30, 2005
There is nothing I can add to the above story. Just read it. But if it is true that the Los Angeles Times rewrote and edited wire copy on a major international event to totally omit the proof supporting the American military, the only question is who needs to be fired. This is so serious, I hope the LA Times has a reasonable explanation. It is simply unthinkable that anyone at any American newspaper could have done this to our troops.
Thursday, April 28, 2005
LA Times Finally Discovers Location Of Hancock Park! Should We All Chip In And Buy All The Out-Of-Staters At The LAT -- Thomas Guides?
Rosenheim mansion — The Home of the Week column in the April 24 Real Estate section said the 1904 mansion that architect Alfred F. Rosenheim designed for himself was in Hancock Park. The house is in the Country Club Park neighborhood of Los Angeles.
Now since I spotted this error on Saturday April 23rd (and posted it on that day)- why should it take five days for the LA Times to correct such an obvious error?
And how many more days will it take for the LA Times to correct the statement by Mike Davis that the San Francisco housing market has 'burst'?
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
Why Do John P. Puerner, John S. Carroll, Dean Baquet, & Michael Kinsley All Support Nick Goldberg & Mike Davis In Lying To Readers Of The LA Times?
But to say that the San Francisco housing market has burst - at a time when prices and sales are hitting record heights every month - is a lie, not an opinion. A lie that had been exposed repeatedly in my previous posts - and equally exposed by links in the LA Times' own real estate section.
But instead of a retraction and a correction (and an apology) - all that there has been forthcoming from the Times is... silence. A silence from the very highest levels of the LA Times that tells everyone in this city that the LA Times and its Publisher and its Editor approve of its writers lying and equally approve of its editors covering up those lies.
But, as anyone who regularly reads the LA Times knows, this should not be news to anyone.
Monday, April 25, 2005
So let me defend.... the indefensible. But before I go into my defense of Marc Cooper's credentials - let me give you my history with him. When NEW TIMES did a favorable article about my exposure of Mike Davis as a fraud, Marc called me up for an interview. And despite the fact that not one, but two other writers at NEW TIMES called me to say he was going to do a hit on me no matter what I said, I did the interview.
I also offered to meet Marc and show him a few hundred examples of how I could prove that Mike Davis had knowingly lied, but he refused to do that. I also offered to send or fax him the proof, but he also refused to allow me to do that, too. He said it was not going to be that kind of article - and he was right.
After we had a short and highly entertaining phone chat (he also refused to meet me in person) largely about our mutual childhoods in LA - and all the things we had in common, he printed a largely fabricated account of our conversation - including having me use words in contexts that I had never, ever in used in my life, much less used when I had talked with him. He also did not challenge a single fact that I had said was wrong about Mike Davis, but he did liberally go into personal attacks on my character, since he could not prove that anything I said was wrong.
However, other than when he is defending a friend such as Mike Davis - in which case Marc has zero compunction about lying - I find him to be one of the best - and most reliable political commentators writing in LA today.
So even though I am on the opposite side of the fence from him politically in many but not all ways, I find his LA Weekly columns on the state of the Republican and Democratic parties in California to be brutally honest and exceptionally insightful.
As always, my main concern is about one thing and one thing only when it comes to writing - the truth. And I always love to read points of view that differ from my own; my only problem is with people like Mike Davis who constantly and knowingly lie to support those points of view and papers like the LA Times who refuse to correct those lies.
Now if Mr. Shaw can only do a follow-up column on the reaction to his piece on how he and the LA Times are the true Gods of accuracy and bloggers are fact-mangling scum...
And, oh, by the way -- the four layers of editors and filters have - so far - missed two errors in the Times' coverage of Mitch Albom prior to their being printed. Those corrections are now on their corrections page.
Sunday, April 24, 2005
LA Times Link Shows San Francisco Area Housing Prices Set All Time Price Record! But LA Times Still REFUSES To Correct Mike Davis!!
It is now Sunday and it has been almost one week since the LA Times' four layers of editors and filters gave their stamp of approval to Mike Davis saying that the real estate market in San Francsico has... 'burst'. And the LA Times still refuses to admit that Mike Davis simply... made that claim up... without there being any reality or basis for that ... preverication. Now today - the LAT Sunday real estate section links to a DataQuick story which shows that the entire Bay area real estate market - and not just the City - is not only still climbing, but that it shows no signs of any weakness of any kind!
Bay Area Home Sales: Record Prices, Near-Record Sales
La Jolla, CA.----Home prices in the Bay Area rose to new highs in March as sales for that month were at their highest level in sixteen years, a real estate information service reported.
A total of 11,310 new and resale houses and condos were sold in the nine-county region in March. That was up 51.5 percent from 7,463 for the previous month, and up 2.7 percent from 11,015 for March last year, according to DataQuick Information Systems.
Sales always increase from February to March. Last month's sales count was the highest for any March since 11,442 homes were sold in March 1989.
"Demand still appears to be stronger than supply, which puts upward pressure on prices. People seem to be increasingly willing to let the homes they live in represent a higher portion of their net worth. I suppose parking wealth in real estate is more attractive than investing in the stock market," said Marshall Prentice, DataQuick president.
The median price paid for a Bay Area home was $568,000, a new record. That was up 3.5 percent from $549,000 in February, and up 19.8 percent from $474,000 for March a year ago.
Prices are going up at their fastest pace in four years.
DataQuick, a subsidiary of Vancouver-based MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates, monitors real estate activity nationwide and provides information to consumers, educational institutions, public agencies, lending institutions, title companies and industry analysts.
The typical monthly mortgage payment that Bay Area buyers committed themselves to paying was $2,566 in March, an all-time high. A year ago it was $2,052.
Indicators of market distress are still largely absent. Foreclosure rates are low, down payment sizes are stable and there have been no significant shifts in market mix, DataQuick reported.
Saturday, April 23, 2005
Now the reason for my surprise was that Hancock Park was not even subdivided by G. Allan Hancock until well after 1904. Now that still does not preclude the story from being accurate as numerous homes dating from as early as the 1890's were moved to Hancock Park during the last century. However, the picture in the Times of the three story brick building makes it highly unlikely that this particular dwelling was one of the homes that has been moved there.
The other factor that makes this story somewhat... suspicious... is that a remarkably similar looking house was built by the same architect for himself in the Westchester Gardens area of the old Country Club district (a considerable physical and a far larger social distance from Hancock Park) in 1915 on a lot that had been subdivided in 1912.
Or at least that is what my printed source tell me. Now granted the construction date might be wrong since I only have a single source on hand for that date, but unless someone picked up this 10,000 plus home and flew it over to Hancock Park since my long distant deb ball days - I also do not recall any house in Hancock Park looking quite like this one, particularly one built by same the architect in question.
Lastly, the phrase 'Hancock Park' is used five times in the article between the first and second pages of the real estate section.
The LA Times today proved that they are far better at making news than at reporting anything resembling news during the latest edition of their hugely successful 'Festival Of Books' on the UCLA campus. It runs again tomorrow - Sunday, April 23rd -- from 10 AM to 5 PM -- and it's FREE!! More info at the LA Times website.
And for downtowners, there was a special note of interest. Fledging LA publishing company, CONFLU:X, run by poet Jim Natal and his wife, book artist, Tania Baban, had just received Downtown real estate agent Ed Rosenthal's first book of printed verse! In fact, I saw a copy of Ed's newly hand-bound poems - beginning with his justly famed ode to Tom Gilmore - even before Ed saw them. So be sure and visit their booth and pick up your copy tomorrow!
PS - The Times is also giving away FREE copies of this Sunday's LA Times! And don't worry about getting there early - even with a captive audience of readers, they were having trouble giving away free copies of the paper...
PPS - Even bottled water goes as high as FOUR BUCKS a bottle!! Free chocolate, though, can be had at least seventeen booths!!! Pack your knapsack accordingly.
Friday, April 22, 2005
We now return you to our normal programming...
Day Four of LA Times/Mike Davis (Lack Of) Truth Watch! And Proof Positive That Mike Davis Is A Big, Fat Liar!!
Now some people have said that I am being overly critical of Mike Davis in stating that he has thousands of lies and errors in his books (and articles) such as City of Quartz and Ecology of Fear. Others have questioned my claim that he fabricated an entire interview in a LA Weekly article.
So let me produce my sources. To being with, my source for his fabricating an entire interview in the LA Weekly - is... drumroll, please... The LA Weekly!
Below I have printed - verbatim, unedited, what was said by Lewis McAdams about how the interview with him was fabricated:
"The first time I met Mike Davis was in the summer of 1989, when he called to say he was doing an L.A. Weekly cover story on the Los Angeles River. Since it was going to be the biggest piece anybody had done yet about the river, and I was running Friends of the Los Angeles River, I suggested we get together down by the river for a talk. He said he wanted to work on the story a little first. A few weeks later, he called to tell me he'd written the story and wanted me to take a look at it.
I was amazed to discover he'd fabricated an entire interview with me: We were standing together at the Fremont Gate entrance to Elysian Park, a place I'd never been, and I showed him a "dog-eared 1890s topographical map prepared for City Engineer J.H. Dockweiler," a document that I'd never heard of at the time. Though we'd never actually talked, the words he put in my mouth made me sound like I knew a lot more about the Los Angeles River than I actually did. I told him to go ahead with the piece just the way it was.
I was still nonplused at Davis's audacity when, a few years later, I finally saw one of the four 11-foot-long sections of the Dockweiler Map at the Huntington Library. The map was rich in detail, composed by a team of researchers operating before suburban sprawl would permanently obscure the river's riparian roots. I realized that what Davis had unearthed from dusty obscurity was the single document that might, on the strength of science, allow us to reverse the bureaucratic inevitability of ill-conceived flood control. I was the expert and the activist, but it was Davis who had put in my hands the blueprint for the restoration of the wetlands of the Los Angeles River.
Davis is the first to admit that he won't let a fact get in the way of a good story. "I was stunned," I've heard him say twice lately, "to find out that something I said turned out to be true."
Now, all you skeptics out there, are there any more questions about my statement that UC Irvine Professor Mike Davis fabricated an entire interview in the LA Weekly?
I didn't think so.
And when the LA Times fires writers for getting a few facts wrong and embellishing a basically true story - how do they justify continually hiring someone who completely made up an entire interview?
Now that that is settled, let's move onto my statement that thousands of Mike Davis' so-called facts are either lies or errors.
And for my first witness for the prosecution I shall call... Mike Davis. Yes, dear readers, Mike Davis himself can be shown that he repeatedly lies about... what Mike Davis himself has said!
And that shall be the subject of my next post. Stay tuned!
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
When will the LA Times admit that if a writer has gotten not just hundreds, but thousands (yes - thousands) of facts wrong over the years - that should disqualify him from being asked to write for them? And if fabricating an entire interview in the LA Weekly (as Mike Davis did) does not disqualify a writer from writing for the LA Times (or teaching at UC Irvine) - what in God's name will?
Mike Davis' latest assault on the truth was - among other things - his statement that the housing bubble in San Francisco has already burst. Well, in a previous post, I showed that the exact opposite was true. And I further checked today with the California Realtor's Association and their January and February figures for sale prices in San Francisco show that not only has the market up there not collapsed, but that prices are still increasing in the double digit range - and that the latest figures show that the most current rate of price increase is actually INCREASING!
In January, for example - after San Francisco prices hit record highs last year - prices went up by 12.1% in January 2006 over January 2005 and in February 2006, the median price went up by 17.8% over February of last year!
And yet the LA Times still stands by Mike Davis' lie that the housing market has 'burst' in San Francisco!
Lastly - this further illustrates the problem with the LA Times now being increasingly staffed by people with no knowledge of either Los Angeles or California. For anyone - much less four layers of editors and filters - to read the claim that the San Francisco housing market has collapsed (particularly when it is written by a known pathological liar) and to then not instantly know that this claim was a complete lie - demonstrates how the the LA Times has become a civic embarrassment.
Tuesday, April 19, 2005
In the article, Mr. Wood describes the new Midnight Mission homeless services center as 'plush' which certainly does not describe the building that I toured. Superbly designed, yes, but very much built on a budget.
But that is only the beginning. First the sub-headline says that the 'city opens a $17 million shelter'. Well, the 'city' did not open anything. It was privately built with largely privately raised funds. Second, it is NOT a shelter. It is a treatment center, not a temporary warehouse for the homeless like so many shelters located in places like New York. Then the article implies that 6,000 homeless live on the streets of downtown. That is inaccurate. 2,500 is a far more accurate figure.
The entire article has a Kafka-like quality in which so much of what is said, is the exact opposite of what the truth is.
Much, much, much more very soon.
Well - guess what? No matter how many times you have been caught making up 'facts' - the LA Times still believes that dishonestly should be its own reward. So not only have they again allowed Mike Davis to again write for them (a person who once fabricated an entire interview in the LA Weekly) - but the LA Times still didn't even bother to check his 'facts'!
I guess since they knew he was just going to make the stuff up any way - why bother?
To just list his most outrageous - out and out - total and complete lie - Mike Davis claims in an article about housing prices that... the San Francisco housing bubble has 'already burst'. So... since the housing bubble has burst in San Francisco, I guess that means that prices are drastically dropping and that the market is filled with unsold houses - right?
Well - guess what? - the exact opposite is happening in San Francisco. Repeat - the EXACT opposite of what Mike Davis has to say! So I guess besides knowing absolutely nothing about Los Angeles, San Francisco is another city about which the publisher and the editors of the LA Times know absolutely nothing about.
Below is the opening of a April 15th story by Carol Lloyd in the San Francisco Gate about the 'burst' San Francisco real estate bubble:
"Last week, a little duplex in Bernal Heights was listed for $799,000. As is customary for most real estate sales in the City, offers were to be reviewed on an appointed date about two weeks later. But after the property had been on the market for only a few days, as agents and prospective buyers were still swarming the property at the broker's tour, the building was already in contract. The price? More than $1 million. The buyer? Someone who knew better than to wait around for the offer date."
I do not know what the most amazing thing is about Mike Davis. That he is incapable of ever fully telling the truth about... anything, or that when he lies, his lies are always so easily proveable, as if he wants to be caught. Or is it that papers like the LA Times continue to print him and colleges such as UC Irvine continue to hire him despite the fact that not even the simplest fact is ever safe in his hands.
More on Davis' claim that the housing market has gone bust in San Francisco. According to the State Realator's Association, not only did sales figures last year surpasss the number of sales at the height of the 1999 internet bubble economy, but prices went up in double digits during last year.
"By far, the most remarkable story comes from the Bay Area, where the regional economy is still reeling from some of the largest job losses ever. Regional sales increased 6.3 percent over 2003 to a new record high level, surpassing the previous record of sales that was established in 1999 at the height of the "dot.com" era. The December median was the highest of the three regions at $658,910. While the median fell by a slight 0.3 percent from the prior month, it rose 13.2 percent over the December 2003 median of $582,320."
Monday, April 18, 2005
Friday, April 15, 2005
However on the good news side - for those us us who actually live in LA as opposed to just visiting it - the LAT's solution to this is the same as always. Bring in lots more out of towners who know and care nothing about this city! I mean - is there ANYBODY left in Chicago??
Though, to give credit where credit is due - the editorial page's pointless ramblings and Steve Lopez's mind numbing columns about himself can in no way be faulted in driving readers from the LAT in ever increasing numbers. At least at the LA Times -- failure is always a team effort!
Thursday, April 14, 2005
The editorial page of the LA Times finally admits (kind of) that there are 30,000 illegal alien criminals (who largely prey on law abiding immigrants) in LA County who are - essentially - protected from the police. So do they - finally - directly address that issue in the editorial? Does the LA Times - at last - look the issue square in the eye and take a firm position on the subject? Can anyone on the LAT editorial page ever write a simple declarative sentence?
The answer to all these questions, of course - hell, no.
Instead, for FIVE paragraphs they whine and complain about the very idea that a police officer might ask a criminal suspect if he is in this country illegally. Then in paragraph six they finally - grudgingly - say that they "don't oppose the LAPD's power to go after convicted felons who have illegally re-entered the country."
And again - they do not support this, you understand - they just do not oppose it. The Times is simply incapable of saying that would support anything might make it easier for the police to protect the millions of immigrants in our community that these criminals prey upon.
And then, even, with their 'don't oppose' clause - the LA Times still demands a set of guidelines (such as police officer would have to get a supervisor's permission to even TALK to the suspect) that would make it virtually impossible for any officer in the field to question, much less detain anyone he suspects of being a violent criminal who is in this country illegally.
The truly wonderful irony here is that when it comes to 'protecting' the people of color being killed at King/Drew, the LA Times' editorial page is too afraid to make any recommendations. But when it comes to protecting criminals who prey upon people of color in the central city - then the LA Times is filled with recommendations and demands they are willing to make.
Someday someone will have to explain this all to me.
Well, with LA's burgeoning wholesale Toy District and with Mattel as one of the few major corporations located in the LA area - it might seem that LA would be a prime spot for one or both toy fairs to relocate. But... no.
First, that international gateway - and media capital - Dallas, is described as the prime competitor for NYC, and LA is not even mentioned. But - wait - since Mattel is located here, surely they will help LA's dying convention and hotel business - as well as our growing toy business- by pushing for LA as the place for at least one of the conventions.
Well, uh... no. And not only is that not the case, but Neil Friedman, president of the Fisher-Price unit of Mattel, Inc. further stated that, "Mattel and Fisher-Price will not attend any shows outside of New York." The article then said that the Toy Association will meet next week to discuss the issue.
I can only hope that LA, Inc. plans on being there to pitch them our dying, bargain priced convention center (along with our serious media presence and international buyers) and that somebody at Mattel's corporate headquarters might bitch slap some sense into Mr. Friedman.
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
On last Monday night, the New York Times announced that Judith Regan was going to move her Harper-Collins imprint - ReganBooks - headquarters from
Now, of course, if the LAT's publisher (the Tribune Company) was covering a major New York book publisher moving to
"She (Regan) also said she intended to bring a different idea of culture to
So once again, if you want to know what is happening in Los Angeles, the only paper to read... is the New York Times, our true hometown newspaper.
Deaths Continue at Killer King -- And LA Times Editorial Page Shamelessly Hides From Its Own Editorial Cowardice!!!!
Two more dead At Killer King/Drew Medical and the LA Times editorial page finally revisits the subject after having almost nothing to say since its (seemingly yearly) expose of the hospital last year. But do they - finally - take a stand? Does the LA Times finally call for cutting loose the
Instead they blame Mayor Hahn for lacking leadership (in which case, they are dead right, btw, even though he has no control over the hospital) - bu, once again, the LA Times still refuses to endorse any of the tough choices that need to be made. Instead the spineless editorial shamelessly states, "Tough truths and tougher choices are needed to save even a scaled down hospital. That is what leadership is about."
And I agree. But the LA Times - once again - refuses to take any kind of leadership role in stopping the killings at Killer King. Even with all these additional, totally needless deaths, the LA Times still continues to refuse to endorse, much less demand the tough changes they still too cowardly to even list, much less demand, in their editorial.
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
Now while I know about as much about cars as the Chicagoans who run the LA Times know about putting out a newspaper - I saw no smoking gun in the article. Just some hard hitting commentary and tons of Neil's wonderfully off-the-wall humor. I would be a lot more impressed with GM's case if they had asked for even one error to be corrected. But they did not.
However, the LA Times still said (properly) they would review their coverage to see if there was anything that needed to be corrected. For once, though, I hope they do not find anything that needs to be corrected. As bad a newspaper as the LA Times is, Neil's coverage is one of its better features and allowing advertisers to dictate either news or editorial coverage is completely unacceptable.
Now, if advertisers start pulling ads because the Times is no longer read by anyone (which is increasingly the case) or if advertisers get tired of supporting a newspaper that does not even bother to report on the city it purports to cover - then that is something else. In that case, let the ad cancelations begin!
But for the LA Times to any way to cave into GM, assuming the LAT's facts are correct, is something the LA Times should never do.
Saturday, April 09, 2005
First the 'good news'. After every other media outlet in Western Civilization has printed the fact, the LA Times - with six reporters as opposed to the NY Times' one man wrecking crew - Charlie LeDuff - has finally - FINALLY! - discovered there are 30,000 criminals who are illegal aliens walking the streets of LA County.
As for the bad news - let's start with the blatantly dishonest - and I mean, embarrassing dishonest - headline reading 'Officers Back New Vision of Sanctuary'.
Now I know a lot of cops - and I talk to them every day on the streets of LA - and they are overwhelming against the concept of allowing sanctuary for illegal aliens who are criminals, even with the 'new vision' part added. So making the lede of the story the claim that cops support this new concept of sanctuary is inexcusably dishonest, no matter how one modifies the statement. Cops are angry and frustrated over the concept. While on one hand, they do not want to be (and should not be) immigration police, they DO want the right to be able to use immigration status to get serious criminals off of the streets.
But since the LA Times' position is in favor of sancuary, that is what both the headline and the start of the story reflect.
Eventually, the LA Times does get around to interviewing cops who are opposed to the concept of sanctuary (cops whose 'vision' is, of course, totally ignored in the headline of the story). But the damage is already done by then. It is often the headline and the start of the story that people just skim when they read a newspaper.
But the most serious damage done by the six reporters, and the god knows how many editors involved in the LA Times version of the 'truth' is, the damage done to the art of journalism. Read below first the LA Times version of the story, and then read Charlie LeDuff's article on the same subject. In one story you get great writing, a visceral sense of what it is like to be a cop in LA and some harsh, unedited truths. In the other version, you find out why the LA Times is daily hemorrhaging readers.
So once again, if you want to know what it is like to live in this city - you have to go to the NY Times and not the LA Times.
Boss Tweed Is Alive And Well In Sacramento And Los Angeles! Whose Heads Will Roll Once Truth Comes Out??
Wednesday, April 06, 2005
Dog Bites Man! Sun Rises In East!! Pope To Be Catholic!!! New York Times Kicks LA Times'... BUTT!!!!
In an article in the Thursday edition of the New York Times, LeDuff describes in painful detail what the LA Times refuses to tell the citizens of Los Angeles -- that there are over 30,000 criminals in LA County who are here illegally and who are PROTECTED from being arrested by the policies of the City and County of Los Angeles.
And Good Old Charlie does an absolutely brilliant job of explaining - and bringing to life - an extremely complex, and tragic - situation. Now if we can only convince the LA Times to steal him away from the New York Times -- and put him in charge of the editorial page! You're on notice John Broder!
However, the most shocking part of this story was when Shaw explicitedly described the hidden places where he goes to gratify his implacable demons, leading the list was the long infamous Wilshire dinery -- Cassell's! A place where I, alas, had once lost much of my own, once youthful innocence.
I might add that even though I was raised within walking distance of this... flesh house.... my parents had wisely felt that someone of my tender years needed to be protected from the sight - much less the caress - of such voluptuarian slabs of raw, pink, firm flesh; thus it was left up to Bill Roberts and Stu Spencer (of the famed political PR firm of Spencer-Roberts) to personally arrange for my debauching. So one spring day, they took me there to fully initiate me into the forbidden pleasures of so much unadorned flesh unashamedly on display. And it was easily the second most enoyable losing of my virginity of my teen age years.
And many thanks to Fishbowl at Mediabistro for alerting me to this story. As I had yet acquired my daily copy of the LA Times from the local trash baskets, I had not read it until I saw it on their site.
I might add this is something very personal for me. If I had not been in the emergency room with my mother on one occasion, they would have let her die. But when I overrode the do not resuscitate order that was mistakenly on her charts, they revived her and she had almost two quality years of life left and was able to die peacefully at home. And this was in a top rated private hospital. I cannot even imagine what the families whose loved ones are being brutalized at King/Drew must be going through.
Tuesday, April 05, 2005
"The Los Angeles Times won the Pulitzer Prize for public service Monday for a series of stories that detailed how Martin Luther King Jr./Drew Medical Center provided care so poor that it sickened and imperiled some patients."
Sickened? Imperiled? Why not just say... mildly annoyed???
Shiny New Ornaments For The Titanic! Pulitzers For The Times! Or - Why The King-Drew Pulitzer Is The Ultimate Indictment Of The LA Times!
So I - dutifully - began to plow through the first submitted story. But, to my surprise, I recognized the first line. And I also recalled the first paragraph -- and the last one, and quite a bit that was in-between. And the same was true of all three articles.
It wasn't so much that I recalled her writing style, good as it is; rather, I remembered the people she wrote about and the lives she brought to life. And what more can you ask for from a reporter?
As for the second award, on the day the King-Drew series began, I heard groans all over town as people reached down to pick-up their morning paper only to find his year's pre-packaged Pulitzer Prize submission - with five chapters ready to assault them.
Except this series was actually about... Los Angeles. And it was good. Actually, it was great. But rather than me telling you this - just over to the Times website (honest, it won't kill you... just this one time; I promise I'll never ask you this again) and re-read it. Tracy Weber, Charles Ornstein, Mitchell Landsberg and Steve Hymon - along with photographer, Robert Gauthier, all did a superb job
But... after they exposed how cowardly politicians have allowed countless people to unnecessarily die at Killer King to protect corrupt and incompetent hospital administrators and staff, the editorial staff then took this information... and betrayed the people of this city.
Instead of a demand for specific reforms, and instead of offering political cover to the elected officials who have allowed this outrage to go on for 30 years so they could implement these desperately needed reforms - the editorial page said...absolutely nothing. See below:
That was later followed up by a summing up article which clearly implied that the best possible option was to suspend civil service rules, shut down the hospital (briefly) to regroup and to then only hire back those who can prove they can meet the highest standards. But these obvious solutions were not only not demanded by the Times, but this article all but stated that it was politically impossible for politicians to do what actually needs to be done, and then accepted that it will not be done. See below:
So the LA Times - after exposing what the conspiracy of silence and cowardice has created, has joined those politically correct politicians too afraid to demand the measures necessary to fix this problem. So instead of becoming the solution to the problem of Killer King - the LA Times has become apart of the problem.
But at least they have a shiny new Pulitzer...
Monday, April 04, 2005
And notice how the ever impartial LA Times said the rates had been 'sharply lowered' when they dropped, but when they went back up, the 'sharply' part somehow got... dropped.
Now this bond rating drop was just slightly over two weeks after Arnold took office as the true extent of the Gray Davis budget disaster was becoming clearer and clearer. So even though one of the bond agencies did cite the car tax repeal as one of their several reasons, it is disingenuous to say that this drop was caused by two weeks of Arnold's policies that hadn't even been developed, much less passed or implemented.
In contrast, once Arnold did get his tax and spending policies approved - not just two - but all THREE bond rating agencies 'sharply' raised their ratings, and all three bond rating agencies cited his policies (along with an improving economy) for their 'sharp' improvement of California's bond rating.
So, to be perfectly clear, before Arnold's tax and spending plan was passed - dropping bond ratings, and after Arnold's tax and spending plan was passed - rising bond ratings. The exact opposite of what the Times said.
But did (or will?) the LA Times ever come out and say that Arnold's spending and tax policies actually RAISED the state's bond ratings? Will the LA Time ever apologize to Arnold and the people of this city and this state for such a monumental error? Will anyone at the LAT fall on his sword to atone for this journalistic sin? Will the LA Times ever hire anyone who was born and raised - or even LIVES - in LA?
Of course not.
Doing something like that might actually improve the LA Times' rapidly plummeting credibility or the Times' equally rapidly dropping circulation figures. And, luckily for those us who care about this city, the LA Times' soon to be realized death wish will prevent that from ever happening.
"The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, which opened its Richard Meier-designed complex eight years ago and is reopening its Malibu villa next winter to house Roman antiquities, is thinking about its own future with the aid of Mr. Ellis. As the Guggenheim Museum continues to expand with satellites all over the world, for example, "We're asking ourselves, does that pattern make any sense for us?" said Barry Munitz, the president and chief executive of the J. Paul Getty Trust. "Do we want other sites? Do we want other partners?"
To refresh your memories, when the Getty Trust became the richest arts institution in the world, it was widely assumed that we would - finally - have a world-class art museum in Los Angeles. Alas, that was never to be.
Instead of building a world-class art collection, the Getty money has been increasingly funneled into various (albeit, very worthwhile) programs all over the world as the last remaining masterpieces of many artists in private hands have been picked up by museums in other cities.
And now, inexplicably, the Getty appears to be considering not only even further cutting back on building its local collection, but to then also distribute its very small painting collection - compared with art museums in other world class cites - to other parts of the world.
Say it isn't so Barry!
Sunday, April 03, 2005
But now - four days later - the LA Times has placed the below retraction on-line:
"GOP governors - An editorial Wednesday on Republican governors' approaches to taxes and spending misstated California's bond rating history under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in saying that the state had "watched its bond rating plummet." Two of three major bond rating agencies sharply lowered the state's general obligation bond ratings in December 2003, the month after Schwarzenegger took office, but raised them in 2004 to about the levels that existed before he took office."
That's it. Now to refresh your memory, California was virtually bankrupt in 2003 due to LA Times supported Gray Davis' out of control spending. And shortly after Arnold was put in office by the voters, the state's bond rating plunged, due to his predecessor's policies. But once Arnold cut spending and refinanced the debt without new taxes, the bond ratings promptly went back up to what they were before the full truth came out about the state's fiscal mess.
So instead of the state's bond rating plummeting under Arnold's policies - as the LAT said -- they actually rose due to his approaches to taxes and spending.
Now since all of this was reported in depth by the LA Times, there is only one of three things we can believe. First, the editorial board actually read what was printed in the paper and knew the truth, but still decided to lie about what really happened. Second, they actually never pay any attention to what is going on and just make this stuff up. Third, and most likely, they are so disconnected as to what is really going on in this city and in this state, that they can not grasp the difference between the real world - and the world as they would like it to be.
But no matter which of those options is true, it is clear that the only honorable thing for whomever wrote, edited or approved that editorial is to publish a front-page apology to both the Governor and the people of this state, and to then submit their letters of resignation to the president of the Tribune Company in Chicago.
Saturday, April 02, 2005
The LA Times Achieves The Harmonic Convergence of Journalism! The Perfect Storm of Journalistic Incompetence!
Second, the LA Times has been justifiably criticized for ignoring the fact that 30,000 Los Angeles-based criminals and violent gang members are in this country illegally and daily terrorizing the streets of LA and yet the LAPD is helpless to stop them due to political correctness run amuck. And, then, even when the LAT is finally forced by outside circumstances to address the issue, they are too afraid to ask the hard questions that need to be asked, much less to take any leadership on this issue. But, in a way, that's fully understandable. I mean, what impact does this have on the citizens of Chicago?
Now with the editor and publisher of the LAT both knowing of these two problems - what are the odds that they would then allow a story to be published that is both factually incorrect - AND also still fails to tell us the facts about this threat to our city
Well, as it turns out -- 100%. Just read below - and weep:
FOR THE RECORD
April 2, 2005
Immigration laws - The headline for an article in Friday's California section about Orange County Sheriff's Department officials' plans to train deputies to enforce federal immigration laws stated that Los Angeles County's sheriff said he would do the same. In fact, Sheriff Lee Baca said he would give his deputies the same powers as those being given to Los Angeles police. Under the LAPD's proposed rules, officers who encounter people they believe had reentered the country illegally would call their supervisors, who would contact federal immigration officials. If the suspect were once convicted of a serious crime and deported, LAPD officers could seek a federal warrant and then make an arrest.
Friday, April 01, 2005
LA Times Corrections Du Jour - Proof That Even The Publisher Doesn't Read The LA Times! Plus, The Ultimate Fish Story!
But for the Times to then take NINE days to discover and correct the error... now we're talking industrial strength Schadenfreude! The only conclusion one can logically draw is that while this year's publisher of the LAT may have to publish the paper during his visit to our city, that doesn't mean that he ever intends on reading it.
New publisher - An article in Section A on March 23 said the new publisher of the Los Angeles Times, Jeffrey M. Johnson, was born in the Chicago area. Johnson was born in Fargo, N.D., but lived for much of his youth around Chicago.
Faux Public Service Announcement From The Faux LA TIMES:
We at the LA Times are always striving to find new and unique ways of entertaining our ever more exclusive (i.e., rapidly plumenting) readership. With that in mind, The Los Angeles Times is pleased to announce its latest feature (exclusive to the Los Angeles Times!) -- Our Correction Correction Section! Yes, our very special place where we will daily correct our incorect... corrections!
And if our readers embrace this new LAT exclusive feature, as we are certain they will - then look out for our new Correcting the Correction Correction Section!
Fish report - A March 25 correction about a fish report item in the March 22 Outdoors section said yellowfin tuna should have been labeled yellowtail tuna. Yellowtails are not tuna.
Note: Tune in to tomorow's Correcting the Correction Corection Section to find out what yellowtails really are now that they are no longer... tuna.
Finally... recently spotted ad on Craig's List:
Help Wanted - Proof Reader! No experience needed! However, Ichthyological expertise in Tuna related taxology a big plus!!
Respond to firstname.lastname@example.org.