Having and expressing an opinion is all well and good but when it becomes like having a fifth shot of vodka every day, it’s time to say you have a problem.
Marina Hyde, The Guardian’s version of an opinion-alcoholic, barfed all over the newspaper’s reputation today, in an hysteria-soaked episode of the delirium-tremens and left no doubt that future historians will say this was the moment; the exact moment – The Guardian traded integrity for being a hypocrisy factory, a newspaper for a tabloid soaked in gossip, a sleazy merchant of sleaze, misusing its power (such as it is) for its own personal satisfaction and sank to the level of the gutter. Granted it was only always a matter of shaving a few inches off before hitting the bottom, or being within viewing distance of the bottom but this was the piece and this was the day.
Offering a set of opinions and statements in place of actual information, Hyde declared that using former Disney stars for films is corrupt, and proof that Woody Allen can’t get anyone else to work with him. She said that his habit of releasing two films every year is proof that he’s a shallow hack factory of mediocrity, and bankrupt artistic reputation. She declared that it used to be an honor to work with him but now “actor after actor” is jumping ship – while in fact it’s four second tier people(1) and hundreds of others have said nothing or supported him and the idea of due process.
But worse still is that Hyde has cast her lot in with the lords of Gilead and said that despite multiple investigations by several state agencies, armies of lawyers, teams of psychologists, the media (sic!) and the courts, and that no evidence was found that was either sufficient to bring charges, or simply that there was no evidence to warrant charging Allen with a crime, he is still guilty. She has declared that opinions shall be given more weight than facts and the opinion of one person shall be viewed as the truth, regardless of the findings of the court.
This is character assassination. This is placing a yellow star on a shop window. Except in this case it is a star with the word: Pedophile in its center but the difference is irrelevant. In both cases this is trial and execution by declaration. This is turning a human being into an unperson. This is the “left” in a Trump-induced panic sinking to the level of Trump and wielding fake news, distortion, rage and bile as tools of domination.
The total abandonment of any pretense of supporting or adhering to due process, of honoring the facts – of following the template of journalism 101 – who, what, where, when and how – leaves Hyde and The Guardian on the side of the sinfully amoral and the fascists. This is the media as a tool of destruction which is bad enough but to do so in the service of an assault on the rule of law, while wrapping yourself in the cloak of liberal-left righteousness and anti-Trump piety, is the jitters and shakes of Orwellian nightmares. When Hyde and the harridans of both sexes at The Guardian wonder when the equally mendacious and vile right wing media decided they were a gang of smug, self-righteous, liberal-left hypocrites, whose banner reads: Our shit doesn’t stink (like The Daily Mail) this is the moment.
We would say shame on The Guardian but that would require them to have a conscience, and clearly they had it removed and replaced with a clickbait machine and watched, as the trash collectors scooped up their remains and brought them to the nearest city dump.
Read the vomit here:
1. It now appears that in addition to the less famous actors involved, Reese Witherspoon and Natalie Portman have also seemingly joined the calls to boycott Woody Allen. One does wonder in the case of Portman what her response is to other calls to divest and boycott?
Having metaphorically killed their parents The Guardian now wishes the court (of public opinion) to view them as sympathetic orphans.
Here’s the latest as a Guardian columnist, having been silent for weeks as her colleagues set fire to Allen’s reputation and acted like extremists.
And notice the headline. Not: Stop Making Accusations As If You Are the Judge and Jury…not: Innocent Until Proven Guilty…but more inflammatory ideologically driven clickbait which is undermined by the content of the article and thus, for anyone who bothers to think, demonstrates the total lack of integrity at The Guardian.
Here’s Javier Bardem talking sense in defense of Allen and the rule of law:
Here’s a thoughtful piece from 2016 in which Guardian editor and columnist (sic!) Catherine Shoard makes every logical point about due process, defending Woody Allen and if not by name, then by implication explaining everything wrong about The Guardian and other media engaging in trial by internet.
In particular we draw your attention to the following:
“The concept of innocent until proved guilty is, in theory, absolute. Scepticism is always to be encouraged. But in Allen’s case, it is rather more than this. The done thing is instead to simply dismiss the principle, ignore the law and rely instead on rumour.”
“Farrow suggests a film festival should not grant Allen a spot on its schedule. But if innocent people – and this, the fact remains, is what Allen is – are to be blacklisted because some people think them fishy, we are in very murky water. This is not, thankfully, a world where the art of those people actually convicted of heinous crimes is censored. We are still free to look at paintings by that murderer Caravaggio, and read poems by incestuous Byron. We are encouraged to take our children to the new Alice Through the Looking Glass film, despite its almost certainly unsavoury inspiration. Ought we to also chuck out our Sinatra records, given his Mafia links?”
Needless to say we have made the same argument using the same examples and naturally we agree with Ms. Shoard. We also note that her colleagues displaying a less thoughtful and far more passionate call for a public burning, seem to have been given far greater play in The Guardian while Shoard seems to be someone you have to hunt for.
Perhaps we’re mistaken.
Here’s the entire piece:
Two points on further reflection.
First, to be accurate, it is likely The Guardian was a rag long before Hyde started pissing in the gutter.
So, in that sense we stand corrected.
Secondly, we take note that amid all the hysteria directed at Allen no one mentions that Mia Farrow’s brother has been in prison for years having been found guilty of…
Which you can read about here:
The Guardian has never reported on this in the context of the coverage and character assassination of Allen.
We also note that on those rare occasions when The Guardian allows comments on its coverage of Allen, it prohibits any mention of Farrow’s brother.