Jake Tapper exposes himself as a craven corporate shill

The New York Post struck a major victory for free speech, forcing social media behemoth Twitter, which blocked and censored its content, to back down.

 

 

It ought to have been a moment of cheers and newsroom solidarity, given that a win for one is a win for all, all regardless of a media outlet's political slant on the wise logic that if they come for one, they'll eventually come for all.

But in reality, the New York Post was all alone.

Instead of standing up for the First Amendment, the first and most important of all American rights, the corporate media stood up for ... the other side, the Twitter censorship side, arguing with pragmatic logic.

Take the case of CNN bigfoot Jake Tapper, recipient of about a zillion of corporate journalism's top awards  -- the Merriman Smith, the Walter Cronkhite, the Vetty, the Mediaite top influencer award....

Like George Babbitt, who believed that what America needed was "a good business government," Tapper tossed all principle to the wind and called on the New York Post, which was being censored and blocked for telling the truth about Hunter Biden, to bow down to Twitter's corporate do-this-or-else demand to delete its own content.

Now perhaps Tapper misunderstood this as a technical issue somehow, imagining that if the Post would just delete its content and it would be free forever to post, as if the problem was a technical glitch. You can see it in the fourth element of his post, suggesting that the New York Post was being tiresomely fussy about free speech by not doing what Twitter asked. That's what Twitter wanted everyone to think which is a gullibility issue for Tapper right there. 

The super-coders of Twitter couldn't figure out how to unlock an account?

More likely, Tapper just wanted the Post to bow down to Twitter's unreasonable demands, shut down their own content, and trust Twitter to allow them to post it all again, which nobody should have to trust Twitter on. 'Blink three times because I say you must blink' seems to have been the spiel.

Free speech, and freedom from censorship, is way more important than that. Twitter was employing the old lefty saw that free speech is confined to those who own a printing press. Instead of recoiling from it, Twitter took it as a how-to guide.

The Post stood alone, moving the earth's axis as it happened, forcing congressional hearings, watching its stock go down at least 10%.

Yet to Tapper, in his full Babbit bloom, the Post was the bad guy.

Once upon a time the press stood up for each other, with no fear or favor. No ifs, ands, or buts, on the Amendment they derived their very living from, they stood together. A perfumed prince at CNN has changed all that, exposing the mainstream media of today, and it's a disgrace. 

 

Image credit: New York Post // Twitter screen shot

 

 

 

 

 

 

The New York Post struck a major victory for free speech, forcing social media behemoth Twitter, which blocked and censored its content, to back down.

 

 

It ought to have been a moment of cheers and newsroom solidarity, given that a win for one is a win for all, all regardless of a media outlet's political slant on the wise logic that if they come for one, they'll eventually come for all.

But in reality, the New York Post was all alone.

Instead of standing up for the First Amendment, the first and most important of all American rights, the corporate media stood up for ... the other side, the Twitter censorship side, arguing with pragmatic logic.

Take the case of CNN bigfoot Jake Tapper, recipient of about a zillion of corporate journalism's top awards  -- the Merriman Smith, the Walter Cronkhite, the Vetty, the Mediaite top influencer award....

Like George Babbitt, who believed that what America needed was "a good business government," Tapper tossed all principle to the wind and called on the New York Post, which was being censored and blocked for telling the truth about Hunter Biden, to bow down to Twitter's corporate do-this-or-else demand to delete its own content.

Now perhaps Tapper misunderstood this as a technical issue somehow, imagining that if the Post would just delete its content and it would be free forever to post, as if the problem was a technical glitch. You can see it in the fourth element of his post, suggesting that the New York Post was being tiresomely fussy about free speech by not doing what Twitter asked. That's what Twitter wanted everyone to think which is a gullibility issue for Tapper right there. 

The super-coders of Twitter couldn't figure out how to unlock an account?

More likely, Tapper just wanted the Post to bow down to Twitter's unreasonable demands, shut down their own content, and trust Twitter to allow them to post it all again, which nobody should have to trust Twitter on. 'Blink three times because I say you must blink' seems to have been the spiel.

Free speech, and freedom from censorship, is way more important than that. Twitter was employing the old lefty saw that free speech is confined to those who own a printing press. Instead of recoiling from it, Twitter took it as a how-to guide.

The Post stood alone, moving the earth's axis as it happened, forcing congressional hearings, watching its stock go down at least 10%.

Yet to Tapper, in his full Babbit bloom, the Post was the bad guy.

Once upon a time the press stood up for each other, with no fear or favor. No ifs, ands, or buts, on the Amendment they derived their very living from, they stood together. A perfumed prince at CNN has changed all that, exposing the mainstream media of today, and it's a disgrace. 

 

Image credit: New York Post // Twitter screen shot