Murdoch, The Spin Media, and TRUMP FOR...WHAT?

One of the big laughs (aside from the Grimsby Tell-a-Laugh) is the idea that NEWSPAPERS are FAIR.

No, they fucking well are not.

Even The Gray Lady, the New York Times, has run ridiculously slanted pieces, like that Kitty Genovese story, where 38 people stood at their windows and watched her get raped and killed. Never happened (the part implying all these people were at their windows, which the reporter obviously was NOT there to witness). Kitty died all right, but the gut-wrenching addition of mass apathy was a whole lotta fiction; the reporter trying to lie his way to a Pulitzer Prize.

Today, most newspapers reflect the biases and corruption of their owner.

Today's example? THE NEW YORK POST ENDORSES DONALD TRUMP. This bizarre news was printed all over America, including via USA Today.

The Donald (to use one of his immigrant ex-wife's phrases) may not be totally insane or totally Hitler, but WHO would ENDORSE the guy?

The New York Post is owned by Rupert Murdoch.

Coincidentally, as you noticed in that little bit of squint between paragraphs, today's Daily News chose to attack...the editor of THE NEW YORK POST.

What the FUCK is THAT? Nothing happened in New York City or the WORLD, more important? No, if you're Suckerman, owner of the Snooze, and you want to get in a cheap shot, you tell your editor, "Let's kick this guy on his way out. I hate him, hate Murdoch, so let's make it FRONT PAGE."

The Daily Snooze isn't immune from being as obnoxious as The Post. Their coverage of the Central Park carriage horse situation has been completely slanted. Rather than point out that many are working to ban the carriage horses, the Snooze turns every article into an editorial screed, mentioning how it's a terrible idea and the horses are just fine and tourists should be catered to.

The Snooze has done vicious Photoshop jobs on politicians who are AGAINST cruelty to animals. Just why the Snooze likes the idea of overworked carriage horses I can only chalk up to some political lobbying or bribery from the teamsters. Or stupidity. Either way, they slant the news. In reporting that a politician came out in support of the ban, they ran a photo of him: Photoshopped covered in horse shit.

Meanwhile what the fuck is the average person supposed to do? Buy the Post AND the News and decide which seems most believable? Only read the Times? The Times, "the paper of record," is sold around the world and covers more international news than local events. It misses 80% of the local coverage the tabloids stick into every issue).

If you've ever watched a boxing match or a movie, and then read two reviewers...you've noticed how all three of you seem to have watched something completely different. It's bad enough that human error and interpretation can be so faulty. It's worse when the media deliberately uses its power to slant and spin the truth.