RT? Al-jazeera?
The actual news items are often more sober and reasoned than most. I haven’t seen the Daily Hate since I put the TeaAndKittens block on Chrome, but before that it was toxic hellhole firing on all guns. RT tends to print a lot of boring articles about Russian politics and business but some of them are quite informative, and its world coverage isn’t bad. It’s comment can be inflammatory but, unlike UK tabloids but like the Gray Lady, it does at least separate comment from news.
On the other hand, I just read an excellent longform about the research an Irish woman is doing about a “fallen women” home that used to stand in her neighbourhood when she was a child.
The articles you cited wouldn’t even get on my “to be read” list, just because I know enough Muslim people that those articles don’t make sense. As the Syrians and Jordanians like to remind me, just because practically everyone’s Muslim in the Middle East doesn’t mean nationalism doesn’t apply.
That was a good article (about Taum). I roll my eyes a lot when reading the Opinion titles. A lot. NYT Op-Ed is ground zero for rich idiots “having their say”.
Why do you feel the need to pay attention to an individual’s tweeting strategy?
A good portion is it probably “I know this person; she’s a fellow journalist; and she wrote this.”
Oh… I get it. Socialism disavows the primacy of the individual, in favour of group decision making-- and groups have tweeting policies.
plus, that link to long reads links right back to the new york times. I am shocked that a new york times reporter would uptweet a colleague.
Because Twitter is one of the most important modern propaganda channels? And because Maggie is one of the most prominent political journalists covering the White House, and her Twitter feed has significant influence?
As I said, any individual tweet is usually defensible. The impact of what she’s doing is in the overall pattern.
Also, I bring up Maggie’s Twitter as an example of the NYT’s bias, not as the limit of it. It isn’t just Maggie. The NYT has a long history of disguised cheerleading for evil.
There are plenty of individual people there who do good journalism and are entirely blameless. But I believe that the NYT ownership and editors are deliberately and actively working for Trump.
Obviously, I can’t prove that. But that is my view.
—
I’ve posted on this subject before. I don’t expect it to convince anyone much, but here it is for the record:
One thing I’ve been wondering for the past few days:
Why hasn’t Trump already fired Mueller, and tweeted that he did it because Mueller insisted on investigating him instead of indicting Clinton for Benghazi/emails/Uranium/etc.?
Can anyone make coherent sense out of those tweets?
Mildly cynical take: Trump is comfortable in the protection of the pardon power.
Moderately cynical take: Mueller is an agent of the RNC-GOP, and they’ve threatened the Trumpists with an impeachment attempt if Mueller is fired.
Highly cynical take: Mueller is a loyal Republican, and the whole investigation is just a distraction to suppress resistance until the final lockdown at the midterms.
Of course, it’s possible that he realizes how people would react, after he fired Comey.
even more highly cynical take: mueller will help take down people that the administration would rather see gone anyways, leaving the core trumpists even more off limits by the end.
we’ll see tomorrow, i guess, when the first person is named. unless it’s a path towards trump himself ( or his family ) it’s just an arrangement of deck chairs on our national titanic.
Rumour is that it may be Kushner.
Who isn’t really family, and whose demise would delight the Nazis.
I heard they’re going to indict Scooter Libby again.
BTW, addendum: although I rate the NYT as a hostile witness, I still read and use them on occassion. Ditto for RT.
All media is propaganda. Take nothing at face value.
Goddamn. When I think of all the trouble I had to do filling out yearly financial disclosure forms while working as a minion for the Fed Gov, this makes me so angry. Well, even more angry, seeing as Congress has been just as bad.
I liked the bit about the “diversary lottery.”