Displaying posts categorized under

MEDIA

Douglas Murray :All eyes should be on Al Jazeera for being founded, funded — and directed — by terrorists All eyes should be on Al Jazeera for being founded, funded — and directed — by terrorists

https://nypost.com/2024/06/20/opinion/all-eyes-should-be-on-al-jazeera-for-being-founded-funded-and-directed-by-terrorists/

Considering how much attention the American media get, it’s amazing that one piece of actual, unbelievable subversion keeps going on.That is the Al Jazeera network — founded, funded and directed by the terrorist-supporting state of Qatar.

Last month, The Washington Post reported darkly that the Israeli government had shut down the Al Jazeera network’s operations in Israel because of its coverage from Gaza. WaPo portrayed this as a “dark day” for press freedom.

In fact, there were a lot of good reasons for the Israelis to stop the network from operating inside Israel.

Just one being that a number of Al Jazeera journalists reporting on Israel’s war against terrorists in Gaza were — er — terrorists.

Take Muhammad Washah, whom Al Jazeera presented as a stellar part of the press corps merely reporting the truth.Unfortunately for them, their man is also a senior commander in Hamas.

He used to be in Hamas’ anti-tank missile unit, but since 2022 he has been in charge of research and development for aerial weapons.Known to you and me as “rockets.”

The Media’s Gaslighting on Biden’s Decline Is This Election’s Laptop Cover-Up By Becket Adams

https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/06/the-medias-gaslighting-on-bidens-decline-is-this-elections-laptop-cover-up/

Don’t believe the evidence right in front of you, they say. Sound familiar?

Major media are aiming to repeat their performance from the 2020 presidential election, back when they endeavored to deny, dismiss, and denounce a story that could have damaged the Democratic presidential nominee.

In that election cycle, the press reflexively rallied behind a theory that the contents of the infamous Hunter Biden laptop were “Russian disinformation,” a Kremlin plot to throw the election in the GOP’s favor. Some went as far as to suggest that the laptop itself was fake (or stolen or didn’t belong to Hunter). Under the flimsy pretense of combating Russian interference, major media engaged in an industry-wide conspiracy to censor and reject the story.

The laptop is real. It appeared as evidence against Hunter Biden in his gun-felony case.

There was never a legitimate reason for members of the press to have dismissed the laptop story out of hand, especially considering the fact that those who pushed the “Russian disinformation” theory never bothered to provide evidence beyond “Trust me, bro.” Major newsrooms merely insisted that you, the voter, disregard the story as well as what the laptop’s contents suggested regarding a possible globe-spanning influence-peddling operation involving Ukrainian business interests, Chinese nationals, and the Biden family.

Voters Skeptical Of CNN, Anchors Tapper And Bash, Heading Into Trump/Biden Debate: I&I/TIPP Poll Terry Jones

https://issuesinsights.com/2024/06/24/voters-skeptical-of-cnn-anchors-tapper-and-bash-heading-into-trump-biden-debate-ii-tipp-poll/

The first 2024 presidential debate is on the way, but already controversy has emerged over the television network that will conduct the presidential face-off and those selected to ask the questions. Some Americans, it turns out, aren’t exactly thrilled about CNN anchors serving as moderators for the debate, the latest I&I/TIPP Poll shows.

The national online poll, taken from May 29-31, included 1,675 registered voters who were asked the following: “CNN will host the first general election presidential debate on June 27, 2024, moderated by Jake Tapper and Dana Bash. What is your opinion of the debate moderators and the host?”

The possible answers, given for CNN, Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, were “very favorable,” “somewhat favorable,” “not very favorable,” “not at all favorable,” and “not sure.” The poll has a +/-2.5 percentage-point margin of error.

First, CNN. It was viewed favorably by a small plurality of voters, at 45% favorable versus 36% not favorable. Another 20% were “not sure.” So a total of 56% either didn’t approve of CNN or were unsure.

Ethics and Hypocrisy: Turmoil at The Washington Post The Washington Post faces a contentious power struggle over appointing Robert Winnett as editor, revealing ethical and ideological rifts among its journalists.By Stephen Soukup

https://amgreatness.com/2024/06/22/ethics-and-hypocrisy-turmoil-at-the-washington-post/

For the time being, at least, it appears that the inmates at The Washington Post have gained the upper hand, forcing management to terminate plans to put British journalist Robert Winnett in charge of the asylum. Much to the inmates’ chagrin, one supposes, this entire episode in American journalism has been far less a dramatic battle for the future of one of the nation’s greatest institutions than a modestly entertaining reenactment of the Iran-Iraq War, in which many outside observers are hoping to see both sides lose.

Perhaps the most entertaining—if also somewhat dispiriting—aspect of the Washington Post slap fight has been the insistence by the paper’s old guard that Winnett simply could not be their new editor because he lacks the requisite “ethical” standards to do so. He is, as the Post’s long-timers fear, too morally compromised to be the leader they so richly deserve. For example, NPR reported that David Maraniss, a “highly regarded Post writer and associate editor,” penned a Facebook post in which he “expressed disgust” at Winnett’s lack of character. Maraniss went so far as to say that “the scandal that has erupted this spring around [Post publisher Will] Lewis and Winnett is worse than the revelation that a Pulitzer Prize-winning account was fabricated by Janet Cooke, a junior Post reporter fed by the hunger of her editors to land a story.”

That’s quite a charge from Maraniss, who, as NPR noted, is among The Washington Post’s most respected and beloved longtime employees. It’s also, one might conclude, an invitation to examine other examples of journalistic ethics as they are practiced at the Post by its old guard, perhaps starting with David Maraniss.

Is Wikipedia Politically Biased?by David Rozado

https://manhattan.institute/article/is-wikipedia-politically-biased

Executive Summary
This work aims to determine whether there is evidence of political bias in English-language Wikipedia articles.
Wikipedia is one of the most popular domains on the World Wide Web, with hundreds of millions of unique users per month. Wikipedia content is also routinely employed in the training of Large Language Models (LLMs).
To study political bias in Wikipedia content, we analyze the sentiment (positive, neutral, or negative) with which a set of target terms (N=1,628) with political connotations (e.g., names of recent U.S. presidents, U.S. congressmembers, U.S. Supreme Court justices, or prime ministers of Western countries) are used in Wikipedia articles.
We do not cherry-pick the set of terms to be included in the analysis but rather use publicly available preexisting lists of terms from Wikipedia and other sources.
We find a mild to moderate tendency in Wikipedia articles to associate public figures ideologically aligned right-of-center with more negative sentiment than public figures ideologically aligned left-of-center.
These prevailing associations are apparent for names of recent U.S. presidents, U.S. Supreme Court justices, U.S. senators, U.S. House of Representatives congressmembers, U.S. state governors, Western countries’ prime ministers, and prominent U.S.-based journalists and media organizations.
This trend is common but not ubiquitous. We find no evidence of it in the sentiment with which names of U.K. MPs and U.S.-based think tanks are used in Wikipedia articles.
We also find prevailing associations of negative emotions (e.g., anger and disgust) with right-leaning public figures; and positive emotions (e.g., joy) with left-leaning public figures.
These trends constitute suggestive evidence of political bias embedded in Wikipedia articles.
We find some of the aforementioned political associations embedded in Wikipedia articles popping up in OpenAI’s language models. This is suggestive of the potential for biases in Wikipedia content percolating into widely used AI systems.Wikipedia’s neutral point of view (NPOV) policy aims for articles in Wikipedia to be written in an impartial and unbiased tone. Our results suggest that Wikipedia’s NPOV policy is not achieving its stated goal of political-viewpoint neutrality in Wikipedia articles.
This report highlights areas where Wikipedia can improve in how it presents political information. Nonetheless, we want to acknowledge Wikipedia’s significant and valuable role as a public resource. We hope this work inspires efforts to uphold and strengthen Wikipedia’s principles of neutrality and impartiality.

The media’s great awokening is alienating the masses Audiences are fed up with newspapers, Hollywood and Big Tech all singing from the same woke hymn sheet. Joel Kotkin

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/06/17/the-medias-great-awokening-is-alienating-the-masses/

When I was a cub reporter working at the Washington Post a half-century ago, being a journalist was first and foremost a craft. I once tried to slip my opinion into an article, but my editor wrote on the copy that ‘nobody gives a shit what you think’.

It was harsh, but good training. Our primary job as journalists was not to indoctrinate but to inform. Even when writing an opinion piece, you would try backing up assertions with facts and leave room for the possibility that your point of view may not be the only permissible one.

All this may seem quaint today, as the news media – television, print, magazines and online blogs – now serve increasingly as ideological provocateurs. Overall, the whole industry is losing the trust of the public. This has now reached a nadir. In 2005, 50 per cent of Americans had confidence in the mass media. Barely a third do today, notes Gallup. Trust has also been dropping among all age groups, according to Pew.

One might have thought that the internet revolution and the growth of the ‘demassified media’ would benefit the customer, as futurist Alvin Toffler optimistically predicted. But today, just a handful of companies control the information pipelines and they largely follow the same script. Nearly two-thirds of US young adults now get their news through the big social-media platforms, like Facebook, X and TikTok.

These platforms use the content of the traditional media, largely without paying for it. Meanwhile, newspaper subscriptions, online and otherwise, have dropped from over 60million to barely 20million in three decades. ‘When you look at what’s evolved’, says Alan Fisco, president of the Seattle Times, ‘and the amount of revenue that’s going to the Googles and Facebooks of the world, we are getting the crumbs off the table’.

Like the barbarians who conquered Rome, the oligarchs have developed a taste for the vestigial print world they helped to destroy. Since the 2010s, tech moguls and their relatives have bought the New Republic, the Washington Post, the Atlantic, the Los Angeles Times and the long-distressed Time magazine.

The left’s lies: A warning for America’s very survival. Victor Sharpe

https://www.renewamerica.com/columns/sharpe

The Democratic Party is now irretrievably the party of Leftwing radicals, the so-called progressives whose behavior should better be described as fatally regressive.

What once united Republicans and Democrats, Conservatives and Liberals has disappeared. Gone are the days when secure borders, national sovereignty, religious freedom along with national pride were a shared American value, instead all came under a sustained and deliberate attack during the eight long years of the Barack Hussein Obama regime. He proclaimed that he had come to transform America and so many cheered loudly.

Our tragedy now is that there is not enough conservative media to combat the tidal wave of misinformation and deception which enslaves the minds of millions of our ill-informed citizens.

If good people know too little about what is going on it is because they are fooled by watching ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, MSNBC or by reading the New York Times and the Washington Post. How tragic that the great profession of journalism, with a few honorable exceptions, has become the propaganda arm of the Democrat Socialist party led by the same Obama as dire puppet master pulling Joe Biden’s strings.

President Trump was not acting as a dictator as some liberal friends of mine shamefully suggested. No, he was fulfilling his Constitutional duty to prevent the burning down of Federal buildings and protecting American citizens from the violence of Antifa and BLM because left wing Democrat mayors told their police to stand down.

We must ask ourselves if viewers of the nightly news truly believe what the Mainstream Media is telling them is the truth. If they still do, then we have reached the terrifying reality of how easily and how far good fellow Americans can be manipulated and deceived.

We are thus being put into the same position that existed in 1776 where Americans were being forced to fight for the continuing existence of freedom and liberty. Political Correctness is the enemy of free speech. Historical Correctness is thus constantly betrayed.

Leftist Media Can’t Hide Their Racism Against Black Republicans The left despises successful black Republicans, not only because they win elections but because they refute the lie that America is a “systemically racist” and evil country. By David Keltz

https://amgreatness.com/2024/06/13/leftist-media-cant-hide-their-racism-against-black-republicans/

n the eyes of the leftist media, the only thing worse than being a black Republican is being a black Republican who chooses to run for office.

Just look at their despicable treatment of recent presidential candidates, including the late Herman Cain, Dr. Ben Carson, Larry Elder, and Senator Tim Scott.

When Cain ran for the presidency in 2012, the media peddled unsubstantiated claims of sexual harassment, just as they did to Justice Clarence Thomas—another one of their favorite targets—and Brett Kavanaugh for that matter.

When Dr. Ben Carson, who happens to have been one of the world’s top neurosurgeons and a God-fearing Christian, ran for president in 2016, his faith was routinely mocked, and his biography—particularly his upbringing—was questioned by the media in ways that Barack Obama’s never was—even though it turns out Obama’s supposed memoir, “Dreams from My Father,” was almost entirely a work of fiction.

Typically, the leftist media has no problem covering a white Republican who they consider a threat to their power because they can gleefully, without a shred of evidence, call him or her a “white supremacist” or a neo-nazi.

One might think a black Republican would be harder to label in such a farcical way.

But apparently for Larry Elder, the affable radio host, that was no longer the case. When Elder decided to run for Governor of California in 2021 in a recall election to unseat the wildly unpopular pro-lockdown policies of Gavin Newsom, the Los Angeles Times disgracefully referred to him as “the Black face of white supremacy.”

Evidently, so long as a mostly white newsroom dispatches a person of color to slander a fellow minority, it’s fair game.

The Media Directive Is Clear: Israel Can Do Only Wrong By Jeffrey Blehar

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-media-directive-is-clear-israel-can-do-only-wrong/

This weekend something quite surprising and wonderful happened, for a change: In a brilliantly daring and well-coordinated rescue, commandos from Israel’s counterterrorism unit, Yamam, raided two buildings in Gaza on Saturday morning and retrieved four hostages taken on October 7 — alive and well. In an eerie echo of the heroics displayed by the Israelis at Entebbe in 1976, they suffered only one casualty, that of Arnon Zmora, who died of wounds sustained while leading his extraction team on their successful mission.

Most media attention has focused on the return of young Noa Argamani, whose abduction — livestreamed by cheering GoPro-wearing jihadis — was one of the most traumatic videos from that day; the images of her reunited with her family were thus among the most moving from this weekend. But for those familiar with Hamas’s brutal hostage calculus, the rescue of the three men — Almog Meir Jan, Andrey Kozlov, and Shlomi Ziv — unharmed is in many ways even more miraculous. (Kozlov popped the collar on his polo shirt as he stepped off the rescue transport, which is exactly what I’d be doing if I’d spent the last eight months expecting to be shot in the head execution-style yet walked away unscathed.)

You might have thought that all this was cause for celebration. You are of course a benighted fool to think that, and likely a moral monster as well. For it seems our betters in the media, as well as the keening mobs online, are here to tell us that the rescue of these hostages was in fact a tragedy if not an outright war crime. Hamas immediately claimed over 200 civilians dead — as spurious and invented as all “official” Hamas death tolls, but the peg upon which they correctly expected Western media to hang their coverage. Then, like clockwork, the story became not about the miraculous rescue but the supposedly horrifying human cost of it.

The Daily Beast’s Wahajat Ali lamented, “Is killing more than 200 Palestinian civilians worth 4 Israeli hostages? A question worth asking on the record.” (Not asked on the record: What were those 4 hostages doing in Gaza?) Others lamented the death of Palestine Chronicle journalist Abdallah Aljamal — killed senselessly while reading his Koran at home during the raid, merely because he was holding three Israeli men captive there. The Washington Post led the way in the media, with the headline “More than 200 Palestinians Killed in Israeli Hostage Raid in Gaza” and a subheading describing it as a “brazen” attack that “unleashed relentless bombardment” in the Nuseirat refugee camp — the story as told from Hamas’s point of view. That freakishly inverted moral framing was everywhere. A pair of CNN headlines told you everything about whom they believed and whose side they were on: (1) “Yesterday marked Gaza’s deadliest day in 6 months, Palestinian health ministry says,” (2) “Israel alleges journalist held hostages in Gaza, without providing evidence.” (They have since provided reams of it.)

‘Jaws’ Out of Water? Veteran actor Richard Dreyfuss gives the USA an intriguing – and brave – civics lesson. by Thom Nickels

https://www.frontpagemag.com/jaws-out-of-water/

The shark in the movie Jaws is alive and well, but instead of attacking innocent ocean swimmers, it is going after woke ideologues in out-of-water venues.

Recently, the Cabot Theater in Beverly, Massachusetts, managed by J. Casey Seward, hosted a Jaws symposium Q-and-A with Oscar-winning actor Richard Dreyfuss. Hundreds of people attended the event, no doubt thinking it was going to be a superficial conversation on Jaws movie nostalgia.

That changed when Dreyfuss walked onstage in a blue floral print house-dress, sashaying and wiggling his hips before the audience after which stagehands then rushed forward to remove the dress and help him put on a sports jacket.

The woman-to-man skit was more sophomoric, self-indulgent SNL-fare than genuinely funny. But it was certainly not a transphobic skit worthy of the attention it received from the progressive, left-tainted mainstream press.

Yet many media outlets “exploded” with sensationalistic breaking news headlines. It was as if Dreyfuss had been found guilty of infanticide. What media outlet didn’t jump into the act? There was Vanity Fair, AOL News, USA Today, The Washington Post, The Blade, as well as hundreds of TV news stations across the country, like WCVB-5 Boston.

Most posted videos of Dreyfuss walking onstage in that tacky house dress. And they followed the actor—dressed as a man—as he sat down with the host of the interview, a short, diminutive woman with an NPR-style, feminist buzz cut, who looked more than a little nervous as she immediately started talking about the award-winning movie, ignoring what had just happened onstage.

In online videos of the Cabot event, what’s noticeable is intense audience applause and enthusiastic appreciation. While media reports stated there were boos from some in the audience from the start, those boos were so soft they were drowned out by the cheers and clamor of approval.

Yes, yes, okay…one can hear a few disgruntled groans when Dreyfuss tells the audience that civics needs to make a comeback in America’s public schools.

Dreyfuss, who founded the Dreyfuss Civics Initiative in 2006, then urged audience members to “make sure your kids are not the last generation of Americans. And you know exactly what I’m talking about.”

Here we have a purely patriotic comment that should not be controversial at all—unless, of course, you’re a Howard Zinn fan and want American history rewritten with a Marxist slant.

Saying you favor civics classes in public schools is a mild-mannered conservative talking point, but to woke folks it can trigger something like an epileptic seizure. In fact, many of the “offenses” that Dreyfuss was claimed to have uttered on the Cabot stage were not recorded on video at all, which strikes me as odd considering all the news attention this “story” generated.