Showing posts with label big tech sucks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label big tech sucks. Show all posts

Friday, September 25, 2026

California AG Caves To Megabullies (The Good Fight Continues)

 

<"He Caved (What Else Is New?)"
Take I/The Reckoner>


<i.>
Like most unconditional surrenders, the negative fallout dropped before the ink dried, even as its signers sought to sneak the news through the back door. A 12-state coalition's attempt to derail the Paramount Skydance-Warner Bros. Discovery merger crumpled to an ignominious end on Monday, when the man leading it, California Attorney General Rob Bonta, folded like a wet rag on a park bench, and pulled the plug:

"When we get down to brass tacks, what we heard over and over from people who would be most directly and immediately impacted by the merger is that what matters most is consistent film output, domestic production, and protecting the livelihoods of workers above and below the line.

"As such, our settlement provides court-enforceable commitments for more films, an infusion of an additional $1.5 billion into home-grown film production, and protections for workers who are impacted by the merger. There’s no Hollywood without the people who work on and off screen to make the magic happen, and today’s settlement protects workers, jobs, and Hollywood.”

The view from the cheap seats looks rather different, as some of the comments from this Reddit thread suggest ("California Vowed To Stop Paramount-Warner Bros. Merger; Why Did It Fold?"; see link below):

"Because establishment dems cannot be trusted. They will cater to the money and call it realism."

"Because neoliberal Democrats are just rational Republicans."


"So (California Governor) Gavin Newsom could appease his donors while lying to the people he wants to vote for him in '28 that he did everything he could."

With this last obstacle to their megalomania removed, the oily father-son duo unleashing it, Larry and David Ellison, can now add CBS Entertainment, Comedy Central, HBO and TikTok, among others, to their personal giant Monopoly board of media trophies. 

Apparently, the Ellisons' finger-wagging threat to pull up stakes and leave the Golden State for good proved sufficient to bring Bonta -- and his boss, Newsom -- to heel. Moments like this one demonstrate why oligarchs exude such confident contempt for the rule of law, one they treat as a mere inconvenience to swat aside, with an airy wave of their greasy palms.

Bonta's press release (see link below) touts a number of concessions, all seemingly designed to head off the blowback already raining down on his office. They include a $5 million independent film fund, for each year of the five-year settlement period; a commitment for both parties to release at least 30 films per year, over the next two years, and 32 for the remaining three years; a $1.5 billion stake, to bolster domestic film production; and a a $47.5 million fund to help workers impacted by the merger.

But there's one fly in the ointment, amid all the feelgood prose oozing through the Attorney General's press release about "being in the best interests of those involved," "ongoing discussions," "resolving our concerns," and so on -- and that's the fate of CNN.

Having laid waste to CBS News's independence, its new Trump-friendly overlord, Bari Weiss, will undoubtedly set about the same task with all the thin-skinned, talentless relish that she demonstrated in turning "60 Minutes" into the equivalent of a giant blazing dumpster fire. 

What makes Monday's announcement all the more painful, from our perspective, is how much of a contrast Bonta's abject surrender makes with the solidarity shown by the legacy media, when Trump the (Not So) Magnificent summarily banned them from the White House: "Right, then. No more pooled video coverage to you."

The net results of Trump's amateurish workaround -- trying to shout out over the roars of jets, at the airport he's been designated to give a few canned remarks -- speak for themselves, and are providing endless hours of sadistic online amusement. The moral here? Resistance works best when everyone makes does it. End of story!

But, given how quickly Bonta and his boss folded, we doubt that California's top law enforcer is losing much sleep over the prospect. He's played his part, not having visited the battlefield, and that's all he wrote. Or cared to write, because that's the beauty of capitulation: it doesn't require anything more than saying...

"I give up."



<:What Comes Around Goes Around.../The Reckoner>


<ii.>
Not surprisingly, the greatest fury over the settlement is flying from progressive quarters like the American Spectator, whose commentary (see link below) covers the basic points quite well:

"Behavioral remedies like promises of film releases are simply unenforceable, and editorial panels for CNN and CBS are similarly dubious and have nothing to do with the core of the case, which alleged that a combined company would have too much power over theater owners and cable companies to set contract terms.

"Yet Bonta caved under pressure, after being abandoned by every major politician in California (from current Gov. Gavin Newsom to heir apparent Xavier Becerra to Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass), all of whom are worried about jobs in the event of a Paramount exit. But Paramount’s stated plan post-merger includes $8 billion in 'savings,' which translates into the loss of tens of thousands of jobs."

Indeed, one point fast being forgotten -- as the
American Prospect's piece notes -- is the so-called "ticking fee," or $7 million daily penalty due to Warner Bros., for not finalizing the deal by its Oct deadline. 1. A federal judge had already issued a temporary injunction against the merger, and set the case for a March 2027 trial date. This small fact explains why the Ellisons suddenly began so much public noise about leaving the state, and wanting to settle the case, or both.

Even for someone like Larry Ellison, with an estimated net worth of $345 billion, it's fair to say he wouldn't want a single day of that $7 million fee, let alone a single dollar of it, slipping under his couch cushions, right?

Now, it's true -- as the
Hollywood Reporter article points out -- that the Ellisons had asked the pro-Trump Supreme Court for an expedited hearing, which they might well have gotten. The court had asked Bonta to answer challenges from Iowa and Montana, in seeking to stop the suit, which likely proved one factor in Monday's outcome.

Would an expedited Supreme Court hearing have halted the states' lawsuit? We'll never know, because Bonta and his fellow California neoliberals didn't try. The same holfd for the Ellisons' threats to leave the state. Although Paramount's board had approved moving to Tennessee or Texas as a fallback, it's hard to imagine such an idea working out in practice -- since the major dealmakers and studios aren't based there, and neither state boasts an abundance of soundstages to make it work well.

Such maneuverings are straight out of the Tech Bully 101 Handbook. As we've seen in New York, there hasn't been a major capital exodus after Mamdani's election, because of the logistical realities involved. Megabullies like the Ellisons rely on a lot of fist-clenching, foot-stomping, teeth-gritting voodoo to get their way, and while it's no picnic to face such a display, it goes with the territory of serving as the state's top law enforcer.
 

On a more practical level, with the so-called Justice Department so firmly in Trump's pocket, state counterparts like Becerra represented the last major backstop against this latest display of corrupt self-dealing, one expressly designed to appease the Orange Menace, as we'll see.

With so much on the line, shouldn't Californians have expected a stiffer fight from their Attorney General? No show of learned helplessness against an onslaught of corruption ever looks good, no matter how artfully you dress it up.

At the very least, Bonta might have pushed for a greater concession -- spinning off CNN from the deal -- which is the whole reason, other than money, that the Ellisons pursued it so rabidly in the first place. Would they have agreed? Maybe not, but they had floated the possibility publicly, which outlets like the L.A. Business Journal were taking seriously, only a couple weeks ago ("Paramount Weighs Assets Selloff To Save Deal").

Again, we'll never really know, because Bonta, Newsom and their fellow neoliberals gave up without a fight. That's what commentators have already been writing, and that's the sum-up that will follow them to their graves, as simple as that. There can never be a place waiting at the table for those so willing to wave the white flag so easily.




<Sourced from Facenook
(so, no credit, but we'll give it, where it's due):
What we don't want to see happening in 2028!
Let's be honest here -- centrists suck>

<iii.>
If nothing else, the fallout from Monday's announcement should disqualify Newsom from any further 2028 Presidential discussions. Don't forget, even before this particular shoe dropped, this is the same guy who furiously backpedaled from a wealth tax measure that will Californians will vote on this fall. He fought to keep it off the ballot, and is reminding anyone in shouting distance that he won't be voting for it.

Since Newsome can't screw up the courage to oppose his home state's bumper crop of Dr. Evils, edgelords and megabullies now, why would he expect him to find it, if he ever gets nominated, let alone makes it to the White House? As those New Jersey guys might say: "Fuhgeddaboutit."

Or maybe we can recall Mike Ehrmentraut's irritable dismissal of Jesse's earnest query on Breaking Bad, about whether riding shotgun makes him "the guy" now: "You...are not...the guy! You're not capable of BEING the guy!"

The post-Trump era will require serious structural reforms, so that nobody can ever abuse their power to that level again. More than mere triage will be required, simply because so many people are screaming so loudly for it. The last thing we need is a repeat of Obama's infamous 2008 vow to "move on," without punishing any of the bad actors responsible for the nation's economic meltdown -- and, in our humble opinion, the first major tipping point that paved the way for Trump's entrance.

And if we permanently lose our democracy, the imminent defanging of CNN might well represent the first tipping point in that direction. As Robert Reich points out on his Substack site, Trump's ongoing irritation and hostility towards CNN prompted him to egg on the Ellisons' megamania fetish:

“I think any deal, it should be guaranteed and certain that CNN is part of it or sold separately, but I don’t think the people that are running that company right now and running CNN — which is a very dishonest group of people — I don’t think that should be allowed to continue. I think CNN should be sold along with everything else.”

The Ellisons have already promised to make sweeping changes, once they finish counting up all their new play toys. If this feels uncomfortably like the goings-on in some Latin American banana republic, or Orban-era Hungary, that's not a coincidence, as Reich notes:

"It’s the neofascist playbook: Take over the media and silence criticism. Even better (because it’s less out in the open), have your cronies take over the media and have them silence criticism. Better still, make deals with your cronies so when they take over the media, they have ongoing financial incentives to silence criticism. If they’re billionaires, they can keep buying up media and silence criticism as they make even more money."

It doesn't take much imagination to ponder how an Ellison-remade CNN might look. Perhaps they'll opt for a softer voiceover than Sean Hannity's familiar stentorian bellow: "Marco Rubio walks us through the night he almost died for love...again, and again, and again. Join us, for an intimate look at the Marco Rubio no one knows, as he toils mightily to make America great again."

Or how about a MAGA-ified "South Park," which its creators recently announced plans to retitle "South America," in honor of Trump's fetish for renaming anything that moves and breathes (or doesn't)? Cue the appropriate voiceover: 

"And now, tonight, on 'South America': Stan and Kyle come face to face with America's border crisis, as they debate about calling ICE on that suspicious-looking family who've moved in next door, only to find..." 

The camera then cuts to an image of Cartman, his arms pinned by a horde of masked ICE agents, as they drag him away to a waiting black van, while he yells: "I hhhhhate yyyyyou guys -- Seeeeerrrrrioussslllyyy!"

Yes, indeed, the possibilities are endless, and pretty grim, too. And they're made all the grimmer, in view of the fact that California's Democratic political establishment simply walked away, and left the megabullies to it, all without firing a shot. Of all the tragedies associated with the Ellisons' megamerger maneuverings, this one looms largest of all.


<"He Caved (What Else Is New?)"
Take II/The Reckoner>

<iv.>
So what exactly do we make of this latest red flag disaster of the Trump Restoration, one orchestrated by some of his closest allies? We'll get the obvious one out of the way first: for those who believe that Corporate Moderates like Gavin Newsom are the Democratic Party's future? "Fuhgeddaboutit." 

We've been led down that path before, by the Clintons, the Obamas, and the corporate classes who spawned them, and look how well that movie played out. In fairness to Bonta, Newsom and others like them, Democrats have a major credibility problem with media monopolies -- as we saw the Clinton era's driving mantra ("Let big fish grow ever bigger, heftier, and wider"). 

And let's not forget the Bruce Springsteen ticket fiasco, while we're at it. Obama's Justice Department approved the LiveNation-Ticketmaster merger responsible for driving up concert pricing, and that's not the only example. Attorney generals tend to be establishment creatures, not the hard-charging consumer advocates and crime busters that the public typically imagines of them.

But, if nothing else, the Paramount merger should remind us of the importance about tackling media monopoly on that Fix What Trump Broke To-Do List. Revisiting limits on what billionaires and media companies can add to their collection of networks, platforms and related outlets should be a major priority, and we shouldn't support any candidates who won't pursue them.

Similarly, ramping up antitrust enforcement should also become a priority. While the Ellisons have won this round, it's worth remembering... What is done can always be undone. Though the Biden-era Presidency made inroads toward that goal -- notably, appointing Lina Khan, the most aggressive Federal Trade Commission head in decades -- it didn't go far enough.

Taming monopolies only happens in two ways. You either move vigorously to break them up, as President Teddy Roosevelt did with his celebrated "big stick," or add a series of guardrails to prevent them from becoming serious societal problems -- the approach that his distant cousin, Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR), pursued during the 1930s. It's one or the other, basically, if society is to ever come out ahead on the deal.

Above all else, we should never stop dogging those who dismiss those issues, or fail to take them seriously. We can never regret speaking out about them, since there's nothing to gain from holding our tongue -- it's why we've started this "Time For Action" series, after all -- and we can never forgive, nor forget, those who let us down, as the American Prospect reminds us:

"The lawsuit was exceptionally strong on the merits, a textbook case of why we have antitrust laws. It is monumentally disappointing that Bonta caved, especially because we don’t have any other lines of defense to the Trump administration’s antitrust corruption. Every company looking to merge is getting a signal that they can bully their way through to extreme concentration. That is terrible for the economy." --The Reckoner


Reddit: California Vowed To Stop Paramount-Warner Bros. Merger:
https://www.reddit.com/r/entertainment/comments/1wnnmp2/california_vowed_to_stop_paramountwarner_bros/

Robert Reich Substack: And Now, CNN:
https://robertreich.substack.com/p/now-cnn

The Hollywood Reporter:
California Vowed To Stop Paramount-Warner Bros. Merge
r:
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/california-paramount-warner-bros-settle-why-fold-1236707326/

(Referenced in the Reddit thread, but included separately, for those wanting to skip right to it)


<Secret Affair's lead singer, Ian Page,
 keeps it up close 'n' personal:
  "Time For Action" video (YouTube capture)>

...They can laugh in our face
'Cause we know we're right
Looking good's the answer,
And living by night...


So take me to your leader,
Because it's time you realized...


...That this is the time
This is the time for action (time for action)
This is the time to be seen (time to be seen)...


This is the time for action,
Time to be seen...

To Be Continued...


<YouTube capture>

Sunday, September 13, 2026

Mad King Watch (Take XIX): Google Bows Down (Again), And Renames Lake Ontario

 

<Your tax dollars at work?
A visual snapshot of the latest delusion
(Google Maps)>


<"Delusions On Display"/The Reckoner>

<i.>
Why does everybody hate Big Tech so much? Hmm, I've no idea. Couldn't imagine why. Oh, wait. Start with its ravenous appetite for unchecked power without accountability, as the demand for all those data centers symbolizes -- one that despots like Hitler, Stain or Louis XIV, could never have entertained, not in their wildest dreams. 

Continue with the rush to cram its latest technology down our throats, as we've seen from the AI explosion -- which will hopefully burst as the AI bubble sooner than later, and leave them all working for food. What are the odds? I know, I know, time will tell. But we all can dream, right? Especially if we need that image to keep us going through these never-ending darkest of times.

And that's before we get to the Tech Bros' other numerous shortcomings, such as their desire to know everything about you, only to turn radio silent the minute that anyone tries to turn those tables on them. Or maybe it's their brutish insistence on atomizing the common man and woman to the point of absurdity, from the products they buy, to the life choices they make, and the rights they claim.

For further reference, look no further than Microsoft's decision to kill its Publisher program, despite its enormous popularity among the DIY community. Why? Because the Mega-Bullies don't like that. Their goal is to enslave us, at all costs -- something all their garish, gauzy TV Soma (excuse me, "ads") will never change. Allowing us to empower ourselves doesn't square with the infinite nannying that they're planning to impose.

But the biggest and most relevant reason, perhaps, is Big Tech's readiness to kowtow to power, as we see from Google Maps's acceptance of Donald Trump's latest executive order tantrum -- renaming Lake Ontario as "Lake America," since Canadians won't accept his mindless maximalism. So what does the Bully in Chief do? Snaps his fingers, and lives out his latest sundowning fantasy, with the stroke of his EKG-style chicken scratches.

Once again, America The Beautiful presents itself as America The Bully State. Never mind that Trump's so-called executive order has no more impact than declaring the moon is made out of green cheese. Judging from this thread I've found on Reddit, the Bully in Chief's latest delusion is going over like gangbusters:

"Google really has gone to shit."

"Added to the list of reasons Google can fuck all the way off."

"All the world uses correct name, only US uses this new wrong name...will ditch Google Maps from all my projects for forcing (on) the world the will of a few."

"Why doesn't Europe invest in technology to combat the various monopolies the U.S. tech industry has globally? I really hope their leaders finally realized they are exposed to massive risk by allowing people from the U.S. to dictate how things work in their country and do something about it.

"There needs to be global competition for these services rather than one company that does these things for nearly the entire fucking planet."




<ii.>
You can read the rest of these delighted reviews for yourself (see link below). What makes the contrast even more unfavorable for Google is how its brethren have responded. Apple hasn't gone alongl apparently, renaming the Gulf of Mexico into "The Gulf of America," as it did last time, proved an unbreakable red line.

And neither is MapQuest. Better yet, MapQuest has also rolled out a new tool, allowing users to name the lake whatever they want, which squares well with this modest proposal from Robert Reich:

"If you’d like Google to return to naming it Lake Ontario, I urge you to open Google Maps on your computer or mobile app and sign in, then click or tap the menu icon (three lines) or your account profile picture in the top corner, select 'Edit the Map' or 'Your opinions about Maps,' type your feedback explaining that the lake should remain designated Lake Ontario, and click Send. You might do the same for the Gulf of Mexico."

Now that's an idea we can all get behind! Who knows? Maybe if enough of us hit that "Edit the Map" function, Google will realize that the cost of their advance obedience may yet come back to haunt them. But we should couple those impulses with a general exodus away from the Great Google Beast, even if it means buying a swath of USBs to back up whatever email or photo archives we were foolish enough to store there.

I could easily write a separate post on their forced conversions and sudden imposition of storage limits, two reasons I'm thinking of switching to the Netherlands-based Startpage, which offers email and searching, without tracking. For all their own shortcomings, Europeans understand the value of privacy, which is why their protections are so much stronger than in the US, where the virtual tail wags the dog -- no, bounces it up and down -- all day long.

From where I sit, the abovenamed commenter who wished for serious competition, instead of one giant company doing it "for the entire fucking planet," has it right. And if we ever get a Democrat-oriented Project 2029, along with a South African-style Truth and Reconciliation Commission, asking the CEOs of Google, not to mention Amazon, Facebook, Microsoft -- indeed, all those who shoveled so many slippery billions into Trump's 2024 campaign, to grease the skids for his restoration -- to explain themselves sounds like a critical step, if we're ever to get our democracy back.

Such a body would allow for some timely reminders of basic principles, starting with the obvious: Obeying any madman's whims in advance is an inadequate response. Sticking to basic facts beats complying with a wannabe autocrat's latest delusions. Speaking truth to power is better remembered than abject compliance, no matter how elegantly it's dressed up.

There's no place at the table for those who collaborate, no matter how hard they try to "explain" their decisions, or the motives they rationalize for making them. Because those impulses invite the most uncomfortable question of all, the one that's certain to dog so many of them, once the Trump era's madness finally runs its course: "Why didn't you stand up to them? Why didn't you stop them?" Whatever they say, we won't bother trying to count all the crickets that supply the final answer. --The Reckoner

Links To Go (The Hills Are Alive,
With...The Sounds Of Delusions:)


Reddit: Google Says Web Developers
Must Set Their Region For Canada
To "Lake Ontario" To Appear On Map
:
https://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1w3d32p/google_says_website_developers_must_set_their/

The Daily Beast: Google Maps
Faces Fury For Caving To Trump:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/google-maps-faces-fury-for-caving-to-trumps-lake-america-demand/

The Hill: Google Maps Changes
Lake Ontario To "Lake America" On US Phones:

https://thehill.com/policy/transportation/6059553-google-maps-renames-lake-america/

Monday, August 31, 2026

Tracking The Data Centers: A Handy Visual Reminder

 <https://brockovichdatacenter.com/>


Want to track the Super Sniffer Dog Surveillance State that all those feral edgelords -- I mean, tech bros, sorry -- are rushing to build, but don't know where to start? If you don't know already, the famed environmental lawyer, Erin Brokovich, offers an interactive map on a website that she's launched to shine a light on this unwholesome phenomenon, which represents that political unicorn -- a development that's aroused enough public antipathy to cross every conceivable party line.

Getting a handle on where they're popping up, however, has been slippery, since data center proponents aren't exactly shouting their arrival from the rooftops. If you look at the maps that some well-intentioned volunteers on the Open Streets public data site, for instance -- there's so few dots, it's enough to make you ask, "What's all the fuss about?"

A quick scan and click across the Brokovich map will part you from those notions pretty fast. As the old saying holds, "knowledge is power," and getting a handle on trends -- since some regions are, shall we say, more overwhelmed by data centers than others -- is the first stop toward stopping them.

And it certainly beats being treated how their proponents envision -- like mushrooms (i.e., fed shit, and kept in the dark), as they swarm our communities, armed with blizzards of non-disclosure agreements, and wild promises dangling from their lips. Which is why it's probably worth filling out the reporting form on Brokovich's website, among many other nifty features, should the need arise.

Another type of map worth checking out is one that shows which states host the most data centers, which you can get from Visual Capitalist (see link below). I was going to include it here, until I saw the "2025" portion of the headline. So, presumably, it's a bit dated, though you can still glean some useful info -- starting with the top data center states.

As you can see, Virginia (665*), Texas (413), California (321), Illinois (244) and Ohio (203) are the top five data hosting states, with others seemingly closing in on a secondary role (such as Oregon and Washington, with 137 and 134 centers, respectively). Even in 2025 terms, they're sobering numbers to view, though necessary, if we want to frame the most relevant lines of protest and resistance.

If nothing else, it's worth having a snappy visual to summarize the problem, which helps in figuring out how to tackle it. After all, what's that equally appropriate old saying? "One picture is worth a thousand words" (or 10,000 words, apparently, because its lineage is somewhat disputed, as the link below will show you), which feels eerily apropos, in this particular context.

Because, as we all know, it's a little bit late when you wake up one day, and find a data center shoehorned onto your doorstep. So let's send the data profiteers packing, wherever they show up, with a different old saying ringing in their tinny, tone deaf ears: "You're bringing coals to Newcastle, and we want it to stop!" Getting the right information, visually speaking, is the first place to start. -- The Reckoner


Links To Go: Hurry, Hurry (Before You Find
A Monster Data Center Squatting In The Backyard)

Brokovich AI Data Center Reporting:
https://brockovichdatacenter.com/

Grammar-Monster.com
A Picture Paints A Thousand Words (Origin):
https://www.grammar-monster.com/sayings_proverbs/a_picture_paints_a_thousand_words.htm

Visual Capitalist: Mapped: States
With The Most Data Centers In 2025
:

(*As dated as the map is by now, it's a grimly amusing figure, being only digit one away from that dreaded Biblical number, 666. Go figure, eh?)

Monday, August 17, 2026

A Glimpse Of The Future? Of Smartphones, Social Networks & Reading Rates (Cabbages & Kings Optional)

 

<LA Times, 7/13/26: A glimpse of the future?>

I stumbled across the above clipping on Facebook, which certainly offers plenty of food for thought. Start with the stat on smartphone ownership. I'm not among the two-thirds who owned one by 2015, which makes me an outlier, on some level. The flipside? My longtime associate, The Squawker, does have one, and uses it regularly, for the usual boring reasons (i,.e., it makes certain mindless tasks easier). So if I want to scratch that particular itch, it's not difficult.

That being said, it's hard to argue with the author's assertion that our ongoing decline in literacy picked up steam the moment that smartphones became universal. The five and seven hours per day that adults and young spend, respectively, starting into their gadgets is also time that doesn't go into reading books.

Nor does it seem especially surprising to see the steepest declines logged among the usual suspects -- from men and boys, to rural residents, and those with lower education levels (translated: high school dropouts, presumably, and also those who never finished college). Unsurprisingly, declines in reading rates are less steeper among girls, and women. 

Obviously, this is a complicated subject. If you're using a smartphone to make speech more understandable, then I'll say, "More power to you." I wouldn't tell you to junk it. Even if we somehow gained the capability of instantly vaporizing smartphones tomorrow, it wouldn't necessarily raise our declining literacy rates overnight. But the LA Times columnist, David Shelley, hits on an often-overlooked point in the Great Literacy Debate -- why it's so important, and not for the most commonly cited reason, of sweeping the sclerosis from the veins of our sagging democracy:

"Reading offers unique benefits and pleasure. Sometimes that pleasure can be hard-won -- it's not a simple, instant dopamine hit -- but it's enduring and long-lasting. We remember the books we loved as a child for the rest of our lives. Can we say the same for a meme we enjoyed, or a social media post?"

I know that feeling well. One of my strongest formative childhood experiences came from my mom, who would read to me -- and encourage me to do likewise, for her ( a habit that continued for entertainment, into her twilight years). But we didn't just bond over The Jungle Book.

She would buy me more advanced fare, like every book written by the French explorer, Jacques Cousteau -- who, along with his son, Phillippe, seemed to be everywhere on '70s TV screens -- and then quiz me on the vocabulary. Or it might be key concepts, or key details, whatever she'd pick out. And if I didn't hit the mark, we'd run down those items, again -- and again, and again -- until she felt I had them down.

My dad was a heavyweight reader himself, gliding from all the classics of literature, to more esoteric subject matter, like those classic Ballantine paperbacks on World War II -- which eventually filled an entire bookcase on their own -- and tomes on history, politics, sociology, you name it.

On top of all that, he read several news magazines regularly, week after week -- including Newsweek, TIME, US News & World Report -- which he'd then hand over to me, once he finished. Without TIME, that arch-establishment bastion, I'd never have learned about the Martin Beck mystery series, to which they devoted a two-page spread -- complete with images of the classic Pantheon hardcover editions -- on August 11, 1975.

The publication date is noteworthy, because it happened just over two months after the death of Per Wahloo -- who co-authored the books with his companion, Maj Sjowall, from 1965-75. Thankfully, the first of its major predictions proved wrong ("
Unhappily, few of their works are likely to make their way to the screen?"), though not the second: "As time passes, the novels will probably be taken more seriously as literature because of their biting social comment and the shrewdness with which it animates the plots."

My curiosity piqued, I went down to one of our local libraries, which -- lo and behold! -- had practically the entire series, except for a book or two. I started reading them, and have never stopped. And they have aged well, whether you enjoy them purely as police procedurals, or social commentaries. I like both approaches, which suits me fine, if I ever start writing mysteries.

Still, when you consider that Wahloo and his other half remained largely unknown at the time, outside of their native Sweden -- and Europe, perhaps, once their books started getting translated into the relevant homegrown languages -- to see them covered in such depth felt impressive. TIME magazine was "on it!"

You can read the article for yourself (see below) and judge, though completists should track down the original -- because seeing those cover illustrations really grabbed me. And that's just one of many, many examples. I never would have learned about the British punk rock explosion without the August 11, 1977 roundup ("Anthems Of The Blank Generation"), whose leadoff paragraph is a classic blast of incomprehension:

"ITEM: In London, Singer Johnny Rotten spits at the audience and cries out, 'I hate you!' Sizing up Johnny’s four-letter words, tattered clothing and generally repugnant personal deportment, the British Establishment decides that it hates him. Johnny and his band, the Sex Pistols, are regularly banned from British radio, concert halls and clubs. Nonetheless, the Pistols’ latest single, a Jubilee diatribe against royalty called God Save the Queen, is currently a bestselling record in Britain."

Again, if you can track down the original article, it's well worth the effort, for the visuals alone. By the time I read the article -- which included quotes from "Blank Generation" (Richard Hell), and "Venus de Milo" (Television), along with grainy black and white shots of the Clash, the Sex Pistols, and so on -- I wanted to get my hands on this music, and experience it myself.

My dad, God bless him, might finally forgive me for that one. Especially if I told him that these days, the man who was Rotten, who wrote that anti-monarchist classic, "God Save The Queen," -- plain old John Lydon -- loves the Queen. Can't get enough of her, in fact. Or so it seems, judging from whatever mood he's feeling that week. With him, it's hard to tell where the act ends, and the real person takes over again.

My other most important formative experience came from the Great Books Program, which I joined around fifth or sixth grade. An outside person -- or "coordinator," as they called it, I think -- came in two or three times a week, and we'd discuss whatever reading we'd been assigned (usually from  an abridged version, if I recall correctly). The fare ranged from the esoteric likes of Bartleby The Scrivener (Herman Melville), to classics like The Iliad, The Odyssey, and milestone works from Charles Dickens, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Edgar Allen Poe, F. Scott Fitzgerald -- I could go on forever, but you get the idea. 

Without those experiences, it's hard to imagine what I would have become. I've always had a natural curiosity about the world around me, so the ingraining of reading may well have happened, anyway -- but might have taken a lot longer, without the input from my parents, or Great Books. And maybe I'd have hit a few speed bumps along the way, taste-wise, who knows?

Suffice to say, those experiences offer something tangible and meaningful, which I don't see happening as often in the virtual world. The bloom is well and truly off the rose from the wide-eyed, golly-gee-whiz vision that Rush's drummer/lyricist Neal Peart, expresses in a song like "Virtuality": "Net boy, net girl/Send your signal around the world/Let your fingers walk and talk/And set you free."

Who would write a song like that nowadays, especially after all the negative revelations about the tech bullies, and their nonstop efforts to manipulate, track, and enslave us -- hence, their pell-mell rush to throw up the data centers needed to build their surveillance state? Or the Facebook whistleblower scandal, or the UK tabloid phone hacking scandal, or the tsunami of cyberbullying reports (now gaining additional legs, after the Jason Arday story)?

If there's any justice at all -- and if the long arc truly bends toward it -- then that AI bubble will blow up in the edgelords' faces, with the data centers going bust as fast as they arrived. Because I don't know about you, but I'm way past tired of seeing a bunch of feral overgrown little boys make the world suffer, because they got cut from their dodgeball team. 

Again, I recognize that it's a complicated subject. I know a lot of people with disabilities, and shut-ins, who would disagree with me, and that's fine. If you aren't able to get around easily, or it's too expensive to travel widely, the digital world might offer your only shot at learning about Japanese cooking, or the crown jewel of Uruguayan direct to video filmmaking (profiled in Straight To VHS).

So duly noted, seconded, and all that. But if we really want to push the literacy curve back in our direction, we not only need to take back our tech, but a more robust discussion about what we expect from it -- and what we can do differently, to avoid rehashing the errors of our past.

That call feels even more urgent, when I read the equally wide-eyed, golly-gee-whiz comments of Aaron Sorkin, writer-director of The Social Reckoning -- the sequel to The Social Network (2020), who finds it "dangerous" that a third of US adults now regularly get their news from it:

"And by the way, let me be clear: I don't think Mark Zuckerberg ever intended for it to have a corrosive effect. I think his intentions were good. He was somebody who, like a lot of people, had difficulty fitting into the social structure of college life and probably high school. He invented his own social structure, and he got to be the mayor of it and couldn't be excluded from it. His brilliance is undeniable, and that was a cool thing and it got way out of hand. It's gone completely out of control."


To which I can only respond with New Musical Express's withering summary of the blame it hung on the Clash's late lead singer, Joe Strummer, for producing the Clash's oft-mocked swan song, Cut The Crap: "Perhaps naively, I don't doubt Strummer's sincerity, but a big question mark has got to hang over his marbles, Ron."

And likewise, I'd ask the same question of Sorkin. How can someone who did the deep dive through the darkest corners of Big Tech's origin story ever emerge from it, waxing so naively about it? Is he really that simple-minded? Sadly, and evidently, yes.

Because if you read The Social Network's printed incarnation, before it hit the big screen, you'll find that "Zuck" -- as they called him, then and now -- wasn't trying to find the cure for cancer, or writing fanboy letters to Mother Teresa, or plotting how to grow a super-grain capable of feeding the starving millions for zero dollars. Nope, none of those things.

Instead, he spent much of his time drinking, partying, and chasing women, amid endless hours and hours and hours of coding, all in pursuit of an endless mountain of loot -- all the things that lead to the dreaded malady of "Billionaire Brain," just as his robber baron predecessors have done before him -- the only difference being, at least the Gilded Age bad boys pretended to feel grateful for all their ill-gotten gains.

Whether they pulled it off is an altogether different matter entirely. But, suffice to say, I don't think we can trust the Aaron Sorkins of the world to lead us to the promised land, anymore than the techno-robber barons he's spent his last half-decade or so chronicling.

And, more than ever, I'm convinced that the next counterculture will owe little or nothing to this insufferable Silicon Gulch that we find ourselves stuck inhabiting, if ever so unhappily. And reading, and improved literacy, will have to be part of that recipe, to reclaim ourselves from it. And if it's not?

Then I think the cartoon below tells us everything we need to know. Just imagine a Communist Bloc-style uber-culture, devoid of any spirit or spark, only backed up by a more wide-ranging and malign apparatus than the drearily bland tinhorn likes of Eric Honecker could ever have dreamed up, one that stands ready to snap its digital cage into place over you.

It's the kind of scenario that gives new meaning to the concept of a "captive audience," one that has the likes of David Ellison dreaming about a future with "everyone on their best behavior" -- as if people are merely dogs to train, by snapping the right leash into place, or dangling the biggest biscuit safely out of reach.

Maybe he, and all of his kind, find the only air-conditioned cells in Hell awaiting their arrival, once the local fire department has finally cleared away the vast puffs of sulfur they've left behind, once they've finally shuffled off.

Now, imagine how you might muddle along through a morass -- and you can take it mentally from there. We'll be revisiting this subject plenty more times, before the next turn of the wheel comes along. So let us gear up, and step up, before there is no margin for error anymore. And history will never forgive us, if we don't get the recipe right. Or, at least, a better sense of the balance. --The Reckoner





Links To Go (Hurry, Hurry, Yank The Plug
On The Techlord's Great Anti-Rock 'N' Roll Swindle):

The Hollywood Reporter:
Aaron Sorkin Says "Facebook is Completely Out Of Control":

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/movies/articles/aaron-sorkin-says-facebook-completely-173335255.html

TIME: Martin Beck Passes:
https://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,917703-1,00.html

TIME: Music: Anthems From The Blank Generation:
https://time.com/archive/6853029/music-anthems-of-the-blank-generation/

Monday, June 29, 2026

Time For Action: Urge Your Attorney General (Stop Paramount's Mega-Media Monopoly) (UPDATED: 7/14/26)

 

<Bari Weiss (l) and Donald Trump: 
The world's oddest couple?
Spotted on Facebook, no source credited
(but we'll credit where it's due, or 
take it down, if the creator objects...>

Suggested Soundtrack: "Time For Action," Secret Affair (1979)


At Ramen Noodle Nation, we don't just copy and paste what somebody else has created. If we had a motto, it might well be, "All original, all the time," which seems only fair -- especially in an age of people being conditioned to accept whatever AI slop rolls off the algorithmic conveyer belt. It's a vow well in keeping with our punk rock heritage, where a full-on set of originals sounds more appealing than a strict set of covers ("Brown-Eyed Girl," "In The Midnight Hour," "Route 66," and so on).

But sometimes, it's just simpler to post content from a non-original source that seems relevant, and on target, as you've seen here -- especially since last winter, when we posted various appeals that offered avenues for action. So it goes with Robert Reich's suggestion on how to weigh in against the proposed Paramount-Skydance merger, which the "Justice" Department has recently approved.

Without further ado, here's Reich's post, and the specific avenue you can take to roll one more log, so to speak, against the idea:

"Paramount is on the verge of becoming the largest pro-Trump media monopoly in America. 

"Two of the nation's biggest news organizations -- CBS News and CNN -- along with CBS Entertainment (home to Stephen Colbert), Comedy Central (home to Jon Stewart), HBO (John Oliver), and TikTok (where 1 out of 5 Americans now get their news) -- are all about to become one giant mega-media monopoly under the control of Trump allies and suck-ups: multibillionaire Larry Ellison and Ellison's son, David.

"It could make Rupert Murdoch's media empire of Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, and the New York Post look scrupulous by comparison.

"Trump is now on the verge of having effective control over a gigantic media company.

"Billionaires are flipping media companies like playing cards. They don't give a fig for the common good, or about the producers, correspondents, journalists, and investigative reporters whose lives are being turned upside down. 

"To them, it's all about accumulating more wealth and power.

"But it's bad for the economy, bad for our democracy, and bad for America.

"All this has happened since so suddenly that most Americans still haven't even noticed the emergency of this new pro-Trump media empire all under the control of one family of Trump cronies.

"The Ellisons' new mega-media monopoly would never pass muster if America still had antitrust enforcers. Media mergers and acquisitions deserve even stricter scrutiny than normal deals. But Trump's Department of Justice is as likely to stop this deal as it is to enforce criminal laws against ICE agents.

"You know who can stop this from happening? State attorneys general. They have the power to enforce antitrust laws and sue to stop this merger. They have legal standing and necessary resources to challenge this monstrosity.

"California's attorney general, Rob Bonta, has already made clear he will take it on. We're asking every Californian to send him a message of support. And for the rest of our country, we're asking everyone to urge their state attorney general to join California's lawsuit or launch a separate lawsuit.

"This is how you can help stop this merger. Click 'START WRITING' to sign and send your message now!"

So what are we waiting for? Head over to the relevant link, and start writing:

If you're not comfortable with getting emails from the campaign sponsors mentioned below the link, you can presumably contact your state AG the old-fashioned way -- as in, writing a letter -- or using whatever email contact info they display on their website.

Either way, you should be to whip up a crisp summary of why "this monstrosity," as Reich calls it, shouldn't proceed. There are ample reasons for just saying no to the idea, starting with the obvious -- monopolies stifle competition, and slow innovation. Imagine how the '60s fiercely competitive cultural landscape would have played out if today's reality -- in which the so-called "Big Six" have now shrunk to the "Big Three" -- had taken hold then.

And, of course, why should Trump -- or any of his allies -- be allowed so much more outsized control and influence than they already enjoy? We are, in a real sense, paying the price for the mantra that accelerated during the Clinton era ("Corporations are people, too, so let big companies grow bigger").

Funny how we no longer hear that golden GOP oldie anymore about "the liberal media," once they sink their hooks into it, isn't it? Amazing how that works.

Keep in mind, the final innings haven't been played in this game yet. A coalition of state AGs is currently suing to block the settlement of the federal antitrust case involving the LiveNation-Ticketmaster merger. UK regulators have also announced plans to review the Paramount deal, and Bonta's counterpart, Letitia James, is weighing whether to join the suit. 

Time will tell how all this activity plays out, but at least it'll prevent the Paramount merger from turning into a walkover. Overdogs of all shapes and sizes thrive on cultivating an aura of invincibility and inevitability; it's a huge part of their PR shtick, so they can save the energy that it would take to actually quash some foe who put up a halfway decent fight.

Going beyond this immediate business, the need for reforming Big Tech and Big Media has never been plainer. As admirable as the state AGs' efforts have been, they shouldn't have to fill a yawning antitrust chasm that's more or less existed since the Clinton era.

And don't automatically assume that Democrats are immune from the "corporations are people, too" ethos that plagues their Republican counterparts -- as I never tire of reminding people, it was Obama's Justice Department that approved the same LiveNation-Ticketmaster merger, the one that sent Bruce Springsteen's fans into a UFO (Unanimous Fierce Outcry, not those little green men!). So what are you waiting for?

Start writing, raise your voice now, and let it be heard, while you crank up some classic Secret Affair. Because -- as the song says -- this is the time, the time for action, time to be seen. --The Reckoner




Links To Go: (Hurry, Hurry,
Before Dr. Evil & Company Buy The Entire Media Landscape!)


Block The Merger: The Open Letter:


Mediate: "I'm Not Working For You Hacks!":
Kara Swisher 
Vows To Leave CNN If The Ellisons Buy It:
The Wrap: Kara Swisher Doubles Down...:
https://www.thewrap.com/media-platforms/journalism/kara-swisher-plans-to-leave-cnn-ellisons/


UPDATE (7/14/26): Twelve states, led by California and New York, are now banding to challenge the mega-merger, which is also drawing askance looks across the pond, too, in the UK (at last report). Obviously, from a distance, this move seems like the longest of long shots.

However, given the healthy skepticism from the federal branch of anything with Trump's fingerprints on it -- or those of his cronies, like the Ellisons -- I'd say that it stands a fair chance. At a minimum, it will slow down the momentum, and who knows? Maybe some smoking gun piece of evidence will emerge to throw the whole project into chaos.

We can only hope, but for now, let's keep the momentum going, and keep the pressure on, as these links show:

PBS Newshour:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/12-states-challenge-paramounts-takeover-of-warner-say-merger-would-extinguish-competition

Yahoo Finance:
<Secret Affair's lead singer, Ian Page,
 keeps it up close 'n' personal:
  "Time For Action" video (YouTube capture)>

...They can laugh in our face
'Cause we know we're right
Looking good's the answer,
And living by night...


So take me to your leader,
Because it's time you realized...


...That this is the time
This is the time for action (time for action)
This is the time to be seen (time to be seen)...


This is the time for action,
Time to be seen...

To Be Continued...


<YouTube capture>