My little war with the San Francisco Chronicle..

Last Friday, the San Francisco Chronicle published, in their editorial section, an article by Dennis Prager. For those not familiar with Mr. Prager, he is perhaps one of the most vile, hate-filled, right-wing columnists this country has ever produced.

Here's a sample of his garbage:

******************************************************************
<snip>
THE SECOND AMERICAN CIVIL WAR: WHAT IT'S ABOUT

Whatever your politics, you have to be oblivious to reality to deny that America today is torn by ideological divisions as deep as those of the Civil War era. We are, in fact, in the midst of the Second American Civil War.

Of course, one obvious difference between the two is that this Second Civil War is (thus far) non-violent. On the other hand, there is probably more hatred between the opposing sides today than there was during the First Civil War. And I am not talking about extremists. A senior editor of the respected center-left New Republic just wrote an article titled, "The Case for Bush Hatred," an article that could have been written by writers at most major American newspapers, by most Hollywood celebrities, and almost anyone else left of center. And the conservative hatred of former President Bill Clinton was equally deep.

In general, however, the similarities are greater than the differences. Once again the North and the South are at odds (though many individuals on each side identify with the other). And once again, the fate of the nation hangs in the balance. The two sides' values and visions of America are as incompatible as they were in the 1860s.

For those Americans who do not know what side they are on or who are not certain about what the Second American Civil War is being fought over, I offer a list of the most important areas of conflict.
<snip>
Link to article: ttp://www.creators.com/opinion_show.cfm?columnsName=pra

***************************************************************

Anyway, here's a copy of my e-mail conversations with the Chronicle editorial board thus far (read from the bottom up). I think we have a duty to fight against such garbage appearing in our newspapers. If we don't fight it, it will only get worse, and pretty soon, the right-wing will be calling for the lyniching or gassing of all liberals. Think it can't happen here? Think again...

Dear Ms. Kazaoff:

That may be, but does not excuse Mr. Prager's urging of a religious civil war in this country (or his other near-fascist positions), nor does it excuse the Chronicle from running such garbage.

In your zeal to provide opinions from both "sides", it appears you have chosen to reach into the depths of depravity when it comes to choosing your writers from the "Right". I am aware of no writer on the "Left" who urges civil war, nor any who write and market the filthy, hate-filled bile of most of the "Right". Not Chomsky, not Franken, not Conason, not Scheer, not Ivins, not Sorenson, and certainly not Krugman.

It almost feels as though we have arrived at a bizarre "Twilight Zone" moment in our history, one I am sure the German people felt as they watched their nation turn towards fascism and Nazism. The difference now, is that liberals are this country's "Jews". That's what it feels like here, when major newspapers choose to publish writers like Prager, and the country embraces (partially) someone like G.W. Bush and his minions.

While I watch our newspapers fill with propaganda (the Chron being better than most in this regard, with its lack of overt propaganda), wars started on outright lies, and the economic destruction of our nation being pushed by a bunch of neocon ideologues, I can only think that Orwell's prophesies have come true.

No, I cannot agree that publishing a writer like Prager is the right thing to do, no matter how you try to justify it. It certainly isn't right for Northern California's premiere newspaper. As a former reporter, editor, and publisher, I would sooner have cut off my arm and burned my paper down, than give someone like Prager a platform.

Sincerely,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

----- Original Message -----
From: Kazakoff, Lois
To: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxx
Sent: 10/20/03 12:04:57 PM
Subject: RE: Editorial pages, and Dennis Prager

The Chronicle tries to provide a wide range of opinion from both the right and the left. And, I might note, probably our most liberal columnist, Robert Scheer, is a Creators Syndicate writer.

Lois Kazakoff
Deputy Editorial Page Editor
San Francisco Chronicle
(415) 777-6054

lkazakoff@sfchronicle.com

-----Original Message-----
From: SFReaderRep
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 10:18 AM
To: Kazakoff, Lois
Subject: FW: Editorial pages, and Dennis Prager

-----Original Message-----
From: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxx
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 7:49 AM
To: SFReaderRep
Subject: re: Editorial pages, and Dennis Prager

Dear Reader's Rep:

Please note that I have sent the following letter to the editor (below), regarding writer Dennis Prager. I would like to know why the Chron would ever publish work by someone as fascist, divisive, and hate-filled as Dennis Prager? His latest (published in the Friday, 10/17 edition) is filled with slander, lies, and religious tainted-hate-filled rhetoric.

The fact the Chron would even allow such garbage to be published, just has my head spinning. What's next? A weekly column by Michael Savage, David Duke, Osama bin Laden, or Ann Coulter? Just because these people can take pen (or keyboard, if such is the case) in hand, does not mean they should be given a platform by Northern California's premiere newspaper! I mean, why not publish weekly excerpts from Mein Kampf while you're at it? I am sure the same people who appreciate work by Dennis Prager and his ilk, would like that too.

Zeig Heil,

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX,

XXXXXXXXX, CA

XXX.XXX.2041



Dear Editor:

Why on earth would the Chronicle publish work by Dennis Prager ("Is This our second Civil War", Friday, 10/17)? Known for writing inflammatory articles representing the radical far-right, his work is often divisive, hate-filled, and thoroughly unbalanced.

Is it the Chron's zeal to appear "even handed", that leads the Editorial Board to select and run such articles? Is this an effort to throw off accusations of "liberal press", by publishing work from whacko wing-nuts now? It's one thing to have a balanced editorial page, representing the Left and the Right, but quite another when you publish authors who advocate religious civil wars, as Dennis Prager did in his piece that appeared last Friday. You should be ashamed for allowing such trash to appear on your pages!

It appears the Chron has signed up with Creator Syndicate, who's stable of radical far-right writers and columnists, are far outside the mainstream. May I suggest, that the Chronicle need not reach so far into the cesspool of conservative thinking to find opposing and right-wing views? Publishing such trash is an insult to your readership, not to mention a gross violation of good taste and balanced editorial function.

Sincerely,

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

P.O. Box XXX

XXXXXXX, CA 9XXXX

XXX.XXX.2041

I put a post here a few months ago mentioning that we liberals are becoming the new scapegoat for our own Nazi regime. It really seems to be getting worse each day as well.

regime's lies and what not, that perhaps, editorially anyway, that some of the newspapers might start backing off a little bit, in their death spiral embrace of the Right. I was wrong. It's getting worse. That can only mean that the Right, as represented by their shills and propgandists in the media, are worried.

We are up against such a jugernaut as far as the media is concerned. Those who aren't overtly right-wing, like the Chronicle, are also moving to the right, bit, by bit, by bit.

My theory here, is that Bush has many friends and supporters among the corporations that own the media, but also in special interest groups, like AIAPC. AIPAC has many friends in the media, and they are using their power to tilt editorial content and pages towards support ME wars, support for PNAC, and support for anything "Israel" (and of course, Israel is a top supporter of U.S. wars in the ME, calling the Bush administraion, "The best friend Israel ever had".). This also means, that Israel, AIPAC, and their friends in the media, are going to go full-court press for Bush's "re-election".

We must counter this somehow, some way.

for countering it?

Nice interchanges. Lets them know WHY people object.

All we can do, is to use the Internet as we've been doing, write letters and make calls expressing our unhappiness with content, and, support the creation of true "liberal media" outlets.

Additionally, it's way past time that we demand our congressional Dems stop supporting G.W. Bush in any way, and let them know that there will be a price to pay if they continue.

Aside from that, I am afraid I have no "fresh" ideas, and would certainly be open to hearing some from others.

only applied to broadcast, not print.

Eloriel

press, at least in markets where there is only one major newspaper? There are many of those across the country. Or, would that push up against the 1st Amendment a littletoo hard?

As far as the Chron goes, since Hearst bought them, and the spun-off Examiner withered on the vine, they are the only major paper left in the San Francisco-proper market.

And, though they used to be pretty balanced, editorially speaking, such is no longer the case, in my opinion. New management was installed about 4-5 months ago, and they've been sliding right ever since. Also, the editor and publisher seem to be very pro-administration now, and pro-Israel, which also means, pro-PNAC. Pretty disgusting state of affairs, in the City By The Bay.

:grr:

Or I didn't notice when I should have. It explains a few things.

and a new exec. editor was brought in. Since that time, I have watched the editorial page push to the right more and more every day. I think they've about reached their limit though, that is, if they wish to continue selling newspapers in America's most liberal city.

Still, it is distressing. As I pointed out to the editorial board, it's one thing to have conservative viewpoints represented, but quite another to publish extreme, and radical, right-wing thought, which they are now doing on a regular basis. They seldom ever publish anything from the radical left, so to seems hardly fair.

persons within those institutions like the San Francisco Chronicle. Isn't this how Goebbels operated in Germany? With Arnold in control in California and Mayor Willie Brown, who is part of Arnold's transition team, still in charge of San Francisco, things are beginning to stink a lot to me.

indeed one of the worst pieces of filth out there, though of course the competition is fierce. I saw that very piece you're talking about at my local gym on Friday. I would've puked, but one expects no less from Prager.

The Chron's resident (as opposed to syndicated) RW whackjob is Debra Saunders. Relative to writers of the Prager-Coulter-Hannity stripe, she's mild. But still, when I read her, it makes me want to apply overwhelming force to small objects.

possible to write the Chron, and protest Prager. It'll take a couple of days to reach everyone, but hopefully the Chron will receive a small flurry of letters protesting Prager, accompanied by threats of subscription cancellation.

As far as Saunders goes, OMFG, she pisses me off sometimes!, but then she'll turn right around and write something like calling for de-criminalization of drugs. Also, she did not initially support the recall either. Go figure.

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but it sounds like the guy is just offering his opinion on the current "cultural war" going on in the USA. And, it was in the opinion section, so it's not dictating editorial content. Op Eds are there just for people to see what others are thinking, aren't they? I wouldn't get all bent. I didn't see where they guy was even close to demanding people to take up arms and shoot their politically incorrect neighbors.

As someone who lives in SF, I can say for certain that many of my friends who describe themselves as Greens or Anarchists have formed a distorted view of mainland USA. Many Democrats would consider Mayor Willie Brown to be a moderate, but these people consider him to be a fascist. There's a city councilman by the name of Gavin Nemman who proposed "Prop N" back in Nov. 2002, otherwise called "Care Not Cash", a revamping of the current city homeless program. It passed 2-1, but in the Haight section, you would have though we were reverting to Nazi Germany. SF tends to be an island unto itself, and when people leave the Bay area and go out into the surrounding countryside or to another state and they see people with flags still flying on their cars or "Support Our Troops" bumper stickers, they can't imagine people would think that way. This seems to me to be an overreaction, but I respect the opinion of Flying Pig and others who think differently.

It's in the paper edition of today's Chron. Oddly, it's not in the online edition.

In any case - it's very troubling stuff. Prager is quite a dangerous demagogue.

Both the Chron and Examiner endorsed Poppy Bush in '88, which outraged me at the time. One would think that a major urban newspaper would at least make a minimal attempt to reflect its readership.

Good luck with your fight (and try the Mercury News instead - pretty good national coverage, better reporting).