MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Trickle Up & The McChrystal Saga

I’ve been saying it for years… and while some old media pays lip service, few have heeded the warning.
Entertainment Media is a canary in the overall media coal mine. We are the least carefully edited, most news content dubious, too close to the talent group in virtually any newsroom. But if you look away when the entertainment media goes rogue, it will eventually trickle up to “real” journalism.
And so it did with the Rolling Stone story on General McChrystal and his aides.
I have gone on about this before, but another twist in the tale was examined by David Carr in the New York Times today. It seems that didn’t print their magazine or post the story to the web fast enough for everyone. So a preview pdf of the magazine was passed around, beyond the intended group, and eventually published by Time.com and Politico.
Carr quotes:

Several commentators suggested that Rolling Stone brought this on itself by not immediately publishing the McChrystal article on its own site (the magazine had planned to publish online but on its own schedule).

Be Sociable, Share!

4 Responses to “Trickle Up & The McChrystal Saga”

  1. Blackcloud says:

  2. tfresca says:

    I don’t think this about Rolling Stone not putting on their site. It’s about them not keeping it close to the vest until the issue was out.. They probably lost a lot of sales not having the issue ready when the story broke. It’s possible the military leaked it to kill their sales. People leaked stories like this all the time pre internet.

  3. Blackcloud says:

    Either way they mismanaged it. Or they fumbled it. And when you fumble, anyone can pick up the ball.

  4. MN Opines says:

    What did the Obama administration expect would happen? They knew that the story was coming out! Isn’t the first rule of PR that you leak the story first, and the first rule of politics that you try to discredit the source first?
    As for stealing content-agreed that it was bogus that they pulled the trigger first based on Rolling Stone’s reporting, but Rolling Stone should also have known that anyone who got wind of that story was either going to do their own reporting ASAP, or steal it.

The Hot Blog

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