WND Rehashed Old, Irrelevant Story To Fearmonger About Vaccine, Censors Relevant Facts Topic: WorldNetDaily
Apropos of nothing, Bob Unruh fearmongered in a Sept. 8 WorldNetDaily article:
One of the first patients to take the AstraZeneca COVID-19 shot was Megi Brakadze, 27, a nurse in Georgia, just over the border from Russia.
A day later, she was in a coma, her heart stopped, and physicians were unable to revive her.
hey blamed anaphylactic shock.
She had made a video at the time of her shot, explaining, "Vaccines are needed. We are powerless against the virus, we must vaccinate ourselves to avoid diseases or not get seri0usly ill. Although people are afraid, there is nothing dangerous about getting vaccinated. I urge everyone to get vaccinated."
Unruh omitted a couple of facts here. First, the AstraZeneca vaccine has not been approved in the U.S., where much of WND's (dwindling) audience resides, meaning that the story is irrelevant to much of its audience. Second, this incident happened in March 2021 -- more than a year and a half earlier. Thus, it cannot be considered to be "news."
Unruh made the mistake of getting his information for this alleged story from the highly discrtedited Gateway Pundit, which also hid the date the incident occurred. Unruh went on to uncritically quote from this discredited source:
The report said, "Doctors tried to restart her heart but were not able to revive her completely. For some reason, Megi's story did not make the headlines. It was not allowed."
The video explained the doctor's concluded her death was from anaphylactic shock.
It was confirmed by the Georgian Ministry of Health.
Netiher Unruh nor the Gateway Pundit offered any evidence to counter the report of the cause of Brakadze's death. But Unruh somehow did manage to avoid repeating the GP's false claim that "For some reason, Megi’s story did not make the headlines. It was not allowed." In fact, as a reputable news organization reported, "Megi Bakradze's death and the investigation that followed has been headline news in Georgia for months, widely discussed in public and on social media" -- to the point that her death hindered vaccine campaigns in the country.
But both Unruh and GP omit the fact that -- as that reputable news organization also reported -- there's still a dispute over what link there is, if any, between the vaccine and Brakadze's death. One review found no link between the vaccine and her death, and there is a dispute over whether the woman was properly and quickly treated with epinephrine as her allergic reaction became clear.
But Unruh doesn't care about facts that contradict the narrative he's being (sporadically) paid to push. His job -- as is that of every other WND employee -- is to spread fear about COVID vaccines.
After Mar-a-Lago Raid, Newsmax's Morris Gets Stuck In Trump Defense Mode Topic: Newsmax
Notoriously wrong Newsmax pundit Dick Morris had to shift his pro-Trump groveling in his Newsmax TV appearances from selling his new pro-Trump book to defending Trump following the FBI raid on his Mar-a-Lago compound in search of purloined classified documents. More than two weeks after the raid, Morris was still in post-raid defense mode:
Morris claimed in an Aug. 26 appearance that "claims of a search for archives was a "pretext' to find evidence that could be used to keep him off the 2024 ballot," adding that "they waited a year and a half to go after him. So how vital could these security issues be?"
In another TV hit the same day, he complained that "the Mar-a-Lago raid affidavit was heavily redacted, with the Justice Department's real motives still "buried beneath black ink," insisting that the Justice Department "saw [a] fabulous political opportunity to embarrass Trump, and they raided Mar-a-Lago."
In an Aug. 29 appearance, Morris asserted that <"I think the Democrats realized [they can't beat Trump at the polls] and they decided to abstain from the political process and just use the control of the FBI and the IRS, and the various government agencies, to hound Trump out of office, and hopefully indict him, and make it illegal for him to run."
Morris was still spinning the raid in a Sept.5 appearance:
''The strategy here by [President Joe Biden's] people is to get off the presidential record and attack Trump personally, and the key element was raiding Mar-a-Lago. That is just creating an issue for Trump that's terribly effective for him,'' Morris said on ''Spicer & Co.''
''The next step will be, I think, that they're going to indict Trump on a records violation about the [National] Archives. That's a little bit like indicting someone for having an overdue library book because the archivist is in, the last analysis, a librarian.
''Basically, their nose is out of joint that all the books haven't come in yet. The only thing that would make it serious is if there's a credible accusation that Trump leaked our secrets to the Russians or the Chinese, and he didn't for four years as president, and he hasn't for two years as a former president.''
Morris still couldn't stop talking about the raid a month later. He ranted in a Sept. 10 TV appearane:
The raid of former President Donald Trump's private residence at Mar-a-Lago might not be about securing an indictment as much as covering for the FBI's pursuit of Trump, according to presidential adviser Dick Morris on Newsmax.
"We need to go from defense to offense on this," Morris, who has advised former President Bill Clinton and former President Donald Trump, told "Saturday Report." "I think that one of the big reasons — if not the major reason — that the FBI seized those documents is that they incriminate not Trump, but the FBI in the Russia collusion scandal, in the scandal of spying on Trump's campaign, and in the scandal of fabricating evidence to the FISA court to lead to wiretaps on key Trump officials."
It got to the point that an article by Jay Clemons on a Sept. 12 appearance that seemed to mock Morris' relentless Trump-fluffing:
Political consultant Dick Morris, who's been busy touting "The Return," a New York Times best-selling book about former President Donald Trump, doesn't need much goading when it comes to making Trump-affiliated prognostications on Newsmax.
While appearing on "Rob Schmitt Tonight" Monday, Morris rattled off four sequential predictions involving Trump and his ongoing document dispute with the Justice Department (DOJ), regarding sensitive materials that allegedly contain "classified" or "top-secret" markings.
Morris' predictions include:
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon's decision to grant the Trumpteam's special master request will be sustained, after the DOJ appeal.
There won't be enough incriminating documents to formally indict Trump in a grand-jury setting.
The Republicans will claim the majority in the House and Senate chambers for the upcoming midterm elections (Nov. 8). Right now, the Democrats control the House and Senate.
Starting as early as January 2023, House GOP investigators will put the FBI and DOJ under further scrutiny, in terms of explaining or justifying the FBI's Aug. 8 raid< on Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort, along with the House hearings on the Jan. 6, 2021 unrest at the Capitol.
"And these Mar-a-Lago documents [that Trump possesses] will be Exhibits A, B, and C in the case against the FBI," quips Morris.
Clemons didn't disclose to readers that his employer published Morris' book.
Morris totally bought into a pro-Trump conspiracy theory in another Sept. 12 appearance:
Speculating to Newsmax on the documents the FBI took in its raid on Mar-a-Lago, Dick Morris tells "American Agenda" that the documents are a "smoking gun," illustrating collusion between the FBI and the Department of Justice.
"I believe that the primary motivation of the FBI in breaking in and seizing those documents" is that the agency is "trying to defend itself against Trump's condemnation," Morris says.
"I think," Morris continues, "Trump took those documents because he believed that they contain evidence of a smoking gun of FBI and DOJ collusion in the Russia-hoax scandal, in the tapping of his phone as president, and getting FISA warrants — on perjury grounds — to surveil his staff."
"I think the reason the FBI raided was to get those documents back before Trump made them public."
Morris wrapped failed right-wing prosecutor John Durham into his conspiracy theories in a Sept. 16 appearance:
Former President Donald Trump took boxes of documents to his Mar-a-Lago estate to "allow him to go after the FBI," not to keep himself from being investigated, Dick Morris, the author of the book "The Return: Trump's 2024 Comeback," told Newsmaxon Friday.
"The issue here is not the documents Trump took, but what's in them," Morris told "National Report." "I believe that the evidence will eventually show that it includes a smoking gun proving the allegations made by John Durham, the special prosecutor, three days ago."
Morris is nothing if not a slavishly loyal pro-Trump shill.
CNS Lets COVID Misinformer Complain About Attempt To Curtail COVID Misinformation Topic: CNSNews.com
MIcky Wootten wrote in a Sept. 12 CNSNews.com article:
As California’s COVID misinformation bill, AB 2098, awaits Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom’s signature, Green Bay Packers’ Quarterback Aaron Rodgers offered some criticisms of the legislation.
Appearing on liberal commentator Bill Maher’s podcast“Club Random” on Sunday, Rodgers discussed, among other things, the public’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic and government measures to combat it.
Rodgers criticized California Assembly Bill AB 2098, which would grant the California Medical Board the authority to revoke the licenses of doctors who promote what it deems to be COVID “misinformation.”
Wootten failed to report that Rodgers is himself a notorious COVID misinformer. As we documnted, Rodgers lied to his tem last fall by insisting he had been "inoculated" against COVID -- in fact, he had not been vaccinated at all but was taking dubious, unproven medications like ivermectin.
Because Wootten censored that fact, it discredits his attempt to portray Rodgers as some kind of expert on COVID, give that Rodgers himself is a documented misinformer. It doesn't really bode well for fulfilling the "Investigative Journalism Fellow" title bestowed uponhim -- censoring inconvenient information is the polar opposite of being "investigative."
MRC Obsesses Over Political Party Of Man Accused Of Killing Reporter Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center doesn't care about the health and safety of journalists who aren't right-wing shills -- witness its whining about journalists being concerned about their safety in covering Donald Trump and cheering attacks on them by rabid Trump supporters and its deliberate ignoring of a non-Fox News journalist killed in covering Russia's invasion of Ukraine while fretting over a Fox News reporter who was injured. If the MRC expresses concern about the health and safety of a non-right-wing journalist at all, it's because it can be exploited to advance the MRC's partisan right-wing narratives.
And that's pretty much what happened with the death of journalist Jeff German. His death itself didn't move the MRC -- he worked for a "legacy media" outlet, the Las Vegas Review-Journal. But when it emerged that his alleged killer is a local official who just happened to be a Democrat, it was explotation time. Curtis Houck ranted in a Sept. 8 post:
On Wednesday afternoon, Clark County, Nevada Public Administrator and Democratic Party official Robert Telles was arrested in connection with the death of Las Vegas Review-Journal investigative reporter Jeff German following a series of stories German had penned about what sources told him was an abusive culture in Telles’s official and an inappropriate relationship with a colleague.
Of course, ABC, CBS, and NBC refused to mention Telles’s party ID in their Thursday morning news programs. If Telles had been a Republican, it’s a safe bet we would hear lectures about how the GOP had made reporting dangerous, democracy died in darkness, and that it was the latest example of right-wing violence after January 6.
HOuck didn't mention that the Jan. 6 violkence was done explicitly for the benefit of a Republican president who is mentally unable to accept that he lost an election, while no partisan political motive has been detected in Telles' alleged crime.
Kathleen Krumhansl similarly ranted the same day (needless bolding in original):
Univision and Telemundo gave a master class today on how to omit inconvenient news during their reports on the arrest of Las Vegas Clark County Public Administrator Robert Telles- taken into custody in connection with the murder of investigative journalist Jeff German. Both networks called him a politician, a civil servant, the suspect, and public administrator, WITHOUT mentioning once that he is an elected Democrat.
The decision to omit the key (D)detail from their reports of the murder confirms the lengths to which the main sources of news for Spanish-speaking audiences in the nation go in their shared mission of sanctifying Democrats.
[...]
It is hard to imagine Republicans getting the same deference from Latino-interest media. Such is the bias that passes for reporting at the nation's leading Spanish-speaking corporate media.
Krumhansl similarly failed to explain Telles' political affiliation to his alleged crime. Nevertheless, her post was translated into Spanish.
A favorite liberal-media theme is that Donald Trump and Republicans at large, by criticizing the media, have endangered the lives of journalists.
So imagine if a Republican elected official had actually been charged with murdering an investigative journalist who had exposed his wrongdoing! Entire special shows would be dedicated to the news! "Tonight on MSNBC: Journalism Under Murderous Republican Attack!"
But let a Democrat [sic] elected official be accused of murdering a journalist who had written stories exposing his misconduct, and MSNBC, in the case of Morning Joe, not only gives the story short shrift, but, incredibly, never discloses that the suspect is a Democrat.
Finkewlstein went on to attack CNN for not making Telles' political affilation prominent enough:
CNN would have been guilty of the worst kind of hypocrisy and double standard had it failed to identify Telles as a Democrat. As Kristine Marsh has noted, CNN's Jim Acosta, a raging Trump antagonist, warned of a coming day of "a dead journalist on the side of the highway, because of the rhetoric coming out of the White House from the President of the United States."
Acosta has also accused Trump of creating “an atmosphere where people can get hurt, where journalists can get murdered.”
Finkelstein didn't mention the difference between the two -- Trump encouraged violence against any and all journalists who criticized his consefvative-leaning polices (which, again, the MRC condoned), while Telles' apparent animus against German was personal and not based on political ideology.
The template was used again in a Sept. 11 post by Tim Graham:
On the terribly titled All Things Consideredon Saturday night, NPR weekend anchor Michel Martin explored threats to journalists and journalism with liberal Washington Post columnist Margaret Sullivan, who just left the paper. They began with the killing of Las Vegas Review-Journalreporter Jeff German by a Democrat...and they never mentioned the Democrat part.
Martin could explain "Clark County Public Administrator Robert Telles was arrested on suspicion of murdering German. Now, the authorities have not provided a specific motive, but German had previously reported on mismanagement and a hostile work environment in Telles's office. Telles denied the accusations and went after German on social media." But she couldn't identify Telles by party.
Instead, Martin alluded instead to "the prior American president" as a violent threat to journalism:
Like Finkelstein, Graham failed to mention that Telles' alleged killing of German wasn't ideological, unlike the threats Trump issued.
After five days of silence from the major broadcast networks, ABC’s Good Morning America broke ranks Tuesday to rediscover the brutal murder of longtime Las Vegas Review-Journal reporter Jeff German allegedly at the hands of Democratic Clark County, Nevada Public Administrator Robert Telles. And, beyond that, ABC broke the network-wide blackout in noting Telles’s party ID.
World News Tonight and Good Morning America on Tuesday broke their network's silence on the party of the brutal murder of longtime Las Vegas Review-Journal reporter Jeff German by Democrat Clark County, Nevada Public Administrator Robert Telles. While the network ran an almost identical news package on the story during their morning and evening newscasts, they were only able to manage one brief mention of Telles's party affiliation. Meanwhile, rival networks CBS & NBC have continued their censorship of the Telles's party ID.
Again, Houck and Tober didn't explain the relevance of Telles' political affiliation to his alleged crime.
Graham attacked Acosta for not conforming to his biased narratie in a Sept. 14 post:
A Nexis search of CNN transcripts confirms that weekend host Jim Acosta -- the man who repeatedly said Trump endangered the lives of reporters as he yelled at Trump in White House press conferences -- said zip, zilch, nada about a Democrat [sic] politician
Acosta's 2019 memoir was titled The Enemy of the People: A Dangerous Time to Tell the Truth in America. In a 2018 panel discussion, he turned to a T-shirt that joked about hanging reporters:
[...]
So as long as there's a dead journalist stabbed by a Democrat, we haven't become something less than America.
It's telling about the MRC's abject hatred of journalists who aren't right-wing toadies the Graham thinks threatening to murder journalists can be dismissed as a "joke."
Also, note that none of thiese MRC writer engaged in their usual dismissal of German as a "liberal" journalist. That's because his death serves the MRC's agenda.
NEW ARTICLE: Narrative Before News At CNS Topic: CNSNews.com
Rather than report what happened at the House hearings into the Capitol riot, CNSNews.com chose instead to not be the "news" organization it claims to be, attacking the committee and pushing right-wing conspiracy theories and narratives. Read more >>
MRC Keeps Up Bogus 'Secondhand Censorship' Narrative Topic: Media Research Center
Over the summer, the Media Research Center invented a "secondhand censorship" metric to manufacture absurdly high numbers in advancing its ridiculous, biased narrative that socia media companies trying to enforce their terms of service are guilt of "censorship" against conservatives. Brian Bradley and Gabriela Pariseau ruther that dishonest narrative -- and those ridiculous numbers -- again in an Aug. 16 post:
Big Tech sent a stark message to conservatives during the second quarter of this year that it will continue to fiercely protect President Joe Biden and censor viewpoints that differ from the left’s narrative on major political issues.
Throughout the first two quarters, MRC counted 309 total individual censorship cases that translated to no fewer than 195,251,589 times that Big Tech kept information from social media users through secondhand censorship.
Big Tech companies tirelessly worked to shackle the spread of content across several issue areas; most notably, elections, President Joe Biden and “transgenderism,” from April through June. This discriminatory information control was an attempt to strong-arm Americans to embrace leftist orthodoxy.
[...]
MRC defines secondhand censorship as the number of times that users on social media had information kept from them.
All this definition does is take an example of so-called "censorship" and multply it by the number of followers that account has, generating those ridiculous and meaningless number. And what does the MRC think is disturbing "censortship"? Pointing out that a discredited film has been discredited:
The platform spiked an election-related post by Daily Wire Editor Emeritus Ben Shapiro in May, with the help of its fact-checking partner PolitiFact, according to a May 10 CensorTrack entry. The “fact-checker” flagged a Daily Wire article that cited political commentator Dinesh D’Souza ’s documentary “2000 Mules” calling the article “partly false,” as “the same information was checked in another post by independent fact-checkers.” The movie examined voter fraud in the 2020 election by using cell phones’ geolocation data. The secondhand censorship effect of the fact-check meant that Shapiro’s 8.5 million Facebook followers couldn’t see information linking potential voter fraud to the 2020 election.
Of course, "2000 Mules" has been repeatedly discredited, particularly on its claims about geolocation data. The MRC's CensorTrack database essentially acted as a PR agent for D'Souza's film, complaining that "The fact-checker also quoted several experts who said that D'Souza and True the Vote's evidence was incredible because geolocation data can be imprecise. But the fact-checker ignored the particular and targeted parameters for how the data was used in an investigation." CensorTrack didn't explain why readers of Shapiro's post shouldn't know that the film is discredited. One might call that, you know, "cemsorship."
Note that Bradley and Pariseau put "transgenderism" in scare quotes. They continued to do so in complaining that transphobic hate was being called out:
MRC counted 25 individual cases of censorship of content critical of so-called “transgenderism” in the second quarter. Secondhand censorship affected the followers of these accounts 8,111,001 times during the quarter.
Twitter perpetrated the most substantial suppression of so-called “transgender”-related content in the second quarter in June. The platform removed a post by renowned psychologist Jordan Peterson when he used “transgender” actor Elliot Page’s given name, Ellen Page.
“Remember when pride was a sin? And Ellen Page just had her breasts removed by a criminal physician,” Peterson purportedly tweeted according to screenshots tweeted by his daughter Mikhaila Peterson. Twitter apparently deemed the post to violate its rules against “hateful conduct.”
Peterson is a "renowned psychiatrist"? That's news to us -- we thought he was mostly a guy trying to justify right-wing anti-"woke" rage. Bradley and Pariseau didn't explain why it's OK to maliciously deadname a transgender person or falsely smear the doctor who operated on him as "criminal" -- and they certainly didn't explain their aggressive use of scare quotes.
Bradley and Pariseau concluded by ranting that "MRC continues to call on the American public to push tech companies to end their authoritarian suppression of opposing viewpoints." They didn't explain why hate and lies should be treatd as legitimate "opposing viewpoints" or why exposing them is "censorship."
Joel Hirschhorn can'tstopfearmongering about COVID vaccines, and he did so again in his Sept. 5 WorldNetDaily column:
WARNING: If you have had a COVID vaccine/booster shot, what this article presents may cause you stress and anxiety.
Two key recent medical research articles, one from Italy and one from Germany, have been used to document what may be the most important research finding during the entire COVID pandemic period.
Blood damage that has been detailed through sophisticated research methods is the "missing link" to explain many negative health conditions ranging from heart problems, cancers, reduced immunity and death. Blood damage is the key biologic explanation for harmful vaccine impacts. Note that I am using the word "vaccine" but fully recognize that COVID vaccines/boosters are not real vaccines, but a form of genetic treatment that, unlike real vaccines, do not actually and truly prevent or cure COVID.
As to deaths, data from Europe, New Zealand, Australia and Canada on total excess mortality countrywide in 2022, greater than in 2020 and 2021, are best explained by widespread COVID vaccine use in 2022 and not COVID infection deaths.
Please understand that ordinary blood testing you may get from your physician laboratory orders are not the same as the research techniques used to document vaccine induced blood damage. Do not let cognitive dissonance stand in the way of your acceptance of these frightening research results.
In both research publications, closely examine the many photographs given to prove blood damage; it is infeasible to reproduce them here. It will take time and patience to closely read these two studies, but there is no alternative if you truly want to understand how blood damage has been proven in a compelling way.
The first study Hirschhorn cited was published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research -- which, as we've previously noted, is an anti-vaxxer journal no credible medical researcher takes serioiusly. The second is titled ""German Researchers Examine Covid 'Vaccines' and Vaccinated People's Blood and Say Stop Vaccinations," and the fact that it puts "vaccines" in scare quotes should be enough to note its anti-vaxxer nature. It's also not a study in the sense that it was published in a respected peer-reviewed journal; it's a report from something called the "German Working Group for Covid-19 Vaccine Analysis," whatever that is, and it appeared on someone's Substack site.
Nevertheless, Hirschhorn thinks this is all serious, credible stuff -- and yet another excuse to indulge his weird obsession with Anthony Fauci:
The blood damage caused by COVID "vaccines" is best seen by the public as the key "missing link" that can explain what I and many others have been reporting on for many months – namely, the multitude of adverse health impacts and deaths from what the medical and public health establishment, the mainstream media and government agencies are still pushing on the public.
Eventually, history will show that all the powers forcing COVID "vaccines" on the public do not have the courage and integrity to admit that the "vaccines" were a dangerous and false pandemic solution that ultimately will explain millions of deaths. They can be seen as part of the biowar forced upon humanity – a true crime against humanity. The principal force that created the phony vaccine movement was Anthony Fauci, whose prosecution as a criminal is sorely needed.
Hirschhorn used his Oct. 4 column to try and gaslight his readers, blaming declining trust in doctors on anything but right-wing anti-vaxxer lise and falsey insist that he's the one who's doing the "truth telling":
Losing trust in doctors and the medical establishment is a sad consequence of the COVID pandemic. Doctors have not done all they should have to better serve their patients.
After truth telling in my writings for about two years, I remain saddened that the vast majority of the public remains victimized by propaganda in favor of vaccines and boosters while ignoring the many truths I and others have been shouting.
It now seems important for all of us who know the truth to put much of the blame on regular doctors people ordinarily see. The very sad fact is that nearly all of them are a combination of being ignorant (about COVID, vaccines and their alternatives), cowards for being unwilling to risk their jobs and prestige, and just plain biased – supporting what government agencies and medical establishment forces have hit the public with.
We need a public uprising against prevalent physician beliefs and behaviors.
When doctors are all wrong about COVID, then it is rational to doubt their overall performance in keeping their patients healthy by using the best medicines, tests and medical knowledge. Are they following medical research on many, many topics other than COVID?
Hirschhorn then served up "a series of questions (just examples) to ask your doctor," which he claimed are "structured to allow a simple answer so that minimal time is needed." Many of the questions try to advance anti=vaxxer conspiracy theories, like:
Are you aware that considerable data show many people are dying about five months after being vaccinated?
Have you stayed informed about proven alternatives to the vaccines that some doctors have been using with great success since the pandemic began?
Are you aware of high rates of excess mortality (that has only happened after wide vaccine use) all over the world, that they cannot be explained by COVID infection and that many believe result from COVID vaccines damaging immune systems and blood?
If I tested positive for COVID and begged you for a prescription for ivermectin, would you provide it?
Hirschhorn added:
f you are truly well-informed about the pandemic and COVID, then you should know what really good or bad answers are for these questions.
Similarly, if you had the opportunity to have time with one of the great doctors, like Peter McCullough in Texas or George Fareed in California, you can imagine how they would answer these questions.
Yes, we can. McCullough is a discredited COVID misinformer, while Fareed, as we noted the last time Hirschhorn brought him up, claims to have developed an ivermectin-centric treatment that normals doctors have disavowed.
Hirschhorn concluded by demanding that his fellow misinformers continue pushing that misinformation:
If you find this topic of great importance, then share all this with those you know who still are brainwashed by the propaganda from the many authoritarian forces pushing all the wrong information about COVID. Think of Anthony Fauci as the leader of those awful forces. Tell those people what good and correct answers are to the above questions.
Theonly person we see who has been "brainwashed" by "propaganda" is Hirschhorn.
How Is The MRC Fearmongering About Soros Now? Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's dirty war against George Soros has continued apace since the last time we checked in, cranking out posts with a heavy emphasis on his alleged support for countering disinformation (which you'd think the MRC would support) and freakouts over "Soros-funded prosecutors":
We've already noted how the MRC was blaming Soros for pointing out that two straight quarters of negative GDP may not be a completely reliable indicator of a recession and bizarrely accusing Soros of someone forcing Wikipedia to change the definition of a recession (showing that the MRC doesn't understand how Wikipedia works). But it also reserved ire for media-related claims. A June 4 post by Jorge Bonilla (also in Spanish) freaked out that a non-conservative owners with a tangental tie to Soros are buying several Spanish-language radio stations in Florida and elsewhere:
After years of whining about "Spanish-language disinformation" and watching the Democrats continue to lose Hispanic electoral share to the GOP, the left has had enough.
In what is clearly a panic move, a Soros-led investment group has backed the acquisition of 18 Univision radio stations by a media organization led by former Obama and Clinton operatives.
[...]
The deal fundamentally recreates the footprint of the failed Univision America talk radio network, with affiliates in: Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, McAllen, Miami, San Antonio, and Fresno. As a deal sweetener, Univision threw in WADO-NY, the Spanish-language home of the New York Yankees, and most importantly WAQI 710 in Miami- the iconic anti-communist Radio Mambí.
The latter is important because Mambí has long been a thorn on the side of an entitled left that demands absolute control over what media Hispanics consume.
Doesn't Bonilla's freakout over this business deal suggest that he's the one who doing the "panic move" here? Meanwhile, one observer pointed out that Radio Mambí is not just the "anti-communist" Bonilla describes it as; it's "anti-Democrat, anti-Biden, pro-Trump and spreads beliefs that Democrats stole the 2020 election and are conspiring to steal the 2022 midterms and the 2024 presidential election," and some hosts "have gone so far as to praise the militant far-right Proud Boys and speak favorably about violence as a way to combat 'a looming Democratic Party dictatorship.'"
But because Bonilla had a narrative to advance, he ignored inconvenient facts and pushed his storyline: "In sum, the move appears to be primarily fueled by panic over Democrats’ continued loss of influence over the Hispanic vote ahead of the 2024 presidential election. This is a significant development inasmuch as it lays a marker down, but not one that is permanently transformative or even a game-changer, given the left's current existing near-monopoly on Spanish-language media."
Meanwhile, the MRC was similarly appalled that Soros was being allowed to express opinions on a website he helped pay for. Jeffrey Clark ranted in a July 5 post:
iberal billionaire George Soros claimed that the greatest threat to the U.S. is “far-right extremists” on the U.S. Supreme Court and not dictators like China’s Xi Jinping or Russia’s Vladimir Putin.
[...]
But there was one thing the chair of Open Society Foundations neglected to mention in his tweet. A radical leftist opinion site — one Soros pays for, called Project Syndicate (PS) – published Soros’s article. PS delivers thousands of extremist, far-left op-eds to a global audience and boasts a membership of “over 600 media outlets” in 156 countries. Soros and wealthy leftist philanthropist and Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates funded PS with $1,242,105 and $5,280,186, respectively, from 2012 to 2019, according to Foundation Directory Online.
Of course, any content that's even slightly to the left of the right-wing rants published by the MRC are "radical" and "extremist" in Clark's eyes. Indeed, so opposed is Clark to the mere idea of Soros being allowed to express an opinion that he bizarrely complained that "Soros then ridiculously suggested that because he is partisan, he can comment on nonpartisan issues." Clark has never applied that logic to any of his MRC co-workers.
An Aug. 1 post by Clark ranted that Soros "is pushing back big time against critics of woke prosecutors that he helped elect across the country. He claimed in a recent commentary that the 'agenda' of his 'reform-minded prosecutors' is both 'popular' and 'effective.'” But he hid the fact that the op-ed appeared in the Wall Street Journal -- hardly a "radical leftist opinion site." Clark apparently didn't want to admit that a Rupert Murdoch-owned publication bets known for its right-wing commentary deviated from that agenda to publish something written by Sorosl.
CNS Jim Jordan & Mark Levin Stenography Watch Topic: CNSNews.com
CNSNews.com still loves quoting Ted Cruz (likely because editor Terry Jeffrey's daughter works for him), but it has (at least temporarily) dialed down its stenography of another Republican representative, Jim Jordan. Here are the articles it devoted to him during July, August and September:
That's just six articles in the third quarter, for a total so far this year of 26 -- and, of course, continued censorship by CNS on his alleged failure to do anything about a doctor who had been accused of sexual abuse by wrestlers on a college team where Jordan was a coach.
Meanwhile, a onetime favorite of CNS, right-wing radio host Mark Levin, didn't fare much better, suffering a similar drop-off in stenography in the third quarter despite a full complement of summer interns:
MRC Laughably Attacks Outlets That Won't Push Anti-Hunter Narrative As 'Liberal Rags' Topic: Media Research Center
Lots to unpack in the lead of a Sept. 7 Media Research Center post by Brian Bradley:
Two liberal rags pooh-poohed a letter sent Thursday by House Republicans to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg that seeks more information from Facebook about its communication with the federal government that led to censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop story.
Headlines Thursday from both Bloomberg News and The Hill screeched that a letter from 35 House Republicans requesting records of communication between Zuckerberg and the FBI reflected a House GOP effort to “target” Facebook as part of a ploy to nab Hunter Biden.
It's a testament to just how far-right the MRC is that it thinks any media outlet not as right-wing as them is a "liberal rag."Indeed, Bradley labeling either of those outlet as "liberal rags" is utterly ridiculous. According to AllSides, the right-leaning checker that is apparently the only bias-checker the MRC trusts, The Hill is rated in the "center," though onecould make a case that it leans farther right given that its most prominent writer is right-wing "media critic" Joe Concha, whom the MRC loves so much he's a featured guest on their upcoming Mediterranean cruise. AllSides lists Bloomberg as "leans left," though given AllSides' bias, that means it's quite center. Further, given Republicans' (and the MRC's) obsession with Hunter Biden, it's entirely reasonable to believe that Repubicans targeting of Facebook is all about trying to "nab" Hunter.
Bradley's factually deficient tirade came in the wake of Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg stating on Joe Rogan's podcast that Facebook limited the spread of the New York Post story making claims about Hunter Biden's laptop because the FBI warned it to be aware of misinformation being spread online. Of course, the MRC had its own biased framing of this story, screeching that "Facebook censored the Hunter Biden laptop." This leaves out the important fact that, as we've noted, the New York Post refued to provide independent verification of the story in a way that would suggest it was anything other than an October surprise that had the hallmarks of Russian disinformation of the kind that was found to have happened in the 2016 presidential election.
Bradley eventally got to the nub of his attacks on Bloomberg and The Hill, complaining that they wouldn't push the right-wing narrative on this story:
Rather than focus on alleged corruption between Facebook and the government, Bloomberg focused on political ramifications of Republicans retaking the House next year. The rag warned the GOP would “focus heavily” on censorship, potentially by using its “subpoena power” and presenting a “risk” to tech companies “reviled by conservatives.”
The Hill wasn’t much better. That publication ignored the impact of Big Tech’s and Big Media’s censorship of the Hunter Biden scandals, which helped steal the 2020 election for Joe Biden. The Hill largely skirted the election issue, opting to portray the reduced distribution of the Hunter Biden story merely as being “argued” by House Republicans as preventing Americans from seeing the full picture of the Bidens’ alleged corruption.
[...]
Media Research Center revealed in November 2020 that Big Tech and Big Media’s censorship of the Biden family scandals helped steal the election for Joe Biden.
As we've documented, the only thing the the MRC "revealed" was that it used Trump's own pollster to further its own version of Trump's "Big Lie" about the election being stolen.
The fact that the MRC is still citing this ridiculously biased conspiracy theory -- and its silly dismissal of reputable publications who refuse to blindly push right-wing narratives as "liberal rags" -- shows just how unserious and untrustworthy the MRC has become in putting partisan attacks ahead of any sort of real "media research."
Farah's WND Publishes Article Attacking His Estranged Daughter Topic: WorldNetDaily
The last time we checked in on familial strife in the Farah household, WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah declared that he was not invited to the wedding of his daughter Alyssa. Things apparently haven't gotten any better, because Farah's WND republished an article attacking his daughter. A Sept. 5 article was a repost of a Fox News article bashing Alyssa after becoming an official co-host of "The View":
New "The View" co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin said Monday she hopes to represent former President Trump's voters in the ABC show's Republican seat, although she has become one of his staunchest critics and hopes he never returns to the White House.
"I'm a millennial and I worked in the Trump administration," she said on ABC's "Good Morning America" in a segment previewing the show's upcoming season. "I've also since criticized the former president, but I still want to be a voice for the 74 million Americans who voted for him, and kind of tell them, from my experience, here's why I won't support him again, but here's what a future Republican Party can and should look like. So that's really what I'm hoping to meet the audience with."
Griffin held a number of key positions in the Trump administration, including Vice President Mike Pence's press secretary, Pentagon press secretary and White House communications director. Griffin resigned in December 2020, expressing pride in her time in the administration in her departing letter. Since Trump left office, Griffin has spoken out strongly against his stolen 2020 election rhetoric and become one of many Republican critics of Trump with lofty media perches.
The article -- co-written by Gabriel Hays, formerly of the Media Research Center -- went on to complain that Farah Griffin and a fellow new arrival, fellow conservatrive Ana Navarro, "are hardly reflective of their fellow party members, which polls show remain broadly supportive of Trump." Hays and co-writer David Rutz went on to complain that "Since Trump left office, Griffin has spoken out strongly against his stolen 2020 election rhetoric and become one of many Republican critics of Trump with lofty media perches."
Interestingly, neither the Fox News article nor the WND excerpt of it mentioned that Farah Griffin is the Joseph Farah's daughter. It's a subtle underbusing that Joseph Farah did of his own daughter, but it's an unmistakable one all the same.
MRC's Jean-Pierre-Bashing, Doocy-Fluffing Watch Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's hatred for White House press secretary continues unabated. A Sept. 15 post by Tim Graham whined about fact-checkers again, parroting a Fox News report claiming that "nearly every major fact-checker has completely ignored White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre since she took over for Jen Psaki. Fox has energetically pointed out KJP preposterously claimed no one walks across the Southern border, which no 'fact checker' touched." Kevin Tober pushed the malicious incompetent-diversity-hire angle in a Sept. 20 post:
On Tuesday night's edition of Alex Wagner Tonight on MSNBC, host Alex Wagner brought on White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre for a wide-ranging interview on everything from the ongoing Biden border crisis to President Joe Biden's claim on 60 Minutes that the COVID-19 pandemic is over. Comments that sent his own public health advisors into a frenzied clean-up afterward. Yet Jean-Pierre's incoherence when answering questions no matter how simple isn't just displayed during press briefings when pressed by the White House press corps, she even struggles when given softballs by friendly press.
In light of the controversy of Governors Ron DeSantis (R-FL) and Greg Abbott (R-TX) sending migrants to liberal states, Wagner asked about a report that "DHS officials have presented the White House with some options including flying migrants to the country’s northern border with Canada to alleviate overcrowding on the U.S. Mexico border." Wagner then asked, "how that is meaningfully different than what DeSantis and Abbott are doing?"
Proving how she is nothing but a diversity hire, Jean-Pierre mumbled and fumbled her way through that very simple question without actually answering it in any comprehensible way:
[...]
Wagner never corrected her for her many false statements like claiming the border "is not open" and that Republicans are playing games on immigration. Neither of which is true.
Toher offered no proof to support either claim. Meanwhile, chief Karine-hater Curtis Houck was on the attack again in his writeup of the Sept. 20 briefing:
The inept White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre continued her penchant Tuesday for stumbling her way through press briefings with the latest topic being Governor Ron DeSantis (R-FL) flying illegal immigrants to Martha’s Vineyard and Governors Greg Abbott (R-TX) and Doug Ducey (R-AZ) bussing them to liberal cities.
And, for once, NPR put your tax dollars to work in a positive manner as correspondent Franco Ordoñez grilled Jean-Pierre on the Biden administration’s refusal to work these governors to secure the border.
For the Sept. 23 briefiing, Houck cheered his mancrush Peter Doocy being nastier than usual to Jean-Pierre (which he baselessly insisted was "rare" of him):
Friday’s White House press briefing sent viewers into the weekend with a bang as Fox’s Peter Doocy showed a rare moment of anger as White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre blatantly and repeatedly refused to answer his question as to whether President Biden believes in any limit to abortion.
Doocy began as he always does with a basic, rather innocuous question. This time, it touched on her opening remarks lambasting the 15-week abortion ban proposed by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC): “Following up on your topper, does President Biden favor any limits on abortion?”
Jean-Pierre said “[w]e've been very, very clear” in “talking specifically about” Graham’s plan, but Doocy interjected to push her along: “And your position on his plan is clear. 15 weeks is unacceptable.”
She then continued: “I was speaking to — directly to what Republicans are trying to do. They are calling — they are calling — they are calling for a national ban, which takes us backwards.”
Continuing to stammer her way along, Doocy fact-checked her by noting Graham’s proposal is only for 15 weeks and not an outright ban.
Jean-Pierre continued to lie, claiming “it's a national ban, which will take us backwards and will put at risk the health of women” and would be the first step by “extreme Republican officials” in ending “privacy” and “contraception” and attacking “marriage” (as in gay and interracial marriages).
“I'm not going to get into specifics here. I’m just going to lay out what — what they have said that they’re going to do,” she hilariously added.
Doocy seized on that nonsense: “Why not get into specifics? The Republicans are saying we don't want abortion after 15 weeks. Why can't you say how many weeks the President thinks the limit is?”
Jean-Pierre again diverted by invoking House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and the House GOP’s Commitment to America, but Doocy wasn’t having it, saying he’s “not asking about Kevin McCarthy” and instead about “Joe Biden and his position on abortion.”
After being asked one last time “how many weeks,” Jean-Pierre filibustered with a meandering answer about Republicans “trying to take away the rights and freedoms of Americans.” Doocy tried to push back, but Jean-Pierre moved on to Bloomberg Government’s Courtney Rozen.
Doocy almost always complies when Jean-Pierre (or Jen Psaki) would move on, but not on this day as he exclaimed, “[y]ou did not answer my question”(click “expand”):
Only in Houck's rightpwing bizarro world could a biased reporter like Doocy be seen as asking almost exclusively "innocuous question."
CNS Rushes To Claim Queen As A Christian After Her Death Topic: CNSNews.com
Following the death of Queen Elizabeth the Media Research Center rushed to claim her as a Christian -- but was weirdly reluctant to put any CNS employee on the record doing that. An anonymously writtten Sept. 8 article declared:
Queen Elizabeth, who delivered a Christmas message to the British people every year, said in her last Christmas message this past December (eight months after her husband, Prince Philip, had died) that the teachings of Jesus Christ had been “the bedrock of my faith.”
“And for me and my family, even with one familiar laugh missing this year, there will be joy in Christmas, as we have the chance to reminisce, and see anew the wonder of the festive season through the eyes of our young children, of whom we were delighted to welcome four more this year,” Queen Elizabeth said in that address.
Another anonymously written article that day did much the same thing:
Queen Elizabeth delivered a Christmas address in 2016 in which she talked about some of the things she had learned from the examples of St. Teresa of Calcutta and Jesus Christ.
“I often draw strength,” said the Queen, “from meeting ordinary people doing extraordinary things: volunteers, carers, community organisers and good neighbours; unsung heroes whose quiet dedication makes them special.
A Sept. 9 article -- surprisingly carrying the byline of Patrick Goodenough -- took a shot at newly declared King Charles for not being Christian-y enough by dredging up what he even admitted was a statement from "several decades ago":
When Britain’s new monarch is formally enthroned, among the titles he will assume, in line with tradition dating back to the 16th century, will be that of “Defender of The Faith” – “The Faith” referring to the doctrine of the Church of England (Anglican Church).
Prince Charles automatically became King Charles III at the moment Queen Elizabeth died, but his official accession and formal coronation await.
Several decades ago, the then-Prince of Wales generated debate over the question of adopting a more inclusive title – “Defender of Faith” – reflecting a more ecumenical view of the world, and an interest in other denominations and religions.
Many Christians and traditionalists were appalled at the idea of a change, which would have required parliament to amend longstanding legislation enacted in 1953.
But in a 2015 interview, the heir to the throne indicated he would not seek that amendment, and suggested his views on the matter had been misinterpreted.
Goodenough followed that with another fluffy article stating how "As many around the world mark the death of Queen Elizabeth, Sunday’s 21st anniversary of 9/11 provided a reminder of her response to the terrorist attack on America, including a break in centuries-old tradition and words of condolence that touched many on both sides of the Atlantic" by a post-9/11 changing of the guard ceremony at Buckingham Palace "featured a playing of The Star-Spangled Banner."
A Sept. 12 article by Goodenough expressed relief that Charles stuck to the original "defender of the faith" pledge while grousing that he still endorsed interfaith dialogue:
Britain’s King Charles III was formally proclaimed king and “Defender of The Faith” in a weekend ceremony, and in his first speech affirmed his “particular relationship and responsibility towards the Church of England,” even as he pledged to serve the citizens of Britain and its realms, “whatever may be your background or beliefs.”
[...]
A longstanding advocate of interfaith dialogue, Charles as heir to the throne sparked debate when he suggested that “Defender of Faith” would be a more inclusive and all-embracing title, although in an interview seven years ago he sought to lay the controversy to rest. “The Faith” refers to the Church of England, the country’s state or established church.
Needless to say, CNS still found a way to inject its right-wing anti-biden bias into the queen's death. A Sept. 19 article by Craig Bannister chortled that "President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill had to wait to take their seats at Queen Elizabeth’s funeral Monday – because they didn’t arrive on time."
WND Complains Its Slack Account Was Suspended Topic: WorldNetDaily
Around the same time it created its own problems with Google by having a malware-infested website to which that Google rightly refused to direct its search traffic, WorldNetDaily was having issues with another vendor who wanted nothing to do with it. An anonymously written Sept. 2 article detailed:
One day after WND got word that the blocking of its website by Google had been resolved, employees of the news site woke up to find they no longer could communicate through the company's Slack instant-messaging account.
There's been no response from Slack. The only communication is a web page stating, "This workspace has been suspended."
In June, a major non-profit that opposes illegal immigration had its Slack account canceled.
The group Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, was banned, according to a Slack spokesman, because it violated the tech company's policy forbidding incitement of hatred or violence and that the nonprofit is "affiliated with a known hate group."
"When we learn of an organization using Slack for illegal, harmful or other prohibited purposes, we conduct an investigation and take appropriate action in accordance with our policy," the spokesman told the Washington Free Beacon in June.
WND failed to mention that Slack, as a private business operating in a free-market economy, has every right to decline to do business with anyone it chooses for any reason -- particularly ifit has declared that it won't do business with companies involved in "illegal, harmful or other prohibited purposes." Given WND'sundeniable reputation for publishing misinformation and conspiracy theories and spreading hate, that seems reason enough for Slack to cease doing business with WND.
Indeed, the misinformation continued in this very article: "FAIR is listed by the notoriously biased, left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group, as is WND." WND loves to make this claim about itself -- but it's not true.
WND hasn't referenced the Slack suspension again after this article, so we assume it's still in force and that WND has found an alternate way of communicating with its emloyees.
NEW ARTICLE: Flip-Flopping To Fix A Failed Narrative Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center fed right-wing claims that a story of a raped 10-year-old who had to go to another state for an abortion wasn't true -- but when the story was proven true after all, it simply changed the narrative and refused to apologize. Read more >>
Apropos of nothing, Bob Unruh fearmongered in a Sept. 8 WorldNetDaily article:
Notoriously wrong Newsmax pundit Dick Morris 
MIcky Wootten wrote in a Sept. 12 CNSNews.com 
The Media Research Center doesn't care about the health and safety of journalists who aren't right-wing shills -- witness its 
Over the summer, the Media Research Center 
Joel Hirschhorn 
The Media Research Center's 
CNSNews.com 
Lots to unpack in the lead of a Sept. 7 Media Research Center 
The last time we checked in on familial strife in the Farah household, WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah 
The Media Research Center's hatred for White House press secretary continues unabated. A Sept. 15 
Following the death of Queen Elizabeth the Media Research Center rushed to claim her as a Christian -- but was weirdly reluctant to put any CNS employee on the record doing that. An anonymously writtten Sept. 8 
Around the same time it 
