Thursday, November 09, 2017


Say what? 

What's black and white, but not necessarily the over-all truth? It's what you read in print. The sad fact is that even before there was movable type, people were writing shit down and expecting it to be believed. You know. The Bible. The Koran. And now, the London Daily Fail, the National Enquirer, etc. 

People love to spread gossip, too. As in, "I met a man whose brother said he knew a man who knew the Oxford Girl..." Something like that. Or as Brother Theodore used to say, "Half the lies they print about me are untrue." Having seen the publishing world CLOSE UP, believe me, there are publishers and editors who get perverse pleasure (as well as payment) out of spreading lies or tricking the gullible. 

Rarely does the injured party win a libel case because it involves proving damages AND dealing with tricky weasel-words. You've seen it thousands of times. Like, the article on your favorite star and her marital woes. The line in the paper: "She is broken-hearted and ready to divorce him," said a close friend. 

Go to court? The writer isn't saying he got this information from a "close friend" of the star. "A close friend of MINE said that," the writer chuckles. Case dismissed. Besides, can you prove "damages?" Hurt feelings aren't "damages." You have to prove that the article defamed you in such a way you lost income; then you get money. Maybe. 

In the meantime, and for such a long time, gossip columnists have routinely and knowingly made shit up. Reporters routinely and knowingly stretch and "interpret" what they've seen, in order to get more readers and make a story juicier. Paul Simon sang it decades ago: "I don't believe what I read in the papers. They're just out to capture my dime."

Or as Bob Dylan sang it, more recently: "all the truth in the world adds up to one big lie." 

In the article above, the weasel word is "alleges." Somebody or other "alleges" that Dr. King had a "love child" by somebody or other, and that he participated in orgies, and that one of his conquests was Joan Baez. 

This is merely gossip that found its way into a file, but since it was a "secret file" kept locked up along with thousands of other documents, it's gotta be true. Where there's smoke there's desire. And lookie, there's a photo of Joanie and Marty together, so it must be so!

Need I go on? People believe what they want to believe and disregard the rest. Lie la lie, lie la lie. 

The media websites rushed to print the lurid headlines, and put "allegations" in very small print. It's all hype and hypocrisy. That this comes from an FBI file and not some third rate "investigative reporter" and his publicist is a bonus. 

The London Daily Fail always runs a huge insane story about Princess Di or Jackie Kennedy or whoever, and almost never is literally called on it for a retraction. There are pricks in the world like Darwin Porter; he makes up crap, self-publishes it, and know the Daily Fail will pay to serialize that garbage. PS, if a person is dead, the person can't sue, and neither can living relatives. That's why Porter's specialized in obnoxious shit-flings like "Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis: A Life Beyond her Wildest Dreams," "J. Edgar Hoover...Sexual Secrets," and "James Dean: Tomorrow Never Comes." He stole (that's legal) the phrase "Hollywood Babylon" off gossip writer Kenneth Anger (who wasn't above telling lies as long as he admitted it was GOSSIP). Porter came up with "Hollywood Babylon Strikes Again!" (Kenneth, you should've trademarked "Hollywood Babylon" to prevent its misuse).

People want to believe conspiracy theories. In this Baez lie, people want to believe that just because some FBI files were unlocked, there's truth in them and not ALLEGATIONS. When it's convenient, people embrace "fake news." When they can make a profit, they circulate it. The Internet is loaded with cynical pricks who are making a living by making up crap and, sometimes, in very small print, putting on the bottom of the website a caveat saying "this is a parody website." Oh. That's what it is. I thought it was a pun. Or a palindrome. It's parody. Ha ha.

As we've all experienced since school days, people make up lies, and don't care who they hurt. Including you. And so, "THERE BUT FOR FORTUNE" goes you and your reputation. And honoring Joan, who is taking a victory lap with a final tour in 2018 and one last album, here's her live version of that famous Phil Ochs song. 

THERE BUT FOR FORTUNE (Live) - No egotistic moronic PASSWORD

No comments: