Oh, Eric, you know how relevant American talk shows are to the average Zimbabwean voter! I mean, if they could afford the computer... and the electricity... and food...
The lack of MSM coverage of this is sick, but not surprising. After all, because he stuck it to whitey, the MSM loves him. Who cares how many people had to die to steal whitey's farms?
It's interesting to see the right losing its mind as its fortunes turn to ash. As it gets scary, some of them cling even tighter to their old, familiar worn-out teddy bears.
Here's the Evil Empire of the MSM, the New York Times, writing about Mugabe's farm seizures in March 2000. Myself, I don't see any pinko Mugabe-loving anywhere in the article. It must be that I'm not as keenly perceptive to the tireless presence of Creeping MSMism as the above poster: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C07E3DB1F39F930A35750C0A9669C8B63&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
Here's the devil Times from July 2003, reporting on (and heavily emphasizing) the criticism of Mugabe: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F05E7DF1F3AF936A35754C0A9659C8B63
The valentine of a headline, "Facing Up to the Mugabe Problem" truly illustrates the way "the MSM loves [Mugabe] because he stuck it to whitey."
You'll notice that while quoting some of Mugabe's supporters in the above article, the Times describes WBAI-FM as "a left-leaning radio station." Wh-wh-WHAT? But, but, but the biased MSM only labels conservative speakers as "conservative," while giving leftist figures a pass of omission! It's what they DO! The five blogs I read all say so!
Does not compute... does not compute... must delete contradictory date... abort... abort...
And whatever you do, DON'T search the Times' online archives for the other 476 articles linked under "Mugabe, Robert." That way, you can keep your paranoid sense of superiority about "the sick but unsurprising lack of MSM coverage."
CNN has been covering the story regularly. The Washington Post's search engine shows 175 story matches that mention Robert Mugabe in the past two months alone.
Brian must be thinking of the miserable New York Post, which displays a whopping 6 archive hits on "Mugabe." Strangely, the Post seems to have immunity from that most devastating of negative brands, "MSM." Gee, I wonder why?
6 comments:
Oh Aloha Steve, you always say such nice things.
Oh, Eric, you know how relevant American talk shows are to the average Zimbabwean voter! I mean, if they could afford the computer... and the electricity... and food...
The lack of MSM coverage of this is sick, but not surprising. After all, because he stuck it to whitey, the MSM loves him. Who cares how many people had to die to steal whitey's farms?
It's interesting to see the right losing its mind as its fortunes turn to ash. As it gets scary, some of them cling even tighter to their old, familiar worn-out teddy bears.
Here's the Evil Empire of the MSM, the New York Times, writing about Mugabe's farm seizures in March 2000. Myself, I don't see any pinko Mugabe-loving anywhere in the article. It must be that I'm not as keenly perceptive to the tireless presence of Creeping MSMism as the above poster:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C07E3DB1F39F930A35750C0A9669C8B63&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
Here's the devil Times from July 2003, reporting on (and heavily emphasizing) the criticism of Mugabe:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F05E7DF1F3AF936A35754C0A9659C8B63
The valentine of a headline, "Facing Up to the Mugabe Problem" truly illustrates the way "the MSM loves [Mugabe] because he stuck it to whitey."
You'll notice that while quoting some of Mugabe's supporters in the above article, the Times describes WBAI-FM as "a left-leaning radio station." Wh-wh-WHAT? But, but, but the biased MSM only labels conservative speakers as "conservative," while giving leftist figures a pass of omission! It's what they DO! The five blogs I read all say so!
Does not compute... does not compute... must delete contradictory date... abort... abort...
And whatever you do, DON'T search the Times' online archives for the other 476 articles linked under "Mugabe, Robert." That way, you can keep your paranoid sense of superiority about "the sick but unsurprising lack of MSM coverage."
The NY Times had an article just 2 days ago, "Zimbabweans Vote, Desperate for Change After Mugabe Rule But Expecting Little."
The poster's complaint is a ludicrous, imaginary grievance. Somebody might be "sick," but it isn't the "MSM."
CNN has been covering the story regularly. The Washington Post's search engine shows 175 story matches that mention Robert Mugabe in the past two months alone.
Brian must be thinking of the miserable New York Post, which displays a whopping 6 archive hits on "Mugabe." Strangely, the Post seems to have immunity from that most devastating of negative brands, "MSM." Gee, I wonder why?
Post a Comment