RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://amgreatness.com/2019/08/13/a-week-in-the-life-of-abc-news/

ABC Nightly News,” televised daily across the nation at 5:30 p.m., offers what is perhaps the lowest common denominator of the mainstream media’s liberal, anti-Trump bias. But even if you compare what ABC has to say to what actually constitutes balanced reporting, as well as to what qualifies as newsworthy reporting, ABC falls short.

By these standards—by what used to be the basic editorial criteria for good journalism—ABC “news” is a dangerous fraud. They spew propaganda, calibrated at an almost infantile level, calculated to reinforce carefully nurtured biases within their television audience.

ABC News is anchored by the dashing metrosexual, David Muir, an actor of extraordinary skill. Muir, along with a laudably diverse collection of equally telegenic thespians masquerading as “journalists,” manages to exude convincing gravitas despite delivering, night after night, an embarrassing infotainment sham, mixing in equal parts pablum and agenda-driven propaganda. Forget about the Walter Cronkite Award for Excellence in Television Political Journalism, or the Edward R. Murrow Award. Give David Muir an Oscar.

ABC’s nightly “news” is easily dissected. Their 30-minute formula, which all three legacy networks follow, consists of a prolonged opening segment, about 15 minutes in length, in which the  top national and international stories are presented (or so they tell us). An examination of what they reported on last week, during the five days from August 5 through August 9, provides ample evidence of just how far removed they are from genuine journalism.

https://amgreatness.com/2019/08/12/jeffrey-epstein-and-the-death-of-trust/

The reaction to the news Saturday morning that sex-trafficker-to-the-stars Jeffrey Epstein reportedly had committed suicide while in federal custody was nearly universal: No one was buying the “official” story.

Hashtags about the Clintons’ suspected culpability in Epstein’s death immediately dominated social media. People who had predicted Epstein would be dead before he faced trial felt vindicated. Suspicions about the “official line” on Epstein’s suicide were bipartisan. Trump foes on the Left, eager to pin the death on the president and his attorney general, proffered their own skepticism about what happened Saturday at a federal prison in Manhattan: “You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to see an evil coverup to protect lots of powerful men here. You’d have to be bizarrely naive not to,” tweeted Harvard law professor and Trump hater Laurence Tribe.

Politicians from both sides of the political aisle, from Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) to Senator Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), demanded an investigation into what happened. The convoluted tale of how Epstein got away with his vile crimes took another final, dark twist.

Independent-minded pundits along with millions of American posed the same questions: Why was Epstein not on suicide watch? How did such a high-profile accused criminal who had attempted to kill himself a few weeks ago have access to any contraband that would facilitate his suicide wish? Did someone get to him in prison, or was someone bought off to turn the other way while Epstein tried to end his own life?

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/stupid-news/

EXCERPTS

“Fake news!” shouts the president. His supporters cheer.

That drives my colleagues into a frenzy of self-absorbed handwringing: “Threats to press freedom … press persecution!”

It’s silly. American reporters are hardly less safe because of President Donald Trump’s hyperbole…..

But I smiled when I first heard him use the phrase, not because news stories are “fake”– they typically aren’t (reporters who make things up are usually caught and fired) — but because so much of what people call “news” is press releases and breathless exaggerations of isolated problems.

It’s stupid news.

“…… why do media mostly ignore more important events like the creation of cellphones and Google or how millions have lifted themselves out of poverty?One reason is because they happen gradually. When Facebook was being invented, few reporters noticed.

Another is because the big stories happen in more than one place. We reporters are good at covering plane crashes and murder. We can easily interview the official in charge.

But the biggest news, like changing attitudes about gender, happens all over the place.

When I graduated, 60% of the world’s population lived in extreme poverty. Now, fewer than 9% do. Globally, that’s probably the most life-changing event over the past 50 years — a great victory, made possible by freer markets.

But most reporters don’t like free markets, and politicians rarely talk about change they don’t control.

https://pjmedia.com/trending/don-lemon-demonizes-black-pastor-who-wont-call-trump-racist/

CNN Tonight
✔ @CNNTonight

“President Trump does not attack people because of color. He attacks anybody he feels need it.” – Rev. Bill Owens says Trump’s meeting with African American pastors was not an attempt to insulate himself from his recent attacks on Rep. Cummings and his Baltimore district.”

On Tuesday evening, CNN’s Don Lemon spoke with Rev. Bill Owens, founder of the Coalition of African-American Pastors (CAAP). Owens had met with Trump earlier that day. Yet it quickly became clear Lemon had no intention of learning anything about the meeting. Lemon, seemingly obsessed with Trump’s recent tweets attacking Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), pressured the pastor to talk about the Cummings tweets, something Owens considered irrelevant. After Owens resolutely refused to condemn Trump as a racist, Lemon launched into personal attacks against him.

“What did the president say about his attacks against these leaders of color and did any of the faith leaders raise concerns about that?” Lemon began.

“Well, I think something was said in passing. I don’t tune in to negative talk from any side,” Owens responded. “I took the position that we as black pastors should go down to Baltimore and see what we can do to help.” He said he grew up “in a two-room house, no water, no lights … so I know poverty.”

Yet again, the CNN anchor asked, “Did anybody there raise concerns about what he has been saying lately about people like Elijah Cummings or anyone?”

“Well, that was not the purpose of the meeting today. Today, the meeting was how can we help the black community. That is my concern and that was the purpose of the meeting. That was the reason I came to Washington and that is my focus: helping our inner-city young people especially, our children, our young people,” the pastor replied.

https://amgreatness.com/2019/07/31/social-medias-transition-from-novelty-to-malignancy/

Once Facebook escaped the cloistered world of mere campus life, it’s all been downhill—unless of course, you are one of those who invested in or went to work for the company early on. The company has endured a year of data breaches; privacy scandals; mismanagement; controversy over whether the company responded responsibly to the posting of a doctored video of Nancy Pelosi; and, finally, the largest fine ever imposed by the Federal Trade Commission, a whopping $5 billion. Co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg has delivered seemingly endless public mea culpas and pledges to do better.

How did we get here? What made sense as a communications vehicle for a diverse but circumscribed group of people sharing many life experiences on campus and later as a helpful tool for the larger world, has transformed benign to malignant as fast as rapidly improving technology could take it there.

Students moved off the campus into the “real world,” taking Facebook with them. In those early days of social media, many Facebook competitors failed because they had developed neither the necessary campus constituency nor the needed degree of habituation among users, prior to graduation. In any case, as the graduates’ life experiences diverged, the nature of the communications was able to evolve along with them on Facebook.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14605/open-letter-to-the-new-yorker-exposes-false

As I have previously written, The New Yorker has commissioned a hit piece that seems calculated to silence my voice on President Trump, Prime Minister Netanyahu and Israel.

Here below is a letter I sent to the editor, the writer and the fact checkers. I have received only a formal response assuring me that the article will be fair. I replied that this will be up to the readers and the courts to judge.

Having been contacted by your “fact” checkers, I now understand the thrust of Connie Bruck’s hit piece: You must know there is no actual evidence that I engaged in sexual misconduct or even met my false accusers — because I did not. So, you appear determined to concoct a false narrative of my life, going back more than 40 years to my first marriage, that falsely suggests that I am the kind of person who “could” or “might” have engaged in such misconduct.

To support your false narrative, you began your negative “research” – as you acknowledged to my son — by sourcing a Holocaust denial site that circulates false stories about prominent Jews, including me. You then interviewed my enemies, my critics, dissenting students and especially anti-Israel and, in some cases anti-Semitic, zealots. The original reporting, which took place over many months, did not include interviews with longtime friends and associates who know me well and can present a more balanced perspective. You agreed to speak to a handful of such people only at the last minute, after I complained to the editor. But even then when some people called you, you told them the story was closed. Let’s see if you include the positive comments that contradict your story, that some of these people relayed to you.

http://q4j-middle-east.com

Channel hopping, I usually can’t help but settle on Fox News for such programming…and at times I have problems with that choice too. So I turn to the wildlife or fishing channels instead.

Fox’s recent hiring of folks like the unscrupulous Democrat honcho (honcha?), Donna Brazile, is a case in point. She and her cohort  south Florida Congressional Democrat Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, would stop at nothing to get their guy or gal elected: in Brazile’s case, feeding at least one question to Hillary Clinton in a major debate. And that’s just what she got caught doing. So, CNN axes her–and then Fox hires her.

No other Lefties in town to choose from for “fair and balanced” reporting?

While there’s been some other problems, it’s the next one that painfully lingers, causing repeated bouts of severe indigestion…

I don’t know what Fox is paying Brazile for her irreplaceable wisdom, but I do know that, when a current co-host of  The Five and frequent participant on some other programs as well, Juan Williams, was hired, he came aboard with a three year, $2 million contract in 2010. I’m sure that has increased substantially since then.

Not only does he continue to be hard to stomach nowadays for anyone with neurons firing properly, but I can’t help remembering a particular day, years ago, when I was driving home from work and listening to National Public Radio.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/23/journalist-who-peddled-shoddy-kavanaugh-story-defends-al-franken/

Of all the people in the world who are in a position to write an article poo-poohing Al Franken’s problems or fretting about journalistic excesses, Jane Mayer may be the very worst choice.

A reporter known for slinging unsubstantiated allegations of improper behavior against conservatives has developed a sudden appreciation for due process and journalistic fact-checking. At least for Democrats. The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer published a robust defense of former U.S. senator Al Franken, who resigned under intense pressure in 2017 after eight women publicly detailed unwanted groping and kissing from him.

Mayer argues that the former Minnesota senator should not have resigned, since one of his accusers was conservative and was associated with political opponents of Franken. As for the other seven, Mayer suggests their complaints about unwanted kisses and groping didn’t rise to the level of seriousness that a Senate resignation would indicate. Yes, Mayer reports, he was known for the unsolicited kissing of women on the mouth, but, we’re assured, he is “a social—not a sexual—’lip-kisser.’” Well, there you go.

Mayer expresses concern that “in an era when women’s accusations of sexual discrimination and harassment are finally being taken seriously, after years of belittlement and dismissal, some see it as offensive to subject accusers to scrutiny. ‘Believe Women’ has become a credo of the #MeToo movement.” Franken learns that “being on the losing side of the #MeToo movement, which he fervently supports, has led him to spend time thinking about such matters as due process, proportionality of punishment, and the consequences of Internet-fuelled outrage.”