
Malcolm X on the media…


Bloomberg News elicited a massive backlash over the weekend for offering ‘tips’ to Americans who might struggle with the rising cost of living which included letting their pets die and eating lentils instead of meat.
The piece, titled “Inflation Stings Most If You Earn Less Than $300K. Here’s How to Deal,” was penned by Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economics at the New School for Social Research, a private university in New York.
Ghilarducci proved she is completely out of touch with the reality of life for everyday Americans, writing “I expect those most affected will adjust to inflation in the classic way by shifting away from relatively expensive items toward close substitutes.”
She continued, “Here are some ideas on how to reconfigure consumption and lessen the blow. But again, adjustment is hard for people without savings or choices.”
The professor then outlined how people should take public transportation instead of driving, eat meat subsitutes like lentils and vegetables, avoid buying items in bulk, and avoid medical expenses for pets.
Right, so let pets die? In short yes.
On March 17, 2022, The New York Times stated it had verified the authenticity of a laptop and its data as belonging to the president’s son, Hunter Biden. This was the same laptop holding information that Twitter, Facebook, and other corporate media immediately suppressed when The New York Post, a right-leaning competitor of The New York Times, reported on it three weeks before the 2020 presidential election.
If they had known about one of the Biden family scandals, such as the Hunter Biden laptop information, 17 percent of Joe Biden’s voters wouldn’t have voted for him, found a 2020 post-election poll. This means big tech’s suppression of this story likely made enough difference to tip Joe Biden into his low-margin win in the Electoral College.
Back in October 2020, Twitter and Facebook immediately responded to The New York Post’s publication of information from Hunter Biden’s laptop by effectively banning it from their platforms that effectively monopolize public discussion. Twitter punished the Post for reporting the repeatedly authenticated laptop information by suspending its account for two weeks.
“What this means is that, in the crucial days leading up to the 2020 presidential election, most of the corporate media spread an absolute lie about The New York Post’s reporting in order to mislead and manipulate the American electorate,” commented independent investigative reporter Glenn Greenwald.

When photos began to circulate online of Russian cosmonauts boarding the International Space Station (ISS), media outlets online quickly spread the hoax that the group had deliberately chosen to wear yellow and blue flight suits in solidarity with Ukraine by wearing the country’s national colors.
The connection between the color of the attire and the conflict in Ukraine spread to outlets like the BBC, Bloomberg Quicktake, The Times, and NPR.
But what many had hoped was an act of heroic defiance against Russian President Vladimir Putin’s regime turned out to be an unrelated coincidence.
Veteran cosmonaut Oleg Artemyev, the mission commander for the Russian team aboard the ISS, quickly debunked the story, Reuters reported. In a news conference from the space station, he said the suits had been created six months ago, predating Russia’s military aggression in Ukraine. Moreover, Artemyev expressed solidarity with his country, voicing no sympathy for Ukraine.
“Color is just color,” Artemyev said. “It has nothing to do with Ukraine. In these days, even though we are in space, we are together with our president and people!”
He explained that the team had selected its colors based off of the team’s common alma mater—a college whose primary colors also used yellow and blue. “Every crew picks a color that looks different. It was our turn to pick a color,” he said.
“Sometimes yellow is just yellow,” Roscosmos’s press service said on its Telegram channel. “To see the Ukrainian flag everywhere and in everything is crazy.”
Independent journalist Glenn Greenwald laid into corporate media in a Twitter thread on Saturday morning, detailing how government officials and media outlets had effectively colluded to protect President Joe Biden’s embattled son Hunter — particularly during the 2020 presidential election.
Greenwald ultimately left The Intercept, the outlet he cofounded, when he was asked to sanitize an article he was writing about then-candidate Joe Biden, his son Hunter, and their past dealings with both China and Ukraine — and he argued Saturday that multiple media outlets had been drawn into the coordinated effort to protect the Bidens.
His comments come in the wake of a report from The New York Times — which, in addition to confirming that Hunter Biden remains under a federal investigation, let slip that the emails found on the laptop he reportedly abandoned at a Delaware repair shop were, in fact, authentic.
People familiar with the investigation said prosecutors had examined emails between Mr. Biden, Mr. Archer and others about Burisma and other foreign business activity. Those emails were obtained by The New York Times from a cache of files that appears to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop. The email and others in the cache were authenticated by people familiar with them and with the investigation.
The New York Post’s Miranda Devine, author of “The Laptop From Hell,” noted that none of the senior ex-intelligence officials — who swore that reports about Hunter Biden were nothing more than “Russian disinformation” — were willing to walk back their statements.
During the heat of the 2020 campaign, Now-President Joe Biden charged that Donald Trump’s accusation that Hunter Biden’s laptop contained incriminating information of his business ties to China and Ukraine was nothing but a ‘smear.’
“So what about the Americans who really today only want me to ask you about Hunter Biden’s laptop?” KCRG Anchor Beth Malicki asked him in October 2020. “How are you going to get them to see that you are fighting for them when they’re so dead-set against you?”
“By the way, there’s nothing to any of that,” Biden claimed. “Nothing to any of that. It’s all smear. Every major outfit, every serious investigator has pointed out that this is a smear. This is classic Trump.”
“We are four days left and all of a sudden there’s a laptop,” he continued. “And you may recall, there’s also talk about four months before there was a similar thing that somebody had allegedly. There’s overwhelming evidence that — from the intelligence community — that the Russians are engaged.”
“I mean, look, this is — my son’s an honorable man and all the investigations that were done around the issue of what was going on Ukraine, if you notice, every one of the major people who worked for Trump during the impeachment went under oath and under oath said Biden did his job,” he added.


On this day in 2003, the United States launched its air invasion of Iraq, with the ground component beginning one day later. It was the first stage of a war that would ultimately drag on for over eight years, killing thousands of American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians as the U.S. and its allies sought to overthrow Saddam Hussein’s government.
Nineteen years on, Americans watch as a conflict embroils Eastern Europe. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s large-scale invasion of Ukraine beginning last month has brought frequent reports of deaths of innocents and strikes on civilian spaces.
Horrific scenes from the conflict in Ukraine have fetched headlines much like those published during the Iraq War. But there is a difference between journalistic reporting on a conflict and coverage that trends more toward activism. Reporters operating under the guise of objectivity repeatedly trended toward the latter approach during the Iraq War. Now, as establishment journalists not-so-subtly agitate for a more interventionist U.S. policy in Ukraine, it’s worth keeping an eye on these tried-and-trued hawkish tendencies.
In a press conference on March 15, reporters pelted White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki with questions regarding the Biden administration’s opposition to certain military support for Ukraine. There were over one dozen questions mentioning military assistance—including five distinct mentions of a no-fly zone—and only one question about the potential American role in facilitating negotiations between Russia and Ukraine.
Neither were the numerous questions about military assistance purely fact-based. “Zelenskyy and other Ukrainian officials have made so clear that what they believe they need the most is more warplanes and fighter jets. So why is the U.S. assessing something different?” asked a reporter. “Why does the U.S. believe they know better what Ukraine needs than what Ukrainian officials are saying they need the most?”
You must be logged in to post a comment.