Little Green Footballs

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Big time!

Ooh! We got mentioned in The New York Times.

[At LGF, before the Great Switcheroo - ed.] Muslims were described as “vermin.” The posthumous nickname St. Pancake was coined for the young American pro-Palestinian activist Rachel Corrie, in reference to the Israeli bulldozer that killed her. Discussion of U.S. foreign-policy options included terms like “targeted genocide.” As for Palestinians, “they don’t need statehood,” offered one commenter; “they need sterilization.” And on and on. A so-called stalker blog, called L.G.F. Watch, sprang up to document instances of what it considered hate speech on the part of Johnson and his followers. Vanity Fair’s James Wolcott compared Johnson’s site to a “disorganized Nuremberg Rally.”


It also emerges from the article that Charles is engaged to be married. Mazel tov!

And thanks to ChenZhen for the heads-up. (although actually, I was just about to post that article independently when I saw CZ's comment. Not that it really matters.)

There's no link to LGF Watch within the article, but just in case any NYT readers have been curious enough to seek us out: We've been on a, shall we say, somewhat lax posting schedule for the past year or so, mostly because Charles' Great Switcheroo has obviated much of our compulsion to keep an eagle eye on his shenanigans. Most of the anti-Charles action these days is, as you might expect, taking place in the far-right, ultra-right, ultra-far-right, and utterly-completely-batshit-bonkers segments of the blogosphere.

So -- if there are any first-time visitors here -- thanks for coming by, and feel free to browse our extensive archives for exhaustive documentation of just what nasty, hateful, warmongering reptiles CJ and his saurian horde used to be.

14 comments:

Southside Suarez said...

Also Vanity Fair.

It's 2004 all over again:

Later this year, we’ll [author Barret Brown and Johnson] be launching a two-pronged campaign by which we hope to increase both the reach and efficiency of the blogosphere, as well as to bring pressure to bear on the media at large. Much of this effort will involve a loose network of bloggers that we’re now in the process of recruiting in order that we might all coordinate on exposing the failures of certain news outlets, for instance.

As Johnson recently reminded me, he once attempted a similar improvement on the blogosphere in 2004 by co-founding the conservative blog compendium Pajamas Media. He later repudiated it as “just another right-wing parrot organization” and sold off his share in 2007.

So he admits that he lied about the reasons he gave back in 2007.

Southside Suarez said...

The Times article mentions that Johnson's unnamed fiancee was present at the interview. Johnson's comments on the article on LGF indicate that Sharmuta (and Thanos) were present for the interview. Interesting coincidence.

Danny F said...

Although the article does criticise LGF and is pretty accurate for the most part, it does make a few statements that are just not true, mainly:

"[Chuckie] came of age ... in the culture of damnation by link, and he does not exempt himself from its logic."

Actually yes he does "exempt himself from that logic". And "voluminous evidence to the contrary" is provided two paragraphs later. I myself was banned from LGF very recently for politely disagreeing with Sharmuta in one comment, regarding how the site used to have problems with it, and specifically who used it and what was allowed to be said on it. Instant ban and comment deletion. And that was my first time ever being a member. Imagine how bad it used to be in the old testament "exterminate all the moooslims" days.

ChenZhen said...

thanks for the hat tip V.

I can't help but wonder what role you folks played in the "great switcheroo". If the turning point was really centered around the whole VB epifiany, as the NYT alludes, then perhaps you did (unless I've gotten my facts mixed up).

In any case, this blog represents an interesting example of a mission accomplished, at least in its original intentions. At this point, I suppose, you could move on to concentrate on the "Animal Farm" aspect.

And BTW, do you think its finally safe to turn the comment moderation off?

Glen Davidson said...

One trouble with LGF and liberals now seems to be that Charles continues to ban and censor like Dembski's Uncommon Descent, apparently not realizing that such tactics aren't generally considered kosher on liberal blogs (or, indeed, on more sensible conservative blogs).

He still has his one "argument," which is that a large and various group has some bad people in it, thus it is to be condemned as a whole. Before, it was liberals and Muslims, now it's the right (and Muslims? I've never read his boring blog much).

It's good to see the NYT pointing out that his tactics remain far from admirable, or able to sustain an honest discussion. Yes, it's fine to move somewhere else if you don't like LGF (or are booted, as so many have been for disagreeing with Charles), but, when you're evaluating blogs, the enforced echo chamber there counts heavily against giving it good marks.

There probably isn't very much to do with the LGF Watch now, but that's mostly because liberals are unlikely to embrace Charles and LGF. You may as well keep watch somewhat, however, since his whole approach to blogging remains as illiberal as it has ever been.

Glen Davidson

V said...

@CZ - We'll never know what role, if any, we played in Charles' volte-face. We were, as you may remember, calling out VB several months before Charles noticed there was a problem; but correlation is not causation, so it would be presumptuous (but fun) for us to assume we had something to do with it.

re: comment moderation, we'll see. The people who forced us to implement it in the first place are still "out there" (but now, of course, commenting on anti-Charles blogs).

@Glen - we'll leave this blog up and running, with sporadic updates, as a placeholder for the day when Charles decides it's to his advantage to align himself with "the right" yet again.

The Poster Formerly Known as Gordon said...

Actually, Danny F., in the old days it took much stronger medicine, even of the left-wing variety to get banned and blocked on LGF. My case is instructive, and can be found at nodrogsgreatesthits.blogspot.com.

The Poster Formerly Known as Gordon said...

By the way, here's a classic.

Defending the Defensible, http://defenseman.wordpress.com/, which was touted by Charles as an LGF defensive blog, and which spent quite a bit of time trashing blogmocracy's Rodan among others, has retreated behind a password wall!

Danny F said...

@ The Poster Formerly Known as Gordon:
Ok well you have a point, however I still think Chuckie edits comments with a huge bias. Only it's no longer a political one, rather it's now anyone who even suggests that Chuckie isn't beyond reproach must be silenced.

On a side note, I've lately become very tired of Chuckie. His responses to the Times article paints the picture of an uneducated individual pathologically unable to take responsibility for himself. He accuses other people of straw-men, then commits the very definition of a straw-man by suggesting the only people who he bans are people who leave incomprehensible or abusive comments; this is just not true.

Also I've realised that, quite frankly, why should I even care what a retired jazz musician thinks? Because that's all I know about the guy. He almost definitely didn't go to college, and therefore is totally unqualified to have an opinion on world events... so why should I or anyone else care. The simple answer is we shouldn't.

katemaclaren said...

Danny F.--I completely agree with that last statement. I will say it's funny to watch the effects of the NYT article slowly seeping in--note that the NYT says that the Top 10 comments button often features Chas himself! This has changed lately. If Sharmuta is his fiance, she's not commenting any longer--notice that she's gone. The two nasties Jimmah and Iceweasel seemed to have run her off. I look at it for the soap opera-ish quality. Charles Johnson really has become a crashing bore--and begun to write for True/Slant. I think he's departing from the swamp he created.

Anonymous said...

I can assure you that Sharmuta has not run off of LGF. It is most likely she is his fiance. She probably is posting under another name. She's posted under a number of nics before and changed to Sharmuta once she was done with an affair with someone else on LGF.

Anonymous said...

she had an affair with peacekeeper and that is when she changed her nic to sharmuta from w-lover. her and charles have always had a thing for each other and she assured me that one day they'd be together and that she knew she'd have to disappear for his good if she ever married him. I know her too well though and she confirmed this that she'd develop a new nic to post on so people would not know. The thing that bothered me is she has two children in MN and she thought nothing of ditching MN to go to CA to be with Charles on some whim that he'd want her. I couldn't take the dramawhore that she was so I left the scene. Looks like her plan has come to fruition and they are going to be married. That is fine but people atleast should know this stuff.

Anonymous said...

I think we should play a game. Who is the new nic that Sharmuta is at LGF lol! This is a given.

Amazed said...

I wasn't going to comment until I saw that I wouldn't really be necro-ing this thread yet.

I was never a strong LGF reader, mostly because it was so hard to get an account in order to participate. However, once I finally managed to register, it only took me a dozen or so posts and moderations (over the course of a week or so) to realize that it was the "Homage Be to Charles!" blog. I haven't bothered posting there since (possibly in late 2008?). But I do drop by occasionally for a laugh -- same as I do barbrastreisand.com or timecube.com

To get to my point, is your job really over now that Charles has become a self-declared "liberal" purveyor of hate speech rather than a self-declared "conservative" purveyor of hate speech? It would seem to me that your job would only really be over because the site is all but dead (and, realistically, has been for quite some time). I just took a glance at it and see that it's primarily embedded youtube videos (50% music) interspersed with links to stories I can just as easily get to from Drudge without the overhead of Charles pithy (*cough* *cough*) commentary.