i love when cenk calls out the american corporate media for beings whores.
*promote

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Friday, August 17th, 2012 8:42am PDT - promote requested by enoch.

Can I up-vote this twice?

When will the people stop listening to the Crap news?

Crap news?!

It's the New York Times, baby, the New Testament for the New Age!

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

New York Times = Corporate Media Lackies, Bush stooges and Iraq war enablers.

Crap news about a crap person then. Hardly promotion worthy.

The corporate news are the sources and encyclopedias for American Traitors.

American media is free to most extents. Just have to get it distributed and then not bought out by a bunch of wealthy dicks who just want to corrupt every message for their own gain. Maybe the problem is that we keep reinforcing the idea of what the American media is. I for one say Democracy Now and the Huffington Post and Indymedia are true American media outlets.

>> ^thumpa28:

Crap news about a crap person then. Hardly promotion worthy.


This is actually very much noteworthy. Even if you ignore the person they are reporting about it used to be pretty much common code that if you were to rip on other entities in the "news and journalism"-buisness, you'd do it in an editorial or sth titled oppinion piece- as a writer/editor you'd want to keep a door open in case of, you know, having to look for stories on the other side of the political spectrum.

This, in journalism circles equals to the NYT publicly stating to any other potential sources: "We will not accept your stories unless they are greenlighted or/and will potentially help backstab you if you come to us with yet unpublished information".

Good luck recovering from that, NYT

Find it super funny that ppl are ripping on an article because they saw a five minute video featuring totally biased bullet points of said article. When a journalist (see: Cenk) uses a whining baby voice to describe his subject (NYT), well, I tend to take that shit with a grain of salt. How can people talk about "crap" news when the source their citing is know for constantly berating their opponents and literally can't go one minute without calling someone stupid?
In summation, if you didn't read the article and formulated an opinion on it by this sensationalist clip, you are, by definition, ignorant.

If anyone's interested in the "smear piece": http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/17/world/americas/ecuador-to-let-assange-stay-in-its-embassy.html?smid=pl-share

My god, it's as if you can't see the difference between a news article and a commentary. Please don't project your own ignorance on everyone else.

>> ^mikeydamonster:

Find it super funny that ppl are ripping on an article because they saw a five minute video featuring totally biased bullet points of said article. When a journalist (see: Cenk) uses a whining baby voice to describe his subject (NYT), well, I tend to take that shit with a grain of salt. How can people talk about "crap" news when the source their citing is know for constantly berating their opponents and literally can't go one minute without calling someone stupid?
In summation, if you didn't read the article and formulated an opinion on it by this sensationalist clip, you are, by definition, ignorant.
If anyone's interested in the "smear piece": http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/1
7/world/americas/ecuador-to-let-assange-stay-in-its-embassy.html?smid=pl-share

Tags for this video have been changed from 'TYT, Julian Assange, journalism' to 'TYT, Julian Assange, journalism, new york times' - edited by xxovercastxx

Yup, toooooootally ignorant to link the article the video is bashing. /sarcasm

Really? Am I the one confusing news with commentary? If people are reacting to TYT being like, "OMG, so true!" I would hope they just kinda try to inform themselves before agreeing. Have ya read the article? Would you also say it's a straight-up hit piece?

The vast overgeneralizations that come out of TYT (oh so similar to ones espoused by every conservative talk show I've ever heard) are what piss me off. Check out this other story from the NYT. They straight trolling' Assange! http://nyti.ms/P7jQC7

The New York Times stealth-edited their article to remove all of the objectionable content, apparently.

http://observer.com/2012/08/new-york-times-article-on-julian-assange-asylum-scrubs-its-toilet-reference/

Not a fan of Assange, but that article is indeed an embarrassment.

*doublepromote

Double-Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Friday, August 17th, 2012 8:42am PDT - doublepromote requested by gwiz665.

>> ^mikeydamonster:

Find it super funny that ppl are ripping on an article because they saw a five minute video featuring totally biased bullet points of said article. When a journalist (see: Cenk) uses a whining baby voice to describe his subject (NYT), well, I tend to take that shit with a grain of salt. How can people talk about "crap" news when the source their citing is know for constantly berating their opponents and literally can't go one minute without calling someone stupid?
In summation, if you didn't read the article and formulated an opinion on it by this sensationalist clip, you are, by definition, ignorant.
If anyone's interested in the "smear piece": http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/1
7/world/americas/ecuador-to-let-assange-stay-in-its-embassy.html?smid=pl-share


Finally someone points out the ass-raping of journalisnm as perpetrated by the TYT cabal and the fawning over he same by their faithful, information starved drones. What is truly sensational is the lack of demand for information and substance from those who control the airwaves.