So on the lower right hand side of the home page on our website, there's a button for GARBAGE.
We actually have a formula for what we put there.
Most of the time, it's left-wing, political hack material. We try not to pick obscure fare for our Garbage Aggregation Button, usually it's a corporate media article from someone like:
Dean Obeidallah at CNN
Rex Huppke at USA Today
Kevin Fallon at The Daily Beast
Tessa Stuart at Rolling Stone
The term GARBAGE is purposely vague. Do I mean the article is garbage? The writer is garbage? The website is garbage? Sometime I mean all three. And sometimes I mean none of the above, I will post links to waste management solutions.
The point is, I haven't posted anything from NBC News there in a long lime. Not that NBC News doesn't print garbage anymore, it's just a little more subtle.
I used to go to the OPINION section called THINK and usually a terrible article just gravitated to the top. But earlier this year, NBC discontinued their opinion page and added new categories like NBC OUT, ASIAN AMERICA, LATINO, and NBCBLK.
Now, in theory, adding diversity to a website is good right? But instead of Opinion pieces, which is a centuries long news tradition, NBC decided to segregate the news. The tip off was in the Latino section. Their top story in Latino was some drivel about Jennifer Lopez. Did NBC hire Latino reporters and send them into Latino neighborhoods? No. They took already existing news and divided it up by race. Did they make a commitment to covering the Latino community better? Again, no.
And, to top it off, NBC didn't really stop giving their Opinions, they just out-sourced their Opinion material to MSNBC. (Which I rarely read.)
What did I read, just today, that I would consider garbage?
The Daily Beast's article: Why is the Mainstream Media Ignoring Trump's Cognitive Decline?
It is garbage on a number of levels:
There is no author: The Daily Beast story was written by The Daily Beast. Beware of articles without authors, it either means the author didn't want to put their name on it or it is AI.
The reason Trump's cognitive decline isn't at the front and center of the debate is because common sense dictates that Biden's cognitive decline would have to be mentioned also. As a libertarian-leaning website, we wish NEITHER major candidates were on the ballot.
The Daily Beast article is labeled Opinion, but in reality, nearly everything at the Daily Beast is really just Opinion. Just because something isn't labeled Opinion, doesn't mean it's not Opinion.
And isn't most news Opinion anyhow?
If you think Trump's Mental Decline is news, that's your prerogative to report on it.
If you think Biden's Mental Decline is news, that's your prerogative to report on it.
And, inversely, if you don't report on it, it's your Opinion that it's not news, right?
Now let's take an absurd example. Frequent Presidential Candidate Vermin Supreme appears to have diminished mental capacity, but there is no such proof. As a matter fact, he's nearly 20 years younger than Biden or Trump, statistics say that the probability is that he has a GREATER mental capacity than either man to run for office.
Your opinion is that he can't win the Presidency, so no one covers him. My opinion is that Supreme has a f@*&ing boot on his head,
But here I am talking about it.
You would think that mental capacity would be an important part of being a president. But there are reports leaking out that the presidential debates might not happen. If NBC posts a bunch of negative articles about Donald Trump, but only positive articles about Joe Biden in regards to the upcoming debates, wouldn't that be an indication as to how they feel about the presidential race? Their opinion?