Berklee in the News (and it ain't pretty)

[mandrill]

On 11/9/2017 at 9:59 AM, Dmitry said:

You believe everything you read in the media?

Do you believe NOTHING you read in the media? That how it sounds from your diatribe on this thread. Or do you think there are still some credible sources left? FOX over CNN? Breitbart News over Washington Post perhaps?

[alankin]

2 hours ago, ghost of miles said:

The AJC, NY Post, CNN and others did not "fabricate" stories about Richard Jewell.  The FBI initiated that fiasco by treating him as a suspect--the media initially reported him as a hero for discovering the planted pipe bomb.  Should we henceforth treat law enforcement as "the world's second-oldest profession," a bunch of contemptible gadabouts who don't care one whit about humanity and only want to bust a suspect ASAP?  Yes, it's terrible that Jewell went through what he did, and yes, some media organizations may have been too quick to run with the FBI's suspicions.  Guess what?  Jewell sued all of them and they all settled with him. (Richard Jewell)

Rolling Stone bought into "Jackie's" account with yes, professionally criminal neglect and perhaps even some of the willful recklessness or malice that you allege.  They were thoroughly castigated by the Columbia University School of Journalism and other media watchdogs.  They have also faced legal action from some of the injured parties in the case. 

The Duke Lacrosse case?  Media, specifically the News & Observer and the Duke student newspaper, actually played a part in questioning the ultimate credibility of the accuser's story.  (But while you're at it, check out a Duke lacrosse player's e-mail from the night in question.  I cite that not as evidence of what happened that night, but as evidence of the rampant all-in-a-night's-play misogyny that some seem to think ain't no big deal or doesn't even exist.) The prosecutor in that case was disbarred.  The three athletes who were arrested filed lawsuits and received significant financial settlements.

You are cherrypicking some high-profile aberrations to condemn media in general and neglecting to mention that there were significant repercussions for the media outlets and other institutions involved in said aberrations.  The best journalistic organizations trade in credibility, and any mistakes that are made, whether they arise from sloppiness or any sort of agenda, are made on a big stage where they can ultimately be held to account.  Now, how about the innumerable women in every walk of life whose lives have been permanently harmed or even destroyed by sexual assault, and who have been made to feel demonized for ever trying to hold their attackers to account?  How we change that culture is a topic suited for another, non-jazz-related forum, I suppose, but grinding an ax against a free and independent media is also best-suited for another forum.

Thanks for the post.

[Dmitry]

1 hour ago, ghost of miles said:

 

You are cherrypicking some high-profile aberrations to condemn media in general and neglecting to mention that there were significant repercussions for the media outlets and other institutions involved in said aberrations.  The best journalistic organizations trade in credibility, and any mistakes that are made, whether they arise from sloppiness or any sort of agenda, are made on a big stage where they can ultimately be held to account.  

Cherrypicking? No, just giving examples of the free and independent media carrying water for whatever clients they have, and whatever issue they want to propagate at the moment. 

Going back to the NYT - their star reporter Walter Duranty  in his Pulitzer-winning series of articles from the Motherland, had influenced FDR to open relations with the USSR, and further enable Stalin's murderous regime. You yourself alluded to their pre-Iraq war coverage. I'll remind everyone - another NYT star reporter Judith Miller [along with Duranty a member of the Pulitzer club], cobbled together material that was taken for granted as evidence of Iraq having WMDs. Results are felt to this day. The paper of record...

Sure, who is Greg Osby, and why would such an esteemed paper of record as the Boston GLobe be interested in rolling over such an insignificant human? Maybe that is precisely the reason: he is a nobody to them, nothing but a side-note to a bigger story.

 

[uli]

a "biblcal" defense of sex abuse

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/alabama-state-auditor-defends-roy-moore-against-sexual-allegations-invokes-mary-and-joseph/article/2640217

Edited November 10, 2017 by uli

[ghost of miles]

2 hours ago, Dmitry said:

Cherrypicking? No, just giving examples of the free and independent media carrying water for whatever clients they have, and whatever issue they want to propagate at the moment. 

Going back to the NYT - their star reporter Walter Duranty  in his Pulitzer-winning series of articles from the Motherland, had influenced FDR to open relations with the USSR, and further enable Stalin's murderous regime. You yourself alluded to their pre-Iraq war coverage. I'll remind everyone - another NYT star reporter Judith Miller [along with Duranty a member of the Pulitzer club], cobbled together material that was taken for granted as evidence of Iraq having WMDs. Results are felt to this day. The paper of record...

Sure, who is Greg Osby, and why would such an esteemed paper of record as the Boston GLobe be interested in rolling over such an insignificant human? Maybe that is precisely the reason: he is a nobody to them, nothing but a side-note to a bigger story.

 

Sure, and let's remember the Maine while we're at it.  Stalin murdered millions of people, not Walter Duranty, and you yourself pointed out that 80 years later the Times has a mea culpa on its website about Duranty's reporting.  (Btw, how do you feel about Breitbart, Fox, and other media outlets that are "enabling" the current Putin regime in Russia--one that assassinates journalists, I might add--or the American president who has benefited so much from the assistance of said murderous authoritarian thugs?  That's happening right NOW, not 80 years ago.)  And I brought up Judith Miller and the WMD reporting because that's a critique from the left, not the right, of erroneous journalism.  But who do we hold accountable for the Iraq debacle?  Judith Miller, or the Bush administration, which so actively pushed U.S. intelligence agencies to exaggerate and willfully misrepresent the potential presence of WMDs in Iraq?  Sorry, that's not on the NY Times, that's on the U.S. government.  I assume you just as roundly condemn all of the rightwing media outlets that so eagerly egged on that invasion, btw, with overblown war-fever "reporting"?  And of course the administration that orchestrated the invasion, correct?

Re Osby, he needs to take responsibility for saying what he said.  Notice how there's been next to no discussion of the two other faculty members named in the article?  Whatever nasty or wrongheaded things they may or may not have done, they didn't then make beyond-the-pale remarks to the Globe denigrating the accuser on the basis of her looks and using a term that makes women sound like prey.  That's on Osby.  The Globe reported what it did because he's one of the three former Berklee faculty members who's been accused of some form of sexual misconduct.  First it's that they're out to get Osby, then it's they just roll over him because he's insignificant?  Or is it simply that he's part of the story and said some really stupid and insensitive things in response? 

[paul secor]

Some of these responses say more about the responders than they do about the issue(s).

[Dmitry]

2 hours ago, ghost of miles said:

Sure, and let's remember the Maine while we're at it. 

I thought you were smarter than that. I was wrong.

[Kevin Bresnahan]

I don't think a bunch of us chatting on a forum are going to solve this problem. I also imagine that if we keep at, it's going to get uglier rather than calmer.

Edited November 10, 2017 by Kevin Bresnahan

[JSngry]

Oh, I am like many of those "other evil men". I just evolved to realize that it's not somebody I have to be. That is an option, you know, a lustrous, well-groomed "mangina" like mine doesn't happen all by itself.

[sonnymax]

4 hours ago, Kevin Bresnahan said:

I don't think a bunch of us chatting on a forum are going to solve this problem. I also imagine that if we keep at, it's going to get uglier rather than calmer.

It's very important for men to have these discussions, ugly or not. If it makes you uncomfortable, then by all means don't read it, but don't try to dissuade others from doing so.

[Kevin Bresnahan]

1 hour ago, sonnymax said:

It's very important for men to have these discussions, ugly or not. If it makes you uncomfortable, then by all means don't read it, but don't try to dissuade others from doing so.

It looks to me like it's only a matter of time before these discussions yield nothing more but name calling, destroyed on-line friendships and forum bans. Not really necessary on a Jazz discussion forum. I would agree with you if this was a different kind of forum, but we are typing this in a forum labeled, "Miscellaneous Music".

[AllenLowe]

sure glad Stalin came up. He was a helluva accordion player.

Dmitry and Bigbandrecord have truly gone crazy here.

[ep1str0phy]

2 hours ago, sonnymax said:

It's very important for men to have these discussions, ugly or not. If it makes you uncomfortable, then by all means don't read it, but don't try to dissuade others from doing so.

Well, (maybe) yes, and it's partly for that reason that I wonder why the political subforum hasn't been reinstated. At the same time, I acknowledge the fact the broader national discourse has become deeply toxic and that some leakage into everyday mechanics is/was inevitable. That being said-

The thing that I find kind of gross about these kinds of conversations is our, I think, inadvertent reluctance to acknowledge our (as a music) culpability in the construction of modes of oppression. I don't want to drag that dude back into the mud because I think he's at heart a good guy whose stardom came to outsize his words, but this ties a bit into the Ethan Iverson debacle re: female musicians. There were a lot of people calling bullshit on Ethan about hiring and documenting female musicians who I know were just as responsible, in a practical sense, for perpetuating that kind of macho jazz insularity. Not that there's anything intrinsically wrong with four dudes playing jazz, but throwing stones and glass houses and not addressing the root problem and all that.

A lot of jazz has a lot of longstanding history tethering itself to progressivism and activism, but as many of you know, it was not and is not some noble artform absent rampant racism, homophobia, misogyny, and generalized bigotry. I've seen a lot of this shit firsthand, and I trust many of you have, too. So--and I say this with much love for the greater discussion here--this is not a harmless conversation between bystanders. We made this as a community.

Look, if you want to be a conspiratorial misogynist or a not-at-all-stealth alt righter, go nuts--we live in America and you're owed those freedoms. I also hope that someone is there to fight you every step of the way, and I say that as someone with plenty of liberal friends but also many conservative intimates.

But yeah, this is not a harmless discussion, and if we were to properly pull on the thread and follow it to its logical conclusion, it would unravel a lot of what is supposedly magical about this music. And maybe it's time to stop compartmentalizing that. 

[clifford_thornton]

YUP.

[sonnymax]

A very thoughtful and substantive response. Thanks for sharing ep1str0phy.

[JSngry]

5 hours ago, AllenLowe said:

 a helluva accordion player.

 

 

 

[ghost of miles]

10 hours ago, bigbandrecord said:

So your the so-called white knight in shining armor that's here to save the day and you ain't like these other evil men.  "Suffering in silence for many years"....How do you know?  I suppose you believe the feminist narrative that 25% of all women on college campuses are sexually assaulted before they leave school....there just not saying anything about it. 

Please, please, no, can't I be the DARK Knight? No white knight am I, just trying to follow the same path of evolution to which Jsngry alludes.  Although I do have insecurities, y'know, that maybe the Creator was more generous to his "mangina" than mine?

[bluenoter]

On 11/9/2017 at 8:29 AM, bertrand said:

Yes, Aruan Ortiz comes off as a real dick as well. I liked that guy's music. . . .

 

So did/do I, a lot. In the case of Ortiz in particular, it's really hard for me to reconcile the artistry with the dickishness.

Edited November 11, 2017 by bluenoter

[Big Wheel]

On 11/9/2017 at 9:23 AM, bigbandrecord said:

   Sir....you have indeed been sold a bill of goods.....endemic to our culture.....REALLY !!!......as if all women are all these sweet , little innocent flowers sugar and spice and everything nice and men are these predatory lecherous beasts.  You sound like your full of mangina, third wave feminist BS, I don't believe a damned thing the MSM says, and if they are telling the truth it's for nefarious purposes. So you guys need to stop your virtue signaling fronting.

[JSngry]

[sonnymax]

[Dmitry]

On 11/10/2017 at 2:07 PM, AllenLowe said:

sure glad Stalin came up. He was a helluva accordion player.

Dmitry and Bigbandrecord have truly gone crazy here.

I would like you to explain what you mean by that.

[AllenLowe]

you, crazy. Comparing the appeasement of Stalin, or some such thing, to Harvey Weinstein exposing himself to actresses.

Look, don't deny it. I have learned from years of experiences that it's always best to not only admit to your own insanity but to embrace it.

 

Edited December 3, 2017 by AllenLowe

[Dmitry]

6 hours ago, AllenLowe said:

you, crazy. Comparing the appeasement of Stalin, or some such thing, to Harvey Weinstein exposing himself to actresses.

Look, don't deny it. I have learned from years of experiences that it's always best to not only admit to your own insanity but to embrace it.

 

I didn’t write a word about Weinstein in this duscussion. And I’m not crazy...just misunderstood.   I will summarize again - press and media in general  can and does change history, put the course of human events on a sometimes disastrous tack. What worse being to illustrate that other than Stalin being lionized by the most respected newspaper in America? Point two - I provided some key individual cases from the not so recent past, where the media had caused serious, potentially career-ending, and life-altering harm to innocent people. 

The Globe reporter interviewed Osby for an hour, and proceeded with printing a couple  self-implicating sentences, with no context. Does that still look legitimate to anyone here? Am I crazy to point that out?

Edited December 3, 2017 by Dmitry

[JSngry]

What do you mean, no context? Berklee fired some people for inappropriate behavior, Osby was one of them, he gave quotes about it, and they printed it in the context of something happening and somebody involved in it talking about it. If that's not context, what the hell is?

The only thing I see being "misunderstood" is what the word "context" means.