Dogging the DOG
Matilda in the Rock is agitated this morning about the editorial praising the late columnist Richard Allin in today's Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. After all, Matilda notes, the very same newspaper fired Allin and Charles Allbright and "replaced them with semi-literate hacks." Matilda also detects a back-handed dig at Allin in the editorial and concludes:
I guess that is the worst part of the Arkansas Democrat's editorial page. It's not the lies or the double standards or the impotent hatred of anything Clinton. It's not the shilling for the administration or the inability to allow a dissenting opinion lest they be shown as fools. It's not their racism demonstrated by deriding a majority of the school board as a gang and willful narrow majority because they are black and unwilling to support their owner's agenda, or their printing letters to the editor with words like "niggernado" in them. All of that is bad enough, but I truly believe the worst trait of the editorial writers is their pettiness. No dig is too small or small minded for them to insert into a column if they have a grudge or an ax to grind. The Arkansas Democrat editorial page is a little editorial page, petty, barbarous and cruel. Even when they get it right.



Comments
Although agnostic I have to admit I have been blessed -- I've been allergic to news rags/papers/ink for several years and that's especially true for the DOG rag!
Posted by: BWC
|
October 20, 2007 09:24 AM
Well said!
Posted by: eLwood
|
October 20, 2007 09:29 AM
Edna at Matilda on the Rock was right on the money this morning. I would suggest that the DOG drop its editorial section, opinion section (that includes a lot of those "Style"-type section fluffs), and possibly the Letters (not only to the editor, but to Heloise, Abby, & Rev Billy G). Add more comics and more world news.
It definitely would improve the quality of the paper and might possibly increase circulation. And, think of the money they would save in salaries for those who opine (or is it whine?) about their pet peeves.
And, I want a section as big as the Sports section that is devoted to education, schools, students, and academic achievement.
Ooops! Tex Ritter is whispering in my ear something about waking up.
Posted by: Jake da Snake
|
October 20, 2007 09:53 AM
I have my own reasons for not liking the D*G editorial page, but this is just plain silly.
"the inability to allow a dissenting opinion" -- You mean Paul Krugman, Maureen Dowd, and racist letter-writers aren't "dissenting opinions"?
"their racism demonstrated by deriding a majority of the school board as a gang" -- So disagreeing with someone who happens to be black is "racism"?
"their printing letters to the editor with words like "niggernado'" -- So you don't like the fact they print "dissenting opinion"?
The D*G editorial staff has its vices, and I've even name pettiness as one. But Matilda's rant equals or surpasses the D*G in pettiness.
Posted by: jmw
|
October 20, 2007 10:11 AM
Wow, jmv, are you an editorial writer for the Dem-Gaz?
Posted by: Roland-in-Waiting
|
October 20, 2007 10:17 AM
I confess, I don't begrudge the Dem-Gaz its editorial opinions and I like the letters to the editor...its good to be reminded sometimes that the knuckle-dragging Neanderthaals are still out there. The Dem-Gaz is what it is, and there are plenty of other more enlightened opinions out there to read - the Arkansas Times, of course, but also the Washington Post, New York Times, any number of blogs. Thanks to the Internet, the days when we were limited to one (or even two, during the newspaper war) newspapers to choose from are over.
Posted by: NoZe
|
October 20, 2007 10:48 AM
" It's not the lies or the double standards or the impotent hatred of anything Clinton."
Of course, the Arkansas Times is a paragon of fair and even-handed editorializing...
Posted by: Hillcrustian
|
October 20, 2007 10:58 AM
"Of course, the Arkansas Times is a paragon of fair and even-handed editorializing..."
Why, of course it is...plus the Times readily admits its biases...unlike those 'news' outlets that like to pretend they're 'fair/balanced' while shoveling more partisan shit than other media outlets.
Posted by: zelda
|
October 20, 2007 01:37 PM
it's not just the editorial pages. The article that appeared yesterday on Allin's death said that he and Allbright had "retired."
ARK. BLOG: It was interesting, too, that Richard worked 12 years at the Democrat-Gazette and there wasn't a quote in the story from a Democrat-Gazette employee,
Posted by: Archaeopteryx
|
October 20, 2007 02:02 PM
Our Town traded in for "Sweet Tea (sic)" ! Oh, the humanity!
Posted by: Diogenes
|
October 20, 2007 05:43 PM
Oh how I miss the old Gazette,,,,,I can just see my Grandad reading every word, every day.
Posted by: jazzy
|
October 20, 2007 06:25 PM
I thought the same thing this morning while reading that damn rag...
Did you notice the cartoon, too? It looked like Charlie on the right...
Posted by: rosso
|
October 20, 2007 09:36 PM
Richard Allen was a true southern gentleman with "good raising," as we say in the South. He and the Arkansas Gazette are fond memories. There should be a law against using Arkansas Gazette and the so-called Democrat in the title of that paper. As for the editorial staff, when the letters to the editor are much better than the staff's ramblings, you know there is something really wrong.
Posted by: Farkleberry
|
October 20, 2007 10:47 PM
I almost spit my food on the "Letters" page today when a writer accused the D-G editorial staff of being "liberal'.
I've already said my piece about the one and only Richard. I've nothing else to say about the D-G.
Posted by: widj
|
October 20, 2007 11:09 PM
I've said this before, but it bears repeating. When I was in the Navy during Vietnam, my family mailed me the Sunday Arkansas Gazette, every week.
I may have been subject to the usual 'Ark-in-saw' jokes, but I had requests to share that weeks old Sunday paper throughout the ship.
You wouldn't get a request to share today's Sunday demozette from someone who needed to line a bird cage!
But that's life. Sometimes the best things are supplanted by substandard successors. Take Bush, for instance . . . Please!
Posted by: docholliday
|
October 20, 2007 11:18 PM