Another big fail by CJR: Jeff Gerth reviewing Russiagate reporting

 Yes, THAT Jeff Gerth of long-ago Whitewater infamy wrote a multi-part series reviewing mainstream media coverage of Russiagate.

Beyond his background making this a bad optics issue, his actual work simply makes this bad. After a "backgrounder," Gerth starts part 1 of his review (ye gads, there's multiple parts) with an interview of Trump himself. Does Gerth really expect Trump to tell him anything that's not totally self-serving? That's beyond Gerth opting for "scene-setting" vignettes like this:

During my interview with Trump, he appeared tired as he sat behind his desk. He wore golf attire and his signature red MAGA hat, having just finished eighteen holes. But his energy and level of engagement kicked in when it came to questions about perceived enemies, mainly Mueller and the media.

DUH! Of course he perked up. Seriously. This is bad optics for CJR.

Presumably, other reviewers could have picked up on Bill Clinton's pre-2016 ties with Vladimir Putin.

Second, there have been other journalists critical of MSM coverage besides the troika, all problematic, of Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi and Aaron Maté. 

And, given what Duncan Campbell recently said about him, having Kyle Pope edit Gerth's series is ... interesting. 

On the other hand, Vox, from whence I saw the CJR piece, continues to try to connect the dots of a circus clown picture into a Monet water lilies painting on Russiagate, and continues to fail. It might have done better than a defensive critique of CJR and used someone other than Andrew Prokop.

Texas Press Association slips again

 TPA last week sent out by email another guest column. I assume Mike Hodges et al are paid for these redistributions. That said, Mike et al, you don't have to take the money, just like you didn't have to take the pig in a poke money from Column.US, but did.

Anyway, the particular guest column? It's dreck by a James Quintero of "Government for the People." Teh Google says, even without learning more about the org, that he used to be at Texas Public Policy Foundation. (GFTP is a sub-agency within TPPF.) Nuff ced. 

And, with the cover story of an attack on the Texas Association of School Boards, it moves into one of the big, continuing wet dreams of wingnuts in the Texas Lege: abolishing "lobbying" by local governments. People who know Austin's hypocritical nutcutting, from plastic bag bans through fracking bans and beyond in city government, all while wingnuts who squeal "states rights" don't let that trickle down, know that "lobbying" is needed. So does TASB on protecting public schools. 

Re TASB, it's full of lies. TASB money is spent on better protections for public schools against book-banners and their fellow travelers like Quintero, if we want to put it bluntly.

As for the argument that taxpayers, via individual school boards, shouldn't have their money "wasted" by TASB?

Mike, same arguments apply to the Texas Press Association if it pays one red cent for redistributing stuff like this. Heck, it should be said even if the redistribution is done for free.

It's also another sign, contra wingnuts like Quintero, that most local media isn't the "librulz."

And, it's also not the first time I've blogged about TPA and press releases, though that was straight news and just more head-scratching than off-putting like this.

Some sensible Section 230 reforms vs a 'disruptor' troll (and other noobs on Twitter)

Reforming Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act has given companies on the Internet and content providers both a variety of very solid protections against content lawsuits.

But, in recent years, on both left and right, there's been fears that social media behemoths have been stretching these protections too far.

At Nieman Lab, two co-authors have an excellent piece on both WHY Section 230 needs some reforms and WHAT they should be.

The troll? This guy on Twitter. I'm not a Twitter expert to know if he has some way of hiding his post-2014 tweets or if he actually does only replies. The fact that he lists ZERO followers means that he's a pontificator type, IMO.

As for his trollery? It's the claim that social media are "disruptors." As in one of those Silicon Valley/New Media BSers.

He claimed that FB/Twitter were just distributors. He repeatedly refused to engage with the idea that between making editorial decisions (that's essentially what they are), whether between the use of algorithms on who gets to see what AND on the human tweakings of said algorithms, or the use of human content moderation panels, etc, especially when combined with monetarization decisions off this, MIGHT not just move them beyond distributors.

At one point, he cited an old federal civil case about bookstores. I said it was a crappy analogy, because the case didn't involve a bookstore either adding pages to, or deleting pages from, the books that had been sold to it, then still selling them. (I didn't think to add, re the algorithm issue, that the bookstore case also didn't involve a bookstore placing limits on certain parts of the store and who could visit.) 

(Update: A Twitter account called "Section 230," whose best part about it is using a sign for NM Highway 230 as its icon, and which admits to "lots of canned responses," has refused to engage with my bookstore analogy, instead citing a variant of the troll's analogy. I eventually told him "where to go" and muted the conversation. Said account has also refused to engage with the monetization issue and whether that doesn't make them "publishers.")

He also repeatedly claimed that the authors of the Nieman Lab piece, a journalism prof and an adjunct law prof, didn't know what they were talking about. (Update: Multiple people on Twitter have made similar claims.)

I told him that I thought he was not only engaging in handwaving with his disruptor claims, but was engaging in "Section 230 originalism" that I found no more compelling than constitutional law originalism. As for analogies? I said that social media didn't exist in 1996. And, full-blown versions of algorithms and content moderation panels took years to develop after FB and Twitter launches.

I finally went Godwin's Law on him and told him Hitler was also a disruptor then muted the conversation.

As for the original claims? The HOW is probably not the final word. But the THAT, in some sense of building on FOSTA/SESTA ideas in 2018, is solid. The one argument against the authors might be the same that EFF raised against FOSTA/SESTA, that "Fair Housing Council" ruling meant that websites willingly abetting sex trafficking were already outside of Section 230.

Per the authors, though, the monetization factor of the issues they raise with social media could be seen as playing out the same — they're no longer Good Samaritans. However, what they're getting at is "triggers" for when they're outside that zone. Re FOSTA/SESTA, at least some groups in original opposition dropped their opposition after a number of its terms were better defined.

==

UPDATES, April 2, 2026

First, content issues are entirely separate from age and age verification issues. Anybody who raises that as a cost issue for smaller social media is going down the red herring route.

Second, social media, or a certain type of social media in particular, and one company above all, ARE held responsible for content in a certain way. Specifically, I'm talking about copyright, and the issue of music video, and of course, the top company being YouTube. If we can have YouTube held liable for copyright violations if they don't accept takedown notices, there's no reason we can't call social media the digital equivalent of publishers on liability for libel.

The Denton Record Chronicle is kind of like a CNHI paper

 And, no that's not good.

I blogged early last fall about the announcement that, no paper, NPR radio station KERA had an agreement to take over the Denton paper. (Since then, KERA has also taken over operations of Dallas' classical radio station, WRR, and is looking more and more like a growing behemoth in terms of legacy media today. Last Saturday's Dallas Snooze was below 15 percent adhole even counting obits as ads. I didn't even look at the StartleGram.)

And, speaking of adhole and CNHI? Let's jump into both.

When COVID hit, the Wrecked Chronic pivoted quickly to semiweekly in print, then to weekly after that. Bad moves, IMO. I don't know what the adhole was then, but, this was still after Patterson had clawed it back from the Snooze, had decided not to circ further north (I am not sure if they did or not pre-Snooze acquisition more than 15 years ago) and other things.

OK. First weekend of January is kind of slow, yes.

Still.

22 pages, 38 percent adhole IF you count the obits. Well, a page and a half of obits piled up with the post New Year's death surge (anecdotal, but other editors have seen this), and if you subtract that, it was below 25 percent.

The CNHI part? When CNHI cut its print papers from daily to nondaily after COVID, it kept running all six days a week of crosswords, comics, etc. WHY? No other newspaper chain is buying your papers individually off your hands, or CNHI as a chain off RSA's hands, at your inflated ask. You're just wasting paper and whatever you're still paying to syndication companies.

Well, the DRC does similar.

Except worse in a way.

They have two daily crosswords, not just one. The other puzzles like the Jumble, etc.

(Forgot to check if either paper still runs a week's work of print horoscopes, Wouldn't that be the beat-all of shit-ass stupidity? "If you're a Pisces today, you should take note of asking yourself why you're reading a three-day out-of-date horoscope and adjust accordingly.")

Anyway, they do NOT run all six days worth of comics! They only run part of the week's comics. WHY?

And, per the part about KERA having an agreement, at least, to take you over, you don't have to goose anything anymore.

Seriously. They could have whacked that paper to 18 pages (one page was a full-page house ad cuz you can't print odd numbers of pages) and been fine.

Now, it would be interesting to be asked to be publisher there, if Patterson doesn't stay around after the takeover is finalized.

I'd work on:

1. Moving it back to semiweekly in print, while killing the comics, one of the two crosswords and some other syndicated material;
2. Circulation north of Denton — there's room for it;
   
3. More local columnists, as well as bumping up paid in-house editorial staff, on sports as well as news;
   
4. Beefing special sections.

That's a minimum. 

I surely won't get that chance.

The 2022 year in review

 Here's the top 10 posts from the last year, by readership, as not all were from last year.

1. An insider in Decatur. I don't know why this took off so much, but it did, even though it's only six weeks old. And, it took off in the first week. Dunno if it was "Decatur" being mentioned by name, or TPA, or what.

2. Lee Zion says "have my paper." This is my skeptical take on the owner-publisher of a weekly paper in Minnesota who decided he had to go fight for Ukraine. It's skeptical about why he thought he had to fight, his claims to 100-hour work weeks, and other things.

Related was No. 9: "So Lee Zion got somebody to take his paper off his hands." Sadly, the big names in the world of media criticism have never looked at this issue.

3. "More fun with the Gainesville Register." Just one of several looks at a nearby CNHI newspaper, as was No. 6, "Another CNHI fail in Gainesville."

4. "US media misinformation about Russia-Ukraine media censorship." This was my callout of folks like the Texas Freedom of Information Foundation for, during Sunshine Week, attacking ONLY Russia and NOT Ukraine as well for media censorship. I don't know whether the problem was more misinformation out of ignorance, willfull party-line warmongering or what, but it was bad.

5. "Take a pass on Wick Communications." Four years old, but, probably just as relevant today about a small chain running itself on the cheap.

7. "A new newspaper player in Texas," used the word "newspaper" loosely, as I looked at the dreck Cherry Road Media puts out and speculated about ulterior and ultimate motives.

8. "Don't apply at Hearst" looked at the shithole that the Beaumont paper has become as well as the jump-through-hoops bullshit of the hiring process.

10. "KERA to buy dead carcass of  Denton Record Chronicle." I hope the public radio station can pull off the revitalization, but I'm not holding my breath. That said, by being part of an NPR and PBS team, the paper's lagging financials can be swept under the rug for a while if they don't show much improvement. (And I doubt they will.)

Didn't realize new Gannett / old Craphouse sucked THIS bad in NM

Per the Reporter, Santa Fe's alt-weekly, it has ZERO in-person reporters at its Ruidoso and Alamogordo, New Mexico papers. Alamogordo was a print daily pre-COVID. And, it, at least (dunno about Ruidoso) was Gannett's before the merger. So, can't even blame Craphouse.

Thankfully for Land of Disenchantment journalism, it sold off the Deming Headlight and the Silver City Sun-News to the owner of the Silver City Daily Press. It closed its old rival, but it has local reporters, which neither of those Gannett papers did. And, it's hired back a long-time Deming writer.

Oh, both those papers were also pre-merger Gannett; can't blame Craphouse there, either.

And Cruces itself sucks, as noted. The El Paso Times is also Gannett, so its lack of non-local environmental and border reporting is coming from there. Problem? Yes. They're in two different states, which affects reporting on Rio Grande and Pecos water rights, for starters.

And, barf me on El Paso staff titles.  There is is an "executive editor," still but NO "managing editor." There IS a "content strategist" and a "content coach." There's also NO "city editor." There's ONE government reporter. Two staff photogs, which means reporters are likely expected/required to shoot pix off smartphones.

Note this quote from Jay Rosen about Gannett et al:

“It’s more of a financial firm. It’s more in the category of a private equity company or a hedge fund than a newspaper company,” Rosen tells SFR.

About right.

RIP Michael Lindenberger

 Until I saw the Chronicle's obituary story for its former deputy opinion editor, I never put the two and two together that it was the former Snooze editorial writer and columnist. 

I can't recall having direct run-ins with him, unlike a couple of the, er, THE Morning News' neoliberal columnists, who weren't even left-neoliberal, but who, under the dynasty of Keven Ann Willey, talked about how librul they really were. They weren't, even before going further right with Brendan Minitur as her replacement. And, what can you expect from a paper that couldn't get ancient history right?

But, I digress.

Per the Louisville Courier-Journal obit story, he was really sick if he dropped 50 pounds in just several weeks. I would say stomach cancer, but the story said his primary doctor couldn't nail anything down and he was scheduled to see specialists. Had to have been sad last days for him, wondering if he really was dying just months after getting a journalism dream job.

Hold on to your dreams, even if they're fleeting.