Skip to content

Hung Like a Cashew?

October 7, 2014

There’s been a new low in journalism by the New York Post.

Ok, we know that lead has been written before.  But this time it’s a really nutty new low.

The folks at the Post are on jag. Again. They are trying to get at Al Sharpton by attacking a person who is supposed to be close to him, a New York City lawyer named Sanford Rubenstein.

Apparently, Mr. Rubenstein is a libertine. That’s an old fashioned word used to refer to a person ignores or even spurns accepted forms of behavior sanctified by larger society.  When you say it like that, it makes Mr. Rubenstein sound like a person who is independent, iconoclastic and kind of cool.

But when you say it the Post’s way, he’s a creep who is “hung like a cashew.”

Yeah, that’s right. They put that in the paper.  They put it on the front page in a headline, and they expanded on the concept in the article.

They apparently interviewed Mr. Rubenstein’s neighbor and that was a quote they obtained. That, plus a lot of stuff about the way he attracts women with stretch limos. And there was also information about Mr. Rubenstein’s use of Viagra.

A question occurred to us: How does the neighbor know all of this?  To gain this knowledge, that person would have to be:

A. A confidant of Mr. Rubenstein;

B. A participant in the alleged hedonist goings on; or

C. A peeping tom.

But the Post’s attribution doesn’t allude to any of the above.

Loose attribution, more than a person of loose morals, bothers us. It makes us question the story and the reporters who would write such a story.

We are so indignant that we are tempted to suggest that those who write about individuals who are “hung like a cashew” may, in fact, be hung like cashews.

That means Bruce Golding has a tiny tool. Ian Mohr has meager member. And Tom Wilson has a pitiful pootsie.

We could say that we interviewed people who are the neighbors of Bruce, Ian and Tom and we could report those individuals’ embellished musings as fact.

Yes, we could do that, but then we’d be no better that the folks at the Post. (And we’d also be opening the door to having our neighbors interviewed as well.)

So we won’t do any of that. We’ll just say this to Bruce, Ian and Tom, and also, Julia Marsh, who shared a byline on this preposterous article.  You need to distance yourself from this kind of work.  If you don’t, nobody is going to think you’re credible journalists. They’ll just think you’re nutty and hold you up to the same kind of ridicule you dish out to others

Advertisements
One Comment leave one →
  1. October 8, 2014 6:52 AM

    such catty journalism

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: