corporate media

Beyond Corporate Media, Journalists Are Stepping Up and Speaking Up About ICE

Spread the love

Original article by Janine Jackson republished from FAIR under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

As millions around the world, fresh off watching real-time footage of federal law enforcement murdering Renee Good, saw federal agents murder Alex Pretti, CBS viewers got a headline (1/24/26): “Person Dead After Shooting in Minneapolis Involving Federal Immigration Agents.”

You can check your calendar; it is 2026. And yet corporate media still think we’ll fall for that passive voice business, wherein law enforcement are…there…and people just kinda die.

Or we get—as CBS (1/27/26) offered elsewhere—“videos of the incident appear to contradict officials’ claims.”

‘No hate, no fear’

Workday: “Everybody Showed Up”: Stunning Crowds at Minnesota Day of Strike and Shutdown Against ICE

“Every time this country has had a debate on the sustainability and expansion of our democracy,” Chicago Teachers Union president Stacy Davis Gates told Workday (1/23/26), “workers have settled that debate—and I’m looking for workers to do the same thing this time.” 

It’s not clear whether corporate media know they’re writing themselves a resignation letter, but they are. Fortunately, there are other outlets ready to step up and speak up.

You can read Hammer & Hope (Fall/24) for an interview with Doran Schrantz, a longtime organizer of Minnesota’s faith-based communities on “How a Decade of Multiracial, Interfaith Organizing in Minnesota Undergirds the Resistance.” Schrantz explains:

We built a strategy together around how we understand what it means to unequivocally be East African and Muslim. Or rural with a rural perspective. No one’s asking you to change any of those things. We are explicitly posing the question about how we can publicly demonstrate, over and over again, the critical importance of multiracial democratic power. We center this question partially to model, but partially to protect our movements from being distracted and divided by identitarian or weaponized racialized attacks.

You can read Sarah Lazare writing for Workday Magazine (1/23/26) and In These Times (1/23/26) about Minnesota’s January 23 strike and shutdown. Tens of thousands marched through downtown Minneapolis shouting, “No hate, no fear, immigrants are welcome here.”

That action crucially involved workers and unions. A union leader from SEIU Local 26, which represents more than 8,000 of Minnesota’s janitors, window cleaners and property service workers told Lazare they’ve “lost over 20 members to these abductions by federal agents, often without warning, often without due process.”

You can read Katya Schwenk at the Lever (8/28/25), who details how ICE has been allowed to swallow more and more resources based on a broad authority that Congress gave the Department of Homeland Security to reshuffle funds with little oversight.

The latest is DHS draining money from FEMA, tasked with disaster relief but lately wielded as a political cudgel, as when Trump floated the idea that he would deny relief to states that allowed consumers to ban Israeli products. Once an independent agency, FEMA was subsumed into DHS in 2003 as part of George W. Bush’s post-9/11 reorganization.

Congress has repeatedly given DHS authority to move money around in a way not afforded to all departments, who have to trouble with things like approval from lawmakers.

Switching names not changing course

Popular Information: How legacy media fell for Trump’s fake “pivot” in Minnesota

“What is motivating all of the reporting on Trump’s ‘pivot’?” Popular Information (1/28/26) asked. “Trump softened his rhetoric, calling Pretti’s death ‘very unfortunate’ and ‘very sad.’”

You can read Popular Information (1/28/26), which warns of media disinformation around a supposed Trump “pivot” on ICE actions in Minnesota. For instance, AP (1/27/26) reports that Trump has “shifted toward a more conciliatory approach,” that this is an “about face.” The New York Times (1/26/26) ran a headline declaring “Trump Changes Course in Minnesota.” Except that switching names at the top—Homan for Bovino, or anyone for Noem—is actually not proof that the violent crackdown in Minneapolis won’t continue indefinitely.

Popular Information also breaks down, for those interested, the weak corporate response to citizens’ murder by the state. Conspicuously silent after Renee Good’s killing, large companies in Minnesota evidently felt moved to address the issue after Alex Pretti. The Minnesota Chamber of Commerce released a letter on behalf of more than 60 CEOs based in the state that consisted of 215 words that said next to nothing.

“With yesterday’s tragic news, we are calling for an immediate deescalation of tensions and for state, local and federal officials to work together to find real solutions,” the CEOs wrote, with no thoughts on how tensions could be deescalated or what a real solution would look like.

Popular Information contacted all 68 companies that signed the letter, asking: “Do you condemn the killing of two Minnesotans by federal officers?” All either declined to comment or to respond at all.

‘Not our first rodeo’

Sahan: Bravery in the face of fear: Immigrant Defense Network goes statewide with constitutional observer training

“They [constitutional observers] are the ones keeping watch,” Immigrant Defense Network’s Edwin Torres Desantiago told Sahan (1/28/26). “They’re the ones that are making sure our constitution is upheld.”You can read, at the Guardian (1/20/26), Alyssa Oursler’s notes on just how grassroots networks in the Twin Cities, with things like community watch and mutual aid, are building on work honed in the 2020 protests in response to George Floyd’s state sanctioned murder. As Oursler quotes one rapid response organizer, “This is not our first rodeo.”

Another aid worker is cited: “We’ve always had to do it ourselves. We have whistles and we have organizing. That’s all we have against people with huge trucks and guns.”

And you can stay in touch with reporting from Minnesotan journalists, like those at Sahan Journal, a nonprofit digital newsroom focused on the state’s immigrants and communities of color, offering reports along the lines of “Bravery in the Face of Fear: Immigrant Defense Network Goes Statewide With Constitutional Observer Training” (1/28/26).

There have been creditable Big Media reports on Minneapolis, but just as events have shown us the need for a disruptive new way forward in politics, they’ve shown up the failures of so-called legacy media to confront the moment, and the value of citizen journalism that doesn’t pretend to come from nowhere, but instead centers the people at the sharp end of the policies crafted by the forces to whom corporate media give pride of place.

Support your local and independent journalists, is what I’m trying to say.

Original article by Janine Jackson republished from FAIR under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn't bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.
Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn’t bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.
Orcas discuss how Trump was re-elected and him being an obviously insane, xenophobic Fascist.
Orcas discuss how Trump was re-elected and him being an obviously insane, xenophobic Fascist.

Continue ReadingBeyond Corporate Media, Journalists Are Stepping Up and Speaking Up About ICE

Thoughts of the day 16 April 2025

Spread the love

It appears that the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) – ultimately, in the final analysis a state broadcaster – is currently forbidden from mentioning Israel’s Gaza genocide. There are local elections approaching on 1st May after all …

I wonder if a DA-notice has been issued – the way to know is probably to watch other corporate media to see if there is a widespread censorship of the Israel Gaza genocide.

Experiencing issues with this image not appearing. I suspect because it's so critical of Zionist Keir Starmer's support of and complicity in Israel's genocides.
Genocide denier and Current UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is quoted that he supports Zionism without qualification. He also confirms that UK air force support has been essential in Israel’s mass-murdering genocide. Includes URLs https://www.declassifieduk.org/keir-starmers-100-spy-flights-over-gaza-in-support-of-israel/ and https://youtu.be/O74hZCKKdpA
UK Foreign Minister David Lammy confirms that UK government and military are active participants in Israel’s genocides and that the F-35 parts that they suspended from supplying to Israel are instead simply diverted via the United States. He says see https://youtu.be/QILgUHrdWRE
UK Foreign Minister David Lammy confirms that UK government and military are active participants in Israel’s genocides and that the F-35 parts that they suspended from supplying to Israel are instead simply diverted via the United States. He says see https://youtu.be/QILgUHrdWRE

Hehe, I remember when the BBC was banned by the Labour government of the day from using the word “deep”. That was fun.

Continue ReadingThoughts of the day 16 April 2025

Media Scorn Gaza Protesters for Recognizing Corporate Reporters Aren’t Their Friends

Spread the love

Original article by ARI PAUL republished from FAIR under a Creative Commons licence.

An emerging complaint the corporate media have against the nationwide—and now international—peace encampments is that many student protesters won’t speak to them. The problem, pundits and reporters say, is that these encampments have designated media spokespeople, and other protesters often keep their mouths shut to the press.

Peggy Noonan (Wall Street Journal, 5/2/24), based, apparently, on talking to no protesters, concluded that “they weren’t a compassionate group. They weren’t for anything, they were against something: the Israeli state, which they’d like to see disappear, and those who support it.”

Conservative pundit Peggy Noonan (Wall Street Journal, 5/2/24) said of her trip to the Columbia University encampment:

I was at Columbia hours before the police came in and liberated Hamilton Hall from its occupiers. Unlike protesters of the past, who were usually eager to share with others what they thought and why, these demonstrators would generally not speak or make eye contact with members of the press, or, as they say, “corporate media.”

I was on a bench taking notes as a group of young women, all in sunglasses, masks and kaffiyehs, walked by. “Friends, please come say hello and tell me what you think,” I called. They marched past, not making eye contact, save one, a beautiful girl of about 20. “I’m not trained,” she said. Which is what they’re instructed to say to corporate-media representatives who will twist your words. “I’m barely trained, you’re safe,” I called, and she laughed and half-halted. But her friends gave her a look and she conformed.

Peter Baker (Twitter, 5/4/24), the chief White House correspondent for the New York Times, supportively amplified the former Ronald Reagan speechwriter’s claim, saying the protests are “not about actually explaining your cause or trying to engage journalists who are there to listen.”

A reporter for KTLA (4/29/24) complained that his news team was not granted access to the encampment at UCLA, and Fox News (4/30/24) had a similar complaint about the New York University protest:

Fox News Digital was told that the outlet was not allowed inside, and only student press could access the gated lawn. A local ABC team and several independent reporters were also denied. However, Fox News Digital witnessed a documentary crew and a reporter from Al Jazeera reporting inside the area.

One has to wonder: What could make activists suspect that the network that produced “Anti-Israel Agitators: Signs of ‘Foreign Assistance’ Emerge in Columbia, NYU Unrest” (4/26/24), “Pressure Builds for Colleges to Close or Shut Down Anti-Israel Encampments Amid Death Threats Toward Jews” (4/26/24) and “Ivy League Anti-Israel Agitators’ Protests Spiral Into ‘Actual Terror Organization,’ Professor Warns” (4/21/24) wouldn’t give them a fair shake?

Organized structure

A New York Times news report (5/2/24) ties protests to the US’s official enemies, despite “little evidence—at least so far—that the countries have provided material or organizational support to the protests.”

What is clear is that the student protesters across the country have organized a structure where many participants who are approached by media defer to appointed media liaisons (Daily Bruin, 4/27/24; KSBW, 5/3/24; Daily Freeman, 5/4/24; WCOS, 5/4/24).

For Baker and Noonan, this is evidence that the protests are at best not serious, and at worst not democratic. Indeed, corporate media, at every turn, have attempted to sully calls to halt a genocide as some kind of perverted anti-democratic extremism (Atlantic, 4/22/24; New York Times, 4/23/24, 5/2/24; Washington Post, 5/6/24, 5/6/24; Free Press, 5/6/24).

But why would such a communications structure even be considered unusual? Most organizations that corporate journalists cover have dedicated spokespeople to handle media inquiries, while others stay silent. Noonan’s experience is no different than how many street reporters interact with the cops; ask a cop for a comment and you’ll get sent over to the public information officer. You’ll rarely if ever see a news story that complains or even notes that a government or corporate employee directed a reporter to talk to the press office.

It’s true that in the worlds of business and bureaucracy, restrictions on employee speech can hamper investigative reporting  (FAIR.org, 2/23/24). But the media discipline at these encampments seems more like a way to keep the message clear. Vox-pop free-for-alls at these encampments could make it harder for news consumers to figure out what the protests are about; the demands and the aims of the movement might be muddled if every participant sounded off into the nearest reporter’s microphone.

With the current media strategy, Baker and Noonan really don’t have to wonder what the messages are: The encampments want their campuses to divest from Israel, and now students are protesting their administrations and the police violence against free speech and assembly. They are not entitled to the time of every individual protester.

It’s also all too easy for corporate reporters or right-wing commentators to find one loose cannon at a protest who can be prompted to go off-message during an interview, giving media outlets the ability to paint protesters generally as unhinged and ignorant. The fact that the Gaza encampment protesters have such a structure in place is a sign of political maturity, because they have found a way to keep the message simple and unified.

“The college kids are showing a precocious message discipline to reporters hostile to the substance of their protest,” Chase Madar, a New York University adjunct instructor, told FAIR.

Insinuating illiberalism

Baker and Noonan don’t express alarm that student reporters covering the protests have been subjected to extreme violence by the police (CNN, 5/2/24, 5/2/24), a very real form of state censorship. Nevertheless, Noonan and Baker insinuate that an aversion to speak to the corporate press signifies the movement’s illiberalism.

Perhaps establishment media are a little bitter that student reporters at places like Columbia University’s WKCR are doing a better job of covering the unrest than some salaried professionals in the media class (AP, 5/3/24; Washington Post, 5/4/24; Axios, 5/4/24).

If anything, what Baker and Noonan are lamenting is that the discipline of the students is making it harder for corporate media to misrepresent, ridicule and embarrass students who are protesting the US-backed genocide of Palestinians in Gaza. They’re telling on themselves.

Featured image: Fox News depiction (4/30/24) of the Columbia University encampment it complained it had been shut out of.

Original article by ARI PAUL republished from FAIR under a Creative Commons licence.

Continue ReadingMedia Scorn Gaza Protesters for Recognizing Corporate Reporters Aren’t Their Friends

As World Saw Hottest Year on Record, Corporate News Cut Coverage

Spread the love

Original article by JESSICA CORBETT republished from Common Dreams under under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

A journalist reports from the Santa Ana wind-driven Bond Fire burning near a hillside residence along Santiago Canyon Road in Silverado, California on December 3, 2020. (Photo: Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

“We need more climate journalism, not less,” said one Media Matters for America writer.

Last year featured not only what scientists worldwide confirmed was the hottest year in human history but also a 25% drop in corporate broadcast networks’ coverage of the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency, according to an analysis released Thursday.

Media Matters for America, which has long tracked television networks’ climate coverage, reviewed transcripts and video databases for ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox Broadcasting Co. The watchdog found that in 2023, despite the worsening global crisis, the networks collectively had just 1,032 minutes of coverage, down from 1,374 minutes in 2022 and 1,316 minutes in 2021.

That amounts to less than 1% of all corporate broadcast coverage aired last year, notes the analysis authored by Media Matters senior writer Evlondo Cooper with contributions from Allison Fisher, director of the group’s climate and energy program.

“Last year’s extreme climate events further illustrated the need for consistent, substantive, and wide-ranging news coverage about all facets of climate change.”

They wrote that “discussion of extreme weather events aired during 37% of coverage, or 160 out of 435 segments. June through September saw the most severe extreme weather events and accounted for just over 54% of total coverage.”

“Only 12% of climate segments on corporate broadcast news, or 52 out of 435, mentioned ‘fossil fuels,'” the pair pointed out. “This is a slight increase from 2022, when ‘fossil fuels’ were mentioned in only 8% of climate segments.”

“Solutions or actions that may be taken in response to climate change were mentioned in 22% of climate segments,” they highlighted. That ended an upward trend: 29% in 2020, 31% in 2021, and 35% in 2022.

Cooper and Fisher also noted that climate scientists made up 10% of featured guests, compared with just 4% in 2022; “white men dominated the demographics of guests featured in climate segments” for the seventh year straight; and discussions of climate justice appeared in only 5% of coverage, up from 3% the previous year.

Looking at only the “Big Three” of the television world—ABC, CBS, and NBC—they found that climate coverage dropped 23% for morning news programs and 36% for nightly shows. CBS aired 42% of all climate coverage while ABC had the least of the trio and NBC had the biggest decrease from 2022.

For the review of Sunday morning political shows, the researchers included Fox. They found that in 102 combined minutes of airtime across 26 segments, CBS again led the pack—it was the only network that increased coverage, from 20 minutes in 2022 to 66 minutes, or over half the total, in 2023.

The analysis recognizes a “significant decline” in coverage of the Biden administration’s efforts to combat the climate emergency, explaining:

This reduction in corporate broadcast news attention occurred during a critical period for climate policy implementation, particularly of the Inflation Reduction Act, which continued to drive positive outcomes in the clean energy market, and new regulations announced during COP28 to curb methane emissions. Despite these significant actions, corporate broadcast networks’ focus on the administration’s climate initiatives was limited.

COP28, the United Nations’ annual climate summit near the end of the year, also received “very limited” coverage from the networks, the report says. The conference—which scientists called “a tragedy for the planet” because its final agreement didn’t demand a global fossil fuel phaseout—was mentioned in just 14 segments, accounting for 3% of climate coverage.

As Common Dreams has reported, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration found that in addition to being the hottest year on record, 2023 also had 28 U.S. disasters that caused at least $1 billion in damage, which collectively cost at least $92.9 billion.

“Last year’s extreme climate events further illustrated the need for consistent, substantive, and wide-ranging news coverage about all facets of climate change,” Cooper and Fisher wrote. “Effective reporting should incorporate a wide range of voices during coverage of extreme weather events, major climate studies, and policy decisions; when applicable, coverage should expose systemic issues that contribute to disproportionate climate impacts; and climate coverage must consistently report not only the impacts of climate change but the drivers of global warming and the solutions that move us away from fossil fuel dependence.”

In a social media post promoting the new analysis, Cooper concluded that “we need more climate journalism, not less.”

Original article by JESSICA CORBETT republished from Common Dreams under under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Continue ReadingAs World Saw Hottest Year on Record, Corporate News Cut Coverage

Media Malpractice: Blacking Out Genocide and Disenfranchising Palestinian Pain

Spread the love

Original article by ZACK KALDVEER and FATINAH JUDEH republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Pro-Palestinians in New York City join “Shut down colonial feminism” rally in front of Senator Kristen Gillibrand’s office, U.N. Women office and New York Times building on Friday, January 12, 2024. (Photo: Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Now more than ever, Americans deserve objective, diverse, trustworthy, and contextualized coverage of Gaza.

America’s corporate media serves as a key cog in the machinery of genocide.

Rather than providing the kind of objective, fact-based reporting integral to an informed citizenry, our mainstream press bombards us with explicit and implicit biases, false narratives, dehumanization, and misdirection, serving to stifle public dissent and justify, rationalize, and conceal the systematic oppression and extermination of the people of Gaza.

As dependable propaganda tools for Israel’s aggression, our news censors truth not only by what they choose to cover and how they spin it—but what they deliberately omit. This orchestrated disinformation campaign helps ensure the ongoing and unconditional support of the U.S. government and its continued role as Israel’s dutiful genocidal benefactor.

This isn’t war. It’s mass murder. But this isn’t what most Americans are watching, reading, and hearing on the news.

How does a Palestinian-American with family in the region reconcile the disconnect between “reality” and the “story” our press is “telling”?

Consider a day in the life in Gaza: Palestinian schools, hospitals, universities, places of worship, and heritage sites are being systematically destroyed. Civilians, nearly half children, are being murdered on a mass scale (over 30,000 dead, nearly half children). The calculated deprivation of food and water is literally starving families to death. Babies are being born into a living hell, with screams of terror, the ear-piercing explosions of limb-searing U.S.-made bombs, and the painful moans of their parents among the first sounds they hear. The electricity powering the oxygen machines keeping sick patients alive cut off, leaving them to struggle to gulp each of their final breaths. Amputations of children’s limbs without anesthesia with barbed wire have become obscenely routine. Broken, but alive, Palestinian bodies riddled with shrapnel require each piece to be pulled from their flesh. Hungry children are found dead with single Israeli sniper shots to the head because they made the mistake of seeking out food from an aid truck. The deliberate decimation of Gaza’s telecommunications infrastructure has left families unable to communicate with one another, or with the world, allowing daily atrocities to become increasingly invisible and unreported.

For those fighting for survival in Gaza, there is nowhere left to run, nowhere to turn, and no one to turn to. This isn’t war. It’s mass murder. But this isn’t what most Americans are watching, reading, and hearing on the news.

American Media’s Israel Bias and Censoring Journalists

Quantitative analyses conducted by The Intercept, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, and an independent collective of U.S. journalists, writers, and media makers of coverage in The York Times, Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times lay bare our news media’s dramatic pro-Israel bias. The litany of press failings are disturbing in their sheer scope and intention. Findings included the systematic undermining of Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim perspectives and the invocation of inflammatory language that reinforces Islamophobic and racist tropes. Misinformation spread by Israeli officials is commonly printed along with consistent failures to scrutinize Israel’s indiscriminate killing of civilians in Gaza. Israeli deaths are disproportionately emphasized, and more humanizing language is used to describe them than Palestinians. This is to name just a few.

Case-in-point: In what’s now being called the Flour Massacre, at least 112 Palestinians in Gaza were killed and hundreds more injured after Israeli forces opened fire on civilians while waiting for food from desperately needed aid trucks. Leading news media descriptions referred to the slaughter as “food aid deaths,” “food aid-related deaths,” “chaotic incident,” and “reported killed in crowd near Gaza aid convoy.”

Do these headlines properly convey the massacre of starving civilians?

The New York Times: “As Hungry Gazans Crowd a Convoy, a Crush of Bodies, Israeli Gunshots and a Deadly Toll”

The Washington Post: “Chaotic Aid Delivery Turns Deadly as Israeli, Gazan Officials Trade Blame”

The Guardian: “Biden Says Gaza Food Aid-Related Deaths Complicate Cease-Fire Talks”

BBC: “More Than 100 Killed as Crowd Waits for Aid, Hamas-Run Health Ministry Says”

Sadly, censored journalists who speak out are paying the price. The Los Angeles Times recently banned 38 journalists from covering Gaza for at least three months after they signed an open letter criticizing Western newsrooms for their biased reporting on Israel and their role in dehumanizing rhetoric that has served to justify ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

But it’s not just print that is to blame. The Guardian reported the accounts of six CNN staffers from multiple newsrooms, including more than a dozen internal memos and emails, finding that daily news decisions are shaped by a flow of directives from the CNN headquarters in Atlanta that have set strict pro-Israel guidelines on coverage. Every story on the conflict must be cleared by the Jerusalem bureau—which has close ties with Israel’s military—before broadcast or publication.

In light of these exposes, it’s no wonder then, that after four months of some of the most indiscriminate and brutal attacks on civilians in human history, a global public outcry, and overwhelming support for a cease-fire in the United Nations, the U.S. continues to fund the slaughter and block international efforts to end it.

Holding Media Accountable, Supporting Journalists, and Promoting Independent News

There is no shortage of ways people can help bring this nightmare to an end. Among them should include pressure campaigns on the corporate media to commit to journalistic integrity and truth. Outlets like CNN and The New York Times have a unique opportunity to educate millions by providing rigorous, evidence-based reporting that could serve to end the ongoing genocide—rather than enable it.

Petitions to hold CNN and The New York Times accountable deserve support. But petitions aren’t enough.  (including protests, boycotts, and sit-ins) and strategies that target these institutions’ advertisers, revenues, and reputational interests are also required.

Israel’s ongoing genocidal annihilation of Palestinians in Gaza will be reviled by history—rendering the once solemn rallying cry “Never again!” cruelly hollow.

Over 122 journalists, more than any war in history, have been killed in Gaza. Journalists seeking to put their own lives at risk to report the truth must be protected. And journalists who have stories to tell about the censorship they have endured must be encouraged to tell them, anonymously if necessary.

Finally, independent, non-corporate news serves as dependable sources of fact-based information and a powerful check on the official narratives of their corporate counterparts. Now more than ever, Americans deserve objective, diverse, trustworthy, and contextualized coverage of Gaza. Thankfully, these alternatives exist, and need our support, from Pacifica radio to a long list of independent news sites.

Israel’s ongoing genocidal annihilation of Palestinians in Gaza will be reviled by history—rendering the once solemn rallying cry “Never again!” cruelly hollow. “Never again” is not meant to be a phrase of remembrance, but a call to action. Let’s not let the corporate media forget it.

Original article by ZACK KALDVEER and FATINAH JUDEH republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Continue ReadingMedia Malpractice: Blacking Out Genocide and Disenfranchising Palestinian Pain