Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily is promoting the new issue of its Whistleblower magazine this way:
Journalists. We pay them well, we rely on them to inform us, they're the "filter" through which most of us see and understand our world.
But there's a problem – a very big problem. Today, an overwhelming number of "mainstream" journalists, rather than serving the traditional role of the press as professional truth-tellers, have shifted 180 degrees in their mission, to become – as July's sensational Whistleblower issue proves – "ANTI-JOURNALISTS."
The subtitle says it all: "Not only do they refuse to report the truth – they attack you if you do."
Actually, that subtitle sounds a lot more like WND than any organization it's purporting to criticize.
One needs to look no farther than here for a prime example. A couple years back, I wrote a Huffington Post article recounting the history of WND, to which editor Joseph Farah responded not by making any significant challenge anything I wrote (indeed, he has never questioned my facts) but by attacking me as a "talent-challenged slug" and denigrating HuffPo.
I reported the truth, and WND attacked me for doing so. Somehow, I suspect my story is probably not covered in Whistleblower this month. Indeed, the list of articles in the magazine is focused entirely on the media being insufficiently right-wing.
WND managing editor David Kupelian is quoted as saying, "Maybe we should just call today's mainstream press 'the George Soros media." That, of course, is a laughable claim because, as we noted, Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. spent more money propping up the money-losing New York Post in one single year than Soros has spent supporting various media organizations since 2003. And WND itself started out as billionaire-subsidized media, beginning in 1997 as a project of the Farah-founded Western Journalism Center, which accepted $330,000 from foundations controlled by Richard Mellon Scaife.
WND also whines about "how both liberal and conservative media routinely mock coverage of the issue of Obama's constitutional eligibility," while it is refusing to report on the existence of experts who defend the authenticity of Obama's birth certificate.
We, of course, have never criticized WND for telling the truth -- we've criticized them because it doesn't. That's another reason we'll never get an honest writeup in Whistleblower.
