December 10, 2016
The relationship between the Judenpresse and its audience has unquestionably been eroded over the election season. The New York Times has done everything from publishing completely unsubstantiated rumors about Donald Trump’s sex life, a completely fake whopper about Trump trying to gain “top secret security clearances” for his kids, not to mention conspiring with all other media outlets in both subtle and overt ways to discourage Trump fans from voting by telling them his election was “impossible.”
But the New York Talmudic Times and every other mainstream paper’s fake news stories aren’t just for trying to block candidates Jews don’t like – unlike the recent Comet Pizza gunman incident they’re all kvetching about, millions of people die when they lie.
Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and American soldiers died in part thanks to the Jew York Times serving as the public relations firm for the Bush administration and falsely claiming Iraq had “weapons of mass destruction” on the eve of the war. As recently as 2013, the filthy Tay-Sachs suffering serial killers at the Times tried to help instigate another war, as the late-night-TV-guest “cool” president Obama reverted into his knuckle dragging ape default and beat his chest on orders from the Israel lobby, by loaning its supposed “credibility” to a provenly false rumor framing Syrian President Assad for using Sarin gas on his civilian population. The case for a “humanitarian war” (Jew logic) imploded, as the war weary public and military are really tired of paying and dying for Israel.
The aforementioned examples reveal not a liberal bias, but a Jew bias that transcends traditional “left” and “right” divides. The New York Times operates on the philosophy of: Is it good for the Jews? Getting rid of Assad is a big issue Israel continued to push for until Hillary Clinton lost. Everyone who isn’t Jewish, on the Jews’ payroll, or in Al-Qaeda, either doesn’t care or supports Assad.
You see, judging the mainstream media by Is it good for the Jews? makes sense of their behavior. If journalism in the West was about making money, they would go back to the drawing board and figure out why they are facing such grassroots public backlash. If journalism was a public service, they would stop lying to advance the status quo.
Instead, these Jews are doubling down in the face of great criticism and calling for both social media and the government to censor news they don’t like as the ground begins to swallow them up. The heavily Chosen editorial boards of the nations two most powerful papers are angry.
Mark Zuckerberg, the founder and chief executive of Facebook, has dismissed the notion that fake news is prevalent on his platform or that it had an influence on the election. But according to a BuzzFeed News analysis, during the last three months of the presidential campaign, the 20 top fake news stories on Facebook generated more engagement — shares, likes and comments — than the 20 top stories from real news websites.
Facebook has demonstrated that it can effectively block content like click-bait articles and spam from its platform by tweaking its algorithms, which determine what links, photos and ads users see in their news feeds. Nobody outside the company knows exactly how its software works and why you might see posts shared by some of your friends frequently and others rarely. Recently, the company acknowledged that it had allowed businesses to target or exclude users for ads for housing, employment and credit based on their ethnicity, in apparent violation of anti-discrimination laws. It has said it will stop that practice.
Facebook managers are constantly changing and refining the algorithms, which means the system is malleable and subject to human judgment. This summer, Facebook decided to show more posts from friends and family members in users’ news feeds and reduce stories from news organizations, because that’s what it said users wanted. If it can do that, surely its programmers can train the software to spot bogus stories and outwit the people producing this garbage.
Blocking misinformation will help protect the company’s brand and credibility. Some platforms have suffered when they have failed to address users’ concerns. Twitter users, for instance, have backed away from that platform because of abusive trolling, threatening posts and hate speech, which the company hasn’t been able to control.
Mr. Zuckerberg himself has spoken at length about how social media can help improve society. In a 2012 letter to investors, he said it could “bring a more honest and transparent dialogue around government that could lead to more direct empowerment of people, more accountability for officials and better solutions to some of the biggest problems of our time.”
None of that will happen if he continues to let liars and con artists hijack his platform.
The flood of “fake news” this election season got support from a sophisticated Russian propaganda campaign that created and spread misleading articles online with the goal of punishing Democrat Hillary Clinton, helping Republican Donald Trump and undermining faith in American democracy, say independent researchers who tracked the operation.
The content from Russian sites has offered ready fodder for U.S.-based websites pushing far-right conservative messages. A former contractor for one, the Next News Network, said he was instructed by the site’s founder, Gary S. Franchi Jr., to weave together reports from traditional sources such as the Associated Press and the Los Angeles Times with ones from RT, Sputnik and others that provided articles that often spread explosively online.
“The readers are more likely to share the fake stories, and they’re more profitable,” said Dyan Bermeo, who said he helped assemble scripts and book guests for Next News Network before leaving because of a pay dispute and concerns that “fake news” was crowding out real news.
In just the past 90 days — a period that has included the closing weeks of the campaign, Election Day and its aftermath — the YouTube audience of Next News Network has jumped from a few hundred thousand views a day to a few million, according to analytics firm Tubular Labs. In October alone, videos from Next News Network were viewed more than 56 million times.
Franchi said in an e-mail statement that Next News Network seeks “a global perspective” while providing commentary aimed at U.S. audiences, especially with regard to Russian military activity. “Understanding the threat of global war is the first step to preventing it,” he said
The elites are now drawing-up a panicky response in the face of growing dissent towards their unpopular policies. These panicky news stories all referred to the website “PropOrNot,” which provided a list of “Russian propaganda sites,” and has since been revealed to be a hoax (the above linked WaPo article has actually added a retraction). Despite that particular site having been discredited, the hysterical narrative of “fake news” run by Russia continues, with Hillary mentioning it in a speech about it this week, claiming it is a crisis.
It should be noted that while InfoWars could probably be classified as fake news, the real target of this crackdown are RT, Daily Stormer and Breitbart, who merely provide an alternative point of view, yet are falsely included on lists inferring that we are controlled by the Kremlin, as if not wanting open borders or gay marriage is a fringe opinion only held by Vladimir Putin.
Regardless, this fake news hysteria concocted by Jewish power has culminated into some very scary legislation seeking to crack down on dissident nationalist publications. One of these has already gotten through the House, and is awaiting Senate approval.
H.R.6393, Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, passed in the House of Representatives on November 30.
The legislation deals with a number of intelligence-related issues, including Russian propaganda, or what the government calls propaganda.
Section 501 calls for the government to counter “measures by Russia to exert covert influence … carried out in coordination with, or at the behest of, political leaders or the security services of the Russian Federation and the role of the Russian Federation has been hidden or not acknowledged publicly.”
Definitions include media manipulation, covert broadcasting, disinformation and forgeries, and “funding agents of influence.”
So who ultimately gets to decide what is “real” and “fake” news, what is journalism and what is “Russian covert disinformation”, in a field with so many shades of gray?
Whoddaya think , Goyim?
A think-tank funded by (((Google’s))) news division has heroically risen to the call, volunteering to taste test information for us before it sullies our beautiful and innocent Gentile minds. This new “ministry of truth” is called First Draft News, and is composed of the usual suspects:
These organizations are disproportionately (to say the least) owned and staffed by Jews, and push the same anti-social ideological line in varying degrees.
Is there a single person on this First Draft board (names other than Jenni Sargent aren’t featured on the website) that believes nationalism is better than globalism? That voted for Donald Trump? That doesn’t support transplanting infinite numbers of “refugees” into Europe ?
These are the people electing themselves as the gatekeepers of information, now that simply buying up all the newspapers isn’t enough anymore. They’re hoping they can do it while you sleep, which is why we have to redouble our attacks on the Judenpresse.