Posted on 01/26/2021 5:07:09 AM PST by karpov
After the 1967 summer of riots, journalists, politicians, and sociologists spent many words and dollars trying to find and cure the “root cause” of the racial unrest. They failed, but eventually a solution did emerge. The root cause of riots turned out to be rioters. Peace returned to the streets once police adopted new crowd-control tactics and prosecutors cracked down on lawbreakers. Mob violence came to be recognized not as an indictment of American society but as a failure of policing.
That lesson was forgotten last year, when police were lambasted for trying to control violence at Black Lives Matter and Antifa protests. Journalists disdained tear gas and arrests in favor of addressing the “systemic racism” supposedly responsible for the disorder. After the January 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, some raised questions about police failure to stop the mayhem, but once again, progressive journalists are focusing elsewhere. They’ve identified a new root cause of mob violence: free speech.
They’ve cheered the social-media purge of conservatives and urged further censorship of “violent rhetoric” and “disinformation.” It’s a remarkably self-destructive move for a profession dependent on freedom of speech, but the journalists now dominating newsrooms aren’t thinking long-term—and can’t imagine being censored themselves. The traditional liberal devotion to the First Amendment seems hopelessly antiquated to young progressives convinced that they’re on the right side of history.
When I wrote in 2019 about journalists’ new antipathy to free speech, it seemed bad enough that they were targeting rivals in their own profession with advertising boycotts and smear campaigns that led to conservative journalists being fired and banished from social media. But since the Capitol riot, they’ve gone beyond “de-platforming” individual heretics. Now they want to eliminate the platforms, too.
(Excerpt) Read more at city-journal.org ...
Journalists are showing what people have known for decades: Journalists aren’t journalists but are instead propagandists. Free speech directly opposes their work.
Oh ye hypocrites ,you generation of vipers.
They are NOT journalists.
They may have gone to schools to pick up the tools and skills of journalism, but they are ideologues first, and not the kind who value liberty.
Those who ascend to prominent and important positions in “the media” do so because the gateways are harder to pass through than those controlled by political party machines, and this leftist vetting from the top down has been occurring for a long time.
This is not a new occurrence. It has been developing and only now appears to have reached a fully obvious manifestation.
IN THE CATEGORY OF “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO”:
AG Barr once revealed DOJ investigations were launched into media leaks to determine how the MSM
were reporting “scoops” on the Trump-Russia smear long before Congress was aware of the subject matter.
The linchpin is the Clintons.
ITEM <><> Journalists Dined at Top Clinton Staffers Homes Days Before Hillary’s announcement of her candidacy
Wikileaks via Breitbart ^ | October 17 2016 | Ezra Dulis / FR Posted by grey_whiskers
Several top journalists and TV news anchors RSVPed “yes” to attend a private, off-the-record gathering at the New York home of Joel Benenson, the chief campaign strategist for Hillary Clinton, two days before she announced her candidacy in 2015, according to emails Wikileaks published from John Podesta’s accounts.
ITEM <><> The guest list for an earlier event at the home of her campaign manager, John Podesta, was limited to
reporters who were expected to cover Clinton on the campaign trail. —snip—
ITEM <><> Wikileaks revealed earlier that late night talk host Stephen Colbert, and his team at Comedy Central, were making TV episodes at the request or order of the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) back in April of 2013. So, viewers thought they were vote-smart because they’re informed by a comedian, yet same said comedian was doing Hillary’s bidding the whole time.
ITEM <><> Hillary frequently used the Democrats’ “wrap-up smear.”......leaking false info about her opponent to the media. When the obedient press published the smear, Hillary would wave it around indicating she was the superior candidate.
CIRCA 2019 IMPEACHMENT ONE The Media’s All-out Push for Trump’s Impeachment
Townhall.com ^ | April 24, 2019 | Brent Bozell and Tim Graham
FR Posted on 4/24/2019, 6:51:31 AM by Kaslin
The Mueller report is out, and Donald Trump’s summary got it right: “no collusion, no obstruction.” Mueller could also have labeled him the next iteration of St. Teresa, but it still wouldn’t have made a lick of difference. The left wants him impeached — period.
No one on the left is more upset than pretty much everyone in the press. MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski insists Democrats have to do their “patriotic duty to step up for the country.” That’s lipstick-on-a-pig talk. Their obsession may require medical treatment. It’s becoming pathological.
NBC’s Chuck Todd thinks that if there were no impeachment push, it would be “okaying the idea of foreign adversaries helping out political campaigns.” He pressed Rep. Jerrold Nadler saying, “you have all of this case of obstruction presented in the Mueller report, as you’ve just stated. Some might ask ... ‘Why haven’t you opened an impeachment inquiry?’”
“PBS NewsHour” analyst Mark Shields wants a “new 9/11 commission,” apparently because the election of Donald Trump is on the level of a terrorist attack that killed 3,000 Americans.
What’s the moral of the story? If at first your hostile investigations don’t wreck the Trump presidency, try, try again.
Reasonable Americans could say that based on the accusations flying all over Washington about possible collusion with the Russians and election fraud, they want the matter investigated and resolved, asked and answered. There was never a shred of it. In fact, the scurrilous accusations came out of the Hillary Clinton campaign. These were not the findings of a pro-Trump investigation. They came from none other than the media’s recent hero, their one-time Eliot Ness, sainted Robert Mueller.
Journalists interested in justice, and in truth itself, would now demand an investigation into the Democrats. Journalists interested in journalism would undertake that investigation themselves. But why uncover the facts when fiction is so much more ... effective?
Top Democrats know that this nebulous and now-disproved concept of Russian collusion with Trump isn’t an issue when they go to talk to voters in Iowa and New Hampshire. CNN found that for 86 percent of voters, the Mueller report would have absolutely no effect on their vote for president in 2020. And yet, in New York and Washington, it’s still the dominant issue, as it has been ever since the election, when Trump ruined all their “conventional wisdom.”
Some members of the press corps continue to harrumph about “foreign adversaries helping out political campaigns” as if the Clinton campaign didn’t pay ex-British spy Christopher Steele to dig around for dirt (including the so-called “pee tape”) from Russian sources. It’s “collusion” for Donald Trump Jr. to meet with a Russian for 20 minutes at Trump Tower, but Christopher Steele being paid to meet with Russian contacts for months somehow can’t be defined as “collusion” in the same conversation.
Steele? Fusion GPS? FISA court? The network evening newscasts spent 2,200 minutes on Trump collusion, but the counternarrative of a liberal conspiracy against the Trump campaign — inside the government as well as outside — couldn’t get a fraction of that airtime.
The network know-it-alls didn’t offer all this “patriotic duty” talk about “foreign adversaries” when the 1996 Clinton-Gore re-election campaign took bags of cash from Buddhist monks and Indonesian businessmen and Chinese communists. Back then, any congressional investigation into Asian collusion was a waste of taxpayer money and network news time. This only shows what everyone knows: The “objective” media are the servile handmaidens of the Democrats.
Journalists should be embarrassed that their expectations about Mueller turned out to be so wrong. Instead of acknowledging the error in their endless speculation about how the walls were “closing in” on Trump, they just keep trying to push the walls in. Their hatred for him knows no bounds.
The modern day DC foreign bribery industry (includes media)
twitter ^ | 4/22/2019 | BRIAN CATES
FR Posted on 4/23/2019, 2:28:38 AM by bitt
...snip...foreign governments/factions don’t just pay bribes to our politicians for favorable policy; they give money to media outlets like the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post - and not only the print media. TV networks also take the $$$$$.
When ad revenues dropped and subscriptions dropped back in the mid 2000’s, the MSM discovered a lucrative new revenue stream.
Many top Fake News outlets are now very, very dependent on the cash they get paid to publish stories from paying clients.”.....
....snip....
“Let me tell you now the dirty secret that has *smart* Fake News reporters all over the DNC Media are freaking out right now.
They took MONEY from foreign governments/factions to publish their propaganda disguised as ‘news coverage’ to sway public opinion & affect US foreign policy.
Many in the DNC Media Complex didn’t just become paid political hacks for one certain US political party; they became FOREIGN AGENTS working for foreign clients and using their influence to publish stories and LOBBYING on behalf of their foreign clients.
Bob Mueller and his Merry Crew just spent 2 years proving what A Very Bad Thing it is to become a foreign agent without publicly disclosing this and filing as a foreign agent under FARA.
QUESTION: “But doesn’t the 1st AMENDMENT give them cover for this? Doesn’t free speech & the freedom of the press allow them to take foreign money ......”
ANSWER: .....no, it doesn’t. There’s no press exception clause in the FARA act.
====================REFERENCE=============
FARA requires certain agents of foreign principals who are engaged in political activities or other activities specified under the statute to make periodic public disclosure of their relationship with the foreign principal, as well as activities, receipts and disbursements in support of those activities.
Well, if they had brains they wouldn’t be presstitutes, would they...
“Journalists” are simply Marxists that write.
There. Fixed it.
BINGO!!
And, they have been for decades. It is only now that the WWW permits people with their eyes wide open to talk about it.
WE recently canceled our local rag subscription (Frisco Times). “Customer Service” quickly called us to see about reinstating. I told them “no way”. “Why? We’ll offer you discount” (Sorta like the Devil might negotiate for only a small bit of your soul). I said: “Because your paper is nothing but propaganda.”
She hung right up. How rude!
It felt so good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.