Tribune Co.’s chief innovation officer Lee Abrams, who carries quite possibly the most obnoxious title in newspaper land, and who should generally place a moratorium on delivering soundbites about his company, says the “beehive of hostility and rage” he expected during a visit to the Los Angeles Times was anything but uncomfortable. Instead, he found the place “loaded with people that are smart, passionate and ready to fight the war.” Now, would that be the war in Iraq, the war on newspapers ad revenue, or the war Sam Zell is launching against his own company?
Is David Geffen making a third try for the Los Angeles Times? Nikki Finke’s gossips say yes, though Geffen has been yachting in the South Pacific for a few weeks, and it’s possible he never had those super secret talks with Sam Zell that have been reported. [DHD]
As a reward for needlessly sullying Diddy’s reputation, Los Angeles Times reporter Chuck Philips will keep his day job. [NYT]
The Los Angeles Times has officially retracted its “Diddy knew about that attack on Tupac” story from Chuck Philips, admitting it got duped by imprisoned conman James Sabatino, hoping to save itself from a lawsuit, and making clear its reporting standards do not deserve Pulitzer Prizes. [LAT]
Just as the Washington Post has certain words (or letters) it cannot print, so, too, does the Los Angeles Times‘ style guide prohibit cursing. Which makes for the most amusing Mad Libs article about complain-y Randi Rhodes ever. (Click image for larger version) [LAT]
The Los Angeles Times rounds up some of the best celebrity pranks, even if they didn’t take place on April 1. There’s the time when a 17-year-old Britney Spears was accused of being 28, the time when BFFs George Clooney and Brad Pitt got into a faux tiff, this year’s Sarah Silverman-Matt Damon-Jimmy Kimmel-Ben Affleck tryst-fest, and 1998’s pie in the face for Bill Gates. Shame: Mario Lopez giving Eva Longoria a necklace is nowhere to be found.
After publishing an article accusing Sean Combs of knowing about an 1994 assault on Tupac Shakur before it took place, based on facts later outed as completely false, the Los Angeles Times might find itself in a courtroom with Diddy’s lawyer. Or at least a conference room, working out a settlement agreement over defamation charges. Nothing is certain yet, but in a statement, Diddy’s attorney Howard Weitzman hinted legal action might be the next step: The “apology is, at best, a first step, but it doesn’t undo the false and defamatory nature of the story, or the suspicion and innuendo that Mr. Combs has had to endure due to these untruthful allegations and the irresponsible conduct of this particular reporter.” LAT owner Sam Zell might return to cursing just yet.
Here’s the Los Angeles Times‘ apology to Sean Combs for fingering him as involved in a 1994 assault on Tupac Shakur — an allegation made based on fake FBI documents journalist Chuck Philips received from con man James Sabatino. “In relying on documents that I now believe were fake, I failed to do my job,” said Philips in a statement. Interestingly, Philips is “an acquaintance” of Smoking Gun editor Bill Bastone, who helped expose the fraud. Says the LAT: “The two met not long ago for lunch, discussing their mutual passion for investigative reporting and other matters.” The apology appeared on today’s front page, below the fold.
Looks like the Los Angeles Times got hosed when Pulitzer winner (though not-always-trusted journalist) Chuck Philips accused Sean “Diddy” Combs of knowing about a 1994 attack on Tupac Shakur before it happened. Diddy, of course, denied the charge. As did the family of Chris Wallace/Notorious B.I.G. when Philips earlier accused the rapper of putting the hit on Tupac in ‘96.
And they had good reason: It’s likely none of it was true. The Times got its info from FBI documents that are now being labeled as fakes, concocted by jailed con man James Sabatino, who tried to fictitiously insert himself in the lives of hip-hop heads.
Diligent reporting from The Smoking Gun reveals the docs aren’t in any FBI database and that Sabtatino – “an audacious swindler who has created a fantasy world in which he managed hip-hop luminaries, conducted business with Combs, Shakur, Busta Rhymes, and The Notorious B.I.G., and even served as Combs’s trusted emissary to Death Row Records boss Marion ‘Suge’ Knight” – was able to distribute them himself by conveniently redacting the names of the federal agents working on the case. Too bad there are other ways to search for the files in the FBI’s records and, low and behold, they don’t turn up.
And also, just like the documents involved in the fall of Dan Rather, their physical elements are a giveaway. Cue an internal investigation at the LAT! And, maybe, a major libel suit from Diddy! CONTINUED »
The Los Angeles Times hits today with a huge story accusing Sean “Diddy” Combs of knowing the assault on Tupac Shakur, at his Quad City studio in New York, was coming weeks before it went down that in November ‘94, escalating the bi-coastal hip-hop war. (Tupac was fatally shot in 1996.)
Writing the article is none other than Chuck Philips, who previously alleged Chris Wallace/Notorious B.I.G. was the one who put the fatal hit out on Tupac. Wallace’s family vehemently denied those claims.
Philips maintains the New York-based rappers, who were supposed to be rivals themselves, knew there was going to be violence, but no shooting; only when Tupac pulled a gun did the plan go awry. And who was behind the shooting? Jimmy “Henchman” Rosemond, says Philips; Henchman now manages the career of The Game, among others.
Naturally, Diddy is already on the defensive. After refusing to comment for the LAT article, his label Bad Boy just issued us this statement: “This story is beyond ridiculous and is completely false. Neither Biggie nor I had any knowledge of any attack before, during, or after it happened. It is a complete lie to suggest that there was any involvement by Biggie or myself. I am shocked that the Los Angeles Times would be so irresponsible as to publish such a baseless and completely untrue story.”
A whole slew of folks are accepting buyout offers to leave the Los Angeles Times as part of yet another round of Sam Zell-issued job cuts. The person we’re saddest to see go? Darrell Kunitomi, tour guide. [LAO]
Congratulations, Los Angeles Times! You beat your goal of racking up 87 million pageviews on LATimes.com with a huge 94 million. Thanks, in part, to your most-read story: “Spears hospitalized for mental health.” [LAO]
A DIFFERENCE OF VISION “Think of it as the changes made at the start of a new presidential term,” says LAT publisher David Hiller about the ousting of the paper’s editor, Jim O’Shea. “In the context of these changes, Jim and I decided we no longer saw things the same way about how to take the company forward.” Guess which of the two men saw “bottom line” in the company’s future?
If you need a reason to never give Los Angeles Times sports columnist Bill Dwyre a modicum of credibility ever again, just read today’s column.
In a special Martin Luther King Jr. Day column – special, if only because it touches upon race in media – Dwyre argues that our industry’s terrible and mostly ineffectual approach to discussing society’s ultimate taboo is because “we blog before we report, when it should be the other way around. We write more about ourselves than we do about our subjects.”
Okay, that second sentence is true, which is likely why Dwyre got this argument so wrong. CONTINUED »
O’SHEA CAN YOU SEE For the fourth time in three years, Tribune Co.’s Los Angeles Times ousts a chief. Gone is editor James O’Shea, removed by publisher David Hiller for refusing to cut jobs in the newsroom, which happened to publisher Jeffrey Johnson last year. And just when we almost started believing the gospel that suggested we start believing the tarot card reading that hinted new owner Sam Zell might take pity of his work force. [NYT]
Forget about the networks, who are forced to rebroadcast late night programming and the writers, who are currently out of work. No, they’re not the real victims of the writers strike. Nor are the American people, who very soon will have to resort to reruns for entertainment, or the show runners who are caught in between the writers and the producers.
No, the real victims of the writers strike are the L.A. coffee shops whose clientèle have left them for the picket line.
CONTINUED »
For a writers strike, there’s certainly a lot to read. While people caught in the middle of this might be busying themselves with Guitar Hero, most people just want to know when The Office will come back on. And updates on the donut status on the picket line is a poor excuse for actual entertainment. Our breakdown on the strike must-reads after the jump.
CONTINUED »
At least at the Los Angeles Times, where issuing a statement about not commenting on a story is considered declining to comment. (Wait, isn’t that how it should be?) [DHD]
Furthering a story we took five minutes to work on last week, the Los Angeles Times opines about Google News’ new comments feature, where “authenticated” people mentioned in news articles get a chance to publicly respond. Argue the editors: “The feature implies that the stories aggregated by Google News are incomplete — possibly because of limited space, but also possibly because of bias, neglect or ignorance. News organizations have their flaws, and the added comments on Google may demonstrate that. […] Google, however, won’t help readers separate the factual wheat from the public-relations chaff — a reminder that Google may strive to be the world’s index, but it’s not journalism.”
So publicists have started embedding themselves into Google News’ supposedly unbiased coverage. What’s next, publicists cheating their clients’ way to the top of search engine results? Oh, wait.
Editorial Director
