Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think the author would agree with me on this, but this scandal is why it is critical to American freedom that the Republicans win in November. Even bigger than Biden's scandal--is the scandal of press censorship. Obama's administration got no oversight by the MSM press even while he spied on them and jailed them. If the Democrats win in November, it will be infinitely worse.
"...The incredible decision by Twitter and Facebook to block access to a New York Post story about a cache of emails reportedly belonging to Democratic nominee Joe Biden’s son Hunter, with Twitter going so far as to lock the 200 year-old newspaper out of its own account for over a week, continues to be a major underreported scandal.
The hypocrisy is mind-boggling....
...If the problem is “American citizens” being cultivated as “assets” trying to put “interference” in the mainstream media, the logical next step is to start asking Internet platforms to shut down accounts belonging to any American journalist with the temerity to report material leaked by foreigners (the wrong foreigners, of course – it will continue to be okay to report things like the “black ledger”). From Fox or the Daily Caller on the right, to left-leaning outlets like Consortium or the World Socialist Web Site, to writers like me even – we’re all now clearly in range of new speech restrictions, even if we stick to long-ago-established factual standards.
As has been hinted at by several prominent journalists, controversies erupted within newsrooms across New York and Washington in the last week. Editors have been telling charges that any effort to determine whether or not the Biden laptop material is true, or to ask the Biden campaign to confirm or deny the story, will either not be allowed or put through heightened fact-checking procedures.
On the other hand, if you want to assert without any evidence at all that the New York Post story is Russian interference, you can essentially go straight into print...."
The media has become the propaganda arm of the Democrat party.
Biden has ended his campaign because he knows that the media will continue to hit Trump with negativity while ignoring the Hunter Biden scandal and thus protecting Joe.
If Biden becomes the President the media will respond as they did when Obama was President. They will highlight and hype the positives coming from the WH while downplaying and ignoring the negatives. They will decipher the Biden gaffes and spin them to the masses explaining what he really meant. We have already seen this where Biden starts getting himself into trouble and the reporter saves him.
They do the opposite with Trump and that is why so many people hate him and think he is a terrible President.
If Biden wins it will be like when Nero fiddled while Rome burned.
The media is using censorship to elect whom they want to be President. Their idea of journalism is blatant propaganda. The media issues opinions, not journalism, they don't know the meaning of the word. The media is run by rich powerful Democrats and they feel they can sway the public the way it benefits them.
Let's pretend you own and run a newspaper. You have a budget in both money and space.
Of all the events, meetings and intrigue that happens each and every day how do you cover it? How many pages do you budget for local, state and federal political events and scheduled meetings. Save some pages for local high school sports.
It cost you green folding dollars to send a reporter to the city council meeting. Add in all the school board meetings, county meetings, yadayada. Where will the money be budgeted? Add in a photographer and we're talking at least a couple hundred an hour. Then you need to decide how much of the costing you money newsprint paper to give that meeting.
Now you need to know your subscriber. What do they want to read about? It's simple, but it is not easy.
The same decisions need to be made each and every day for electronic.
What you call censorship may be just a matter of dollars, time and space.
I find it helpful to learn a little about how stuff works when that stuff really pisses me off.
It cost less to pick news up from a wire service. You want investigating you need to be willing to pay for it.
Subscribe. All y'all Trump fans screaming about fake news expect what you want, when you want it. And you are not willing to pay for it.
Let's pretend you own and run a newspaper. You have a budget in both money and space.
Of all the events, meetings and intrigue that happens each and every day how do you cover it? How many pages do you budget for local, state and federal political events and scheduled meetings. Save some pages for local high school sports.
It cost you green folding dollars to send a reporter to the city council meeting. Add in all the school board meetings, county meetings, yadayada. Where will the money be budgeted? Add in a photographer and we're talking at least a couple hundred an hour. Then you need to decide how much of the costing you money newsprint paper to give that meeting.
Now you need to know your subscriber. What do they want to read about? It's simple, but it is not easy.
The same decisions need to be made each and every day for electronic.
What you call censorship may be just a matter of dollars, time and space.
I find it helpful to learn a little about how stuff works when that stuff really pisses me off.
It cost less to pick news up from a wire service. You want investigating you need to be willing to pay for it.
Subscribe. All y'all Trump fans screaming about fake news expect what you want, when you want it. And you are not willing to pay for it.
This needs to be re posted.
Some organizations still do great investigative reporting, NY times, NY magazine, Atlantic. Forbes sometimes. Others just regurgitate or get their funding through nonsubscribers or advertisers who have an agenda.
This needs to be re posted.
Some organizations still do great investigative reporting, NY times, NY magazine, Atlantic. Forbes sometimes. Others just regurgitate or get their funding through nonsubscribers or advertisers who have an agenda.
NY Times??????? Seriously??????
Atlantic and NY Magazine have become total jokes, just regurgitating DNC talking points.
ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC should be giving this serious coverage. But they have just become propaganda pages.
Atlantic and NY Magazine have become total jokes, just regurgitating DNC talking points.
ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC should be giving this serious coverage. But they have just become propaganda pages.
This is clearly not your field, maybe you should stick to the law. I know you often comment on constitutional law topics.
Yes the NYTimes has the deepest and most experienced bench. No one argues that they are a first class investigative journalism organization. Take a look at their Pulitzers.
Universities are also doing deep dives into current topics and marrying it with the rigor of data and analysis.
The major networks have their news magazines like 20/20 or 60 minutes but they tend to be more entertainment focused and are still more concerned with ad sales.
NY mag blew the Harvey Weinstein case which was big news and they can be surprisingly detailed in their reporting.
It takes time and money to research a story and there has to be something there. Of course it goes with out saying that breitbart, fox new and many of the other right wing outlets are not serious journalist in the same league.
On the other hand NPR uses BBC which has some real talent especially in international news.
Atlantic and NY Magazine have become total jokes, just regurgitating DNC talking points.
ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC should be giving this serious coverage. But they have just become propaganda pages.
The New York Times has great international and foreign affairs coverage compared to most other papers. Because it is foreign affairs, maybe it avoids some of the bias that the paper normally has covering domestic issues.
Even on domestic coverage, you sometimes find well written articles about domestic issues that seem to be neutral, even at the Times there are at least some professional journalists left.
However IMHO, the Times editorials are worthless. They are indeed very liberal but not just ordinary liberal, they are sort of an elitist liberal. Even when I was younger, more liberal and lived in Queens back in the 90s, I felt the Times editorial was unrealistic and lived in some kind of elite Manhattan bubble world and blind to what life was like in most of the rest of the country, even including the outer boroughs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
