BY DAN
KENNEDY
Serving the reality-based community since 2002.
Notes and observations on
the press, politics, culture, technology, and more. To sign up for
e-mail delivery, click
here. To send
an e-mail to Dan Kennedy, click
here.
For bio, published work, and links to other blogs, visit
www.dankennedy.net.
Saturday, April 10, 2004
THE ARROGANCE OF MR. JUSTICE
SCALIA. Here is the text
of a press release by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the
Press over the goon-like
behavior that Supreme Court
justice Antonin Scalia encouraged with his bizarre policy of not
allowing himself to be videotaped or recorded. The highlight is this,
from the committee's executive director, Lucy Dalgish:
Even assuming it was
reasonable for Justice Scalia to prohibit recordings of his speech
- which it was not - the law does not allow law enforcement
officials to seize work product from journalists under these
circumstances. Perhaps one of these days, Justice Scalia will tell
us why he has so little regard for electronic media. Certainly the
only effect the tape recordings by two print reporters would have
had on coverage of his speech would have been to make the
reporting more accurate.
The press release goes on to note
that the forcible erasure of the two recordings may have been a
violation of federal law. Gee, if that ever makes it to the Supreme
Court, do you think he'll recuse himself?
The Hattiesburg American,
one of the two news organizations singled out for Scalia's judicial
assault-by-proxy, reports
on the latest developments today. The other organization, the
Associated Press, has a story
showing that Scalia continued his thuggish ways in an appearance at
William Carey College.
The college's spokeswoman said she
was "embarrassed and angry" over the position she'd been put in when
a Scalia aide ordered news photographers to stop taking his picture
even as guests snapped away.
RICE'S UNINTENTIONALLY REVEALING
TESTIMONY. I haven't said anything about Condoleezza Rice's
testimony before the 9/11 commission because it struck me that - not
unexpectedly - she said nothing revealing or even particularly
interesting. She ran out the clock for three hours, which isn't
exactly hard to do. (And can we cut the condescending crap about how
"articulate" she is? She was no more articulate than any member of
the administration would have been, with the obvious exception of
George W. Bush.)
Slate's Fred Kaplan, though,
has a piece worth pondering. He argues
that Rice's testimony, seemingly bland and innocuous, actually
revealed her to be "a bad national security adviser - passive,
sluggish, and either unable or unwilling to tie the loose strands of
the bureaucracy into a sensible vision or policy."
A must-read.
posted at 11:33 AM |
|
link
MEDIA LOG ARCHIVES
Dan Kennedy is senior writer and media critic for the Boston Phoenix.
