Tag: media

MSNOW Cutting Some ‘News’ Shows to Focus on Anti-Trump Resistance Programming

MSNOW, the left wing network formerly known as MSNBC, is dropping the charade of being a ‘news’ network to focus on their real money maker, which is anti-Trump resistance TV shows.

This is actually a smart move for them.

People who watch MSNOW are not going there for news, they watch to have their anti-Trump biases confirmed. They watch to cheer on as the hosts insult Trump and all things Republican.

NewsBusters reported:

Rating MS DOWN? MS NOW Shakes Up Network Line Up, Anchors Out

After being cast out into the wilderness by NBCUniversal last year, things didn’t appear to be going well for the rebranded “MS NOW.” On Wednesday, a shakeup was announced that saw daytime completely reshaped with two anchors losing their seats with at least one already announcing that she had quit, Morning Joe experiencing some shrinkage, while a new face would appear during the 11th Hour, among other shifts.

Going down the line up, first, Morning Joe will be losing an hour. After spending some time at an inflated four hours of Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski shrieking at the camera, the purported preferred morning show for Washington D.C. insiders would be returning to just three hours.

Anchor Stephanie Ruhle will be leaving The 11th Hour and taking over that lost hour from Morning Joe, as well as the following one. Meaning her time slot would be 9 a.m. to 11 a.m.

One of the more noteworthy line items in the shakeup was Ana Cabrera losing her position as an anchor of the 11a a.m. slot, and her announcement that she would be leaving the company.

Keep reading

CBS News Investigation Uncovers Massive Medicare Hospice Fraud In L.A. County

An investigation by CBS News has discovered massive Medicare fraud at more than 700 out of 1,800 licensed hospice providers in Los Angeles County

The scam utilizes stolen Medicare numbers to fraudulently enroll healthy seniors in hospice with fake terminal diagnoses, billing Medicare an average of $29,000 per patient without delivering care, to the tune of hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars.

About 31 percent of hospice and home health companies in the U.S. are registered in L.A. County but when investigators visited the addresses listed, they found no clinics, patients or healthcare workers.

Instead they found multiple red flags, including multiple hospices in one building, high rates of terminally ill patients later discharged alive, excessive billing, and staff shared across multiple companies.

The California state auditor had sounded the alarm three years ago, saying that Los Angeles County had seen the number of hospice companies increase more than six times the national average, relative to its elderly population.

Let’s put this in perspective.

The population of residents age 65 or over in California is estimated at 6.3 million while Florida estimates its population of 65+ residents at 4.9 million.

Public records show 2,279 Medicare-certified hospice organizations in California with just 208 such Medicare-certified organizations in Florida.

This raises serious questions as to why California would have more than 10 times the number of Medicare-certified hospice organizations than Florida when it has less than twice the population of 65+ residents.

According to CBS, in just one year, L.A. County hospices overbilled Medicare by $105 million, prompting the state to investigate and revoke the licenses of 280 hospices.

This latest revelation of potential Medicare fraud shows that the problem of scammers enriching themselves at taxpayer expense extends far beyond Minnesota, which has been under scrutiny for the past few months over the alleged theft of billions of taxpayer dollars via social services.

It also reveals the silver lining that a mainstream news organization is finally willing to do investigative reporting on suspected fraud rather than leaving the heavy lifting to citizen journalists like Nick Shirley, who blew the lid off taxpayer fraud in Minnesota and then turned his sights on California.

Keep reading

Blocking the Internet Archive Won’t Stop AI, But It Will Erase the Web’s Historical Record

Imagine a newspaper publisher announcing it will no longer allow libraries to keep copies of its paper. 

That’s effectively what’s begun happening online in the last few months. The Internet Archive—the world’s largest digital library—has preserved newspapers since it went online in the mid-1990s. The Archive’s mission is to preserve the web and make it accessible to the public. To that end, the organization operates the Wayback Machine, which now contains more than one trillion archived web pages and is used daily by journalists, researchers, and courts.

But in recent months The New York Times began blocking the Archive from crawling its website, using technical measures that go beyond the web’s traditional robots.txt rules. That risks cutting off a record that historians and journalists have relied on for decades. Other newspapers, including The Guardian, seem to be following suit. 

For nearly three decades, historians, journalists, and the public have relied on the Internet Archive to preserve news sites as they appeared online. Those archived pages are often the only reliable record of how stories were originally published. In many cases, articles get edited, changed, or removed—sometimes openly, sometimes not. The Internet Archive often becomes the only source for seeing those changes. When major publishers block the Archive’s crawlers, that historical record starts to disappear.

The Times says the move is driven by concerns about AI companies scraping news content. Publishers seek control over how their work is used, and several—including the Times—are now suing AI companies over whether training models on copyrighted material violates the law. There’s a strong case that such training is fair use. 

Whatever the outcome of those lawsuits, blocking nonprofit archivists is the wrong response. Organizations like the Internet Archive are not building commercial AI systems. They are preserving a record of our history. Turning off that preservation in an effort to control AI access could essentially torch decades of historical documentation over a fight that libraries like the Archive didn’t start, and didn’t ask for. 

If publishers shut the Archive out, they aren’t just limiting bots. They’re erasing the historical record. 

Keep reading

As Washington Succeeds in Wrecking Cuba’s Economy, US Media Blame the Victim

The US government’s decades-long economic blockade against Cuba is in many ways not a complicated issue. The policy of restricting trade with the country’s Communist government was put into full force under the Kennedy administration, with the explicit goal of causing enough economic hardship, hunger and desperation to spur regime change.

The UN General Assembly has overwhelmingly and consistently voted to end the embargo since a resolution to that effect was first introduced in 1992. Member countries argue that the embargo violates international law. It has cost the country anywhere between $130–170 billion since its inception, and has restricted the Cuban people’s access to food and medicine. And it has not accomplished its primary goal of overthrowing the Cuban government.

These are key points that should be included in any article reporting on Cuba’s economic struggles. However, US journalists have consistently leaned into the US government’s framing of the issue: that the country’s Communist government is largely or exclusively to blame for its financial woes (FAIR.org, 11/4/24).

As the Trump regime tightens the screws of the embargo by further restricting oil access to the country, a move that has been condemned by UN human rights experts as a further violation of international law (New York Times, 2/13/26), legacy media continue to toe the government’s line on the issue, with coverage that is either low on context or outright stenography.

President Donald Trump has tried to justify his administration’s significant escalation in tactics on the basis that Cuba represents an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to the security of the United States, primarily by supporting US geopolitical enemies. This accusation is not new: The country has previously been accused of hosting both Russian and Chinese spy bases. Despite neither claim being backed by evidence (Belly of the Beast, 2/6/26, 8/1/24), the Trump administration doubled down on them when rolling out its new and harsher set of policies.

But the administration also unveiled a new claim that upped the ante: Cuba has apparently been harboring Hamas and Hezbollah forces, not 90 miles off of our shores! “Cuba welcomes transnational terrorist groups, such as Hezbollah and Hamas,” reads an executive order from January 29,

creating a safe environment for these malign groups so that these transnational terrorist groups can build economic, cultural and security ties throughout the region, and attempt to destabilize the Western Hemisphere, including the United States.

The administration did not provide evidence to support this claim, and none has surfaced, despite local journalists’ investigative efforts (Belly of the Beast, 2/2/26).

Keep reading

The Most Obvious Question Liberal Media Refuses to Ask About the Iran War

Doubtless, the war launched by US President Donald Trump is not popular among ordinary Americans.

According to the latest public opinion poll, only a minority of Americans—part of the dwindling core of Trump’s supporters—believe that the US-Israeli aggression against Iran has merit.

According to a Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted in early March 2026, only 27 percent of Americans approve of the US-Israeli strikes on Iran—while 43 percent disapprove and 29 percent are unsure.

This pro-war constituency is likely to remain supportive of Trump until the end of his term in office, and long after.

However, the war on Iran is not popular, and it is unlikely to become popular, especially as the Trump administration is reportedly fragmented between those who want to stay the course and those desperate for an exit strategy. Such a strategy would allow their president to save face before the midterm elections in November.

Mainstream media—aside, of course, from the pro-war chorus in right-wing news organizations, podcasters, and think tanks—also recognize that their country has entered a quagmire.

If it continues unchecked, it will likely prove worse than the war in Iraq in 2003 or the long war in Afghanistan, which lasted 20 years and ended with a decisive American defeat in August 2021 following the withdrawal of US forces and the collapse of the Afghan government.

Both wars have cost US taxpayers an estimated $8 trillion, including long-term veteran care and interest on borrowing, according to the Brown University Costs of War Project.

Iran is already promising to be even more costly if the insanity of the war—instigated by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his war-crazed government—does not end very quickly.

Many Americans may understand the difficult situation in which Trump’s unhinged behavior and his unexplained loyalty to Netanyahu have placed their country. What they rarely confront is the moral dimension of that crisis.

Though they speak of the war’s failure—the lack of strategy, the lack of preparation, the absence of an end goal, and the confusion surrounding its objectives—very few in mainstream media have taken what should have been the obvious moral position: that the war itself is criminal, unjustifiable, and illegal under international law.

Keep reading

Correcting the NY Times ACIP Reporting on Vaccine Injury

Seeing Sunday’s NY Times headline titled Confidential Report Calls for Sweeping Changes to Track Covid Vaccine Harms, a reflexive question flashed in the minds of even the most staunch defenders of legacy vaccine policy – Is the NY Times about to dismiss the Covid vaccine injured?

For those who don’t care to read the outlet’s reporting, here are what the author’s chose to add as closing words:

“The basis of supposed Covid vaccine injury syndrome is even less persuasive and thus even less directly relevant to vaccine policy…”

For experienced readers, seeing who the article’s lead author is should have caused pause immediately. When is comes to journalistic integrity, Apoorva Mandavilli is not who comes to mind.

In an October 6, 2021 NYT’s article titled A New Vaccine Strategy for Children: Just One Dose, for Now Mandavilli stated that 900,000 U.S. children have been hospitalized due to Covid. She was forced to correct the glaring error when the real number was found to be slightly more than 63,000.

In 2022 Mandavilli reported on the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) recommendation of Pfizer’s Covid shot for kids 5-11-years-old. NY Times initially reports, “Nearly 4,000 children aged 5 to 11 have died from a Covid-related condition called multisystem inflammatory syndrome during the pandemic.”

Mandavilli was again forced to add a correction”

Keep reading

Trump Administration Goes After the Media for Negative Coverage of the Iran War

In recent days, senior Trump administration officials have increased their criticism and complaints about negative coverage of the US-Israeli war against Iran, with President Trump even suggesting certain media outlets could face “charges for treason.”

Trump made the comments in a long post on Truth Social put out on Sunday night, where he claimed that Iran has been feeding “false information” to the “Fake News media” and said fake AI videos were being circulated.

The president said there was a fake video that showed the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln on fire. “The story was knowingly FAKE and, in a certain way, you can say that those Media Outlets that generated it should be brought up on Charges for TREASON for the dissemination of false information!” Trump wrote.

While a fake video of Abraham Lincoln was circulated on social media, there’s no indication that it was picked up by any major media outlets. The only media outlet President Trump named in his post was The Wall Street Journal, which he accused of “false reporting” over a report on five US Air Force refueling tankers being damaged by an Iranian missile strike in Saudi Arabia.

However, Trump also acknowledged that one tanker was damaged and that the other four were back in service, which doesn’t refute the Journal report since it said the aircraft were not fully destroyed and were being repaired.

“The five US Refueling Planes that were supposedly struck down and badly damaged, according to The Wall Street Journal’s false reporting, and others, are all in service, with the exception of one, which will soon be flying the skies,” Trump said.

The president also pointed to comments from Brendan Carr, the head of the Federal Communications Commission, who is threatening to revoke the licenses of news broadcasters for their coverage of the war in Iran. “I am so thrilled to see Brendan Carr … looking at the licenses of some of these Corrupt and Highly Unpatriotic ‘News’ Organizations,” he added.

US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has also complained that media outlets haven’t been “patriotic” enough in their coverage. “We will keep pushing, keep advancing, no quarter, no mercy for our enemies,” Hegseth said at a press conference on Friday. “Yet some in this crew, in the press, just can’t stop. Allow me to make a few suggestions. People look up at the TV, and they see banners, they see headlines. I used to be in that business. And I know that everything is written intentionally.”

The US war chief continued, “For example, a banner or a headline: ‘Mideast war intensifies,’ splashing on the screen the last couple of days, alongside visuals of civilian or energy targets that Iran has hit, because that’s what they do. What should the banner read instead? How about, ‘Iran increasingly desperate,’ because they are. They know it and so do you, if it can be admitted.”

Hegseth described a headline that said the “war is widening” as fake despite the conflict spreading across the region. He suggested a “real headline” for an “actually patriotic press” could say “Iran shrinking, going underground,” though senior Iranian officials attended a public Quds Day march in Tehran that same day.

Keep reading

Trump threatens media with treason charges over Iran war coverage

US President Donald Trump has threatened media organizations with treason charges, accusing them of knowingly colluding with Iran to cast doubt on Washington’s decisive “victory.”

In a lengthy Truth Social post on Sunday, Trump alleged that “fake news” outlets had been spreading false information supposedly fabricated by Iran using artificial intelligence.

“The fact is, Iran is being decimated, and the only battles they ‘win’ are those that they create through AI, and are distributed by Corrupt Media Outlets,” Trump wrote.

Trump claimed that Tehran has circulated fabricated footage showing attacks on US military assets, including alleged strikes on refueling aircraft and naval vessels.

Keep reading

Veteran ’60 Minutes’ reporter says the network ‘crumbled’ under Trump’s pressure

A veteran “60 Minutes” journalist slammed the previous owners of his parent network, CBS, for settling an election interference lawsuit with President Donald Trump.

“Our previous owners at CBS faced political pressure and crumbled‚” Scott Pelley said, according to The Guardian’s Jeremy Barr, referencing the fallout over the legal dispute between Trump and CBS. Pelley was introducing former “60 Minutes” executive producer Bill Owens at the National Press Foundation Annual Journalism Awards Dinner last week. 

Pelley was referencing former CBS parent company, Paramount Global, before it was merged with Skydance Media, run by David Ellison, the son of billionaire Oracle founder and Trump ally Larry Ellison.

In the days leading up to the 2024 presidential election, CBS News aired its “60 Minutes” interview featuring then-Vice President Kamala Harris. Critics at the time noticed that an answer she gave to a question about Israel that first aired in a preview clip on “Face the Nation,” which was mocked by conservatives for her “word salad” comments, appeared to have been swapped with a different answer that aired during the primetime election special the next evening.

Trump accused the network of election interference and filed a $20 billion lawsuit against the company. 

After months of contentious mediation, Paramount and CBS settled Trump’s lawsuit for a sum expected to be north of $30 million, including $16 million upfront for Trump’s presidential library.

Keep reading

When Do Protest Observers Become Lawbreaking Participants?

When an ICE agent shot and killed Minneapolis resident Renee Good after she allegedly obstructed immigration authorities with her vehicle, disobeyed their commands, and attempted to flee – drawing fatal fire from an officer nearly struck by the vehicle – politicians and pundits decried her death as murder. They called it particularly unjust because she was not acting as a protester but a legal observer.

After federal agents arrested Don Lemon for allegedly disrupting a St. Paul church service in protest of the same Twin Cities immigration enforcement surge Good had opposed. His lawyer defended the former CNN anchor as a journalist, persecuted by the Trump administration for having carried out “constitutionally protected work” in violation of his First Amendment rights.  So too did myriad media organizations ranging from the National Association of Black Journalists to the Committee to Protect Journalists.

While Good’s shooting presents a distinct issue, her case and Lemon’s highlight the complex legal issues surrounding those who claim to be chronicling protests. Legal observers and journalists have long worked on the frontlines of civil unrest, the former documenting instances of alleged police misconduct in violation of constitutional rights to peaceably assemble, and the latter chronicling the assemblies. Their efforts have brought transparency and accountability. But what happens when legal observers and journalists act, or are seen by authorities as unlawful protestors rather than the neutral parties they are supposed to be? To what degree do their titles afford them special protections from prosecution in a court of law?

These questions have been brought into sharp relief as the Trump administration has brought hundreds of cases against people whom it alleges have not merely monitored but participated in illegal actions impacting immigration enforcement operations. 

“We respect the First Amendment and the right to peacefully protest,” a DOJ spokesperson told RealClearInvestigations, but “journalists and observers are not provided special protections to obstruct law enforcement operations.”

Northwestern University Law Professor Steven Lubet, who has criticized the Trump administration’s approach to immigration, concurred that legal observers “have no special legal status,” nor do journalists have “license to engage in violence or disruption.” But, he added, “law enforcement authorities should have a heavy burden to show that a journalist…or legal observer…had overstepped their role.”

Although it did not respond to a request for comment, the American Civil Liberties Union has litigated against federal law enforcement authorities in connection with ICE’s activities in Minnesota. It argues that the government is violating the “constitutional rights” of people “observing, documenting, and protesting ICE activity in their neighborhoods.”

Like so many issues, the very nature of protest and the definitions of legal observers and journalists have come into question during the Trump years. America has a long history of protest, but the anti-ICE protests are different. Typically, protestors have engaged in somewhat organized demonstrations, with law enforcement responding if there is violence or property damage. But residents of Minneapolis, Los Angeles, and other sanctuary jurisdictions to which the second Trump administration has surged ICE agents have turned this dynamic on its head by arriving at the scene in response to law enforcement actions, and sometimes challenging such efforts.

It is hard to distinguish protestor from legal observer as many self-described ICE-watchers pursue officers in their cars and approach them during encounters – often times with phone in hand to record the events, and, they claim, to deter misconduct. Alex Pretti, an armed man who was killed by border patrol agents in Minneapolis after appearing to come to the assistance of another protestor, had been filming the scene before his deadly encounter. While he was widely described as a legal observer, just a few days prior, he had kicked in the taillight of an ICE vehicle, raising the murky issue of whether one can toggle back and forth between protester and observer depending on the circumstances.

Keep reading