On Thursday, Federal Reserve Chairman Janet Yellen suggested in a videoconference call, as translated into plain English by the Wall Street Journal, that "there could be benefits to allowing the central bank to buy stocks as a way to boost the economy in a downturn."
In an extended Friday writeup which appeared on Page A9 in its print edition, Matt Flegenheimer at the New York Times appeared to be preparing the paper's left-wing audience for what was supposedly unthinkable just a month ago: The possibility that Hillary Clinton might lose the presidential election.
The theme, as would be expected, was how Mrs. Clinton could "actually blow this." Since liberals never lose because their ideas and positions are unpopular (that's sarcasm, folks), Flegenheimer absurdly pointed at the campaign's mishandling of Mrs. Clinton's pneumonia last week as the primary cause of the potential failure. To do this, he only made a glancing reference to Mrs. Clinton's email/private-server scandal (without using the "S-word," of course), and completely ignored her "deplorables" insult directed at "half" of rival Donald Trump's supporters and the myriad controversies associated with the Clinton Foundation.
Don't be so modest, Bob. You have an amazing power. Any presidential candidate who you either work for directly or declare to have won before Election Day is doomed to fail. That power that you are so reluctant to brag about is known far and wide within political circles as the "Shrum Curse." We saw the latest demonstration by Bob Shrum of that power on With All Due Respect on September 2 as chronicled by your humble correspondent who anticipated its effects in this Newsbusters article, WADR: Will Shrum Curse Doom Hillary's Campaign?
When it came to covering voters’ most important issue, networks fumbled again in August. Instead, the networks spent more time tackling a football player who protested the national anthem.
As Barack Obama prepares to leave the White House in January, the press is noting the president's accomplishments over the past seven years and seven months.
According to the fawning mainstream media, one of the heights the 55-year-old Democrat has reached is not boosting the country's economy nor successes in foreign policy, but instead that Obama has played more than 300 rounds of golf since taking office in January of 2009.
Last month, yours truly, with the help of commenters (and in a supplemental post found here), shredded the idea proposed in a column at Slate.com that journalists should eliminate the words "terrorist" and, by extension, "terrorism," to describe genuine acts of terrorism committed by terrorists (unless those words are uttered in quoted remarks by interview subjects). Sadly, in the course of covering the topic, I learned that that the Newspeak practitioners pretending to be journalists at Reuters have already done this in association "with specific events."
Now Philip Mudd, who "comments on counterterrorism and security policy for CNN" and is a former “deputy director of the CIA’s Counterterrorist Center,” wants to travel part of the way down that road. Mudd wants to effectively eliminate the T-words when describing "seemingly random attacks with debatable motivations," while continuing their use for "politically motivated Islamist revolutionaries" such as "Osama bin Laden."
Adam Ragusea, writing at Slate.com, believes that the word "terrorist" has become "uselessly arbitrary and loaded," because it "has acquired a powerful religious—and specifically Islamic—connotation" that "is substantively consequential."
As a result, Ragusea believes that the Associated Press, whose Stylebook sadly exerts nearly ironclad control over language used in U.S. establishment press journalism, should follow the lead of Reuters and stop using that word. Oh, and based on looking at what Reuters shamefully did with little fanfare, the word "terrorism" also needs to go.
Saturday morning US Time, Reuters reported (HT Zero Hedge) that "The British government has rejected an online petition signed by 4.1 million people calling for a new referendum on whether to leave the European Union." The wire service AFP posted a similar story on Sunday, reporting that "The British government on Saturday formally rejected a petition signed by more than 4.125 million people calling for a second referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU."
Reports such as these leave one scrambling to find a word to describe something beyond "bizarre." After all, it's been nearly two weeks since the entire "petition" was exposed as a scam, as most of the "people calling for a new referendum" aren't real people, and there is no way to know how many signers who are flesh-and-blood humans are really UK citizens. Reuters and AFP, even as they covered the government's rejection, still wouldn't acknowledge those realities. Sadly, they're not alone.
ABC's World News Tonight stood out as the only Big Three evening newscast on Thursday to cover the revelation that a Russian police officer physically attacked an American diplomat as he entered the U.S. embassy in Moscow. Martha Raddatz spotlighted the "really astonishing" incident, where "the diplomat was assaulted the second he went up the steps; and then, had to fight and struggle to get himself inside to safety." She also pointed out the context of the recent "ear-shattering close encounters between Russian jets and U.S. warships."
In its coverage of Egypt's declaration of a national holiday to mark the ouster of Islamist dictator Mohammed Morsi (also spelled "Mursi") three years ago, the Associated Press recast history. It completely ignored Morsi's assumption of de facto dictatorial powers only months after he was "freely elected" in 2012, his government's brutal repression while he was in power, and his Muslim Brotherhood's attempt to ramrod sharia law and socialism into the country's constitution and legal framework.
The wire service, by noting that "millions of Egyptians took to the streets on June 30 (2013), to call for Morsi to step down," also effectively admitted that it attempted to downplay the size of the protest crowds in its original reporting three years ago. Most other news services accurately reported at the time that "millions" had taken to the streets throughout Egypt, while the AP would only acknowledge "hundreds of thousands."
Hundreds of British actors and celebrities are clamoring for Great Britain to remain part of the European Union when the nation votes this week. That’s in direct opposition to the view of many conservatives on both sides of the pond. Either result could have major economic consequences. UK citizens will vote June 23 on the contentious “Brexit” referendum. Putting their high-profiles to use, 282 people involved in Britain’s creative industries signed a letter in May arguing many of their “projects” would not have been possible without “vital EU funding” or “collaborating across borders,” according to a website urging people vote “REMAIN.”
The American media cabal is…ridiculous. They are the Borg of politics - many entities, but of but one Leftist mind. Led around by their noses by whatever hack government-growing politician is before them at that moment.
Just as they calmly repeated the "ventriloquized" Obama line on the Iran deal, so they're doing with the latest ruling on "Net neutrality."