The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Is Legacy news media about to die a slow death?

The story about why they got married is as interesting as the sudden marriage. Joe and Mike both divorced their spouses. Then they got a call from Jared saying, "Call the President. He wants to help you get rid of a story that the National Enquirer plans to run about your relationship". Joe and Mike returned from a vacation and told them story on "Morning Joe" and announced that they were engaged, effectively scooping the Enquirer and getting rid of Trump's blackmail attempt.


It was an earlier story that presaged the Stormy Daniels/Karen McDougal story about Trump nefarious dealings with the National Enquirier.
Well they had a good run at it, while it lasted.

Along the way, I have always looked at them askance...they always have seemed a little tawdry and cynical...so we rarely have watched them. And I could never understand the buzz around them and their affair and marriage.

In the end, I don't think I was too far off the mark.
 
CNN is once again sane washing Turmp's threats against other sovereign nations....with the clever little 'if serious', thrown in.

This is how the US legacy media enables autocrats and madmen. The rrrZZn media play this game all the time.

bafkreiepyx6lq3j7rd4yzqxf62zpsslmae553r2wzotejxamzonpyxrpn4@jpeg
 
Once upon a time, the US put in rules to prevent a single person or corporation from owning large swaths of media. Similar regulations, prevented foreign entities from controlling US media companies.

In 1995, Rupert Murdoch was given a waiver.

(1995 archived article)
For the first time, the US Federal Communications Commission will officially give a foreign entity major control of an American broadcast firm.

Today, the FCC is expected to grant Australian-born, media mogul Rupert Murdoch a waiver of the rules of the commission's foreign-ownership restrictions. The ruling would permit the core of Mr. Murdoch's Fox television network to remain intact.

While some hail the controversial decision as a victory for free trade, others condemn it as opening the door to foreign influence in the US election process and yet another in a series of regulatory exemptions unfairly granted to the entrepreneur.

From the same story:
Murdoch, who is scheduled to testify before the House Ethics Committee on Tuesday about his publishing company offering House Speaker Newt Gingrich a $4.5 million book advance, was not available for comment.


Why did the US put these rules in place decades ago?

From this week's Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal:
How the White House Functioned With a Diminished Biden in Charge

From this week's Murdoch-owned New York Post:
White House aides hid Biden’s apparent mental decline from Day 1 of his presidency, explosive report reveals

From this week's Murdoch-owned Australian News.com.au:
‘Hand holding’: White House aides hid Joe Biden’s mental decline, explosive report claims


These stories were echoed by other conservative outlets, like the Unification Church ("Moonies") owned The Washington Times, citing the Wall Street Journal's article:
Biden was losing mental abilities even before 2020 election, report says
The Wall Street Journal’s report on Thursday revealed the lengths that Mr. Biden’s staff went to seclude him, so as to not highlight his declining mental acuity, starting even before he took office.
 
CNN is once again sane washing Turmp's threats against other sovereign nations....with the clever little 'if serious', thrown in.

This is how the US legacy media enables autocrats and madmen. The rrrZZn media play this game all the time.

bafkreiepyx6lq3j7rd4yzqxf62zpsslmae553r2wzotejxamzonpyxrpn4@jpeg

Oh Jesus Christ! Talking about invading or occupying sovereign nations is something leaders JUST DON'T DO! The media is betraying their trust by talking as if this is something normal. I'm getting sick and tired of this attitude of it's OK, it's Trump being Trump. Quit trying to cover up the fact that putting him back into office is the gravest mistake the American electorate ever made.
 
CNN is once again sane washing Turmp's threats against other sovereign nations....with the clever little 'if serious', thrown in.

This is how the US legacy media enables autocrats and madmen. The rrrZZn media play this game all the time.

bafkreiepyx6lq3j7rd4yzqxf62zpsslmae553r2wzotejxamzonpyxrpn4@jpeg
The media keeps doing this.

Back in the 90s, Trump would feed New York City tabloids stories to keep his name in the paper and to distract from some of the shady business dealings that he was promoting.

The national media seems unable to learn how to deal with Trump. We're being bombarded with these nonsense stories as if they were going to happen. "Trump is going to take over the Panana Canal!". "Trump is going to invade Mexico". "Trump is going to sell Puerto Rico!".

They need to stop covering this nonsense. Pay attention to what Trump does, not to what he says.
 
Seen today:

MSM’s salivating over having four years of this chaotic BS—exactly why they pushed Shitler’s candidacy. They’ll whine about Shitler’s inept, controversial madness publicly, but toast it privately bc it gets clicks, good ratings & drives good profits.
Never at a loss for “Breaking News!”


breakingnewsannimateed-breakingnews.gif


Shame on them.

These outlets used to have columns and dedicated shows where the media examined itself. CNN ran a show called, "Reliable Sources" for 28 years where hosts Bernard Kalb (1992-1998), Howard Kurtz (1998-2013) and Brian Stelter (2013-2022) looked at the media's coverage of news stories and critiqued what they did right and, more importantly, what they did wrong.

Both Kurtz and Stelter critiqued the endless "Breaking News!" coverage of 24x7 cable news. Stelter, in particular, reported on the deteriorating "news" at Fox, where conspiracy theories and Republican talking points were treated as legitimate news.

In one of CNN's many reorganizations, CNN cut "Reliable Sources" from their lineup. This was after CNN's latest parent, Warner Brothers Discovery, decided that it needed to cut costs. Stelter left CNN.

The ratings for cable news are down. Newspapers, especially local papers that cover local and state politics are in trouble. Trump's branding of the media is also doing damage.

One of the cornerstones of liberal democracy is a Free Press. It's supposed to be the citizens' eyes and ears to keep a check on government. We've allowed the Free Press to be bought up by billionaires, foreign interests, churches and entertainment companies. That's on us.
 
The propaganda machine is primed and ready to go.

News Item #1: Biden and Democratic Senators confirmed the 235th Federal judge of his term.

How mainstream outlets reported it: "Biden highlights judicial nominees"

How left-leaning media reported it: "Biden beats Trump's numbers on Federal judiciary confirmations." and "Biden appoints a record number of Black judges".

How right-leaning media reported it: "Biden has a bruise on his hand!".



News item #2: New Orleans attack death toll rises to 15

How mainstream outlets reported it: "Terrorist killed 14 people celebrating the New Year on New Orleans' Bourbon Street" and "Security failures lead to Bourbon Street deaths in deadly terror attack"

How left-leaning outlets reported it: "The New Orleans Terror attack is breaking MAGA brains"

How right leaning outlets reported it: "Trump blames immigration and open borders for deadly terrorist attacks"


The media hasn't quite gotten comfortable with the word "lie". Instead, they're using phrases like "appears to", "falsely" and "without evidence".
1735915119157.png
 
Remember, the Mainstream Media loves Trump and will handle him like a fragile child. Where they have a really twisted symbiotic relationship like with the NYT where he will dump all over them and Maggie Haberman will get exclusive interviews, it is all about using one another to create noise and draw readers.

To use the word 'Lie' will open msm outlets and their spox to jeopardy.

They know he is lying and most often knowingly, but will continue to give the benefit of the doubt that he just didn't have or didn't understand the information has was provided with.
 
Remember, the Mainstream Media loves Trump and will handle him like a fragile child. Where they have a really twisted symbiotic relationship like with the NYT where he will dump all over them and Maggie Haberman will get exclusive interviews, it is all about using one another to create noise and draw readers.

To use the word 'Lie' will open msm outlets and their spox to jeopardy.

They know he is lying and most often knowingly, but will continue to give the benefit of the doubt that he just didn't have or didn't understand the information has was provided with.
I agree that the mainstream media can't quit Trump because they have the kind of symbiotic relationship that narcissists have with outlets- trading clicks for attention. It's evolved from a cattle egret type relationship to a mutually parasitic co-existence.

But we're getting more and more men who are being fed lies that incite them to violence... like this guy who was using Biden's picture for target practice:

Prosecutors are fighting to keep a Virginia man behind bars after they say investigators found what could be the largest number of “finished explosive devices” in FBI history at his 20-acre home near Norfolk.

The man, Brad Spafford, was arrested earlier this month on one charge of possessing an illegal unregistered short-barrel rifle. During the arrest, the FBI – including bomb technicians – executed a search warrant on his property and found a stockpile of more than 150 apparent pipe bombs, which were x-rayed on the scene, according to prosecutors. Some were allegedly marked “lethal.”

Prosecutors say the pipe bombs were found in a backpack, a detached garage, and that a few “were preloaded into an apparent wearable vest.”

We're seeing the kind of radicalism that we saw during the Nixon years on the far left. This time, we're seeing it on the far right and it's being fueled by the right-wing disinformation machine and social media algorithms. If someone like Kash Patel gets becomes the FBI director, that lowers the chances that these guys are going to get caught before they commit violent acts.
 
And yet all the focus of the media will likely be on the radicalisation of the New Orleans terrorist...and not on the ongoing right wing radicalisation of the mentally off centre white guys who fall down rabbit holes on line.

We saw the rresults here in Canada during Trump's first term. His incessant hate speech and targeting of minorities led to increased incidents of planned and executed terrorist attacks.

But the MSM will play it all for eyeballs and ears.
 
right wing radicalisation of ... white guys ... on line.

Individuals from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds can become radicalized online. Can you provide evidence to support your statement that the MSM in the US avoids reporting radicalization of white males?

Can you provide evidence to support the suggestion that white males are more likely to become radicalized online than males of other racial groups?
 
Anybody can be "radicalized" online, but it's frigging obvious that the most visible sector of bigots online in the US are white men. Just take a stroll through Fake Twitter and you'll find the proof you need.

But that's not really the major problem. They always were there, and they always will be there. Mostly I think they are coming out of their holes because the Republican party is coddling them, applauding their calls for terrorism, winking at their genocidal tendencies, and nominating politicians who are them, just a little toned down in public - but not private rhetoric. Not to mention all the coddling and condoning, and justification of a significant number of citizens.


Toad made it normal to treat them like patriots and made it acceptable to hate publicly and intimidate for political purpose and indeed justifies the violence that tried to end our democracy and nearly killed Nancy Pelosi's husband. They routinely threaten various levels of violence against politicians they don't like, and routinely the Republican party winks and nods and does not categorically denounce them.

Even here on this board full of gay men we have seen people who justify this behavior and refuse to denounce them in any way.
 
Individuals from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds can become radicalized online. Can you provide evidence to support your statement that the MSM in the US avoids reporting radicalization of white males?

Can you provide evidence to support the suggestion that white males are more likely to become radicalized online than males of other racial groups?
Firstly, I am not saying that they are radicalized more than other racial groups.

And I am only relying on my own sloppy memory that so many of the mass shooters in North America over the last decade as well as all the many far right wing militias out there and the Proud Boys and the Jan 6th Insurrectionists and Timothy McVeigh and maybe there are some other ones that just don't come to mind at the moment who all are then found to have become radicalized in white race supremacy and fear of brown people, black people, Asians and Jews as a result of the consumption of a steady diet of extremist stuff on line and in their get togethers to celebrate their KKKness, often at rallies since 2015 particularly.

And maybe because of my race bias, I just am not paying attention to all the mass shootings and bombings and insurrection riots being instigated by non-whites, except for the few that have been motivated by radical islamic hatred.

Unlike the 60's and civil rights fight, it doesn't seem that Black Power radicalization has much sway now. And I will not accept the periodic reaction of black communities to acts of violence against them as being equal to the radicalisation based on ideology because of the episodic nature and short bursts of destructive reactionary violence. If anything it has coalesced around Black Lives Matter type of collective movements that keep trying to tackle systemic and instituionalized racism.

But MSM does tend to gloss over radicalization generally. And only to touch on it briefly because it lays bare some really uncomfortable truths about media influence generally and electronic media even more specifically. Most often they aren't digging into the radicalization anymore unless, as I noted, it has the audience appeal of being radical islamic conditioning. In the anti-muslim post 911 era it was all the rage and lots of ink and bytes were spilled to try to analyze how it had occured in the west. And even then more often than not, the MSM has tended to try to give comfort by going with the Lone Wolf trope and of course, mental illness without going much further.

During Trump's first term there was a lot of discussion about the radicalisation of white males in America and it has continued up to recent papers and studies.


A number that I have read, because like the MAGAt phenomenon, I am fascinated at how group think among hate groups takes hold, whether it what led up to the rise of the NAZIs and Fascists in Europe in the 1930's or the hypercharged mass messaging and manipulation of bias in the current period.

Lots to read here.

 
Well... there's also the elephant in the room: military service, and in particular, service in the Iraq/Afghanistan conflict.

Sec Defense Lloyd Austin recognized that there was something going on. Too many of the men involved in groups like The Proud Boys, Three Percenters, et al, are ex-military. In 2021, he set in motion efforts to study why so many active duty men (and it is primarily men) are being radicalized either during their service or immediately thereafter.


Memorandum for Senior Pentagon Leadership
Defense Agency and DOD Field Activity Directors
Commandant Of The Coast Guard
SUBJECT: Countering Extremist Activities within the Department of Defense
(US Secretary of Defense [PDF]; December 20, 2021)

We didn't study it seriously after Timothy McVeigh and it really took off in the early part of the 21st century.


You can bet that, if someone like Hegseth becomes the next SecDef, all of the discussion about radicalization is going to be swept under the rug.
 
Last edited:
Firstly, I am not saying that they are radicalized more than other racial groups.

Thank you. I apologize for misreading your statements.

I don't usually ask a question that I have not already at least attempted to answer myself, so thanks for the Google link, though I generally boycott Google.

I was unable to find much information compiling the race of persons who are radicalized (via their online activities or through other means). One glaring result, however, is that the radicalization to causes is heavily skewed toward far-right extremism and within that category is heavily skewed toward White Supremacist and Nativist ideologies. It seems reasonable to assume that most of the people who promote white supremacy or white nationalism would tend to be white.


Profiles of Individual Radicalization in the United States (PIRUS)
(National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism [PDF]; Research Brief covering the period from 1948 to 2021; March 2023)

The PIRUS data show that, on average, far-right extremists tend to be older, have lower rates of college experience, and higher rates of military experience and pre- radicalization crime than other types of extremists.

With regard to the most recent incidents of violence associated with radical extremism, the PIRUS data demonstrates that the largest group of offenders was connected to the QAnon conspiracy theory and a majority of offenders identified within that group were arrested in 2021 for participating in the January 6th attack on the US Capitol.

The National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism sponsors an interactive web page that may be of interest to some readers:

Profiles of Individual Radicalization in the United States - PIRUS (Keshif)
(US Homeland Security / University of Maryland)


I am only relying on my own sloppy memory that so many of the mass shooters in North America over the last decade as well as all the many far right wing militias out there and the Proud Boys and the Jan 6th Insurrectionists and Timothy McVeigh and maybe there are some other ones that just don't come to mind at the moment who all are then found to have become radicalized in white race supremacy and fear of brown people, black people, Asians and Jews as a result of the consumption of a steady diet of extremist stuff on line and in their get togethers to celebrate their KKKness, often at rallies since 2015 particularly.

I cannot dispute the accuracy of your recollection.

In terms of media coverage regarding acts of violence, I suspect there is reliable data compiled somewhere to substantiate your observation. It is certainly true that individual acts of violence are often represented as a vague misfortune that cannot be explained and about which citizens are not particularly curious. What may realistically constitute instances of white radicalization is sometimes dismissed as previously undetected mental disturbances in the mind of the perpetrator. Shit happens.

"He seemed like such a nice guy."
 
...But MSM does tend to gloss over radicalization generally. And only to touch on it briefly because it lays bare some really uncomfortable truths about media influence generally and electronic media even more specifically. Most often they aren't digging into the radicalization anymore unless, as I noted, it has the audience appeal of being radical islamic conditioning. In the anti-muslim post 911 era it was all the rage and lots of ink and bytes were spilled to try to analyze how it had occured in the west. And even then more often than not, the MSM has tended to try to give comfort by going with the Lone Wolf trope and of course, mental illness without going much further.

During Trump's first term there was a lot of discussion about the radicalisation of white males in America and it has continued up to recent papers and studies.
The problem isn't just the MSM. It's the FBI. If you read their domestic terrorism reports, they have several categories like "animal rights extremism", "abortion-related extremism", et al. One of their categories is "racially or ethnically motivated extremism" but their reports focus upon the race of the targeted victims, not the race of the extremists. Because of how the reports are constructed, we know that racially and ethnically motivated violent extremism has increased exponentially (357% according to a 2023 GAO report) but we don't know much about the people committing the violence because of how it's reported.

There is no crime called "domestic terrorism (DT)".
Unlike foreign terrorism, the federal government does not have a mechanism to formally charge an individual with DT, which sometimes makes it difficult (and occasionally controversial) to formally characterize someone as a domestic terrorist. Further, domestic terrorists may adhere to the ideologies of certain extremist movements or belong to hate or extremist groups, but unlike the formal process involved in designating foreign terrorist organizations, DT movements and groups are not officially labeled as such by the federal government, thereby making it difficult to categorize the threat presented by any group or movement as a DT threat. While some observers may look to terrorism-related incidents, investigations, and arrests to help understand the scope of the DT threat, these data are limited

The people who are getting onto the FBI's radar are there because they committed a weapons crime or made specific threats. Congress has been given multiple recommendations about adding legislation that would allow the FBI to investigate domestic terrorists but those efforts have been stymied by Senators like Rand Paul for libertarian reasons or by House members who are defending the Jan 6th terrorists as being "patriots" who are being persecuted by the FBI and DOJ.

Chris Wray testifies in front of Congress and he brings up domestic terrorism and it has been increasing but the members of Congress want to occupy the time by questioning Wray about Hunter Biden's laptop, the "Biden Crime Family", FBI investigations of Catholic organizations, the border and whatever conspiracy theory is being floated by right wing media. The Senate hearings are a little better but they tend to focus on international terrorism involving nation-state actors like Iran, North Korea, Russia and China.

It's hard for the media to report on domestic terrorism, when we don't have much beyond anecdotal reports about specific incidents that got onto the FBI's radar. The FBI will state what White Christian Nationalism is on the rise but they won't state why men are being recruited into those groups or give much information about the background of the extremists.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps the death of responsible journalism in this era is a reflection of the last century and a warning about the power of media in shaping US politics.

Tabloid journalism has never gone out of style in England and America and in many ways FOX and other outlets are only following in the tradition of Pullitzer and Hearst.


In the same way that the irony of the Nobel Peace prize being sponsored by the invention of dynamite, every year when the Pullitzers are announced for journalism, my eyes roll back in my head slightly.
 
So. This mole did not go to NYT or WAPO or NBC, ABC, PBS or any other Mainstream media network.

This is not unknown since the days of Watergate, but it is telling.

People doing real, and sometimes really dangerous investigative work have no alternative now but to go to platforms like Meidas or Pro-Publica in order to help them get their stories out.

Co-incidentally, it also relates to the subject above, talking about the MSM approach to researching and reoporting on the far right wing radicalization of males in America.

 
There are a number of voices speaking up about the legacy media's disastrous failure to do their jouranlistic duty covering Trump.

I still think that so much of this is rooted in the shift in North America to news as infotainment and opinion and the rise of (scripted) 'reality' shows that elevated celebrity style over substance; ie the dumbing down of America.

It is actually pretty clear what needs to happen, but with so much of the media now controlled by conservative billionaires...it is a safe bet that it won't.

 
Back
Top