 The Media Are Going Bankrupt, Financially and Morally By Cliff Kincaid It is almost laughable. The paper owned by Jeff Bezos, one of the richest men in the world, is going broke. The Washington Post is the paper that runs a long story about the horrible example of Kristi Noem killing her dog and then turns around to complain about “longer wait times” for women seeking abortions in “clinics” on the East Coast. This paper puts animal rights above human rights, and its coverage of politics is just as twisted. This is one reason why the paper has almost become a laughing stock. I say “almost” because it is really a sickness that infects most of the major newspapers in the United States. It continues because many reporters get rich, smoke dope, and employ illegal aliens as nannies and gardeners. It is a comfortable lifestyle for them, but not the rest of us. As a 40-year critic of the major media, it is satisfying to learn that the Washington Post, even with Jeff Bezos behind it, is losing tens of millions of dollars. I remember the days when Reed Irvine and I used to attend Post annual meetings and watch owner Katharine Graham squirm under harsh questioning. (Accuracy in Media bought a couple shares to attend). She once compared the exchanges to dancing as a machine gun opened fire at her feet. Later, Bezos bought the rag from her son, Donald Graham, and it became extreme left-wing, rather than just liberal. Bezos, however, spends time on his yacht and lets his underlings handle the shareholder meetings and the pending bankruptcy. The failure of these fish wrappers to prosper has caused the rise of specialized publications like Axios and Politico, led by reporters in a mass exodus from the so-called “mainstream media,” like the Post. They have mastered the art of liberal media bias that is heavily camouflaged, to further confuse the American people about what is really happening in the United States and the world. As I documented in my special report on how reporters want to save the world for socialism, they are brainwashed into a worldview that holds extreme left-wing, even pro-communist views. In their self-induced fog and haze, they are currently promoting abortion as the issue that will save the Democratic Party from electoral oblivion. In this controversy, the New York Post ran a story about how a CNN legal analyst offered cash to abort his son after impregnating his co-worker’s daughter. It is the same analyst caught masturbating on camera. Viewed in the context of the Supreme Court ruling which overturned Roe v. Wade, this story alerts us to the fact that the man-hating women demanding abortion are playing into the hands of their promiscuous boyfriends, who are ready to pay to abort their kids if it gets in the way of their political careers. This sickness puts the “women’s rights” motif into context. Abortion is for the benefit of men, not mothers or their babies. In this case, however, the woman had her child. God bless her. When we consume the actual text and meaning of the Constitution, the real “insurrection” is now coming into view. That power grab can be seen in how the original Supreme Court decision in 1973 legalized abortion on demand, leading to the loss of 60 million innocent unborn lives. Worldwide, as noted by the Global Life Campaign, 1 billion babies have been destroyed, with most of the loss of life in Russia, the first communist state to legalize abortion, and Communist China. But this is not the Court’s only unconstitutional ruling. As noted in the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissent in the gay marriage decision, the Court engaged in a judicial “putsch” in that case as well, finding a “right” that does not exist, to overthrow our democratic form of government and deny citizens their constitutional rights. Justice Clarence Thomas, in his opinion on reversing Roe, said the gay marriage decision should also be reconsidered because there is no “right” to gay marriage in the Constitution. On another important topic, the cost of living, reporters are also out of touch, mostly because they are overpaid. Consider that the publication called Axios has drawn a contrast between the “cumulative change” in inflation since Biden's inauguration, 19.3 percent, and the “year-over-year change,” 3.4 percent. These facts are correct. But it then attempts to get the pro-Biden reporters off the hook for their misleading coverage of the issue by saying there is somehow a difference between rising prices and high prices. Informing us peasants of the “big picture,” this publication says that “Inflation, at least as officially measured by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, has come down sharply from its peak of 9% in mid-2022. It now stands at 3.4%, broadly in line with where it was for the quarter-century between 1983 and 2008.” No, the Big Picture is that Joe Biden has been lying about inheriting the 9 percent rate from Trump. Axios says, “When Biden administration staffers push back by saying that inflation isn't high, they risk being seen as out of touch.” It is much worse than that, of course, because they are facilitating Biden’s lies. The saving grace is that people know that Biden and his assembly of liars are in fact lying, just as they realize the media are liars, too. In the case of the inflation numbers, some in the media have somehow managed to tell the truth, as CNN on May 14 ran a “fact check” noting, “For the second time in less than a week, President Joe Biden falsely claimed Tuesday that the inflation rate was 9 percent when he began his presidency.” CNN added, “The year-over-year inflation rate in January 2021, the month of his [Biden’s] inauguration, was about 1.4 percent.” So is there hope for the media? Probably not. After all, the people know Biden is lying. It doesn’t add much to the media’s credibility to acknowledge this fact. Axios is going the way of the Post. To avoid bankruptcy, even with billionaire Jeff Bezos behind it, the Post has announced the launch of specialized publications to make up the $77 million lost in the last year. The plan is to generate “new revenue from companies” by issuing newsletters “geared toward high-priced corporate subscriptions.” Will the corporate world go for this? We know ordinary people aren’t buying it. But we know that if the Post follows the Axios model of differentiating between rising prices and high prices, a non-issue, the future looks bleak.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
|
Proudly powered by Weebly