Memo to Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism: I read your little "report", and you knuckle-draggers still don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

The more people in journalism education spew, the more ignorant they reveal themselves to be.

And why the old guard needs to clear out.

They are perpetual bunglers.

Even if they draw a pay check from Oxford University (I took a short course on Art Nouveau from the uni last year because I am a silversmith, and it was a fabulously informative course, but art history has nothing to do with journalism).

But boy, do they not know the first thing about journalism or journalism education.

The wankers put out this farce of a bullshit report that is atrocious and ignorant on every level:

Time to step away from the ‘bright, shiny things’? Towards a sustainable model of journalism innovation in an era of perpetual change

It is ignorant garbage cobbled together by motherfucking poseurs who really aren’t very bright.

So what does the propaganda say?

Nothing real.

You don’t have to go very far to see it is an attempt for a bunch of leeches to try to keep their racket going.

They puke about “storytelling” as if that should be a part of journalism.

Assholes, if you want to do the storytelling, go write fiction.

People need facts to know about reality, not about the bodice-ripper narratives that you fart out that stink.

The report is a feint, trying pretend they are on to something, when they are prolonging the agony of pulling a big, shiny salary as the profession imploded.

You assholes — every single one — should be fired for incompetence. The fact that journalism collapsed under your watch is all that anyone needs to know.

Memo to the University of Oxford: kick those wankers out. Do not promote bullshit and draw attention to the fact that you have an embarrassingly shitty faculty run by goobers who do not know what the fucking hell they are doing.

Because they spinning yet another bullshit story as they drag you down with them…

The Boomerang and the Mirror.

They say what goes around comes around.

We even have a tool that mimics life.

The boomerang.

When Western journalists chose to demonize Serbs, they had no idea they were making a deal with the devil.

And what happened to the Serbs would one day also happen to them.

They job loss casualties in the profession continue as the Tampa Bay Times is reducing staff.

They are not the only ones.

La Presse is also letting go staff so that they can become beggars and slaves to a wealthy benefactor.

The cowardly propagandist swine at Nieman Lab are trying to spin their bullshit by pretending being slave propagandist to a robber baron is gaining momentum and is a glorious thing:

Newsonomics: Newspapers are shells of their former selves. So who’s going to build what comes next in local?

There seems to be some momentum among those with deep pockets to address the local news crisis. But if that money appears, where should it be directed?

Fuck you, sellouts. The rich will abandon you when they realize their money won’t serve their interests because no one is fucking looking in your direction.

And Donald Trump is having the time of his exciting life demonizing journalists and messing with their little minds by calling them fake news.

Journalists are howling like the rabid pigs that they always were: crying fowl as they cluck and screech about being maligned by a president.

The same shit they pulled on Serbs.

Yes, the boomerang came around and shattered their mirror.

They fucked up the former Yugoslavia with their games, and so it should be no surprise that Kosovo is a hub of fake news.

The fake news journalists spewed was revolting, but when you plant dishonest seeds, the fruits of your labours will poison you and the ground around you.

And for the profession, that ground eroded.

What goes around comes around.

And yet the worst — and best is yet to come…

Journalism lived in the present, and never evolved. F.R.E.E.D. pays attention to all the chords of time.


This is an ignorant tweet.


No, it’s not where the US is "at.”

It is in the 1990s when Democratic President Bill Clinton was accused of having truckloads of people whacked on his climb to the White House as if he were Tony Soprano only with a saxophone and a Southern accent, according to Republicans with their various vast and diabolical conspiracy theories and the Democrats correctly thought that the GOP were hysterical loons who were just reaching.

We just flipped the roles now where it is the Democrats who are the conspiracy-spewing hysterical loons saying the same childish thing about Trump that the Republicans said about the Clintons.

It is just sour grapes.

The middle class live in the now. The wealthy live in the future. The poor are stuck in the past.

And as journalism always pandered to the middle class, they stuck themselves in the now.

But never actually saw that obvious truth.

Prey live in the now. Predators think steps ahead. Prey and predators who were taken down are stuck in the past.

But when a predatory profession such as journalism emulates prey like the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing, and begins to assimilate to whom they are pandering, they lose their advantage and get hunted down.

And in this case, the wilier predator was Big Tech.

They bamboozled credulous journalists who live in the now that the future was strictly “video.” They took this decree to be Divine Truth and changed what they did to be hip, with bad results, and Nieman Labs honestly asking stupid questions:

Did Facebook’s faulty data push news publishers to make terrible decisions on video?

Publishers’ “pivot to video” was driven largely by a belief that if Facebook was seeing users, in massive numbers, shift to video from text, the trend must be real.

And then recalling the fateful moment when the profession got played:

“It will probably be all video.”

In June 2016, Nicola Mendelsohn, Facebook’s VP for Europe, the Middle East and Africa, spent several minutes of a panel at a Fortune conferencetalking about how Facebook was witnessing video overtake text.

“We’re seeing a year-on-year decline on text,” Mendelsohn answered. “We’re seeing a massive increase, as I’ve said, on both pictures and video. So I think, yeah, if I was having a bet, I would say: Video, video, video.”

“Wow,” the moderator, Pattie Sellers, responded.

“The best way to tell stories, in this world where so much information is coming at us, actually is video,” Mendelsohn continued. “It commands so much more information in a much quicker period. So actually, the trend helps us to digest more of the information, in a quicker way.”

I also recounted this very episode in A Dangerous Woman Story Studio essay entitled Word in 2016:


I called it out as bullshit then, and in other places as well.

But journalists didn’t call it out as anything but the gospel, and dutifully followed someone else’s decrees, even though Facebook is hardly an honest corporation.

And still, the Associated Press gives them yet another journalistic free pass with this piece of PR baloney:

Facebook’s election ‘war room’ takes aim at fake information

As if they were qualified or credible. They throw money and algorithms at the problem, never considering their shoddy methods will do nothing but provide some ineffectual window-dressing to make their PR problems go away and have proven to be as credible as the now defunct journalism profession.

My favourite part of this photo op is the picture with the photocopy sign of “War room” taped on the wall. Gee, that makes it real if you post the sign on the door.

And you buy what they are selling yet again? Are you teachable?

When you live in the now, you have no purpose or meaning in your individual or collective existence.


Here is another ignorant meme, this time on Facebook:


Yes, there are plenty of gay animals. One of my cats, Davy Jones, is one of them. He has never had any attraction to female cats, but the male who doesn’t reciprocate. They are all fixed, but it doesn’t change the fact that many animals in nature are gay, or that Davy Jones is the kindest, most responsible, loving, and well-behaved cat I’ve ever known.


But the second part that animals do not practice religion is bullshit.

It is a real phenomena, and one I studied as a psych student. We do not know what goes on in the hearts and minds of animals; so do not speak on their behalf.

But this meme is classic middle class logic: there is just black and white and we assume that we have to have 100% occurrences for it to be real and definitive. This is primitive and patriarchal binary rote thinking or The One Rule That Explains Everything.

No intelligent person would say no animals have religion. That would be to ignore a wealth of data that says otherwise.

An intelligent person would say, it is more than possible, but probable, and look for confirming and refuting proof.

But in order to do that, you cannot just live in the now.

You have to be living in the past, present, and future simultaneously.

In other words, you have to be in tune with reality.

So no, religion is not only not “against nature”, it is a biological drive.

It is innate and natural.

Even atheists treat their atheism as a religion without a god with their incessant need to preach and hold on to their unscientific beliefs as they create pecking orders and using othering to separate themselves from those who do believe.

They have not found the loophole that places them higher on any real intellectual pecking order. They are just disguising their primitive thinking.

Because religion occurs in every single nation and civilization. Neanderthals practiced it. Animals practice it.

So what we have is a lie and a piece of propaganda spewed by atheists who want to rig public opinion to force everyone to think just like them, and they will lie and ignore facts to do it.

Just like a religious fanatic. No difference in structure or motive to control others, but just choosing different content of thought.

So atheists spew untested and unscientific garbage just like those who use the bible to try to control people.

People hedge their bets going for whatever seems posh or safe to believe and follow it with no regards to past history or the consequences of their actions.

They way people who live in the now operate.

The way so-called “middle class avengers” are throwing temper tantrums in public, beating up on people who have different beliefs than they do — but try to spin a narrative that their violence and aggression is moral.

No, it isn’t. You’re just an air-headed thug who is morally masturbating in public using misdirection to hide your own wickedness, except you are doing wicked things.

Just like those who burned women at the stake at Salem and said they were doing a public service.

But when you live in the now, whatever garbage someone else pops in your empty head seems great and glorious.

These are not anarchists: these are spoiled and sheltered followers who were trained by social media to throw tantrums and do nothing but complain when things do not conform 100% to their sheltered and unscientific beliefs.

People are using ideology to use virtue-signalling as a Trojan Horse in order to gain control of other people.

But when you want 100% compliance, not only do others spit in your face and do whatever they want to do, but reality and truth do the same thing.

The middle class can never grasp it because the past and future are foreign concepts to them. Whatever they see on television or online is what they are thinking.

It reminds me of one of Nora Dunn’s classic skits when she was on Saturday Night Live (which I have mentioned before, but here it is again):

Well, you caught me doing my favorite thing -- reading a good book! You know, I like to think of my mind as a big, empty bucket, just waiting to be filled with pictures and words and...whatever. Surprise me! That's why Vogue is my favorite book...and you know, I have my own library -- volumes and volumes of Vogue. You know, I can just refer to them. What was I thinking last October? Well, I can look, and it's right her, between September and November!

Except there is no library of previous thoughts.

But not only does the middle class not think about tomorrow, let alone yesterday, journalists are the same, as this ridiculous and arrogant Think Progress drivel spews:

As ‘news deserts’ widen across America, communities and civic engagement fray

A new study has researchers worried about the future of our democracy.

Not at all, and a bad study with no context proves nothing.

The myth of a “news desert” is just that — a myth. It is no different than the myth that animals cannot be gay, that animals cannot be religious, that religion is unnatural, or that the president you did not vote for is a real-life Vito Corleone.

Get a grip, children.

Social media has replaced journalism for now. It is the place holder, and what is happening is the same thing that happened during the Pre-Penny Press Era, when everything was partisan and there were many newspapers shilling and manipulating people trying to gain dominance, destroy the competition, and gain patronage appointments from those in power.

This article is just another way of trying to scare people into going back into their cages where it is journalists alone who tell them what to think and how to think it.

The 1980s had more honesty, not just from Nora Dunn, but from Diane Sawyer whose Letterman film short from 1986 is also worth repeating.

That was always journalism’s default goal: to do or say whatever they want, and the crowd they called their own all happily marched behind them, cheering them on.

Now that they lost their grip of tomorrow as they forgot their past, other like-minded people are trying to cut in on their bit.

That is why future generations will call this era the Dark Ages where sophistry and temper tantrums were coming from everyone, including those with doctorates.

Because they all chose willingly — and willfully — to live in the now.

That is the reason the middle class are jittery by nature: because they are not visionaries. They follow whatever an Establishment tells them to do, even when they try to “do their own thing.”

Instead of Vogue, they scour the Troll Scroll or Liebook for clues.

Because the majority of people in the Western world identify as middle class, they are the ones trying to break out to be the next intellectual dictator and messiah, giving the impression that things are unravelling, when the opposite is happening.

If they are all behaving alike, there may be content incongruity, but not structural incongruity.

Meaning they are all walking lockstep.

And sooner or later, that lockstepping will trip up their plans.

Big Tech will not be able to do anything about it. Journalism won’t, either.

But when you have an alternative to journalism that can do something none of the other structures can do, that’s when things begin to change.

And that something else is not to merely live in the now with no respect for yesterday or tomorrow…

Twitter is a Troll Scroll that hates journalists? You don't say, mainstream news media!

If it weren't for Matt Drudge, no one would bother with looking at articles about journalism. He is one of the few that actually remembers when they were still a thing, and throws a pity links.

The level of obliviousness in those articles is truly remarkable to the point that it should be a law that the entire profession be forced to take selfies with dunce caps.

The one from Neiman Lab is one for the books:

The universe of people trying to deceive journalists keeps expanding, and newsrooms aren’t ready

No, sillies: it has always been the same. You just kept falling for it like a bunch of sheltered rubes. I did write the book about it way back in 2005.


AI is not the big threat the article is proclaiming it to be.

If journalists were actually doing their jobs and not cribbing from processed and canned sources, such as PR, this would not exactly be a problem.

If you are in the middle of action among your fellow human beings, you are seeing reality up close.

This article is mere attempt at puffing: giving a likely story about how hard journalists are trying to verify information, which is patent malarky because the verification methods they are trying to shill here don't actually work, which is what the article is actually saying.

If you did not bother to verify in the flesh sources, you aren't going to do any better with AI-generated images.

This is a mere Computers Are Scary propaganda piece to make it seem as if what is left of newsrooms are feverishly working to get facts to news consumers the way they pretended they were getting information on the front lines of wars when they were getting it from PR firms.

It is the same old con job, just a different angle.

But journalists were never ones to keep up with the times they cover.

This article from the Hill is another example of the profession's thickness:

Media figures lament toxic Twitter

Twitter toxic? You don't say!

It's a Troll Scroll. Nothing else. It behaves the same way journalists did when they had completely control of the communications channels because there are no checks or balances to keep people civilized or accountable.

Nor are people forced to confront their own biases, which are nothing more than rigs used so people do not have to confront their own nincompoopity.

But those sentiments were always there. It's just before people would say it under their breath, and now they can say it in public and think it means something, especially if someone backs down or retreats.

I remember having to work in a newsroom writing stories for an anchor to read. Some of the stories were silly and not up to me. I got assigned it, like this one.


Don't blame me. Mind you, I wrote serious stories, too.

And also those trendy benign ones that didn't matter.

Or so you'd think.

I did this one, and it was right off the wire.


In no way did the piece say OJ Simpson was guilty or innocent. You don't say anything in the midst of a court case. It is the reason you always hear "allegedly" until the person is convicted or found not guilty, and then you move on.

Except one angry person called the newsroom absolutely insistent that the anchor who read that said that Simpson was guilty.

No. Not at all. The wire story never implied it. I never implied it. The anchor read the script verbatim and never implied it.

As in, no hint of it.

But the irate caller heard things never said, and when the anchor offered to send a video of that actual newscast, the caller said that it would be altered.

No, that would have cost too much money, and when management counted the seconds their staff used their company-issued cell phones, they'd never go for that.

It was a misinterpretation of reality. Period.

Back then, that caller had no way of airing that mistaken perception to the public.

With Twitter, he could air any paranoid conspiracy theory with impunity, and become emboldened with like-minded followers who think they have strength in numbers. They don't have prove their misperceptions are true.

It is enough that they have a public forum.

The way journalism once was given free reign to believe their misperceptions were reality just because they put them out in a public forum.

True verification methods do not actually exist.

They never have for the profession, and the disjointed half-baked methods show they never will.

It's too late for that profession, anyway.

A mention here or there from Drudge doesn't mean a thing.

That Twitter hates journalism should not be surprising. Those on the Troll Scroll believe they have power and control, and aren't going to let go of their illusions.

Should someone snub their nose at the puritanical disapproval and gives the trolls something to talk about happily, the power begins to vanish.

Because that's what happened to journalism.

And Twitter's fate will be no different...

Whatever happened to Investigative Journalism? Facts were seen as boring and hard to find, that's what.

Spiked has a piece wondering whatever happened to Investigative Journalism. It cut corners, that's what.

Narrative, opinion, sensationalism, and sophistry seemed like short-term quick fixes and boosts that were cheap. Digging for hidden facts is hard, and viewed as unglamorous.

And facts are seen as dry and boring.

Which baffles me. Facts are exciting. They can tell a story far better than narrative.

Journalism got lazy and passive, assuming their opinions were tantamount to facts.

You have junk organizations such as Nieman Lab trying to ensure that journalism is never held accountable for their own sins:

People’s trust in media is terrible: bad. Attempts to fix that: good. Now, what the heck are they?

Facing the fallout from the presidential election, the rise of fake news, and the stark challenges of covering a presidency that aims to undermine press credibility, the U.S. journalism industry has been positively ballooning with trust-geared initiatives.

Thinking up make-work programs with deceptive names is not going to solve the problem. Journalism is broken, and no self-righteous-sounding organization that just begs for money is going to solve it. It is like trying to fight an inferno with a glass of water.

Not a single one of these organizations have genuine qualifications or merit to know what is good journalism or bad as we never had empirical and tested means to do so. These groups are trying to insert their own biased ideology and keep a broken status quo afloat.

You cannot have a ballooning of fake organizations telling you what is real news. It seems to be a mere get-rich-quick scheme.

And that's what happened to investigative journalism: it got buried underneath all that rot and hubris. Facts need no organization or title: they just need someone to find them, and analyze them, test them, and disseminate them.

But it is all about window-dressing an hiding rot with over-thinking and sophistry. If journalism just confronted their weaknesses and did what had to be done, there would be no need for yet another "Trust Me" organization shilling its quack services to keep the scam going...