Talk:Little Green Footballs

LGF was never "right wing"

My friends consider me a bleeding-heart lefty and even I'm more conservative on most things than Charles. The people saying he started out "right wing" before turning liberal seem to be making a big mistake: Being caught up in the post-9/11 anti-Islam fervor had nothing to do with "right wing". He was merely a left-winger caughter up in the post-9/11 anti-Islam fervor. You could argue that he was once "mildly conservative" on a handful of issues but "right wing"? That's the opening line of the entire article and it's linked to one single opinion column using it as an umbrella term. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.246.164.189 (talk) 01:49, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Are there any cites in sites or works that meet Wikipedia's guidelines for use as sources regarding whether LGF is right-wing, left-wing, centrist, or something else? It would help to have an unbiased opinion on this that we can cite here; lacking that, it would help to have a consensus of opinions where the bias is known. --Rob Kelk 18:44, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Name Origin

While the name may have originated with a Muppets-driven Japanese song, Kermit's inspiration undoubtedly derives from a form of soft green vitamin-pill our mother gave us in the 50's and 60's, which we promptly dubbed exactly 'Little Green Footballs', as in "Here come the little green footballs.", and a web-search shows we were not alone. A D-supplement that apparently survives to this day which some people still call 'little green footballs', e.g.:

I have read a suggestion of 1000 IU daily PO, for every 25# of wt.....if obese perhaps more rather than less.....

and yes the little green footballs are Vit D2......not the useful form.

[emphasis added]

http://allnurses.com/general-nursing-discussion/vitamin-d-511928-page2.html

JohndanR (talk) 16:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Parting ways with islamophobia

Sometime during 2007 the blog switched from promoting islamphobia to making a break with that movement. Perhaps that should be mentioned in the article as it's a quite dramatic change. I think it might have been somewhere around this. // Liftarn (talk)

He made a break with some figures of the "counter-jihad" movement, but he continued to make paranoid claims through the 2008 election (e.g., that Michelle Obama was "friends" with a Hamas agent and that Pres. Obama himself was a secret Muslim) and beyond until the "Ground Zero Mosque" controversy, which was led by the two closest of his former associates. It seems clear that he only abandoned islamophobic cant (while, in the same move, adopting equally-strident anti-islamophobic rhetoric) as a means of prosecuting a personal vendetta. 06:37, 12 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CCA3:460:E038:355F:9661:5DB6 (talk)

documentary

Was there a documentary that had LGF as a center piece in the drumbeat to war? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.51.236.225 (talk) 06:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Little Green Footballs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110604220456/http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/62000 to http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/62000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110604220456/http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/62000 to http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/62000
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/24/magazine/24Footballs-t.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:00, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Worth adding history of the site prior to 2009 ?

Hi, I used to read LGF since about 2001. Certainly since before the September 11 attacks. The article, currently, reads as though LGF started out as a right-wing/conservative site. Actually, it started out as a personal blog, with stuff about computing, music and with mildly LEFT wing viewpoints (Johnson posted criticisms of George W Bush, referring to him as/alluding to then-President Bush's stupidity. In fact, he was even critical of Bush in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, and, if I remember accurately, only altered his views (to the right) slowly, from about mid 2002, up until about the time of the start of the Iraq War, and the events and media coverage leading up to that (2003).

I seem to remember, vaguely, that this Wikipedia page actually did have information in an older version, about how Charles started the blog with left wing views, then changed (or as Johnson himself put it, quoting some other figure whose name now escapes me, "I was mugged by history" (or something like that)).

Forgive my vague recollections, this was some time ago now.

But does anybody think that it might be worth including that history ? As for sources, I think there were some older newspaper articles and perhaps even an interview on Fox News, where Charles Johnson makes reference to the change (from left, critical of George W Bush, to right wing).

I think it is a worthwhile edit, because, in its current form the article implies the website started as a right wing blog, which shifted to the centre or the left. When the truth is, it started out as mildly left wing (probably, 2/3rds of the content was personal stuff, about cycling, about web design, computers, music) and 1/3rd was about politics (little posts, brief posts, critical of Bush, and the Bush administration).

It was one of the most viewed political blogs in the US, at its peak, and certainly has a storied and interesting past.

Anyway, not being a registered editor, and not having much experience editing Wikipedia, I thought it would be prudent to ask others what they think. If I can source some of the articles and interviews I mentioned (where Johnson, and journalists in newspaper articles about LGF, describe the blog as starting out as a personal blog, with slightly left wing/anti Bush views) - can I then make some edits to the page to reflect that history ?

Internet history has always been fascinating to me, or the history of certain websites anyway. I am not a political person funnily enough, I can claim no advanced knowledge or even much interest in politics, so I might not be the person for the job. But I certainly did read his blog, for many years, and was even a commenter there. I enjoyed some of the discussion in the non political threads (the Overnight threads), which were frequent.

OK, thanks for reading. If people do agree with my suggestions, I would only be talking about a brief, say, 1 paragraph edit, with words to the effect of: "Johnson started the site in 2000 [or whatever year], and blogged about his daily activities: cycling, music, and information technology. He would occaissionally include posts critical of the Bush administration, and of George W Bush personally. [Here I'd include some Wayback Machine/Archived links to old posts where Johnson called Bush stupid or what not, as he often did]. After the 9/11 attacks, Johnson's views began to change, and so did the orientation of the blog: the content became more frequently political, and the posts themselves took on an increasingly conservative tone. By March of 2003, Johnson was openly supportive of the Iraq War, Israeli foreign policy, and routinely ridiculed specific Democrats, liberals and left-wing politicians. At this time and in the subsequent months, LGF became one of the most viewed right-wing blogs on the Internet."

[Then this would lead into the current page].

Please let me know what you think, if you care to ! Cheers and all the best Pete — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:44B8:3100:4004:AD88:88AB:91BB:48BA (talk) 14:54, 10 December 2018 (UTC)