Neither does Comcast.
Can you name its MSM properties?
Absolutely. A paper being leftist! No way!
when I’ve been stuck places where news is on tv, I have at times seen the newscasters hold up headlines of newspapers. likely some sinclare affiliates.
I hope FReepers understand that talking points from an oligarch being repeated by force at many media sources is NOT NEWS OR INFO and we should despise it for a free country whether the bias is left or right.
It doesn’t matter which propaganda is parroted as news. It’s wrong and it should not be used to fool people.
Do make sure you read incpen’s comment.
JMO, but Nuzzi firmly belongs in the “Hillary wuz robbed!” camp of writers. Why Smith agreed to exchange views with said snowflakette is beyond me.
Why stop at print media?
Didn’t want to give them a click, but did anyway.
Smith never granted an interview! Quote are from him blowing her off! Nuzzi simply dusted off the email exchange where Smith declined her interview request.
Only picture they could find of Smith was from 1998?!
L8r
Print media? Is that still a thing?
Sinclair is the pot calling the kettle black.
Their TV stations peddle just as much garbage as major market newspapers.
He’s right about one thing, print media is dying away.
I worked in a local TV newsroom in an editorial position. Here’s the drill: the editorial people and news producers read local and national newspapers early in the morning to structure their newscasts. The local rag dictates what local stories may be covered. Most all local station news departments will deny that they use the papers for guidance and will tout their stable of “investigative reporters” but this is garbage. In the internet age, I assume that the papers’ websites take the place of the physical fish wrappers. Although I never watch the network newscasts, I assume they are wed to the WPost and NYT as papers of record and worship.
. . . and well you should!But you should also demand proof for the opposite claim that wire service journalism - a monopoly - is objective.
You will find proof of that claim to be wanting, for the simple reason that it is obviously false. Journalism is not objective, journalism is negative.
Journalism is negative for the simple reason that bad news attracts attention, and good news is advertising. Journalists all know this to be true, and yet journalists claim that wire service journalism is objective. In fact, making that claim is the definition of a journalist - anyone who does not go along and get along with that claim is, according to mainstream journalists, “not a journalist, not objective.”
But, of course, "the conceit that 'negativity is objectivity’” is a fine definition of cynicism.