Advertisements
Home

The Latest Betrayal of Main(Lame)stream Media

Leave a comment

History is full of journalists who strove for the “truth”; they saw through the manipulations of the culture industry and tried their best to give their readers at least a semblance of an alternative view on current affairs. While I put the term “truth” in quotations above, this is only to recognize that absolute “truth” is a difficult thing to find for any human being. This does not mean that existential philosophy is the end all and be all, rather it is to say that many of us—as unique human beings—have different perspectives on the world. This is to be expected from a humanist view point. Unfortunately, however, too many modern journalists have chosen to avoid even attempting to find “truth” in their reporting; rather, they have—it seems—chosen to focus on what can best be termed as nonsense.

While this blog is about football, there are certain times when I cannot help but point out absurdities in the modern world since, as a sociologist, I work with the words of C. Wright Mills in mind: It is the job of the Sociologist to point out absurdities in the world. And, indeed, the modern world throws out absurdities almost every day.

Most recently, I came across a piece in The Guardian with the headline “Hate body odour? You’re more likely to have rightwing views”. Now, clearly, this is absurd. So I dug further. Indeed, the article claims that, according to research published in the British journal Royal Society Open Science “People who have a greater tendency to turn their nose up at the whiff of urine, sweat and other body odours are more likely to have rightwing authoritarian attitudes”. The Guardian continues, claiming that “The team say the findings support the idea that a feeling of disgust might partly underpin social discrimination against others, with the link rooted in a primitive urge to avoid catching diseases from unfamiliar people or environments”. Indeed, according to the co-author of the research, Dr. Jonas Olofsson from Stockholm University and the Swedish Collegium for Advanced Study, “authoritarian attitudes might, at least in part, be rooted in biology”.

Now, the idea that one’s world view should be rooted in biology is very clearly a slippery slope; biological determinism is something that most sociologists—and indeed, I’d say most academics—should have given up long ago. Yet, clearly here, we see “research” which attempts to tie a concern for hygiene with “authoritarian” ideas. Unfortunately, however, the absurdity does not end here. Indeed, the Los Angeles Times chose to cite the same story with the headline “Disgusted by other people’s body odor? You might be more likely to support Donald Trump”. Again, this is absurd. Yet the main(lame)stream media will go to any length to attack Mr. Trump—and his supporters—even if it means demonizing people whose only concern is with basic human hygiene. After all, one of the first rules of being a decent citizen—of whatever country one may be a citizen of—is not making others uncomfortable as a result of your own body odor!

It is interesting that the main(lame)stream media chose to focus on this rather absurd piece of “research” rather than on a piece published by the (much) more reputable journal Political Psychology entitled “Finding the Loch Ness Monster: Left‐Wing Authoritarianism in the United States”. Given the agendas and narratives of the main(lame)stream media, it should not be surprising that they should ignore the presence of left-wing authoritarianism in the U.S. Yet it is also concerning, considering that the body odor “study” cited by The Guardian and the Los Angeles Times used the right-wing Authoritarianism scale which the authors of “Finding the Loch Ness Monster” criticize for not being accurately representative of “authoritarian” sentiment at all; rather—they argue—it reflects a particular conservative point of view which was prevalent in 1980s America. In short, it is a bogus scale used by bogus research to confirm a certain narrative.

What is most important to recognize is that The Guardian and the Los Angeles Times are not the most reliable of news sources, at least when it comes to doing their jobs. In fact, with less than a week to go before the FIFA World Cup, neither paper has reported (as of the time that this piece was published) on the fact that a Kenyan referee appointed to Football’s biggest tournament has resigned after it was revealed that he took bribes while officiating in Africa. While this kind of corruption threatens the integrity of the game most of the world loves, you won’t see it reported on by the lame(main)stream media.

 

Screen Shot 2018-06-07 at 8.48.13 PM.png

The Guardian Cannot Seem to Report on Real Issues . . . Image Courtesy of Google Search.

 

Screen Shot 2018-06-07 at 10.07.08 PM.png

. . . Even on their Sports Page, Even Though They Are The “Sport Website Of The Year”. Image Courtesy Of: https://www.theguardian.com/uk/sport

 

Screen Shot 2018-06-07 at 10.28.13 PM.png

Yet, Apparently, the LA Times Cannot Be Bothered Either. Misery Loves Company, I Suppose. Image Courtesy of Google Search.

 

A simple Google search of both The Guardian and the Los Angeles Times has no mention of this scandal (in fact, a search of The Guardian reveals an ironic headline from 2010 “Kenya leads way in ending blight of corruption in African football” instead). In a bid to follow the globalist narrative, both papers refuse to admit that the globalists from FIFA turn a blind eye to corruption nearly every day. And it has to make the reader pause for thought: Which is more important? Taking every possible route to criticize U.S. President Donald Trump and his supporters, or pointing out—and rooting out—corruption in both African and world football? Clearly, the reader should know—by now—what the most important thing is between these two choices. Let’s just hope that more people start to recognize that the main(lame)stream media are only interested in following their own narratives, while ignoring the well-being of the world we live in.

Advertisements

Turkish Football Results Might Depend on Political Developments (But Don’t Depend on Lamestream (Western) Media for Real Analyses)

4 Comments

On Saturday 21 October Ankara Mayor Melih Gokcek was over the moon as his team won 3-0 against Kardemir Karabukspor at home. The response was typical, since it was just Osmanlispor’s second victory of the season (and not enough to lift them off of the bottom spot). Osmanlispor—or Ottoman Football Club—is one of the Turkish football league’s “project teams”; part and parcel of the Turkish state’s attempt to create a new hegemony through sport. Currently, however, the team run by the Ankara Mayor’s son Ahmet Gokcek has fallen on hard times. The attempt to create a neo-Ottoman hegemony through sports has stalled due to a crisis among the the ruling elite of the Turkish state; Ankara mayor Melih Gokcek’s resignation was reportedly requested by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan as early as 5 October 2017.  Mr. Gokcek, however, has refused to resign and has instead exacerbated a power struggle within the Turkish state. On the surface, the Turkish state presents it as a struggle between pro-Erdogan and pro-Fethullah Gulen forces; a battle between two factions of globalists for the soul of the Turkish nation. As an ardent nationalist, I clearly do not side with either of these factions (and I also root against Osmanlispor). But, in lieu of a detailed analysis of this latest power struggle in Turkish politics, I would rather send a message to globalist media.

 

8480988.jpg

Melih Gokcek Celebrates…For Now. Image Courtesy Of: http://www.posta.com.tr/melih-gokcek-osmanlispor-kardemir-karabukspor-macini-izlerken-goruntulendi-haberi-1344441

 

I am an honest hard-working individual who struggles to get by with the wages provided for me by my home institution. It is my hope that, after getting my PhD, I will be able to become a full-fledged independent writer. My only issue is that I am currently engaged in an unequal fight against . . . globalist media. While mainstream (or “lamestream”) media claims that they are providing “free” and “independent” media, they are doing nothing of the sort. In fact, a recent piece in The Guardian blatantly plagiarized from this blog. Writer Emre Sarigul’s 12 October 2017 piece follows the same team, Altinordu, I wrote about in my 14 August 2017 piece. Unfortunately, The Guardian’s Emre Sarigul neglected to cite this blog in his piece. While the Guardian claims to want to make the world a “fairer place”, it is clear that they also give a space to plagiarizing writers on their website. This is unacceptable for any journalistic organization, and all readers would do well to see The Guardian’s hypocrisy. Their website claims:

 

We want to make the world a better, fairer place. We want to keep the powerful honest. And we believe that doing so means keeping society informed by producing quality, independent journalism, which discovers and tells readers the truth.

It’s essential for the functioning of democracy. And our unique ownership structure means no one can tell us to censor or drop a story.

 

While The Guardian claims to uphold the lofty goals of preserving “democracy” they also clearly support writers—like Emre Sarigul—who are noted plagiarizers; in fact this is not the first time that Mr. Sarigul has stolen ideas. That such a writer should be supported by The Guardian shows the failure of Western “liberal” media.

 

I will never ask for “crowd-funding” or other money-making gimmicks; I will always write for my audience free of charge. That said, however, it is clear that I cannot continue writing this blog if my ideas are continually stolen without receiving credit. Therefore, I am sorry to announce an indefinite hiatus; I cannot—with good conscience—continue to write for the profit of plagiarizers like Mr. Emre Sarigul. Until globalist—and (lamestream) media like The Guardian apologize, I will be forced to keep my posts to a minimum. I will also encourage readers who value my writing to contact The Guardian and encourage them to re-assess the vetting policies for their writers. Stealing ideas is no different than stealing property; that is why it is called “Intellectual Property”. Stolen ideas produce FAKE NEWS.