Jim Acosta seems to have no idea how this whole journalism thing works.

CNN’s Jim Acosta seems to live in a dimension that is not this one. His tantrum is a perplexing one to say the least.

Screen Shot 2019-06-11 at 3.54.29 PM.png

Journalism has collapsed for the Left and Right propaganda mills disguised as news outlets, but his fuming seems silly:

“To our friends in conservative media, Anderson, I say this: It is no guarantee that you get to stay in power forever,” Acosta told CNN’s Anderson Cooper. “Another administration could come in and do the very same thing to them and say, 'Well, Donald Trump did it. Guess what, we’re going to do it to you guys, too.'”

As I recall, Barak Obama’s administration already did that.

But this is narrative spin: pretend there were no problems until the guy you don’t like won despite your targeted campaign against him. Trump won by bypassing the press for Twitter and stumping, not because of Fox News.

There is no power in journalism anymore. Acosta is fantasizing out loud, hoping all it takes is a Democrat in the White House and the press will be telling the little people what to think and that is precisely what they will think.

That ship has sailed. Journalism is dead, and the denials won’t change that reality…

Partisan Players whine about not getting everything their own way. Oh, grow up.

Seriously?

CNN’s Jeff Zucker should really be a comedian when he spews dreck like this little tirade. Fox News being called “state-run” is quite funny, given that’s precisely what CNN is whenever a Democrat is president.

But then News Corp CEO Robert Thomson is in a tizzy himself, jawing about BIg Tech “damaging” democracies, as if traditional media doesn’t do it, too.

The partisan players are whining because they cannot fool all of the people all of the time and there those more adept at manipulating mass audiences than they are. Boo hoo hoo…

CNN's propaganda strategy: Gaslighting as an abusive ex-spouse. A case study of Reliable Sources.

I

II

Dangerous Woman was a song and album that came out in 2016.

My venture A Dangerous Woman Story Studio came out in 2013.

Screen Shot 2018-12-30 at 3.39.32 PM.png

So when people make the assumption that I called this A Dangerous Woman based on the song, I say, “NIce try, you dumbass motherfucker. I predate it by three years.”

I am not impressed with people assuming that I am the follower, just as I am not impressed when people talk about there not being a feminist Intercept when I had it years before the actual Intercept.

So Grande is not only unoriginal, the “dangerous woman” label nowhere near fits the goods.

There was a terrorist attack during her concert in Manchester, she didn’t explode herself or show anything other than timidity.

A dangerous woman would have not just produced a “fuck you” album, she would have done a lot more things to upset the Establishment.

She gets disrespected at Aretha Frankin’s funeral and just took it. She should have whacked him one, and reminded him, “R-E-S-P-E-C-T” or he’d find out what happens when you fuck around with a dangerous woman.

And as an aside, when my time comes, and someone does something disrespectful to you at my Viking funeral, please kick them in the balls as hard as you can, and call them “motherfucker” from the top of your lungs, even if we were besties and my death wounds you deeply, and the whole wide world is watching. You can even give them the finger. Calling them an asshole or picko jedna for good measure is a classy and dainty touch. I will be wholeheartedly cheering you on from Eden if you do. Don’t use my death as an excuse to allow bullshittery to go unpunished. Fuck that shit.

But in the communications industries, what you see on the label isn’t what you actually get: you are told this entity represents X, when it represents Y.

We see this in the entertainment industry, especially when they proclaim to have “strong women” or “feminist” characters. It is utter and total bullshit. You cannot have a singer who is rail-thin, in a mock Playboy bunny outfit, and living up to every stereotype of a typical starlet be a “dangerous woman.” She defies no conventions. She adds nothing new to the discourse. She creates no new genre or message.

She isn’t a dangerous woman. She is a popular singer. She can carry a tune. She may be ambitious, but you do not have to be a feminist or a dangerous woman to be ambitious.

But it isn’t just Hollywood that misdirects attention with bombast and empty promises.

It is journalism, too.

III

Because journalism is trying to fight for its existence a day late and a dollar short, they are going for a melodramatic propaganda campaign that is holier-than-thou and self-aggrandizing.

Just like the psychopath ex you dumped who tells you that you cannot live with them.

There is a lot of gaslighting and a narrative where they are the selfless martyr who has to risk their lives for you, even though there is no evidence of it.

I doubt this will be their propaganda campaign in 2019 because it is not working.

But let’s break down how journalistic gaslighting works as their is the least sophisticated version of it.

And to keep things even simpler, let’s take a look at CNN’s journalistic meta-propaganda tool, a show about journalism called, ha ha, Reliable Sources, which is anything but reliable.

Mind you, once upon a time, this was a very good show. When Howard Kurtz and Bernard Kalb were hosting it. They actually did take a critical look at their own profession, had very smart and good interviews, and had good information and perspective.

Now, it is just plain garbage and bullshit used to propagate a self-serving narrative that journalism is the abusive ex you cannot live without.

Puke, puke.

So what propaganda is Reliable Sourced puking?

Well, the episode I saw today was the martyr bullshit story about how it was a “record” year of threats against journalists, which is nonsense. There really isn’t any reliable stats out there. After all, as a journalist, I got my share of various threats, and not one made it to any list of database, and we have had years where people such as Daniel Pearl, Chauncey Bailey, and Jill Dando were killed on the job as a direct result of doing their job.

Even if we were to look at stats, let’s not fall into a confirmation bias of looking at a single profession in a vacuum.

I bet it is more dangerous to live in Chicago than be a journalist.

Or someone on a cruise ship.

Or an aid worker in a war zone.

Or a US high school student.

I bet more nurses in Hamilton get harmed on the job in one year than the entire profession of journalism in a decade.

Or firefighters, police, and high school teachers because while I never met a reporter who got assaulted on the job, I know several teachers that did. I had a student in one of my college classes that I found later had beat another professor. I witnessed a classmate in the second grade throw a desk at my teacher and broke her leg.

How many first responders died on 9/11, compared to a single photographer who was killed by falling debris? (there were a few non-journalists who worked for broadcasters who were killed, but they weren’t targeted per se or killed covering the event — and you cannot compare them to the people who died saving others).

So when we start to do apples to apples comparison, journalism comes off as a very safe profession. Covering the sex life of Ariana Grande is not actually dangerous.

So it is safe to say journalists aren’t sticking out their necks for you.

They may be sticking their necks out lying, and their editors get fired for it when it gets exposed, yeah.

It isn’t as if journalists don’t die, but it is often from a domestic meltdown, a murderer who knows nothing of their profession, illness, or a drug overdose.

That happens to everybody.

But that is not the only sneaky things we see: trying to discredit critics by accusing them of having “fake” complaints" is rich and a typical gaslighting ruse.

I wonder if Fixpoetry is so cocky now that they ignored my warnings from the latest book and their nation’s most well-regarded newsmagazine published a whack of lies for years.

And no, Haaretz, journalism’s problems have nothing to do with “technological” shifts or having a hand’s off approach to so-called “rising stars”: they just never bothered with empirical methods. You don’t need an army of fact-checkers: you need empiricism. If you read my first book, you would have seen how many cases of fraud there was in all sorts of times and places — whether or not there was a photographer present.

There was a photographer present for this lie, Haaretz.

4704471_111618-wpvi-gofundme-case-woman-says-used-11pm-video-CC-vid.jpg

So here is a profession that never owns up to their problems are bothers to investigate their source. They take wild and unscientific guesses, but always fall back to trying to scare and gaslight people into trusting them.

Nice try.

But you fucked up your profession, and it screams the truth no matter how your try to manipulate the people who have abandoned you…

Vanity Fair babbles incoherently...find something real to write about that requires research.

Vanity Fair has lost its shit. It is spewing about Melania Trump, but has nothing real or coherent to babble about:

Melania Trump’s Spokesperson Writes a CNN Op-Ed to Beat Up on CNN

Uh-huh. And?

CNN beats up on her and her family all the time. What is your point?

At the very least CNN should give Trump a platform for a rebuttal.

Or do you just want to silence people who disagree with whatever a journalist decrees?

And what CNN decreed was very uninformed and devoid of anything of value.

So what is your point, you dumb motherfuckers with the plummeting circulation?

Do you know how to put a coherent thought together anymore?

Do you all realize you are having a collective public mental breakdown?

Look in the mirror before you start making snide remarks about things you no longer have any grasp of handling…

CNN's very bad day in court.

This is not a good ruling for them (you can read it here), but the bottom line is this:

This interlocutory appeal requires us to decide whether the motion-to-strike procedure of the Georgia anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) statute, O.C.G.A. § 9-11-11.1, applies in federal court. Davide Carbone filed a complaint against Cable News Network for publishing a series of allegedly defamatory news reports about him and the medical center he administered. CNN moved to strike the complaint under the Georgia anti-SLAPP statute or, in the alternative, to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court denied that motion. It ruled that the special-dismissal provision of the anti-SLAPP statute does not apply in federal court because it conflicts with Rule 12(b)(6) and that Carbone’s complaint states a claim for relief. CNN challenges both rulings. We agree with the district court that the special-dismissal provision of the Georgia anti-SLAPP statute does not apply in federal court, but we lack pendent appellate jurisdiction to review whether Carbone’s complaint states a claim for relief. We affirm in part and dismiss in part.

You can read about the anti-SLAAP statue here, here, and here, but the simplest explanation for the uninitiated comes from here:

Anti-SLAPP laws are designed to provide for early dismissal of meritless lawsuits filed against people for the exercise of First Amendment rights. The acronym “SLAPP” stands for “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation – a phrase coined by two law school professors in the late 1980s. They identified a trend of retaliatory lawsuits brought to intimidate and silence opponents or critics who had spoken out in the public sphere, typically on land use and development issues. The actual resolution of the plaintiff’s claims – for defamation, tortious interference or related theories – was a secondary motivation at best. Anti-SLAPP statutes were proposed to provide a quick, effective and inexpensive mechanism to combat such suits. Anti-SLAPP laws enable those who are the subject of a SLAPP suit to seek early dismissal and oftentimes get their legal fees reimbursed.  The fact an anti-SLAPP law is on the books in a jurisdiction can also help to deter potential litigants from filing retaliatory lawsuits in the first place.

This ruling is going to seriously hurt. In Canada, two doctors went after the CBC in 1996, while this country isn’t known for awarding big payouts in civil cases, for the CBC, they made a big exception. Journalists often use the façade that the person suing for defamation is a villain wanting to silence them, but honestly, that’s not too common: suing a large institution is intimidating, stacked against the ones suing, expensive, cruel, and slow.

In the CBC’s case, the melodrama proved troublesome as the facts took a backseat. In the CNN case, if the network used bad statistics and bad empirical methodology, they are in serious hot water, especially given the compulsion to use narrative over the mere replaying of facts.

And if that is the case here, as it was with the CBC, there is no better argument to replace journalism with an alternative that doesn’t commit those kinds of amateur errors in the first place…

Tweaking the noses of the puritanical neo-Victorians: Misdirecting the middle class locksteppers has never been easier.

Rubbing the noses of American neo-Victorians has never been simpler.

55a3d085-c2a8-48e1-b2f0-32d6d1e3d770-VPC_PUTIN_HIGH_FIVES_SAUDI_PRINCE_DESK_THUMB.jpg

CNN is shitting its pants.

American presidents have been responsible for untold deaths over the decades, but a high-five between world leaders is just too horrid for words.

And journalists keep lying to the public because they are assholes.

45954290_1865929230122688_2913613394500124672_o.jpg

No, assholes: they goad presidents into sending armies to kill people; so they use guns by proxy.

Fuck you, propagandists.

But that is a propaganda poster, and a very bad one to boot.

Journalism should never have been neo-Victorian chicken shit.

It was supposed to be about facts. Give information, not go into a helmet-haired tizzy.

No wonder world leaders have found cheap and easy ways to tell the press to go fuck themselves.

They have become the rebels who know how to play the gullible press who have been reduced to being old biddies gasping because people do not abide by their ridiculous fake rules.

The self-oppression of the middle class is the purest form of sanctioned insanity.

People make fun of those delicate flowers of the Victorian Era and of those bored housewives of the 1950s, but they are far, far more repressed than any other time in modern history.

Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.

Yes, but who would have thought that people would willingly shackle themselves, throw away the key, then judge others who think that is just plain nuts?

If the morons at CNN expected Trump to say anything, they are truly losers. You cannot slag him for everything he does, and then expect him to be your concierge.

The press has no idea what a leader is supposed to do, and neither does the public.

The ignorance of the neo-Victorians is blaring. They move the goalposts because the truth is they want to confine leaders to being Santa Claus the Butler who is doomed to fail. Bribe us or we’ll bully and blackmail you.

When we get AI instead of humans running our countries, that ought to take care of things.

A computer doesn’t give a flying fuck that you’re offended. It will just be given data and spit out who gets to live and die based on an algorithm.

If you demand too much, then the software can cut its losses by cutting you out, and save on resources.

And that’s the ultimate tweaking of an offended public…and it’s coming.

But cloning world leaders? I don’t think so…

How defending Jim Acosta and throwing Julian Assange under a bus could cost journalists a whole lot more.

The narcissistic and short-sighted strategies journalists employ are a sign that this is a profession that does not think about the future, consequences, or strategy.

They painted WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange as some sort of Russian agent or dupe because his group revealed unflattering but accurate truths about Hillary Clinton. It was all true, and everyone knows it.

Instead, they were jealous, and now some are realizing how dangerous things will become if Assange is prosecuted.

The Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald said it best:

Over the last two years, journalists and others have melodramatically claimed that press freedoms were being assaulted by the Trump administration due to trivial acts such as the President spouting adolescent insults on Twitter at Chuck Todd and Wolf Blitzer or banning Jim Acosta from White House press conferences due to his refusal to stop preening for a few minutes so as to allow other journalists to ask questions. Meanwhile, actual and real threats to press freedoms that began with the Obama DOJ and have escalated with the Trump DOJ – such as aggressive attempts to unearth and prosecute sources – have gone largely ignored if not applauded.

But Greenwald is the lone sane man in that journalistic nuthouse. The obsession the press has with hating Trump has blinded them to how stupid their knee-jerk spasms are or the consequences of their childish games.

CNN’s Jim Acosta is not Bob Woodward. He is not breaking news or doing any actual journalism. He is a clown who behaved like a moron, and when he lost his hall pass, journalists defended him, which was a supremely bad move.

The White House banned a single idiot for being an idiot, and a low-class one to boot. No one else from CNN was barred; hence, they should have taken a hit on Acosta, and then leave it alone because if it becomes a shoving match, they are unevenly matched and the regime can do worse things that cost everyone much more in the long run.

They went to court and cheered that Acosta was allowed back in as if this would be the last of it.

Stupid, stupid move.

Now there will be rules in place.

Rules that had never been there before.

And now it dawned on the press that the rules will far worse than what they had before.

And they have CNN and Jim Acosta to thank.

Politico was very naive when their headline blared in part:

Trump discovers new weapon against media

Never considering that Trump's banning Acosta was a probe for him and he was actively seeking that weapon all along. Acosta’s selfish antics was a costly mistake and the press should know by now what happens when they resort to nose-tweaking Trump.

They never think ahead. They never plan ahead. They have some narrative running through their heads that they are good guys and if they slap back, everyone will back down and they will win.

Memo to journalists: at what point do you wake up to reality?

At what point do you change your ways?

You have had people like me research and point out rationally why you were actively being the agents of your own self-destruction.

You chose to ignore me and shut me out repeatedly.

And you chose to give free publicity to a knuckle-dragger like Acosta and cheerlead him even though you all know who he is.

You earned this wallop.

You earned the fallout because you never listen to people who speak the truth because they are brave enough and loving enough to see reality.

That is the reason you all have become a joke.

You were cruel to Assange, and he was an idealist who had a good idea. He is in over his head, and you are all responsible for it.

He knew what direction it should have gone. He has flaws, but he knew something and had a piece of the puzzle to your resurrection.

Now you whine.

But you were always lousy friends to the truth, and to the people who actually were trying to do something to save an industry.

Shame on you for that.

Shame on you for being as selfish as you are….

Toxic is the word of the year? You don't say!

Oxford Dictionary has decreed that the word of 2018 is toxic.

You don’t say!

The National Post has always been the Establishment’s best friend. They are sycophants to the Man, and do all that they can to scorn and deride anyone who dares question an authority figure.

Of course, that is propaganda, and the Post is nothing more than propaganda.

Christie Blatchford has made a living being a managandist, and she does her best to push around a university student who did not like a speech from a police officer and lodged a complaint against him to the Edmonton Police Service and demanded he be suspended.

In the column, Blatchford appeals to authority, and decrees that if other students didn’t mind, then the student was wrong, but then repeatedly makes fun of the young woman’s surname, as if that was a legitimate reason to put her down.

If you have to stoop to making fun of someone’s name, then you have no argument. That is bullying, and when you are picking on someone who has less clout than you and you are belittling them for complaining against an authority figure, you are indulging in cowardice.

People will complain and if something bothers them, they should. It doesn’t mean they will get results or be seen as correct by others, but that’s called feedback.

And if you have a problem, you should still speak up because there are times when you are right.

When you are young, you have to learn to complain and you should speak up and learn from trial and error. You will not be right every time. You will not get results every time, but you do not become discouraged just become some timid troll misuses a media outlet to try to break you into silence because they are slaves to the minion mindset.

And memo to Blatchford: a veteran police officer doesn’t a mommy hack to defend him, unless, of course, you think he is not competent enough to do so himself.

But 2018 has been a very toxic year.

In the US, voters didn’t get an actual platform from either the Democrats or Republicans, but cheered that they keep voting in the same patterns, thinking they have made progress. If voters weren’t drowning in toxic propaganda, they would have demanded both parties give them a reason to vote for them, and should have lodged complaints that they have two political parties that are allegedly different, but believe they are entitled to rule just because they are special.

Toxic.

And CNN and Jim Accosta are prematurely celebrating because a judge ruled being a spoiled brat is glorious and that immaturity and a lack of producing factual reports is no reason to revoke press credentials.

I wouldn’t spin the ruling as a victory for CNN. Trump has lost in court before, but consistently gets the last laugh, and his own way in a more unpredictable second round. Doug Ford lost in court when he slashed the number of seats on Toronto City Council, but he pulled out the notwithstanding clause, and the election went ahead with a leaner council.

And speaking of Ford, the Toronto Star has childish toxicity, decreeing in an editorial that, golly, life isn’t fair:

Ontarians did not sign up for deep cuts in services

So what? People don’t sign up for getting cancer, either. Reality doesn’t heed to what you will and will not “sign up” for, and Ontarians have been very stupid by allowing the previous regime to amass such a colossal debt that the next entity that owes more is an actual country.

But Ontario signed up for trouble because they thought they were getting something for nothing. Teachers threw fits because they wanted more than what the province actually had to give.

So yes, Toronto Star, Ontarians did sign up for it. They allowed themselves to be self-entitled and nannied for years, and then abandoned the party who enabled that to happen. Voters got greedy, and voted for the NDP, and the house of cards collapsed.

It is called consequences.

And voters in Ontario do have to take some responsibility and stop throwing temper tantrums in order to grow up and get the house in order.

A premier is not a concierge who is in charge of making you happy. The job is to guide and make complex and complicated decisions based on the bottom line and the resources at hand. Sometimes inequality is the most pressing matter and that is what needs top priority. Sometimes youth cannot find work because they have been inadequately prepared by those teachers who want even more for doing less, and that needs to be straightened out.

And sometimes the place is broke and needs to work on paying down their debt.

But a toxic editorial wants to incite people so that there is an identifiable people can blame for the woes of their own making.

An honest one looks at the books and reports on the numbers and sources of income.

But the toxicity has made people complacent: they have no facts to guide them.

Just toxic propaganda.

Facts are the cure for toxicity, but they are in scarce supply these days, and the stupidity and barbarism runs rampant unchecked…

CNN throws temper tantrum, yet never tries this actual journalism thing.

CNN throws yet another arrogant shit fit.

You act like self-entitled divas and boors, and that is not journalism.

This is a grandstanding publicity stunt to make themselves part of a story, and when that happens, the motives is not about doing a job, but strategically positioning yourself to get maximum optics to cultivate a persona.

And they are nothing but swine.

Acosta has no purpose being there in the first place. He doesn’t break stories. He doesn’t give facts. He shoves his ugly mug in front of a camera as he babbles and thinks slamming Trump is some sort of equivalent of being a journalist.

And it is bullshit…

The Clement Affair: As always, no one bothers to ask the men what they were wearing when they found themselves trouble.

Tony Clement was a known troublemaker for many years, but journalists in Canada never let those yokel middle class commoners know anything about it.

But now it all comes out.

But as late as 2016, the Huntsville Forester has a profile on him called “The Real Tony Clement”:

Our MP, Tony Clement, announced his bid for leader of the federal Conservative Party on Tuesday night. This positions him to possibly be our prime minister in the event Trudeaumania weakens by the next election.

Clement has always worked hard for this riding and has been uniquely available and considerate of its people. He has always had our backs. An "unapologetic Conservative," he has been generous of his time and his influence when it comes to both the people of privilege and those who struggle to get by; he has been a strong supporter of the non-profit organizations that serve those in need.

Doubtless having our representative in the big chair would benefit our riding. Certainly, it has the journalists at this newspaper intrigued; covering the top office from a Muskoka perspective would be one sweet beat.

The question is - would it be good for Canada? Clement's track record is with two hyper-conservative governments that turned even dyed-in-the-wool Conservatives into Liberal voters. There are strong arguments against the value systems demonstrated by both Ontario's Mike Harris and former prime minister Stephen Harper.

Clement did well with both governments, toeing the party line and building a powerful career. But have we met the real Tony Clement? He is loyal to his leaders and we suspect there are times when he didn't necessarily agree with the line he was toeing. He's selling an "optimistic, modern conservatism" and we're curious to see what that looks like on paper. He said Canadians want government to be an empowering force for good - and he's right. He said he is the leader to bring a better quality of life from health to the environment. Those are two tricky pledges given the records of Harris and Harper on both topics. Clement is running on the values of hard work and personal responsibility, enterprise and freedom, family and community, and equal opportunity for all. He calls these the highest aspirations of Canadians. In his time here in Muskoka, he has personally demonstrated those values. Clement has got our attention and we are eager to learn more about Tony Clement the leader.

Nothing about what is happening now.

Not even in non-journalistic media.

Remember how Rick Mercer had fun with him?

Yeah, nothing based on what has been revealed now.

It is nothing like the UK’s Profumo affair, however. No dreamy babes in this equation.

lewis-morley-1963-christine-keller-insta-final.jpg

But a whole lot sleepwalking.

The local press in Clement’s riding made no hint of it. No national reporter did, either.

Big media, small media.

Brain dead media.

That is the reason we had a news media: to ensure someone was watching and said something before it got this far.

But, ha ha, not a chance.

No one bothers with men in power.

Not to question their truisms, behaviour, untested nutjob theories, nothing.

No one to ask them what they were wearing when they got into trouble.

We have a “boys will be boys” mindset, but no female equivalent.

Where women get their money is actually counted against them in many financial dealings as if it spoke about their character without a shard of empirical evidence, but not for men, for instance. No one questions where men got their wealth.

They do not question if the man is up to the job or not.

Women get scrutinized from every angle.

Now we find out that there were all sorts of red flags with Clement, never mentioned before until the trouble got too big to hide.

Think of the financial resources it took to clean up his messes over the years.

And he had the cover of doting press coverage all along.

Now the narrative is to blame government officials.

Not so fast.

Journalists loiter those halls of power every day. They see things. They hear things.

They witness things.

For all the babbling and spewing how journalism is needed, they never actually do their jobs.

CNN is putting out feelers about suing because the White House had enough of pissant Jim Acosta, and his buffoonery became a cringeworthy spectacle.

If he was a competent newsman, he wouldn’t be sitting his ass on that chair.

He would be finding out facts, not grandstanding, and certainly not voguing and morally masturbating at the same time.

Ick.

Bad governments come from a sleepwalking press, and a public that cowers in the corner as they don’t really want to know the truth…

"What a stupid question": The game of Go radically shifts as journalism is in a deep level of Hell.

CNN must stand for Clown News Network. First, bottom feeding gadlfy Jim Acosta got his White House pass taken away as others in the profession reluctantly support someone whose never done anything substantial in his career, and then Abby Phillip got call out by the president for asking a stupid question.

How many television shows and movies have gloriously had their heroes say the same thing to a scrum?

Like The Mentalist.

Trump doesn’t fantasize about telling the Establishment to go fuck themselves.

He just tells them to go fuck themselves.

And the middle class are truly jealous of that. He is living a fantasy life they only wish they could.

But it couldn’t happen to a more deserving profession.

Journalists are used to being the ones to make fun and ridicule people who are different or brave.

I have been in contact with a few of those people, and their observations are fascinating.

Now that the profession collapsed, you have a president who can target and belittle them the way they did with all sorts of people.

They have destroyed lives. There is no question of it.

And now the shoe is on the other foot.

No journalist is safe from feeling the consequences of their own barbaric power trips being thrust upon them.

And they will be put in the same position as they gleefully placed others without a twinge to their conscience.

But there is a new game of Go, and the President has radically upped the ante.

When the wrongfully convicted were demonized by journalists, those people could not fight back because the stress of their imploding world distracted them too much.

And now the game is on the next level where there is no place to run or hide.

Reporters have been facing declining readers and viewers as they lose their job in droves.

And now they get openly disrespected as liars and morons for all the world to see.

Internal strife and external strife.

The way Hillary Clinton lost her election.

And she is still spewing about running again.

As if the Democratic Party was her own personal fiefdom.

But the game has taken a sharp and unpredictable turn for the middle class who need memos to be told which way is up, how to feel, and what to think.

They are not visionaries are mavericks who can afford to tell of their bosses or the Man.

But when The Man can tell the world to fuck itself and have the time of his life doing it, you know the ride will be wild as the stones begin to branch out beyond the board to turn over the rules to make a brand new game.

And one where journalists have no clue what to do because they were too busy pretending rather than observing.

But Chaser will be there and will be ready to spin and turn over those grains to break them wide open…

In an Age of Propaganda, even the watchmen play in the gutter.

CNN’s days of real journalism ended about twenty years ago. The Boys of Baghdad were just about it.

That network replaced news with trash. They went for gossip and super-stories that had a soap opera vibe.

Larry King was right that CNN stopped doing news, but they stopped doing it long ago.

What has happened since Trump is that CNN stopped pretending to be news.

CNN are your vulgar poor relations that make you cringe when they come for a social gathering: you endure their drama and egos as they let the world know they play in the gutter, but most people suck it up and put up with that crap because they feel obligated.

But Trump is president and he is one of those people who tells you to your face that you’re full of shit.

And he threw that obnoxious and annoying relative out of his White House, and now CNN, like the trailer park trash it has become, is howling, shocked that Trump is having the time of his life telling the world that CNN is too vulgar to be around him.

It is the comedy of a Sucker Circus, and it is being made over into a deliberate farce to lure the suckers deeper into the indignant games. Jake Tapper throws a hissy, comparing Trump to a gangster, which is rich, considering all the press has done is gang up together on the president because they couldn’t force people to vote for Bill Clinton’s little woman.

Jim Acosta thinks Trump is trying to shut CNN down — why would he when they give him free publicity to be outrageous?

7.4 billion humans on planet Earth, and the asshole press is only able to focus on one person.

ONE.

Monomania is a mental illness.

And a sign of a sick press.

And why bother with social media and all when millions or billions of people have just one focus?

There is no point.

But that is what happens when you are living in an Age of Propaganda.

You get sucked into a vortex that bombards you with a single idea with no outside fresh air to keep you awake.

One idea. One narrative. One focus.

And you get lost when you just think about The One.

You lose your sense of values and your sense of your place in the world, let alone your sense of self.

This is a fight between a Go Master and a group of egotistical knuckle-draggers who think they can behave poorly and suffer no consequences.

Because once upon a time, when journalism was a thing, reporters could destroy lives and get away with it.

And the world changed as it got away from their gangster grip, and they never saw it coming.

Now the brutes in suits are throwing diva fits, and it is just another low-class act in the sucker circus.

There are many horrendous things that have been ignored because of this theatre, and you can wonder how many of those secrets games are eroding your quality of life and you are not seeing it because there are no watchmen on alert because they got tricked into going in the gutter where they now make their miserable home…

Unreasonable facsimile of journalist gets called out and loses his credentials.

CNN’s Jin Acosta isn’t some heavy-setting reporter who finds stuff. He is, at best, a loud mouth schnook.

The president calls him a “rude, terrible person”, and he is right. Just because Acosta follows the crowd like a well-trained lapdog, doesn’t make him anything but a thug and a bully. Fuck him.

And then Acosta got his little White House press credentials revoked. Boo fucking hoo.

If journalists thought they won this round, they are, as usual, delusional. The Democrats failed to get the Senate, the branch of government that actually counts, and that is saying something considering the US electorate usually do it regardless of who is in the White House or from what party they are.

In fact, that the disorganized Republicans picked up seats goes to show that despite the never-ending propaganda from both the press and the nouveau riche Left-wing Big Tech meddlers, people are not paying attention to them.

The Left didn’t get a victory, and I suspect the supposed win is not going to bode well for them for one big reason: people will start looking at which rich white Left robber barons contributed to which politicians, and see they are the same cabal who are funding both journalism outlets and the so-called watchdog operates. It’s all on public record, and it will be easy for their rivals to identify them as they nullify their effects.

That alleged journalists such as Acosta never bother telling the public those kinds of important stories of people who exploited their workers, secretly took data for people, and then try to influence both the elections and press coverage even though they weren’t elected, making them non-journalists, but enablers.

If I were the president, press credentials would be revoked and then journalists would have to pass skill-and knowledge tests to get back in — and you know not a single one of them would pass…

Memo to Jeffry Zucker: Do not blame Trump for calling your garbage garbage. The bloodshed CNN has caused over the years is revolting.

When there was a war in the former Yugoslavia, I used to cringe every time CNN had one of its propaganda reports. They never let people know about those white tents set up to give press releases to reporters who would then pretend they got it in the field.

They were not the only ones and that was not the only war they fanned the flames. Remember those nonexistent Weapons of Mass Destruction they touted as if they had a clue?

Or Nayirah?

How many people died because journalists reported lies as facts?

I was a teenager when I discovered just how much puffing and bluffing journalists did.

How many times does a reporter wear a protective vest while on-camera, even as all the crew can be seen without it.

Of course, it isn’t just CNN. CBC in Canada had one of their reporters on camera shushing the crew to keep quiet as they were in Syria…while their big, honking lights were shining in the darkness.

Yeah, those blind snipers with super-hearing can be a real bitch to avoid.

So when CNN’s Jeff Zucker rage pukes as he morally masturbates with this garbage is a knee-slapper:

“There is a total and complete lack of understanding at the White House about the seriousness of their continued attacks on the media. The President, and especially the White House Press Secretary, should understand their words matter. Thus far, they have shown no comprehension of that.” Jeff Zucker, President CNN Worldwide.

Fuck you, Mr. Zucker. How many lies did journalists spew the cost people their lives, their peace, their life savings, and their careers?

Too many to count, but I wrote the book and then another on the amount of deception and dishonesty your ilk have caused.

This is CNN.

Fake news.

This isn’t Trumps fault.

It is yours.

In the name of bragging rights, you hunt down your prey and tear them to shreds, with no regards of the consequences.

You ignored predators like Harvey Weinstein, for instance. You drooled and slobbered over horrible people and presented grifters as Great Men and Titans of Industry.

If people are angry at journalists, they have every right.

So shut up, and stop exploiting events as a misdirection to try to keep skeptical eyes form seeing what you really are.

Because you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.

Especially not those of us who have watched you behind those curtains and know just how low you’ll sink in the name of being on top of some non-existent pecking order…

Google rigs its search results? You don't say, New York Post!

Donald Trump has spoken the obvious about Google, and CNN, being the powerless and brainless immature teen, takes a contrarian viewpoint just because.

The New York Post frets about Google's power, and they are right to do so.

It is not a conspiracy theory. Google, by its very nature, has to rig results. Google can deny it, but then again, they have been fined by the EU for rigging.

Google and Facebook rake in billions, but they expect people to give ratings and reviews on places and products for free. So, right off the bat, you have a structure of exploitation: grabbing content for free, and then mining big data to sell and advertisers who pay these social media companies, not those providing content.

And if you have a robber baron mindset, then it extends in everything you do.

A few years ago, without my permission, Google Books had chunks of my first book online for free, and yet had advertising on the side of the page -- so they were making money on my print product.

I wrote to them to complain, but they cheerily refused my request, telling me to take it up with my publisher, which I did, and they thought it was a great idea, because, according to the publisher's logic, it was like browsing at a bookstore, which I said was a wrong analogy because it was more like having a photocopier right beside the shelves with free paper.

I still, as an author, have problems with Google. When you google my name, what comes up in the search results is a crapshoot, which it should never have been. Most of my articles that should show up, do not. 

And then there is the sidebar that they can never get right. I have written to correct it several times. It never gets changed, or gets changed back to the incorrect version.

I clicked on the small print that says, "Do you manage the online presence for Alexandra Kitty?" to claim it, but the process is obscene, asking for way too personal information that includes providing a photograph of me holding up my driver's license.

Excuse me? Why would I give you a photograph of that? You are using my image and my works, and you have control over what is in my biography -- one that, if Google's system wasn't rigged, would have it right.

But it doesn't have it right. It never has. Why isn't this website at the top of the search results? Why does my Twitter feed outrank alexandrakitty.com?

So Google's denials are insincere. I have played around with it, and I have noticed patterns of rigs. It is not just political with suppression of other ideologies to just a single one (and hello! there are far more than two). It is also rigged to maintain an individual's confirmation bias.

You get different results on the same search words depending on your previous searches. I have a couple of computers and use different Google accounts. On one, I searched scientific and atheist information. On the other, I looked up tarot, astrology, and other hoodoo.

Then I used neutral searches that were unrelated on both for each primed account.

The results were very different. It restricts alternative thoughts as it reinforces your opinions.

So Google denying that it rigs search results is rubbish.

Search engines can easily socially engineer people's thinking patterns, and it forms unnatural habits.

Yes, we need to study Google empirically to see how their various rigs alter thinking and behaviour.

And it should be a top priority...

Follow the PR: When journalists all walk lockstep, there is a silent general giving the marching orders.

The Intercept has an interesting piece about how CNN's "blockbuster" story turned out to be a dud.

But in all the talk about the series of similar strategic misinformation articles and all of the vitriol, no one is asking a more basic question:

What PR firms and experts are coordinating the coverage, and who is footing the bill?

It was the same game during the civil war in the former Yugoslavia: when all reporters spew alike, they are all relying on the same super-source, and always a PR firm. Someone pays for the coordinated guerilla attacks.

When a person, company, group, or even nation are getting besieged, there is almost always someone funding the bad coverage.

If someone wants to place the lens on where it ought to be -- that's where you begin to look...

100+ newspapers openly become propaganda outlets marching lockstep like a zombie attack.

Bullies on the playground. That is what journalism does.

They are too cowardly to admit why their industry died; so they blame one man.

And they are deciding to all gang up and write garbage propaganda to prove why they do not know what news is anymore.

They made a mess of things. Their failures are on them

They do not know what news is anymore. They either drool over celebrities, attack Trump, or inflate customer service complaints into some sort of social breakdown.

That is the reason journalism is no longer relevant.

And when those coordinated attacks bring them nothing, then what?

Will they then admit they no longer are rational human beings, but dead zombies outraged at nothing in particular?

That is the reason we need F.R.E.E.D.

We need it to replace the propaganda and the garbage being paraded as news.

Journalists remembered how their bullying destroyed the Serbs, and now they want to relive those bloody glory days.

Yes, they are pathetic.

Yes, they are losers.

No, that is not opinion. Just look at their fortunes and face reality.

They lost the game.

They lost the battle.

They lost the war.

Memo to the press: Yes, we know you hate Trump because he defeated you all with a single elegant victory. That is not news.

Get over it before.

And move on...

It is 2018. We don't need press conferences or briefings anymore.

I never understood press conferences. They have always been a canned event. You have someone read from a script that serves as a spoon to directly feed the press. It is just for soundbites. Once crisis management and public relations firms became a well-oiled machine, journalists should have abandoned the practice and go out looking for raw, unprocessed information that could just as easily be disseminated in other ways.

After all, people holding press conferences and briefings never answer the questions. The recent mass killing spree in Toronto was marked by police and hospitals having press conferences where they praised their own work, fancying doing what they are paid to do as heroic, and then not actually answer the questions of the names of the victims that they released when they were good and ready via press release.

But it is a staple in journalistic grandstanding and melodrama, where a scrum of uncivilized shouters mug and try to out-yell each other.

They are as convoluted as those scrums chasing a newsmaker down the street as the person, doing what is an evolutionary instinct when ambushed and hunted by jackals: run away as fast as their legs can carry them.

But it sure does look like reporters are doing their jobs and keeping ambushed people in check.

It is a hack. You can sounding commanding and oh, so serious without actually just toiling for real stuff that people who hold press conferences do not want people to see.

So this mass temper tantrum at the White House Briefing. Jim Acosta, always an unreasonable facsimile of a journalist getting into some childish and egotistic slap fight with White House press secretary Sarah Sanders.

Journalists are an enemy to common sense, and this is what they have been reduced to in 2018: self-indulgent nihilism.

Right now, there are a million scandals flying under the radar because you have knuckleheads trying to make themselves seem important at a fake event.

We don't need this kind of trash. Not in 2018 in a world where canned events have no place in a modern landscape...

How journalism's binary thinking turned them into partisan mouthpieces

Once upon a time, nuances meant something. When you have time to reflect, you get to see issues as they are in reality.

But journalism had an odd habit of being binary. Good, bad. They either fawn advertorial-style, or take a hatchet and use the pen as an axe.

Doting or rage. Eros or Thanatos.

That's not information. No wonder job losses in the profession are steep.

The New York Times has a rambling kissy advertorial-esque article on Gwyneth Paltrow's Goop, which is a classical example of bad reporting. It is of the same ilk as the countless articles they have done in the past of various Titans of Industry...who later turned out to be frauds. 

But the logic of the article defies maturity. You have critics calling it snake oil...but hey, she still makes money.

If people pointing out how wellness products are bunk for decades didn't stymie demand for it until now, it is safe to say they won't turn on Paltrow for it, either.

She comes from wealth and pedigree, and offering solutions to the little people is going to net her profits. Jane Fonda created the niche; there is a precedence and far less risk. She has an Oscar. She married a popular musician. She gets to wear designer clothes on the red carpet for free. People fantasize about it, and for a few hundred dollars, they get to have a piece of it.

It is a niche, nothing more. People who indulge in fantasies like that also believe "Real Housewives" and Kardashians aren't staged, either. It is a fantasy factory, and it delivers that fantasy, and any mention of reality is resented.

There is nothing much more to say about it, but the Times' article is short on facts, but heavy on filler and colour. There is no there there. There are no hard questions. There is no context. There is spin. There is the same deference in this piece as there was in the Times' infamous 1976 article introducing America to that winner Donald Trump, except back then, people knew when to shut up. It is typical Limousine Liberal logic.

If they are not drooling, they are trying to utterly annihilate others. Paltrow should be concerned because the Donald Trump was once the recipient of that dotage, too...but now we have CNN and other childish outlets with a piece that daddy Bob Woodward is writing about Trump...all hinting that the end is nigh.

Having to crawl to someone who did the last hard-hitting long arc piece in US journalism is beyond pathetic. It is an admission of defeat. It's like having an fifty-year-old having to call the nursing home so grandpa can get them out of a jam because daddy is as incompetent as junior.

What we have are two extremes: love or hate.

What we no longer have are logic supported by facts.

The worst of it is that the same subjects of media attention face both kinds attention: the adoration and deification, and then the loathing and demonization. Hero or villain, and nothing in-between.

Reality rarely reflects the binary, and what we need are maps in reality -- not fantasy...