Guest shiloh357 Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 (edited) The media took a brief break from its campaign against the Sinclair Media Group to go after the National Enquirer. The two don’t have anything in common except the perception of being pro-Trump. In the good old days, going after rival media outlets meant writing nasty things about them. But these days the media doesn’t write nasty things for the sake of writing them. It writes nasty things to get someone fired, investigated or imprisoned. And that’s what its Sinclair and Enquirer stories are about. CNN, the Washington Post and the New York Times had wasted barrels of ink and pixels, to warn that Trump’s criticism of their media outlets represented a grave threat to the First Amendment. And what better way to protect the First Amendment than by destroying it? In its story about the FBI raid on Trump’s lawyer, the Times managed to suggest that the Enquirer’s support for the President of the United States might strip it of its First Amendment protection. The Times tells its readers that the "federal inquiry" poses "thorny questions about A.M.I.’s First Amendment protections, and whether its record in supporting Mr. Trump somehow opens the door to scrutiny usually reserved for political organizations.” That’s a thorny question alright. And there’s plenty more thorns where that one came from. In ’08, the New York Times published an op-ed by Obama, but rejected McCain’s response. It just published an editorial titled, "Watch Out, Ted Cruz. Beto is Coming" which appears to have no purpose other than to help Beto O'Rourke raise money from New York Times readers. The Times has a sharp thorn. So sharp it could punch a hole in it and the entire mainstream media. “In one instance, The Enquirer bought but did not publish a story about an alleged extramarital relationship years earlier with the presidential candidate,” the Times sniffs. It’s not unprecedented for a paper to have damaging material about a politician without publishing it. Just ask the Los Angeles Times about the vault they’re keeping Obama’s Khalidi tape in. Or ask the Washington Post about its embargo of the photo of Obama posing with Nation of Islam hate group leader Louis Farrakhan at a CBC event. Try and suggest that behavior like that should strip them of their First Amendment rights and a howling mob of pudgy pundits would descend on the green rooms of CNN and MSNBC like hornets out of hell. On the Sinclair front, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker and eight other Senate Democrats sent a letter to the FCC demanding that it take away its licenses because Sinclair condemned media bias. No, really. As “strong defenders of the First Amendment”, Bernie, Liz and Cory want to silence Sinclair because its anchors warned about "the dangers of 'one-sided news stories plaguing our country.'" And what better way to disprove such nonsense than by using government power to silence the news on the other side? The Senate Stalinists accused Sinclair of a "systematic news distortion operation that seeks to undermine freedom of the press." But most people know that as the mainstream media. Freedom of the press requires us to accept the idea that a handful of major lefty corporations control the country’s new distortion operation because it also allows conservatives to have their own media. But the media left doesn’t accept that compromise. It isn’t willing to settle for the first spot in a two-man race. Like Tonya Harding, it wants to take a club to the knee of its political opponents. In the media’s utopia, just like in a Soviet election or a movie tagline, there can be only one. https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/269870/medias-war-freedom-press-daniel-greenfield Edited April 13, 2018 by shiloh357 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreyDestiny Posted April 13, 2018 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 21 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 131 Content Per Day: 0.06 Reputation: 59 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/08/2018 Status: Offline Share Posted April 13, 2018 News outlets really should be held to a certain standard. If it's just an opinion outlet, then mark it as an opinion outlet, not as news. A group can be free to it's opinions, but it should mark it as an opinion. If it's news, then it should purely be news; no biases, no pettiness, none of that. They are there to give updates about current events, not to try and sway people one way or the other. The key to any healthy relationship is communication. When people can't communicate, things get unhealthy. Is it any wonder the times are so turbulent at the moment? I fear that things will only get worse with time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 10 minutes ago, GreyDestiny said: News outlets really should be held to a certain standard. If it's just an opinion outlet, then mark it as an opinion outlet, not as news. A group can be free to it's opinions, but it should mark it as an opinion. If it's news, then it should purely be news; no biases, no pettiness, none of that. They are there to give updates about current events, not to try and sway people one way or the other. The key to any healthy relationship is communication. When people can't communicate, things get unhealthy. Is it any wonder the times are so turbulent at the moment? I fear that things will only get worse with time. Well, we have no OP-Ed forums to post this kind of thing, and since it is political in nature we are not allowed to post it outside the news/political forums, so this is the only place I have post this kind of thing. It would be nice to have an Op-Ed forum in this section for these kinds of articles, but that just isn't the case at this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreyDestiny Posted April 13, 2018 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 21 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 131 Content Per Day: 0.06 Reputation: 59 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/08/2018 Status: Offline Share Posted April 13, 2018 3 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: Well, we have no OP-Ed forums to post this kind of thing, and since it is political in nature we are not allowed to post it outside the news/political forums, so this is the only place I have post this kind of thing. It would be nice to have an Op-Ed forum in this section for these kinds of articles, but that just isn't the case at this time. Oh no, I didn't mean this thread, lol, the thread is fine. I meant the content within the thread, your original post. Media outlets fighting one another over personal biases when they're supposed to be news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 7 minutes ago, GreyDestiny said: Oh no, I didn't mean this thread, lol, the thread is fine. I meant the content within the thread, your original post. Media outlets fighting one another over personal biases when they're supposed to be news. LOL sorry, I misunderstood, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts