Find more Claytoonz here.

Time for another episode of T.H.R.E.A.T (Trump Human Rights Erosion And Termination) Watch.

Anthony Scaramucci, one time Trump sycophant who lost his White House Communications Director job after 11 days because he was trying to out-Trump Trump, is not someone I normally take seriously. He's self-important, pompous, preening and generally obnoxious. But given the toxic political environment we live in, anyone who plays the role of canary in the coal mine is worth paying attention to.

Scaramucci tweeted out this warning Sunday.

For the last 3 years I have fully supported this President. Recently he has said things that divide the country in a way that is unacceptable. So I didn’t pass the 100% litmus test. Eventually he turns on everyone and soon it will be you and then the entire country. https://t.co/BUvwujc6LW

— Anthony Scaramucci (@Scaramucci) August 11, 2019

No matter how loyal you try to be, Scaramucci warns, "Eventually he turns on everyone and soon it will be you and then the entire country."

It's Scaramucci's version of the famous lines:

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Find more Claytoonz here. 

Find more Claytoonz here.

Find more Claytoonz here.

Find more Claytoonz here.

Find more Claytoonz here.

I had no intention of posting today, and certainly not about another front page Star headline after writing about a misleading front page headline Monday. But then again, I had no idea I would encounter this headline when I opened the morning paper:

Trump vows 'urgent resolve' after weekend's mass killings

It's atop an Associated Press story about the speech Trump read from a teleprompter Monday in response to the country's two most recent mass killings. The AP story covers what Trump said, but it also notes that this and similar statements he has made in the past fly in the face of his lack of action on gun regulations and his intention to put what he calls the "invasion" of our southern border at the center of his campaign, stirring up hatred and division to drive his supporters to the polls.

The Star headline, unlike the AP article, assumes that Trump's statement in his speech, "We vow to act with urgent resolve," actually means something, that if he said it, we can take the man at his word.

As the old saying goes, or kinda goes: Fool the media once, shame on you. Fool the media a thousand times, beginning way back when you said your father loaned you a million dollars which you paid back with interest when he actually gave you $400 million and bailed your ass out time and time again, shame on the media.

Before I wrote this post, I checked to see if the Star just took the headline from its AP feed, at which time the blame goes to the news agency. Nope. I googled the story. In dozens of news outlets, the headline is a variant of "Trump vows action after the shootings, but gives few details." The last phrase, "but gives few details," adds the necessary skepticism to Trump's "vow." The Star headline traffics in blind faith.

It was definitely a Star exclusive. And, I should add, a print edition exclusive. On the Star's own website the headline reads, "Trump vows urgent action after the shootings, offers few details."

That's twice in two days some creative headline writer at the Star took a reasonably accurate headline and screwed it up, both times on the paper's big front page story. On Monday, a perfectly good headline had already been written for the online version, but it was changed for the worse. Today, a perfectly good AP headline which virtually every other news outlet used or altered slightly was changed to the point that it misrepresented the contents of the article.

Maybe I shouldn't worry. After all, I'm a big supporter of the Star, which I think is a quality local paper with many first rate journalists. I start every day with a cup of coffee in my hand and the Star on my lap. Maybe this is just a one-off — actually a two-off — and it won't happen again.

I certainly hope so. If the Star continues to indulge in this kind of headline writing, the paper and the community will be worse for it.

Find more Claytoonz here.

I usually read education articles written for the Star the day before they make it into the paper, courtesy of my Google Alerts which link me to stories about Arizona education the minute they go live. So on Sunday I read an online version of a story about teacher shortages decreasing in Pima County which was written for Monday's paper. I was happy to read that local districts are doing better with teacher recruitment this year.

When I opened my paper this morning, there the story was on the front page, word for word. Except for one thing. The headline was rewritten to take away any impression that our teacher shortage situation had improved.

Because in the Star, if education bleeds, it leads, even if the editors have to bloody it up a bit. "Ain't it awful?" stories about public education make the front page. They sell papers.

According to the story, Pima County districts still have 142 fewer teachers than they need. That's not good news. But also according to the story, that's down 19 percent from last year. That is good news. Our districts moved the needle. They're trending in the right direction.

The article itself is a long, well researched, well written piece by reporter Danyelle Khmara. No surprise there. She does her journalistic homework and it shows.

Then there are the two headlines, which most likely were not written by Khmara.

Whoever wrote the version for the online story captured the sense of the article accurately.

Pima County has fewer teacher vacancies this year, but it's still a problem for schools

As for the Monday headline? Not so much.

Teacher vacancies still an issue in Pima County despite raises

The original online headline says things are better this year, which is accurate.

The rewritten front page headline implies nothing has changed, it's the same old teacher vacancy problem, even though teachers got a raise. It makes it sound like nothing will satisfy those damn teachers. But that's not what the facts in the article say.

This headline change may sound like a minor detail, except that, as everyone who has studied journalism knows, people who take the time to read a headline often get no farther than the first paragraph before they move on. Most people who see the front page of the Star are going to think Pima County has the same teacher vacancy problem it had last year.

That rankles me. I wrote a series of posts recently about how attacking TUSD in particular and public education in general has turned into a blood sport. The Star had an opportunity to leave readers with a sense that things are a little better. Instead, it blasts out a headline saying things were bad before, and they're just as lousy now.