And the trend of “canceling” responsible independent journalism is not confined to college campuses. No less a paper than the NY Times has changed its headlines at the demands of the mob.
An institution that pretends to be a media outfit but is nothing but more than a public-relations arm for its most radical constituency is a dangerous and perfidious body that can only serve to harm society.
Real journalism is vital to a free society and it must be protected.
The Washington Post’s slogan now is “Democracy dies in darkness”. It should be changed to “will killed Democracy because we created a cloud over truth”.
“Modern journalism is about finding important stories and covering them. With a pillow.
Until they stop moving.” Iowa Hawk.
L
The media is unwavering.
Unwavering in its dedication to the destruction of America.
There is no media. There is no press.
There is a propaganda machine owned operated and controlled by the Progressives. All of it must be totally destroyed so it can start over from scratch.
The existing press is a dangerous American enemy
Liberals desire the destruction of this nation.
Liberals grew up angry at their parents. They wanted to prove that their childish ways would work, but their ways don’t work.
Problem is, their parents’ ways do work.
So, liberals want to destroy their parent’s nation to prove their parent’s ways don’t work.
It is about a childish anger, and if you keep that in mind then everything a liberal does is predictable.
Beware the military, industrial, media, educational/indoctrinational, political/criminal COMPLEX...and
America’s robed mullahs. 666 ways to Sunday.
The 21st century US press has become a propaganda machine for the Democrat Party and Democrat politicians. Those who control this propaganda machine, including its so-called "journalists," have abandoned any quest for TRUTH and have dishonored themselves before history and all the world.
Some might not be aware of their dishonor, so suffused are they with the propaganda they have allowed to pervade themselves, but they cannot escape the responsibility and the dishonor. It is they themselves who have brought this dishonor upon themselves.
Hey Tom - in the future, place your blog material in our bloggers forum. Thanks.
The media has long proven it works for those who want to destroy this country. There is very little honest journalism. It’s mostly propaganda.
We haven’t had a free press in decades.
The Ministry of Propaganda would make Goebbels proud.
Agreed. But the “real journalism” of which you speak is responsible journalism - journalism which is not merely propaganda (since “Half the truth is often a great lie,” and since nobody can articulate absolutely everything, there is inexorably a POV in anything anyone writes or reports) but is rooted in a respect for fact. But in 1964 the Warren Court promulgated its unanimous New York Times Co. v. Sullivan decision. Sullivan was unanimous - unanimously wrong.At the Newseum in the Aspen Institute 2011 Washington Ideas Forum, Scalia said the landmark ruling meant “you can libel public figures without liability so long as you are relying on some statement from a reliable source, whether it’s true or not.As is well known, the framers of the Constitution did not include a bill of rights in the unamended Constitution - on grounds that the rights of the people were common law, nowhere codified comprehensively. Forced by the Antifederalists to agree to establish a bill of rights via amendment, they “enumerated” in the first eight amendments rights which tyrants had historically denied to the people in order to oppress them.“Now the old libel law used to be (that) you’re responsible, you say something false that harms somebody’s reputation, we don’t care if it was told to you by nine bishops, you are liable,” Scalia said. “New York Times v. Sullivan just cast that aside because the Court thought in modern society, it’d be a good idea if the press could say a lot of stuff about public figures without having to worry. And that may be correct, that may be right, but if it was right it should have been adopted by the people. It should have been debated in the New York Legislature and the New York Legislature could have said, ‘Yes, we’re going to change our libel law.’”
But in Times v. Sullivan, Scalia said the Supreme Court, under Justice Earl Warren, “… simply decided, ‘Yes, it used to be that … George Washington could sue somebody that libeled him, but we don’t think that’s a good idea anymore.’” — JUSTICE SCALIA: THE 45 WORDS — AND ORIGINAL MEANING — OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT
They did not abandon the posture that no one could enumerate all rights, tho - the Ninth and Tenth Amendments articulate the fact that common law rights were not touched by the Constitution in any non-explicitly defined way. And even the “freedom of the press” clause of 1A is crafted to avoid touching rights other than freedom of the press. That is what the expression “the freedom of the press” is all about - freedom of the press was traditional and so were limits such as libel and pornography law. Assaying to obliterate the right to sue for libel would have been controversial, and the object of the exercise was to suppress controversy. By convincing everyone that their rights - not just those of printers, but all rights - could not legally be compromised.
In criticizing Sullivan above, Justice Scalia’s point was that by design the Bill of Rights does not touch the right to sue for libel. From an originalist POV, that is, " libel can claim no talismanic immunity from constitutional limitations. It must be measured by standards that satisfy the First Amendment” is poppycock. And that poppycock is a direct quote from the Sullivan decision.
The suppression of libel suits by Republican has been an engine of Political Correctness - “liberals” are entitled not only to their own opinions but to their own facts (and journalists allow no one to be called “liberal” who does not go along assiduously with the journalism cartel. Such people never get libeled).