• Home
  • Media/ Media Corruption

Confirmed: Facebook’s Recent Algorithm Change Is Crushing Conservative Sites, Boosting Liberals

By George Upper

Facebook’s much-publicized demotion of publishers’ content in users’ news feeds has negatively impacted conservative-leaning publishers significantly more than liberal-leaning outlets, an analysis by The Western Journal has revealed.

Liberal publishers have gained about 2 percent more web traffic from Facebook than they were getting prior to the algorithm changes implemented in early February.

On the other hand, conservative publishers have lost an average of nearly 14 percent of their traffic from Facebook.

This algorithm change, intentional or not, has in effect censored conservative viewpoints on the largest social media platform in the world. This change has ramifications that, in the short-term, are causing conservative publishers to downsize or fold up completely, and in the long-term could swing elections in the United States and around the world toward liberal politicians and policies.

Facebook Algorithm Impact On Conservatives

Example: New York Post vs. New York Daily News

Case in point: Two rival publishers in New York City, the New York Post and the New York Daily News, are similar in many ways, except for their editorial slants. The Post is well-known as a right-leaning outlet, whereas the Daily News has an established left-leaning slant. For example, the Daily News recently ran a headline after the Parkland shooting that read, “Brave Florida survivors plan day of action for gun sanity and to call out ‘blood on hands’ of NRA puppets.”

Headlines like that garnered the Daily News a 24.18 percent increase in traffic from Facebook, while the right-leaning Post’s traffic dropped 11.44 percent in the same time period.

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Sharyl Attkisson Explains the Origins of the 2016 'Fake News' Narrative

Was the effort to focus America's attention on the idea of “fake news”—itself a propaganda effort? Connect the dots and learn who’s behind it and why. It’s not what you think. Sharyl Attkisson is a five-time Emmy Award winner and recipient of the Edward R. Murrow award for investigative reporting and author of two New York Times bestsellers: “The Smear” and “Stonewalled.” Attkisson hosts the Sunday national TV news program “Full Measure,” which focuses on investigative and accountability reporting. For thirty years, Attkisson was a correspondent and anchor at PBS, CNN and CBS News, where the Washington Post described her as "a persistent voice of news-media skepticism about the government's story.” She’s a fourth degree blackbelt in TaeKwonDo. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community.


  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: CNN Interviews Ohio DEMOCRAT Trump Voters One Year Later -- Gets Stunned by Answers

Editor's Note: I can't even believe CNN aired this . . .


CNN Shocked That Trump Voters Thrilled at His First Year

Former Democrats express glee at president’s achievements. 

In an apparent effort to pour scorn on the president’s first year in office, CNN traveled to Youngstown, Ohio to ask former Democrats who switched parties to vote for Trump what they thought of his performance, only to discover they were thrilled with the job Trump’s doing.

The report points out that 7,000 registered Democrats in one county switched from being Democrats to Republicans to vote for Donald Trump.

One former Democrat featured in the report said he switched because he realized “the core foundation of the country is slipping away”. Another woman remarked, “It got to the point where I did not like the direction my country was going”.

Perhaps expecting the five former Democrats to express regret that they switched to vote for Trump, CNN’s Martin Savage asked how Trump was doing one year in. The answers were resounding.


  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Project Veritas: HUNDREDS of Twitter Employees Paid to View “Everything You Post Online” Including Private “Sex Messages”

Project Veritas has released undercover footage of Twitter Engineers and employees admitting that Twitter employees view all of your private messages on their servers and analyze it to create a “virtual profile” of you which they sell to advertisers.

The footage features four current Twitter software engineers–Conrado Miranda, Clay Haynes, Pranay Singh, and Mihai Alexandru Florea.

Haynes, who was featured in part one of the Twitter exposé, admitted in a January 6, 2018 meeting that Twitter has hired hundreds employees with the express purpose of looking at these “dick pics,” stating:

    “There’s teams dedicated to it. I mean, we’re talking, we’re talking three or four… at least, three or four hundred people… Yes, they’re paid to look at dick pics.”


  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Project_Veritas - Sr Network Security Engineer Reveals Twitter Ready to Give Trump's Private Messages to DOJ

A Project Veritas undercover investigation has revealed a senior network security engineer at Twitter suggesting that his company turns over the private communications and deleted tweets of President Donald Trump to the Department of Justice. If true, it is yet unknown whether Twitter is voluntarily disclosing this sensitive information or acting under a court order. Twitter is currently in the midst of defending itself from left-leaning criticism that President Trump hasn’t been removed from the enormous media platform for violations of Twitter’s Terms of Service.

Mr. O’Keefe has just completed a book about this series entitled "AMERICAN PRAVDA: My fight for Truth in the Era of Fake News." The book will be released by St. Martin’s Press on January 16, 2018.


  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Project Veritas -Twitter Engineers To "Ban a Way of Talking" Through "Shadow Banning"

Uses keywords like “America” and “Trump” to silence opposing views

In what represents a chokeslam of an exposé, Project Veritas has released undercover video of Twitter engineers admitting that they deliberately censor conservative opinions and are implementing a way of relegating “shitty people” so their content is shadow banned.

In the video, current and former Twitter employees confirm virtually everything that conservatives have long suspected about the left-wing company silencing people on the right.

Key quotes include;

Olinda Hassan, Policy Manager for Twitter Trust and Safety, admits that Twitter is implementing software algorithms that down rank conservatives so “shitty people to not show up” on people’s timelines.

“The idea of a shadow ban is that you ban someone but they don’t know they’ve been banned, because they keep posting and no one sees their content,” says former Twitter software engineer Abhinov Vadrevu. “So they just think that no one is engaging with their content, when in reality, no one is seeing it.”

Parnay Singh, Twitter Direct Messaging Engineer, reveals that the company’s machine learning algorithms are programmed with “five thousand keywords to describe a redneck,” which include words like Trump, America, as well as images of the U.S. flag, guns and Christian crosses and these terms are used to delete “bot” accounts as well as down rank conservatives.

Singh also revealed that the U.S. government routinely pressures Twitter to take down Julian Assange’s account and that this is the reason he isn’t verified Singh also says that governments ask Twitter to remove accounts belonging to other public figures because they don’t like their political views.

Former Twitter Content Review Agent Mo Norai admits that Twitter employees have the power to ban accounts if they merely disagree with someone’s political views, remarking, “Yeah, if they said this is: ‘Pro-Trump’ I don’t want it because it offends me, this, that. And I say I banned this whole thing, and it goes over here and they are like, ‘Oh you know what? I don’t like it too. You know what? Mo’s right, let’s go, let’s carry on, what’s next?”

The video represents the biggest tech/censorship story in years yet will attract little or no mainstream media coverage.

However, it will lead to an increase in calls from the right for Twitter to be regulated as a public utility to ensure that free speech rights are protected given how social media companies like Twitter, Facebook and Google have basically become monopolies.


  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Hollywood Wants Your Money...and Your Mind

Imagine a group so powerful they could beam ideas directly into your head. Well, you don't have to imagine -- it's Hollywood. Ben Shapiro, Editor of the Daily Wire, explains the world's largest mass propaganda machine.


  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Sex, Power, and Consent: How to Interpret the Media Frenzy Around Sexual Assault

By Joe Jarvis

The same media that covered for the rich and powerful is now delighting in throwing them one by one under the sexual assault bus.

I can’t deny that it is a joy to watch liberal elites like Al Franken and Harvey Weinstein fall from grace.

But a chill goes down my spine when I think, but why now? Why has the media suddenly done a complete 180?

Don’t get me wrong, it is great to hold sexual predators accountable. But the first thing that doesn’t feel right is “convicting” people in the court of public opinion based only on an accusation.

Okay, so for people like Weinstein and Spacey, there are enough people coming forward with enough verifiable evidence that they are beyond a reasonable doubt sexual predators. Al Franken posed in a photo that confirms his harassment.

But could this be the media’s angle? The first step is to accuse all the easy targets. Get the public whipped into a frenzy. Once everyone has the torches and pitchforks, all that will be required is an accusation, and the mob will burn the witches. And at that point, no one will wait to see if the evidence pans out. A simple accusation, true or false will condemn a man and destroy his career.

Unfortunately, these conditions will make liars and exploiters come out of the woodwork. It’s now trendy to accuse someone, and a consensual one night stand might turn into borderline rape in decades-old retrospect. You will have some people who want attention and money. You will also have some people who simply want to ruin a famous person.

And you will have elites picking targets in their games of power. Just consider how Julian Assange and Dominique Strauss-Kahn were accused of rape at opportune times to ruin them. Both charges were later dropped. Perhaps today in the witch-hunt mindset, the charges would have been further pursued.

Is the Media Offering a Solution?

It is great that men and women who have been victims of sexual assault and sexual harassment can now come forward and expect mainstream support. It is a serious problem. And just because some will abuse the witch-hunt for their own ends does not mean it is fair to the real victims to ignore or marginalize anyone who comes forward.

In this sense, it seems like the reporting from the media is beneficial. Most of the cases focus on a disparity of power. It is rich and famous people taking advantage of young fans, their students, aspiring actors, interns, or employees.

Maybe people with power will think twice. They may think of their careers, their marriages, their future, and decide it’s not worth it to be a creep.

But doesn’t it also divide society further? It creates suspicion and tension between multiple groups. Men versus women. Rich versus poor. Celebrity versus normie. Politician versus citizen.

And it is worth noting that many accused have been politicians. Unfortunately, the underlying fabric of a society is woven by politicians. They have the power to pass laws and regulations which drastically alter behavior. People even take cues from their government. Debt-laden governments produce debt-laden citizens.

Doesn’t that say something about what kind of society these sexual predators have created? It certainly won’t be one based on consent.

The Solution is Consent.

Sounds obvious, right? Sex requires consent at every level.

But on other subjects besides sex, consent is not held in such high esteem. Consent in general, in every aspect of our lives, should be held as the golden standard. Under these conditions, we will see consent respected in all aspects of life, including sex.

This is not a new concept. You’ll know the tree by the fruit it bears. In a society based on consent, fewer people will be taken advantage of sexually.

The root of the issue is a coercive society. It starts with people wanting their kids to be obedient to authority or elders, without ever explaining why. But obedience is not a virtue. As annoying as it can be for kids to constantly ask why, or assert their own attitudes and desires, this is a good thing. It doesn’t mean giving in to every demand of a child. It means recognizing their autonomy and largely allowing them to make their own decisions.

I have discussed how a coercive society breeds psychological distress on those forced to act a certain way. But missing was an assessment of the psychological conditions of those who exert the coercion. The actual coercive agents of the state go equally crazy. But they go crazy with power instead of crazy with desperation to be an individual.

And the rich, powerful, and famous have access to the power of the government. They have access to the same coercion they use against their victims.

The way the government treats the citizens is the exact same way sexual predators treat their victims.

There are different levels of manipulation. Some victims are groomed with gifts and kindness. Sometimes the abuser uses intimidation and threats. Sometimes victims are enticed by the promise of being elevated to the position of the abuser, with all the power that comes with it. Sometimes the abuser downright rapes the victims who won’t comply.

And our political structure is not based on consent. Democracy is not consent, it is mob rule. It is the will of the majority dominating the will of the minority. Nor does living in a society mean you consent to be governed. It should not be up to victims to flee in the face of a threat. Saying everything the government does is fine because you continue to live in a country is like saying if a victim of sexual assault didn’t want it, they wouldn’t put themselves in that situation.

But it doesn’t have to be that way. You can have an organized society based on consent. After all, if the government services are truly desired by the people, why do they have to be forced on them? Why do we have to be forced to pay taxes, instead of enticed with a good offer?

I am not saying ending the abusive relationship between government and citizen will eliminate sexual violence. I am simply saying it will set a consistent precedent for behavior. By acknowledging that all interactions must be consensual, there would be no double standard. These abusers would not get used to operating without the consent of others.

Yes, what I am suggesting means a vast restructuring of society. It certainly wouldn’t happen overnight. But as victims begin to stand up to their abusers, it is time all non-consensual relationships are called out for what they are.

If we really want to get to the root of this issue, we will examine the fundamental nature of the relationship between governments and citizens.

Video: American Pravda, NYT – Senior Homepage Editor Reveals Biased Political Agenda at NYT

New York Times Senior Home Page Editor, Des Shoe, Admits Company Culture of Blatant Bias at NYT is "widely understood to be liberal-leaning..."

NYT Journalists: "if we write about him [Trump], and how insanely crazy he is...maybe people will read it and be like...we shouldn't vote for him."

Calls Trump an "oblivious idiot" and Pence "f***ing horrible" Because of Religious Views

Admits New York Times Report on "what the readers want"

"They call it the Trump bump" Says Shoe, Regarding the Influx of Subscribers Since Trump's Presidency Began

Des Shoe: "The main objective is to grab subscribers. You do that any way that you can."

(NEW YORK) - Project Veritas has released a video of the New York Times Homepage Editor Des Shoe, who was caught on hidden-camera admitting that the Times has a liberal bias and attacking President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. This is part three of their American Pravda NYT investigation.

When confronted with the notion that during the election, The Times' front page, for which she is responsible, was completely focused around Trump. She tells the undercover journalist that NYT reporters tried to influence the election with their reporting:

"I think one of the things that maybe journalists were thinking about is like...Oh, if we write about him, about how insanely crazy he is and how ludicrous his policies are, then maybe people will read it and be like, oh wow, we shouldn't vote for him."

She admits that the New York Times has a clearly defined liberal-leaning bias: "The New York Times is not...I mean, it's widely understood to be liberal-leaning. But, American newspapers are not supposed to claim a bias, they're supposed to be objective."

"So the...ahh, but the New York Times is not left?" the Project Veritas journalist asked. Shoe clarified, "I'm not saying that they're not. I'm saying it's widely, widely understood to be left-leaning."

She also tells the undercover journalist that reporting objectively is simply too difficult for the Times: "Our main stories are supposed to be objective. It's very difficult in this day and age to do that."

Shoe blames the business model for the New York Times' lack of fact-based reporting:

"This is what I was trying to say is like the last couple years it's changed for the bad...
"I think the business model itself is just... there's so much panic about what to do that, you know, what else is a company supposed to do?
"That's the conundrum...is that a business model, in this time is built on what the readers want."

The New York Times senior homepage editor goes on to explain the positive effect of Trump's victory: "Since the election, like you know...Speaking on, you know, for The New York Times, our subscriptions have sky-rocketed since...I mean, they call it the Trump bump."

This sentiment was echoed by Nick Dudich, who was featured in American Pravda Part 1 and Part 2. He explains, "I mean honestly, Trump has driven us more business than anybody else. Anytime he says failing, we add a boost of subscribers."

The New York Times responded to Part I in a statement, calling Dudich "a recent hire in a junior position." Later, Executive Editor of the NYT Dean Baquet described Dudich as "a kid...who just started his career in journalism." The same cannot be said for Ms. Shoe, a senior-level employee who has been with The Times since January of 2009.

Des Shoe claims that the New York Times has to chase clicks in the current media environment, "The Washington Post, people who have paywalls up...The main objective is to grab subscribers. You do that any way that you can."

When told the New York Times seems more like a 'click-paper', Shoe replies:

"I mean, you're not wrong. Like, I would love to be able to speak my mind completely about...If I ever leave the Times I'll go back to you guys and tell you exactly what I think. But, I mean, there's stuff like...And this is what I was trying to say is like the last couple years it's changed for the bad."

Shoe finally goes on to explain her personal biases against President Trump, "I feel like Trump is...is just a...is sort of an idiot in a lot of ways. Just an oblivious idiot."

She also attacks Vice President Mike Pence, implying that his religious beliefs make him unfit to lead:

"If you impeach him, then Pence becomes President, Mike Pence, who's f***ing horrible...I think maybe, possibly worse than Trump.
"He's extremely, extremely religious. He [Pence] at one point backed a bill that hinted at conversion therapy for gay people...Which is like electrocution, stuff like that."

"Corruption is inescapable within the mainstream media machine. From the Times editors that dictate the paper's coverage to the journalists that try to sway the public with their reporting," says Project Veritas founder James O'Keefe. "In American Pravda, truth takes a back seat to money, and objectivity takes a back seat to politics."

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: "The News" is a Social Construct. It is Used to Program You

If all the "alternative" media ever does is report on "the news" (as decided by the MSM), then aren't they just unwitting participants in the mockingbird media system? Join James for this heady thought for the day as he dissects the idea of "the news" and talks about the real value of an outlet like The Corbett Report.


  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)