Media Organizations
From iGeek
News, Newspapers, Websites, Radio, TV, and organizations that convey information the public.
~ Aristotle Sabouni
Created: 2019-02-02 |
- Bloomberg - A privately held financial, software, data, and media company headquartered in Midtown Manhattan, founded by Michael Bloomberg in 1981.
- Boston Globe - The Boston Globe was founded in 1872 was originally controlled by Irish Catholic interests before being sold to Charles H. Taylor, and then sold to The New York Times in 1993 for $1.1 billion. Where it subsequently lost 94% of its value, and was sold to John W. Henry (Red Sox Owner) for $70 million.
- CNN - 1980 Ted Turner started CNN to put his left center spin on "the news", along with his later marriage to Hanoi Jane Fonda. He wanted to be the 24 hour, more left version of the already left of center news outlets like CBS, ABC, NBC, and rather than fill airtime with deeper stories, he'd use far left op-ed fluff.
- Daily Kos - A far left blog founded in 2002 by Markos Moulitsas that eschews journalism for trolling and far left spin : the Kos comes from his first name. If there's a way to spin or twist the facts to make the left look good and the right look bad, the Kos is there. Like the Huffington Post, with even lower standards and a stronger agenda.
- ESPN - ESPN was told by common sense not to politicize sports, that they were just entertaining escapism. They chose to go the other way. Now they're damn near going bankrupt as viewership is way down, advertising is way down, and the trends for the future look way down. So what did we learn?
- Fake Facts - "Facts" that aren't but people believe anyways, either through ignorance, self delusion or deception. The worst are ones that people heard from their authorities, but never questioned - confirmation bias makes them especially resistant to growth. But how we react to new information defines what kind of person we are. Do we validate our assumptions, or just remain ignorant/progressive?
- Fox News - The left loves to hate. And there's little they hate more than Fox News. Why? If you ask them it's because it's biased, sloppy, and sensationalizes headlines. All true, but MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC are all at least as bad in all those areas. The real reason they hate Fox, is why it is so needed, it offers a counter-balance to their one sided propaganda.
- Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence - The GLCTPGV is part of the far-left disinformation campaign to dupe the gullible rubes. They either know nothing about the topic of guns, or are flamingly dishonest, sometimes both. This article explains how.
- Huffington Post - HuffPo is a mockery of new journalism. The rules to get published seem to be (1) be popular (2) be wrong on everything you post (3) be sensitive to any corrections (4) have a flock of trolls. They are proof that popularity has no correlation to quality of information.
- MSNBC - Documenting MSNBC's bias or errors is a Sisyphusian task similar to naming all the victims of the Holocaust. Ed Shultz, Chris Matthews, Tom Brokaw, Mika, Maddow, it's a cornocopia of incompetence and bias. Here's a few nuggets, greatest misses, and things that can point out the obvious to those capable of getting it.
- Media Matters - Media Matters: the big lie -- it's a hit list for David Brock's political enemies, masquerading as a 501c. Center for American Progress (a marxist institution) funds them. And the goal is to play gotcha or misrepresent anything a conservative says, usually with out of context lies of omission, but often delving into just outright lies.
- NPR - State dept. and Air America in the 1930's was infiltrated by communists. McCarthy showed that they never left, they just moved around. NPR is evidence that this is as true today as it was back then. I listened to them for years on my commute, and could count a few times a day they did leftist spin, and can think of no examples of them taking a conservative or moderate position.
- New York Magazine - Vox owned clone of the New Yorker, with even lower quality and more bias. But they are fun to use as example of how stupid some "Journo's" or New Yorkers are, that believe this tripe. They were one of the pioneers of the New Journalism, which is truthspeak for they replacing objectivity and journalistic standards with biased, opinionated, far left drivel.
- New York Times - A never great News Agency has become a shadow of their former self: admittedly biased by their own Ombudsman and editors. Occasionally good content can't make up for their more frequent bad, or their willingness to deceive, commit lies of omission, or present things in a biased way. (Never trusting their readership with the whole truth).
- New Yorker - The New Yorker was once a renowned for their fact checking and quality. Then New management, with snowflake 2.0: David Remnick took over as Editor and they became the cheap partisan low-quality mock-worthy rag that they are today. No fact checking, more clickbait. This details just a small portion of that.
- Newsweek - A magazine that fell from mediocrity into the annals of incompetent partisanism. Once semi-reputable Newsweek started making supermarket tabloids embarrassed with articles like the following.
- PolitiFact - They have a long history of (a) cherry picking data to fit a leftist narrative (b) oversampling the right (selection bias) (c) being pedantic to find excuses to correct the right on technicalities or to excuse/ignore the left on much broader/worse errors (d) not correcting errors when found (e) attacking those that point out the errors. They're a partisan mouthpiece for the far left, pretending to be non-partisan.
- Reuters - Reuters isn't usually quite as biased and partisan as the AP is, but that's a bar that a drunk could trip over. Still, here's some examples of their stories where they either failed Journalism 101, or they succeeded at Dishonesty 101. Even when the organization isn't bad, their feeders for content are.
- RollingStone - American monthly magazine that was founding in the late 60's San Francisco, and focused on music and pop-culture. But they forgot their goal is to entertain, became full of themselves, and started preaching instead of entertaining. Music folks preching on stuff they don't understand, becomes boring ignorance.
- Scientific American - A left biased popular "Science" magazine that occasionally lets a good article or two past their woke staff. They do have stuff worth reading and I read it. But if there's a bias, it'll always be left.
- Skeptical Science - A FakeScience site created to misinform the gullible, created by not-a-scientists John Cook. (I feel like his name is a missing an 'r' in it). The whole purpose is to lie by omission and comission, and attack or omit scientists or data that is inconvenient to his agenda. Having an advocacy site isn't bad. Pretending it's a science site is the problem.
- Snopes - Snopes was created by California couple Barbara and David Mikkelson to covert alt.folklore.urban newsgroup into a website. Despite a cabal of liberal editors, most of Snopes isn't that bad... but mostly fair is synonymous with unfair, and it is far from the paragon of objectivity some pretend. Virtually all errors or biases lean left, thus all sources that rely on them lean the same way.
- The Atlantic - A far-left magazine that occasionally lets a good article or two through. I had some hope when they hired the prolific conservative intellectual, Kevin Williamson, but then they fired him for thoughtcrime of having once written a pro-life article, showing that they do not value diversity of thought at the Atlantic.
- The Hill - Far left DC based Newspaper, founded by far lefty, mixing news with disinformation. Like WaPo, with more tabloid.
- The Verge - Owned by far-left Vox, The Verge launched in 2011 by pirating folks from Engaget. But it's a reasonably good tech site that only occasionally delves into leftist advocacy (e.g. lets the editors bias through). Basically, it was an AOL editor's next big thing, and it mixed in a lot of podcast and video stuff.
- Time Magazine - A once respected publication before liberals ruined it. Replacing "journalism" with propaganda. While good articles occasionally get through their editorial bias, it's strictly by accident, and usually not touching anything vaguely political.
- USA Today - USAToday has a long history of dumb, and they should have been renamed USSA (United Socialist States of America) because that seems to be their bend/lean. But here's an example of their dumb.
- Vice - A hard left outlet, that exists to twist every news story from a hard left PoV. The worst of WaPo, HuffPo and a basement blogger, all screaming against the injustices of the anyone with a clue. They were created as a pump-and-dump scam, that seems to have been successful. Sensationalism sells.
- Wall Street Journal - Wall Street Journal used to be a New York finance paper, that became another paper. They have a little better reputation as a centrist paper, but they're still in New York, thus they're kind of hit or miss. Some good reporting, some bad... some stuff to irk both sides. They often provide counter-balance to the NYT or WaPo. But have their misses too.
- Washington Post - A once great paper, now a liberal fake news rag that looks more like Bezos Blog (or the DNC's blog) than an objective Newspaper. To be fair, WaPo was always walking in the Grey Lady's (NYT's) shadow, and Jeff Bezos acquisition didn't change much... now that the NYT in the mud, it's no surprise that WaPo is crawling in the sewer. Here is a partial list of falsehoods, embarrassments, and mistakes.
- WikiLeaks - I respect WikiLeaks, but am not realy a fan. They've done a service, and gotten people killed. They can only exist in free countries, so they undermine freedom. They are both a cost and consequence of being an open, diverse and free society. So they can be a force for evil and good at the same time.
- Wikipedia - Wikipedia is both hit and miss, with a lot more hits than misses. I reference it a lot, because most articles are pretty good or good enough. But a few are very biased, and virtually all bias leans far left. Usually it's more lies of omission and not offering both sides. So they are referencable, but the most interesting stuff is often omitted, or in the talk section.
🔗 More
| |
| |
| |
Tags: Organizations Main Page Facts
<! -- Media Viewer Icon - Commons Gray.svg|Small=true -->
