-
Patterico “OUTS†Los Angeles Times Blogger Michael Hiltzik – Los Angeles Times Suspends Golden State Blog
Los Angeles Times: Notice from the Editors
The Times has suspended Michael Hiltzik’s Golden State blog on latimes.com. Hiltzik admitted Thursday that he posted items on the paper’s website, and on other websites, under names other than his own. That is a violation of The Times ethics policy, which requires editors and reporters to identify themselves when dealing with the public. The policy applies to both the print and online editions of the newspaper. The Times is investigating the postings.
The Los Angeles Times Ethics Policy (newly revised) is here.
Staff conduct
The Times expects its editorial staff to behave with dignity and professionalism. We do nothing while gathering the news that we would be ashamed to see in print or on television. We do not let the behavior of the pack set standards for us.In general, we identify ourselves as staff members when covering news events. There are some instances when offering such identification is impossible, impractical or counterproductive, but in no case should a staff member lie about his or her affiliation with The Times. We should deal honorably with people and institutions we cover, just as we expect them to deal honorably with us.
Times journalists may not use their affiliation with the newspaper to resolve personal disputes or seek special treatment or personal benefits. Emphasis in bold is Flap’s.
Flap views Hiltzik’s conduct as a clear violation of this section of the Los Angeles Time’s Ethics Policy. But, this is not the first time Hiltzik has run afoul of Los Angeles Times policies.
In 1993 he was not fired or suspended as the L.A. Times Moscow Correspondent for hacking into a co-workers e-mail account. Hiltzik was merely reassigned to Spring Street to the Business Section where he has won a Pulitzer Prize.
And then there is this section of the Los Angeles Times Ethics Policy:
OUTSIDE WORK
The emergence of blogs has created potential quandaries for staff members who want to express themselves through that medium. No matter how careful Times bloggers might be to distinguish their personal work from their professional affiliation with the paper, outsiders are likely to see them as intertwined. As a result, any staff member who seeks to create a personal blog must clear it with a supervisor; approval will be granted only if the proposed blog meets the paper’s journalistic standards. When approval is granted, staff members should take care not to write anything in their blogs that would not be acceptable in the newspaper. Staff members should observe the same principle when contributing to blogs other than their own.
Clearly, another violation of the ethics policy.
Hiltzik, arrogant and unapologetic in his blog this morning about lying about his name and writing attributions deserves the back hand of the Los Angeles Times and the Tribune Company.
Michael Hiltzik should be history at the Los Angeles Times.
Hugh Hewitt has more: The Los Angeles Times Suspended the Blog?
Patterico responds to the suspension: Hiltzik’s Blog Suspension Should Not End the L.A. Times’s Interactivity with Readers
I didn’t know anything about Michael Hiltzik when I said that, or I wouldn’t have made that comment. I don’t really want to see blogs like his — blogs manned by deceptive sock-puppeteering destroyers of strawman arguments. What I wanted to see was blogs manned by honest reporters and columnists of all political persuasions, who would be willing to engage their reading audience on a personal level.
I still want to see that. But I’m afraid that this incident may have ensured that we won’t see any such blogs on the Times’s web site for a long time to come.
I hope I’m wrong. I hope that Times editors realize that their mistake was not the decision to allow a staff writer to operate a blog — it was the choice of Michael Hiltzik as that blogger. I hope that this is not the end of the paper’s experiment in using the Internet to interact with its readers. It is a noble experiment, and I want to see it continue.
Previous:
Patterico “OUTS†Los Angeles Times Blogger Michael Hiltzik
Michael Hiltzik Watch: Stalking Hugh Hewitt?
Los Angeles Times Watch: Hugh Hewitt – Michael Hiltzik in ANGER Stage
Los Angeles Times Watch: Pulitzer Prize Winning Reporter – An UNHINGED Blogger
Michelle Malkin Watch: 2005 IN REVIEW: THE WAR ON BLOGS
Bear Flag League Watch: Patterico’s Los Angeles Dog Trainer Year in Review 2005
Technorati Tags: HughHewitt, MichaelHiltzik, Patterico, PatrickFrey, MSM, LosAngelesTimes
-
Patterico “OUTS” Los Angeles Times Blogger Michael Hiltzik
Welcome Hugh Hewitt Readers. There is an updated link for this evolving story (the Los Angeles Times has SUSPENDED Hiltzik’s Golden State blog) here.Â
Michael Hiltzik of the Los Angeles Times Golden State blog.
LA Observed: Three names better than one?Liberal L.A. Times columnist-blogger Michael Hiltzik and conservative prosecutor-blogger Patterico have been butting heads and online personas ever since the former joined the blogosphere last October. Even earlier, perhaps, if Patterico is right about the case he lays out on his blog this morning. He offers compelling evidence that Hiltzik has been posting argumentative comments on his own Times blog and on Patterico’s blog under the pseudonyms of Mikekoshi and Nofanofcablecos, attacking Patterico and other conservatives and posing as an independent supporter of Hiltzik. You have to wade through some prosecutorial posturing to get to the goods, but Patterico appears to show that 1) Hiltzik has previously used the name Mikekoshi in other online forums, 2) Hiltzik and Mikekoshi recently posted comments on Patterico’s blog from the same IP address, and 3) Nofanofcablecos looks suspiciously like Hiltzik as well. Of course, prosecutors only give the jury one loaded version of a case, so the verdict has to wait on Hiltzik. But these seem like charges he’ll want to answer—and the Times might want to as well.
And Patterico’s Post is here: Three in One: Michael Hiltzik, Mikekoshi, and Nofanofcablecos
Why does this matter — or does it? After all, I’m obviously not objecting to use of pseudonyms by bloggers and blog commenters. How could I be? I mean, you’re reading a post by someone who calls himself “Patterico.†And, while I made the decision to make my real name public long ago (it’s Patrick Frey), many of my commenters use pseudonyms. So what’s the big deal?
Here’s the thing. I am actually a strong defender of people’s right to comment anonymously, or pseudonymously. I myself was semi-pseudonymous for the first several months of this blog. But I don’t think that commenters should use pseudonyms to pretend to be something or somebody they aren’t.
I don’t go around pretending to be someone else. I am accountable for what I say. If I were anonymous commenter “Patterico,†defending the arguments and actions of well-known blogger “Patrick Frey,†I wouldn’t be surprised if people found that fact worth sharing. And as far as I know, my blog commenters are not going around pretending to be people they’re not, commenting on themselves using pseudonyms. If I found out that they were doing that, I’d let ‘em have it.
John Lott has endured much ridicule for posing on the Internet as a person other than himself, and justly so. Is this any different? You be the judge.
The one thing I know for sure is this: This just isn’t the way that bloggers do things.
And, of course, I go by Flap (Greg Cole).
But, what does this really mean?
Michael Hiltzik is an even BIGGER DUMBASS than Flap thought before.
Flap will look forward to the Tribune Company and Los Angeles Time’s response…….
A change of employment for Hiltzik…..?
Update #1
Armed Liberal has good commentary on Winds of Change: Sock Puppets, Journalists, Dialog, Hiltzik
On the Internet, no one knows you’re a dog, as they say. But a pseudonym doesn’t have to be obvious. It could be that everything Trent Telenko has written was really written by me – how would that change your perception of his or my honesty and the seriousness with which you’d take my words?
What this enterprise is about, to me is a simple exercise in creating a public dialog about issues that matter.
We have to trust each other to do that.
Michael Hiltzik, like my Journalist In The Hat, doesn’t trust us or the dialog. He’s undermined it.
And, I’ll suggest he’s done so because it has no value to him.
Update #2
Michael Hiltzik’s response: On Anonymity in Blogland
Some years ago, the New Yorker ran an amusing cartoon about one of the supposed virtues of the Internet, its anonymity. It showed two dogs in front a computer. One was saying to the other (I am working from memory), “On the Internet, no one knows you’re a dog.”
The right-wing blogger Patterico has apparently worked himself into a four-star ragegasm (Tbogg’s inimitable coinage) at the notion of anonymous or pseudonymous postings on his website by me. This is amusing, because most of the comments posted on his website are anonymous or pseudonymous. “Patterico” is itself a pseudonym for an Assistant Los Angeles District Attorney named Patrick Frey. Anonymity for commenters is a feature of his blog, as it is of mine. It’s a feature that he can withdraw from his public any time he wishes. He has chosen to do that in one case only, and we might properly ask why. The answer is that he’s ticked off that someone would disagree with him.
Set alight by my recent post tweaking Hugh Hewitt for his numbskulled method of analyzing newspaper economics and newspaper circulation, two subjects about which Hewitt claims omniscience and knows nothing, Frey evidently pored through the IP addresses of comments on his blog to discover that sometimes I commented under my own name, and sometimes under a pseudonym. He noticed that this is a pseudonym I’ve used on other occasions. He pats himself on the back (so to speak) for his brilliant sleuthing.
Read the rest here and the comments THAT SMACK DOWN Hiltzik
Hiltzik is BUSTED and now the Los Angeles Times needs to FIRE him.
Previous:Michael Hiltzik Watch: Stalking Hugh Hewitt?
Los Angeles Times Watch: Hugh Hewitt – Michael Hiltzik in ANGER Stage
Los Angeles Times Watch: Pulitzer Prize Winning Reporter – An UNHINGED Blogger
Michelle Malkin Watch: 2005 IN REVIEW: THE WAR ON BLOGS
Bear Flag League Watch: Patterico’s Los Angeles Dog Trainer Year in Review 2005
Technorati Tags: HughHewitt, MichaelHiltzik, Patterico, PatrickFrey, MSM, LosAngelesTimes
-
Howard Dean Watch: Border Security Democrat Party’s Top Immigration Priority for November
Former President Bill Clinton, left, jokes with Congressman Charles Rangel, center, and Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean at a DNC fundraising dinner in New York, Monday, April 10, 2006.
Washington Times: Dean calls the border top priority
Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean yesterday called border security his party’s top immigration priority for November.
“The first thing we want is tough border control,” he said. “We have to do a much better job on our borders than George Bush has done. And then we can go to the policy disagreements about how to get it done.”
Republicans reacted with surprise to Mr. Dean’s announcement, which puts the DNC chief’s views at odds with those of many Democrats in Congress.
“If Dean means what he says about border enforcement, that would put the Democrats somewhere to the right of President Bush on immigration,” said Rep. Steve King, Iowa Republican.
A spokesman for the Republican National Committee dismissed Mr. Dean’s “newfound commitment to border security” as “not believable.”
But, what did the Chairman of the Democrat National Committee actually say?
The Quotes:
Mr. Dean said he wants “immigrants who obey the law and pay taxes to be able to apply for citizenship. We support earned legalization vigorously. And, much to my surprise, so do the American people.”
“We don’t like guest-worker programs,” said Mr. Dean, a candidate for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination. “I don’t like guest-worker programs. I think the president’s guest-worker program is essentially indentured servitude. It doesn’t help the immigrant, and it threatens wages.”
“Don’t forget — the Republicans have been in power for five years. They’ve had the House and Senate and the White House most of that time. And they have done nothing about immigration.”
To Summarize the Democrat Party’s Fall position on immigration:
1. Tough border control but what does that mean? Fence? Troops? No specifics….
2. Amnesty for the 12 million illegal aliens already in the USA but what does ‘earned legalization” mean? Is it the Kennedy-McCain bill?
3. No Guest Worker Plan because it depresses union wages and is involuntary/indentured servitude.
It sounds to Flap that the Democrats should support Senator Bill Frist’s secure the border bill rather than the Kennedy-McCain bill voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. But, Howard Dean as the Democrats fearless leader has to balance the unions vs. Latino immigration activists vs agricultural interests in order to troll for votes and campaign funds.
And why did over 200 House members vote against the House immigration reform bill passed in December? And why did Senator Reid (Democrat Senate Minority Leader) block amendments to compromise legislation prior to the Easter recess?
Congressman King (R-Iowa):
“If Dean and his Democrats in the Senate are serious, they could force the president to make a decision to sign or veto an enforcement-only package,” he said. Mr. Bush and several Senate Republicans have sought to tie border enforcement to a guest-worker plan — a program that many of the Republican Party’s conservative supporters sharply criticized.
“Someone should remind Howard Dean that it was [Senate Minority Leader] Harry Reid [Nevada Democrat] who obstructed immigration reform, underscoring the fact that Democrats would rather manipulate the issue than reform it,” he said. “President Bush and Republicans in Congress have increased border-security funding by more than 65 percent, expanded the number of border agents by 30 percent and significantly upgraded technology on the border.”
Howard Dean, the mouth that roared, has been BUSTED for pandering to all sides again.
Stay tuned……
Previous:
Technorati Tags: HowardDean, illegalimmigration, illegalaliens
-
Gaggle by NewsBusters.org
-
Iran Nuclear Watch Briefing: April 20, 2006 Morning
Iranian Defence Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar gestures after a wreath laying ceremony in Baku April 20, 2006. The prospect of the United States taking military action against Iran over its nuclear programme is empty talk, Najjar said on Thursday.
Reuters: Iran defence minister dismisses talk of US attack
The prospect of the United States using force to halt Iran’s nuclear programme is empty talk, Iranian Defence Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar said on Thursday.
U.S. President George W. Bush says he is using diplomacy to curb Iran’s atomic ambitions, but has not ruled out military options, even including a nuclear strike, to prevent the Islamic Republic from acquiring nuclear weapons.
“The United States has been threatening Iran for 27 years and this is not new for us. Therefore we are never afraid of U.S. threats,” Najjar told reporters during a visit to neighbouring Azerbaijan.
“If you take into account the fact that they are not doing anything, this shows it is just talk,” he said.
“We are ready to resolve all issues through negotiations (but) if we are confronted with something, we are ready to deal with it,” the minister added.
RIA NOVOSTI: Russia will deliver air defense systems to Iran – top general
The chief of the General Staff said Wednesday that Russia would honor its commitments on supplying military equipment to Iran.
“We discussed supplies of military equipment to Iran, including the Tor M1, in the framework of bilateral cooperation, but it does not fall into the category of strategic weapons,” Army General Yury Baluyevsky said after talks in Moscow with NATO Supreme Allied Commander in Europe General James Jones.
“And I can assure you it will be delivered under the control of the relevant organizations,” he said.
At the end of 2005, Russia concluded a $700-million contract on the delivery of 29 Tor M1 air defense systems to Iran.
The Tor-M1 is a fifth-generation integrated mobile air defense system designed for operation at medium, low and very low altitudes against fixed/rotary wing aircraft, UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicle), guided missiles and other high-precision weapons.
Despite strong criticism from the United States, Russia has maintained that the systems could be used only to protect Iran’s air space.
Baluyevsky also said Russia’s Armed Forces would not be involved in any military conflict in Iran.
“I do not think the conflict [in Iran] will turn into a war,” he said. “Russia will not propose the use of its armed forces in a potential military conflict on either side.”
AFP: Russian-built nuclear power station in Iran no threat: Moscow
A nuclear power station being built by Russia in Iran presents no threat, Moscow’s top nuclear official said here following a US demand for the project to be shut down.
The building of the Bushehr nuclear power station does not threaten the non-proliferation regime,” Rosatom nuclear agency head Sergei Kiriyenko told journalists in the Kyrgyz capital Bishkek.
US Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns said during a visit to Moscow Thursday that “it is important for countries to stop cooperation with Iran on nuclear issues, even on civilian nuclear issues like the Bushehr facility.”
Burns made clear that he was talking about various countries’ work with Iran’s nuclear industry. However, Russia is Iran’s biggest nuclear partner and is building the country’s first atomic power station at Bushehr.
“A number of countries are continuing to permit the export of dual-use materials that could be used, and we think in some cases are being used, to help the growth of Iran’s nuclear industry,” Burns said.
“It is the view of my government that it would be appropriate now for those individual governments to stop that practice and no longer permit it.”
AP: Russia to Set Iran Position After Report
Russia will decide its stance on the Iranian nuclear crisis based on a report next week by the head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the deputy foreign minister said Thursday.
Sergei Kislyak said consultations would be held after the April 28 release of the report by Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Both Russia and China have been resistant to levying sanctions against Iran in response to suspicions over its nuclear program.
“We will determine our reaction depending on the contents of the report,” Kislyak was quoted as saying by the ITAR-Tass news agency. “The IAEA has ideas of what is happening and what is not happening in Iran. We’ll be relying on these evaluations.”
China on Thursday renewed calls for a negotiated settlement.
“We hope relevant parties will exercise restraint and show flexibility to properly handle the Iranian nuclear issue, to create conditions for the solution of the issue through negotiations,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said at a regular briefing in Beijing.
TAR-Tass quoted an unnamed Iranian source as saying that Russian diplomats were meeting Thursday with an Iranian delegation led by Javad Vaidi, deputy secretary of Iran’s National Security Council. The Russians were briefing the Iranians on the results of meetings in Moscow this week between the five permanent U.N. Security Council members, plus Germany, ITAR-Tass reported.
And anyone in the international community EXPECTS Russia to sanction their business partner, Iran?
The United States will push for a punishing resolution in the United Nations Security Council. Then, listen to the squeals coming from Russia and China.
The United States and Israel are alone in dealing with Iran’s uranium enrichment program AND they WILL deal with it.
Stay tuned……..
Previous:
Iran Nuclear Watch Briefings
Technorati Tags: Iran
-
Day By Day by Chris Muir
