William Joyce
Chemotherapy for PC
A major factor about the media that's rarely brought up is the heavy Jewish influence behind it. Yes, it's liberal/left in orientation -- nobody really disputes that. They've done surveys of newsrooms where Democrats outnumbered Republicans 10:1. Yes, it's often "corporate", as in, it looks to make a profit. Nobody really disputes that.
But look at the figures who OWN those corporate interests, the figures in power in the newsrooms, and so on, and you find that Jews are astoundingly overrepresented vis a vis their numbers in the population.
I submit that's why, for instance, you see plenty liberal agitation in the press but never any criticism of Israel. It's why "anti-Semitism" is a huge story, but anti-white discrimination is never talked about. Why the cares and concerns of Jews rank high, but not those of Christians. Why you'll see the NYT call Christians "dumb followers", but never say anything untoward about Jews.
http://theoccidentalobserver.net/tooblog/?cat=61
California Girl mentions Pro Publica. But there's nothing "pro publica" about it... it's rich Jews funding their own ethnic agenda:
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2008/02/propublica-or-projudaica/
Months ago, Slate’s Jack Shafer cast a sharply critical eye on the ProPublica enterprise, asking whether the major funders, Herb and Marion Sandler, will create a firewall between their own deeply Democratic leanings and the journalism.
The Sandlers, Bay Area billionaires who made their fortune in finance, have given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Democrats. That’s enough to make a conservative or a skeptic wary about their intentions in setting up “ProPublica.”
But as Businessweek reports, the Sandlers aren’t just big fans of Democrats — they’re big fans of Jewish causes, and have given handsomely to those projects, as well. And naturally, both are Jewish.
...
Most conservatives, and many American whites, are convinced that the media is hopelessly liberal. It might enhance their understanding to look a little deeper at the ethnic motivations behind that trend.
But look at the figures who OWN those corporate interests, the figures in power in the newsrooms, and so on, and you find that Jews are astoundingly overrepresented vis a vis their numbers in the population.
I submit that's why, for instance, you see plenty liberal agitation in the press but never any criticism of Israel. It's why "anti-Semitism" is a huge story, but anti-white discrimination is never talked about. Why the cares and concerns of Jews rank high, but not those of Christians. Why you'll see the NYT call Christians "dumb followers", but never say anything untoward about Jews.
http://theoccidentalobserver.net/tooblog/?cat=61
California Girl mentions Pro Publica. But there's nothing "pro publica" about it... it's rich Jews funding their own ethnic agenda:
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2008/02/propublica-or-projudaica/
Months ago, Slate’s Jack Shafer cast a sharply critical eye on the ProPublica enterprise, asking whether the major funders, Herb and Marion Sandler, will create a firewall between their own deeply Democratic leanings and the journalism.
The Sandlers, Bay Area billionaires who made their fortune in finance, have given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Democrats. That’s enough to make a conservative or a skeptic wary about their intentions in setting up “ProPublica.”
But as Businessweek reports, the Sandlers aren’t just big fans of Democrats — they’re big fans of Jewish causes, and have given handsomely to those projects, as well. And naturally, both are Jewish.
...
Most conservatives, and many American whites, are convinced that the media is hopelessly liberal. It might enhance their understanding to look a little deeper at the ethnic motivations behind that trend.
Last edited:
