A host of corporate media outlets including CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and MSNBC have participated in private dinners and sponsored trips with the China-United States Exchange Foundation, a Chinese Communist Party-funded group seeking to garner “favorable coverage” and “disseminate positive messages” regarding China, The National Pulse can reveal.
New York Times podcast host Michael Barbaro reportedly pressured several journalists to tone down their criticism of the paper after it retracted the core of its award-winning podcast series “Caliphate” due to false reporting.
According to NPR’s David Folkenflik, Mr. Barbaro “repeatedly pressed at least four journalists Friday to temper their critiques of The Times and how they framed what happened. I know, because I was one of them.”
Over there in The Wall Street Journal as we travel through the Christmas holiday season, was this very perceptive piece by one David Satter. Mr. Satter is identified as the “author of Age of Delirium: the Decline and Fall of the Soviet Union and a member of the academic advisory board of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation.”
At one stage in his earlier life he was the Moscow correspondent for The Financial Times of London, arriving in the Soviet capital in 1976. He went on to work for The Wall Street Journal as a special correspondent covering Soviet affairs. Suffice to say, he knows well how a state-run media runs.
Americans need to insist that legacy media be held to account as a treacherous culprit in the mass deception campaigns attributed to politicians, shady public relations operatives, and foreign powers.
Disinformation media campaigns operated by the Russians and the Chinese may also have a domestic origin. It is not what one would think. They don’t come from sleeper cells. Instead, the American legacy media, by way of its greed and lack of accountability, is responsible for the deception.
The best stories in The New York Times often involve the Gray Lady’s self-flagellation over a doozy of a mistake, and Saturday was one of those days. The paper was crowded with confessions, explanations and apologies over a disgraced podcast called “Caliphate” that went off the rails and into the weeds of fiction.
Over 12 episodes in 2018, the program promoted the false boasts of a Pakistani man living in Canada who claimed he murdered and beheaded people as a member of Islamic State in Syria. The man, Shehroze Chaudhry, who went by the name Abu Huzayfah, also told tales about terrorist leaders using maps to plan attacks on Western targets and aiming for another 9/11. “They wanted to outdo Al Qaeda,” Chaudhry warned.
The New York Times has returned an award and had another withdrawn after it found discrepancies in its podcast on the Islamic State group.
After a two-month investigation, the newspaper said the podcast, Caliphate, failed to meet its editorial standards.
In the 2018 series, Shehroze Chaudhry, one of its central figures, claims he travelled to Syria and joined IS.
But the Times said on Friday that it found “a history of misrepresentations” about his involvement with the group.
For a damaging story about a Democrat to be true, DNA must be found on a blue dress. There must be Blue Dress Proof™. It’s not enough to have a witness and a victim. It’s not enough to have a computer, a cache of validated emails, thousands of affadavits signed under the threat of perjury. There must be actual DNA, videotaped evidence. If the bad guy is a Democrat, there must be Blue Dress Proof.
The New York Times’ Pulitzer Prize-nominated podcast about ISIS was an “institutional failure” that included shoddy reporting based off interviews with a “con artist,” executive editor Dean Baquet said Friday.
In a blistering editors’ note, the newspaper said the 2018 series “Caliphate” blew its journalistic standards.
An internal investigation into the 12-part series was launched after the main subject, Shehroze Chaudhry, was arrested in late September in Canada on charges he lied about his role in ISIS activity in Syria.
Covering for the Biden family by trying to suppress rather than report on The Post’s scoops may prove expensive for a host of US media institutions — especially the privileged social-media companies.
A majority of voters say the media intentionally buried The Post’s October bombshell about Hunter Biden’s laptop to help his father Joe Biden’s political campaign, a Rasmussen Reports poll showed Tuesday.
Over the past five or so years, the media has shifted its business model to focus on making virtually every story about Donald Trump. From local news stories to every conceivable national scenario, Trump has been the feature.
“How did he influence this?”
“What do Republicans think about this tweet?”
“This is surely the end of the Trump administration!”
Years of this constant barrage. Nonstop.
If there is one thing that the Hunter Biden laptop episode has proved, it is that former directors of the CIA aren’t as adept at evaluating evidence as advertised.
Five former directors or acting directors of the CIA signed a letter asserting that the laptop, first reported by this newspaper in the weeks before the election, “has all the hallmarks of Russian information operation.”
More than 50 former senior intel officials, including former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, signed the letter, which was used by the Biden campaign and the media to discredit the damning e-mails about Hunter Biden’s business dealings.
In an opinion piece published on Friday in The Wall Street Journal, Joseph Epstein, former editor of The American Scholar, triggered a firestorm when he suggested that Jill Biden stop referring to herself as “Dr. Jill Biden” because she was not a medical doctor, having earned a doctorate in education.
On Saturday, The New York Times published a piece in response, titled, “An Opinion Writer Argued Jill Biden Should Drop the ‘Dr.’ (Few Were Swayed.)” The piece began, “Do people who go by Dr. need to carry stethoscopes?”
“The story could not be more obviously fake if it had been wearing dollar-store spectacles and attached plastic moustache.”— David Frum. Oct. 18, on the Hunter Biden scandal.
North American journalism is going to have to engage in a massive repair job, a complete and radical overhaul, if both practice and profession are to retain any — any — credibility or respect.
There has been plenty of criticism in recent days of the mainstream media’s refusal to cover the New York Post’s bombshell reporting on Hunter Biden ever since the Biden transition issued a press release acknowledging that he was under investigation over his so-called “tax affairs,” but the media went far beyond simply ignoring the controversy.
Washington Post columnist Greg Sargent quickly declared the day after the New York Post first began reporting on the alleged contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop that it was “Trump’s fake new Biden scandal,” calling the allegations “laughably weak.”
It’s now clear that the Hunter Biden story was real, with Hunter himself acknowledging a federal probe into his taxes — one that reportedly began in 2018. Really, it was always clear. Yet, when The New York Post broke the details, virtually the entire journalistic establishment and left-wing punditsphere defamed the newspaper, claiming it was passing on Russian “disinformation” or partisan fabrications.
The political media quickly began pumping out process stories about the alleged discord in The Post’s newsroom and about the problems with the reporting. In so doing, of course, they did practically no reporting on the substantive allegations that Joe Biden’s family had spent years cashing in on his influence.
The media are criminals never to be trusted.
