The New York Times

NSFW The New York Times crossed the line with this image

The New York Times has posted a gruesome image of Stephen Miller with the headline ?Public Enemy No. 1.? It seems that we now live in a topsy-turvy world where new Media like Whaleoil have strict moderation standards and have cleaned up their act becoming more professional by the day while in contrast old establishment media’s standards are deteriorating in their desperate attempt to regain lost readership.

The New York Times appear to have become desensitised to barbarism, perhaps because their journalists have watched too many stomach churning ISIS videos. They have the freedom of course to use this kind of an image but I think less of them as a media organisation because they did. What will they do next? If it is acceptable to show President Trump’s White house advisor with his severed head on a pike will they next show counsellor to the president Kellyanne Conway being gang-raped, set on fire, stoned to death, hanged or being lashed?

NOTE: Image shown after break.

Read more »

Social Media reaction to The New York Times discount offer

Wow, what a deal you can now get The New York Times for ONLY $1.50 a week which is even cheaper than a subscription to an ad-free Whaleoil.?The reaction on social media must have been phenomenal because they are a “trusted perspective” and provide “independent journalism.”

Do you remember what Margaret Thatcher said that about being a lady? I think it applies to the New York Times.

5183d0a796b3b67be2b7c358a2f7c948 Read more »

Trotter on journalism, such as it is

Chris Trotter has finally woken up to the abject failure of the media and to the chattering classes.

DAMN AND BLAST HILLARY CLINTON! Not just because she lost ? exposing in the process the appalling political judgement of the Democratic Party. And not just because her failure has saddled the world with President Trump for at least four years. Those sins, on their own, more than merit political damnation. But there is another sin for which I would like to see Clinton blasted. The sin of exposing the vacuity of contemporary journalism and the powerlessness of the mainstream media. Because, to be perfectly honest, Clinton?s failure is my failure too.

Strong words.

Then Trotter embarks on a typical left-wing hypothesis complete with jargon that no one even knows what it means.

The story has its beginnings in the Watergate Scandal. I was just 18 when Nixon was driven from the White House by what everybody said was the investigative journalism of, among others, Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein, and The Washington Post. For one brief shining moment journalists were hailed as heroes and journalism was portrayed as a force so powerful that not even the office of the President of the United States could prevail against it.

Forty years on, however, it is clear that Nixon?s fall owed as much to the deliberate and secretive manipulation of the news media as it did to the efforts of the courageous journalists, Woodward and Bernstein. After all, the latter?s? key informant, the infamous ?Deep Throat?, turned out to be no less a buttress of the American ?Deep State? than Mark Felt, the Associate Director of the FBI.

In the movie, All the President?s Men, Deep Throat is portrayed as a reluctant but principled whistleblower from the dark heart of the Washington bureaucracy. A more probable explanation, however, is that Felt represented a Deep State faction determined to drive the mentally unstable Nixon out of the Oval Office. In 2016, it is equally probable that a highly-motivated Deep State faction, this time based in the FBI?s New York Field Office, used the news media to prevent Hillary Clinton from re-entering the White House as President.

Read more »

Hail Mary promise from NYT publisher to try to save his paper

This is a first, a publisher of a biased and bent former newspaper of record is begging for forgiveness of his readers and pledging to ‘reflect’ on saving the reputation of the New York Times.

The publisher of The New York Times penned?a letter to readers Friday promising that the paper would ?reflect? on its coverage of this year?s election while rededicating itself to reporting on ?America and the world? honestly.

Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr., the paper?s embattled publisher, appealed to Times readers for their continued support.

?We cannot deliver the independent, original journalism for which we are known without the loyalty of our subscribers,? the letter states.

Read more »

A Gay perspective on Islam


I have given this article the title? ‘A Gay perspective on Islam’, but after re? reading both the blog post quotes and the advertisement I realised that both have failed to link Sharia Law ( Which is Islam ) to the way homosexuals are treated in Palestine, Syria and Iran. It is this liberal failure to gloss over the root cause and to instead pretend it is a terrorist/autocratic thing that deeply concerns me. Why this fear to say what is so obvious? Saudi Arabia is held up as an almost perfect example of Islam and we all know how they treat women and gays.

The rights of LGBT people in Saudi Arabia are unrecognized. Homosexuality is frequently a taboo subject in Saudi Arabian society and is punished with imprisonment, fines, corporal punishment, capital punishment, whipping/flogging, and chemical castrations.


I think people are confused because they see Islam as a religion and separate from politics/government. It is the fact that religion and politics are the exact same thing in Islam that is the problem. The Islamic activists are very honest about this. They say Islam is Sharia and Sharia is Islam. Historically and now there is no shortage of hard evidence that this is the case, so why are the victims so afraid to name their oppressor? I think that the below advertisement is great but it is like the victim of child abuse speaking out against the social worker who placed them with the pedophile rather than speaking out against the pedophile who abused them.

Read more »

Mark Steyn blasts media and many outlets cower in the face of terrorism

Mark Steyn wishes that the media would try at least to find their testicles.

The Sunday Star-Times gets a dishonourable mention in the segment.

We saw yesterday the cowardice of the NZ Herald in publishing only those Charlie Hebdo cartoons that offend politicians, Christians and Jews, but not a single one that might offend a muslim.

David Farrar found his courage though, which puts the New Zealand media to shame, and this same attitude seems to prevail worldwide where legacy media lack courage and new media exhibit it in spades.

With few exceptions, it has been digital outlets like The Huffington Post, The Daily Beast, Business Insider, BuzzFeed, Vox, and Slate that have exercised their constitutional right by republishing the cartoons that are thought to be the basis for the attacks. In contrast, many ?legacy? organizations, from CNN, to The Washington Post, to The New York Times, largely withheld the images. In explaining its decision not to distribute any of the images, the AP?s spokesman, Paul Colford, was quoted as saying, ?It?s been our policy for years that we refrain from moving deliberately provocative images.? Bloomberg, meanwhile, published a slideshow that included many of the incendiary covers.? Read more »

Photo Of The Day

Photo: Thomas Hoepker

Photo: Thomas Hoepker

Photographs Can Speak A Thousand Words, But Without A Narrative Device Framing Them, They Are Mute

Read more »

Photo Of The Day

Photo Credit Sebastian Liste/Noor, for The New York Times Zero Freitas, on the records, Freitas is a wealthy businessman who, since he was a child, has been unable to stop buying records. ?I?ve gone to therapy for 40 years to try to explain this to myself.?

Photo Credit Sebastian Liste/Noor, for The New York Times
Zero Freitas, on the records, Freitas is a wealthy businessman who, since he was a child, has been unable to stop buying records. ?I?ve gone to therapy for 40 years to try to explain this to myself.?

Meet the man who would own all the vinyl records in the?world

Read more »

NY Times endorses legalisation of cannabis

The NY Times has taken an editorial stance supporting the legalisation of cannabis.

The New York Times editorial board endorsed the repeal of federal law banning marijuana use on Saturday, a landmark moment in the decades-long fight for legalization.

The Times is also rolling out?an interactive six-part series?with more editorials discussing issues related to marijuana use.?In the first interactive editorial, which turns the stars of the American flag into marijuana leaves as the user scrolls down, the editorial board argued that the ban on marijuana has caused ?great harm on society just to prohibit a substance far less dangerous than alcohol.?

?There are no perfect answers to people?s legitimate concerns about marijuana use. But neither are there such answers about tobacco or alcohol, and we believe that on every level ? health effects, the impact on society and law-and-order issues ? the balance falls squarely on the side of national legalization,? the board wrote. ?That will put decisions on whether to allow recreational or medicinal production and use where it belongs ? at the state level.?

The Times is the biggest U.S. newspaper to endorse the legalization of marijuana. In recent years magazines like National Review and a few state newspapers like the Las Vegas Review Journal and the Star-Ledger Editorial Board have endorsed legalization.? Read more »

The New York Times needs to man up about soccer

Soccer is gay. The New York Times is gayer for agreeing with Major League Soccer to try and ban football chants.

For decades, soccer officials in the United States simply wanted some fans in their stadiums. Now they have them, and some of those fans have brought an unexpected problem: a vulgar chant, in the vein of more notoriously rabid soccer fans in other countries.

Hardly clever, it is only three words ? an insult directed at the opposing goalkeeper ? but enough to give M.L.S. officials fits as they hear it spill over into live television broadcasts. The chant?s simplicity is what makes it appealing or appalling, depending on your perspective.? Read more »