Google's business model is to place adds wherever the clicks are coming from.
28
When I purchased my computer, I was not told that it was a free billboard for any company (Breitbart related or not) that wanted to advertise on my personal property. Make them pay to advertise on my property (as they would if they wanted to erect a billboard on my land), and much of this threat will disappear.
72
Great idea. One that should be applied equally to MSM outlets like the New York Times which promote globalist domination, one world theories that cause irreparable harm to those who aren't in the majority. And why, because they believe it is a good business model.
Choose your fascism, ladies and gentlemen. Either way its still fascism.
Choose your fascism, ladies and gentlemen. Either way its still fascism.
83
So let understand the approach here. You honestly think that this approach of suppression of speech is OK? I find this tactic abhorrent and another example of a sudden desire to suppress any opinion that is not endorsed by the PC police in this country. Perhaps its my libertarian spin but perhaps you might start to rethink this desire to shut down the opposition. To have the right to take your money where you want but you are fighting a loosing battle over Social Media. You shut down one venue, it will simply find another.
101
Google Ad Sense is the enabler here. Without Google's ad serving platform, Breitbart will have a much more difficult time generating income in this manner. It is Google, who has pledged to "not be evil", who needs a spanking. I hope Sleeping Giants turn to focus on the real giants behind this mess. Follow the money!
125
I'm glad to see this. I've been told I'm naive to expect companies to remove ads from fake-news sites because "Google and the ad sites just do that, we con't control where the ads show up." Clearly they can.
145
More NY Times fake news propaganda. Try reading some Breitbart articles before making stupid, unfounded accusations.
102
BTW, Breitbart has provided this rebuttal to this article-
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/08/new-york-times-aims-b...
It contains this argument- "These would-be censors of the totalitarian left have decided that since they cannot defeat conservative views and arguments on the merits, they would prefer to eliminate them."
Does the NYT have a response to this? I don't see Breitbart urging a boycott of NYT. Why doesn't NYT refute arguments made by the alt right instead of dismissing them as viewpoints that potentially incite antipathy towards minority groups. Supposedly Breitbart represents a grave danger to women and minorities. Yet this article written in response to the NYT's call for a boycott was written by an orthodox Jew. The senior editor of Breitbart UK, Raheem Kassem, is a south Asian ex Muslim. Numerous jewish authors contribute to Breitbart (who was also Jewish) and their most famous provocateur is a gay man with a Jewish mother.
It seems that minorities aren't supposed to express opinions that deviate from the established liberal narrative. Said minorities are like decorations who are valued only for there ability to further the liberal establishment's agenda. Once minorities write for Breitbart, everyone must pretend their opinions belong to white nationalists or that they are fake news.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/08/new-york-times-aims-b...
It contains this argument- "These would-be censors of the totalitarian left have decided that since they cannot defeat conservative views and arguments on the merits, they would prefer to eliminate them."
Does the NYT have a response to this? I don't see Breitbart urging a boycott of NYT. Why doesn't NYT refute arguments made by the alt right instead of dismissing them as viewpoints that potentially incite antipathy towards minority groups. Supposedly Breitbart represents a grave danger to women and minorities. Yet this article written in response to the NYT's call for a boycott was written by an orthodox Jew. The senior editor of Breitbart UK, Raheem Kassem, is a south Asian ex Muslim. Numerous jewish authors contribute to Breitbart (who was also Jewish) and their most famous provocateur is a gay man with a Jewish mother.
It seems that minorities aren't supposed to express opinions that deviate from the established liberal narrative. Said minorities are like decorations who are valued only for there ability to further the liberal establishment's agenda. Once minorities write for Breitbart, everyone must pretend their opinions belong to white nationalists or that they are fake news.
169
The advertising world is vast. Although the big brands, for PR reasons, may redirect their ad dollars, there are many advertisers who covet the angry and the thoughtless. Listen to Hot Talk radio sometime. Surrounding the hateful rhetoric of Limbaugh/Savage/Hannity, you'll find ads for miracle cures, tax relief programs, get rich quick schemes, gold, etc. The fundamental problem is that there are many companies who want to reach the easy marks who read stuff like Brietbart News. I'm sure the Sleeping Giants will sleep better at night, but this problem isn't going away.
85
How is Breitbart so feared and loathed but the Enquirer and Star whatevers are just ignored?
Consumers are voters. They vote daily with their wallets, without paying attention to ethical values. Do they have ethical values? Most claim they do, but display no true signs that it true.
It is the consumer voters who need a stern talking to.
Consumers are voters. They vote daily with their wallets, without paying attention to ethical values. Do they have ethical values? Most claim they do, but display no true signs that it true.
It is the consumer voters who need a stern talking to.
16
So you don't like Breitbart and you want to silence them by destroying their Business Model. How is this different than a totalitarian regime silencing by all means its opposition?
82
Looks like the Sleeping Giants team on Twitter is already doing some good work, but what they're doing would be MUCH more powerful if it was automated. Here's something potentially enormously useful that a smart crew of hackers could do in a weekend:
1) Automate screenshot taking from Breitbart and other sites promoting hate and/or fake news (you can collaborate w/ Sleeping Giants to find all sites).
2) Use OCR or other algorithms to identify advertising companies.
3) Automatically tweet screenshots at advertisers and share brand advertising behavior on other social media.
4) Create a site that publicly lists and shames brands advertising on hate and fake news sites.
5) Publicly list and congratulate companies that pledge not to advertise with these sites (though keep monitoring all brands to keep them honest).
6) Build APIs to make it easy for company advertising behavior data to be incorporated into external ratings and services that influence investor and consumer decision-making (like Oroeco or Etho Capital).
Know some savvy hacktivists who'd want to take on this mission?
1) Automate screenshot taking from Breitbart and other sites promoting hate and/or fake news (you can collaborate w/ Sleeping Giants to find all sites).
2) Use OCR or other algorithms to identify advertising companies.
3) Automatically tweet screenshots at advertisers and share brand advertising behavior on other social media.
4) Create a site that publicly lists and shames brands advertising on hate and fake news sites.
5) Publicly list and congratulate companies that pledge not to advertise with these sites (though keep monitoring all brands to keep them honest).
6) Build APIs to make it easy for company advertising behavior data to be incorporated into external ratings and services that influence investor and consumer decision-making (like Oroeco or Etho Capital).
Know some savvy hacktivists who'd want to take on this mission?
79
This article ignores the fact that Google's Adsense is the primary money maker, not Breitbart or the other propaganda sites. We can send letters to Nissan, (who ignores them) or Kellogg, (who responded) all day, with little effect, thee will always be someone who wants to advertise, Rush Limbaugh is still on the air. Stop Google from working with these types of businesses, and you can have a real effect. Unfortunately Google, for all the hype behind their philosophy refuses to acknowledge any responsibility.
67
Just went over to Breitbart.com to check out the ads they run, and the top news story today is "Fake News Plus Fascism: New York Times Urges Boycott of Breitbart" (http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/08/new-york-times-aims-b...
You know they're hurting when they get defensive.
Go NYT!
You know they're hurting when they get defensive.
Go NYT!
306
I agree with some of what you say, but you might do well to keep in mind that one verse from Buffalo Springfield's "For What It's Worth":
What a field day for the heat.
A thousand people in the street
Singing songs and carrying signs.
Mostly say "Hooray for our side."
What a field day for the heat.
A thousand people in the street
Singing songs and carrying signs.
Mostly say "Hooray for our side."
17
Thanks for this information! Just flowed on twitter.
28
Please admit the real motivation behind this. Progressive media elites have lost control of their narrative. The power has shifted and they are desperate to stop it.
78
Interesting but more for the evolution of ad buys by robots. In the dark ages when I worked for a company with a very limited budget, such random placements were unheard of. You wanted to put your ads in magazines that reached your target market, so you got your press kit and had your pub reps make their case to persuade you the "reach" of your ad.
It still amazes me that any company would just throw money at online sites they know nothing about. Robots or no robots, don't they still have to justify their spend to upper management?
In any event, better late than ever. At least it returns some power to the powerless, those of us who would love to drive a junk, racist site like Breitbart out of business.
It still amazes me that any company would just throw money at online sites they know nothing about. Robots or no robots, don't they still have to justify their spend to upper management?
In any event, better late than ever. At least it returns some power to the powerless, those of us who would love to drive a junk, racist site like Breitbart out of business.
89
This effectively shows how consumers might influence the ad revenue stream on Breitbart. But there are actually two issues at play here.
Advertising on Breitbart might imply that these are the values that brands that appear there stand for.
But when Patagonia, Chase, Audi and the ads of other important brands appear there, it also unwittingly lends their credibility to Breitbart.
Advertising on Breitbart might imply that these are the values that brands that appear there stand for.
But when Patagonia, Chase, Audi and the ads of other important brands appear there, it also unwittingly lends their credibility to Breitbart.
44
Alarmed, I just visited Breitbart News. I read a headline: "Obamacare will survive Trump". Another criticizes Republicans who celebrate the Russian heck. How's this "neo Nazi", exactly?
40
The plural of anecdote is not data. Just because 2 of their headlines lack overt hate speech does not mean they all do. In particular, roll back to pre-election content. You may also have to visit a site cache, as Breitbart has walked back particularly inflammatory content after it's had its intended effect and is no longer on the front page, as it were.
These are truly despicable people.
These are truly despicable people.
75
Sleeping Giants is just another self-appointed anonymous gang of censors. The claim that they are not targeting Breitbart for being alt-right and conservative is bogus. Sure. They are targeting Beitbart because it is conservative and alt-right and Trumpian.
If these high-minded moralists were so concerned about corporate morality, they would also be targeting those "progressive" Silicone Valley companies who manufacture their high prices toys in Third World sweatshops and park their obscene profits in off-shore tax havens. But Apple, Et Al, are not alt-right and conservative. They contributed heavily to the Democrat and powered her campaign.
That's ult-left morality for you. It wears blue-lens virtual reality googles.
If these high-minded moralists were so concerned about corporate morality, they would also be targeting those "progressive" Silicone Valley companies who manufacture their high prices toys in Third World sweatshops and park their obscene profits in off-shore tax havens. But Apple, Et Al, are not alt-right and conservative. They contributed heavily to the Democrat and powered her campaign.
That's ult-left morality for you. It wears blue-lens virtual reality googles.
44
If Breitbart didn't engage in hate speech, Sleeping Giants wouldn't be able to convince companies to pull their ads.
Try again, but with a logical argument.
Try again, but with a logical argument.
77
You need to learn the meaning of censorship. This group isn't censoring, they are informing advertisers on Breitbart site about where there product is being advertised.
78
Stop changing the subject. Fake News needs to be irradicated. Talking about sweatshops in Asia is irrelevant to Fake News and is just another tactic used by Breitbart to change the subject. Are you just another Breitbart troll?
33
Trump apologists here are defending Breitbart as if it were a real news organization. It is not. Breitbart promotes hate and its currency is fake news.
Breitbart is leading the charge on destabilizing western societies - not just here in the U.S., but globally.
Their sole aim is to foment people into a rage using fake news. Here's one in support of the far right agenda to spread Islamophobia and the step by step debunking through verified details by an actual news organization: Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/allahu-akbar-chanting-mob-se...
Breitbart must be neutralized. These people are the face of pure evil.
Breitbart is leading the charge on destabilizing western societies - not just here in the U.S., but globally.
Their sole aim is to foment people into a rage using fake news. Here's one in support of the far right agenda to spread Islamophobia and the step by step debunking through verified details by an actual news organization: Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/allahu-akbar-chanting-mob-se...
Breitbart must be neutralized. These people are the face of pure evil.
174
Follow the money. Funding is key. Once we understand who funds directly or indirectly websites, research, churches and religious groups, and political campaigns, so much that previously was mysterious and opaque becomes clear.
Money brings power. Money buys sex and other commodities. It's all about the money.
For most adults, once they're set in their ways, the money comes first. And for the very rich? Yes, it's all about the money. It really is all they care about. So if we follow the money then we discover the truth.
Money brings power. Money buys sex and other commodities. It's all about the money.
For most adults, once they're set in their ways, the money comes first. And for the very rich? Yes, it's all about the money. It really is all they care about. So if we follow the money then we discover the truth.
27
From this interesting article: "the post-truth reality makes it difficult to measure the scope of the problem."
What kind of times are we living in where the bizarro phrase "post-truth reality" isn't understood by more to be a fundamental contradiction? And yet...strange days...we need to awaken more Sleeping Giants.
Facts must still matter: http://thewaryouknowcurat.wixsite.com/the-war-you-know-
What kind of times are we living in where the bizarro phrase "post-truth reality" isn't understood by more to be a fundamental contradiction? And yet...strange days...we need to awaken more Sleeping Giants.
Facts must still matter: http://thewaryouknowcurat.wixsite.com/the-war-you-know-
19
Speaking of fake news, you mean it's not just Russian hackers who brought about our not-so-honest presidential election? Some Americans, too, and -- I'm just shocked here -- for profit? (That's leaving out the DNC's and Clinton campaign's own stupidity, which Times reporters should write more about, not just Op-Ed contributors.) And remember those Times stories from a few years back about electronic voting without paper trails, often using hackable machines supplied by companies with strong Republican Party connections. Funny, but after a funny election we're not hearing much about those. Home-grown election hacking, anyone, by the party that invented breaking into the DNC in an effort to rig a previous election (1972)? How about recounts in ALL the states where results were close, and going forward, requiring a paper backup for all votes cast in America. I'm far from convinced we just had a legitimate election, and I don't think only foreigners were to blame.
50
I wrote 3 articles on examples of mostly mainstream companies taking pro-social and environmental actions over-and-above any obvious benefits to their bottom line. I hypothesized that we may be seeing the emergence of a conscience among some companies. The series did not get the buzz I expected, possibly because the proposition seemed so outlandish, given some companies continuing to do negative things, and that it fit no existing ideological position.
Here's the first of the three:
“When It Really Isn’t Business as Usual: Can There be Principle Without 'Principle?" http://www.sustainablebrands.com/news_and_views/stakeholder_trends_insig....
If we can overcome the mental barriers, we might see the potential here. Kennedy gives us two additional reasons, even if they're not pure "do it because it's the right thing to do": businesses are being forced to "take a side," and we don't have a lot of other options.
Consultants, writers, academics, screen writers, economic development agencies, moral philosophy professors open to a challenge: if we can get there, these companies are going to need help thinking through the ethical minefields ahead.
Someone is going to have to start this, and someone else take the catalytical second step.
Here's the first of the three:
“When It Really Isn’t Business as Usual: Can There be Principle Without 'Principle?" http://www.sustainablebrands.com/news_and_views/stakeholder_trends_insig....
If we can overcome the mental barriers, we might see the potential here. Kennedy gives us two additional reasons, even if they're not pure "do it because it's the right thing to do": businesses are being forced to "take a side," and we don't have a lot of other options.
Consultants, writers, academics, screen writers, economic development agencies, moral philosophy professors open to a challenge: if we can get there, these companies are going to need help thinking through the ethical minefields ahead.
Someone is going to have to start this, and someone else take the catalytical second step.
10
The only thing conservatives and corporations truly understand is their pocket book and what's in it. Keep them from making profits and you'll see how fast they change. Boycotts work.
32
Another hysterical screed about Breitbart?
Based on the article. You'd think it was describing Der Sturmer or some other Nazi rag.
Based on the article. You'd think it was describing Der Sturmer or some other Nazi rag.
32
More proof that the best disinfectant is sunlight. Boycotts are overused, and will continue to lose their luster. But more information and real knowledge can work.
25
I'd like to think so,but apparently information is not the answer for many. Money seems to have a louder voice.
9
I read this over breakfast and got a good laugh. Lets see the whole basis of right wing views is the free market rules. The market should allow bakers to discriminate and others to choose. The market should set the cost of your health and well being. If you do not like being harassed at a job you have agency.
Now here we have an example of the market in action. People going to sellers of goods and saying if you persist on advertising on that site I will not purchase your products. I becomes We. Funny when folks are hoist on their own petard suddenly the market and freedom are no longer good. Now it is suppression, censorship (no where near what the word means) etc.
Should it bother folks nothing stops them from making donations etc. Cause you know freedom..
Now here we have an example of the market in action. People going to sellers of goods and saying if you persist on advertising on that site I will not purchase your products. I becomes We. Funny when folks are hoist on their own petard suddenly the market and freedom are no longer good. Now it is suppression, censorship (no where near what the word means) etc.
Should it bother folks nothing stops them from making donations etc. Cause you know freedom..
56
I don't really understand why Breitbart has sent its army of trolls to protest this idea. For years, I've listened to the right wing talk about how they are the real America and the silent majority. Surely, if this were true, they could afford to lose the advertising dollars of the minority liberal elite that they detest so much? Wouldn't it be hypocritical to take their tainted money anyway? Or could it be that they know the vast majority of Americans don't actually subscribe to their loathsome agenda and are terrified that the gravy train could come to an abrupt halt?
71
They hate liberals because they bore us to death.
10
wait until all the consumers of fake news remain chronically unemployed, and can no longer afford internet access?
32
We're baffled to hear that Simon & Schuster has given white nationalist and Breitbart editor, Milo Yiannopoulos, a book deal and a $250k advance.
The Chicago Review of Books has already jumped into action with an announcement that they will not review ANY books from the publisher in 2017.
Want to make your displeasure known? Here are the email addresses:
The Chicago Review of Books has already jumped into action with an announcement that they will not review ANY books from the publisher in 2017.
Want to make your displeasure known? Here are the email addresses:
31
"Those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside."
No telling where the strategy of censorship through advertiser pressure might lead. Might even bite a struggling media corporation that recently took to renting rooms in the HQ to make ends meet.
No telling where the strategy of censorship through advertiser pressure might lead. Might even bite a struggling media corporation that recently took to renting rooms in the HQ to make ends meet.
16
The coastal elites think that they will choke off funding to sites they oppose.
Today it is Brietbart--five years from now it will be NRO or heck, maybe USA Today.com for continuing to use gender-specific pronouns, not demand everyone cough up another 15 percent in taxes for slavery reparations or some other nonsense.
Normal America, what is left of it, will fight back. It's not 2042 yet. Until it is, expect the other side to fight to get us back to 1972.
Today it is Brietbart--five years from now it will be NRO or heck, maybe USA Today.com for continuing to use gender-specific pronouns, not demand everyone cough up another 15 percent in taxes for slavery reparations or some other nonsense.
Normal America, what is left of it, will fight back. It's not 2042 yet. Until it is, expect the other side to fight to get us back to 1972.
30
This article points the way for activism that can be done from your own laptop!
This is something anyone with a computer can do....it is one step we can take to decrease the sense of helplessness that a lot of us have experienced!!
This is something anyone with a computer can do....it is one step we can take to decrease the sense of helplessness that a lot of us have experienced!!
17
The use of the word "destroy" is very telling--it's violent. The urge to "destroy" a media outlet whose point of view you disagree with is about as undemocratic as I can think. Simply not reading it, or writing rebuttals is not good enough.
This stems from the progressive conviction that the people who voted in Trump are either racists or morons. They really argue this, without any awareness that it is precisely this obtuse classist contempt that lost the election for them. So they have to 'destroy' Breitbart et al because the peasants are just too dumb to differentiate fake from real & are easily propagandized--unlike the intelligent left wing which cannot possibly be suspectible to Fake News because they are just so intelligent.
Somehow this intelligence fails to see that Fake News only became a concern once Clinton lost & establishment Dems, after their tempter tantrums & denials, rather than look at themselves, turned to the Russkies & the nefarious Fake News, which is utterly undefined & without any data to back it up--exactly what percentage exactly of its news is fake - false - versus other outlets?
In hilarious irony, establishment Dems now largely use "fake" to mean "opinions I disagree with." They cannot differentiate 'fact' from 'opinion.' For them there is only one orthodox opinion, & it is their own, & that is Truth. To disagree is to disagree with 'fact.'
Hence the need to "destroy." They cannot argue, so they seek to "destroy." Sad & pathetic.
This stems from the progressive conviction that the people who voted in Trump are either racists or morons. They really argue this, without any awareness that it is precisely this obtuse classist contempt that lost the election for them. So they have to 'destroy' Breitbart et al because the peasants are just too dumb to differentiate fake from real & are easily propagandized--unlike the intelligent left wing which cannot possibly be suspectible to Fake News because they are just so intelligent.
Somehow this intelligence fails to see that Fake News only became a concern once Clinton lost & establishment Dems, after their tempter tantrums & denials, rather than look at themselves, turned to the Russkies & the nefarious Fake News, which is utterly undefined & without any data to back it up--exactly what percentage exactly of its news is fake - false - versus other outlets?
In hilarious irony, establishment Dems now largely use "fake" to mean "opinions I disagree with." They cannot differentiate 'fact' from 'opinion.' For them there is only one orthodox opinion, & it is their own, & that is Truth. To disagree is to disagree with 'fact.'
Hence the need to "destroy." They cannot argue, so they seek to "destroy." Sad & pathetic.
42
Wow. I'm beginning to think this is Civil War 2.0. Where's Ken Burns?
8
Agreed. Now that america has had enough of these liberals and their lies , NOW they feel the need to "Destroy" and opposing viewpoints ! Sorry but you cannot destroy opposing viewpoints liberals ..... and when you try it only makes us stronger , when will you realize this ?
26
I'm a diehard liberal who mainly watches MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, Lawerence O'Donnell, Chris Hayes, Chris Matthews and CNN too. I do not understand why Maddow, Matthews, and CNN allows Kellyanne Conway air time to spew her convoluted explanations and distorted logic as she spins Trumps outrageous comments and tweets. All she is doing is re-framing Trump's lies. Trump is a con man; Conway is his side-kick-----Bonnie and Clyde.
Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow, as much as I like their programs seem to fawn all over Kellyanne Conway as if they won a prize just because she has agreed to an interview. I've reached the point whenever Conway is on I switch the channel. Probably the only anchor who could properly handle Conway and put her in her place would be Lawence O'Donnell, a show that Conway never seems to be on.
I don't know why more anchors don't just confront Conway and tell her to her face that she is justifying a liar, which makes her a liar.
Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow, as much as I like their programs seem to fawn all over Kellyanne Conway as if they won a prize just because she has agreed to an interview. I've reached the point whenever Conway is on I switch the channel. Probably the only anchor who could properly handle Conway and put her in her place would be Lawence O'Donnell, a show that Conway never seems to be on.
I don't know why more anchors don't just confront Conway and tell her to her face that she is justifying a liar, which makes her a liar.
42
Lawrence O'Donnell is fantastic!! He's the one person who I watch even if I don't watch anyone else.
I like Matthews and Maddow. But, they feel the pressure to chase ratings. Maddow used to be the one I followed religiously, till she did a program in November 2015 when she questioned whether Trump was a serious candidate. Then she did one in May 2016 when she was debating if anything at all could save Trump...!!!
I wrote to her complaining on each occasion. But, while she is razor sharp and smart, I don't have time for intellectual hubris. We are paying the price of the media's hubris thinking they could get ratings from Trump but that he'd never get elected.
Print. We all need to support print as there is real investigative journalism there - not entertainment. I spend more time reading The Times, WaPo, and Guardian now that I no longer watch CNN or the Sunday shows.
I like Matthews and Maddow. But, they feel the pressure to chase ratings. Maddow used to be the one I followed religiously, till she did a program in November 2015 when she questioned whether Trump was a serious candidate. Then she did one in May 2016 when she was debating if anything at all could save Trump...!!!
I wrote to her complaining on each occasion. But, while she is razor sharp and smart, I don't have time for intellectual hubris. We are paying the price of the media's hubris thinking they could get ratings from Trump but that he'd never get elected.
Print. We all need to support print as there is real investigative journalism there - not entertainment. I spend more time reading The Times, WaPo, and Guardian now that I no longer watch CNN or the Sunday shows.
16
"Fair and equal" can only exits if all the players follow the same rules. Wake up. mainstream media. Giving lies and misinformation the same weight as fact is in no way "fair and equal". That Fox News uses it as a slogan should be a clue.
6
Saying that Breitbart is a fake news outlet is fake news.
31
Really! Would you like to buy a bridge?
28
This is a great idea. On the Breitbart site I saw an ad/solicitation from Kellie Leitch, a Canadian politician vying for the leadership of our federal Conservative Party. Leitch is running on a Trump-lite platform (vetting immigrants for "Canadian values," and such).
I took a screen grab and forwarded it via Twitter to the news department of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, our national broadcaster - much like Britain's BBC. Hopefully, someone there can ask her why she is spending her campaign funds on a white supremacist web site.
I took a screen grab and forwarded it via Twitter to the news department of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, our national broadcaster - much like Britain's BBC. Hopefully, someone there can ask her why she is spending her campaign funds on a white supremacist web site.
22
Hit it where it hurts. It's a great strategy and one I practice on a personal basis. No travel to red states that adopt policies that are aimed at controlling women, for instance. I won't do it. If I can keep a dollar from these regressive, 18th century states, I'm more than happy to do it.
52
I don't think they want you there, so it's a win-win situation.
14
I took a similar approach to the nefarious American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which supports many right wing bills and proposals (including voter suppression and gerrymandering bills) at the state level, with considerable funding from the Koch brothers and anonymous dark money contributions. I wrote many polite letters noting that I would take my business elsewhere if the companies kept up funding and active involvement (i.e., serving on the board of directions) with ALEC. Many companies informed me they already had plan in place to disassociate from ALEC. However a few, for instance the giant State Farm Insurance firm (with considerable interest in shaping state insurance policies) and which has members on key ALEC councils, gave me the big brush off. I've since learned that more organized boycotts of some of the resistant companies are underway. Boycotts are one of our few paths to remind the government and the companies, and Brietbart, that citizens of this country still have some power. We need to use it.
54
The heck with this. I ignore the advertising anyway...when I can.
Is there some reason why I have to see the same ads over and over? Especially ones without a volume control or even a button to stop it from running?
These ads go into my "NO BUY" column.
Is there some reason why I have to see the same ads over and over? Especially ones without a volume control or even a button to stop it from running?
These ads go into my "NO BUY" column.
10
Big companies don't really care where the money comes from, just as long as it comes in. Shaming has no effect where is no shame to begin with. Ad revenue is all important, and if there is a surge from a quarter which wasn't responding before, then companies push that area for maximum profit, because, after all, their stockholders demand a decent return on investment. It's all bottom line, and anyone who says they are morally opposed to making money from a sector of society they don't agree with and they didn't previously advertise in, is lying.
9
There was a large Facebook group that lobbied advertisers on the Rush Limbaugh Hate Radio abomination and almost completely chased him off the air. So the way has been cleared, big companies know consumers are serious. The same problem occurred in radio with rotating ads bought in bulk.
Decent people shouldn't have to contribute to the cesspools of either Breitbart or Hate Radio on AM, a civil society never condones nuts urging people to be their worst possible selves. Limbaugh did a lot of damage and created the space for a horror like Breitbart to happen. One wonders what these twisted men's mothers think of them.
Decent people shouldn't have to contribute to the cesspools of either Breitbart or Hate Radio on AM, a civil society never condones nuts urging people to be their worst possible selves. Limbaugh did a lot of damage and created the space for a horror like Breitbart to happen. One wonders what these twisted men's mothers think of them.
55
Please give an example of Limbaugh using hate speech. Political speech that you disagree with doesn't count.
25
The best way to combat 'false news', and to counter illiberal thought is by engaging in the argument with a better point of view, and the truth. There's nothing wrong with consumer activism, of course, but this one just tends to reinforce the view that its promoters are just trying to stop an information source that they disagree with, and that the 'Times' is attacking a competitor. Every piece of information on-line is equal to every other one, no matter where it appears, and having better content rather than attacking the source of another one is the only strategy that will really work.
27
David Godinez, it's actually untrue that every piece of information on line is equal to every other. And I spend quite a bit of time on line "engaging in argument with a better point of view, and the truth" but when one's 'opponent' dismisses facts presented as "liberal lies" then no progress can be made. So, a multi-prong strategy to get falsehoods out of reporting needs to be employed. It may look to you like the Times is attacking a competitor, but it looks to me like the Times is outlining a second prong in the strategy to eliminate slant-outrage 'reporting'.
199
There is no "truth". There are facts, and there are points of view.
13
So, big corporations are going to decide what I can and can't read?
21
Big companies are going to decide where they will and won't advertise.
17
When I published a small press literary magazine in the 1990's, although advertising was important we were so small as to be at the same time important and invisible. But just as it used to be a rule that negative reviews — of books, publications and such — were not worth the cost of the inches nor ink to print, it never intruded into my thoughts to give exposure to these fake and in fact fraudulent comments, ads and so-called 'free speech' activities.
Although we trust in God, we are not supposed to legislate on the basis of the Ten Commandments or other Code, it's not usual for a law to reflect some prohibition against transgressing those commandments, as well they should. Where laws or other regulation appears to have no relation to notions of moral or ethical behavior, the such law is probably at least considered to be unnecessary, unfair or in fact contradictory to lawful activities.
I believe that although we will not receive any investigations from the new occupants of our government into crimes against the common people and only blind eyes and shaky consciences when directed to do their jobs, the terms of mortalities are limited and I plan to outlive these weaklings. In the meantime, don't buy from those supporting evil, which is what abuses your notions of what's right, and most definitely at least try to follow the suggestions for direct action which Ms Kennedy explains. You already knew that 'ad' and 'fake info' spoiled your appetite.
Although we trust in God, we are not supposed to legislate on the basis of the Ten Commandments or other Code, it's not usual for a law to reflect some prohibition against transgressing those commandments, as well they should. Where laws or other regulation appears to have no relation to notions of moral or ethical behavior, the such law is probably at least considered to be unnecessary, unfair or in fact contradictory to lawful activities.
I believe that although we will not receive any investigations from the new occupants of our government into crimes against the common people and only blind eyes and shaky consciences when directed to do their jobs, the terms of mortalities are limited and I plan to outlive these weaklings. In the meantime, don't buy from those supporting evil, which is what abuses your notions of what's right, and most definitely at least try to follow the suggestions for direct action which Ms Kennedy explains. You already knew that 'ad' and 'fake info' spoiled your appetite.
3
But... the more people visit Breitbart, the more page clicks they get, and the more ad revenue they can generate... !!!!
6
In print, we could tell the seriousness of the article from its place in the periodical. Back of the mag with the ads for pheromones and escort services meant 'Disregardable'. The Internet has blurred that line but this seems like a good method to re-establishing it. Now if we had a way of easily establishing Internet Troll from real person...A network-savvy equivalent of challenging identity. A new form of 'Halt! Who goes there?"
5
Were you equally incensed about the fake news from Dan Rather or Brian Williams and the recent fake news about racial incidents blamed on Trump's election? As a Neither voter, I find much of fake news is news that is half-true without telling the entire story. While some are more obvious, fake news, misleading headlines, half truths and distortions all fall into the same category.
24
Just now checked out breitbart and took a screen shot of a quicken loans ad. I sent it to quicken loans asking whether it was their intent to maintain this association--stating further that I would not support or recommend quicken if so.
15
Maybe we need to ask ourselves why fake news sites are apparently so popular in the first place. Are they (popular)? Do the people who visit sites like Breitbart actually believe the headlines they read? Or is this nothing more than the Internet extension of the supermarket check-stand "National Enquirer"? And is this attention actually creating its own media circus and validating Breitbart, et al? This aspect of our immature cyber culture, racing to stamp out anything that is "wrong", genuinely troubles me. There are plenty of times when ignoring a liar is more effective than attacking them. And seriously, is anyone here genuinely concerned that an avid and credulous Breitbart reader is going to attend Duke University?
7
The lesson for all of us is to find a way to do more than just comment or tweet our outrage. The "liberal elites" these people can't stand are on average smarter, harder working and more successful (that's what made us "elite" in the first place). It's time to use those qualities.
21
This is a page taken out of the anti-apartheid movements 'round the planet. Hit 'em in the wallets. Works like a charm.
Only problem is, many of us who are very concerned avoid these social media sites, like Twitter, like the plague. I'd feel like I betrayed my own ethical code of behaviors if were to join in these wasteful, troll havens. But maybe if I can do something truly good by it...I might. I will have to mull this over.
Only problem is, many of us who are very concerned avoid these social media sites, like Twitter, like the plague. I'd feel like I betrayed my own ethical code of behaviors if were to join in these wasteful, troll havens. But maybe if I can do something truly good by it...I might. I will have to mull this over.
151
I suggest you create a Twitter account for the sole purpose of taking part in the Sleeping Giants campaign, sending tweets and screen shots to companies that may be advertising on Breitbart without knowing it. When you're not doing that, stay off Twitter. It doesn't have to be "wasteful" unless you let it.
7
Informed dissent is a cornerstone of a functioning democracy in the same way that civility is a cornerstone of a healthy society. Let's work to strengthen them.
10
Great tactic.
4
I am going to Breitbart and will write to all the advertisers how much I appreciate their support.
What about the NYT and its relentless fake news and beyond normal adoration for Hillary Clinton?
Well let's see if your readership numbers will increase. It is fun reading your articles and I use your articles to help me in my sales profession. How to turn a negative into a positive. Great reading.
What about the NYT and its relentless fake news and beyond normal adoration for Hillary Clinton?
Well let's see if your readership numbers will increase. It is fun reading your articles and I use your articles to help me in my sales profession. How to turn a negative into a positive. Great reading.
22
About time the NYT ran an op-ed on a practical way for citizens to oppose the harm Donald Trump will do to us all. Thanks to Pagan Kennedy for the report and to Nathan Phillips and the Sleeping Giants for taking action! An inspiration for all of us!
11
So because Donald Trump has been elected president we should now throw Freedom of Speech overboard as we seek to "defend" our democratic heritage against him and his hateful supporters?
Yes, I know this column appears to be merely advocating an updated version of traditional individual economic boycotting based on one's political or moral viewpoint.
But we need to be very careful about unintended consequences. People on both the left and the right are already pressuring Google and Facebook to suppress what they see as "hate speech," "fake news" and an alleged "liberal bias" in news feed selection.
For those who may not have been following recent developments in the financially weakened news media, Facebook referrals and Google ads have become essential to the survival of what's left of the news business.
Pushing to have Google, Facebook and other such companies to begin censoring news and specific publications or websites is effectively advocating for the privatization of government censorship. Is this what we really need in our already dangerously polarized nation? How do we make sure only "their" websites are hurt and "ours" are left free?
Now that "normalization" and "delegitimation" have become favored tactics from many in both major political parties, are we going to delegitimize the always threatened First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and the press and normalize censorship and suppression of it on the internet? If so, Trump is already winning.
Yes, I know this column appears to be merely advocating an updated version of traditional individual economic boycotting based on one's political or moral viewpoint.
But we need to be very careful about unintended consequences. People on both the left and the right are already pressuring Google and Facebook to suppress what they see as "hate speech," "fake news" and an alleged "liberal bias" in news feed selection.
For those who may not have been following recent developments in the financially weakened news media, Facebook referrals and Google ads have become essential to the survival of what's left of the news business.
Pushing to have Google, Facebook and other such companies to begin censoring news and specific publications or websites is effectively advocating for the privatization of government censorship. Is this what we really need in our already dangerously polarized nation? How do we make sure only "their" websites are hurt and "ours" are left free?
Now that "normalization" and "delegitimation" have become favored tactics from many in both major political parties, are we going to delegitimize the always threatened First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and the press and normalize censorship and suppression of it on the internet? If so, Trump is already winning.
14
Does it trouble you at all that advertisers "push" Google and Facebook to remove ad content from adult entertainment websites?
Would it trouble you at all that advertisers direct Google and Facebook to withhold ad content from websites that promote socially abhorrent and illegal practices? Precisely where do you draw that line?
I agree that encouraging advertisers to weigh political concerns when deciding where ad content is to be seen is a potential slippery slope. But I happen to believe that a First Amendment right to freedom of expression is not accompanied by any enumerated right to get rich in the process.
Would it trouble you at all that advertisers direct Google and Facebook to withhold ad content from websites that promote socially abhorrent and illegal practices? Precisely where do you draw that line?
I agree that encouraging advertisers to weigh political concerns when deciding where ad content is to be seen is a potential slippery slope. But I happen to believe that a First Amendment right to freedom of expression is not accompanied by any enumerated right to get rich in the process.
12
Amen, Mark! I fear boycott is the best remedy we have. Sadly, I do not expect critical thinking to have a spontaneous re-birth in our sound-bite culture.
7
We need to do a similar thing with The Trump Organization.
In particular, I will not spend so much as one penny for anything that includes "Trump" in the brand name, or that is identifiable as being owned by any of the Trumps. There is no reason to support any of their businesses. Anything that they provide can be obtained from another vendor. I for one do not need the tasteless glitz.
In particular, I will not spend so much as one penny for anything that includes "Trump" in the brand name, or that is identifiable as being owned by any of the Trumps. There is no reason to support any of their businesses. Anything that they provide can be obtained from another vendor. I for one do not need the tasteless glitz.
12
I'm in. Just joined sleeping giants on twitter and passed this article to friends. Let's make a difference!
10
Interesting article. It made me mildly amused as we all know the the NYTimes editorial position is strongly oppositional to the 2nd Amend. and gun ownership (except for Democratic candidates shooting skeet or a goose).
However, as I read the site - there is an ad for 9 mm ammunition. That is the type commonly stuffed into the higher capacity handguns the Times deplores. Or there is an ad for concealed carry classes or information - another concept that the Times deplores - despite it being the law of the land in over 45 states.
Oh, dear. Please send any funds from those ads to the HRC retirement fund.
BTW, while we all can denounce fake news, perhaps the Times (with their associated firearms ads) might look to the issue of false or misleading news when it comes to firearms issues. The Times had an opinion piece denouncing concealed carry laws with misinterpreted and misleading statistics worthy of Breitbart false news. Tom Friedman - usually quite brilliant, called for HRC's election based on her reinstating the Assault Weapons Ban - demonstrating that his intelligence failed as he knew little about the ban or its effects, as seen in referred criminological literature.
If you denounce the porn sites, you might research how the need for porn has driven and supported a large part of the video and internet technology. Hidden story but interesting.
Looking forward to more terrible ads on the Times web pages. I
However, as I read the site - there is an ad for 9 mm ammunition. That is the type commonly stuffed into the higher capacity handguns the Times deplores. Or there is an ad for concealed carry classes or information - another concept that the Times deplores - despite it being the law of the land in over 45 states.
Oh, dear. Please send any funds from those ads to the HRC retirement fund.
BTW, while we all can denounce fake news, perhaps the Times (with their associated firearms ads) might look to the issue of false or misleading news when it comes to firearms issues. The Times had an opinion piece denouncing concealed carry laws with misinterpreted and misleading statistics worthy of Breitbart false news. Tom Friedman - usually quite brilliant, called for HRC's election based on her reinstating the Assault Weapons Ban - demonstrating that his intelligence failed as he knew little about the ban or its effects, as seen in referred criminological literature.
If you denounce the porn sites, you might research how the need for porn has driven and supported a large part of the video and internet technology. Hidden story but interesting.
Looking forward to more terrible ads on the Times web pages. I
12
I'm a veteran and a gun owner. I support the 2nd Amendment. However, I'm pretty sick of seeing it used to justify voting for people who otherwise wish to ignore the Constitution. There is no chance that the 2nd Amendment will be repealed in this generation. Look at the numbers. Wake up and look at the real threats to freedom.
15
"The founder of Sleeping Giants agreed. “It’s scary to say it, but maybe companies will have to be the standard-bearers for morals right now,” he said."
The founder missed an opportunity to express a powerful statement: WE THE PEOPLE are the standard-bearers for morals now! Isn't that the whole reason he created the Sleeping Giants group? Stand up and claim your power!
The founder missed an opportunity to express a powerful statement: WE THE PEOPLE are the standard-bearers for morals now! Isn't that the whole reason he created the Sleeping Giants group? Stand up and claim your power!
17
I have not seen anything on the financial structure of the Breitbart organization, but it seems to be based on a marketing model for subsidized extreme rightwing media rather than that of traditional mainstream media. While a boycott or public shaming of advertisers may make liberals and moderates feel better in their opposition, such actions will have little effect on the alt right media. Those attack media are supported indirectly, sometimes directly, through the deep pockets of rightwing oligarchs for whom such expenses are mere chump change. It is a seemingly impossible mission but the only route to success would be to go after the oligarchs' wealth rather than their attack dogs.
5
We have seen how well oligarchy has worked in Putin's Russia. Too bad that the Supreme Court made the Citizens United ruling --- might be the death knell of democracy. Trump obviously likes the concept. Look at his cabinet nominees. This isn't the first time in history that an outraged populace has put a conman into power.
6
"In the behavior of some of these companies, you can detect the way our norms have already shifted. In the old normal, it would have cost little to stand up against neo-Nazi slogans. But in the new normal, doing so might involve angering key players in the White House, including the president-elect, Donald J. Trump, who has hired the former editor of Breitbart as his senior adviser. Mr. Trump recently proved the damage he could do to a company by criticizing Lockheed Martin on Twitter; soon after, its stocks prices tumbled."
We need to make racism expensive again. A nationwide campaign of shaming, boycotting, and protesting companies that collaborate with Trump and the alt-right can help. We need to get to the point where the mainstream advertising companies themselves won't do business with brietbart. We need to counter the presidential seal of approval on racism with everything we have.
We need to make racism expensive again. A nationwide campaign of shaming, boycotting, and protesting companies that collaborate with Trump and the alt-right can help. We need to get to the point where the mainstream advertising companies themselves won't do business with brietbart. We need to counter the presidential seal of approval on racism with everything we have.
17
I joined Sleeping Giants a month ago and have rallied friends and students alike to take part. Today the almighty dollar is the only way to make a stand.
8
Although satisfied with the car they made me, I wasn't satisfied by Nissan's answer to my complaint that they had no control over their ads ending up on a site that, if it was a person, would be a bully. So until they pull them, I'm appending "...and they support hate." when recommending their products to my friends.
17
The problem with the "real news" is that so much of it isn't real, or news.
I only read mainstream news. Rarely go to facebook. But so much what I read is speculation and analyses of that speculation. Summaries and diatribes of things that haven't happened yet. Things people think may happen soon, and why. It isn't news if it hasn't happened yet.
Like the actual count on how the superdelegates would be voting months before they were to vote. And portrayed as if these people had already voted. No asterisk. * no note.
This is done to guide public opinion. That's ok, but.. be real. Opinions are ok but The Times in particular seems fully incapable of discerning opinion and speculative reasoning about the future from present day fact and events of the proven and "have already happened" variety.
I only read mainstream news. Rarely go to facebook. But so much what I read is speculation and analyses of that speculation. Summaries and diatribes of things that haven't happened yet. Things people think may happen soon, and why. It isn't news if it hasn't happened yet.
Like the actual count on how the superdelegates would be voting months before they were to vote. And portrayed as if these people had already voted. No asterisk. * no note.
This is done to guide public opinion. That's ok, but.. be real. Opinions are ok but The Times in particular seems fully incapable of discerning opinion and speculative reasoning about the future from present day fact and events of the proven and "have already happened" variety.
21
Sounds like you may the one having trouble distinguishing facts from speculation. I never thought the NYT was trying to do anything but keep up with the projections and polls, which every other news outlet in the world was doing as well.
11
I love it! Of course the right wing talk shows et al gin up boycotts of advertisers in the NY Times, NBC, CNN, etc. So who knows where it will go? A few years ago I learned Ruth's Chris advertised on Rush L, so that was the end of Ruth's for me.
Denver Bronco's owner John Elway owns great steak house restaurants (Elway's) here that I used to love ... until I saw him in an ad AGAINST raising the Colorado minimum wage. Will never eat at Elway's again. Too darn bad.
Corporations need to step up and demonstrate some positive principles instead of just dreaming about taking over the world.
Denver Bronco's owner John Elway owns great steak house restaurants (Elway's) here that I used to love ... until I saw him in an ad AGAINST raising the Colorado minimum wage. Will never eat at Elway's again. Too darn bad.
Corporations need to step up and demonstrate some positive principles instead of just dreaming about taking over the world.
17
A large percentage of the properly 'uninformed' are typically under educated.
They usually get their news or information in 10 second bites on TV news or AM radio. Never in any relative depth. This topically delivered so called news format is mostly commercially delivered and are 75% press releases.
The people paid to present this infotainment are pseudo celebrities who often are sunny, lightweight and on a first name basis. What is important to the viewers is the dress and hair style/makeup. They're your friends sitting in your living room. AM radio is equally bad with rambling running together words and statements. There was a fire on Elm St. 2 died and the stars are out on the red carpet for awards the future president is spending the holidays in Palm Beach there was a terrorist bomb explosion killing 49 the banks will be closed due to long weekend car crash through front window of pizzaria nuclear power plant shut due to faulty leak Mcdonalds is now offering its McRib sandwich for a limited time there's an auto recall store robbed at gunpoint airport flights canceled due to weather ......
They usually get their news or information in 10 second bites on TV news or AM radio. Never in any relative depth. This topically delivered so called news format is mostly commercially delivered and are 75% press releases.
The people paid to present this infotainment are pseudo celebrities who often are sunny, lightweight and on a first name basis. What is important to the viewers is the dress and hair style/makeup. They're your friends sitting in your living room. AM radio is equally bad with rambling running together words and statements. There was a fire on Elm St. 2 died and the stars are out on the red carpet for awards the future president is spending the holidays in Palm Beach there was a terrorist bomb explosion killing 49 the banks will be closed due to long weekend car crash through front window of pizzaria nuclear power plant shut due to faulty leak Mcdonalds is now offering its McRib sandwich for a limited time there's an auto recall store robbed at gunpoint airport flights canceled due to weather ......
6
If you want to actually inform yourself you might actually read the Brietbart article in question.
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2015/12/08/birth-control-makes-women-unatt...
It's basically the exact same information sourced from university research that you find on women's websites that largely target single urban liberal women who voted for Hillary. Brietbart just puts a racy negative headline on someone else's research and publishes it. Women stripper's tips vary substantially by where they are in their menstrual cycles. That's a tidbit you could find on Slate or even the NYT. Where did Brietbart find it? At Psychology Today as per the link Brietbart provides. So is Psychology Today a provider of fake news? Nope. In this case the most news that is most "fake" is the NYT's own article. Conflating Brietbart with Fake news and white supremacy is a big mistake because the millions of people who read Brietbart know its not true. It just further discredits the NYT and that's too bad.
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2015/12/08/birth-control-makes-women-unatt...
It's basically the exact same information sourced from university research that you find on women's websites that largely target single urban liberal women who voted for Hillary. Brietbart just puts a racy negative headline on someone else's research and publishes it. Women stripper's tips vary substantially by where they are in their menstrual cycles. That's a tidbit you could find on Slate or even the NYT. Where did Brietbart find it? At Psychology Today as per the link Brietbart provides. So is Psychology Today a provider of fake news? Nope. In this case the most news that is most "fake" is the NYT's own article. Conflating Brietbart with Fake news and white supremacy is a big mistake because the millions of people who read Brietbart know its not true. It just further discredits the NYT and that's too bad.
27
"How to Destroy the Business Model of Breitbart and Fake News"
A more accurate headline for Kennedy's piece is: "How to Destroy Free Speech and Dissenting Opinion".
Censorship is not the answer. Whatever happened to liberals belief in the First Amendment?
A more accurate headline for Kennedy's piece is: "How to Destroy Free Speech and Dissenting Opinion".
Censorship is not the answer. Whatever happened to liberals belief in the First Amendment?
24
As has been stated before "You are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to make-up your own "facts"". In other words it is wrong to distort the truth!
3
Just because you have the right to say it doesn't mean it's RIGHT!
8
Consumers have the very same right to freedom of expression. And consumers shouldnt be falsely shamed into withholding that expression, including withholding their commerce from businesses that support ideas they find abhorant.
13
Liberals attacking free speech. Nothing new here.
20
Interesting. I just went to the site and an add for the Toronto Film School popped up.
9
Interesting essay about some people with a good idea, doing good things. Very progressive.
More, please.
Thanks
More, please.
Thanks
13
Oh, man, did that feel good! I went to Breitbart and saw that Quicken Loans advertises there. So I went to Quicken Loans' site and emailed one of their bloggers that I would never finance my home through a company that advertised on a racist, sexist, anti-Semitic site like Breitbart. Strike Back! Awwwww yissssss
22
This is a tough call, since it requires one to waste the time descending the online rathole that is Breitbart in the first place. No clicks, no clickbait. As social media has become an echo chamber and hall of mirrors, time is better spent in face to face discussion, testing patience and bringing facts to those few Trump supporters who claim they are willing to listen. As few as there are.
6
The most informed and thoughtful people that I know who voted for Trump were really casting their vote against HRC--for reasons that I can understand, even if I don't agree with them. I am by no means asserting that there are no actual Trump supporters who would be open to an informed and reasoned debate, but I have yet to see them.
6
Thanks for this article. I just went to Breitbart, turned off my ad-blocker and found ads for a college I'd been considering and a public transportation advocacy site I'd visited. I'm glad I found and contacted the college since I was considering an online degree program there. No way will I give them thousands of dollars for tuition if they support that kind of thing.
14
Breitbart is now running fake news in Germany in early attempts to undermine Angela Merkel in the upcoming elections. The right wing parties in Europe are ecstatic. Bannon has stated publicly that he is an anarchist and wants to bring everything down. And Trump may have fired Flynn's son but we have seen that Flynn himself sent out tweets about the supposed child molestation in a DC pizza parlor. Maybe time for some libel and slander lawsuits. Hard for a public figure to do, but a pizza parlor wonder who loses business would seem to have a case.
23
What is wrong with America? We seem to be becoming stupider. This is what happens when the quality of secular education declines and the influence of religion and counter-science agenda in public policy grows. Religion is a means of distracting the populace from the real problems. With the declining quality of education, the average person is happily voting against their own interests while the rich and powerful get even more rich and powerful.
16
The day after Kellogg announced their departure from Breitbart, I went on the site to see what other advertisers were there. One that immediately caught my eye was Nissan. That felt personal because I just bought a Leaf electric vehicle from them. I contacted Nissan and asked that they refrain from advertising there. The response was less than satisfying. An excerpt:
"Nissan places ads in a variety of sites in order to reach as many consumers as possible. Any placement of Nissan advertising is not intended to be a political commentary and does not describe nor support anyone in any ideological way. We recognize that people have different standards as to what they view as acceptable content, and we are sorry that you found this program in particular to be unacceptable."
"Nissan places ads in a variety of sites in order to reach as many consumers as possible. Any placement of Nissan advertising is not intended to be a political commentary and does not describe nor support anyone in any ideological way. We recognize that people have different standards as to what they view as acceptable content, and we are sorry that you found this program in particular to be unacceptable."
12
Thanks for sharing that response.
4
I thought companies made ad buys targeted to the groups of people they wanted to attract as customers. $22 billion seems like a lot of money to just randomly throw around with no knowledge of how effective the ad buys are.
There was an article in the WaPo a day or two ago about events in Germany reported on Breitbart. According to WaPo, the events fell into two categories: never happened, or the actual event was pretty much a non-event, as told by law enforcement in those areas. Breitbart seems to be in the business of click-bait, and incitement against ethnic and religious minorities. Sadly, there are thousands of sites that trade in fake news and white supremacist notions. It'll take an army of concerned citizens reporting ads on these sites in order to effect meaningful change.
There was an article in the WaPo a day or two ago about events in Germany reported on Breitbart. According to WaPo, the events fell into two categories: never happened, or the actual event was pretty much a non-event, as told by law enforcement in those areas. Breitbart seems to be in the business of click-bait, and incitement against ethnic and religious minorities. Sadly, there are thousands of sites that trade in fake news and white supremacist notions. It'll take an army of concerned citizens reporting ads on these sites in order to effect meaningful change.
11
As long as outlets like the Times continue to feature sponsored content from advertisers on their homepage, gussied up to resemble news articles, then shut up about this. As long as you promote and partner with Facebook, furthering the folly that social media is a legitimate source of anything but personal information, then I am not interested in your opinion about fake news.
Lead by example, and you might eventually claw your credibility back.
Lead by example, and you might eventually claw your credibility back.
13
I applaud organized grassroots actions to combat corrupt news media, but its important to see the forest for the trees. You have to ask how Journalism in the US got to this terrible state to see the scope of the problem.
First reason has to be about de-industrialization in the US. We lost more then just the domestic factories that make socks. All industry shrank, and experienced newsrooms hiring real reporters to go out and give a voice to the people are just like any other industry making a product. We can buy our socks from factories in China, but local news can’t be outsourced. The politicians who favored monopolization of markets in the 80s & 90s made it happen, because they gutted the FCC rules. Today almost ALL "news" media lacks a real newsroom, assignment desk, and first hand reporting. Electronic media companies (TV, radio, internet) easily fool us making it all look like news, w/ colorful designs, or TV sets to look like it has news value. They "aggregate" news from others. Even the sainted NYT downsized their newsrooms and reporting staff while going online, and global. Now's there’s a fraction of content you can call first hand reporting then there used to be.
In the '80s politics disbanded the 1930's made 50 independently owned and operated market system made to avoid the corruption, and news falling in the hands of demagogues. The same law gutting story happened in the banking industry, and lead to a repeat of the 1929 crash in 2008.
First reason has to be about de-industrialization in the US. We lost more then just the domestic factories that make socks. All industry shrank, and experienced newsrooms hiring real reporters to go out and give a voice to the people are just like any other industry making a product. We can buy our socks from factories in China, but local news can’t be outsourced. The politicians who favored monopolization of markets in the 80s & 90s made it happen, because they gutted the FCC rules. Today almost ALL "news" media lacks a real newsroom, assignment desk, and first hand reporting. Electronic media companies (TV, radio, internet) easily fool us making it all look like news, w/ colorful designs, or TV sets to look like it has news value. They "aggregate" news from others. Even the sainted NYT downsized their newsrooms and reporting staff while going online, and global. Now's there’s a fraction of content you can call first hand reporting then there used to be.
In the '80s politics disbanded the 1930's made 50 independently owned and operated market system made to avoid the corruption, and news falling in the hands of demagogues. The same law gutting story happened in the banking industry, and lead to a repeat of the 1929 crash in 2008.
5
Where is Bannon these days? Interesting that he has been so silent. Perhaps he is in Russia.
7
The Trump Transition Team is trying to get America to forget about him.
13
If one's only access is limited to not-so Breitbart, FOX "news", Rush Limbo, Sean Insanity et al. then they are getting a consistent barrage of fake news. They even tell their audiences they are not journalists just opinion makers.
If someone has such a thick skull as to believe these sources are in the least credible they then deserve the scorn and ridicule of we Dems who find such ignoramuses deplorable. They are deplorable and that is being way too kind.
DD
Manhattan
If someone has such a thick skull as to believe these sources are in the least credible they then deserve the scorn and ridicule of we Dems who find such ignoramuses deplorable. They are deplorable and that is being way too kind.
DD
Manhattan
12
Typical. When the progressive left can't compete with something - they try to destroy it. But they never seem to understand that these shady tactics are what makes them look so bad in the first place, and why their party is headed into the dustbin of history.
15
I think it's the Putin-Trump alliance that will put us in the dustbin of history.
9
What you say. Market decisions and free agency... Those horrible shady tactics that the right have been applauding for years. Now they are being turned. Who would have thought.
6
I oppose artificial birth control.
I have known some women who are wild.
I oppose a carbon tax.
I believe climate change has always been a natural part of earth’s ecosystem.
I think preferential affirmative action is discrimination.
I voted for Donald Trump despite character flaws (in both of us).
I subscribe to the New York Times despite more than a few differences with its Editorial Board.
The Sleeping Giants think I am part of the basket of deplorables.
The Sleeping Giants are vigilantes who would shut me down if they could.
The Sleeping Giants don’t know that I welcome and seek divergent points of view.
The Sleeping Giants don’t care that I defend the underdogs all the time.
The Sleeping Giants point to the splinter in their brother’s eye while having a log in their own.
I have known some women who are wild.
I oppose a carbon tax.
I believe climate change has always been a natural part of earth’s ecosystem.
I think preferential affirmative action is discrimination.
I voted for Donald Trump despite character flaws (in both of us).
I subscribe to the New York Times despite more than a few differences with its Editorial Board.
The Sleeping Giants think I am part of the basket of deplorables.
The Sleeping Giants are vigilantes who would shut me down if they could.
The Sleeping Giants don’t know that I welcome and seek divergent points of view.
The Sleeping Giants don’t care that I defend the underdogs all the time.
The Sleeping Giants point to the splinter in their brother’s eye while having a log in their own.
10
Are you opposed to advertisers being informed about where their advertising appears and making their own decisions about where to place their ads?
11
It is called freedom. You are free to have those views and others are free to have other views. When those others see your views as detrimental to the society and environment they are free to act which includes protest, boycott, shunning, etc. Freedom is messy....it is simply that my fellow progressives are waking up and seeing that in order to prevail they have to more aggressive. Once again I find it funny how so many complain when the tactics and strategies they use are turned on them.
10
"... it’s about using corporations as shields to protect vulnerable people from bullying and hate crimes."
That is about the most disingenuous statement ever. You are only protecting the vulnerable - by preventing them from hearing any message that differs from your own.
Right.
Long live freedom of speech.
That is about the most disingenuous statement ever. You are only protecting the vulnerable - by preventing them from hearing any message that differs from your own.
Right.
Long live freedom of speech.
14
I can see this is a threatening idea to the alt-right types, based on the flurry of trolling in the comments. Always a reliable metric!
22
Idiots and conspiracy theorists unite. Fake news. Who would believe it for long? Just Goggle or Wiki the real facts. Its right at your fingertips.
As for destroying a business model we should all pay special attention to the advice in this column. For many years The NYTs was an ad supported model. That's essentially gone now. If this paper survives (and you have to grow to survive) by moving to a digital subscriber model it will be a wonderful case study.
As for destroying a business model we should all pay special attention to the advice in this column. For many years The NYTs was an ad supported model. That's essentially gone now. If this paper survives (and you have to grow to survive) by moving to a digital subscriber model it will be a wonderful case study.
1
Boycotting businesses is destructive for all.
4
Worked pretty well for Martin Luther King in the south against the bus lines. Worked pretty well for Nelson Mandella in South Africa. So why is it that boycotting businesses is destructive for ALL?
12
The 1st amendment protects speech from government action, not citizen action. Boycotting hate speech is a form of speech. Breitbart and fake news are destructive and should be destroyed if possible.
13
This is an excellent example of the power of grassroots activism. It uses one of the two best tools average citizens have to exercise power.
Voting is the first power. The tea party became a strong movement because its members decided to turn out and vote, not just in the general election, but also in the primaries, and targeting their local politicians.
The power of the wallet is another way ordinary citizens can effect change. Most companies are risk averse, so any association with unsavory online content, and the potential backlash from consumers, should cause them to pull their ads.
Voting is the first power. The tea party became a strong movement because its members decided to turn out and vote, not just in the general election, but also in the primaries, and targeting their local politicians.
The power of the wallet is another way ordinary citizens can effect change. Most companies are risk averse, so any association with unsavory online content, and the potential backlash from consumers, should cause them to pull their ads.
11
I CANNOT legally create an advertisement for breakfast cereal that says if you eat it you will be able to fly and it will eliminate your cancer. That would be false advertising and considered illegal. But I CAN legally create a fake news story that says the Clintons run a child sex ring in the basement of a pizza parlor and that Obama is a Muslim from Kenya. We already have laws that apply to deceptive and misleading claims. Why can't they apply to deliberately fake news stories?
22
Thanks, Pagan, for a doable, effective tactic to fight back. We are all looking for ways to act, and Sleeping Giants will get my support, for sure.
9
If we do not find ways to combat the deluge of lies, hate, and misinformation vomited forth by organizations like Breitbart, our democracy faces a rocky, downhill road. Even a Fox News might have to respond to declining revenues. After all, a boycott was one of the levers used to topple apartheid in South Africa.
This is an idea worth trying! Better an outraged population expressing its distaste than government regulation of free speech.
This is an idea worth trying! Better an outraged population expressing its distaste than government regulation of free speech.
12
Wow! This is just amazing. I wish I were so enterprising. Thanks to all the people who are using their talents to help get rid of these facsist monsters. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
11
I was amazed while I was watching a BBC broadcast(I believe) on a group of normal looking folks in Tennessee who when asked about where they get their news from said they don't believe any of the main media and they only believe Breitbart News, Twitter etc.,
I would bet thats the case in most red states as well as rural areas in the rest of the country. Is this freedom of speech or aggressive and unpatriotic dumbing down of America? America is fast slipping into a world of ignorance and hate. A great Pity that a country that world looked unto is becoming a laughing stock of the world.
I would bet thats the case in most red states as well as rural areas in the rest of the country. Is this freedom of speech or aggressive and unpatriotic dumbing down of America? America is fast slipping into a world of ignorance and hate. A great Pity that a country that world looked unto is becoming a laughing stock of the world.
18
It's Breitbart! No it's the Russians! No it's the FBI! No it's rigged voting machines! It is impossible to Trump to have won, Hillary had a 89% chance of winning!
16
The techniques of revenue denial that activists utilize are nothing new--however, what is surprising is the Times' deferential treatment toward a clandestine group working to 'destroy' a rival news organization--a major direct competitor.
This is smug at best; at worst it's cynical beyond the pale.
As is the equivocation of Breitbart with 'fake news' clickbait mills.
Whether or not one agrees with its politics, it must be stated that Breitbart practices normal journalism--Breitbart reports stories by carefully selecting real-world facts to support its editorial point of view, as does the Times.
Suggesting otherwise is practically defamatory.
This is smug at best; at worst it's cynical beyond the pale.
As is the equivocation of Breitbart with 'fake news' clickbait mills.
Whether or not one agrees with its politics, it must be stated that Breitbart practices normal journalism--Breitbart reports stories by carefully selecting real-world facts to support its editorial point of view, as does the Times.
Suggesting otherwise is practically defamatory.
9
Their is no practice of "normal journalism" when those contributing to a publication subject their readers to biased, manipulative, exploitive and the bigoted perversion of human behavior that is destructive to a government of 'equally free people'.
9
It's editorial point of view, however, is contemptible. Cherry-picking real world "facts" in order to push a racist and fascist agenda is not the same thing as practicing normal journalism.
9
Dear NYT,
I sincerely suggest devoting some resources to fishing out trolls from your comment section. If you don't, you continue to provide a platform to paid alt-right trolls to dissipate their propaganda under the guise of "free speech". This is very clearly outlined technique of what Alexander Nix from Cambridge Analytica calls "nuanced messaging". Check out his video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8Dd5aVXLCc
Please notice the methodical approach:
1-align with the target audience (in this case educated progressive NYT readers)
2-attack an effort to curtail fake-news with a free speech argument
3-persona attack on the author of the original article as "unAmerican"
4- attack the NYT for being biased and publishing such an article
I sincerely suggest devoting some resources to fishing out trolls from your comment section. If you don't, you continue to provide a platform to paid alt-right trolls to dissipate their propaganda under the guise of "free speech". This is very clearly outlined technique of what Alexander Nix from Cambridge Analytica calls "nuanced messaging". Check out his video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8Dd5aVXLCc
Please notice the methodical approach:
1-align with the target audience (in this case educated progressive NYT readers)
2-attack an effort to curtail fake-news with a free speech argument
3-persona attack on the author of the original article as "unAmerican"
4- attack the NYT for being biased and publishing such an article
8
Sign me up.
5
I agree we should all protest advertising with media outlets printing content we don't like or view as too ideological, biased, false or fake. Using NYT Liz Spayd and Steve Bannon as my guides, both the NYT and Breitbart would be on my list. I'm guessing the net effect will be zero.
7
"In the past month and a half, thousands of activists have started to push companies to take a stand on what you might call “hate news” — a toxic mix of lies, white-supremacist content and bullying that can inspire attacks on Muslims, gay people, women, African-Americans and others."
And most of the "attacks on Muslims, gay people, women, African-Americans and others" that were reported by main stream media after Trump was elected turned out to be false. They were stories that the so-called "victims" made up.
It seems the liberal media is equally guilty of fake news.
And the tragic irony is that there's been a lot of white people and Trump supporters who have been the victims of real hate crimes, during the campaign and afterwards. Just look at the white man who was attacked and beaten by a group of black men in Chicago about a month ago, while people shouted, "He's a Trump supporter. Beat his ass!" And the downright evil kidnapping and torture of the 18 year old special needs white kid in Chicago this week by a group of black thugs.
And most of the "attacks on Muslims, gay people, women, African-Americans and others" that were reported by main stream media after Trump was elected turned out to be false. They were stories that the so-called "victims" made up.
It seems the liberal media is equally guilty of fake news.
And the tragic irony is that there's been a lot of white people and Trump supporters who have been the victims of real hate crimes, during the campaign and afterwards. Just look at the white man who was attacked and beaten by a group of black men in Chicago about a month ago, while people shouted, "He's a Trump supporter. Beat his ass!" And the downright evil kidnapping and torture of the 18 year old special needs white kid in Chicago this week by a group of black thugs.
15
We have to be the resistance to the White nationalist news like Breitbart. Ads are placed to reach a wider audience and to increase profits.
Boycott companies that advertise on these fake news sites. Keep in mind that many companies place profits before people. Those are the companies to stay away from.
Boycott companies that advertise on these fake news sites. Keep in mind that many companies place profits before people. Those are the companies to stay away from.
10
Breitbart is certainly not on the same level of seriousness as the NYT, but this smacks to me of the pot calling the kettle black.
What does the NYT mean by 'fake'? Where are the lies exactly? Let's talk stats. What percentage of Breitbart's reporting is lies versus the NYT or CNN? We're not talking about points of view we don't like. I've read Breitbart out of curiosity--Most of Breitbart are not lies at all, but simply points of view the NYT doesn't like. And again, it doesn't pretend its not partisan. It is certainly partisan. It has occasional higher level analysis, with mostly heavily partisan articles---exactly like many left leaning media outlets.
The NYT meanwhile has been chock full of lies. (I even doubt this will be published. The NYT engages in censorship in readers comments, something Breitbart doesn't do.) The promotion of Clinton was blatantly partisan & filled with implicit lies & repression of fact. And we won't go into its history, e.g. weapons of mass destruction. But it also publishes fake news. For instance - to use an obvious example - the daily 'statistics' trumpeting Clinton's 90% chance of winning. What was that if not fake news? Or are you saying your mathematicians & analysts are utterly incompetent? But if so, why haven't you fired them? Instead they are writing just as before, with every bit as much confidence.
The NYT is literally arguing that only right wing media is fake. Come on. This is incoherent.
What does the NYT mean by 'fake'? Where are the lies exactly? Let's talk stats. What percentage of Breitbart's reporting is lies versus the NYT or CNN? We're not talking about points of view we don't like. I've read Breitbart out of curiosity--Most of Breitbart are not lies at all, but simply points of view the NYT doesn't like. And again, it doesn't pretend its not partisan. It is certainly partisan. It has occasional higher level analysis, with mostly heavily partisan articles---exactly like many left leaning media outlets.
The NYT meanwhile has been chock full of lies. (I even doubt this will be published. The NYT engages in censorship in readers comments, something Breitbart doesn't do.) The promotion of Clinton was blatantly partisan & filled with implicit lies & repression of fact. And we won't go into its history, e.g. weapons of mass destruction. But it also publishes fake news. For instance - to use an obvious example - the daily 'statistics' trumpeting Clinton's 90% chance of winning. What was that if not fake news? Or are you saying your mathematicians & analysts are utterly incompetent? But if so, why haven't you fired them? Instead they are writing just as before, with every bit as much confidence.
The NYT is literally arguing that only right wing media is fake. Come on. This is incoherent.
25
Point of fact: Only one major newspaper endorsed Trump in its opinion pages, and it was owned by Sheldon Adelson (Las Vegas). Other newspapers across the country, including many that never endorsed a Dem for president, recognized that Trump posed a threat to our democracy as well as to the fourth estate, journalism. Finally, many studies have been conducted on the effect of editorial endorsements on news coverage and shown little effect. Brietbart was not included in the older studies because it is not an actual news outlet so much as a propaganda mouthpiece.
9
There is a difference between being wrong, and being fake. There is a difference between making a mistake and telling a lie. People who make mistakes willingly educate themselves and become more accurate in their understanding and better able to regulate their behavior to be suitable for whatever circumstances they encounter.
People who think lying is OK to gain money or power over others have no empathy for those they victimize, and are doing evil. People with a strong desire for power and money have to constantly monitor themselves to make sure they are not justifying unsuitable behaviors in themselves and their connections, in the pursuit of their goals.
This is not a partisan issue. As we look at the last few Presidents this country has had, it is not very difficult to categorize the ones who were clearly able to regulate their own drive for power in the interests of the common good. The last Republican who did this well was Bush senior. The last Democrat is Obama.
Trump's self regulation skills are obviously impaired going into office. Whether he is able and willing to improve his self regulation and act for the good of all remains to be seen. He is an 70 year old
man, with a limited understanding how most of the people who voted for him actually live. The people who voted for him have been subjected to years of misinformation and manipulation by people who do think it is OK to lie and cheat to achieve their goals.
People who think lying is OK to gain money or power over others have no empathy for those they victimize, and are doing evil. People with a strong desire for power and money have to constantly monitor themselves to make sure they are not justifying unsuitable behaviors in themselves and their connections, in the pursuit of their goals.
This is not a partisan issue. As we look at the last few Presidents this country has had, it is not very difficult to categorize the ones who were clearly able to regulate their own drive for power in the interests of the common good. The last Republican who did this well was Bush senior. The last Democrat is Obama.
Trump's self regulation skills are obviously impaired going into office. Whether he is able and willing to improve his self regulation and act for the good of all remains to be seen. He is an 70 year old
man, with a limited understanding how most of the people who voted for him actually live. The people who voted for him have been subjected to years of misinformation and manipulation by people who do think it is OK to lie and cheat to achieve their goals.
6
The New York Times is often "fake" or highly inaccurate and partisan "news." So by all means less destroy fake news.
17
Great idea! I believe that those companies that advertise in the New York Times should be alerted to a lot of the falsified stories that can be found on their pages. This is another one of those attempts to position the right as wrong and the left as right. The Times has been as guilty of spreading false narratives as any other publication. Those in glass houses!
10
How to kill Fake News? Simple, quit buying NYT.
15
Please follow your own advice.
9
Education is the only solution to this crippling cycle of fabricated news. It appears that many people are so desperate to want something different, that they're willing to overlook cold, hard truths in favor of a very convoluted and distorted sense of reality. We will pay dearly for those citizens unwilling to accept the truth, we are already in a deep ethical and moral deficit with the election of DT & Co.
8
The biggest fake news purveyors are the elite liberal media, NYT included. Despite the babble about inclusions, the liberal media actually excludes half the citizens of this country, by politically correct mind control, speech control, labeling, demonizing, marginalizing, firing and financially destroying anyone who disagrees with them. In their bigoted mind, liberal ideas are all so sacred and inviolable that all opposition to them has to be destroyed and the perpetrator banned. So be careful what you wish for, the business model of the NYT could be destroyed too.
13
Except you already have proved that you don't have the courage of your convictions, or you would be boycotting the liberal media right now instead of paying to post on the New York Times.
The thing about the right wing is they love trolling way too much to ever stay away from the media sites they love to hate.
The thing about the right wing is they love trolling way too much to ever stay away from the media sites they love to hate.
12
The biggest fake news purveyors are the elite conservative media, Breitbart included. Despite the babble about inclusions, the conservative media actually excludes more than half the citizens of this country, by politically correct mind control, speech control, labeling, demonizing, marginalizing, firing and financially destroying anyone who disagrees with them. In their bigoted mind, conservative ideas are all so sacred and inviolable that all opposition to them has to be destroyed and the perpetrator banned. So be careful what you wish for, the business model of the Breitbart could be destroyed too.
4
Another commenter posted this quote a while back in response to another article it remains the most fitting response to this intolerant hypocritical rubbish.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.” - C.S.Lewis
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.” - C.S.Lewis
8
What is truly hypocritical is that the same people who have called for boycotts of anything they disagree with through Breitbart are now whining when the same strategy is used against them. And no, I don't tolerate Breitbart or Alex jones or Michael Savage or anyone who thinks like them.
7
Let's get religion into it; that will fix everything. Shall we read the Screwtape Letters next? Fake news, hate radio and the lack of the Fairness Doctrine have turned the political system into the madhouse it is now.
5
I like the idea but I'm not sure online advertising works predominantly the way you describe. I clicked on Breitnart and saw an ad for Beachbody. This is a company I've bought from before so I don't think it's a coincidence. I could have clicked on almost any site and gotten the Beachbody ad. Where Breitbart makes their money is simply number of people who go to their site, isn't it?? Then the ads customiz d for me follwo alomg.
3
Exactly. Whenever I browse something on Amazon, ads for that product follow me around to just about every site I visit. Cookies attach themselves to a specific user, they don't hang out on a specific site.
3
He addresses that in the article - ads that follow you can choose not to follow to certain sites. You can let Beachbody know that they follow you to Breitbart and they can decide if that's acceptable. But they can't fix what they don't know about.
3
Keep up the great work. This is not stopping free speech at all. Breitbart is free to publish what they want (not kid porn) but my dollars and that of companies I do business with should not keep them afloat. I intend to visit some of these sites and make sure I am not involved with them vis ad $$. If we bind together all 66MM of us we can beat them. It is a good start.
12
Thanks for doing this. Money talks like nothing else in our society unfortunately.
15
It seems this is a fairly simple issue being over-complicated in the readers' comments.
Most media live primarily on revenue generated by advertising. Until recently, advertisers knew exactly where their advertising money was being spent. Only recently and fueled by the rise of 'social media' have algorithms replaced media buyers whose purchases reflected their client's strategies.
We need to return to this model by letting human beings with judgement back into the media choice process and giving them the tools to control it.
It's up to Kellog or any other advertiser to know where its advertising message appears and to decide where its advertising dollars are spent.
Pagan Kennedy's solutions make great good sense.
Most media live primarily on revenue generated by advertising. Until recently, advertisers knew exactly where their advertising money was being spent. Only recently and fueled by the rise of 'social media' have algorithms replaced media buyers whose purchases reflected their client's strategies.
We need to return to this model by letting human beings with judgement back into the media choice process and giving them the tools to control it.
It's up to Kellog or any other advertiser to know where its advertising message appears and to decide where its advertising dollars are spent.
Pagan Kennedy's solutions make great good sense.
22
Never looked at Breitbart before and won't again. The fearful tone threading through all of the articles, much like the RNC, would make many people not want to come out from under the bed.
An example: "Obama Denies The Murder Wave on His Watch"
The article cites a one year 10% increase in murders and a 3.9% rise in overall violent crime from 2014 to 2015. It fails to note that violent crime dropped 12% in 2015 from the end of the last W Bush term and 36% from the end of the HW Bush term, while the total US population has grown 25%. Murders are also down 7% and 38% compared to the same GOP presidential terms.
And this includes the one year "alarming increase". But most of the Breitbart audience lives outside big cities and may be afraid to visit, which is why they don't notice that Millennials have flocked to urban areas.
It would be more instructive to focus on specific cities like Chicago, where cops are holding back after decades of executing extrajudicial "street justice", allowing chaos to emerge among gangs.
And also helpful to examine the successes in NYC through more effective community policing.
But you won't find these stories in Breitbart because their readers apparently want "fear and loathing" or "trivial" but little in between (the ears).
An example: "Obama Denies The Murder Wave on His Watch"
The article cites a one year 10% increase in murders and a 3.9% rise in overall violent crime from 2014 to 2015. It fails to note that violent crime dropped 12% in 2015 from the end of the last W Bush term and 36% from the end of the HW Bush term, while the total US population has grown 25%. Murders are also down 7% and 38% compared to the same GOP presidential terms.
And this includes the one year "alarming increase". But most of the Breitbart audience lives outside big cities and may be afraid to visit, which is why they don't notice that Millennials have flocked to urban areas.
It would be more instructive to focus on specific cities like Chicago, where cops are holding back after decades of executing extrajudicial "street justice", allowing chaos to emerge among gangs.
And also helpful to examine the successes in NYC through more effective community policing.
But you won't find these stories in Breitbart because their readers apparently want "fear and loathing" or "trivial" but little in between (the ears).
10
I practice my own personal campaign called "Turn Off Trump" to combat the gratuitous Trump coverage in mainstream radio and TV designed to increase eyeballs and ears.
When I hear the usual breathless reporting about the latest 3am Trump hate tweet or similar nonsense, I turn it off and email the news organization that I turned off their show. I stay tuned in if he has something constructive to offer, but that's not often.
Maybe not as effective as the Breitbart approach here but I choose not to participate in his reality TV show.
When I hear the usual breathless reporting about the latest 3am Trump hate tweet or similar nonsense, I turn it off and email the news organization that I turned off their show. I stay tuned in if he has something constructive to offer, but that's not often.
Maybe not as effective as the Breitbart approach here but I choose not to participate in his reality TV show.
38
Remarkable story about consumer activism. Should inspire creative people to find ways to return the "Power to the People" that we have seemed to lose through our political system.
32
"Still, a new consumer movement is rising, and activists believe that where votes failed, wallets may prevail."
Which is as it should always be. If you don't like what an organization is doing, don't give them your money.
My alma mater, an Ivy League institution, refused to punish Black Lives Matter activists who were disrupting students in the library during exam week. It was my prerogative to withhold my normal contribution (several thousand dollars) to the scholarship fund.
Which is as it should always be. If you don't like what an organization is doing, don't give them your money.
My alma mater, an Ivy League institution, refused to punish Black Lives Matter activists who were disrupting students in the library during exam week. It was my prerogative to withhold my normal contribution (several thousand dollars) to the scholarship fund.
11
Entirely your prerogative, but by withholding a donation to the scholarship fund weren't you really punishing students? Was that your intention?
6
yes...because punishing hard working students by withholding financial support really hurts the university....(sarcasm...just in case you missed it).
3
If what you say is true, - good decision.
2
These types of campaigns can be effective because right-wing nuts worship the pursuit and accumulation of wealth. They don't care what you say about them or what you do. But if you cut off their source of revenue, they pay attention. Case in point: Rush Limbaugh and the Sandra Fluke controversy. Rush eventually apologized after he lost advertisers.
81
I have a few friends who are college educated on Facebook who are in their late 60's or older of whom some are Trump supporters. These same people keep posting pro-Trump/fake news sites on their Facebook wall which then shows up in my FB feed. I have written in the comments that these are fake news sites but I was ignored. I have now resorted to hiding or deleting these sites when they pop up. College educated people should know better, some of these people seem to be under some kind of spell. They become angry when I post a news item from a legitimate news site such as NY Times which may be critical of the president-elect. I haven't noticed very many positive articles about Mr. Trump on the NY Times or Washington Post which is as it should be since he is a toxic person who is unlikely to do anything good for the country in my opinion.
94
The hypnotic power of Trump and Breitbart news over college educated citizens is out there and scary. Does it stem from the emotive approach to news over fact based rationality? Ideology over science? It's so hard to explain. I personally know of an inlaw with a PhD in forestry, who is tasked in his position to replant great swaths of land with trees adapted to a changing environment, who believes that climate change is a hoax. Will it take a collapse of society to return this country to its senses?
9
Yes, I too have noticed that "under a spell" thing. It also shows up in the pictures/visuals of the rallies if you pay attention. It's a curious thing for me.
College Educated. Well, yes,one would expect a more enlightened view sure. And I think the anger and venom you get when you question the 'safe position' suggests that somewhere inside they know more and know better. But even the college educated can experience fear of "the others"- fear of what they haven't bothered to try to understand (takes effort and courage not a degree)- and if you shut off information that doesn't question that fear - you naturally gravitate to what validates it - Breitbart.
Watching. Questioning. Participating.
College Educated. Well, yes,one would expect a more enlightened view sure. And I think the anger and venom you get when you question the 'safe position' suggests that somewhere inside they know more and know better. But even the college educated can experience fear of "the others"- fear of what they haven't bothered to try to understand (takes effort and courage not a degree)- and if you shut off information that doesn't question that fear - you naturally gravitate to what validates it - Breitbart.
Watching. Questioning. Participating.
7
It's the 'my-team-right-or-wrong' attitude that seems to have pervaded politics over the past few decades. I have many friends on my FB list who are also Trump supporters and I see a lot of the fake news & myopic pro-Trump stuff on my feed as well. They *do* get angry, indignant, or combative when they are presented with facts or an opposing viewpoint in the comments section of their post. I guess that they post some article, meme, etc. just to put their perspective out there - it's not an invitation to a political discussion or exchange of ideas. "This is how I see things are you ain't gonna tell me I'm wrong!" Discouraging times....
5
Breitbart News Is not racist. It is not about "fake news". It's on par, or better than Drudge Report, especially with it's national vertical. If it weren't for Breitbart News, we'd be left in the dark about the Mexican cartel violence, the illegal hordes being transported over our southern border and the Muslim invasion of Europe.
This article is garbage. It's the hard left dying, trying for some semblance of relevance.
This article is garbage. It's the hard left dying, trying for some semblance of relevance.
28
No advertiser should fear being embarrassed by advertising on a legitimate news site. To paraphrase DJT, advertisers can make up their own minds.
3
You omitted the Black Death and the Spanish Inquisition.
3
Really -- and your evidence is?
2
"Many companies don’t know that their ads are appearing next to abhorrent content. Tell them. "
QUESTION: If I am not reading the abhorrent content, how am I to know which companies' ads are appearing next to abhorrent content? If I am reading the abhorrent content, I probably do not care about the ads appearing next to it.
QUESTION: If I am not reading the abhorrent content, how am I to know which companies' ads are appearing next to abhorrent content? If I am reading the abhorrent content, I probably do not care about the ads appearing next to it.
6
Obviously this is a call to activism. Activism sometimes requires us to read thing we would not otherwise read. Plus other stuff also.
2
Well, you need to get out of your bubble and start reading, or at least monitoring, sites with "abhorrent" content (Breitbart, Drudge, etc) and then take the appropriate action. I read Drudge every day. And even when it makes me really mad that's still good because it gives me more cause to contact the advertisers and complain. And by abhorrent, it's not sex porn, it's fake news, so it won't hurt you to see and understand what the far right is up to.
3
Um...you could take the time to look over the page, thereby viewing something unpleasant, in order to perform a bit of social advocacy? I mean you don't have to READ the abhorrent content to see the ads on the page, take a screen shot, and start communicating to the companies who are putting their dollars into supporting Breitbart etc.
5
Sign me up for the Sleeping Giants.
48
This is an amazing, important essay. It needs to be shared and read by everyone. You have opened my eyes to an entirely new way to fight back against the threat of the post-truth world Donald Trump symbolizes.
I will follow Sleeping Giants and PARTICIPATE.
I will follow Sleeping Giants and PARTICIPATE.
145
The Sleeping Giants awoke during the election. By voting down the progressive agenda of the Alt Left and the corrupt methods of the DNC, the voice of the people was proclaimed - loudly and clearly.
The fact that large corporations may choose not to advertise for Breitbart is a foolish business move. People with left leaning ideology will not abandon these organizations because liberal leadership is fraught with hypocrisy. They are influenced by corporatism and dirty money. Their agendas are driven by their own personal gain.
The power of the purse has a greater influence on the left than it does the right. Other people's money is what drives the liberal machine, whereas the exact opposite is true for the right.
The fact that large corporations may choose not to advertise for Breitbart is a foolish business move. People with left leaning ideology will not abandon these organizations because liberal leadership is fraught with hypocrisy. They are influenced by corporatism and dirty money. Their agendas are driven by their own personal gain.
The power of the purse has a greater influence on the left than it does the right. Other people's money is what drives the liberal machine, whereas the exact opposite is true for the right.
4
@ObviousOne
You obviously fear the power of Sleeping Giants. By"voice of the people" you can only mean the rubes and Russian bears. Right?
You obviously fear the power of Sleeping Giants. By"voice of the people" you can only mean the rubes and Russian bears. Right?
8
Fear that giant? It is an illusion.
Regardless of the silly efforts to boycott everyone and everything that exposes liberal hypocrisy, the bottom line is the bottom line. No legitimate organization that must generate revenue to sustain its existence will abandon half of their potential consumer market to avoid offending liberals or conservatives.
Of course, some organizations practice extortion to generate revenue by force or false pretenses. Now that the mainstream media has been exposed and the gangster practices of the U.S. Executive branch will soon be turned over to an outsider, there seems to be widespread panic among the illusionary giant.
The voice of 304 electoral college votes for President, majority in the House, and majority in the Senate. Progressive strategy has backfired.
Rubes and Russian bears? That's a stretch. How many Russians voted for Trump? Independent thinking Americans voted Trump into office. Love him or hate him, he will be the Commander in Chief in less than two weeks.
Regardless of the silly efforts to boycott everyone and everything that exposes liberal hypocrisy, the bottom line is the bottom line. No legitimate organization that must generate revenue to sustain its existence will abandon half of their potential consumer market to avoid offending liberals or conservatives.
Of course, some organizations practice extortion to generate revenue by force or false pretenses. Now that the mainstream media has been exposed and the gangster practices of the U.S. Executive branch will soon be turned over to an outsider, there seems to be widespread panic among the illusionary giant.
The voice of 304 electoral college votes for President, majority in the House, and majority in the Senate. Progressive strategy has backfired.
Rubes and Russian bears? That's a stretch. How many Russians voted for Trump? Independent thinking Americans voted Trump into office. Love him or hate him, he will be the Commander in Chief in less than two weeks.
2
This is quite easy to do. Usually you can find the contact information for the Media or Public Relations group of a company. Send them a nicely worded, polite email with the attached screenshots, and even the URL of the page.
Many, many of the companies *in your local area* are horrified to find out they are paying for Breitbart. They do not need to do anything public in response -- they can just have their ads removed, depriving Breitbart of the oxygen it needs to survive.
I generally follow up to see that the companies' ads are indeed no longer appearing.
Many, many of the companies *in your local area* are horrified to find out they are paying for Breitbart. They do not need to do anything public in response -- they can just have their ads removed, depriving Breitbart of the oxygen it needs to survive.
I generally follow up to see that the companies' ads are indeed no longer appearing.
125
Thank you. Helpful.
5
I also visited Breitbart in December and was shocked at the ads there. I emailed the companies whose products I buy (Amazon, RH, etc.) but didn't bother with the NRA. Some companies needed some follow-up, but at this point none of the companies' ads appear on Breitbart, as far as I can tell. Also, I wrote Kellogg's and Warby Parker to thank them for their decisive actions. My next pair of glasses will be from Warby, and Rice Krispie treats were our standard treat this Christmas season. With non-Trump supporters controlling 70% of the economy, it's time to flex some muscle.
455
"With non-Trump supporters controlling 70% of the economy," I'd very much like to see the basis for this remark.
3
I use AdBlock Plus, so I never see ads. When I want to buy something, I click Search. (Eighty-nine years old and using Linux Mint as my computer operating system. No more Windows.)
2
Can you fact check: "non-Trump supporters controlling 70% of the economy"
5
Just goes to show what happens when you turn your ad dollars over to a robot. Just what I would want to have happen, my soft, furry toy rabbit being advertised on a Neo Nazi web site. Like the author said, porno sites can be filtered out, why not fake news/hate mongering sites. Answer, because business knows they can get away with it. Now their hand is being called. Let's see how much these corporate citizens want to behave as the people they supposedly are. Or will they hide behind the veneer of profit maximization, efficiency and the invisible hand.
22
Fantastic!
6
The author is hoping to whip up an army of Internet activists to intimidate and silence web sites that dissent from prevailing liberal orthodoxy. This tactic has actually worked rather well against individuals -- for example it got Brendan Eich, the creator or JavaScript, fired from his job at Mozilla for opposing gay marriage -- so it's not surprising that the Left wants to scale it up. The goal is that anyone deemed guilty of a sufficiently serious thoughtcrime should be personally and financially ruined.
But hey, the government isn't doing it, so that means it isn't censorship! (You might disagree, but you should probably think carefully about doing so too loudly and publicly, if you catch my drift...)
But hey, the government isn't doing it, so that means it isn't censorship! (You might disagree, but you should probably think carefully about doing so too loudly and publicly, if you catch my drift...)
19
Contacting an organization to let it know its ads are appearing on a certain website, and letting the organization know your opinion about that website, is not censorship. It is free speech.
6
And, as has been reported, Breitbart is listing companies who have removed their ads and is encouraging people to boycott them. And I'm sure one can easily find reports of people who have been fired for promoting inclusiveness and tolerance.
7
So are you opposed to advertisers making up their own minds about where to advertise?
Sleeping Giants isn't calling for boycotts--that's being done by Breitbart. Are you saying that you are opposed to that?
Sleeping Giants isn't calling for boycotts--that's being done by Breitbart. Are you saying that you are opposed to that?
7
Mass marketing makes modern capitalism work. Without large audiences, our brands will disappear.
The future will care for itself.
The future will care for itself.
7
Found your comment interesting so wanted to reply. From my view, Breitbart is one of the bad pennies in a big bucket of coins. Big brands outlive and will continue to outlive most things (some horrible). They'll find a way to 'live on' without Breitbart and its kind, no doubt. But the future 'never' cares for itself. We have to care for it, influence it, and commit to making it the best that we can. I guess I prefer a forward looking world view - one that's participatory. Like when I hit provocative though.
81
Unfortunately, the future cannot care for itself. It is forged by today's behavior. The failure of the majority of eligible voters to bother to vote got us where we are today. Any study of history warns us that no democracy, not even America, is guaranteed to survive apathy.
It has been said that for evil men to accomplish their purpose it is only necessary that good men should do nothing. - C. F. Aked
It has been said that for evil men to accomplish their purpose it is only necessary that good men should do nothing. - C. F. Aked
4
could anyone direct me as to where to donate to these guys? I just realized reading this I haven't donated to charity yet this year, this seems like a good place to start.
16
Stupid is as stupid does. If both Bannon and Cruz received elite educations, why are they both so disgustingly vile?
24
There are plenty of wackos who get degrees from prestigious academic institutions. That does not necessarily make them sensible.
Why are they so vile? Try any one or more of: mental illness, total lack of any conscience, greed, narcissism. Who knows and why does it matter?
The issue is to defeat them. Use their vile expressions to cut them down to size.
Why are they so vile? Try any one or more of: mental illness, total lack of any conscience, greed, narcissism. Who knows and why does it matter?
The issue is to defeat them. Use their vile expressions to cut them down to size.
4
Gregory, please provide specific examples of what you deem "disgustingly vile" just so we are all clear on your perspective.
Thanks.
Thanks.
1
As the social media gets more organized on the right, you face the fact this is not a one-sided street. One tweet about your advertisers by President Trump, and I think you would lose some.
5
The more Trump tweets, the less effect his tweets will have over time. Eventually there will be no one left about whom he has not tweeted. Business will adjust and businesses will get on with their lives. A tweet from Trump? Ho hum.
5
Money talks and I applaud the efforts of the Sleeping Giants. The irony is that with the election of Trump, his own fake news media will be heard 24/7 by all Americans, and cost nothing.
33
I have stopped watching the news on tv. Tired of hearing trump this and trump that. Nothing to offer me for my time
2
During the waning days of last years presidential campaign, I emailed a friend in London to complain about the appointment of Steve Bannon of Breitbart News to the Donald Trump contingent.
When she wrote back saying she'd never heard of him, I sent her a barrage of NYT articles and links to U.S. websites that would provide a more complete picture of why I held this person in such contempt.
Less than a week later she sent me on online petition she had started to circulate warning people about supporting U.K. companies doing business with Breitbart -- one of them was Google.
Three days ago an article appeared in German SPIEGEL warning of an imminent Breitbart invasion into the country, just in time for its upcoming elections.
As most already know, tensions have been running high in Germany since almost a million refugees and migrants started to flood into the country after Chancellor Merkel's Open Door Policy ("Willkommenskultur") became known. The result has been a rise in right-neo Nazi activity and political parties like AfD (Alternative für Deutschland) and the virulent NPD (Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands).
All of this fertile ground for the race-baiting Fake News of Breitbart, and it already started by circulating the fabricated story that a 1.000-man mob of foreigners set fire to a Church in Dortmund on New Year's eve.
No matter how much Trump extols the values of Steve Bannon and Breitbart News, it is an international threat with devastating potential.
When she wrote back saying she'd never heard of him, I sent her a barrage of NYT articles and links to U.S. websites that would provide a more complete picture of why I held this person in such contempt.
Less than a week later she sent me on online petition she had started to circulate warning people about supporting U.K. companies doing business with Breitbart -- one of them was Google.
Three days ago an article appeared in German SPIEGEL warning of an imminent Breitbart invasion into the country, just in time for its upcoming elections.
As most already know, tensions have been running high in Germany since almost a million refugees and migrants started to flood into the country after Chancellor Merkel's Open Door Policy ("Willkommenskultur") became known. The result has been a rise in right-neo Nazi activity and political parties like AfD (Alternative für Deutschland) and the virulent NPD (Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands).
All of this fertile ground for the race-baiting Fake News of Breitbart, and it already started by circulating the fabricated story that a 1.000-man mob of foreigners set fire to a Church in Dortmund on New Year's eve.
No matter how much Trump extols the values of Steve Bannon and Breitbart News, it is an international threat with devastating potential.
120
How to Destroy the Business Model of the Liberal Media and Fake News
Elect Donald Trump
Enjoy!
Elect Donald Trump
Enjoy!
13
@Reality Check: Better check your reality. The NY Times now has more subscribers than it ever has in its entire history. Trump's election triggered a flood of liberal activism, and we have only just begun.
12
Actually, WE didn't elect Comrade Trump, Putin did. Trump is now Putin's "useful idiot" and he will now try to destroy our economy and our democracy for his Russian debt-holders.
I think it's just a matter of time before the "Manchurain President" is recognized as a traitor and impeachment hearings begin.
Facts are the "liberal media's" best revenge and they will continue to dog Trump until he slithers off into his high-rise for good.
I think it's just a matter of time before the "Manchurain President" is recognized as a traitor and impeachment hearings begin.
Facts are the "liberal media's" best revenge and they will continue to dog Trump until he slithers off into his high-rise for good.
4
Emperor Donald will be his own worst enemy. Wait and see.
4
There are SO MANY of these alt-right and fake news sites that it truly is amazing. a lot of them have no content to speak of and nothing even remotely journalistic, just lots of bombast and outright lies. They truly pollute our world and like the old definition of porn have no redeeming social value. obviously the founding Fathers did not envision this kind of social claptrap that masquerades under the First Amendment.
19
Breitbart is not the only site where the Sleeping Giants strategy can be applied.
It may not be possible to apply the strategy to all offensive sites (since new ones will continue to pop up) but if it's done often enough for enough sites then someone will figure out a means by which the whole category can be avoided, as with pornography.
It may not be possible to apply the strategy to all offensive sites (since new ones will continue to pop up) but if it's done often enough for enough sites then someone will figure out a means by which the whole category can be avoided, as with pornography.
3
Bob Jack - Exactly, we need more real news from the mainstream media...like these gems from the last two weeks:
"Russian operation hacked a Vermont utility, showing risk to U.S. electrical grid"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russian-hackers-p...
CNN reports Assange is a pedophile.........wrong.
https://twitter.com/NewDay/status/816713773939621890
"Russian operation hacked a Vermont utility, showing risk to U.S. electrical grid"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russian-hackers-p...
CNN reports Assange is a pedophile.........wrong.
https://twitter.com/NewDay/status/816713773939621890
6
I love you...for your use of claptrap.
1
You might regret getting what you wished for.
Ronald Reagan only entered politics after General Electric booted him from host of their GE Theater TV show for criticizing the TVA.
Ronald Reagan only entered politics after General Electric booted him from host of their GE Theater TV show for criticizing the TVA.
8
Trying to take down fake news would be like playing a game of whack-a-mole. New sites would just keep popping up. Instead, we should try propping up real news. Offer a tax credit for a news subscription.
19
I agree with everything but your last sentence. If there was a tax credit for a news subscription, who would decide which publications would be eligible?
3
Let's do it all. Don't think it has to be mutually exclusive. Every little bit counts.
4
Why the heck is Duke advertising over the web in the first place ? I would suggest the degrees from there are overpriced.
8
An online search shows Breitbart and its ilk quickly summon their followers to boycott companies de-listing adds on the fake news and racist sites. I have been following this de-listing and email or call (ask for head of marketing) the company to praise their efforts to stop promulgate fake news. It can be particularly effective is you wait a bit since it shows persistent damage to brand to not block Breitbart.
16
I think the title of Mr./Ms. Kennedy's book, "How We Dream Up Things" is very appropriate because it is difficult to distinguish fact from what he/she/they dream up about Breitbart to fit preconceived leftist political beliefs. Dems are still looking for inflammatory statements by Steve Bannon...and they are still looking...not finding anything to hang him.
8
A quick way to find inflammatory statements by Steve Bannon is to google "inflammatory statements by Steve Bannon."
8
I have a problem with step 2 ("Tweet the screenshot to the company"). I don't have a twitter account and no interest in obtaining one. What is the alternative?
9
Send the screenshot as an email attachment.
4
No effective one. Print and snail mail?
2
Send the company in question an email.
4
It’s not just fake news that is a concern. A second problem is that some media publish only the information that supports their viewpoint. After the Furguson shooting, a close friend signed up for twitter updates from Black Lives Matter. I saw her carefully reading an update, and engaged her in conversation on the shooting. She did not believe me when I said that Michael Brown had reached into the patrol car and had struggled with the policeman for his gun. My friend assumed that the BLM twitter account would have told her all about what had happened. She was wrong.
I imagine that there are still many Americans who are unaware that Brown grabbed the policeman’s gun in an effort to wrest it from him. Many also believe that Brown held up his hands and shouted, “Don’t shoot.” The scary thing is that these people think they know what happened at Furguson, and some of them may have been the ones who, perhaps in retaliation, shot policemen.
The media outlets that publish only part of a news story are not less guilty than the ones that concoct fake stories.
I imagine that there are still many Americans who are unaware that Brown grabbed the policeman’s gun in an effort to wrest it from him. Many also believe that Brown held up his hands and shouted, “Don’t shoot.” The scary thing is that these people think they know what happened at Furguson, and some of them may have been the ones who, perhaps in retaliation, shot policemen.
The media outlets that publish only part of a news story are not less guilty than the ones that concoct fake stories.
17
The NYTs barely touched the actual facts in this unfortunate incident.
7
Thank you, Sleeping Giants, for this practical & workable strategy to combat the scourge of fake news. This gives me hope.
18
The next time someone tells you this is about freedom of speech, retort by suggesting some anatomical impossibility. You may both end up physically injured, but neither of you will raise a Constitutional issue, because the First Amendment's speech clause only restrains the government.
14
We are an oligarchy now. We can only hurt the oligarchs pockets.
12
Yeah, I wouldn't expect the New York times, or any other fact checker site (Politifact, Snopes, etc.) to be the arbiter of fake news. All too often, it seems whatever the times classifies as fake news is whatever they don't like. The fact that anyone can wonder how Trump won is astonishing when the answer is in front of them, and they caused it.
14
Yes, use the power of the purse, but please also utilize the power of the pen.
Don't dignify this as "fake news," when it is a heap of lies. Don't say that this is "the post-truth reality,"when it is the age of propaganda, which is about to be rooted in the White House with Trump and Bannon.
Don't dignify this as "fake news," when it is a heap of lies. Don't say that this is "the post-truth reality,"when it is the age of propaganda, which is about to be rooted in the White House with Trump and Bannon.
11
Good...starve the beast (Brief Bart el al.)
6
I went online and most of the articles and information I found were attempts to organize boycotts against those companies that had pulled their brands from Breitbart!
Of course that just made me more determined to reward those companies who have pulled their ads from Brritbart's hate-spewing and racist website.
I found this site
www.factsforamerica.com
which tells you how to contact advertisers and a list of those good companies that have already blocked Breitbart from their media plan. I am going to favor those companies whenever I can.
Of course that just made me more determined to reward those companies who have pulled their ads from Brritbart's hate-spewing and racist website.
I found this site
www.factsforamerica.com
which tells you how to contact advertisers and a list of those good companies that have already blocked Breitbart from their media plan. I am going to favor those companies whenever I can.
18
Very much like attacking porn and spam. From the sleeping giants FAQ: Visit Breitbart News (we will be expanding to others soon), take a screenshot of an ad next to some of their content, then tweet the shot with a polite note to the company’s twitter account and tag us (@slpng_giants) so we can keep track of the progress. If the company responds, ask for confirmation that the ads are down. Once you get the confirmation, retweet it to us with the words “CONFIRMATION TWEET” and we will announce it to the Sleeping Giants Community.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/14xnkluiAdVqT-KmwcZRJs4U0wia9TIBRzPaU...
https://docs.google.com/document/d/14xnkluiAdVqT-KmwcZRJs4U0wia9TIBRzPaU...
9
Great job, New York Times and Pagan Kennedy. I hope to see more of these smart op-eds in the Times that respond to the danger of our days with actionable intelligence. With more work like these, our democracy, frayed and battered as it is, has hope. Keep these articles going!
12
How can I help the Sleeping Giants!
6
A great piece on what seems to be a smart response to the abuses of Breitbart et al. I hope this makes a sustained difference.
10
Hey, that is really cool. I have a question: could the Sleeping Giants twitter accounts be "verified?" Is there anything that needs to be done to protect this form of activism?
3
I would not recommend Twitter accounts now, especially "verified" ones. Julian Assange wants Twitter to track "verified" accounts and keep dossiers on people who have them, including some very personal information. With his ties to the Russian hacking, the saying "Big Brother is watching you" may now refer to the Russian government, not the US government.
2
I found it so inspiring, gave me patriotic chills really, when Sarah Palin so passionately told the tale about how Paul Revere road a 4-wheeler through the dark of night to warn Abraham Lincoln that Mexican secular communists under Nelson Mandela were coming to destroy the statue of the 10 commandments on the White House lawn. Got me all fired up. That's the mentality that craves fake news. That is why it will be hard to put the genie of fake news back in the bottle. It both serves up red meat and makes money.
18
1, the birth control makes women unattractive and crazy was just an attempt to trigger feminists by a troll by the name of Milo. If you actually go on their website 75% of their articles are pro-trump articles mostly from teh hill. 15% opinion. 9.99% investigations. .01% conspiracy theory
2
What is it that the left fears from Breitbart, and how is it any different from conservative fears stirred by the Daily Kos ? A journalist who seeks to undermine the First Amendment rights of any citizen is an abject disgrace and should be chased out of the business.
But not at the New York Times, because advancing the radical left wing progressive agenda is a much higher priority than responsible editorial review.
It is predictable, and consistent with history, that the first tool used by progressive leftists is an attempt to silence their critics by any and all means.
This is because, under scrutiny, the political philosophy of the collectivist socialists always has been, and always will be, always exposed as bankrupt, and indefensible.
When you cannot defend your position with substance and reason, attack....
But not at the New York Times, because advancing the radical left wing progressive agenda is a much higher priority than responsible editorial review.
It is predictable, and consistent with history, that the first tool used by progressive leftists is an attempt to silence their critics by any and all means.
This is because, under scrutiny, the political philosophy of the collectivist socialists always has been, and always will be, always exposed as bankrupt, and indefensible.
When you cannot defend your position with substance and reason, attack....
17
Thanks, Ayn!
4
Well done, Objectivist. I would love to see a reasonable and substantive reply here to your comment, but will not hold my breath.
3
Who is in the radical left wing?
Why do you conflate "conservative" with right-wing authoritarianism? I thought conservatives were libertarians .
I think what people may be worried about with Breitbart is the agenda, which seems to be authoritarianism, militarism, and corporatism - in other words, fascism.
Why do you conflate "conservative" with right-wing authoritarianism? I thought conservatives were libertarians .
I think what people may be worried about with Breitbart is the agenda, which seems to be authoritarianism, militarism, and corporatism - in other words, fascism.
12
Good luck to those efforts. Don't expect me to help, however, since I cannot abide visiting those sites, even briefly.
4
Pagan is just one little journalist changing the world for good with her stories.
11
Thank you, Pagan. I will send the Indivisible Guide to all my friends. It's perfect, to take action effectively, in this horrible time.
11
Please is there a website or other place where we can see a list of Breitbart advertisers so we can boycott them and notify them of why? Hitting them in their wallets they understand.
24
Exactly my question. Is there a site that lists advertisers on such hateful, racist, anti women, etc., places on the internet, so that we can begin to write or complain to the companies and spend our money elsewhere? I already know, now, to avoid Zappos, for example. Thank you!
3
The epitome of 'news you can use' - THANK YOU.
11
I have ad blockers installed on my laptop and my iPad. I'll pay for the NY Times but other sites get nothing from me. (I hope!)
Online advertising is a waste of money. These companies are not reaching me. It's clear now that this business model is a threat to our way of life and it has to be "destroyed".
Online advertising is a waste of money. These companies are not reaching me. It's clear now that this business model is a threat to our way of life and it has to be "destroyed".
10
Looking over Kennedy's writings, one thing becomes clear, Pagan is no fan of personal responsibility or self-reliance. In fact, the foundation of the American legal system and culture, the US Constitution seems to be abhorrent to this individual, one primary example being the First Amendment. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Nowhere in there is the right to suppress an opinion you do not agree with, and yet this writer is pressing for just such a movement. It has been said that there is no more intolerant philosophy than that of progressive liberalism. It appears that opinion may be correct.
12
Nothing in this article suppresses opinion.
What this article says is that consumers have the right to express their opinions to advertisers, who then have the right to determine where their advertising dollars go.
That's the free market.
What this article says is that consumers have the right to express their opinions to advertisers, who then have the right to determine where their advertising dollars go.
That's the free market.
10
I guess the fundamental question is, if you oppose intolerance, does that make you, in turn, intolerant?
2
This comment reflects a common misunderstanding of the First Amendment to United States Constitution. It applies to state action only.
4
It is two months after the election and articles like this one confirm my faith in democracy. I was wrong the American voters were correct.
This is the chaos we need to finally have an honest conversation.
John Ralston Saul Canada's foremost public intellectual calls our ideology neoliberalism which is neither new nor liberal. Saul says the ideology is what we call Western Civilization.
We are starting to again have the Plato Socrates debate.
Socrates seems to be rising from the dead. The search for Truth seems to be gaining in value.
This is the chaos we need to finally have an honest conversation.
John Ralston Saul Canada's foremost public intellectual calls our ideology neoliberalism which is neither new nor liberal. Saul says the ideology is what we call Western Civilization.
We are starting to again have the Plato Socrates debate.
Socrates seems to be rising from the dead. The search for Truth seems to be gaining in value.
5
Three American institutions: hate propagandists, advertisers, and corporations. Hard to pick a favorite here; they’re all destructive, psychopathic forces. Still, it’s nice to hear that they’re all fighting with each other.
We saw a version of this before when many advertisers fled from Rush Limbaugh after he viciously attacked Sandra Fluke for several days because she had the temerity to request that insurance companies cover contraception. Still, enough advertisers stuck with Rush and thereby enabled him to continue spewing hatred and misogyny on the radio. I don’t expect much of a different outcome here, especially now that there will soon be some proud white racists and misogynists in the White House and cabinet.
When it’s truth and ethics versus profits and appearances, my heart is always with the former, but my money is always on the latter.
We saw a version of this before when many advertisers fled from Rush Limbaugh after he viciously attacked Sandra Fluke for several days because she had the temerity to request that insurance companies cover contraception. Still, enough advertisers stuck with Rush and thereby enabled him to continue spewing hatred and misogyny on the radio. I don’t expect much of a different outcome here, especially now that there will soon be some proud white racists and misogynists in the White House and cabinet.
When it’s truth and ethics versus profits and appearances, my heart is always with the former, but my money is always on the latter.
12
Ive been readinf Breitbart for months now. They have been promoting that Kellogs boycott for weeks and got like half a million people to sign up. I hope that liberals truly will put their dollara where their mouth is, because these people are intense.
Remember Chick Fil Eh or whatevee they are called. They couldnt be defeated by liberals after trying to impose Christianity on its employees. Now that company is everywhere and every conservative loves their crappy chicken.
Remember Chick Fil Eh or whatevee they are called. They couldnt be defeated by liberals after trying to impose Christianity on its employees. Now that company is everywhere and every conservative loves their crappy chicken.
21
Liberals are going to need to buy a lot of pop tarts in order to win this one. Thing is, I think Kellogs demographic might just be idiots working for Walmart in Alabama. I know I dont eat pop tarts.
See, Im all for using corporations to get protections for minority groups. Im a transgender woman, so HB2 would be just fine with everyone had it not been for a bunch of corporations. Maybe they can be useful for something. However, that does mean that liberals need to actually support these companies when they make a stand. Thats the sticky part because it reeks of corporatism, but thats the way America is, at least for now.
See, Im all for using corporations to get protections for minority groups. Im a transgender woman, so HB2 would be just fine with everyone had it not been for a bunch of corporations. Maybe they can be useful for something. However, that does mean that liberals need to actually support these companies when they make a stand. Thats the sticky part because it reeks of corporatism, but thats the way America is, at least for now.
3
Idiots working for Walmart in Alabama.
Prejudice like this is why Trump won. You may be living off pop tarts sooner than you think.
Prejudice like this is why Trump won. You may be living off pop tarts sooner than you think.
6
I take issue with the title, and the intent. As a small business owner myself, I'm very aware of the importance of branding, and the effect 'guilt by association' can have on clientele.
Busy companies don't habitually check the sites where their ads are appearing to see what they're sharing real estate beside.
I don't feel terribly sorry for Breitbart. Look at Breitbart's vindictive "Dump Kellogg" campaign.
Busy companies don't habitually check the sites where their ads are appearing to see what they're sharing real estate beside.
I don't feel terribly sorry for Breitbart. Look at Breitbart's vindictive "Dump Kellogg" campaign.
18
Yeah, and look how well it worked. Decency is what it's about.
3
How is Breitbart's "Dump Kellogg" campaign any different that what this column is advocating for?
4
Declining education to blame? No, it's the Internet, enabling and magnifying our most socially destructive innate psychological tendencies, such as confirmation bias and tribalism.
Marshall MacLuhan was worried about TV. How quaint that seems now.
Democracy as we have known it will, I believe, end within my lifetime or soon thereafter. Massive social disruptions flowing from the accelerating and irreversible rise in temperatures and sea levels will only fuel the global political convulsions to come.
Marshall MacLuhan was worried about TV. How quaint that seems now.
Democracy as we have known it will, I believe, end within my lifetime or soon thereafter. Massive social disruptions flowing from the accelerating and irreversible rise in temperatures and sea levels will only fuel the global political convulsions to come.
20
This has about as much of a chance of destroying Breitbart as the League of Morals boycott had of destroying Playboy in the 1950s. Boycotts work by damaging reputation, not by driving away business. Breitbart and the fake news purveyors already have terrible reputations, and so are less vulnerable to boycotts.
5
Well, we'll just have to try, won't we?
13
They still need advertising dollars to survive. When companies realize that some of their visibility is in places like this, they will move their money to more acceptable places. There are still more decent people than fascists, in our country.
7
I doubt that this effort can succeed. If I were responsible for directing advertising dollars for a corporation, I would want to spend it exactly where I can find the most gullible people, and that would be fake news sites like Breitbart. That's certainly morally reprehensible, but certainly profitable from a pure business perspective. After all, ads are exactly that: fake news.
13
Not all corporations want or need to succeed by directing advertising dollars to the most gullible and reprehensible. Even CEOs have to sleep at night.
3
D
It is apparent that you fail to understand marketing.
You spend smaller dollars in order to get people to spend more money so the net return is positive (more cash in than cash out).
If your ad on a racist site is turning off more buyers than it is attracting, you are spending money to LOSE sales.
Now do you understand?
It is apparent that you fail to understand marketing.
You spend smaller dollars in order to get people to spend more money so the net return is positive (more cash in than cash out).
If your ad on a racist site is turning off more buyers than it is attracting, you are spending money to LOSE sales.
Now do you understand?
4
Remember citizen soldiers that wars make for casualties. So for instance, monied interests could easily threaten companies that place ads in your favorite places while funding places you are seeking to stifle. The answer, which escapes liberals as a matter of genetics, is to have a better idea - one that, ahem, trumps the fake, the speculative, the inaccurate. The fact that this remedy takes intellect is also a stumbling block for the common sense-challenged. Alas, such is the fate of do-gooders without the goods.
11
Actually what escapes conservatives is common sense. Liberals have plenty of facts on their side. The fake, the speculative and the inaccurate were exposed practically on an hourly basis during the campaign, but Trump supporters, already brainwashed by Fox into believing right wing media is the only source of truth, rejected actual truth, no matter how obvious it was.
You forget that it has been conservative/evangelical groups that have made a business of boycotting everything under the sun that doesn't agree with their worldview, and steering their consumers to do their patriotic and Christian duty by shopping at businesses labeled Christian. Why all the outrage when liberals want to pressure businesses?
You forget that it has been conservative/evangelical groups that have made a business of boycotting everything under the sun that doesn't agree with their worldview, and steering their consumers to do their patriotic and Christian duty by shopping at businesses labeled Christian. Why all the outrage when liberals want to pressure businesses?
5
Maybe it will make a difference when a business being sued for racial discrimination or sexual harassment has a screenshot presented of its advertising next to an inflamitory article. Try getting a jury to understand that the advertising robot didn't mean to place that ad
87
Here is another example of leftist bad advice to their "allies" based on their misunderstanding of free markets. Businesses that kneejerk pull out of Breitbart are leaving money on the table. They will increase their advertising cost while lowering that of their competitors. That's going to be fatal in our super competitive world, especially as the election has proven that middleclass Whites, who probably spend more as a group than elite Whites or lower class minorities, have a strong demand for the views that Breitbart expresses. Forcing businesses to drop Breitbart is just going to cause liberal businesses to bleed money. The article should rather be called how to destroy businesses that want to destroy Breitbart.
14
@BBB
Us
One little problem with your analysis. There are almost certainly more tolerant, anti racists in the US than people like you. So corporations risk leaving their money on the table. The assumption that across the entire country racist, nativist whites are in a super majority is almost certainly flawed although it may be true is some states. Witness the corporate and sporting reaction to NC's passage of anti gay laws. Then there are the changing demographics. Currently whites make up about 68% of the population but within 25 years this will be down to around 50%. Also rather amusing is your suggestion that lower middle class whites buy more Audis than higher income ones. You don't appear to have much idea who spends most of the money in our consumer driven society.
Us
One little problem with your analysis. There are almost certainly more tolerant, anti racists in the US than people like you. So corporations risk leaving their money on the table. The assumption that across the entire country racist, nativist whites are in a super majority is almost certainly flawed although it may be true is some states. Witness the corporate and sporting reaction to NC's passage of anti gay laws. Then there are the changing demographics. Currently whites make up about 68% of the population but within 25 years this will be down to around 50%. Also rather amusing is your suggestion that lower middle class whites buy more Audis than higher income ones. You don't appear to have much idea who spends most of the money in our consumer driven society.
57
"forcing"? Or informing? Funny how the right wing loves the free market until it isn't going their way. Same way they hate the government unless it is giving THEM handouts, passing laws they approve of, and using the power of the government of force behaviors they approve of. Mr. BBB needs to remember all roads can be traveled in both directions and everything can be used either for or against. Go Sleeping Giant! PS. I am quite sure that 'liberal' business (is that a code word for 'successful'?) like Apple are not really too worried about the lost of business from losing Bretibart
10
Some folks may actually believe that money is not the final arbiter of EVERYTNING! As you seem to. This is the kind of thinking that has brought us the value-less capitalism we are all now suffering under.
Anyway, if consumers can be brought into the process, they have every right to decide where their dollars go and may help to make up any losses companies may suffer by doing 'the right thing'.
Anyway, if consumers can be brought into the process, they have every right to decide where their dollars go and may help to make up any losses companies may suffer by doing 'the right thing'.
6
This is exactly the right strategy and one that Republicans use as well. How do they hurt unions? They pass "Right to Work" laws which drain them of dues. Dismantle public education? Funnel taxpayer dollars to private schools.
Going forward, it will be business leaders who demand that the Republican Party acknowledge climate change and support civil rights. Money talks, and it's all the current crop of Republican leaders understand.
Going forward, it will be business leaders who demand that the Republican Party acknowledge climate change and support civil rights. Money talks, and it's all the current crop of Republican leaders understand.
247
Do whatever it takes to get rid of Breitbart and Co. The real problem is that so many people are desperate to listen to these lies. They are addicted to these lies. They need them. How to deal with the people desperate for lies.
145
Whatever it takes? the hallmark of every totalitarian.
8
i think the NY Times was very partisan and over the top this election cycle.
6
In Germany there is no constitutional right to free speech and the government routinely censors the press and the people, especially when it comes to criticisms of the government.
We have the right to free speech in the US, no matter how many Leftists wish it otherwise. That said, go right ahead and boycott Breitbart, as that too is protected speech.
We have the right to free speech in the US, no matter how many Leftists wish it otherwise. That said, go right ahead and boycott Breitbart, as that too is protected speech.
7
There is a direct correlation between the decline in the quality and content of our education and the rise of alternate news realities that growing segments of our population accept. We've come to the point where depending on where one stands in this polarized society, they will only accept the news that are meted out by like-minded outlets. It used to be that "crazy" was relegated to the Inquirer and most people accepted what they read in Time, Newsweek, Washington Post, and the New York Times.
The way to undo the damage done by the Foxification of our news, ultimately, is to make foundational correction in the single biggest inequity in our society. What is the one thing all members of the elite get? An excellent education, founded on the best, broadest font of knowledge in the humanities.
How did Trump, a man whose expressive language is of a very young 8 year old make such an impact on so many millions of voters and to on to get elected? Ronald Dworkin was right, our declining system of education has put democracy at-risk: http://wp.me/p2KJ3H-1pI Where did Steve Bannon go to school after a stint in the Navy? Georgetown University. He got an elite education. Where did Ted Cruz get his education? He went to Harvard.
Give every citizen in every state the same high-quality public education, from pre-K to 12th grade. http://wp.me/p2KJ3H-1qI Make college, whether technical or academic, free. That is how Breitbart and Fox News will be made irrelevant.
The way to undo the damage done by the Foxification of our news, ultimately, is to make foundational correction in the single biggest inequity in our society. What is the one thing all members of the elite get? An excellent education, founded on the best, broadest font of knowledge in the humanities.
How did Trump, a man whose expressive language is of a very young 8 year old make such an impact on so many millions of voters and to on to get elected? Ronald Dworkin was right, our declining system of education has put democracy at-risk: http://wp.me/p2KJ3H-1pI Where did Steve Bannon go to school after a stint in the Navy? Georgetown University. He got an elite education. Where did Ted Cruz get his education? He went to Harvard.
Give every citizen in every state the same high-quality public education, from pre-K to 12th grade. http://wp.me/p2KJ3H-1qI Make college, whether technical or academic, free. That is how Breitbart and Fox News will be made irrelevant.
292
What defines what we all know or should know? I was surprised to find that there is no single definition for "common font or fount of knowledge." See http://www.rimaregas.com/2015/06/common-font-of-knowledge-defining-what-...
5
Matt Taibbi did a piece about how he's an exceptionally good con-man who appeals to some people's lowest instincts. When I turn on Fox News on occasion, I feel as though I have entered an alternate reality. I really don't have the answer though since I'm not a psychiatrist! I think the things that Trump says are the things his supporters want to hear and he knows it. When he goes back on one of his campaign promises they don't care, due to his cult of personalty they are bewitched by him and will defend him at all costs. It is unknown at this time whether some or many of these people will wake up to reality. I am waiting to see what happens.
3
What you call education is indoctrination into radical progressive ideals taught by draft dodging hippies. The election of DJT, and the apparent gamble of it, is a direct revolt against the left. The liberals are still in shock and denial because they did not think there were enough sane people left who did not buy the trash the left sells.
2
It's a nice effort. I've seen a few similar campaigns, and daylight is certainly a good way to combat things that grow in dark places.
That said, there are plenty of people in the kleptocracy perfectly willing to finance the influential lie manufacturers - consider the accusations that ended up with violence at the pizza ping pong place. It's keeps people amused and makes them think they have power to disrupt.
That word disrupt, I find disturbing. There comes a time when disrupting a disruption of a disruption - for profit - is merely profiteering. If people want to know where their jobs have done, this is one cause. Young billionaires have paid no dues when they consolidate profits under one roof and get rid of mom and pop stores etc.
Too many billionaires: now there is a market that creates artificial value for them to spend all that money. We're much better off putting our resources into the whole community and acting for the benefit of all.
But back to Breitbart and disinformation: some people might find this informative. This is a very bright young man who has no sense of right and wrong, just how to manufacture rage and pain.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/31/trolls-for-trump
That said, there are plenty of people in the kleptocracy perfectly willing to finance the influential lie manufacturers - consider the accusations that ended up with violence at the pizza ping pong place. It's keeps people amused and makes them think they have power to disrupt.
That word disrupt, I find disturbing. There comes a time when disrupting a disruption of a disruption - for profit - is merely profiteering. If people want to know where their jobs have done, this is one cause. Young billionaires have paid no dues when they consolidate profits under one roof and get rid of mom and pop stores etc.
Too many billionaires: now there is a market that creates artificial value for them to spend all that money. We're much better off putting our resources into the whole community and acting for the benefit of all.
But back to Breitbart and disinformation: some people might find this informative. This is a very bright young man who has no sense of right and wrong, just how to manufacture rage and pain.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/31/trolls-for-trump
75
"We're much better off putting our resources into the whole community and acting for the benefit of all."
For the Breitbart and Trump crowd, that is the very definition of communism, to be avoided at all cost. Individualism and personal responsibility are the mantras of today's right wing. They categorically reject any sense of obligation to our fellow Americans for anything, but apparently, everyone owes them a job, a home, an education and a middle-class life.
I don't know what it's going to take to change that type of mentality. Trump certainly won't be any help there.
For the Breitbart and Trump crowd, that is the very definition of communism, to be avoided at all cost. Individualism and personal responsibility are the mantras of today's right wing. They categorically reject any sense of obligation to our fellow Americans for anything, but apparently, everyone owes them a job, a home, an education and a middle-class life.
I don't know what it's going to take to change that type of mentality. Trump certainly won't be any help there.
4
And your approach uses the free market! What could conservatives possibly complain about?
Thank you!
Thank you!
589
I have nothing against the free market of ideas...
But to claim the exclusive control of the truth when there is more than just a modicum of debate is not only dictatorial, but offensive.
But to claim the exclusive control of the truth when there is more than just a modicum of debate is not only dictatorial, but offensive.
11
I don't believe most thinking conservatives have any affinity for Breitbart, just as they don't identify with the KKK and other hate groups. I have intelligent friends who are conservative. We have differing views on some subjects but are in agreement on many others. We can argue points with civility, and without resorting to hateful rhetoric. I also believe it is dangerous to stereotype conservatives and liberals. There are many iterations within both groups.
11
Thank you for this article. It's hard to believe that respected newspapers across America have gone out of business, or greatly reduced the scope of their operations, because advertisers moved their ad money to the digital platform. It should be called the "flea" market because getting attention for ads on social media is like chasing fleas - it's next to impossible to "brand" a product or create a lasting audience for traditional retailers. Companies like Microsoft use newspapers when they want to get a serious, broad message out to the public because it's what works to reach a broad audience.
There are organizations that have taken on fake news. Media Matters actually shows people what is fake. Companies like Breitbart and fox so-called news are tricky - they run just enough real news to seem credible then put in a fake zinger and people don't question it. They use the National Enquirer, Heritage Foundation models to undermine democracy.
A new organization, Indivisible.Com, started by staffers on the Clinton campaign, gives suggestions on how to effectively protest the new democracy-destroying administration and Congress and give individuals and groups a "clearinghouse" to post their ideas and actions. Organized, co-operative, non-violent resistance and obstruction at every level is the only thing that will stop them for two years until Progressives can take back Congress.
http://mediamatters.org/
https://www.indivisibleguide.com/
There are organizations that have taken on fake news. Media Matters actually shows people what is fake. Companies like Breitbart and fox so-called news are tricky - they run just enough real news to seem credible then put in a fake zinger and people don't question it. They use the National Enquirer, Heritage Foundation models to undermine democracy.
A new organization, Indivisible.Com, started by staffers on the Clinton campaign, gives suggestions on how to effectively protest the new democracy-destroying administration and Congress and give individuals and groups a "clearinghouse" to post their ideas and actions. Organized, co-operative, non-violent resistance and obstruction at every level is the only thing that will stop them for two years until Progressives can take back Congress.
http://mediamatters.org/
https://www.indivisibleguide.com/
329
Media Matters, like Hillary Clinton, has a troubled relationship to the truth.
Your touting it as a reliable source, njglea, says a great deal about your willingness to be objective.
As for your other reference for "the truth", a cursor first look reveals that it is nothing more than more political gobbledegook just like Media Matters, the Democratic National Committee, and what you seem always to offer on these pages.
Your touting it as a reliable source, njglea, says a great deal about your willingness to be objective.
As for your other reference for "the truth", a cursor first look reveals that it is nothing more than more political gobbledegook just like Media Matters, the Democratic National Committee, and what you seem always to offer on these pages.
4
I just recommended indivisible.com as well. Looks exciting.
6
@njglea
Thank you for sharing! We need to take every avenue to stop fake news and the oppression of a Trump world.
Thank you for sharing! We need to take every avenue to stop fake news and the oppression of a Trump world.
6
It won't take much. Just take this article and summarize is as: "here is a liberal who called Breitbart racist because they don't believe humans caused global warming", and on that basis wants your ad pulled! Of course, this isn't exactly true, but then to Breitbart followers, everything written in the liberal press isn't exactly true either.
Let's hope the dem party dismisses this effort.