Category Archives: Propaganda

How Frat Feminists ‘Report’ On Rape

Feminism, Journalism, Propaganda, Socialism

In reporting on an alleged rape at the University of Virginia, Rolling Stone Magazine’s Sabrina Rubin Erdely made a pledge not to the facts of the case and the principles of investigative journalism; but to her sorority of feminists. In so doing, this frat feminist followed the propagandizing principles of radical leftist ideology, which is to pursue consciousness-raising on issues they deem important.

Now, an earlier apology over the failure to fact-check the story has been retracted. Instead, editor Will Dana is prepared only to apologize for failing to do her journalistic due diligence. She concedes she was “mistaken in honoring Jackie’s request [the alleged victim] to not contact the alleged assaulters to get their account.”

Her equivocating, disgraceful words:

Last month, Rolling Stone published a story entitled A Rape on Campus which described a brutal gang rape of a woman named Jackie during a party at a University of Virginia fraternity house, the University’s failure to respond to this alleged assault – and the school’s troubling history of indifference to many other instances of alleged sexual assaults. The story generated worldwide headlines and much soul-searching at UVA. University president Teresa Sullivan promised a full investigation and also to examine the way the school investigates sexual assault allegations.
Because of the sensitive nature of Jackie’s story, we decided to honor her request not to contact the man who she claimed orchestrated the attack on her nor any of the men who she claimed participated in the attack for fear of retaliation against her. In the months Erdely reported the story, Jackie said or did nothing that made her, or Rolling Stone’s editors and fact-checkers, question her credibility. Jackie’s friends and rape activists on campus strongly supported her account. She had spoken of the assault in campus forums. We reached out to both the local branch and the national leadership of Phi Psi, the fraternity where Jackie said she was attacked. They responded that they couldn’t confirm or deny her story but that they had questions about the evidence.
In the face of new information reported by the Washington Post and other news outlets, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie’s account. The fraternity has issued a formal statement denying the assault and asserting that there was no “date function or formal event” on the night in question. Jackie herself is now unsure if the man she says lured her into the room where the rape occurred, identified in the story, as “Drew,” was a Phi Psi brother. According to the Washington Post, “Drew” actually belongs to a different fraternity and when contacted by the paper, he denied knowing Jackie. Jackie told Rolling Stone that after she was assaulted, she ran into “Drew” at a UVA pool where they both worked as lifeguards. In its statement, the Phi Psi says none of its members worked at the pool in the fall of 2012. A friend of Jackie’s (who we were told would not speak to Rolling Stone) told the Washington Post that he found Jackie that night a mile from the school’s fraternities. She did not appear to be “physically injured at the time” but was shaken. She told him that that she had been forced to have oral sex with a group of men at a fraternity party, but he does not remember her identifying a specific house. Other friends of Jackie’s told the Washington Post that they now have doubts about her narrative, but Jackie told the Washington Post that she firmly stands by the account she gave to Erdely.
We published the article with the firm belief that it was accurate. Given all of these reports, however, we have come to the conclusion that we were mistaken in honoring Jackie’s request to not contact the alleged assaulters to get their account. In trying to be sensitive to the unfair shame and humiliation many women feel after a sexual assault, we made a judgment – the kind of judgment reporters and editors make every day. We should have not made this agreement with Jackie and we should have worked harder to convince her that the truth would have been better served by getting the other side of the story. These mistakes are on Rolling Stone, not on Jackie. We apologize to anyone who was affected by the story and we will continue to investigate the events of that evening.

Will Dana
Managing Editor

Most journalists these days are activist reporters-cum-celebrities. Prime examples are Anderson Cooper, Don Lemon and Brooke Baldwin, not one of whom deserves to be called a journalist. They do not report on the central events of the day, as journalists of old were obliged to do by definition. Rather, they decide which story should matter to YOU. The activist-journo-celebrity proceeds from the working premise that you don’t care about the right things, and that You, the hick-rube viewer, needs some good old Marxist consciousness-raising.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

Those State-Manufactured Millennials

Education, Liberty, Political Correctness, Propaganda, The State

Comedian Chris Rock avoids doing his routine in front of Millennial audiences—although he dissembles by identifying them as excessively “conservative,” when in fact he means to say Millennials are politically correct to a fault.

I’ve long said that of the segment of readers who’ve contacted me over the years—and with a few wonderful exceptions—the Millennials are the most ignorant, arrogant, politically correct, mindless, monolithic and brainwashed cohort. In their suitability to conformity, Millennials are probably the first state-manufactured generation; a product of government indoctrination K-12 and beyond. From Kindergarten through 12th Grade, on to tertiary and graduate schools, they’re groomed as obedient left-liberals bereft of a funny bone in their bodies, much less an original thought.

Millennials have acquired an education but are profoundly uneducated: they don’t know history, literature, great music, etc. And they seem to think that piercing their noses and bellybuttons and preaching global warming is tantamount to individualism, when in fact they run with the herd.

As readers of this space, Millennials don’t linger for long.

Likewise, Robby Soave at Reason.com finds “Rock’s remarks about why he no longer performs at college campuses most illuminating”:

What do you make of the attempt to bar Bill Maher from speaking at Berkeley for his riff on Muslims?

Well, I love Bill, but I stopped playing colleges, and the reason is because they’re way too conservative.

In their political views?

Not in their political views — not like they’re voting Republican — but in their social views and their willingness not to offend anybody. Kids raised on a culture of “We’re not going to keep score in the game because we don’t want anybody to lose.” Or just ignoring race to a fault. You can’t say “the black kid over there.” No, it’s “the guy with the red shoes.” You can’t even be offensive on your way to being inoffensive.

When did you start to notice this?

About eight years ago. Probably a couple of tours ago. It was just like, This is not as much fun as it used to be. I remember talking to George Carlin before he died and him saying the exact same thing.

Provocative comedians avoiding the college scene?

MORE.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

The ‘Newspeak’ Of Immigration

IMMIGRATION, Propaganda

The phrase “our immigration system is broken” is statist semantics, “Newspeaks”; a linguistic trick to lead Americans to believe urgent action is required. Greg Gutfeld, the only intelligent, amusing neoconservative on Fox News’ “The Five,” is correct about “broken” being a euphemism for refusing to enforce immigration laws.

Among the multiplying procession of vacuous panelists plonked together on these God-awful, dual-perspective chat forums–Gutfeld stands out as, if not a great thinker, then certainly a comedic genius. And, as the great late Joan Rivers said, making someone laugh is like giving them a holiday.

In any event, so long as the TV viewer knows he is being entertained and not edified by most cable and nitwork current-affairs shows—he should be OK. For such an awareness, one presumes, will lead the viewer to seek in-depth information and analysis, rather than confuse mind-numbing banalities tumbling from the mouths of botoxed babes with big hair and an overbite for words of wisdom.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

The Obama Ebola Doctrine: Worship The Saints In ‘Spacesuits’

Barack Obama, Ethics, Foreign Aid, Healthcare, Nationhood, Propaganda, Pseudoscience, Terrorism, The State

“The Obama Ebola Doctrine: Worship The Saints In ‘Spacesuits'” is the current column, now on WND. An excerpt:

… The Obama Ebola Doctrine (OED) was dictated during the second of two presidential addresses, this week, on Ebola. The message, delivered against a backdrop of demigods in freshly unpacked, white laboratory coats, was hardly subliminal. So serious was Obama, he even threw in references to a God not himself, something he rarely does.

The president used the word “troops” to describe the individuals stationed behind him. These public health workers were “serving” America (much like soldiers would). Theirs was a “sacrificial service” (much like that of saints). They were “citizens of the world, global citizens,” who were “leading globally” (as all you locals should strive to do).

Volunteering in Africa Obama has equated with American “patriotism.” Well of course. If being “citizens of the world” is the in existential state-of-being—then patriotism must be redefined. No longer does it mean the love of one’s country and countrymen, but love of The World. Go to West Africa, and you are demonstrating “citizenship … and public service at its best.” In Africa, you will be serving America, “the country that we love.”

The medics who rush headlong into the Ebola maelstrom embody “American exceptionalism” (unlike all those Americans who run businesses they didn’t build).

To the extent that America’s Ebola workers are motivated by “faith,” it is their “sense of faith and grace” that Obama has commanded all Americans to emulate.

The president is now defining for his subjects the very meaning of worship.

Aversion to Ebola, Obama mocked as “hiding under the covers,” indirectly associating precautions with cowardice, even venality.

His Holiness “saluted” Dr. Craig Spencer for “his service”— Spencer is the saint in scrubs who lied to investigators about his whereabouts. He had been gallivanting around Manhattan when already symptomatic.

Is Nurse Kaci Hickox next to be canonized? …

The Bush Terrorism Doctrine was as follows: We’re fighting them over there, so we don’t have to fight them over here.

The Obama Bioterrorism Doctrine runs parallel. BHO’s express objective is to convince Americans that if we fight Ebola in West Africa, it won’t threaten America: “If we [don’t] deal with this problem there, it will come here” …

… The complete column is “The Obama Ebola Doctrine: Worship The Saints In ‘Spacesuits,'” now on WND.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

Dying For Obama’s Deadly Dogma

Africa, Conspiracy, Constitution, Healthcare, Propaganda, Racism, Science, South-Africa, The West

“Dying For Obama’s Deadly Dogma” is the current column, now on WND. An excerpt:

Africa, Like Trayvon Martin, is extremely important to Barack Obama. “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon,” the president said famously about the slain teenager.

His fellow-feelings about the continent, the president expressed during the August 4-6 U.S.-Africa Summit, this year: “I do not see the countries and peoples of Africa as a world apart; I see Africa as a fundamental part of our interconnected world – partners with America,” he said.

With the wealth of the most industrious, generous and gullible taxpayer at his disposal, the president believes that it is his duty, first, to stop the Ebola epidemic in West Africa, when, in fact, the duty of the president of the United States is to those who pay the piper.

America’s governing elites habitually betray their constitutional and fiduciary obligations to their constituents. The head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Tom Frieden, and the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Anthony Fauci, claim that restricting entry into the U.S. from the Ebola ground zero is without merit “from a public health standpoint,” and will only worsen matters.

For whom, pray tell, Dr. Fauci? For American nurses? Cui bono Dr. Frieden?

Contrary to the Frieden-Fauci-Obama obfuscations, it is quite possible to both stop at-risk individuals from entering the U.S., as well as assist in curbing the contagion in the hot-spot countries of Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia. The two are not mutually exclusive. While the U.S. welcomes, on average, 150 daily travelers from West Africa; dozens of infection-free African nations have done the sensible thing to contain the spread of the dread disease. The most advanced of them, South Africa, has “restricted entry for all non-citizens traveling from Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone.”

OBAMA’S OBFUSCATIONS ABOUT EBOLA
Back in South Africa of the mid 1990s, I trained and volunteered as an HIV/AIDS counselor. My last client, before I decamped to North America, was a lovely gay man who had just been diagnosed HIV positive and whose CD4-cell count was already low. He wept in my arms for hours.

My point: Comparing HIV/AIDS to Ebola, as the Frieden-Fauci duo has repeatedly done, amounts to politically correct theatre. …

… Read the rest. “Dying For Obama’s Deadly Dogma” is the current column, now on WND.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

Obama Obfuscates On Ebola

Barack Obama, Healthcare, Propaganda, Pseudoscience, Science

As a former HIV/AIDS volunteer counselor in South Africa, it is my never-humble opinion that comparing Ebola to HIV/AIDS amounts to politically correct theatre. For one thing, it is not easy to contract the human immunodeficiency virus. For another, the virus is relatively fragile outside the host. Viral load or titer factors into the chances of transmission. And it is both easy and cheap to prevent transmission. AIDS infection rates in Africa have nothing to do with lack of resources but, rather, with unprotected sex irrespective of ample education.

Ebola is the exact opposite. It is not difficult to get. The virus doesn’t easily destruct outside the body. In West Africa, in particular, it is difficult to stop an Ebola epidemic because of magical thinking and a lack of infrastructure.

Front men for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have obfuscated plenty about Ebola. However, Dr. Barack Obola, who should get that growing proboscis checked out, takes the cake. The president has managed to dispense Ebola advice in direct contradiction to even the CDC’s breezy platitudes.

“You cannot get it through casual contact like sitting next to someone on a bus. … Ebola is not spread through the air like the flu. … You cannot get it from another person until they start showing symptoms of the disease, like fever. … cannot get it from someone who’s asymptomatic.” (CNSNews & Hot Air)

The CDC’s website, as opposed to its media representatives, provides the correct information, distilled by Hot Air:

Casual transmission in close quarters in public spaces is possible.
Spending “a long amount of time” within three feet of an infected person is risky, a scenario that logically includes a long bus ride.
A spokesman for the CDC told the LA Times recently that “I’m not going to sit here and say that if a person who is highly viremic … were to sneeze or cough right in the face of somebody who wasn’t protected, that we wouldn’t have a transmission.” Well, there you go. If there’s a risk of transmission on a plane, why wouldn’t there be a risk of transmission on a bus?


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint