The feud between Conrad Black and Rosie DiManno is bad for newspaper readers, great for the dictionary industry
Conrad Black and Rosie DiManno have spent the past few days attacking each other in their respective newspaper columns, and it’s incredible. This is the media equivalent of Godzilla versus Mothra, except instead of body blows, both sides are hurling awkwardly written sentences.
Black and DiManno, more than any other journalists working in Toronto today, are known for over-elaborate prose. Black, in particular, likes using words that seem like they were pulled from a 19th-century thesaurus. DiManno, while not quite as prone to weird word choices, does have the distinction of having written what has been called the worst lede of all time. The pair’s latest feud—over Black’s softball interview with Rob Ford, during which Ford allegedly libelled Star reporter Daniel Dale—has brought out the worst in both of them. Here’s a sample of the invective, taken from Black’s December 14 Post column and DiManno’s response in today’s Star.
Black begins his assault on the Star (and the English language) by comparing it to a dying t-rex:
[The Star] is now like a decrepit Jurassic monster, with failing sight and palsied limb that yet comes snorting out of the undergrowth occasionally in pursuit of some misconceived or conjured cause.
DiManno responds by using the word “ganglion” in a way that is not sanctioned by any dictionary we’ve seen.
[Black] managed to generate the stuff of libel action by seducing from Ford a ganglion of lies about my Star colleague Daniel Dale.
Black even gets a little ad hominem with DiManno, specifically.
On Wednesday, [Star editor Michael] Cooke unleashed his most fiercely braying columnist, Rosie DiManno—a feminoid who is so disconcerted by my wife’s timeless appearance that she refers to the frequent praise of her as a form of ‘necrophilia.’
It’s not clear when, if ever, DiManno insulted Black’s wife, Barbara Amiel, that way. Regardless, DiManno shrugs off the accusation and hammers away at Black’s incompetence during the Ford interview. She reiterates the fact that Daniel Dale was cleared of wrongdoing by the police, and then slips in an insult so creaky that it reads like it was written by Lord Black himself.
One more time: There was no lurking, no spying, no young children and no “perversion,” you contemptible oaf.
Oh, but who are we kidding? Black’s insults are the old-timiest in town:
[DiManno] is a coarse, vapid blunderbuss, complaining of imagined slurs on her colleague Daniel Dale.
From the Oxford English Dictionary:
blunderbuss, n.: A short gun with a large bore, firing many balls or slugs, and capable of doing execution within a limited range without exact aim. (Now superseded by other firearms.)
What an apt description. Wait, which one of the two were we talking about, again?
11 thoughts on “The feud between Conrad Black and Rosie DiManno is bad for newspaper readers, great for the dictionary industry”
Think Rosie better get the number pronto for Barbara’s plastic surgeon her face is as as screwed as her writing NEWSFLASH the pink streak does’nt detract from your nastiness. Go back to the hole you climbed out of!
Black is by far the better writer and less biased. I’d take his prose over her invective any day.
This has been fun to read for a few days. I just can’t take convicted felon Black or his publishers seriously.
DiManno wiped the floor with Black. give it up, Convict Black.
Conrad Black -or why use a three syllable word when you can use a six syllable one. Black is not a good writer because he can’t get past his own insecurities, that being (if I don’t appear fabulously erudite, people will think I’m not fabulously erudite) hence he lays on the vocabulary with an earth mover. Black was genuinely shocked at the way his sit down with mayor Ford was perceived, but he shouldn’t be, he is not an interviewer and has scant experience being one. Whether writing or interviewing Lord Black is a
dilettante . He’s long on style but short on substance. Rosie Dimanno on the other hand can write and has proven it. You may not care for her view on things but she can write. She gets the point across.
I’d take Black over vicious DeManno any day, he’s a far better writer than DiManno.
Oh I love my Rosie. She gets the points across always on whatever subject she writes about. Black on the other hand is always trying to promote himself and doesn’t give a fig about what he is writing about except that it affords him a subject.
Black’s latest alliance with Ford shows his desparation to become relevant again. All it showed was his total ignorance of the “subject”….or it was shrewdly scripted televsion to promote further media coverage. I will believe they are buds when I see Black at a hockey game in a Leaf’s Jersey tossin’ back a brewski.
.. oooh … Barbara is gonna be maaaad.
But, I assume by now she’s accustomed to being dragged through the muck in Conrad’s wake.
Ummm, WTF articles did you read? DiManno is outmatched and outclassed by Lord Black’s pinkie finger.
Who Killed Canada:
Media Ownership and the Radical Right in Canada
Part 1, 2 & 3.
Note: each video about 10 minutes
No time for video?
Read review instead:
Mel Hurtig begins by discussing the Canadian media and how
we now have the greatest concentration of media in the western world. In fact, he states this would simply not be
allowed in any other western democracy.
And since these same media outlets control newspaper,
television and radio news; we are essentially only being given one voice. There are few or no alternative views. As stated in the video, a healthy democracy
should foster a healthy and independent news media.
Comments are closed.