News
Is about the paper aspect of the industry rather than the news
itself.
Newspapers Censor Their Way to Oblivion
The Kansas City Star [ I had not heard of it either -
Editor ] is a medium size newspaper in a Republican area which chooses to
spike stories that will annoy Democrats. Their share price has gone from $50
in 2005 to $3 now, in 2008. Their sales are reflected in the price. Cause
and effect? With the Internet giving us access to the truth, they have a
problem. The Guardian, a left wing operation in England is losing money in a
big way too. I am not shedding tears for them.
Newspaper Circulation
QUOTE
Newspaper circulation is going steadily down. The number are out there and they
make bad reading for those in the industry. They are propaganda machines that
have out lived their peak influence. The
British National
Party will not be shedding tears for them. Giuseppe has the numbers and a
gloat. The Telegraph aka The Quislinggraph dropped 16% in a year. No wonder they
are sacking people. The Sun with sales of 2,936,099 at 20p a time is grossing
around £587,219 per diem or £214 million per annum. This sounds like a living to
me. Knock off 50% for distribution and 25% for printing to leave £53 million for
editorial. There is room for lots of snouts in that particular trough. The
Grauniad, grossing some £54 million should be able to survive.
UNQUOTE
Will we be poorer for their passing? I doubt it. So would a lot of past
readers, if they gave the matter a thought.
Newspapers Are Dying
They were profitable, influential then the wireless became an
option. Television was another news channel. The Internet was the real option,
one that made publishing cheap, easy worthwhile. Paper is no longer the only
way.
Let Us Pay
QUOTE
During 2009, it was difficult to find
anybody inside the newspaper business who was not profoundly depressed about
the future of the industry. All the trend lines were downwards. The
migration of readers and advertisers towards digital media was already a
long-standing headache for the industry. Then came the credit crunch, whose
aftermath brought recession, further decline in sales, and a sharp downturn
in advertising. The result was industry-wide gloom........
Would it matter if it died?....... Without it our democracy would head the way that papers themselves risk heading, and become hollowed out, with the external apparatus of democratic machinery but without the informed electorate which the press helps create. And one beauty of the current arrangement is that it functions without the press having to be well-meaning or high-minded......
Why is that [ going totally on line ] a good thing? Because the internet can make all those costs go away. If newspapers switched over to being all online, the cost base would be instantly and permanently transformed. The OECD report puts the cost of printing a typical paper at 28 per cent and the cost of sales and distribution at 24 per cent: so the physical being of the paper absorbs 52 per cent of all costs. (Administration costs another 8 per cent and advertising another 16.) That figure may well be conservative........
At some point, the economic logic of this is going to become irresistible......... So this, I think, is the future of newspapers. Their cost base will force them to junk their print editions......... I feel equally certain in saying that what the print media need, more than anything else, is a new payment mechanism for online reading, which lets you read anything you like, wherever it is published, and then charges you on an aggregated basis, either monthly or yearly or whatever........
I say again, let us pay. Make the process as easy as
possible. Make it invisible and transparent. Make us register once and
once only. Walls are not the way forward, but walls are not the same thing
as payment, and without some form of payment, the press will not be here
in five years’ time. I hope one of the big organizations is working on
this idea or something like it, because for print newspapers, the clock
isn’t just ticking, it’s ticking louder and faster.
UNQUOTE
Mr Lanchester has a bias. Being in the business means he wants the
cash flow. A sensible analysis.
Tough times get tougher for the New York Times
Things are going down hill as the Great Depression of 2008 gets underway. But cash flow at the New York Times was drooping well before. When people have the Internet telling the truth they do not need the media's lies.
British mass
media owners
QUOTE
David and Frederick
Barclay
Richard
Desmond
Lew Grade
Robert Maxwell
Paul Reuter
UNQUOTE
The Wikipedia gives five. Four of them are Jews. There are other
owners. Murdoch is a Zionist even if he is not one of God's Chosen. The
Barclay brothers are Catholics.
PS The Wikipedia does not bother to
mention Black, the Jewish Zionist thief.
The Economist - The World’s
Sleaziest Magazine
QUOTE
For The Economist, the Putin-as-Fascist story isn't
bound by traditional Newtonian concepts of time or space, let alone the
basic principles of Western journalism........ For the last few years, The Economist
has been waging a relentless, obsessive-compulsive campaign to rebrand
Russia and Vladimir Putin as a Fascist state and a Fascist regime.
Consider last year's "The
Hardest Word":
"It is an over-used word, and a controversial one, especially in Russia. It is not there yet, but Russia sometimes seems to be heading towards fascism.".....
And speaking of Hitlers, in the mid-1930s,
The Economist even found time to
praise you-know-who: "Herr Hitler is showing encouraging
signs of statesmanship." Yes, they really did write that. The first and
last example of genuine wit that The Economist ever
produced.
UNQUOTE
The wonderful, caring people at The eXile, a magazine produced by
expats in Moscow have a view about The Economist's line and its dislike
of Vladimir Putin. Colonel Putin, late of the KGB is a rather sound sort of man. That is
why he gets a bad press.
Daily
Express [ 1900 - ]
Is written for the right wing lower
classes. It is currently owned by Desmond, a foul mouthed pornographer and Jew.
Financial Times [ 1888 - ]
Is about money to say the obvious.
Fox News
Lefties do not like so it can't be all bad, even though it is
owned by Murdoch.
The Guardian [ 1821
- ]
or
Guardian
Is otherwise known as the Grauniad or Graun. It is a left wing organ but
has good articles. It is was altogether too friendly with Zionists in
their early days but sound on systematic murder and torture
in Israel.
“They do not toil, nether do they spin,” but they live better than those that do.
The working-class Manchester and
Salford Advertiser called the Manchester Guardian "the foul
prostitute and dirty parasite of the worst portion of the mill-owners".
Private Eye rarely sneers
at the Graun. It has to be their paper of choice but the halo slipped
recently. The
eXile, a little paper in Moscow got robbed by Luke Harding of
the Graun. They were not amused. See
Hack Watch -Did Guardian Journalist Hack Again?
PS Their style owes something to the Eye.
Haaretz
Is published in Palestine, the Stolen Land by Jews for Jews.
The
Independent
[ 1964 - ]
It is writes for the left and can be VERY
Zionist is its sympathies.
Jewish
Chronicle [ 1841 - ]
The Jewish Chronicle prints about 30,000 copies.
See
Zionist Empire Rotting From Within
for in depth analysis.
Daily
Mail [ 1896 ]
Was for people's servants and the first to publish a million. It tends to the
right usually but is prone to go the other way.
Mirror [ 1903 - ]
Was a right wing operation but became a left wing sensationalist paper for the toiling peasant masses.
Mirror Group News
Is the holding group for the Mirror and others.
National Review - Has gone communist During this period he also became an outspoken
opponent of desegregation. He editorialized against the U.S. Supreme
Court’s 1954 ruling in Brown vs. Board of Education, which declared
school segregation unconstitutional. The centerpiece of Kilpatrick’s
opposition was a 19th-century doctrine called “interposition,” which
said that states had the right to override a federal mandate that
encroached on their sovereign authority. Bolstered by Kilpatrick’s
editorials, several Southern states used the interposition argument to
pass laws favorable to segregation. Kilpatrick also wrote a book, “The
Sovereign States” (1957), to drum up support for the doctrine outside
the South, but it failed to gain traction..... Yes, National Review used to be an Compare that to the National Review of today,
an irrelevant publication that just fired
John Derbyshire for writing common sense, elementary level
truths about race.
QUOTE
Things
sure have changed at National Review
Does anyone remember James J. Kilpatrick? At one time,
in the late 1970s to the mid 1980s he was apparently one of the most
widely read columnists in the country. Do you know how he became famous?
In the early 1950s he was an unknown editor/editorial writer for a
newspaper in Richmond, Virginia. Then he began denouncing Brown vs.
Board of Education, and championing states’ rights and segregation.........“racist” honest
magazine, well up into the 1970s. Today’s conservatives, in
an effort to prove that they’re the good guys who love Black people the
most, love to scream that “Bull Connor was a Democrat!” and that “It was
Democrats who opposed the Civil Rights movement!” What they never mention is that it was conservatives who
once opposed the “Civil Rights” movement, and they did it from the pages
of National Review, the leading conservative magazine in the
country back then.
UNQUOTE
A sad loss.
The left wing version of that talk about race.
New
Statesman
Was founded by communist subversives who also started the
Fabian Society and the
LSE. It was to be a working tool destroying England.
QUOTE
New Statesman was founded in 1913 by
Sidney and
Beatrice Webb with the support of
George Bernard Shaw and other prominent members of the
Fabian Society. Its first editor was
Clifford Sharp, who remained editor until 1928.......... Although the Webbs
and most Fabians were closely associated with the
Labour Party, Sharp was drawn increasingly to the
Asquith
Liberals........
During the 1930s, Martin's Statesman moved markedly to the
left politically. It became strongly anti-fascist and was generally critical of
the government policy of appeasement of Mussolini and Hitler (though it did not
back British rearmament). It was also, notoriously, an apologist for
Joseph Stalin's Soviet Union. In 1934 it ran a famously deferential
interview with Stalin by
H. G.
Wells. In 1938 came Martin's refusal to publish
George Orwell's celebrated despatches from Barcelona during the
Spanish civil war because they criticised the communists for suppressing the
anarchists and the left-wing Workers' Party of Marxist Unification (POUM).
"It is an unfortunate fact," Martin wrote to Orwell, "that any hostile criticism
of the present Russian regime is liable to be taken as propaganda against
socialism."
UNQUOTE
The agenda comes
first. The truth comes last.
News Of The World
or
News Of The Screws
[ 1843 - 2011 ]
Circulation is some 3.5 million copies. Murdoch's rag. Now it is
gone - see
News Of The World for more and better details.
News of the Screws Faces £800,000 Payout
Bullying can come very dear. Murder is cheaper -
Menezes family settles for £100,000 Met payout
Private
Eye [ 1961 - ]
Circulation 205,231
Was first published in 1961. It was part of the satire boom that stayed the
course. It even has a pension scheme now. It does some first class reporting on
corruption at the interface between
Big Business
Big Government but it is against the commercial
side rather than the apparatchiks.
The
Spectator [ 1828 - ]
It had a succession of owners. Conrad
Black was one such until he had problems with major fraud raps. For an example
of its gross treachery see their article on
Enoch Powell And His Most Important Speech
PS Black got six and half years.
Der Stürmer
[ 1923 - 1945 ]
QUOTE
Der Stürmer (literally,
"The Stormer;" or more accurately, "The Attacker") was a weekly tabloid-format
Nazi
newspaper
published by
Julius Streicher from 1923 to the end of
World
War II in 1945, with brief suspensions in publication due to legal
difficulties. It was a significant part of the Nazi
propaganda machinery and was vehemently
anti-Semitic. Unlike the
Völkischer Beobachter (translatable as The People's Observer),
the official party paper which gave itself an outwardly serious appearance,
the
tabloid-style Der Stürmer often ran obscene and tasteless materials
such as anti-Semitic
caricatures and propaganda-like accusations of
blood libel,[1]
pornography,
anti-Catholic,
anti-capitalist and anti-"reactionary"
propaganda too.
The paper originated at
Nuremberg
during Hitler’s attempt to establish power and control. During the struggle to
achieve power, Streicher was accused by the opposition of the
Nazi party as being “a liar, a coward, of having unsavory friends,
mistreating his wife and of flirting with women”. Despite the accusations, the
first copy of Der Stürmer was published April 20, 1923. Der Stürmer’s
circulation grew over time, distributing to a large percentage of the German
population as well as
Argentina,
Brazil,
Canada and
the
United States. Between August 1941 and September 1944, Streicher
authorized articles demanding the annihilation and extermination of the
Jewish race.
UNQUOTE
The fact that
Julius took a forthright line on Jews was never going to make him popular
with the criminals of the Stolen Land, of Palestine. Notice that the Wiki
claims that he makes accusations. It does not deny that he was telling the
truth.
The
Sun [ 1964 - ]
Is owned by Rupert Murdoch and follows
his party line which is often to the right but is more to do with the
politicians involved.
The Tatler
[ 1709 - ]
The current incarnation began in 1910. It
is more concerned with gossip and manners than politics but can be very
informative.
The
Telegraph aka The Quislinggraph
[ 1855 - ]
It is THE paper of the
moderately right which may be why the Wikipedia didn't bother to tell us about it.
It is a Quisling operation.
The Times
[ 1785 - ]
It was politically sound and very profitable.
Rupert
Murdoch bought it since when it has gone off.
Völkischer Beobachter = The People's
Observer [ 1920 - 1945 ]
QUOTE
The Völkischer Beobachter ("Völkisch
Observer") was the newspaper of the
National
Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP or Nazi Party) from 1920. It first
appeared weekly, then daily from February 8, 1923. For twenty-five years it
formed part of the official public face of the
Nazi party.
The "fighting paper of the National Socialist movement of Greater Germany" (Kampfblatt der nationalsozialistischen Bewegung Großdeutschlands) had its origin in the Münchner Beobachter ("Munich Observer"), which in 1918 was acquired by the Thule Society and in August 1919 was renamed Völkischer Beobachter. The NSDAP purchased it in December 1920 on the initiative of Chase Bauduin and Dietrich Eckart, who became the first editors. In 1921 Hitler acquired all shares in the company, making him the sole owner of the publication........
Perhaps the most notorious article printed was an interview with Hans Frank, Governor-General of occupied Poland, on June 6, 1940. The occasion was a widely distributed proclamation in Czechoslovakia announcing the execution of seven Czech students. This is what he said:
|
“ |
If I had to order a distribution of posters announcing such an event every time I order a shooting of seven Poles, there would not be enough trees in the Polish forests to supply the necessary paper. |
” |
The final issues from April and May 1945
were not distributed.
UNQUOTE
It was the voice of Adolf, the voice of the Nazis.
