Media Stupid Fucking Credulous Hack of the Day: Gary Chittim
posted by on August 21 at 13:12 PM
KING 5 Television’s Gary Chittim wants you to know that federal agents destroyed a field of marijuana in Eastern Washington. That crop was “bad news for public land and public safety,” he says. But, it turns out, the bust was reported earlier this month there’s no actual “news” here. Chittim’s “news” is exhumed and rehashed from his old story to inform you that pot is scary, pot growers are scary, and the feds are doing a better job than ever before at rounding up this scary, scary menace.
Pray tell, Gary, where have we heard this before? The White House Drug Czar John Walters.
“And these aren’t your peaceful, old school growers,” writes Chittim to express his completely original idea. Really, how does he know?
“This is not the old hippy growing a few pot plants for personal use. These guys are in the business to make a lot of money,” says Mike Cenci, deputy chief of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Well, case closed—law enforcement says the criminals are dangerous. Does Chittim talk to someone who doesn’t represent the government?
No. But Chittim does continue with his independently minded report…
Millions of dollars worth of pot are produced in single operations and the growers are willing to protect it from the unsuspecting hiker or fisherman who stumbles upon it.
Did he get any type of confirmation from locals that there is some danger in them hills? Any botanists to confirm the “dangers to the environment” or someone who might explain why this is happening, respond to what the law-enforcement mouthpiece is saying, or if the busts are having any effect? Nope, because Gary Chittim is a stupid fucking credulous hack.
It’s true, of course, that some pot growers are scary. And they shouldn’t be growing pot on public land. But the reason they’re growing on public land, as Dan has mentioned, is because they’d get busted if they grew it on farms. But more pot bust on public land require even more pot to be grown on public land—demand elicits more supply—so these busts result in destruction of even more public land, not less. So you’d think the article—which is all about our endangered wild places—would mention that. But don’t except that sort of obvious logic (which certainly appears nowhere in the federal press release) to escape the keyboard of a fucking credulous hack reporter.
On the topic of fucking credulous hack reporters—who are usually good reporters on most other subjects, using their own “get both sides of the story and explain the root of the problem” values—here’s one thing that’s always funny:
Almost every pot-growing bust story describes the location as an inconceivable shock. It doesn’t matter where, it’s always a scandal: Can you believe pot was growing in a neighborhood, a basement, a house, the suburbs, King County, British Columbia, the woods, the vineyards, the park? Where will they grow pot NEXT? Yes, you stupid credulous hack reporters, we can believe it! People are smoking pot everywhere and, sure as the brownie bakes, people are growing it everywhere. If we were to tax and regulate the stuff, then we could restrict where it’s grown… but that point is an advocacy issue.
For the record, nobody expects Chittim to run a marijuana legalization advocacy piece—only that he (and other MSM reporters) stop reciting the same bullshit scare lines that originate from the White House. Until then, he’s a stupid fucking credulous hack.
He saw The Beach one too many times.
That's strange, medical research from around the world disagrees with him.
Maybe he lives in some alternate reality where up is down, $4 million a year salary means you're Middle Class, and we have always been at war with Iraq Iran Iceland and are willing to die in a nuclear holocaust for Georgia (the occupied former Russian state, not the US state).
Every time I read something by you, I wanna ask: "Dude, you holden?"
William Holden come to the party? You got Holden Caulfield in there? Is Dominic Holden ready for dessert?
I don't know if this is obvious logic. It seems like bad logic:
Couldn't you use that same argument to oppose busting, well, pretty much anything?
@ 5) No, the argument of supply and demand applies to drug and alcohol production. Roughly the same number of pot smokers are always going to keep buying pot--there's always a stead demand in the market--so if a field gets torn up or a grower gets busted, someone will take his or her place.
In contrast, there is no consumer market for murder. People aren't walking around hoping to be murdered. Thus, taking a murderer off the street doesn't draw out people from the woodwork to go murder.
D,
We're still waiting for the Stranger's in-depth pro-marijuana story on legalization. it's been many months now and still no sight of it in your pages. Did it get bounced off the budget?
Until then ...keep crowing.
And again, you calling someone else a hack is a bit like Thomas Kincaid criticizing other painters for their lack of originality.
7 - please freshen it up, it's getting boring.
@ 7) It has been months... since you started repeating this comment. But we've written those sorts of pieces weeks ago, months ago, and years ago. Here's a feature by Eli about drug legalization. Here's feature by me about drug homicide laws. Plenty more drug articles if you search on Google.
I've never met a Jeff I liked.
It's the fucking stupid sheep who believe this crap. That's the problem.
There used to be nice hippie growers, but ever since Nancy Reagan's Just Say No crackdown they've mostly been driven out of business by organized crime. Just like alcohol prohibition created Al Capone.
The Drug War mouthpieces never met an effect of their failed policy that couldn't be turned into an argument for pursuing their failed policy more aggressively.
Well, ok, right, anything involving a product. So how about people selling highpowered weapons to drug dealers or something?
Hey Poe,
I used to feel the same way, but now know two Jeff's that I like very much.
I still haven't met a Derek or a Kevin that didn't invoke a neck hair bristling response of some kind.
sincerely,
diggum
leek @ 13) Perhaps. The thing to keep in mind is that the drug market specifically is fueled by an unwavering demand. Society has a steady appetite to alter its consciousness, regardless of penalties or price. So, while most product will always have some market--like say, snap-on bracelets--the demand will wane based on outside forces and trends. But some people will always want to get stoned.
dominic, who is his editor? who is his editor's editor? they make the rules he plays by.
Chittim is probably trying to compensate for Rick Steves pro-pot rant on KUOW this morning.
Rick Steves should win a medal, by the way. He makes an incredibly common-sense argument in favor of decriminalization.
Comments Closed
Comments are closed on this post.