It's here! It's here! All the local news headlines you need to know about, delivered straight to your e-mail box and from there to your little grey brain.
Learn more about it here.
Sign up at the handy link below.
CLICK HERE to get on board with your very own MISCmedia MAIL subscription!
I’ve spent the day lost in the past.
I’ve done that before. But never quite like this.
I’ve been buried this afternoon in old Seattle Times articles, ads, and entertainment listings. They’ve been scanned from old library microfiche reels and posted online by ClassifiedHumanity.com.
The site’s anonymous curators scour back SeaTimes issues from 1900 to 1984.
The site’s priorities in picking old newspaper items include, but are not limited to:
Go to Classified Humanity yourself. But don’t be surprised if hours pass before you walk away from the computer.
sorry, maude, you didn't make the list
oh, NOW they get customers.
first 'weekly' cover, 1976, from historylink.org
The late investor and arts patron Bagley Wright lived just long enough to see one of the local institutions he jump-started, Seattle Weekly, descend from troubled to pathetic.
First, the paper got caught up, through no fault of its own, in the PR campaign against its parent company Village Voice Media and VVM’s online escort-ad site Backpage.com. Mayor McGinn has ordered the city to not advertise in the Weekly until VVM closes Backpage.
Second, and this is something local management’s responsible for, was a cover story about an S&M practitioner accused of turning a consensual encounter with a streetwalker into a non-consensual violent assault. Feminist blogger Cara Kulwicki has called the story’s writer and SW’s editors “rape apologists,” citing the author’s speculating that the event might have simply been “a bondage session gone haywire.”
Now, they’ve put out a cover piece about local true-crime author Ann Rule. The article’s writer (who’d never written for the Weekly before) claimed Rule had written lies and/or conducted sloppy research about an Oregon woman convicted of murder, in Rule’s 2003 book Heart Full of Lies. The issue was published before SW editors figured out the article had been written by the convicted woman’s boyfriend.
Setting aside the matter of Backpage, over which the SW staff has no power, the once solidly establishment Weekly is drowning in sensationalism. Maybe it should swim back toward safer areas like politics (oops, VVM cut way back on the Weekly’s formerly formidable news staff) or arts coverage (oops, ditto).
…Making simple products is way more difficult than making complicated products…. Simple is more complicated, simple is elegant, simple is harder.”
happy bite of seattle consumers
"rupert bear," ironically, was and is a comic in the non-murdoch owned london express.
The sometimes fiercely divided left and progressive factions in the U.S. are today united on one overriding desire.
They’d all like to see the phone-hacking and bribery scandal at Rupert Murdoch’s British newspapers result in the collapse of Murdoch’s American media empire.
Especially of the (deservedly) fiercely-despised Fox News Channel.
Could it happen?
Lefty pundits are pondering possible scenarios that could potentially lead to the sell-off and /or dismemberment of Murdoch’s stateside properties.
Such a move, these pundits guess, could be triggered by shareholders deathly afraid of the Murdochs’ sullied reputations ruining News Corp.’s American brands. Even if no direct link surfaces between the U.S. properties and the Murdoch U.K. papers’ scandals.
I’m not so sure.
If forced to do so, the Murdoch family could sell off its stock in, and retire from leadership of, the Fox broadcast network and its 27 network-owned stations. That move could avert any challenges to those local stations’ FCC licenses.
(Most Fox broadcast affiliates are owned by other companies. Here, KCPQ is owned by the Tribune Co.)
Such a spinoff could leave the Murdochs still in charge of the 20th Century-Fox film studio, along with its TV-production and home-video divisions. Rupert and his offspring could still own The Simpsons, even if they no longer owned the network on which it airs.
The family could also sell what’s left of the once mighty Wall Street Journal and Barron’s;Â perhaps to Bloomberg.
The assorted Fox cable channels are another potential matter altogether.
For one thing, the FCC doesn’t oversee the ownership of or content on cable channels.
And when Viacom spun off its former subsidiary CBS into a separate company again, some of Viacom’s cable properties (MTV, CMT) stayed with Viacom, while others (Showtime, The Movie Channel) became part of the new CBS Corp.
The Murdochs could sell off FX, Fox Movie Channel, Fox Soccer Channel, Speed, Fuel TV, Fox’s distribution/marketing contract with the National Geographic Channel, and its partnerships in the remaining regional FSN sports channels.
And they could keep Fox News Channel and Fox Business Channel.
Just to spite us liberals.
And with the money they get from selling their shares of all those other properties, the family could even keep subsidizing the New York Post for a few more years.
(Answer to yesterday’s riddle: The $25,000 Pyramid.)
pittsburgh post-gazette illo by anita dufalla, 2009
street food vendor, 1930s, singapore; from the-inncrowd.com
vintage 1940 trolley bus from seattletransitblog.com