{"id":193854,"date":"2019-08-27T06:56:17","date_gmt":"2019-08-27T06:56:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=193854"},"modified":"2019-08-30T07:06:35","modified_gmt":"2019-08-30T07:06:35","slug":"legacy-media-whining-about-investigations-into-their-bigotry","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=193854","title":{"rendered":"Legacy media whining about investigations into their bigotry"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Karmic\u00a0Consequences of\u00a0Heresy-Hunting\u00a0<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Oozing with\u00a0aristocratic entitlement and indignation, the legacy media are whining about the insolence of writers and\u00a0broadcasters who have the effrontery to investigate the skeletons in their closet<\/h4>\n

By Michael Hoffman \u2013 Revisionist Review Aug 25, 2019<\/strong><\/h1>\n

Former reporter for the New York bureau of the Associated Press<\/h3>\n

On the front page of the August 25 edition of the New York Times,<\/em> two reporters, Kenneth P. Vogel and Jeremy W. Peters, decry a new movement by Right wing researchers among Donald Trump\u2019s base, aimed at sleuthing into the background and statements of journalists in the employ of the legacy media<\/span><\/a>\u00a0<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

These investigations have been declared to be\u00a0off-limits and \u201cclearly not journalism.\u201d So saith\u00a0Washington Post<\/em>\u2019s Lord High Emeritus Executive Editor, Leonard Downie Jr.<\/span><\/p>\n

He alleges that an “organized, wide-scale political effort to intentionally humiliate journalists and others who work for media outlets\u201d\u00a0is\u00a0something\u00a0new.<\/span><\/p>\n

One wonders on what desert island he\u2019s been sojourning. The censorship, doxing,\u00a0boycotts\u00a0and obstruction of revisionists, black nationalists and Conservative and Christian journalists don\u2019t seem to register or even exist<\/em> for media Brahmins of the upper crust.<\/span><\/p>\n

Follow the money: the legacy media will brook no competition that harms its lucrative monopoly on news. Therefore, we\u00a0dissident\u00a0journalists\u00a0are supposed to know our place and be content with our lot as virtually invisible. The many attempts to humiliate, libel, obstruct and remove us from Google, YouTube, Facebook, Amazon, Twitter and Instagram are of no concern\u00a0to\u00a0the High and Mighty in the legacy press.<\/span><\/p>\n

“It\u2019s one thing for Spiro Agnew to call everyone in the press \u2018nattering nabobs of negativism,\u2019\u00a0Mr.\u00a0Downie\u00a0said, referring to Agnew’s critique of how journalists covered President Nixon. \u201cAnd another thing to investigate individuals in order to embarrass them publicly and jeopardize their employment.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

This is precisely what several corporate newspaper chains, cable television news, websites, blogs and podcasts have been doing for years<\/em>, including the NY Time<\/em>s\u00a0\u2014\u00a0calling for the dismissal and loss of employment of alternative reporters who have been smeared as anti-Semitic, racist, sexist, homophobic, and so on.<\/span><\/p>\n

A. G. Sulzberger, the publisher of The New York Times<\/em>, said in a statement that exposure of shady biographical facts about Times <\/em>reporters was a case of taking Trump’s “campaign against a free press to a new level. They are seeking to harass and embarrass anyone affiliated with the leading news organizations that are asking tough questions and bringing uncomfortable truths to light,\u201d Mr. Sulzberger declared.<\/span><\/p>\n

When such tactics are used\u00a0against\u00a0the\u00a0\u201cleading”<\/em>news organizations they are immoral and wrong.\u00a0However, when the Times, Washington Post <\/em>and CNN smear, intimidate and prevent alternative journalists who work for smaller online operations from\u00a0\u201casking tough questions and bringing uncomfortable truths to light,\u201d then it\u2019s not at all a matter for outrage. The news aristocrats have spoken. You may now kiss their designer shoes.<\/span><\/p>\n

Mr.\u00a0Sulzberger takes the moral high ground on behalf of his very profitable and powerful business behemoth:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThe goal of this campaign is clearly to intimidate journalists from doing their job, which includes serving as a check on power and exposing wrongdoing when it occurs. The Times<\/em> will not be intimidated or silenced.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

What about journalists who seek a check on your<\/em> monopoly power and wrong-doing Mr. Sulzberger? What of your newspaper\u2019s\u00a0endeavor\u00a0to\u00a0jeopardize our<\/em> employment?<\/span><\/p>\n

Mr.\u00a0Sulzberger\u2019s\u00a0heresy-hunting\u00a0NY Times<\/em> has shown zero interest in defending\u00a0conservative reporters who are not members of the legacy media\u00a0from calumny and\u00a0blacklisting.<\/span><\/p>\n

Often the Times<\/em> has been guilty of these odious\u00a0tactics, which it now indignantly protests when its political rivals and business competitors employ them to deflate the reputation of the Times,\u00a0<\/em>and inform the public concerning the questionable character of some of its writers and editors.<\/span><\/p>\n

In many cases\u00a0Sulzberger\u2019s\u00a0newspaper has encouraged those attacks and covered up for thought police groups like\u00a0Right Wing Watch<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and “Media Matters for America<\/a><\/strong><\/span>\u201d\u00a0that closely investigate and attack conservative journalists,\u00a0and Sleeping Giants<\/strong><\/span><\/a>, which is sworn to threaten and shame any platform online that dares to host radical alternatives to\u00a0politically\u00a0correct dogma and revolutionary social change.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL)\u00a0is a prominent thought police group campaigning for the censorship of history books at Amazon, the silencing of black leaders like Louis Farrakhan, and of activists who are outside the established boundary of permissible opinions about Israeli settler-colonialism and the racist creed of the\u00a0Babylonian\u00a0Talmud. Over the years, the New York Times<\/em> has been\u00a0a dependable\u00a0mouthpiece\u00a0for the ADL and complicit in its\u00a0libel and intimidation\u2014yet the Times<\/em> is horrified now that such tactics are being wielded against its own writers. Here we observe the grotesque hypocrisy of the entitled.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

In June the heresy-hunters at Google\u2019s YouTube removed several legitimate revisionist history videos, together with many white supremacist and hate speech videos. Having accepted without investigation Google\u2019s deceitful description of all the videos<\/em> it removed from YouTube as constituting “hate speech,” the New York Times<\/em> mechanically reported the entire ban in terms of taking down hate speech. Our video exposing Deborah Lipstadt\u2019s hate speech toward historian David Irving<\/strong><\/span><\/a> was one of the films banned from YouTube. Consequently, our video which fulfilled a public service by advancing knowledge about the hate speech of an Establishment-revered Zionist celebrity<\/em> (Lipstadt), was banned in the name of combating hate speech. The Times<\/em>\u00a0cooperated and was party to the masquerade. Revisionist researchers and activists are barely human in the eyes of the Times,<\/em> and unworthy of the anguish and hand-wringing now being expended to defend their own hired hands from suppression and removal. This corrosive double standard undercuts Mr.\u00a0Sulzberger\u2019s protestations and reveals the corruption at the heart of his newspaper\u2019s reporting.<\/span><\/p>\n

Below is our note, which we e-mailed to the two NY Times<\/em> employees who,\u00a0in the August 25 online edition, told of the supposedly immoral and\u00a0impudent\u00a0move to investigate the background and statements of their distinguished fellow reporters at the legacy media\u2019s most honored and acclaimed flagship, to which every decent American is expected to demonstrate fealty.<\/span><\/p>\n

Dear Messers Vogel and Peters<\/strong><\/h3>\n

You wrote, “In the case of the pro-Trump network, research into journalists is being deployed for the political benefit of the White House.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

I can\u2019t abide Trump but I consider these exposures of\u00a0privileged \u00a0members of the legacy media delightful, due to the fact that said media have acquiesced in massive censorship and denial of service on Facebook, YouTube, Google and in Amazon\u2019s censorship of historians\u2019 dissident books. In these instances involving\u00a0alternative writers and journalists who compete with the NY Times<\/em> and other legacy media, there has been little or no solidarity offered by your fellow reporters and editors.<\/span><\/p>\n

In many cases where the harassed and interdicted alternative journalists are Conservatives, there have been expressions from members of the legacy media of satisfaction at the heresy-hunting, doxing and removals.<\/span><\/p>\n

Now, when the shoe is on the other foot, we\u2019re supposed to believe the process of sleuthing into journalists’ public and private foibles and failings is somehow an outrage against press freedom?<\/span><\/p>\n

Freedom of the press does not begin at the gate of the legacy media. The Times, the Post<\/em>, CNN etc.\u00a0were the ones who first let the genie out of the bottle. You ought to deal with the karmic consequences without whining.<\/span><\/p>\n

Better yet, work for the freedom of expression of your\u00a0lumpen proletariat rivals online.<\/span><\/p>\n

Michael Hoffman<\/h5>\n
_____________<\/h5>\n
Your donation keeps Michael working for Truth<\/strong><\/h5>\n
Donate now<\/span><\/a>!<\/span><\/strong><\/h5>\n

Source<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Oozing with aristocratic entitlement and indignation, the legacy media are whining about the insolence of writers and broadcasters who have the effrontery to investigate the skeletons in their closet<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":39262,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[61,25],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-193854","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-Commentary","category-The_Media"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/193854","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/39262"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=193854"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/193854\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":193859,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/193854\/revisions\/193859"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=193854"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=193854"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=193854"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}