The Conformative Liberal Media

Last Thursday, October 25, the New York Times revealed what we have long suspected: the world isn't buying what they are selling. The NYT announced some hard facts, a rarity indeed.

"The stock fell by 22% to end the trading day at $8.31, representing the biggest one-day drop in its price since at least 1980. Overall revenue at the company totaled $449 million which was down 1 percent from the same period last year, and well below analysts estimates of $479 million. Advertising revenue continued to show weakness, with print ad revenue falling a whopping 11 percent, while digital ad revenue fell just 2.2 percent."

Money talks. It confirms and sponsors activities deemed worthy of investment and return. Ironically, it may be capitalism itself that leads to the rejection and consequently the decline of the liberal media. Is that why they fear it so?

The New York Times deserved its sharp decline in the stock. Advertising revenue and circulation are blamed, but those are merely the consequences of a poor product. Recall the NYT's apparent cover-up of the Fast and Furious investigation. Now there is a suggestive dismissal of the Benghazi attacks and the administration's attempted cover-up. These are fine examples of peculiar reporting standards.

"The media is no longer informative, it is conformative. It is not interested in broadcasting events unless it can also script them. It does not want to know what you think, it wants to tell you what to think." writes Daniel Greenfield.

Prioritization of news is one tactic where incidents of page one importance are shuffled off to the back sections. However, editorializing via omission is their great tool. It can go unnoticed when artfully implemented. When it is blatant, it is fatal. People who want to know will cease sourcing publications that omit stories and misrepresent or withhold facts. In this one respect, the world has grown smarter. The real world has caught up to them. Now will the Times notice? Their investors are certainly getting the message.

And then there is Newsweek.

Newsweek sold for one dollar back in 2010, and recently dropped its hard copy edition. I guess the number of people who want to know what Eleanor Clift thinks is down to only John McLauglin of the PBS political talk show of the same name.

Add in the miserable ratings of CNN, MSNBC, and progressive radio stations. Free markets are a scary idea to these entities and the people who shill for them.

And there stands the Wall Street Journal -- number one in the circulating daily newspaper rankings.

The liberal media is kicking and screaming as the realities of the "bottom line" culls their herd. Newsweek is dying, the New York Times is in trouble. They have held the standard of the liberal press for years, selling a product that had a certain disrespect for reality. But financial reality is unavoidable.

Like the witch in The Wizard of Oz after Dorothy douses her with water, the liberal media is melting and going down screaming. Chris Mathews, Lawrence O'Donnell, Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, Paul Krugman, Clarence Page, et al sense something is wrong, but they can't quite determine that indeed it is "they" who are wrong. The omissions and twistings of the liberal media just don't float anymore. The balance sheets will lead to their decline. Alas, capitalism.

Last Thursday, October 25, the New York Times revealed what we have long suspected: the world isn't buying what they are selling. The NYT announced some hard facts, a rarity indeed.

"The stock fell by 22% to end the trading day at $8.31, representing the biggest one-day drop in its price since at least 1980. Overall revenue at the company totaled $449 million which was down 1 percent from the same period last year, and well below analysts estimates of $479 million. Advertising revenue continued to show weakness, with print ad revenue falling a whopping 11 percent, while digital ad revenue fell just 2.2 percent."

Money talks. It confirms and sponsors activities deemed worthy of investment and return. Ironically, it may be capitalism itself that leads to the rejection and consequently the decline of the liberal media. Is that why they fear it so?

The New York Times deserved its sharp decline in the stock. Advertising revenue and circulation are blamed, but those are merely the consequences of a poor product. Recall the NYT's apparent cover-up of the Fast and Furious investigation. Now there is a suggestive dismissal of the Benghazi attacks and the administration's attempted cover-up. These are fine examples of peculiar reporting standards.

"The media is no longer informative, it is conformative. It is not interested in broadcasting events unless it can also script them. It does not want to know what you think, it wants to tell you what to think." writes Daniel Greenfield.

Prioritization of news is one tactic where incidents of page one importance are shuffled off to the back sections. However, editorializing via omission is their great tool. It can go unnoticed when artfully implemented. When it is blatant, it is fatal. People who want to know will cease sourcing publications that omit stories and misrepresent or withhold facts. In this one respect, the world has grown smarter. The real world has caught up to them. Now will the Times notice? Their investors are certainly getting the message.

And then there is Newsweek.

Newsweek sold for one dollar back in 2010, and recently dropped its hard copy edition. I guess the number of people who want to know what Eleanor Clift thinks is down to only John McLauglin of the PBS political talk show of the same name.

Add in the miserable ratings of CNN, MSNBC, and progressive radio stations. Free markets are a scary idea to these entities and the people who shill for them.

And there stands the Wall Street Journal -- number one in the circulating daily newspaper rankings.

The liberal media is kicking and screaming as the realities of the "bottom line" culls their herd. Newsweek is dying, the New York Times is in trouble. They have held the standard of the liberal press for years, selling a product that had a certain disrespect for reality. But financial reality is unavoidable.

Like the witch in The Wizard of Oz after Dorothy douses her with water, the liberal media is melting and going down screaming. Chris Mathews, Lawrence O'Donnell, Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, Paul Krugman, Clarence Page, et al sense something is wrong, but they can't quite determine that indeed it is "they" who are wrong. The omissions and twistings of the liberal media just don't float anymore. The balance sheets will lead to their decline. Alas, capitalism.

RECENT VIDEOS