Don't Bother Cancelling Your Subscription!

Newsweek is doing it for you...

They do not think highly enough of your---well---let's rephrase that...

They think quite poorly of...YOU!

Think of them, however.

Such suffering must occur when you find yourself whoring out words and content for the public when they wrack you with revulsion.

Stupid public!!!:

I met Jon Meacham in 1994 and foolishly resisted when my colleagues urged me to hire him as a NEWSWEEK writer. Thankfully, I caved, but months later when it was suggested that he take over our national news coverage, I balked again. Jon was one of the best writers I had ever met, but he was 26 years old and, frankly, a bit odd. He answered most questions with a historical or biblical reference. He dressed in a gray suit, tie and pocket square. He courted his soon-to-be wife through handwritten letters. Most of his friends were two or three times his age...

Holy crap!! I am actually laughing, and crying, and I realize that as stupid as I am I really didn't need to insert that elipse, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT MADE UP AND THERE IS NO GAP IN THE CONTENT THAT I AM CLIPPING FOR YOU!

YET ONE MORE ELIPSE FOR ELEGANCE!

...

I eventually realized that Jon was a unique talent and a great man. He had read NEWSWEEK since he was 6 years old, and imagined being the magazine's editor. In 2006, that dream came true, for Jon and for NEWSWEEK. He became editor (with my enthusiastic support, finally) and has led NEWSWEEK to be a better-written and more deeply reported, thoughtful and analytical weekly. On May 18, we will debut a new version of NEWSWEEK both in print and online, one that reflects Jon's passion for great writing, reporting and provocative, but not partisan, journalism.---By Ann McDaniel, Managing Director, NEWSWEEK

So smart those folks. No wonder it kind of makes the employees shiver:

Jon Meacham admits it is hard to explain, even to his own people, why chopping Newsweek's circulation in half is a good thing.

"It's hugely counterintuitive," the magazine's editor says. "The staff doesn't understand it."

That step -- along with a redesigned, revamped publication that hits newsstands today -- may well determine whether the 76-year-old newsmagazine survives. Newsweek will concentrate on two things -- reporting and argument -- while kissing off any recap of the week's developments.

Time has been gravitating in that direction as well. But Newsweek, owned by The Washington Post Co., is accelerating the process because it is bleeding red ink, losing nearly $20 million in the first quarter. Newsweek, whose circulation was as high as 3.1 million in recent years, plans to cut that to 1.5 million by the beginning of 2010, in part by discouraging renewals. The magazine will begin charging the average subscriber about 90 cents an issue, nearly double the current rate.

"If we can't convince a million and a half people we're worth less than a dollar a week, the market will have spoken," Meacham says. The newsstand price will also jump from $4.95 to $5.95, a buck more than Time.

The new layout, with larger photographs, splits each issue into four parts: Scope (News, Scoops and the Globe at a Glance); Features; The Take (What We Think About the World); and The Culture. Meacham, an admirer of the Economist, is fashioning a serious magazine for what he calls his base, with a heavy emphasis on politics and public policy.

Time, with a circulation of 3.25 million, will sell more than twice as many copies. Meacham says he wants to get away from the "Cold War metaphor" of Time vs. Newsweek, insisting that "we live in an age of asymmetrical warfare."

Time's top editor, Rick Stengel, agrees, saying that "we are effectively by ourselves" in the newsmagazine category. "There are advertisers who need scale, who need to reach a mass audience, and we will be the vehicle for that."

Time will continue to recount some of the week's news but is concentrating on "long-form journalism about people, about ideas," Stengel says. "We came up with that mix and it's been ratified by our readers." The magazine, which expects to make a substantial profit this year, will benefit from Newsweek's retreat by being able to raise its own subscription fees. Time, which has already lowered its circulation from 4 million, has benefited from being part of a much larger news and entertainment conglomerate that has helped leverage its worldwide brand.

Newsweek executives are gambling that advertisers will support the equivalent of shifting from beer to wine. "Will they accept a more affluent Newsweek demographic," Meacham asks, "given that they've been acculturated all these years to think of us as a mass vehicle?"

And will a smaller magazine have less cultural clout? Such recent cover stories as "The Decline and Fall of Christian America" sparked a flurry of op-eds, suggesting that the power of ideas still trumps circulation.

The ideas that Newsweek is promoting are mainly left-of-center. The cover story in today's issue is a generally sympathetic interview with President Obama, written by Meacham, that describes Obama "moving as he wishes to move, and the world bending to him." An accompanying piece by Tina Brown on Nancy Pelosi -- who's just endured her worst week as House speaker over the waterboarding controversy -- calls her "fast-talking, formidable, high-energy and supremely self-confident."

Earlier, in Newsweek's 100-day assessment of the new president, liberal columnist Jonathan Alter wrote, "Barack Obama has put more points on the board than any president since Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933." Allison Samuels wrote this month: "I knew that Michelle Obama was already changing the way we see ourselves as African-American women. . . . What's remarkable now . . . is how quickly and decisively Michelle has taken on the issues that matter most to us."

When Newsweek put a conservative's essay on the cover, it was by David Frum, assailing Rush Limbaugh under the headline "Why Rush Is Wrong." And when Newsweek took on Obama, it did so from the left, in a piece built around New York Times columnist Paul Krugman and his criticism of the president's economic policies.

Meacham sees only a perception problem. "In making arguments," he says, "we have to make sure people don't believe we're partisan." (Time, for its part, has also been sympathetic to Obama, and this month ran a cover story calling the Republican Party an "endangered species" pushing a "hard-right agenda" that is "shamelessly hypocritical" and "over the top.")

Meacham recently had lunch with Stengel, and they commiserated about the era of diminishing resources. "I don't take pleasure in any media organization shrinking or going away, but we definitely see opportunities that didn't exist before," Stengel says.

There is little doubt that Newsweek is trying to make the best of a tough situation. Catering to a more elite audience may or may not be a viable strategy, but Newsweek appears to have no Plan B. If the effort fails, its future as a print magazine could be in doubt.

"I'm not saying the battle's going to be easy," Meacham says. "It's going to be hard as hell."

Journalism and the Future

This video is so rich...rich and layered.

Crittenden has also just "drunk-blogged" the SOTU. His comments are apt and he used Rolling Rock in moderation.

I thoroughly enjoy his blog.

I thought the address the President just finished giving was more fodder for suckers.

A year along and he promises and promises and blames and blames.

Then he had to throw some folks under the bus so he used the Supreme Court, among others.

Is there, other than simply class and decorum, some level of threat from the Chicago style machine which would concern those who hold the separation of powers dear?

(Just checked Instapundit. No doubt Althouse will have some notions on this as well...and here it is and she does. She has the video already as well, it is below. The President can say what he wishes. So can I and all of us fortunate enough to reside in the great republic. There are more pressing matters. I hope this does not become the circus distracting everyone and providing cover for politicians from more difficult questions.---just watched it again. Oh Lord, is that Holder who stands up? A corrupt bigot Holder is, no link here. There is so much out there on that toadie. It turns out that Eric Holder Traitor has a better return than Eric Holder Toadie.)




Wow do I feel it embarrassing seeing the whole corrupt and shameless menagerie together, the Dem and Repugly alike, applauding their horrific failures and sellouts on their feet, and promising to do more, more, more.

We know that the journalistic class will support it all...

I had the discouraging task of reading the freshest Newsweek in which Meacham says that Obama is so post partisan and centered that he can't adjust for any failure, we will just have to come to our senses and be blinded by his greatness.

Meacham, ugh.

So, back to the truly compelling video which did indeed cover, and well, the future of newspapers and computers regarding technology. This is fascinating:



For the record I was long ago anticipating having a subscription to the now failed New York Sun if they had made it this far for delivery, and looked forward to it. It was tiny but showed potential.

A modest fee for a news organisation's delivered product would be a delight if they had some of the better content of the NYTimes and the WSJ and some SCOOPS!!

The journalists are in bed with the politicians and it's making everyone sick and selling no papers or magazines. They won't investigate or report on corruption or scandals of liberals.

Here is a snippet of transcript from Meacham on Charlie Rose.

It is a restatement of his sentiments from his little pamphlet this week.

(formerly a widely distributed but never intellectual magazine, shallow and cheap even, which he retooled to limit readership but entice and retain the truly brilliant--oops, wealthy--- readers and thinkers, how's that going?)

Do yourself a favor and don't buy it, save some trees, Meacham would want that no doubt.

Poke around at the older barber shops and you can, no doubt, find one that has half of the chairs full and an unstoppable lifetime subscription which they wrote off as an expense years and years ago.

A couple of buzzcuts and touchups between you and the Sweeny seat will be enough to read it thoroughly.

It's unbelievable. The foreign coverage at the beginning entices a piss-shiver of sympathetic humiliation for those involved in the magazine's production.

Here is a piece on the Malay situation involving Christians using the term "Allah" for God...Actually I will just copy and paste the entire article.

It's fairly involved, the ethnic and religious backstory and the complicated political and economic realities which must be outlined to describe Muslims torching 10 Christian churches because they use a word those Peace loving Muslims don't like, no?

Newsweek just culled their idiot cheap herd so they can support more involved analysis provided to readers who are knowledgible and up to the erudite rigors, no?

Here is the entire article from the online Newsweek, I believe there is more here than in the pamphlet I read earlier today:

"The Fight Over ‘Allah’

Malaysia's delicate balance is at risk.

By Ioannis Gatsiounis | NEWSWEEK

Published Jan 22, 2010

From the magazine issue dated Feb 1, 2010

The interethnic chaos Malaysia has long feared moved closer to reality this month when 10 churches were at-tacked around the country. The attacks followed a civil-court ruling on New Year's Eve declaring that a law prohibiting non-Muslims from using the word "Allah" to describe their God was unconstitutional. Strangely, though, Christians have been using "Allah" for "God" in East Malaysia since the 1920s without much controversy. So why the sudden spate of violence in a nation long viewed as a model of tolerance in the Muslim world?

The answer is that beneath Malaysia's outward glow of progressive moderation, racial and religious consciousness has risen steadily among Muslim Malays, who make up 60 percent of the population. That creeping conservatism has been fanned by the United Malays National Organization (UMNO), seeking to revive support that is slipping amid rampant corruption and other forms of misrule. Rather than trying to quell misgivings among Malays who felt that the use of "Allah" to describe the Christian God would sow confusion, the government appealed the decision, saying that Muslim sensitivities must be respected to protect the fragile ethnic balance. Then UMNO leaders, including Prime Minister Najib Razak, said the government could not stop planned protests against the ruling, though he has often opposed the exercise of free speech in the past. Critics charge the government with institutionalizing racism and emboldening Muslim hardliners. Whatever the case, the church attacks are the clearest sign yet that Malaysia's racial-religious compact is unraveling.

During the 1980s and 1990s Malaysia transformed itself from an agrarian-based economy to a manufacturing one. More recently it has struggled to shed its low-value-added, low-wage structure. Private investment, now at 11 percent of GDP, is down more than two thirds since the late 1990s at least in part because of investor concern about the social tension. Efforts to create a high-tech innovation economy have been set back by the flight of talent: opposition leader Lim Kit Siang says 300,000 "top brains" have fled to Singapore since the last general election. Now Malaysia's reputation for stability is under threat, and investors are jittery amid reports that Malaysia saw the biggest foreign-exchange outflows in Asia last year. Though some an-alysts give Najib high marks as a liberalizing economic reformer, sectarian unrest won't help, and could well thwart the country's aim of becoming a fully developed nation by 2020.

The church attacks also threaten regional stability. Indonesia's Muslim leaders have cautioned Muslims there not to take their cue from Malaysia. The U.S. government issued a travel advisory warning that the court ruling could trigger criminal or terrorist attacks on foreigners in Malaysia's eastern Sabah province, which borders the southern Philippines, home to the Qaeda-linked Abu Sayyaf. And so it is that in a few short weeks Malaysia has gone from pointing the way for Muslims in neighboring countries to joining the list of regional hot spots.

Last week the government took a step to undo the damage, saying Christians may use "Allah" in the states of Penang, Sarawak, and Sabah, and in the Federal Territory, which includes Kuala Lumpur. That, along with Malaysians' tendency to avoid racial confrontation, may stave off wider violence. But it hardly addresses the festering racial resentments that precipitated the attacks.

Almost 40 years ago the government introduced a policy of positive discrimination for Malays, a move that helped reduce income disparities between the Malay majority and the big Chinese and Indian minorities. But it also heightened communal identification, restricted educational and economic opportunities for non-Malays, and bred dependency among the Malays. Until now, all that was hidden by political sloganeering, tightly controlled media, and billions spent on eye-catching infrastructure projects in-tended to make Malaysia appear both modern and progressive. But the at-tacks have blown the cover off the myth of racial harmony. Now Malaysia must get down to the nitty-gritty of building a truly pluralistic society. As the church bombings make clear, it can't afford not to.

Gatsiounis is a Malaysia-based journalist and author, most recently, of Velvet & Cinder Blocks, a story collection detailing a planned attack on a Christian landmark in Malaysia."

I certainly gain the sense that the author was under space restrictions, and I also get the sense that he was edited even further.

What's left is worth a Fisking.

Newsweek is all that is wrong with journalism, elitism, politics...and on...and on...

but so tiny!

Which brings us back to the technology.

Newsweek has shrunk and distilled it's self important garbage, now that's improvement!

Take a look if you get a chance, but don't buy...

The Cover of Newsweek

No comment ought to be necessary.

I am finding it difficult to find the cover anywhere. Even on the Newsweek website.

A "powerful" photo of Ted Kennedy is on the cover with a suggestion to the effect that he has written a piece on the healthcare bill.

I can't imagine that he wrote it, the Newsweek piece.

However, I feel that if I meet someone who wishes to discuss the news I should say:

"First let me state that anyone who does not have their BullshitMeter pegged and all systems associated with Flim Flam reading "TILT!!" each time Barack Hussein Obama generates pulmonary energy is...well..."

Then what?

They are the problem. No matter what happy silly crap is behind the fact that this man has them suckered can save them or our future.

Related:

John Meacham read Newsweek when he was six years old!!!



Pick up a copy.

Defend it.


These people look down on us, they regard us as difficult children.

Tar.

Feathers.

Bill Whittle -- Or -- Not a Tea Party Post

This is not a post regarding the Tea Party or, more aptly, Tea Parties, as I believe there is no "Tea Party" in and of itself.

The Tea Parties have been assailed by many and, might I add, poorly, as being any number of violent or ignorant or fascist constructs. You may know an ignorant and poorly read soul by their opposition to the "Tea Party" as it takes a discussion to even understand the movement and an individuals rejection of the trend and an individuals identifying with said trend requires thought.

To reject the "Tea Party" is really to reject the Bill of Rights---I wrote and re-wrote that phrase several times but I must simply state it as I know it, and as I know each and every one whom I have ever met at a Tea Party gathering or whom I have ever met who self-identified as a Tea-Party leaning individual.

A number of years before the Tea Parties I felt a tense and resentful anger towards the MSM.
I had discussions with librarians in which they did not believe the NYTimes was liberal. Subsequently in those discussions they did not understand the objection to and lack of admiration for their "Masters of Library Science". Even when they admitted that an individual who worked for Borders for a year or two could eclipse them in their job duties they would never concede that some level of mandarinization were occurring. They would become highly animated, however, when the notion of replacing them at a lower pay scale with the individual who honed their teeth at Borders would be suggested.

Well, that was a clutz's try to remind folks of how it was before the internet. All of everywhere seemed to be NYTimes, all Newsweek, all liberal fourth estate oikephobic and parlor room trash. I thought I was about to go insane, and this went on for a long and painful era. Then I noticed things like Bill Whittle and Murdoc and Insty and Alphecca and the list grew and grew and I was heartened. It was lonely reading the NYTimes and Newsweek and Time and realizing that the folks who had subscribed to those publications 25 plus years earlier had renewed by rote, with no thought, and had not realized that the periodicals were not the same.

I wish I could go back in time and speak to those people, the journalists and my relatives alike---alas, upon thinking I feel that is a selfish longing not associated with this post.

If you see Bill Whittle's name anywhere persue i!

This man articulates our American Ideals and he seems to speak from MY HEART!!!

Time Magazine

Has a bit on the Top Ten Toilets.

Time and Newsweek were horrendous in the 1980s, absolutely awful. I tried to cancel my parents subscription with a letter, was complimented on my writing but the folks vetoed the cancellation. I continued to read with morbid fascination. They declined and degraded and...it's almost indescribable how awful they are now. Time and Newsweek, understand. You must actually pick up an issue, any recent will do, and show someone. They won't believe how bad they are. Let me take a moment to once again shake my head in consideration of that ass Mr. Meacham.

Anyhow, let me add one more crapper to the list--yes, Time magazine.

via Atlas Shrugs, which reminds me to go look at how bad LGF has become. Not going to hypertext to that sad lost soul, wow, he also boggles the mind.

Mohamed was a vile disgusting individual. Here is a post with a video of an actual stoning, if it were committed by any group other than muslims the media and the female advocates would be screaming from the rooftops. Do they hold their tongues because they hate the West so much, because they hate and think the muslims incapable of humanity, or because on some level they hate themselves?

Even more gruesome and heart wrenching, even more chilling is this letter from an encounter...well, brace yourself and read it all, please.

Where is the outrage on the left and in the media. Where is the relentless flight of lawyers and journalists and condemnations from jackasses like Barak...oh...never mind.

They are too busy condemning the number of ice creams available to prisoners in Gitmo and condemning the tolerant West.

God Damn the fourth estate, the left and the U.N.

Most Painful

Terry Gross interview ever.

So often I find myself thinking that while I am enjoying the interview I resent the relentless liberal political fog that pervades.

Nothing but empathy for Ms. Gross in this instance however. She was admirable.

Gene Simmons is...well. Nothing need be said if you listen.

I'm sorry, my mistake. Chaim Witz. I won't attempt to pronounce it through my gentile gob.

The Erim.net link I noticed in the comments over at Althouse. Althouse links to an article in the NYtimes that is just as painful to read. The responses are even worse. I poked through the Althouse comments just to see if I had gone insane. (Actually the Althouse comments are often a good read, but seeing so many comments onboard made me fear I was being gaslighted)

Judith Warner is as bad as Chaim Witz in her own way. I have a vague feeling I may have linked to her tripe before.

John Podhoretz cited her as "America's most embarrassing online columnist".

Her material would be merely embarrassing were it on her own blog. That it is coming out of the NYTimes megaphone is truly a testament to the lack of merit in contemporary Western society.

Update: Ugh! The vomitous circle is now complete. Ms. Gross interviews Ms. Warner on the release of her book "Perfect Madness: Motherhood in the Age of Anxiety".

How perfect. She was "a former special correspondent for Newsweek in Paris".

I won't listen. Folks like Ms. Warner gave us "Moms" parking spaces at supermarkets.

I will suggest, but not confirm, that I intentionally park in those spaces.

(The Japanese like to incorporate the term "maru" into the names of their maritime vessels. The notion of a circle implies a safe and complete journey out onto the sea and back to shore. This "vomit circle" is now complete.

吐く円)

Media Having Trouble

finding proper angle.

Here is a nice Onion piece on how the JourOlists are propagandizing for Obama. I'm copying and pasting a significant portion for you to read and laugh and then tear your hair out and cry before vowing to tar and feather editors around the nation:

WASHINGTON—More than a week after President Barack Obama's cold-blooded killing of a local couple, members of the American news media admitted Tuesday that they were still trying to find the best angle for covering the gruesome crime.

"I know there's a story in there somewhere," said Newsweek editor Jon Meacham, referring to Obama's home invasion and execution-style slaying of Jeff and Sue Finowicz on Apr. 8. "Right now though, it's probably best to just sit back and wait for more information to come in. After all, the only thing we know for sure is that our president senselessly murdered two unsuspecting Americans without emotion or hesitation."

Added Meacham, "It's not so cut and dried."

Enlarge Image

Associated Press reporters investigate any possible gym training regimens the president might have used to get into peak physical condition for the murders.

Since the killings took place, reporters across the country have struggled to come up with an appropriate take on the ruthless crime, with some wondering whether it warrants front-page coverage, and others questioning its relevance in a fast-changing media landscape.

"What exactly is the news hook here?" asked Rick Kaplan, executive producer of the CBS Evening News. "Is this an upbeat human-interest story about a 'day in the life' of a bloodthirsty president who likes to kill people? Or is it more of an examination of how Obama's unusual upbringing in Hawaii helped to shape the way he would one day viciously butcher two helpless citizens in their own home?"

"Or maybe the story is just that murder is cool now," Kaplan continued. "I don't know. There are a million different angles on this one."

So far, the president's double-homicide has not been covered by any major news outlets. The only two mentions of the heinous tragedy have been a 100-word blurb on the Associated Press wire and an obituary on page E7 of this week's edition of the Lake County Examiner.

While Obama has expressed no remorse for the grisly murders—point-blank shootings with an unregistered .38-caliber revolver—many journalists said it would be irresponsible for the press to sensationalize the story.

"There's been some debate around the office about whether we should report on this at all," Washington Post senior reporter Bill Tracy said while on assignment at a local dog show. "It's enough of a tragedy without the press jumping in and pointing fingers or, worse, exploiting the violence. Plus, we need to be sensitive to the victims' families at this time. Their loved ones were brutally, brutally murdered, after all."

Nevertheless, a small contingent of independent journalists has begun to express its disapproval and growing shock over the president's actions.

"I hate to rain on everyone's parade, but we are in the midst of an economic crisis here," political pundit Marcus Reid said. "Why was our president ritualistically dismembering the corpses of his prey when he should have been working on a new tax proposal for small businesses? I, for one, am outraged."

The New York Times newsroom is reportedly still undecided on whether or not to print a recent letter received from Obama, in which the president threatens to kill another helpless citizen every Tuesday and "fill [his] heavenly palace with slaves for the afterlife" unless the police "stop the darkness from screaming."

"President Obama's letter presents us with a classic journalistic quandary," executive editor Bill Keller said. "If we print it, then we're giving him control over the kinds of stories we choose to run. It would be an acknowledgment that we somehow give the nation's commander in chief special treatment."

Added Keller, "And that's just not how the press in this country works."

Newsweek

Samizdata has a post up on the insanity of the publication.

Bisphenol-a

I linked to the aluminum can popcorn device below and mentioned the coating in the can. Newsweek mentioned it in a recent article:

'Take bisphenol A. It's a basic constituent of the polycarbonate plastics found in many baby bottles, sippy cups and juice bottles. A highly versatile compound, it is also found in dental sealants, CDs, DVDs and the resin linings of food and beverage containers, including many cans and takeout cartons. But most scientists say small amounts can leach out—and ultimately find their way into our bodies—when the plastics start to break down under high heat or wear and tear. The CDC has found BPA in 92 percent of Americans age 6 and older who were tested. But the chemical industry says it's safe—and the Food and Drug Administration agrees. "It's not possible to contact harmful levels of it," says Steven Hentges of the American Chemistry Council, which represents the major chemical companies.

Reproductive biologists aren't so sure. Patricia Hunt of Washington State University was alerted to possible dangers of BPA in 1999 when her mouse study on an unrelated topic suddenly went haywire, with dozens of female mice unexpectedly developing chromosomal abnormalities in the eggs they carried in their ovaries. As it turned out, a lab worker had used the wrong detergent to clean the animals' cages—one that caused BPA to leach out of the plastic cages and feeding bottles. Hunt tried washing brand-new cages with the same detergent to confirm the source of the problem. She then began studying BPA exposures in unborn rodents, which she followed into adulthood. The results were striking. Almost half the eggs of female mice exposed to low doses of BPA during gestation carried extra copies of chromosomes or were missing chromosomes. No one has replicated the findings.

There are other potential effects. Hundreds of animal and test-tube studies suggest that low-dose exposures, particularly during gestation, may later lead to breast and prostate cancer, abnormalities in the reproductive tract and behavioral problems, among other things. But there is disagreement about the implications for human health. Two groups convened by the National Institutes of Health have reached opposite conclusions. In 2007, advisers to the government's National Toxicology Program found "minimal" cause for concern. Meanwhile, another scientific panel produced a consensus statement saying that, based on animal data, common levels of exposure could pose a problem and that further study was needed. "We can't say there are conclusive data in humans," says Frederick vom Saal of the University of Missouri, who headed the second panel. "But given the fact that we're seeing irreparable damage in animals, for heaven's sake, let's get this out of products our babies are coming in contact with."'

Endocrine disruption.

http://www.cerc.usgs.gov/Other_Webs/endocrine/framework.htm

Bpa disrupts young brains.

Hermaphrodite fish and the pill etc...

Drugged waters...

Who knows the links go on and on, we are certainly all going to die!

Iowahawk

channels Newsweek's Meachum with immaculate clarity.

Go laugh.

Newsweek

How'd this slip by those dhimmi useful idiots?

via LGF

Journalists/JournOlists

My contempt and outright loathing is no secret.

This satire of the media template by the Onion stands alone and should be shown to every 101 class in the supposed once and former craft of "reporting" now called "journalism".

I have posted on the change from reporter to journalist and "man on the street" to "vox populi".

Did I mention I hate journalists?

May I again?

I hate journalists, those folks at the NYTimes and Newsweek and Time and CNN and CBS and on and on...

They should show this to everyone who passes through the damn SALT institute, they fall into similar B.S. patterns. It's so real it's past funny and into we all deserve it for not isolating and humiliating the media class by now stage.

Anyone have an invite to a gathering with a journalist for me?

At any rate, here is the rubric for a story regarding anything which journalists put out in their sleep and expect us to fall at their glamorous feet, the prick pieces of fecal matter:

Zombie Traction

This Blog has been very concerned with the lack of Zombie preparedness in this nation and the greater Western world. It is getting some more attention, thankfully. Instapundit posts a link and I now consider that "press" attention, as he has more ethics and reporting skills than the traitors shilling for Hillary and struggling to lose the American efforts in Iraq, otherwise known as the MSM: NYTimes, Newsweek, Time, CNN, Washington Post, LA Times et al.

Does no one remember?