Category Archives: Freedom of Speech and of the Press

Posted on by

Killadelphia: It’s the last update of 2022 But The Philadelphia Inquirer is still trying to obscure the truth.

The Philadelphia Police Department have released their last ‘official’ homicide report for the year, showing that 514 people have spilled out their life’s blood in the city’s mean streets. Oh, there’ll be another report tomorrow, generated by computer to update past year’s daily numbers, but the current year’s numbers are updated only Monday through Friday, meaning that Friday’s numbers won’t be included on Saturday’s report, now will New Year’s Eve’s numbers on the Sunday report.

We might not even get the yearly total on Monday, because New Year’s Day, a government holiday, occurs on Sunday, and whomever in the Philadelphia Police Department updates the statistics will be allowed to take his holiday on Monday; that’s what happened on December 26th, the Monday after Christmas Day.

In 2021, there were five total murders on December 30th and 31st.

Of course, with a final number which will fit within the range I projected three days ago, 514 to 521, there’s no particular reason to fudge the numbers the way that some have alleged happened at the end of 2020, where an initial report of 502 was downgraded to 499. With the second-place number being an even 500, set during the crack cocaine wars of 1990, and the record of 562 set last year, this year’s 514 to 521 will be securely in between those two, so there’d no advantage to any downgrade.

If anything, a homicide or two committed early enough on New Year’s Day might as well be added to 2022’s statistics, in the hope that 2023 can come in under 500; that’s something I can easily see happening.

But, regardless of what the final number is, there’s no escaping one simple fact: under Mayor Jim Kenney, District Attorney Larry Krasner, and Police commissioner Danielle Outlaw, the City of Brotherly Love have averaged 525 homicides per year, assuming that the current 514 is the final number for this year. Assuming that 514 is the end number for 2022, for the Kenney-Krasner-Outlaw triumvirate to average under 500, the city would have to see a homicide number for 2023 down to 421. Of course, for every homicide added to the 2022 total, that 421 number decreases by one.

It’s so bad that even The Philadelphia Inquirer noted this year’s numbers, though, of course, they never did the real math to note the average that the law enforcement triumvirate have racked up.

Philly’s gun violence remained at record levels for the third straight year

Philadelphia had recorded 512 homicides this year through Tuesday, police said, and nearly 1,800 people were shot and survived.

by Ellie Rushing and Chris Palmer | Thursday, December 29, 2022

When Taneesha Brodie’s eldest son turned 8, she moved her family out of North Philadelphia to Upper Darby, seeking a safer community away from the city’s gun violence.

She was proud of the people her children became, especially her eldest, Quenzell Bradley-Brown. A married father of four, the 28-year-old spent four years in the National Guard reserves, then worked two jobs and often performed hip-hop, poetry, and comedy at open mic nights.

In February, Bradley-Brown and his family moved back into the city, to Overbrook Park, for more affordable housing and to be closer to his elderly grandmother.

Brodie worried at first, but considered the area to be relatively safe.

Seven months later, her son was dead.

Quenzell Bradley-Brown was apparently a victim of a mistaken identity killing, and remains unsolved, as are hundreds more. With a mostly uncooperative public who hate the police, a police department around 600 officers undermanned, and a probable next mayor who hates cops, who can reasonably expect that number to get better?

Many subsequent paragraphs give us some of the statistics and references, before article authors Ellie Rushing and Chris Palmer go off the reservation:

Arguments and drug-related feuds remained the predominant motives in homicides, according to police statistics. But authorities also pointed to ongoing gang conflicts, social media posts, retaliation or revenge, and domestic violence.

We have several times mocked the Inquirer for recently claiming that there were no real gangs in the city. We were reliably informed by the Inquirer that there are no gangs in the city, just “cliques of young men affiliated with certain neighborhoods and families,” who sometimes had “beefs” with other cliques, so we must replace the term “gang-bangers” with “cliques of young men” or “clique beefers”. District Attorney Larry Krasner and his office seem to prefer the term “rival street groups.” But, the embedded link led to another article, from just 11 days ago, in which Miss Rushing was one of the authors, along with Rodrigo Torrejón, telling of the violence not of gangs, but “West Philadelphia street groups.” They did use the word “gang” one time, but it appears to simply have been a matter of prose, because they’d already used “street group” in the sentence:

Lacey-Woodson and Mickens, affiliated with the street group “02da4,” were targeting a member of the rival gang “524″ and opened fire on the party, said Jeffrey Palmer, an assistant district attorney with the Gun Violence Task Force, which headed the investigation.

Unless I missed it, which is always possible, that was the only use of the word “gang” in the article. There were plenty of subsequent references to “street groups” and “groups” in the article.

Obviously, there was some editorial ‘guidance’ in this. While the article headline and subheading are “West Philly street group members charged for their roles in five different shootings: The rash of violence was part of ongoing feuds between feuding West Philadelphia street groups, authorities said,” the original article title, visible by hovering your cursor over the article tab, was “West Philadelphia gang members arrested in Sircarr Johnson Jr., Salahaldin Mahmoud fatal shooting”, and the article url is https://www.inquirer.com/news/sircarr-johnson-west-philadelphia-gang-arrests-july-4-shooting-20221219.html.

Translation: what I have often referred to as The Philadelphia Enquirer[1]RedState writer Mike Miller called it the Enquirer, probably by mistake, so I didn’t originate it, but, reminiscent of the National Enquirer as it is, I thought it very apt. is, I assume to follow Publisher and Chief Executive Officer Elizabeth ‘Lisa’ Hughes directives to be an “antiracist news organization“, the word “gang” is apparently racist. Perhaps, for Miss Hughes, the word “gang” draws into the minds of readers an image of black gangs, or perhaps it’s simply that, for her, the truth is racist.

The Enquirer, oops, sorry, Inquirer really doesn’t like investigating the truth. The paper will never report the numbers I use, all from documented sources, to note how the current law enforcement triumvirate have failed, nor have they, at least as far as I could find, mentioned what Ben Mannes reported on Broad + Liberty, that the homicide numbers are obvious fudges, given the high number of obvious homicides that remain classified as ‘suspicious,’ and not counted in the official homicide statistics.  When the Lenfest Institute, which owns the Inky, sends out begging letters which state that “It is impossible to have a democratic society without a free press that informs citizens,” and “Reporters at The Inquirer are dedicated to speaking truth to power and delivering you news that makes Philadelphia a better place,” one ought to expect that the reporters who are dedicated to speaking truth to power would do something really radical and investigate what that truth really is.

References

References
↑1 RedState writer Mike Miller called it the Enquirer, probably by mistake, so I didn’t originate it, but, reminiscent of the National Enquirer as it is, I thought it very apt.
Posted on by

Kara Alaimo exercised her #FreedomOfSpeech and CNN’s #FreedomOfThePress to decry conservatives’ Freedom of Speech and of the Press

In an episode of Blue Bloods, fictitious New York City Police Commissioner Frank Reagan said, “Freedom of the press only applies to people who own one,” and, in a lot of ways, he’s right.  The New York Times and The Washington Post went to court in 1971 to fight President Richard Nixon’s attempts to prevent publication of the so-called Pentagon Papers, winning their case  in New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971).

Many people regard the issue of Twitter having been bought by Elon Musk as a matter of freedom of speech; I view it more as a matter of freedom of the press. You can say anything you want, but no one else is somehow obligated to repeat it, or publish it. For umpteen years people have submitted articles and other things to the Times and National Review and Simon & Schuster, and had their articles or books not accepted for publication. The editors at those companies were exercising a ‘gatekeeping’ function, and using their presses to print what they decided they wished to print, even if the authors of the rejected pieces thought differently.

And yes, I have — at least in memory; I didn’t keep them — a small collection of rejection letters myself. But my late best friend and I knew, in advance, that we were entrusting our submissions to the judgement of those who owned the presses in which we sought to get published.

This internet thingy that Al Gore invented changed all of that. Rush Limbaugh made the first crack, when he got his radio show syndicated, to the absolute horror of many on the left. Internet chat rooms on America Online widened things a bit, but the real break came when independent people could start their own websites, and Powerline and Little Green Footballs[1]Did you notice what I did there? I approve of Powerline, and included the hyperlink to it. Little Green Footballs went way, way, way in the wrong direction, and I do not want to give them more … Continue reading exposed CBS News use of forged documents to try to defeat the younger President Bush’s re-election in 2004.

And in the end, Twitter, and the other social media sites, are publishers, able to choose what, and what not, to publish.

Now comes Kara Alaimo, an associate professor in the Lawrence Herbert School of Communication at Hofstra University, who writes about issues affecting women and social media. Dr Alaimo, it seems, does not much like it when the wrong people who own presses get to decide what does, and does not get published.

Elon Musk is running Twitter like dictators run their states

Opinion by Kara Alaimo | Friday, December 16, 2022 | 7:20 PM EST

Kara Alaimo, from her website.

CNN – On Thursday, Elon Musk’s ownership of Twitter entered a terrifying new phase when he began wielding his power to censor the press. The Twitter accounts of several journalists who have covered Musk critically recently — in other words, done their jobs — were suspended.In tweets, Musk accused the journalists of violating the platform’s policy against doxing — or posting private information online — by sharing his “exact real-time” location. But none of the banished reporters — including CNN’s Donie O’Sullivan and The Washington Post’s Drew Harwell — appeared to have done so. Musk and Twitter didn’t respond to CNN’s requests for comment.

Well, we already knew that Dr Alaimo had no problem at all with Taylor Lorenz’s doxxing of Chaya Raichik, the creator of Libs of TikTok, calling it accountability even while she stated that “Doxxing can be dangerous — or even deadly. There are many people who should be able to share information anonymously online.” It’s almost as though the professor believes that the acceptability of doxxing is determined by the political views of the victim.

It was yesterday’s news that Twitter had suspended the journolists[2]The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their … Continue reading in question; by the next day, Twitter announced the restoration of those accounts.

Now I don’t know: was this all part of Mr Musk’s master plan to teach those journolists a lesson, that what they celebrated when Donald Trump and some prominent conservatives were suspended by the previous Twitter management could happen to them as well, or was Twitter responding to the negative publicity for having done so?

If it weren’t obvious before, the latest moves make clear that Musk tends to run this company the way dictators run their states: by making decisions that serve his personal interests rather than those of the public, and capriciously getting rid of people who stand in his way. That’s why tech workers and journalists who have lost their jobs in the past few weeks should come together to create non-profit social networks designed to serve the public interest.

“The way dictators run their states”? Dr Alaimo didn’t quite go full Godwin’s Law and proclaim that Mr Musk is “literally Hitler,” but she was certainly hovering around that button. Twitter, as a publisher, was exercising its freedom of the press to not grant publication to a few reporters. Her OpEd, published on cnn.com, was certainly taking advantage of CNN’s freedom of the press!

And Dr Alaimo really, really doesn’t like freedom of the press when the wrong people own those presses, or are the one’s taking decisions about whose words they will publish:

The chilling problem with Kanye West’s definition of ‘free speech’

Opinion by Kara Alaimo | Tuesday, October 18, 2022 | Updated 8:12 AM EDT

CNN — The conservative social media company Parler announced on Monday that it is being purchased by Kanye West, who was temporarily suspended from Twitter this month for an antisemitic tweet. A statement from Parler’s parent company announcing the deal described West, who has legally changed his name to Ye, as having taken “a groundbreaking move into the free speech media space” where “he will never have to fear being removed from social media again.”

In a release by Parler, West said that “in a world where conservative opinions are considered to be controversial we have to make sure we have the right to freely express ourselves.”

This development means several social media companies could soon be left in the hands of mercurial, mega-rich men who have pledged to promote “free speech,” including the kind of extreme views that got West temporarily booted from Twitter. Elon Musk is currently in the process of buying Twitter, though Twitter said in a recent court filing that federal authorities (it was not clear which ones) are investigating Musk (while Musk’s attorney said this filing was designed to distract from Twitter’s own legal issues).

For his part, Musk has said Twitter should be “an inclusive arena for free speech.” And former President Donald Trump, who was thrown off Twitter and Facebook in January 2021, founded the company that created Truth Social, which describes itself as a “free speech haven.”

If West and Musk go through with their deals, these three social media platforms are likely to serve as ecosystems for conservative thought. This will likely make the views of those who remain on them more extreme — which could have a radical effect on our politics. That’s because when people who think similarly come together, they reaffirm and heighten one another’s initial beliefs.

Also read: William Teach: FBI Was Super Excited To Censor Conservatives On Twitter

So, if that’s what Dr Alaimo believes — and I certainly take her at her word — “ecosystems for conservative thought” are bad, bad things. On Twitter, at the time under the previous ownership, would have been an ‘ecosystem for liberal thought,’ with conservatives allowed, as long as they followed the left’s rules. I have already noted that I have had to be careful in tweets, especially when it came to my reporting about Will Thomas, a male swimmer who claimed to be a woman named “Lia,” including calling him ‘Lia’ Thomas in a couple of article titles to get past Twitter’s rules, even though I do not accept the cockamamie notion that anyone can change his sex.

While men such as West, Musk and Trump claim to promote free speech by not favoring the moderation of problematic content, here’s what lack of moderation really does: It drives away the people victimized by abusive content such as West’s tweet.

“Victimized,” huh? Apparently to Dr Alaimo, it’s not just sticks and stones which can break people’s bones, but names most certainly can hurt them!

As much as I’d like to quote all of Dr Alaimo’s OpEd piece, I’ll summarize much of the rest. She stated that Twitter really is a digital “town square,” and that while slightly less than a quarter of Americans have Twitter accounts, it does have an “outsize influence” on what reporters write and talk about, and thus is very, very important, and journolists journalists must be able to hold people in power accountable. Social media, Dr Alaimo stated, must be a place where the public can find “reliable information,” decrying what she saw as hate speech and misinformation.

It’s clear that we can’t rely on Musk’s Twitter to provide a safe, open forum. We need new, non-profit social networks run by boards responsible for considering the public’s interest when making critical decisions about things like content moderation and community standards. And many of the people who have these skills have just been laid off from their jobs. In addition to the mass exodus from Twitter since Musk’s takeover, there have been layoffs at a number of tech and journalism companies lately, including Facebook and CNN, with more coming at The Washington Post. Some of these professionals should work together to create new social platforms designed to provide the truly open town hall we so desperately need.

So, a “truly open town hall” must be one in which conservatives are censored, but not liberals, in which conservatives can be doxxed, but not leftists.

Musk’s latest power moves are nothing short of dangerous. Recently unemployed tech and journalism workers should take them as a rallying call to unite to create new, healthier online spaces. We have nothing to lose except our dependence on a mercurial, egotistical czar to set the terms of our public debates.

The creation of Parler and Truth Social were mocked by the left, and none of the alternate sites gained anywhere near the size and influence of Twitter. Governments ar all levels use Twitter to convey information to the public, but if any government has a Parler account, I’ve not heard of it.

Now Twitter has been taken over by a man whose ideas of what should and should not be published are different from the left, and the libs are aghast. Really, Dr Alaimo, names really cannot hurt you . . . unless you are weak-willed enough to let them.

References

References
↑1 Did you notice what I did there? I approve of Powerline, and included the hyperlink to it. Little Green Footballs went way, way, way in the wrong direction, and I do not want to give them more publicity, so I did not link that site. Owning the site The First Street Journal, I am able to take that decision as to which things I wish, and wish not, to publicize, and exercised my discretion.
↑2 The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use the term ‘journolism’ frequently when writing about media bias.
Posted on by

I take no joy in seeing Washington Post employees getting laid off

I’ve said it before: I really love newspapers! I delivered the Lexington Herald and the Lexington Leader — now combined as the Lexington Herald-Leader — when I was in junior high and high schools, and, being hearing impaired, I find it much easier to read the news than to watch and listen to it on television. More, television news stations are in the business of presenting stories which happen right away, stories which have a strong visual component. Only newspapers have the capacity to dig more deeply, to present more information than people can get from a thirty-second story on television; that’s just the nature of the different media forms. With the switch to a mostly digital format, newspapers are no longer stuck with assigned story length, save in the actual print editions.

More, running a conservative blog as I do, I like to cite credentialed media publications with a liberal reputation as my sources; this insulates me from criticism that my sources are somehow untrustworthy because they are conservative themselves.

And this is why I have been discouraged to learn about the pending layoffs at The Washington Post, and why I don’t share in the schadenfreude of others like Breitbart:

‘Mood Is Really Grim’ at Imploding Washington Post

by John Nolte | Thursday, December 15, 2022

More bad news is coming from the imploding Resistance Force that calls itself the Washington Post.

On Wednesday, Breitbart News informed you that the Washington Post, a far-left propaganda outlet devoted to spreading lies and conspiracy theories, has lost 500,000 subscribers since January 2021. This drops its subscription base to just 2.5 million.

The Post also announced to its staff of entitled Resistance Babies on Wednesday that layoffs were coming to its 2,500-person workforce. No numbers were yet available on the layoffs. All we know is that it will be a single percentage (1 to 9 percent) of the current workforce.

The response from our journalist elites was exactly what you’d expect from entitled babies:

There’s a lot more at the original, and Breitbart is not behind a paywall, so I’m not asking anything big for you to check out the rest yourselves. The Post’s own story is behind the paywall, so if you aren’t a subscriber, you won’t get more than a couple of paragraphs, unless you haven’t tried to access Post stories recently; you do get a couple of freebies every month.

The Washington Post announces more job cuts next year

The announcement comes amid a season of layoffs throughout the media industry and weeks after the paper said it will eliminate its stand-alone magazine

By Elahe Izadi and Sarah Ellison | Wednesday, December 14, 2022 | 2:31 PM EST | Updated: 6:21 PM EST

The Washington Post will continue to eliminate jobs early next year, Publisher Fred Ryan said Wednesday, weeks after the paper announced it will shutter its Sunday magazine and lay off 11 newsroom employees.

Ryan said at a companywide meeting that the cuts will probably amount to a “single-digit percentage” of the company’s 2,500 employees but did not provide specifics. He added, though, that the company will add new jobs to offset the loss of positions that are “no longer serving readers,” and that The Post’s total head count will not be reduced.

Later, in an email to staff, Ryan said that the plan to cut jobs “in no way signals that we are scaling back our ambitions” but that “like any business, The Post cannot keep investing resources in initiatives that do not meet our customers’ needs.”

The publisher walked out of the meeting after dozens of employees raised their hands and peppered him with questions. Plans for job cuts will be finalized “over the coming weeks,” Post spokeswoman Kathy Baird said in a statement.

The development comes during a difficult season for media workers, as companies across the industry have laid off workers and instituted hiring freezes. Citing “economic head winds” as a factor last month, The Post’s executive editor, Sally Buzbee, announced the newspaper will end its weekly stand-alone magazine, along with the jobs of its 10 staffers. The magazine’s last issue will publish Dec. 25. The company also eliminated the job of Pulitzer Prize-winning dance critic Sarah L. Kaufman. None of those employees were offered new roles at the paper.

During Wednesday’s employee meeting, Ryan cited a difficult economic environment, particularly for companies reliant on advertising, and he acknowledged that “for those people whose positions will be eliminated, this will be a difficult time.”

There’s more at the original.

In this, I think of my favorite reporter, the Post’s Heather Long. I became familiar with her work when she was an economics reporter for CNN, and appreciated it for one simple reason: I could not tell, from her reporting, whether she was conservative or liberal, Republican or Democrat. And if I couldn’t tell, that meant she wasn’t pushing an agenda in her reporting; that’s the kind of thing that, for me, distinguishes between a journalist and a journolist.[1]The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their … Continue reading

I’m not too worried about Miss Long’s job: she has, in a fairly brief time, worked her way up from being an economics reporter to one of the Post’s columnists and Editorial Board members. But she left CNN, and CNN later experienced layoffs, and now she’s with the Post, and they, too, are seeing layoffs.

So, what’s up? Miss Long, along with data analyst Andrew Van Dam, reported in June of last year that a lot of different types of businesses had responded to the panicdemic — and no, that’s not a typographical error; I spelled it exactly the way I believe it should be spelled — by offering subscription services, for all sorts of things:

Subscriptions boomed during the coronavirus pandemic as Americans largely stuck in shutdown mode flocked to digital entertainment and signed up for regular home delivery of boxes of items such as clothes and chocolate. But what really set the past year apart was the increase in subscriptions in the hard-hit services sector. Owners of restaurants, hotels, home-repair companies and others upended their traditional business models to try subscriptions and often found more interest — and revenue — than they anticipated.

“This was really about flipping the business model for restaurants: paying before eating instead of eating before paying,” said Vinay Gupta, a winemaker who spearheaded the Summerlong Supper Club in Washington and New York City.

Upon reading that, my first thought was: if people are paying restaurants before eating, how are the restaurant employees who depend on tips going to survive? But, further down:

The typical U.S. consumer now has two to three subscriptions, according to user data from budget app Mint and research by Tien Tzuo, author of “Subscribed” and chief executive of subscriptions platform Zuora.

There’s a growing trend of “power subscribers” with 10 or more recurring payments, according to budgeting app Truebill. The app’s users average 17 subscriptions and typically spend $145 a month, according to an analysis Truebill did for The Washington Post. Last spring during the shutdowns, Truebill users averaged 21 subscriptions, as people tried different entertainment, home workout and delivery services.

Perhaps, just perhaps, with inflation having spiked, and even with it coming down recently, has outpaced the average weekly earnings of Americans, some Americans are starting to dump some of those subscriptions? The Post had more than three million digital subscribers at the end of 2020, but were down to 2.7 million by October of 2021, and around 2.5 million now. Maybe the Post needs to find a way to make it more valuable to customers than Hulu?

Me? Miss Long turned me on to a $99.00 per year subscription in 2017, which increased to $104.94 in 2020, a 6.00% increase, and I’m now scheduled to be billed $120.00 next August, a 14.35% bump. Yeah, I’m still going to pay it; it’s still a lot cheaper than my subscription to The New York Times, at $17.00 every four weeks, or $221.00 a year, $5.49 a week, or $285.48 a year to The Philadelphia Inquirer, — which also wants federal government subsidies to support the newspaper industry — or the utterly hideous amount I pay for The Wall Street Journal.

Still, a question has to be asked: why is The Washington Post, one our nation’s premier newspapers, and one of the four listed ‘newspapers of record,’ starting to lose subscribers, and money? What must the Post differently to attract more readers, more paying readers, so that the newspaper starts to make money again? John Nolte blamed it on the liberal bias he sees in the Post, and their continued bias against Republicans and supporters of former President Trump. The New York Times said, “As the breakneck news pace of the Trump administration faded away, readers have turned elsewhere, and the paper’s push to expand beyond Beltway coverage hasn’t compensated for the loss.” Nevertheless, the Times also noted, “two of The Post’s top competitors — The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal — have added subscriptions since Mr. Trump left office.”

There are real differences between the two New York newspapers and the Post. A city of 8½ million people is a heck of a lot bigger market from which to draw, and The Wall Street Journal is a specialty publication which meets different needs, and appeals to a different customer base. But when the Post, supposedly the number one newspaper for reporting on our federal government, returns zero relevant returns on a site search for Sam Brinton, the ‘gender fluid, non-binary’ former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition in the Office of Nuclear Energy who was fired for stealing suitcases from airports, it starts to look as though the newspaper either has a truly pathetic search engine, or is covering up for the utter embarrassment that Mr Brinton has brought upon the Biden Administration.

CNN’s online content is free, as is content from Fox News and MSNBC. Print newspapers, as they transition to a digital subscription medium, have to find ways to compete with free. The New York Times seems to be doing so, even if few other newspapers are, so the Post should be able to as well.

References

References
↑1 The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use the term ‘journolism’ frequently when writing about media bias.
Posted on by

Killadelphia Is The Philadelphia Inquirer trying to keep the truth hushed up to protect Democrats?

I noted, just five days ago, that I saw a mathematical possibility, at the margin of error, that the City of Brotherly Love could finish very slightly below 500 homicides in 2022. That was based upon the decrease in the rate of killings since Hallowe’en.

Alas! while the rate of killings still isn’t in the 2021 range, it has picked up once again, and the math makes it seem impossible now. With 488 killings as of 11:59 PM EST on Sunday, December 11, 2022, Philly is now seeing 1.4145 murders per day; that works out to 516.29 murders for the year. And with at least six homicides over the last three days, the city has seen 43 murders in the 41 days since Hallowe’en. At that rate, 1.0488 per day, times thee 20 days left in the year, yields 20.98 homicides in these last three weeks. If there are 21 homicides in the last 20 days, that would end the year with 509 murders.

But that is working with the official homicide numbers, and Broad + Liberty, along with other outlets, broke the story of the uncounted deaths in the city, showing at least 101 “suspicious” deaths, in a photo taken just before Thanksgiving. That the credentialed media didn’t want to report that is evidenced by the fact that, since the story broke, The Philadelphia Inquirer, our nation’s third oldest continuously published daily newspaper, winner of twenty Pulitzer Prizes, and the supposed newspaper of record for the area, and one which believes it is so important that the federal government should subsidize it, has nothing on that story, even though it was published four days ago, on a subject that would seem pretty serious and significant. Checking the Inquirer’s website main page, specific crime page, and doing a site search for suspicious deaths, as of 9:45 AM EST today showed no stories on the subject at all. Did the Inky investigate at all? Did Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw tell them that it was nothing, don’t worry about it? Did the top officers clam up?

You’d think that a leak like this, from someone inside the Philadelphia Police Department, would have piqued the interest of real journalists, especially the police-hating #woke of the Inquirer, but if you actually thought that, you’d be wrong, wrong, wrong!

Who knows, perhaps the unauthorized leak from someone in the Police Department was a fake, a political attack. If so, wouldn’t the journolists[1]The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their … Continue reading want to expose that? After all, it’s a serious accusation, one which attacks the political leadership of the Police Department and the city as a whole . . . and Philadelphia hasn’t had a Republican mayor since Harry Truman was President.

Oh, wait, that’s it: the editors of the Inky don’t want anything which could hurt the Democrats made public.

References

References
↑1 The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use the term ‘journolism’ frequently when writing about media bias.
Posted on by

Journolism!

The New York Times’ famous logo tells us something other than what the public might think; it tells us that the editors will decide what you should know.

Sam Brinton, from his Department of Energy biography, and is a public record.

Remember Sam Brinton? Well, he’s actually someone you’d really not want to remember, because he’s loony tunes, off his rocker, certifiably nuts, cookoo for Cocoa Puffs. Mr Brinton ‘identifies’ as ‘non-binary’ and chooses to use “they/them” pronouns, something along with which the credentialed media go, but The First Street Journal, in accordance with our Stylebook, does not.

Mr Brinton is a graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology with a Masters in nuclear engineering, technology and policy, which, I suppose, qualified him to be appointed by President Biden to become Deputy Assistant Secretary for Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition, despite the fact he is completely nuts, because the #woke[1]From Wikipedia: Woke (/ˈwoʊk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from … Continue reading in the Biden Administration are promoting all sorts of sexual weirdness acceptance.

Now, you would think that The New York Times, one of our newspapers of record, would have a story on it if the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition, someone with a high-level security clearance, was arrested for felony theft, but if you thought that, you’d be wrong. Site searches for both Sam Brinton and the more specific “Sam Brinton” did not return any results related to his arrest. Going through the Grey Lady’s website front page, at 9:28 AM EST, I saw nothing on Mr Brinton’s arrest.

The New York Post had the story, as did Fox News, as did The Telegraph in London, as did the Daily Mail, but not The Washington Post, at least not according to a site search conducted at 9:35 AM EST. Scrolling down through the Post’s website main page also showed no such story.

You remember The Washington Post, one of our other newspapers of record, one which specializes in federal government reporting, and its addition of “Democracy Dies in Darkness” to its logo, during the Trump Administration? It would appear that the editors of the Post want this story to die in darkness!

Of course, the Post’s Editorial Board did have a posted editorial against Elon Musk’s opening Twitter to freedom of speech, so perhaps “Democracy Dies in Darkness” really means that the editors only like light on news and opinions they approve.

Also see: Nine Bookout, The Victory Girls, Gender Fluid DOE Official Charged With Felony, and Robert Stacy McCain, The Other McCain, Crazy People Are Dangerous (and They’re Working for the Biden Administration)

This is not journalism, but journolism. The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity, and I use the term ‘journolism’ frequently when writing about media bias. It seems that two of our newspapers of record, the most important papers in the United States, don’t want their readers to know that President Biden appointed someone who is just plain nuts to an important security position, and that he’s turned out to be both stupid and (allegedly) a thief. Knowing that Mr Brinton (allegedly) stole a suitcase off thebaggage claim carousel at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport might, just might, lead some people to have poorer opinions about ‘gender-fluid’, ‘non-binary’ people in general, and they just can’t have that!
_______________________________
Update: 8:15 AM EST, Wednesday, November 30, 2022: Site searches of our nation’s four ‘newspapers of record, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, and The Los Angeles Times, still show no returns for “Sam Brinton” on this subject.

References

References
↑1 From Wikipedia:

Woke (/ˈwoʊk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from the African-American Vernacular English expression “stay woke“, whose grammatical aspect refers to a continuing awareness of these issues.
By the late 2010s, woke had been adopted as a more generic slang term broadly associated with left-wing politics and cultural issues (with the terms woke culture and woke politics also being used). It has been the subject of memes and ironic usage. Its widespread use since 2014 is a result of the Black Lives Matter movement.

I shall confess to sometimes “ironic usage” of the term. To put it bluntly, I think that the ‘woke’ are just boneheadedly stupid.
Posted on by

Those who want to regulate speech aren’t really afraid of lies or misinformation; what they are afraid of is the truth.

The American left are aghast that Elon Musk’s somewhat delayed purchase of Twitter has meant that conservatives would be able to actually speak freely. As we have previously noted, Twitter added rules banning “targeted misgendering or deadnaming of transgender individuals.” “Misgendering” means referring to ‘transgendered’ individuals by their biological sex, either directly or through the use of the appropriate pronouns, while “deadnaming” means referring to such people by their birth names rather than the ones they have adopted which are more consistent with their imagined ‘gender.'[1]The First Street Journal’s Stylebook is exactly the opposite: while we do not change the direct quotes of others, in original material we always refer to people by their normal, biological sex … Continue reading The New York Times gave OpEd space to Chad Malloy[2]Chad Malloy is a man male who claims to be a woman, and goes by the faux name “Parker.” to claim that such restrictions actually promoted freedom of speech.

To trans people, it represented a recognition that our identity is an accepted fact and that to suggest otherwise is a slur.

That their ‘identity’ might not be “an accepted fact” is not something Mr Malloy wanted to concede, but Twitter’s policy also meant that those who did not accept such claims still had to be careful with their language, or be suspended or permanently banned.

And yes, I have had to be careful in tweets, especially when it came to my reporting about Will Thomas, a male swimmer who claimed to be a woman named “Lia,” including calling him ‘Lia’ Thomas in a couple of article titles to get past Twitter’s rules.

Now comes Robert Stacy McCain, who had his own @rsmccain Twitter account, with “tens of thousands” of followers, permanently suspended noting that Twitter, under the previous regime also suspended credentialed media sites which did something really radical like tell the truth:

‘Blood On Your Hands’? Is Anyone Really Endangered by Twitter ‘Amnesty’?

by Robert Stacy McCain | Sunday, November 27, 2022

Hopewell Chin’ono is an award-winning journalist who has relentlessly exposed the evils of the lawless and corrupt regime in Zimbabwe:

In 2020, Hopewell reported on alleged Covid-19 procurement fraud within the health ministry, which led to the arrest and sacking of Health Minister Obadiah Moyo. It was President Emmerson Mnangagwa who fired Obadiah in July for “inappropriate conduct” over the $60 million medicines supply scandal. On July 20, 2020, Hopewell was arrested and charged with inciting public violence. The US embassy called Hopewell’s arrest “deeply concerning”, while his lawyer called it “an abduction” and Amnesty accused Zimbabwean authorities of “misusing the criminal justice system to persecute journalists and activists”. He was freed in September on bail, then he was arrested again in November 2020 and was charged with obstructing justice and contempt of court for a tweet about the court outcome of a gold smuggling scandal.

Hopewell Chin’ono was released on bail on January 27, 2021 after spending three weeks in prison. Chin’ono expressed concern about the COVID-19 pandemic in the overcrowded Chikurubi Prison and accuses the government of harassment for arresting him three times in five months.

Given such credentials, Chin’ono must be taken seriously when he warns of the risks of a general “amnesty” for banned accounts on Twitter. And certainly we should hope that Elon Musk will have his staff exercise caution when it comes to such cases as these, where repressive regimes are using “ghost accounts” to harass their critics. But the problem in the United States is almost the diametrical opposite situation, i.e., critics of the regime have been banned, because Twitter staff were working with the Democratic Party to effectively prohibit dissent.

The New York Post, America’s oldest continuously published newspaper,[3]There’s some dispute, but I believe that the Hartford Courant, founded in 1764, is the oldest, followed by the Post, founded in 1801 by Alexander Hamilton, as second, and The Philadelphia … Continue reading had its Twitter account suspended at the behest of intelligence officials who falsely declared the Hunter Biden laptop story to be “Russian disinformation.” (For the record, I do not think the Biden family is less corrupt than the rulers of Zimbabwe.) Comparing the problems in America to the problems in Zimbabwe is apples and oranges, of course, but that’s the point: If we don’t want to descend into a Third World nightmare, the voices of opponents of the Democratic Party must be heard. Maybe you think Zimbabwe can’t happen here, but you’re wrong. I mean, look what Democrats have done to Chicago and Philadelphia . . .

Of course, as it turned out, the Hunter Biden laptop story turned out to be true, but it was far, far, far more important to the #woke[4]From Wikipedia: Woke (/ˈwoʊk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from … Continue reading nerds who ran Twitter previously that the story be stifled on October 14, 2020, three weeks before the presidential election, because Joe Biden just had to be protected so that he could win the election.

Twitter’s then-CEO Jack Dorsey was able to say that yeah, it had been a ‘total mistake’ to block the Post’s story . . . on March 25, 2021, after the election.

I’m old enough to remember when the left were free speech absolutists .  .  . when they weren’t really in control of much, when they were trying to get their messages out to the public in general. Now that they have power, not only in government but largely in the professional media, they really aren’t so enamored of freedom of speech, not for those with whom they disagree. To them, Twitter was great, when Twitter was suspending Mr McCain, when the platform was censoring the Post, when views contrary to theirs were stifled.

In one episode of Blue Bloods, fictitious New York City Police Commissioner Frank Reagan said that freedom of the press applies only to those who own a press, but that time has elapsed: with internet service (sort of) inexpensive, and the cost to have your own website cheap — heck, even I can afford it, and some platforms are free — almost anyone can own a ‘press.’

Well, social media like Facebook and Twitter and less popular sites like Parler are, in effect, publishers, and publishers do get to choose what they will and will not publish. But once Elon Musk bought Twitter leftists like The Philadelphia Inquirer’s Will Bunch, whose newspaper rarely publishes any opinions which aren’t #woke, decided that Twitter “should exist more as a semi-public utility than as an entity that a man with a spare $44 billion can just light on fire,”[5]As we have previously noted, Mr Bunch’s newspaper has been begging for donations to help keep it afloat. while Salon’s Amanda Marcotte wants Twitter to be ‘socialized’:

Of course, there is one way Twitter could be saved: By actually making it the “digital town square” Musk says he wants it to be. Which is to say the government should buy and run Twitter, just as government owns and operates actual town squares. Yes, I’m talking about a “socialist” takeover of Twitter, just like we have “socialist” libraries, schools and museums.

I don’t think that they understand what they’ve advocated, because a public utility cannot deny service to anyone who will pay the bill! It doesn’t matter how odious someone might think my opinions to be: Jackson Energy Cooperative cannot deny me the electricity service I use to power my too-old computer as long as I pay my sparktricity bill. Verizon cannot deny me the cell phone service for which I’ve contracted as long as the bill is paid, even if they’re worried that I might say something unsavory over the phone. Mr Bunch and Miss Marcotte somehow seem to think that if Twitter were a public utility, the utility’s directors could ban people they don’t like. Perhaps they just don’t understand what a public utility actually is?

Well, I actually (kind of) agree: Twitter should be considered a public utility, not only because of the size of its reach, but because governments at all levels use Twitter and Facebook — but not Parler or Truth Social — to communicate with the public. Virtually every government in the United States, federal, state, and local, have a Twitter account that they use. Being a public utility does not mean that it cannot be privately owned, as most of our electric, water, telephone , and natural gas companies are.

As a private publisher, Twitter was able to censor information it didn’t want disseminated, information which turned out to be the truth, and the left liked that. Now that Twitter is owned by someone who actually favors freedom of speech, the left don’t like it, don’t like it at all. It wasn’t just the Hunter Biden laptop story; Twitter routinely throttled down messages that exposed the fact that the COVID-19 vaccines did not actually keep a person from contracting the SARS-CoV-2, something we now also know to be true, because the left just can’t handle the truth.

References

References
↑1 The First Street Journal’s Stylebook is exactly the opposite: while we do not change the direct quotes of others, in original material we always refer to people by their normal, biological sex and their original names.
↑2 Chad Malloy is a man male who claims to be a woman, and goes by the faux name “Parker.”
↑3 There’s some dispute, but I believe that the Hartford Courant, founded in 1764, is the oldest, followed by the Post, founded in 1801 by Alexander Hamilton, as second, and The Philadelphia Inquirer, founded in 1829, third.
↑4 From Wikipedia:

Woke (/ˈwoʊk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from the African-American Vernacular English expression “stay woke“, whose grammatical aspect refers to a continuing awareness of these issues.
By the late 2010s, woke had been adopted as a more generic slang term broadly associated with left-wing politics and cultural issues (with the terms woke culture and woke politics also being used). It has been the subject of memes and ironic usage. Its widespread use since 2014 is a result of the Black Lives Matter movement.

I shall confess to sometimes “ironic usage” of the term. To put it bluntly, I think that the ‘woke’ are just boneheadedly stupid.

↑5 As we have previously noted, Mr Bunch’s newspaper has been begging for donations to help keep it afloat.
Posted on by

They thought we wouldn’t notice, but we did.

Ever since Powerline and Little Green Footballs spotted the use of forged documents by CBS News 60 Minutes, in their attempt to swing the 2004 election away from President Bush and toward Senator John Kerry (D-MA), the credentialed media were, or at least should have been, put on alert that there were eyes on them, looking for the kind of bovine feces they had long been peddling. And so you’d think that the editors of The Washington Post would have learned that lesson by now, 18 years later.

So, when James Woods tweeted a screen capture from the Post, it was going to live forever, regardless of how the editors tried to soften the headline. It didn’t work.

Covid is no longer mainly a pandemic of the unvaccinated. Here’s why.

Analysis by McKenzie Beard | Wednesday, November 23, 2022 | 7:46 AM EST

For the first time, a majority of Americans dying from the coronavirus received at least the primary series of the vaccine.

Fifty-eight percent of coronavirus deaths in August were people who were vaccinated or boosted, according to an analysis conducted for The Health 202 by Cynthia Cox, vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation.

It’s a continuation of a troubling trend that has emerged over the past year. As vaccination rates have increased and new variants appeared, the share of deaths of people who were vaccinated has been steadily rising. In September 2021, vaccinated people made up just 23 percent of coronavirus fatalities. In January and February this year, it was up to 42 percent, per our colleagues Fenit Nirappil and Dan Keating.

If you hover your cursor on the Post’s article title, you’ll see the hyperlink for it, and see that it was originally https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/11/23/vaccinated-people-now-make-up-majority-covid-deaths/, “Vaccinated people now make up majority (of) covid deaths”. I am reminded of Tony Stark’s line in the first Avengers movie, “That man is playing Galaga. He thought we wouldn’t notice, but we did.”

You can read the rest at the link, and if the Post’s paywall stymies you, another site has copied it.

Also see: William Teach: Vaccinated Account For Majority Of Wuhan Flu Deaths

Let’s be clear about this: the original headline would grab far more attention than the revised one, and part of a headline writer’s job — articles in newspapers traditionally have an editor rather than the author compose it — is to write a headline which is accurate but will still grab the reader’s attention and make it more probable that he will read the article.

But the original title very much undercuts what William Teach noted yesterday, “World Leaders Sign Declaration to Introduce COVID Vaccine Passports“:

At this year’s G20 Summit in Indonesia, the twenty participating world leaders signed a declaration to introduce vaccine passports for their respective jurisdictions, with the stated intention of creating a global verification system to facilitate safe international travel. (snip)

In a statement, the leaders affirmed their respective countries’ support of the World Health Organization mRNA Vaccine Technology Transfer hub, which aims to build capacity in low- and middle-income countries to produce mRNA vaccines.

The leaders said they welcome joint production and research of vaccines and acknowledge the importance of shared technical standards and verification methods.

They also agreed to a globalised ‘vaccination passport’.

While the details are scant at this stage, the statement says this will be done under the framework of the International Health Regulations to “facilitate seamless international travel, interoperability, and recognizing digital solutions and non-digital solutions, including proof of vaccinations.”

Indonesia’s Health Minister Budi Gunadi Sadikin said that a Digital Health Certificate using World Health Organization standards would be introduced during the next World Health Assembly in Geneva, in May next year.

“If you have been vaccinated or tested properly, you can move around. So for the next pandemic, instead of stopping the movement of people 100%, you can still provide some movement of the people,” Mr Sadikin said.

So, it’s somewhat alarming that governments – and of those belonging to the G20, the majority represent democracies – would consider introducing a passport that, since it was first mooted by individual countries, been widely condemned as medical discrimination as well as a violation of privacy with serious ethical implications.

Of more concern are reports that the vaccine won’t just apply to Covid vaccinations, but also to any vaccination that WHO recommends is required for international travel.

But if the SARS-CoV-2 virus is simply bypassing the vaccinations, something we have known for a year now, there is really no purpose in requiring vaccine passports, at least no real medical purpose. There is, as always, a Control Of People purpose. The editors of the Post have no real objections to more government control over the public, at least not if that control is exercised in the direction they like.

Between my wife and I, we’ve been in the Netherlands, Scotland, Canada, Israel and Switzerland — three of them just airport layovers, but there was nothing stopping us from leaving the airport in those countries — in the past two months, and neither of us has ever been asked for our vaccination records. We did carry them with us, in case they were required, but I, for one, was very happy that the busybodies and Karens didn’t ask. We were not asked for such when we returned to the United States.

While we have the stupid COVID-19 vaccination records, being relatively recent, how many people have their childhood vaccination records? Sure, I had all of the childhood vaccinations when I was a child, but that stuff was sixty years ago. The physicians who administered them are all probably dead, their offices gone. The school I attended from third grade through high school closed after the 1976 school year; where would those vaccination records be?

The vaccines are available for free, and anybody who wants to take them can do so. What the government does not like is the fact that those who do not want to take them have the right not to take them, so our government, and other governments, want to add more coercive pressure on those who decline.

I am not opposed to the vaccines, and am vaccinated myself. But I am very much opposed to the government trying to coerce people, trying to use force to get people to comply. A nation which has individual liberty as its standard should never, ever do that, and should always be resisted.

Posted on by

Brynn Tannehill and the American left love them some freedom of speech and of the press . . . for themselves. For conservatives? Not so much!

I will admit it: I had not heard of Brynn Tannehill before seeing this tweet from my good Twitter friend Robert Stacy McCain. Now I don’t know what Mr McCain tweeted to her that she found blockworthy — though blockworthy seems to have a pretty low threshold among many on the left — but, as I frequently do when I see something like that, I checked out the blocking author.

It didn’t take too much scrolling down to find this tweet in Miss Tannehill’s file. She is exercising her freedom of speech and of the press to tell us why other people ought not to have the same rights. That is, sadly, far too typical of the American left!

Why Elon Musk’s Idea of “Free Speech” Will Help Ruin America

Twitter without content moderation—and with Donald Trump and others reinvited—means that lies and disinformation will overwhelm the truth and the fascists will take over.

by Brynn Tannehill | Wednesday, October 26, 2022

After months of legal wrangling, Elon Musk’s bid to buy Twitter appears to be finally going through. Musk and the right see this as a great thing because it will restore “free speech” to Twitter. Any suggestion that the sort of “free speech” they envision can have highly undesirable consequences is met with howls of “Libs hate free speech” or other accusations of fascism. Similarly, warnings that unfettered free speech results in dangerous misinformation spreading are derided with “Sunlight is the best disinfectant” and the libertarian belief that in the marketplace of ideas, the best will always win out.

These theories will be tested quickly. It is being reported that after the sale is finalized, Musk plans on laying off nearly three-quarters of Twitter’s staff and that one of the first things to go will be any corporate attempt at content moderation and user security. Musk also plans on restoring the accounts of high-profile sources of disinformation and violent messaging who were previously banned, most notably former President Trump.

Well, of course it’s all about Donald Trump, who has been living rent-free in the heads of the left since before he was elected, and still now, after he’s been out of office for 21 months. We have often noted how some of the major organs of the credentialed media, including those who have so vigorously defended their own freedom of speech and of the press, have advocated censoring other people’s freedom of speech and of the press, all as the left scram that evil reich-wing Republicans are the fascists! That Miss Tannehill has previously accused Republicans of wanting to ban books only makes it more hypocritical, and more humorous.

OK, at this point, 9:41 PM EDT on Friday, October 28th, I need to make a serious correction. When I originally wrote this article, I made a huge, huge error: I failed to check the author’s biography, and did something silly like use the feminine honorifics and pronouns. Commenter 370H55V I/ME/MINE notified me of the error, and now I need to correct it. It turns out that Bryan Tannehill was a 1997 graduate of the United States Naval Academy, and began to ‘transition’ in 2010. I left the above part of my article in place, as written, but shall now correct the rest of it.

The pro-Musk arguments are complete nonsense, and there are innumerable historical and modern examples of why social media platforms with nearly unlimited freedom of speech produce horrors. The Supreme Court decided free speech isn’t absolute long ago, when Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes noted that you can’t shout “Fire!” in a crowded theater, for obvious reasons.

As happens so often among the anti-free speech crowd, Miss Mr Tannehill wholly missed the point. From Schneck v United States, 249 US 47 (1919), internal citations omitted:

But it is said, suppose that that was the tendency of this circular, it is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. Two of the strongest expressions are said to be quoted respectively from well-known public men. It well may be that the prohibition of laws abridging the freedom of speech is not confined to previous restraints, although to prevent them may have been the main purpose, as intimated in Patterson v. Colorado. We admit that in many places and in ordinary times the defendants in saying all that was said in the circular would have been within their constitutional rights. But the character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done. Aikens v. Wisconsin. The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic. It does not even protect a man from an injunction against uttering words that may have all the effect of force. Gompers v. Buck’s Stove & Range Co. The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.

The entire opinion is short, and can be easily read in just a couple of minutes, but what Miss Mr Tannehill and others have so often forgotten is that while Associate Justice Holmes — he was never Chief Justice of the United States, as Miss Mr Tannehill claimed, though he was once Chief Justice of the Massachusetts state Supreme Court — said that the First Amendment does not protect a man from the consequences of shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater and causing a panic and, presumably, a stampede for the exits, he never stated that the worry that someone might do such, without solid information about a specific, real, and credible threat justifies the law disallowing him from entering a theater in the first place. Miss Mr Tannehill and the like-minded left are basing their desire to shut down access to the most important organs of free speech these days to those they fear might shout “Fire!” in that crowded theater.

First, freedom of speech has caused untold death and suffering when used to disseminate hate or spread disinformation. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was a fabricated antisemitic text that purported to expose a global baby-murdering Jewish plot bent on world domination. Mein Kampf was Hitler’s autobiography, which blamed Germany’s post–World War I woes on a global Jewish conspiracy. Both were readily available in the Weimar Republic, which had no First Amendment per se but guaranteed freedom of speech. They were key contributors to the fall of German democracy, the rise of the Third Reich, and the Holocaust itself.

Godwin’s law, also known as Godwin’s rule of Hitler analogies, “is a statement maintaining that if any online discussion continues long enough, someone will almost certainly compare someone else to Hitler. Typically, the comment likens someone to Hitler or calls that person a Nazi, and the individual described in that way is often a participant in the discussion. The law is thought to apply to conversations about any conceivable topic.” Miss Mr Tannehill leapt to that in just four paragraphs!

In modern times, lack of moderation on social media sites has repeatedly contributed to mass murder. The Christchurch, New Zealand, shooter killed 51 Muslims at two mosques after being radicalized on YouTube, 4Chan, and 8Chan. The shooter who killed 11 Jews at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh had been radicalized on the social media site Gab, which advertised itself as the “free speech” alternative to Twitter. Dylann Roof killed nine people at the historically Black Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina, in 2015, after he self-radicalized online. Investigations revealed that Google searches steered him further and further into extremist propaganda and hate.

Conservatives might just as well have stated that the free dissemination of the unfortunate death of George Floyd during a legitimate arrest helped lead to 2020’s summer of hate riots under Antifa and #BlackLivesMatter, though I suspect that Miss Mr Tannehill might disagree with that. If the freedom of speech and of the press are to be restricted because they might lead to harm, it has to be remembered: the speech that will be limited depends upon who is doing the limiting. Had President Trump been the horrible fascist that the left told us he was, he might have just suppressed the freedom of speech and of the press of the left. Oddly enough, the proposal for having Nina Jankowicz to lead a Ministry of Truth “Disinformation Governance Board” under the Department of Fatherland Homeland Security never occurred under President Trump; that was a (quickly trashed) idea of the Biden Administration. Washington Post writer Taylor Lorenz was aghast that it had been torpedoed:

But within hours of news of her appointment, Jankowicz was thrust into the spotlight by the very forces she dedicated her career to combating. The board itself and DHS received criticism for both its somewhat ominous name and scant details of specific mission (Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said it “could have done a better job of communicating what it is and what it isn’t”), but Jankowicz was on the receiving end of the harshest attacks, with her role mischaracterized as she became a primary target on the right-wing Internet. She has been subject to an unrelenting barrage of harassment and abuse while unchecked misrepresentations of her work continue to go viral.

Of course, Miss Lorenz being appalled that the “Disinformation Governance Board” was a flopped idea, was somewhat hypocritical, given that Miss Lorenz had been most recently famous for her investigation and doxing of Chaya Raichik, a Brooklyn-based real estate saleswoman and creator of the Twitter site that the left hate, Libs of TikTok. Freedom of speech is for the left, not the right.

There’s a lot more at Miss Mr Tannehill’s original, trying to tell us all about the horrors that freedom of speech has caused, and telling us that the “libertarian fairy tale” of the “free market of ideas”, that “truth will inevitably conquer demonstrably false narratives” but then she he concludes with a strange paragraph:

As far as the free market goes, people forget that the usual result of completely unregulated markets is monopolies. Ideas within social media are no different. “Free speech” competitors to Twitter such as Gab, Parler, Truth Social, and GETTR (which exert little to no moderation) are uniformly conservative monocultures full of the worst kinds of misinformation and hate outside of 4Chan and Kiwifarms. Parler’s former CEO has begged liberals to join the site and even offered people $20,000 to do so, without any success. Musk himself has made it clear that he plans to follow down the path of Parler and Truth Social, posting a meme of himself, Donald Trump (owner of Truth Social), and Ye (formerly Kanye West and now owner of Parler) as the Three Musketeers.

It’s also true that Gab and Parler and the rest are simply not very large; begun to compete with Twitter, they can’t hold a candle to Twitter’s success. However good or bad they are, they are not winners in the competition for customers. Liberal Twitter has been winning, in part because conservatives like Mr McCain, and me, have been using Twitter because it allows a far more widespread dissemination of what we want to say.

The problem with the oh-so-noble left is that they just can’t handle the truth! Allowing, gasp! conservatives to speak freely on Twitter might just challenge the left’s thinking, and that simply cannot be allowed.

Posted on by

The Philadelphia Inquirer, which declines to print the photos of criminals who are black, sure is willing if the perp is white. That the perp is a former police officer is just icing on the cake for the Inky!

As we have previously noted, The Philadelphia Inquirer chose not to publish the photos of Quadir Jones, charged in the rape of a 13-year-old girl leaving a SEPTA train station on her way to school, or Yaaseen Bivins, already convicted and awaiting sentencing for an incident killing an unborn child, and now accused in the Roxborough High School shootings, but they made certain that we knew a former Warminster police officer who pleaded no contest to sexually assaulting five underaged boys was a white guy:

‘A wolf in sheep’s clothing’: For years, a Warminster police officer sexually assaulted troubled teens, DA says

James Carey assaulted four teenage boys he met through the D.A.R.E. program, prosecutors say.

Screen Capture from Philadelphia Inquirer, October 27, 2022. Click to enlarge.

by Vinny Vella | Thursday, October 27, 2022 | 12:26 PM EDT

A Warminster police officer acted as a “wolf in sheep’s clothing” and sexually assaulted four teenage boys he knew were dealing with difficulties at home, Bucks County District Attorney Matthew Weintraub said Wednesday.

More than 30 years after the initial alleged attacks, James Carey was arrested Wednesday and charged with felony sexual abuse.

“A police officer’s creed is to protect and serve his community,” Weintraub said. “In a perverse and cruel dereliction of duty, James Carey took advantage of the rank and credentials he had as a police officer on the job to prey on our community’s most vulnerable.”

Carey, 52, met his victims between 1988 and 2000, when he worked as an officer in the D.A.R.E antidrug program at schools in the Centennial School District in Warminster, Weintraub said. But he had access to victims beyond the schools, including on overnight camping trips to the Poconos and to Camp Ockanickon, a Boy Scout facility in Pipersville, the district attorney said.

With his conviction, Mr Carey faces a maximum of 94½ to 189 years in prison. 🙂 Whatever his sentence, I suspect that a convicted child rapist who is a former police officer will not much enjoy his time in prison.

Let me be clear about this: I have no objection to the Inquirer publishing photos of criminals. Indeed, I think that they should be published, and it is The First Street Journal’s policy to do just that. But that the Inky, which publisher Elizabeth ‘Lisa’ Hughes proclaimed to be an “anti-racist news organization,” one which would:

  • establish “a Community News Desk to address long-standing shortcomings in how our journalism portrays Philadelphia communities, which have often been stigmatized by coverage that over-emphasizes crime,”
  • create “an internal forum for journalists to seek guidance on potentially sensitive content and to ensure that antiracism is central to the journalism,” and
  • examine their “crime and criminal justice coverage with Free Press, a nonprofit focused on racial justice in media”

seems to have decided that the way to do that is to indicate for readers when crimes, especially crimes committed by police officers, are committed by white people.

Perhaps that’s what Miss Hughes thought would be the right thing to do after declaring that the Inquirer was a ‘white newspaper’ in a ‘black city.’

The Inquirer did not just publish the offender’s photograph after he was convicted, but did so on April 20, 2021, shortly after he was arrested, 1½ years before conviction, as I have documented in this screen capture, taken at 4:39 PM EDT on Thursday, October 27, 2022. Why the screen capture? It ought to be obvious: I do not trust the editors of the Inquirer not to scrub the earlier article once this is pointed out to them!

Want more proof? Published just this afternoon:

Samir Ahmad, taken during FBI sting operation, photo via Steve Keeley, Fox 29 News, on Twitter. Click to enlarge.

Guns used in Roxborough shooting later ended up in the hands of a Philadelphia sheriff’s deputy

Samir Ahmad, a four-year veteran of the department, was arrested while at work last week as part of an FBI gun trafficking investigation, court records say.

by Ellie Rushing and Jeremy Roebuck | Thursday, October 27, 2022 | 4:35 PM EDT

Two of the guns used in the shooting outside of Roxborough High School last month, which left a 14-year-old dead and four teens injured, later ended up in the hands of a Philadelphia sheriff’s deputy who then illegally resold the weapons to a federal informant, according to a court filing unsealed Thursday.

Samir Ahmad, 29, a four-year veteran of the department, was arrested at work last week as part of an FBI gun-trafficking investigation, the records say.

The photos of now-fired Deputy Sheriff Samir Ahmad were freely available, and on Twitter an hour before Miss Rushing’s and Mr Roebuck’s story was published. The Roxborough High School football field shooting has been a major story in the City of Brotherly Love, so this wasn’t just a minor gun trafficking story. But the Inquirer reporters and editors did not, for some reason, publish the photos alleging to show the now-former Deputy Sheriff in the act of selling guns, somehow lifted from evidence lockers, to what he thought was a criminal and an illegal immigrant, but turned out to be an FBI agent.

The credentialed media sure didn’t like being called #FakeNews, something which challenged their veracity and credibility, but they sure have been caught in the act doing it, kind of a lot. The credentialed media rarely tell outright lies, but they often omit important pieces of information when the whole truth would undermine their political positions.

Now, here the Inky goes again, trying to conceal the races of black law-breakers, not that readers wouldn’t have guessed just from the names of the accused that they were black, but making sure that readers would know when an accused man (at first) and now convicted sex offender and rapist is white.

The part I really don’t get? The editors, reporters, and publisher of the newspaper know that people like me are watching, yet they keep doing the same stuff, over and over and over again.