Welcome To Zelo Street!

This is a blog of liberal stance and independent mind

Thursday, 12 January 2017

Sun BuzzFeed Hypocrisy

[Update at end of post]

If you’ve seen just one news bulletin in the past 24 hours, you’ll know that a number of highly damaging allegations are flying around the web concerning Combover Crybaby Donald Trump and his visits to Moscow. The suggestion is that the President-Elect of the USA is vulnerable to blackmail, not an attribute that will engender confidence in the average citizen - or, indeed, the country’s security forces and agencies.
Thus far, the claims, which have been aired by BuzzFeed, come from a single source in the British intelligence community, who it seems has now gone into hiding. Trump is incandescent with rage - at the media, at the CIA, at his political opponents (many of whom are in his own party), and anyone else he can think of. Also not best pleased, but seeing an opportunity to play this story for their own advantage, are the Murdoch press.
So today has brought a Sun Says rant to satisfy the most discerning rant connoisseur, with the screaming headlineBuzzfeed made a mockery of journalism with false Trump allegations … Online journalists run wild while British newspapers are under pressure to be regulated”. We don’t know whether it’s false or not. But the Sun is under orders to back Rupe’s new pal. Anyhow, do go on “THE Buzzfeed site styles itself the ‘most trusted’ name in news. That’s a laugh”. Yes, the Sun calling “untrustworthy” on others.
What’s BuzzFeed done wrong, then? “It came across highly damaging and sexually explicit allegations about ­Donald Trump, could not confirm them and had ‘serious reason to doubt’ them . . . but published them in full anyway … [their editor in chief has] certainly made Buzzfeed hacks’ jobs easier. They needn’t verify a single fact again”.
Stories that can’t be stood up, right? And this is the Sun calling such practices A Bad Thing? Well, let’s look at just why the Murdoch goons are in a very draughty glasshouse right now. Remember “‘MUSLIM CONVERT’ BEHEADS WOMAN IN GARDEN”? He wasn’t. Or “1M Migrants Heading Our Way”? They weren’t. Or “1 in 5 Brit Muslims sympathy for Jihadis”? That was another single sourced pack of lies.
It gets worse. “COURT JEZTER”, claiming that Jeremy Corbyn would lose Labour its “Short Money” if he didn’t bend the knee to the Queen was another unverified pack of lies. “QUEEN BACKS BREXIT” was gossip - untrue gossip, as was “GIVE ME 3 GOOD REASONS TO STAY IN EUROPE”, also attributed to the Queen, and also untrue.
We’ve had “LONE WOLF PLOT TO BLITZ UK” (also single sourced and unverified speculation), “XMAS TERROR PLOT BUSTED” (there wasn’t one), “BRIT I. S. CELL LINKED TO TRUCK HORROR” (only linked by the Sun - more newsroom fantasy) and “DOGGY PADDLER”, claiming a BBC pundit had done something wrong, except what it was they could only speculate, as they had no evidence to pony up.

They needn’t verify a single fact again”? Welcome to the world of the Super Soaraway Currant Bun, BuzzFeed people! Murdoch goons busted once again.

[UPDATE 1830 hours: the Sun is actually wrong even in its claim "Online journalists run wild while British newspapers are under pressure to be regulated". BuzzFeed would be subject to Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act as it is a "relevant publisher", based on turnover. The fact that it is an online news source does not enter.

The Murdoch goons could have verified this by inspecting the legislation - that's Schedule 15, Paragraph 8 (full text HERE). Not going too well today, is it, Sun thickos?]

6 comments:

Andrew Birss said...

That of course does not even bring into account the lies concerning the Hillsborough Disaster when there were 40,000 witnesses but Kelvin MacKenzie decided to trust the 'evidence' of somebody who was not even there. Surely the very essence of fake news?

R Murdoch said...

Always making me out to be a troublemaker. What next, attack my tweets?
Sure, if you see any tweets of mine that appear of concern then please do grab a shot and send it to the authorities who will then ask me to explain.

Andy McDonald said...

They might contemplate that if Trump had treated these allegations as a joke or had made no comment (see Cameron and Piggate) they would have disappeared. Screaming "Fake news!" and trying to block out CNN only makes people think along the lines of protest and too much of it.

Alan Clifford said...

Well, let's NOT bother with looking over there at the Scum.

After all, anyone who doesn't know that rag is owned, edited and written by a gang of cowardly gobshites is either of like mind as they or is a fool.

Instead, let's look at the MI6 agent who produced and distributed the smear. And why he did it, and on whose orders. And on whether he STILL works for MI6 in a "plausibly denial" role. And whether MI6 (and MI5 for that matter) creates such "private security companies" to contract out of responsibility by creating cut outs. You know, coincidentally the same thing done by US "intelligence" services.

But who amongst our "free press" (see Katharine Viner) and "free broadcast news" is going to raise their heads above the parapet for any appreciable time?

My reasonable guess is: none. They'll all be too busy cowering in the bottom of the foxhole or behind their mortgage payments.

Meanwhile the spooks will continue to be their Nastzi selves.

So what's noo, Vauxhall Cross?......Hey, let's do lernch at the Mayflower next time you're in Washington, huh?

Anonymous said...

Murdoch's targets repeatedly consist of Mi5,Royals,MP's.

A nice picture he's building there. Or rather his minions are and hanging him in the process.


Imagine if they all got together and decided his fate.

Ohhhhh yeeeeessss!

Anonymous said...

Good to see that the Sun and the Guardian (of bricks through window fame) are singing from the same hymn sheet, as, indeed, they did over article 40.