Media Bias

[Cunt]

https://t.me/Glenn_Greenwald/1978

Liberals believe that the US corporate media is biased against the Democratic Party and in favor of the GOP, and if you think I'm joking or exaggerating -- and I don't blame you if you do -- just ask them. They say it constantly. They really believe it.

I've heard it, but I don't know if I know anyone who fell for it.

By the way, Psaki is quitting. How will she ever earn a living now?

[Brian Peacock]

The US corporate media is biased in favour of the status quo.

[Cunt]

The US corporate media is biased in favour of the status quo.

Yes.

I used to mock the 'agency-friendly' news programs as 'Friends Of Epstein', but it might make more sense to refer to that gang as 'Friends Of Disney'.

(it WAS ABC/Disney after all, who was first outed by Project Veritas, for having quieted the story)

https://emeralddb3.substack.com/p/why-w ... aisers?s=r

Photos of convicted pedophile Ghislaine Maxwell hosting an event called “Happy Family Disney Day” in 1985 have surfaced on the Internet today. It’s the ultimate PR nightmare.

It’s going to be very hard for Disney to claim that it’s not a pro-pedophile organization when it literally took donations from the world’s most infamous (still) living pedophile and “groomer to the stars.”

Creepy, isn’t it?

There is more, but at least enough to make 'Friends Of Disney' a group I wouldn't want to be counted in.

[Brian Peacock]

If you're going to quote someone's comments at least try and make your own response relevant. I understand that you think what you called the US corporate media is biased. I think they are too. The vast majority of the US get their news, along with their political analysis, from commercial organisations with real skin in the game. However, I don't think the corporate end of those organisations are fundamentally or necessarily ideologically biased in favour of one political outfit or another, because it's clear that their presumed allegiances can, have, and do swing to wherever it suits them best - the status quo. Those who are not corporate media giants but merely aspire to being big hitters, have to fight for market share in an over-crowded marked. They too also have skin in the game in undermining their bigger, harder rivals.

It seems to me that there's a serious issue clouding the waters here, and that's the framing of the US corporate media as being divided between a Democrat vs Republican, Left vs Right media. For one, Democrats, being conservatives, are basically for the status quo. They are not lefties and nobody really associates them with wanting to overthrow capitalism, get rid of landlords, place factories in the hands of their workers, make everybody work on collective farms, etc. So that's the first problem, the issue of media biased being framed around assumptions that the Democrats are lefties who want to take your stuff and collectivise your granny. For two, while people are being continually primed to squabble over each other's consumer preferences, on the basis of whose media is the best/worse, honest/dishonest, biased/unbiased, moral/immoral, patriotic/unpatriotic, Democrat/Republican, blah/blah, the corporate sector continues to rake it in as usual and exert their influence without serious challenge - the status quo.

[Cunt]

If you're going to quote someone's comments at least try and make your own response relevant. I understand that you think what you called the US corporate media is biased. I think they are too. The vast majority of the US get their news, along with their political analysis, from commercial organisations with real skin in the game.

Are you sure?

Are you sure the whole 'Mockingbird Media' thing doesn't play a part?

I see you ignored my questions, so I'll follow up with you on your chosen 'unmoderated' platform, if you want to go on.

I definitely agree that they are biased, I just don't think it's easy to see when the liars are flying rainbow flags, pretending to represent the 'oppressed'. I mean, BLM exploited community love for ending racism, and bought big fancy mansions. (they are getting in trouble now over it) but if anyone is critical about them, they risk being called 'racist'. It's been an effective defense for them, though it is eroding with evidence coming out.

Antifa uses a similar tactic, trying to suggest that if you are against them, you are in favour of 'the fascists'. Of course, the likelihood of violence seems to increase predictably with their presence at a protest, but they still present themselves as somehow doing 'good work', and standing against them gets groups labeled by a compliant and cooperative news ecosystem.

[Hermit]

I used to mock the 'agency-friendly' news programs as 'Friends Of Epstein', but it might make more sense to refer to that gang as 'Friends Of Disney'.

(it WAS ABC/Disney after all, who was first outed by Project Veritas, for having quieted the story)

https://emeralddb3.substack.com/p/why-w ... aisers?s=r

Photos of convicted pedophile Ghislaine Maxwell hosting an event called “Happy Family Disney Day” in 1985 have surfaced on the Internet today. It’s the ultimate PR nightmare.

It’s going to be very hard for Disney to claim that it’s not a pro-pedophile organization when it literally took donations from the world’s most infamous (still) living pedophile and “groomer to the stars.”

Creepy, isn’t it?

1985, huh?

Here is a more recent friend of convicted pedophile Ghislaine Maxwell. Must be pro-pedophile too.















Bonus footage of Trump Roberts throwing a party at Mar-a-Lago. Featured guest is Jeffrey Epstein. Ghislaine Maxwell can be seen walking past both of them at 0:44 - 0:49.

[Cunt]

Excellent find, Hermit! What an unbiased take on the convicted child-trafficker!

Why do you think the Friends Of Disney worked so hard to NOT uncover the customers of Maxwell, Epstein et al?

I mean, they were certainly comfy going after Trump (and a few others) so one would think they would have dug into some of these stories...

Bill Gate's ex-wife complained about his relationship with Epstein in a recent interview, but I don't see him in your unbiased review there...must be tough to find or something...

[Hermit]

Excellent find, Hermit!

Not as much a find as pointing out that if you regard Disney as a pro-pedophile organisation for being associated with her almost four decades before her paedophile related convictions you'd have to regard Donald Trump as a pro-pedophile individual on the same grounds.

[Cunt]

Excellent find, Hermit!

Not as much a find as pointing out that if you regard Disney as a pro-pedophile organisation for being associated with her almost four decades before her paedophile related convictions you'd have to regard Donald Trump as a pro-pedophile individual on the same grounds.

I didn't say they were 'pro-pedophile', but that fits well enough. In 2014, CNN thought so too.



But keep the focus on the ex-president. I'd be disappointed if you didn't.

Friends Of Disney will be most offended, if they were NOT approving of grooming, but found themselves supporting it accidentally.

I wonder if there are a lot of cancelled Disney+ subscriptions over this...or if people are just going to redirect their hate to Trump...

[rasetsu]

[Cunt]

After being caught lying on the stand, he went on to lie on TV. For a biased media company, who still wanted to paint young Master Rittenhouse as a villain.

But this meme doesn't prove much, except that enforcement looks awfully one-sided in this jurisdiction.

[Brian Peacock]

... I see you ignored my questions ...

Which one's specifically?

[Cunt]

... I see you ignored my questions ...

Which one's specifically?

My mistake, I must have gotten my threads crossed. Sorry about that.

[Brian Peacock]

Back to the status quo then I guess.

[Cunt]

Back to the status quo then I guess.

Well, if you wanted to explore our deeper disagreements, you know how you could have.

This protected space is great for lighter interaction.