Bloggers are more important than journalists; FACT

DSC06431

by Kenneth Justice

~ Okay, its 2015 and the reality of life is that the Internet has changed the world forever. And while in some ways it has caused people to waste a LOT of time (aka men sitting at their screens and looking at porn till very late into the night = bad) it has also enabled us to accomplish a lot of GOOD things.

For the better part of a couple hundred years, journalism, whether Newspapers, TV News, Radio News, etc., has been by-and-large controlled by the wealthy. It was wealthy businessmen (usually white) who owned all the newspapers, television news, and various news outlets (and oddly enough, most of the outlets are still owned by white men).

The voice of the people was only heard when the journalists and owners of these NEWS agencies deemed them relevant to be heard; the professionally paid journalists and wealthy fat cats controlled EVERYTHING we heard when it came to the NEWS.

Step aside wealthy fat cats, the Internet has screwed up your groove.

For the first time in the history of humanity, an average person could write about the NEWS of the day, or write about his or her perspective on the current events; and they didn’t have to purchase an expensive printing press or have to pass out papers on the street corner.

The Internet has given a voice to millions (actually billions) of people around the globe. We are living in an age of New Media, and its making the Old News obsolete. Newspapers are folding up all over North America, the evening News on the big networks are seeing massive drops in audience. And with the exception of Fox News, the other cable NEWS networks get practically no audiences compared with the traffic that Internet sites get on a daily basis.

Of course, criticisms are plenty when it comes to the New Media. As my favorite journalist Jen is always saying, “much of the NEWS you hear on blogs and the Internet are not fact checked” . While Jen might be right, that is definitely nothing new to the world of NEWS, isn’t that right Brian Williams?


Actually, anyone who takes an honest college course on the history of NEWS and media, will find out that the NEWS has ALWAYS had a history of reporting biased and inaccurate stories. What can you expect when the NEWS was owned and operated by a bunch of rich white men; do you think they had no agenda’s all those years when they controlled the media?

Do you think Fox News doesn’t have an agenda?

Do you think MSNBC doesn’t have an agenda?

Do you think BBC News doesn’t have an agenda?


Do you think these News agencies aren’t run by biased reporters, with biased political agendas, with which those biased political agendas leak into their stories? Of course they are! We are all biased! Journalists have agendas; and if you haven’t watched my One Minute with the Monk episode on Journalists here is the link

We ALL have agendas, I have an agenda and I’m not afraid to admit it to you; I want to encourage people to build better communities. Better community in their personal/social lives, and better physical communities (the community that you live in). I want to encourage bloggers to place more emphasis on fact checking their sources. I want to be apart of this revolution in New Media.

The time has come when the major political parties in our country have become obsolete; they simply don’t represent the majority of the people anymore. You can fact check this; the majority of people in Europe and North America are tired of Right Wing and Left Wing politicians. The majority of people are looking for more moderate and less polarizing politicians. We’re tired of politicians from both sides of the aisle who pay off their special interests.

Did you know that the National Football League (NFL) is a non-profit organization? (source) Did you know that they don’t pay any taxes? They are the biggest sports giant in North America….and THEY DON’T PAY ANY TAXES!!! They pay their commissioner 44.2 million dollars…AND THE NFL DOESN’T PAY ANY TAXES!!! 


The Republicans and Democrats waste our time arguing on Television about taxes and the poor, taxes and the middle class, taxes and the upper class…..how about just TAXING THE BLOODY NFL!!!!

Did you know General Electric DOESN’T PAY ANY TAXES either; because they keep 108 billion dollars over seas? (source)

You see, we all know that our politicians have sold out to corporate interests. ALL OF OUR POLITICIANS HAVE; George W. Bush, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, ALL of them. None of our politicians are knocking on the door of General Electric or the NFL and saying, “hey, maybe you guys should pay some taxes”

The blogging world has to change the world….because nobody else will.

Just a few thoughts as I sipped my coffee,


Kenneth



Categories: Culture & Society

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

24 replies

  1. It hasn’t changed the world yet, but it has changed my life and how I view the world… It’s also restored my faith in people a little…

  2. This is a great one, Ken! Good to know that We make a difference. Regards. 🙂

  3. Reblogged this on lovehappinessandpeace and commented:
    1. Excellent Post!

    2. From the article: “The voice of the people was only heard when the journalists and owners of these NEWS agencies deemed them relevant to be heard; the professionally paid journalists and wealthy fat cats controlled EVERYTHING we heard when it came to the NEWS.”

    3. I do not think that Only White men are guilty of this. Think of Russia, China, Korea, and Our Dear India!

  4. Only the money isn’t with the NFL. The money is with the teams, who aren’t tax exempt. Making the NFL suddenly pay taxes won’t change much at all. http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2013/06/01/nfl-as-tax-exempt-less-than-meets-the-eye/ (Aside from the fact that they do pay some taxes, as evidenced by their 990 form).

    With you as far as GE goes.

    • Matthew, I agree with you in part….while the teams are not tax exempt; who pays for the stadiums that the teams play in? Most of the new stadiums are financed 50% with public money. Thus, the NFL corporate is a non-profit company, with a CEO that earns a ridiculous amount of money (should any non-profit have a CEO that earns 44.2 million????) and their teams which do pay taxes, get buildings to play in that are funded by US! It is a ridiculous situation!!!

    • The teams pay for the stadiums through the NFL, which is the tax entity created for that purpose. This is to make sure that corners aren’t cut as far as safety goes (because the majority of revenue comes from TV rights). It might make more sense to go with an LLC as far as it goes.

      So how would you treat other non-profits (like Harvard) that post record profits, as opposed to the NFL which, on paper at least, has liabilities in excess of its assets?

      As far as funding with public money: that is a decision local, not federal, jurisdictions make, with an eye toward the future revenue increased sales tax, revitalizing areas where the stadiums are built, etc. No one is holding a gun to politicians’ heads to pass those spending measures.

      Regarding the salaries of non-profits: are you proposing a mandated salary cap on people working in non-profits in order for those organizations to maintain that status?

  5. Loved this post. Never at any time in the history of the world has it been possible for an individual to put his/her thoughts out to so many. Of course, actually getting large numbers of readers is another matter (as you well know – that takes work and commitment). What really surprises me is the quality of a lot of the writing out in the ‘blogosphere’. I see some people working really hard for very little compensation. Of course, there is a lot of garbage out there too, but I think most of us find a half dozen blogs that we check in with regularly (as I do yours).

    • W.E. right on, bloggers put in a LOT of work, often for NO money…which in my mind; improves their credibility over a news agency that is incentivized to put out certain kinds of stories.

  6. Kenneth, I have 2 questions: 1) do you REALLY believe that major blogs like Huffington Post represent majority of Americans and are not financed by parties or “wealthy fat cats”?
    2) You often say “we all know that our politicians have sold out to corporate interests.” Don’t you know that at least last 40 years unions have more political power than corporations?

  7. The tax monies avoided by General electric , the NFL and others, is money that could help fund schools for our children’s future. It could fund free medicines in Africa, or food in India or perhaps create a desalination plant to water the desert and reclaim some land. The Government need to be told to change the laws on tax avoidance and perhaps even make a retrospective claim from the dodgers. The money should not be allowed to be counted as profits for the firm or any individuals within it.

  8. Were you or were you not the one person who wrote several articles about facts? Didn’t you say if it can be disputed it can’t be a fact? Well my friend, a lot of what you have said here can absolutely be disputed so it’s NOT fact. You feel strongly about it so it feels like fact but it’s not. It’s interesting you should point out the fat cats have dictated what is important for news…that is something that goes both ways. The Internet has created the issue you constantly complain about…there is no hierarchy of what is important and what isn’t to help readers get to the information they SHOULD or NEED to be reading. It’s a free for all and let’s face it…as discussed in our show and many other times before then, people are CHOOSING to read about fashion, about Bruce Jenner’s upcoming sex change, etc. The things about those old fashioned newspapers is there was a way to help direct people to knowing what information is good for them to know. Yes there are natural biases and slants in newspapers and magazines…they have specific audiences. For example, you’re right the paper I work for is slanted because we only try to include information about this small city BUT that’s what the readers want! If they want news from Los Angeles or the world they will pick the appropriate news source for that information. This small paper simply doesn’t have the funds to have enough pages to cover all that news or the resources (we are down to just a reporter and an editor…if you really think two people can cover all that you’re kidding yourself!). I know you think you can take one journalism class and that’s enough to know what goes on in the business but I assure it is not. As for other biases, part of the issue there is it is up to journalists to determine the most important information for readers because again, they are only going to read so much. If I were to write an article about last night’s school board that covered the full nearly three hours of information, well let’s just say that would never happen. One – people would quit reading because of it being “boring” material; two – there isn’t enough page space to print all of that information. It is better to break it up and provide only the information readers really need to know. Journalists are gatekeepers of information. That is why the fallout with Brian Williams is so bad. We, the audience, trusted him to not only tell the truth but to provide us with viable information; we trusted him to know what was really needed to be known and that he would report it honestly and faithfully and he failed to do that…apparently on multiple articles. While I’m all for bloggers (clearly as I am a blogger lol) and I’m all for the Internet eventually being what makes journalism better, I’m cautious about saying just anyone can provide the news. You’re right, everyone is going to have a bias or agenda but for any so-called real journalist, the only agenda should be to provide enough information to readers to decide for themselves about what is or isn’t going on in this world. Has that gotten off target…yes…but is that true of all journalists…no! We just lots a few very good journalists in recent weeks. I would like to think there are more coming up in the ranks. What I hope is that all those trained professionals will eventually band together to create much more reliable news sources for folks via the Internet. I am leery of just anyone being a “journalist” or reporter because so often I’ve talked with folks about what they think it takes to report the news and they’re frequently incorrect. I also have seen first hand what happens with people who seem to think that just anything can go on the Internet. I have experienced local bloggers who quite frankly should be sued for liable because they are just plain lying about things but because it would cost more to do so in court vs. actually getting anything back from it, no one has sued these folks, so on they go, keep perpetuating lies. Is that okay for bloggers to do Kenneth? It is also about protection for the so-called reporters also. If a liable suit does come up, how do they protect themselves just out there on their own? Oh I suppose they could call it artistic license but that only goes so far. If bloggers are just out there spreading lies, who protects those who are being lied about…again the artistic license takes precedence in that sense and the “victim” just has to live with it, nevermind the damage that’s caused. It’s like I said in a comment the other day to you, once you’re considered a “celebrity” or a public figure, you are virtually no longer protected. The problem there of course is then there’s no recourse if there’s lies about you or misinformation. Those things can be very damaging. Just some thoughts.

    • Jen, the “NEWS” is invented….its an entire semantical creation that occurred in the not too distant past. Professor Neil Postman (sociologist) wrote a number of books and peer reviewed essays on this very issue; “How to watch the evening news”, “amusing ourselves to death”, and the “the disappearance of childhood” to name a few. Journalists do not have a corner on how to define “what is news’ that is the problem i am addressing in the post.

      Who gets to decide that because someone works at a newspaper, has a journalism degree or owns the newspaper that they are “BEST” qualified to determine what is “news”? As professor Postman points out, it was the the early Newspapers and Owners of newspapers that created their own semantical definition of what news is and was. It wasn’t the public that created the semantical definition, it was newspapers and the newspaper owners…..To this date, i’ve never read an academic refutation to anything Professor Postman ever wrote on this subject.

      During the 1970’s and 80’s and early 90’s until he died, he was considered one of the most important sources and voices on this issue….yet conveniently, newspapers, tv news, and college journalism programs have conveniently left his voice out of the equation…because they couldn’t refute what he was teaching at NYU

    • I’ve had two very long responses now to this but I’m tired…I’m deflated. This is not a day that’s going well for me and apparently neither is this discussion. I’m clearly just wrong and nothing I say could have any merit to it at all so I’ll stop. No more comments from me on this matter.

  9. you have to pay the price, you have to …

  10. Ken, you are getting prolific! hah

  11. the problem is that with all this information people now have, the action is to go on line and blog about it and create facebook protests, and ‘on line petitions’. while the real changes that are taking place are happening where the people are actually out on the streets protesting.
    barstool warriors never changed a thing

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: