RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events ABC News:Press is Liberal

So you're compensating for the fact that you can't prove Sharyl Attkisson a liar or "right-wing", by changing the subject and trying to slander Tucker Carlson (who we weren't even talking about), with a hit piece from left-leaning NPR?

Yeah, that makes sense.

You ignore that what you label as Attkisson's "conservative narrative" is he simply subjecting Obama (and now Biden) to the very same scrutiny that she gave to the George W. Bush administration. When she was embarassing the W. Bush administration, CBS loved her reporting. When she continued doing the exact same reporting about the Obama administration, suddeny they stated heavily editing and blunting and/or not airing her stories. I don't see that you've successfully shown any examples of Attkisson demonstrating a "conservative narrative". She has shown herself to be an impartial reporter who is critical of liberals OPENLY SAYING they are out to get Trump and Republicans and abandoning journalistic standards and sources, toward their OPENLY STATED goal of damaging the Republicans and hurting the Democrats.

It's similar to what Bernard Goldberg said in his 2001 book BIAS: Goldberg said that whether news bias is conservative or liberal, it hurts credibility. And he said this in a courageous editorial in the Wall Street Journal (reprinted in his book), that even as a liberal, he held liberals to the same standard. For which he was clearly unwelcome at CBS for the rest of his 30 years until he retired (he had previously been one of the anchors on 60 Minutes), so he was took a risk to push for what was right. Goldberg said that many reporters, including Dan Rather, were far-left and saw their own views as "middle of the road", which gave them an unconscious bias in their coverage. Anything to the slightest bit right of their far-left views they saw as "right wing". I suspect you suffer from the same affliction.

Goldberg said that while some biased coverage is conscious, a lot of it is unconscious. And Goldberg likewise cited many examples. Some of them hilarious. On an island in the Caribbean, they took news footage of the aftermath of a hurricane, where there was mass looting, and all the inhabitants were black. CBS executives were aghast when they saw the video.
"Oh we can't air your story, it's racist, all the people you showed looting are black."
The reporter, agitated, said: "But the entire population of the island is black! THE POLICE are black! I thought our job was to report the news! "
The story aired without video footage, just a graphic behind Dan Rather of the island's flag.

You brought up Tucker and why is it slander to bring up FOX’s legal defense of him? I can understand why you don’t like the truth but maybe you should want more honesty and integrity from your sources? And yes I see Attkisson is also critical of Biden. I don’t see anything on Trump though other than fluff about how he was surely going to win the election.

So Tucker Carlson makes a point related to our conversation that I cite, and your response is to go away from the point and go after him personally, with somthing you googled from leftist NPR?

You're trying to go after the man, not the ball, as Australia-Dave used to say here.


And Sharyl Attkisson said in the 50-minute video I posted, that she's left-of-center and voted for Biden. I'm really not getting at the basis of your logic, or based on that, what you're trying to prove. Other than just blanket-attacking anyone you believe to be presenting a conservative opinion.

FOX’s legal defense it uses for Tucker is embarrassing but it’s still true no matter the source. What does it say that you feel it’s somehow unfair to point out a particular conservative’s bias and flaws when you want to condemn anything non conservativ in the way you are doing? Not very principled or honest.

I’m just looking at her actual reporting WB from the last couple of years. I might be missing it but I don’t see where Attkisson treated the Trump WH anything close to Obama’s or now already Biden’s. She actually goes in an opposite direction and paints Trump in the best possible light. Did you see any reporting that challenged a conservative narrative from her that I missed?

Tucker Carlson is not a journalist, he is an opinion host. While he presents facts, his program is at its base commentary. he's not in the same category as, say, Sharyl Attkisson or Scott Pelli, or Brett Baier or Lester Holt.

What SPECIFICALLY is it that is such a bug up your ass that NPR alleges about Tucker Carlson and Fox's legal defense of him?
You vaguely express outrage without ever citing something specific you judge outrageous.

I frankly find aspects of Tucker Carlson distateful. While as G-man cites, Carson is actually more conservative than Bill O'Reilly he replaced, Carlson has a prissy smart-alecky elitist New England prep school demeanor that I find offputting, he tends to elevate his voice and get overly emotional and hysterical at times (you may or may not know that he's an heir to the Swanson frozen foods family fortune, so he was born into great wealth, just as Anderson Cooper was born into the Vanderbilt hotels family fortune).
Carlson also has this boyish way of elevating his voice that makes it sound like he's on the defensive, and he also giggles a lot at sometimes inappropriate moments in the conversation, or when he wants to shut people up or go to a commercial. He also has an ass-kissy way of hyperbolically praising his guests way too often ("Oh great point, GREAT point, Ohh that's so smart , so smart !", ad nauseum.) Generally the best part of Tucker Carlson's show is his opening commentary, although he often gets lost in the weeds of trying to show off his own cleverness, talking super fast and bouncing from point to point to show off how much he knows, and getting into snarkiness and parody to the point that I think for some the point might be lost. At points Carlson parodies Democrat/leftist arguments to the point that one could mistake his mocking parody of that POV to be him expressing that point of view himself, rather than making fun of it. I don't watch Carlson every day, I max out on him and sometimes don't watch him for weeks. And then conversely, I find some of his points well made enough that I post Youtube videos of it here.

But all that said, I still have no idea what the bug is up your ass regarding Tucker Carlson. You've failed to give any specifics.

I'm pretty much the same with Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Jesse Waters and Judge Jeanine Pirro. There are times when each makes points well, and other times I find them offputting and annoying.
And where the cockiness of Newsmax hosts mirrors that on FOX, I find them offputting as well (Greg Kelly and Stinchfield. And Chis Salcedo recently has had the best commentary on Newsmax).

And in the recent past, I find One America News to be the most consistently informative and to have the least editorial opinion injected into its stories. I especially like how OAN in its reports quote CNN, The New York Times and other liberal sources in news stories, to show that a year ago or in 2016 or 2012 these liberal media sources were reporting exactly what OAN is reporting, what the liberal networks now portray as baseless "conspiracy theory" by OAN, but that CNN and N Y Times were reporting the exact same sources and facts, till their puppetmasters told them to bury the facts and start reporting a false narrative.
Previously, the mainstream media reported the facts on Dominion machines' vulnerability to election fraud and remote access, or the origins of Covid-19 being deliberately given "enhanced function" virulence to humans in a Wuhan lab (contract research in Wuhan funded by Fauci and the N I H, no less, updated on weekly on Fox's "The Next Revolution" show, 9PM on Sundays), or Hydroxychloroquine being the choice of doctors to treat Covid-19 in over 30 nations worldwide, including by the director of France's CDC who has personally prescribed it to hundreds of patients, a medication FDA approved since 1955, prescribed to millions of Americans for decades, that many nations hand out free to citizens in their countries to protect them from Covid-19.


I just re-watched Sharyl Attkisson's video in my above post. At 41:00 into the video, she talks about the venom of those reporting on Trump, and says "It's a test of our journalistic integrity that we can even report on those we don't like, and still fairly and accurately report on what they're saying." That doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement for Trump on her part, just reporting on him in a fair and balanced way. She is never overtly praising Trump, she is just critical for 42 minutes of bad and opinionated/propagandized reporting, and cites specific examples of objectively provable innaccuracies reported.
And emphasizes that in her question and answer section as well, where as I said, she self-identifies (at 46:00 in the video, comparing herself to Glenn Greenwald) as a "left-leaning reporter". Greenwald, though to the left of my own views, is still a reporter of integrity, who created a news site called The Intercept, and he resigned from the website HE CO-CREATED when editors of that site censored his coverage of the Hunter Biden story.

I frankly don't know how you go from her consistent thesis of powerful "political and corporate interests" spending enormous sums of money to corrupt and shape the narrative, and how you distill out of that Sharyl Attkisson is evil and "right wing". For an entire hour she lays out clear examples of news stories where the mainstream media have a clear agenda to deliberately got the facts wrong, and all she is doing is exposing those innacuracies, and making a stand for "old school" news integrity and accurately reporting the news. Even if you're a left-leaning reporter who doesn't like the guy you're reporting on, you still have a journalistic standard to report accurately what he says and does, not cave in to pressure and conform your facts to a lying narrative. Or editorialize your unbridled hatred of that person into your "news" story.

You brought Tucker up. You cite him a lot. All the while you bitch and moan about bias. I still don’t see where she applied the same standard to Trump that she applied to Obama. It honestly wasn’t a super deep dive but from what I’ve seen I do understand why you like her. I’m sure she’s making some nice money on the conservative circuit too. I never called her evil. You making shit up like that is dishonest. Please let’s not go there and try to keep at least one toe in the real world.

I don't "bitch and moan", I cite facts about media bias. For 50 years, in every poll done, media reporters have self-identified consistently at an 80% ratio as either "liberal" or "very liberal".

In another article I cited by a college professor who wrote a book about liberal bias, Tim Groseclose cited that in the 2008 election, 93% of Washington DC based reporters voted for Obama. And cites that 93% is a higher ratio than even the two most dense populations of Democrats in the U.S. (in the Berkeley, California region, and the Boston, Massachusetts region). And these are the people shaping the news and available information to voters nationwide.
https://ricochet.com/88333/archives...lists-my-feud-with-eric-alterman-part-2/

Another example is how these same zealously Democrat reporters in 2020 suppressed the Hunter Biden laptop story, and the e-mails that showed Biden's huge payoffs to Hunter and "the big guy" Joe Biden from Russia, China and Ukraine, among other nations. The liberal media suppressed that information to help Biden get over the finish line, and polls show about 15% of Democrat voters would not have voted for Biden if they'd known before the election.
https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/2...nown-about-scandals-suppressed-by-media/

Regarding Sharyl Attkisson's reporting, for the billionth time, she said that (working for CBS News) she applied the same award-winning journalistic standard she had investigating the W. Bush administration, when she investigated the Obama administration, but that CBS news directors blunted or didn't air her stories when she was similarly critical of Obama.
And that she (like fellow award-winning journalist Glenn Greenwald) self-identifies as "liberal-leaning". Logically she continues to hold Trump to the same standard, as she did not play partisan politics in her previous decades of award-winning reporting. She spent the bulk of 4 decades at either CNN or CBS News, logically if she was a "right winger" she would have moved to Fox or another more conservative network a long time ago, if she were the partisan you want to allege she is. In a 56-minute video, she simply cities written mainstream media stories and how they were provably inaccurate, and how an NYU journalism professor and cited other well known news writers openly endorsed abandoning long-established journalistic ethics to engage in partisanly aiding the Biden campaign and maliciously attacking Trump to damage him in the election.

You implied that Attkisson was maliciously attacking liberal/Democrat journalists and political figures, while allegedly promoting Trump and a right-wing agenda. It was with a bit of sarcasm and shorthand that I described you saying she was "evil", but that certainly wasn't far off the mark of what you allege. "Evil " or "malicious intent" are pretty synonymous. She has called herself "left-leaning" and I don't see where she has exhibited support of Trump, or to be uncritical of Trump, as I detailed in her own words above. She was only objectively critical of the liberal media and quoting THEIR OWN STATEMENTS of unbridled hatred of Trump, and their clearly stated intent to weaponize their reporting to aid the Democrats, in the examples she clearly quoted.

I’m just judging her from her work over the Trump administration so you trying to say I called her evil is just flat out not true. From what I’ve seen, she reported on the Trump WH far differently than Obama’s. It’s not even a case of easing up on criticism for Trump. I don’t see virtually any. What I saw from examining some of Attkisson’s reporting as it concerns trump ranged from her letting us know she felt trump probably secured a second term and compared him to Superman when he got Covid after hosting several super spreader events. Again if I missed anything resembling her previous work or her current work now that it’s Biden in the WH please link it and I’ll check it out.

Asked and answered. See above. Your version doesn't even resemble the stated facts.

And I did link the alleged "Trump/Superman" article you mentioned. You were not even close to what she actually said. She gave a one-line joke about "super-immunity" or prolonged immunity to Covid, that Trump may or may not have.

Where did she ever apply the same standard to the Trump administration? It looks like a solid pass or even advocacy for him from anything I’ve seen from her. Throw me a link to a critical story on Trump by her and I’ll check it out. My guess there isn’t any. You wouldn’t like her if she stepped out of the conservative narrative.

And the Trump Superman story did put the most positive spin on Trump getting Covid after doing super spreader events. Attkisson from some comments seems to realize it’s a dangerous pandemic so why choose that angle to it? Yeah people that catch Covid develop some antibodies to it. We don’t know how much protection or how long it lasts though. We also know there are people suffering long term effects from Covid too. She left that out though.

You're so full of shit. I linked the entire article. You're a fucking liar.
That is NOT anything close to what Attkisson said.
And I've told you 3 times what it *ACTUALLY* said.

It didn't hero-worship Trump as a Superman, it talked about super-immunity to Covid-19 that Trump and others who survived the virus without vaccination might have, that could last a year or more, even against new Covid strains.

I think we’re saying the same thing WB. I’m just pointing out Attkisson took a really negative thing with Trump having super spreader events and found a positive angle for it. Again looking at her work during and after Trump I see nothing that would upset a trumper.

If Attkisson making a one-liner joke about Trump having super-immunity to Covid making him a Superman is the extent of your evidence, then you clearly have no case for that.

Again, Attkisson self-identifies in her 56-minute video as a "left-leaning" journalist. The extent of her defense of Trump is citing the true facts in cases of journalistic malpractice against Trump, not praising his policies. She only points out the parameters of good journalism, and where journalists, even from the former prestigious heights of New York Times, Washington Post, Politico, CNN (a station that while I always considered it liberal, at least had some journalistic standards until the era of Obama and Trump), and the lower hanging fruit at MSNBC, Vox, Yahoo News, and the like, have plummeted to. Where their "news" article look like something from a partisan blog rather than a major news source, with no self restraint calling Trump an infant, a child, a liar, comparing him to Hitler, and so forth in unhinged completely unprofessional language and insults.

I looked at a few of her columns recently, beyond criticizing the media for its standards in general from the example of their Trump coverage, I've never seen her actually praise Trump or his policy.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...101_notable_media_mistakes_on_trump.html

I see a difference in how she reports between the now last 3 WH. I see virtually nothing that would upset a very biased trumper.. And let’s be honest, there is not much room for disloyalty She sticks to a conservative narrative for an audience that I suspect listens to Tucker Carlson urge his viewers to call the police if they see children in masks and not think he’s goofy.

You keep parroting that bumper-sticker slogan.

But with nothing to back it up, in the way of facts or evidence.

I looked at her work WB and if there’s something that looks like it falls outside the conservative narrative please share it. I get why you like her and she has a safe space on a conservative broadcaster though.

I posted a 60-minute lecture where Sharyl Attkisson picked apart story after story from the mainstream media, citing the factual errors, their unprofessional violation of journalistic ethics, and time after time writers and articles cited when caught saying blatantly false and disproven things, just re-wrote the articles, or completely wiped them from their websites.
That is LITERALLY to the letter what workers at the Ministry of Truth did in Orwell's 1984 novel.

What Orwell wrote as a warning is what the Leftist media now uses as a how-to manual !
They (and you) are utterly without shame.

::eye roll::

Shut the fuck up, you god awful cock gobbler.

It’s still hard to believe you’ve read that book and truly comprehend it’s meaning. The media is full of individuals and different owners. It’s an important part of democracy. That’s why Trump and you guys hate it. You can’t control it. You have posted only stuff from her that trumpers love that would fit into Trump’s ministry of truth. She treated the Trump WH differently like an advocate. Trump and his cult doesn’t tolerate truly independent reporting.

It's hard to believe YOU'VE read it, M E M. You cheer on censorship and authoritarianism with astonishing zeal.
You daily repeat whatever your party's Orwellian lying talking points are, no matter how absurd and how PROVEN to be untrue.




That's hilarious. The media is full of something, but those individuals have a remarkable hive-mind in their malicious abuse of power to destroy Trump, and Republicans in general, and really, ANY dissenting conservative thought. And in examples like former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), and Sharyl Attkisson, or former CBS reporter Bernard Goldberg, or former VP candidate and Senator Joseph Lieberman(D-CT). Even within your own party, any dissenting thinker have to be shut down and destroyed. The only "diversity" you and other Democrat/Left types respect is those that agree with you. And you are Hell-bent on destroying the tiny pockets who disagree with you.

I don't have to defend Sharyl Attkisson, she has laid out in great detail with quoted examples the unethical journalistic malpractice the mainstream media is involved in. And I notice the 56-minute Youtube video I linked has been deleted. Probably because you and Leftist Bolsheviks like you deceitfully complained about it till Youtube took it down. And Youtube is run by more Bolsheviks like yourselves, who are eager to use a complaint to take down dissenting views that interfere with their/your lying narrative.
You can't win a debate on journalistic ethics.
Sharyl Attkisson's 56-minute explanation has cited very detailed quoted examples that expose the Democrat/Left-aligned media's blatant lies. So unable to debate her facts, you go the Orwellian route and erase it from history, so you don't HAVE to debate it. And broadly without specifics slander her as "a Republican partisan", despite that she has described herself as "left-leaning", and one in spirit with another acclaimed award-winning liberal journalist Glenn Greenwald. So your side deletes her facts. You airbrush her out of history, in exactly the way Orwell described.

Orwell in 1984 allegorically describes Stalinism, and that is precisely what your vicious party now worships and emulates: Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, the Sandinistas, Hugo Chaves, Che. And I've linked text and video of dozens of Clinton and Obama officials quoting these genocidal Marxists. Bill and Hillary Clinton. Both Obamas. Valerie Jarrett. Bernie Sanders. A O-C and her "squad".
They worship them !
This is what your party leaders worship, and what they are emulating in their own strong-arm tactics. What they are fanatically trying to turn this country into in the last 100 days: An authoritarian marxist utopia, where at great threat no one can disagree with them.
Donald Trump, Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, and now Rudy Giuliani are prime examples of that.
As well as anyone who comes forward as a witness against your Bolshevik party, such as standing up as a witness against Nov 2020 election fraud, or the shop owner who exposed the hard-drive e-mails and photos on Hunter Biden's laptop, or who simply wants to verify the legitimacy of the Nov 2020 election with an audit. But that is not allowed, and your side (the unholy alliance of the liberal media, the Democrat Central Committee, and the Big Tech monopolies) will crush anyone who steps out of line. In terms of government (IRS, FBI, DOJ, State Dept, NEA, DHS) , the news media, and now Big Tech, your side has 90% of the power.

But incredibly, despite the crushing abuse of that power, 51% of this country (including 48% of independents and 30% of Democrats) are still is not afraid to say they think the Nov 2020 election was rigged and want an audit of the vote in every state. Your side is terrified, because they CHEATED.
In 2000 and 2004 and 2016, when Democrats demanded a re-count, myself and other Republicans said sure, whatever, go ahead. And I was actually curious if they could prove fraud. GO AHEAD !

But it's telling that your side doesn't allow that same accountability in 2020, and fights and intimidates those who want that accountability, every step of the way. They block conservatives' Twitter and Facebook accounts to prevent them from passing on information to other Republicans. They even shut down the social media accounts of the NEW YORK POST (the nation's second largest newspaper) toward that goal, to prevent N Y POST from informing millions of voters about Hunter Biden's laptop, and the clear pay-to -play of Joe Biden with Ukraine, Russia and China revealed in those e-mails.
As I've said, every audit and re-count of Nov 2020 permitted has shown massive Democrat fraud, in Georgia, in Michigan, in New Hampshire, in Montana, and now Arizona. The Democrat Bolshevik Party is terrified of daylight and the truth. They are sinister creatures that only function well in darkness.

Freedom of the press is a threat to the true authoritarians WB. Loyalty to Trump vs democracy is really the only value the GOP is ending up with as it eats it’s own that refuse to choose country over a pathetic lying rich guy that had a tv show.

My side cheers for a free press and objective journalism.

Your side slanders people like Sharyl Attkisson, John Stossel, Lara Logan and John Solomon, award winning journalists who refuse to just be propagandists for the Democrat party's daily lying talking points.
Your side ARE the authoritarians, for which "journalism" for them is just controlled messaging and propaganda, not actual reporting. And the message is consistently hate Trump, hate conservatives, and negatively portray them at every turn no matter what the true facts, to advance their Democrat/Left allies.

The Republican party rejects self-serving deceivers like Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney, Liz Cheney, Mitch McConnell and others because they campaigned on one thing and then betrayed the voters they were elected to represent !
That's not "loyalty to Trump", that's loyalty TO THEMSELVES and their own values defended by Trump. And Trump has been the only Republican leader to keep his promises and truly represent the interests of the people who voted for him. He has kept his promises like no other president since Ronald Reagan. And as I cited previously, arguably (according to Heritage foundation) delivered more of what he promised than even Reagan.

As I said, when I first voted for Trump, I was hesitant. I liked his agenda, but was unsure if he could do what he promised, or if he even had an interest in keeping his promises. But he proved himself, achioeving beyond my wildest dreams, and likewise for at least 74.3 million Americans. That's not blind loyalty or indoctrinated loyalty, that's EARNED loyalty, with his clear achievements.

Cheney and the others won’t roll with Trump’s big lie and that can’t be tolerated in the GOP. You chose Trump over your country and you’re upset that these people won’t forsake the oath they swore to serve this country. You want Big Brother. You’ve made it crystal clear that you don’t support freedom of the press when you rolled with casting them as the enemy. All for a big fat weak loudmouth that made you feel good about hating your fellow countrymen. That’s all he really gave you besides some of the biggest trade deficits ever.

I never said that. You once again have to "script" me and make up fake quotes to try and front your lying narrative.

Although OAN and Mike Lindell have presented a lot of facts that no one else wants to report. In spite of themselves, CNN and the other liberal media sometimes actually report the facts.





https://www.rasmussenreports.com/pu...shments_compiled_in_shockingly_long_list

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2018/02/28/heritage-trump-agenda-n2455142


By the way, those last two sources are not OAN or Mike Lindell. And even liberal partisan sources like the Washington Post were forced to report the same story.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-back-coverage-following-owners-2020-bid

Bloomberg News has already established itself as a wing of Orwell's Ministry of Truth. Their job is not to report the news, it's to sell whatever the Democrat Party's current talking points are.

So you think because Bloomberg wrote about it that it than means Biden didn’t undo Trump’s secret visitor logs?

You seem to have forgotten how the Obama administration tried to exclude Fox News from white house press conferences and completely block them out as "not a legitimate news sourcce. And Judicial Watch subpoenaed their internal White House staff e-mails to show that was EXACTLY what they plotted to do, despite the Obama administration's public denials denials.But their private e-mails revealed told the truth.
https://www.judicialwatch.org/press...ouse-attacked-excluded-fox-news-channel/


And the Obama administration further had reporters arrested, including then-Fox reporter James Rosen, just for breaking unfavorable news about the Obama administration from White House sources who went on the record. Even reporters who covered the White House for 4 decades for the New York Times and Washington Post called the Obama administration the "most control freak" administration they ever dealt with, in terms of monitoring and prosecuting White House employees to prevent leaks and communication with the press. At the very least, describing Obama as the "worst since Nixon".
https://theblacksphere.net/2017/02/media-silence-obama-stunning-record-prosecution-journalists/

https://www.nationalreview.com/corn...d-control-freak-administration-ive-ever/

https://freebeacon.com/issues/journalists-obama-the-worst-since-nixon/

I remember you bitched a lot about that. Guess you were just being a partisan hypocrite.

I don't see that you've made any lucid point, let alone supporting facts to make a case for it.

That's because you are a fucking partisan moron, asshole.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coprolalia

You're such a piece of garbage, Iggy. You have absolutely nothing to contribute.

.


Sharyl Attkisson at Hilllsdale college Slanted Journalism and the 2020 Election -56 minutes

Sharyl Attkisson University of Floirida, The Rightful Owners of Public Information, Mar 31, 2015


On FOIA requests and disclosure, under the Clinton, W. Bush, and Obama administrations, and the increasing evasiveness of bureaucratic federal officials under administrations of both parties. At 33:45 she cites that reporters of the New York Times, Washington Post and other liberal media were critical of the Obama administration as "the worst yet" and comparable to Soviet Pravda". But that Democrat or Republican, each administration is more difficult to get information from.

Interesting that Attkisson graduated from UF in 1982, and I was at UF at the same time she was, for about a year. She was a junior at the time I was a freshman.

The part about C-SPAN running a tiny Obama interview the Obama administration didn't like, and the vindictive payback C_SPAN got for the rest of Obama's term, and that this was the most resistance the Obama administration got from any media source, is chilling in how subservient all other media were to the Obama administration. From that level of subservience, to how incredibly hostile the collective media were toward the Trump administration.

.


Just a small sampling of all the news stories the liberal media got wrong in the last 4 years or so:

Gutfeld, on media embracing lying whistleblower - May 21 2021


Rebekah Jones, the Florida Health department employee who accused Gov. DeSantis of forcing her to alter the true number of Covid-19 cases.
Sleazy porn lawyer Michael Avenatti's false allegations, before he proved himself a liar.
Julie Swetnick and now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh's other lying Democrat-zealot accusers.
Jussie Smollett, and his two "white racist" black attackers, who Smollett PAID BY CHECK for the fake attack!
And 4 years of "Russia collusion" media stories, that the FBI, House Democrats, and much of the media knew was false from the start, but propagandized anyway.
Plus Anthony Scaramucci, who got himself fired by Trump, and has vindictively backed every false narrative against Trump ever since.

That's not including all the times the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and many other media groups have been caught red-handed getting it wrong and/or completely fabricating a story with fake sources, and either quietly deleting or altering the story later, rather than making an honest retraction (as cited by Sharyl Attkisson again in her 56 minute video on the decline and "woke"-ification of liberal media as a willing propaganda tool of the Democrat/Left), rather than objective news coverage.

And so many more examples.
The Michael Brown "hands up, don't shoot" narrative.
The "George Zimmerman is a right-wing Tea Party racist" (he was actually an Obama-voting Democrat of Ecuadoran hispanic origin, with Jewish and black racial history who tutored black kids).
The Aurora, Colorado movie theatre shooter was "outed" by CBS as a Tea Party member (it was actually another person's page on Facebook by the same name, much older than the shooter, that any decent journalist would have confirmed before going on-air. )

And the current lying "January 6th INSURRECTION" lying narrative, "the worst attack on the Capitol since the Civil War". Yeah... except y'know, 9-11-2001, or an attack in 1998 where two Capitol police officers were killed inside the capitol by some lone nut shooter, or a larger attack during the Brett Kavanaugh nomination. And except for the fact that, as FBI assistant director of anti-terrorism Jill Sanborn affirmed in Senate hearings, NOT ONE firearm of any kind was confiscated on Jan 6th in or around the Capitol grounds. Pretty hard to have an "armed insurrection" without any arms. No, it was just a riot by a handful of unrepresentative misfits, INCLUDING John Earle Sullivan and his group of BLM/Antifa chaos instigators, who deliberately provoked the ONLY shooting death that day, of Ashli Babbitt., by a Capitol police officer who remains un-named, and un-punished, despite clear excessive force, videotaped by 2 people, from 2 different angles.

But when someone like, say, M EM sources any of these "news" organizations of Trump-hating liberal zealots, who openly say IT'S THEIR JOB to advance the liberal narrative no matter what, I take all the above into consideration.

.


CNN HAS SHED MORE THAN HALF ITS VIEWERS, DOWN A STAGGERING 60% IN KEY DEMO


What if, due to an overwhelming liberal bias in network news reporting, people stopped believing the shameless bias of the liberal networks?
What if that liberal bias became so overwhemingly obvious and deceitful, that people largely stopped even listening to it at all?

We are rapidly approaching that point. Apparently 60% already have stopped listening, even liberals.


Joe Conchia of Mediaite says since this was reported, CNN has now lost 80% of their viewers.