MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Taking Sides?

Interesting that (who knows if it will be in print?) decided to run a Jeff Ressner piece mocking Paramount

Be Sociable, Share!

9 Responses to “Taking Sides?”

  1. jeffmcm says:

    Hey, David, is there _any_ media outlet that you still have respect for? I would be interested to hear just for the sake of contrast.

  2. David Poland says:

    Well, Jeff… you might want to look on the cover of MCN for dozens of daily links to stories we think worth reading.
    Btw… do you have any thoughts about the actual topic? Or were you just waiting for Spam to leave so you could get rolling again?

  3. jeffmcm says:

    It was an honest, if lazy, question.
    You have links to the L.A. Times and the N.Y. Times and every other outlet that you regularly criticie on your front page, so I assume that front-page-status is not an endorsement.

  4. David Poland says:

    What gets posted in here, Jeff, is intended to be discussion points, not a way for me to let off steam. There are many, many stupid stories – incliuding in the major papers- that never get posted or commented on.
    The point of this post was to discuss this piece and whether it is reasonable or fair. Spam chose to slam Jeff Ressner. You took a shot at me. My interest is only the discussion. Maybe you don’t care about the subject. But I do.
    And frankly, the idea that I read all these things because I don’t respect any media is silly. I like around 10% of what I read a lot, am irritated by about 20% and most of it is just fodder. Fodder is not a conversation starter.

  5. James Leer says:

    DP likes British newspapers a lot.

  6. jeffmcm says:

    I didn’t ‘take a shot’ at you, DP. I’m sorry if you think so, but I think it’s a sign of your oversensitivity and not my insistent needling.
    The meta-theme of every story that you post along these lines is that the traditional media is slipping in its standards, which I agree with. My question, which apparently I needed to rephrase to avoid offending you, still remains: are there any media outlets who still have standards and integrity?
    You really mustn’t get so defensive when your readers question your underlying premises instead of limiting ourselves to your own parameters of discussion.

  7. David Poland says:

    Anything on the subject, Jeff?

  8. jeffmcm says:

    If you’re going to insist that people only write on your narrowly circumscribed topic, then no. A news outlet has allowed themselves to be corrupted. Fine, I’m sure you’re right, you typically do your homework about these things.
    If I might be allowed to ask about the bigger picture, though, that underlies your topic – what this means to the culture at large, and once again, if there are any trustworthy news outlets at all in this day and age, then I hope I can have that conversation. Because I find the whole topic very frustrating, and as far as I’m concerned, constantly nattering around the edges doesn’t help any.

  9. “still remains: are there any media outlets who still have standards and integrity?”
    Seems like a decent question to me. Considering nobody else seemed to have anything to say about the actual topic, was it so hard to just answer him and save all the negative mumbo jumbo?

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon