America Betrayed ---- Introducing Pre$$titutes.com

[Presstitutes]

I've been posting on DU for a couple of months now, and I figured I'd formally introduce my site by posting the full text of the 'About' section. DU is a tremendous political resource, a massive think-tank and news service and social networking tool rolled into one. When I launched Pre$$titutes, one of my hopes was that DU members would find it a worthy successor to Media Whores Online. I worry that many Democrats are so preoccupied with the vicious blatherings of Rush and Coulter and Hannity, that they overlook the greater danger posed by 'trusted' mainstream reporters who enable those hate-spewers by echoing their talking points. Pre$$titutes like Wolf Blitzer, Chris Matthews, Dana Milbank, Bill Schneider, Tim Russert and their ilk betray America by abusing their position of trust to deceive the public. So here goes...

http://www.presstitutes.com/

Q. What Is A Pre$$titute?

A Pre$$titute is a member of the press who uses his or her media presence to support the Bush administration. Our emphasis is on "non-partisan" mainstream reporters and media outlets who continue to peddle pro-Bush narratives despite the collapse of America's credibility under Bush and a litany of scandals that would bring down any other administration. Wolf Blitzer, Chris Matthews, Paula Zahn, Dana Milbank, Howard Kurtz, Kyra Phillips, Bill Schneider, Tim Russert, Howard Fineman, Norah O'Donnell, Elizabeth Bumiller, Adam Nagourney, Bob Woodward, the Bush apologists at ABC's The Note and others with a similar veneer of neutrality exert a more insidious influence on the public debate than rabid partisans like Limbaugh, Coulter, and Hannity.

=====

Q. Why This Site?

We believe Pre$$titution is the First Cause of the worst presidency in U.S. history. The transformation of George W. Bush from a smarmy underachiever to a supposedly resolute, pious, compassionate leader is the result of years of methodical Pre$$titution. Journalists have abdicated their interrogative role and pandered to the administration, propagating rightwing talking points and pushing pro-Bush storylines. The cumulative effect of countless implicit and explicit pro-Bush stories and soundbites has been to create the illusion of legitimacy around an individual uniquely unqualified to be president. It is death by a thousand cuts in reverse, the creation of a myth in thousands of small increments. Our aim is to make that process transparent.

Pre$$titutes use sophisticated persuasion tactics to influence public perceptions and to shape the political landscape, from cable coverage of Bush's stage-managed speeches with captions that read "Bush Stands Firm," to the correction and re-framing of Bush's mangled English, to the use of 'negative' stories to push pro-Bush narratives. For example, saying Bush is "unwavering" in the face of sliding poll numbers reinforces the fabricated image of a steadfast, principled leader. Another favored press tactic is to create a self-reinforcing loop by making news and then commenting on it. During the 2004 presidential campaign, the cable networks gave round-the-clock coverage to the Swift Boat slime machine. Weeks into the coverage, these same outlets began asking why Kerry's attackers were getting so much traction in denigrating his military service.

By choosing what to cover, what not to cover, and how to cover it, Pre$$titutes influence ALL aspects of American politics. Touch-screen voting machines fixing elections? If the Pre$$titutes don't report it, few Americans know or care. Abu Ghraib a permanent stain on America's moral standing? Not if the Pre$$titutes lose interest and move on to round-the-clock Michael Jackson or Natalee Holloway coverage. Our troops coming home in flag-draped coffins? Not if the Pre$$titutes won't show it to you. Saddam Hussein unconnected to 9/11? Not if the Pre$$titutes let the administration conflate the two.

Bush's resilience in the face of scandals that would bring down any other government is primarily a factor of Pre$$titutes' willingness to give him a pass. Pushing deeply-ingrained fictional narratives about Bush and avoiding the derisive tone they reserve for Democrats like Howard Dean or Al Gore, Pre$$titutes provide cover for Bush's worst transgressions.

=====

Q. How Does Pre$$titution Work?

Commission - intentionally saying or doing something to advance the Bush agenda. Example: the Associated Press describes a group of Bush's supporters as a "patriotic camp" opposing an "anti-war demonstration."

Omission - intentionally neglecting to say or do something that might damage the Bush administration. Example: prioritizing a manufactured crisis like a missing girl in Aruba for weeks on end in order to consume air-time that could go to one of the many Bush scandals.

False Balance - reporting two sides where one is sufficient with the explicit intention of diluting a story that might damage the Bush administration. Just because one military mother is confronting a president who sent her son to die, it doesn't mean the media should reflexively run pieces about mothers who support Bush's war.

=====

Q. Why Do They Do It?

Some argue that Pre$$titutes are lazy, or bad at what they do, or that they're answering to their corporate masters, or that they want to suck up to the winning side, or that they're obeying White House marching orders. The bottom line is that they do it because they can. Why stop doing something they've been getting away with since Bill Clinton's bogus impeachment, the sliming of Al Gore, and the Swift-boating of John Kerry?

=====

Q. Is The Media Liberal?

YES, according to these unbiased observers: Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Joe Scarborough, Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter, Charles Krauthammer, Tucker Carlson, Brit Hume, Fred Barnes, Tony Blankley, Oliver North, Bill Kristol, Matt Drudge, George Will, Bob Novak, Mort Kondracke, Monica Crowley, Larry Kudlow, Tony Snow, Shepard Smith, Bill Bennett, Carl Cameron, Michelle Malkin, Pat Robertson, Larry Elder, John Gibson, Neal Boortz, Dennis Prager, Cal Thomas, Hugh Hewitt, Dr. Laura, Michael Reagan, Michael Medved, Michael Savage, Glen Beck ... you get the point.

=====

Q. Why Do People Think The Media Is Liberal?

People think the media is liberal because for more than thirty years rightwingers have worked the refs, using the "liberal media" mantra as a political tool to browbeat the press into skewing coverage to the right. The constant decrying of the media's "liberal bias" has provided cover for the creeping rightwing stranglehold over all facets of the American press. Lacking the time and resources to scrutinize this claim, many Americans, including Democrats, have bought into the liberal media myth despite the fact that partisan rightwing voices dominate the media landscape and 'legitimate' reporters echo rightwing talking points.

Invariably, rightwingers will counter the above assessment with some poll that "proves" the majority of reporters are liberal. But this line of reasoning ignores two important facts: First, there's a critical difference between a journalist with a personal political leaning and a journalist who injects an overtly partisan point of view into their reporting. When's the last time you heard someone on NPR adopt the Limbaugh/Hannity/Coulter/O'Reilly approach of calling their political opponents terrorist appeasers or traitors? Second, the mindless hewing to GOP narratives by mainstream reporters, liberal or otherwise, ensures that pro-Bush myths get maximum exposure.

=====

Q. What Can You Do?

Spread the word. You can help build this site into a vital political tool by contributing examples of Pre$$titution and sharing the content of the site with your friends, family, neighbors, and co-workers.

[bryant69]

1. It's quite a good site

In my opinion - need to add it to my blogroll.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[No DUplicitous DUpe]

54. Yes, but as a search engine ranking expert, you need to make these

changes to improve your traffic from Google, MSN and Yahoo. (It's how I make part of my living.)

Changes to homepage:

Title tag should be changed from:

<title>Presstitutes</title>

To

(Example) <title>Presstitutes | Media Bias In TV Radio And Newspaper Reporting</title>*

*(Stretch out your title tag to 70 characters using the keywords you want to be found for in the search engines.)

ALT tag on logo:
I would also recommend placing an ALT image tag on the logo at the top of Every page in the site, with the same words that you use in the Title tag...And add all the names of the "presstitutes" in that Alt tag as well. So when someone searches for, say, Wolf Blitzer, your page with the most Wolf Blitzer info will be visible with top rankings as well.

Bloggers: Link to Presstitutes using the new keywords in the title and alt image tags. (example: Link to the Wolf Blitzer info page with the words, say, "Why Wolf Blitzer Is A ..."(you are all smart here, you get the drift)

With keywords in the Title, Body (found in the alt tag) and Links,
you can drive new traffic for free. You will be found for a host of media related searches...and you have nothing to loose.

Proof I know what I'm talking about? Search for Minnesota Car Dealer in MSN or Yahoo, here, I'll make it easy for ya:
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?FORM=TOOLBR&q=Minnesota+Car+Dealer

http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=utf-8&fr=slv1-fp&p=Minnesota+Car+Dealer

and guess who my customer is (hint: his initials are D.H.)

I have an 11,000 page static html site that I will link to you from as well. My site, by itself (example above), can move you in the search engines (with links), if you take my (free for you and all of my DU friends) advice.

Regards,

NDD

[pretzel4gore]

2. how much money are the presstitutes paid?

peter jenning was getting $28000 US a day ($10 miilion/yr)...obviously, this is for more then just the good looks and so on, there must have been actual sex involved, with greasy bj's etc given the moneypig in xchange for constant lies....blitzer's a millionair, and so are many of the others. this means vast sums that could be sopent doing news reportage are spent paying off the whores, like jennings (who died with a $50 million estate....the man was a news reader! sam donaldson has a ranch as big as ted turner's ranch, and turner at least set up a company! what has donaldson ever done? Lie?)
when people are told of the immense sums that the ho's get, they often say 'i too!' if given opportunity, but on reflection....

[Lefty48197]

8. Better question: Which of them are paid by the White House?

ala Armstrong Williams and the others? Why isn't anybody investigating the media to see which others are on the White House payroll?

[leftchick]

3. Great Site! question....

who's legs are in the "R"?

I loved the Daryn Kagen run down. She is a pre$$titute Supreme!

[Miss Elizabeth]

52. Ann Coulter

Pretty sure those are Ann's sticks. Ugh. That's one woman who starved herself past the point of hotness. Not that she had much of a chance with that face....

[leftchick]

58. ugh is right

I was hoping they were not her gams. :puke:

Wellcome to DU Miss Elizabeth!

:toast:

[justiceischeap]

4. Added to my blog as well

Good stuff.

[samsingh]

5. well put

good term 'presstitute'.

i've book marked your interesting site.

[MelissaB]

6. I love it!

Call them on their sh*t.

K&R to spread the word.

:kick:

[Lefty48197]

7. Very good website about a very important topic - the death of journalism

The art of journalism has been pretty much been laid to rest by the corporate media. That's why we get 'presstitutes'.

"Pre$$titutes like Wolf Blitzer, Chris Matthews, Dana Milbank, Bill Schneider, Tim Russert and their ilk betray America by abusing their position of trust to deceive the public."

They abuse that trust by allowing the members of the Bush army to come on their shows and spew their talking-points without any proper investigative journalism. Nobody calls them on their lies. Nobody keeps score as to who lies the most, who lies the second most... etc. The corporate media has killed off "mainstream media" and driven it "underground"...

[Toots]

9. Pop in on Huffington Post with this introduction or Daily Kos

They seem to get more public attention and aren't considered so radically left as DU. I think youyr site and it's claims and information should get more national attention. Let the Truth win out....:thumbsup:

[Tactical Progressive]

10. Nothing can replace Media Whores Online

I still miss MWO even though it's been years since they walked away. They were the first to recognize just what America's media was doing to this country. I bonded with them from the day they opened the site up and chided them on being disrespectful to actual whores, who don't hurt anybody, let alone tens of millions of people and entire countries.

I'm glad someone else has started a site to focus on America's deeply depraved corporate news establishment. They are the bane of this country, have completely betrayed the very concept of journalism as an honorable profession, and have been doing far more damage to America than terrorists ever have or ever will do. They are America's greatest enemy by far.

So good luck on your site. First impressions are good and the writing, which is critical, seems clear. Most importantly, you seem to have a good understanding of how they do what they do in support of the right wing. Keep in mind that it's not just Bush that they support, it is conservatism, from supply-side economics to their twisted 'moral' values and everything in between.

Some suggestions:

Presstitute of the Week, by reader poll - The Horse had a monthly poll for exceptional whore, but their Republican ass-kissing is so pervasive now that it really needs to be a weekly thing. From there monthly and annual winners.

Another feature that MWO had was where readers could fill in a headline and a whore personna and write a short 'news' report to capture the essence of their whorish feats. It was always creative and funny.

Link prominently to Daily Howler and Media Matters

A Presstitute Wealth directory - We know Rush makes $24 million a year and lives in what was a $20 million Florida mansion five years ago and is now probably more than double that. Tim Russert has a $50+ million deal with GE through that sleaze Jack Welch. Diane Sawyer was reputedly making $16 million at ABC, etc. I think no single thing would convey just where these people are coming from more than the astronomical amounts of money they receive for their journalistic whoring. It would be a great resource for everyone on the net to have it all in one place. I repeatedly tried to get MWO to do this but they never bit. It would be such an eye-opener.

Lastly, if you think you can resist being co-opted, subscribe to the journalism industry's trade magazine. I forget the name, but it has all the inside scoop on who's doing what-where in the industry. The only thing journalists love to talk about more than how great Republicanism is, is how great they are. There will be reams of fodder in that source, as long as you don't start feeling like one of the gang.

Good luck, I'm going to start following your site. It's needed and appreciated.

[WiseButAngrySara]

14. These are great points. Why did MWO go offline? I linked to their

site a while ago through a Google search on subject matter I can't even recall, and was shocked at what they had written about Aaron Brown (of all people, since he was just canned by CNN Whores.) They stated that Aaron was as guilty of the Iraq War as BFEE was. At that time, Aaron Brown was someone whom I regarded as truthful, and with integrity and honor, but what MWO did, was open my eyes in a big way, and I never fully recovered from my naive impressions of Aaron. Since that time, I found DU and their unacceptance of the M$M has been a life saver for me in terms of sanity! I never forgot that one encounter with MWO, and had their site bookmarked. When I finally went back to it, it was gone. Poof. What happened?

[WiseButAngrySara]

15. mistake. oops n/t

[Tactical Progressive]

18. Nobody really knows

They used to close up for a week or two at a time with increasing regularity, then one time they just never came back. They didn't give any of us a warning that they were going to close, or an explanation after they did.

Nobody ever knew who the writers were, except for 'Jennifer' I believe - first name only - who ran the site, and there was speculation in the actual media about their identities, as they seemed to be Washington insiders who were attacking the media anonymously. My theory is that they were getting close to being outed and so to protect their identities and careers, they just folded.

No matter, they did us all a great service, in my mind doing more than just running a really well-written site and opening alot of minds about the pretense of a liberal media - I think they kind of provided the impetus and attitude for the alot of the early successes at the start of the progressive blogosphere. I'm pretty sure that Atrios was an MWO board alumni, as were Roger Ailes and a few others. When the MWO board shut down, before the site was abandoned, they went on to start their own blogs.

I keep hoping they'll come back. In the meantime I do my best to keep the message of what a bunch of right-wing henchmen American journalists really are front and center.

[WiseButAngrySara]

24. Thanks for the info. even though it remains a mystery. Maybe I was

linked to their site through Atrios rather than Google...too bad, at any rate that they're gone. Let's hope The Presstitutes can fill in this much needed service! They certainly have the name to do so; Media Whores and Presstitutes!

BTW, what are your thoughts, opinions, etc. r.e.: Aaron Brown, and CNN's motivations for firing him? I used to almost place him in the same category as Bill Moyers.

[Tactical Progressive]

28. Aaron Brown seemed to remain more moderate

than others over the past ten years, like the disgraceful Chris Matthews or that pig Russert that has run NBC news to the far right, or people like Jeff Greenfield or Gwen Ifil or that crud Blitzer or any of the older hands that to me have no excuse for their disgusting betrayals of truth and fairness. Even PBS Newshour has been increasingly solicitous towards winger half-truths and outright distortions for years now, long before their takeover. (This past Friday is the first time I've seen them stop mewling like kittens for righies in years and years. I don't expect it to be anything more than a one-time aberration.)

It's across the board. These people aren't just taking corporate directives, they have become rightists within themselves. They have corrupted journalism from the inside out, not the top down as so many believe.

Aaron Brown is just a soft-spoken moderate who seems pensive, but really just plays the journalistic establishment's game with a more thoughtful tone. If you have to watch a news program, he's less likely to make you want to throw something through your TV. I guess that's something, at least in what's left of journalism today. He's certainly no Bill Moyers - passionate leftists have been drummed completely out of the media. My guess is that his just-reading-the-newspaper milquetoast style doesn't fit in with their new bombastic makover of America at War, Hurricane-Destruction-Live-Now, etc. If I had to guess. I don't know because I don't watch him or much CNN at all any more. Maybe the back-story will leak out, but he probably got paid not to let that happen.

[WiseButAngrySara]

31. Wow! You pinned that (t) nail on the (non) donkey. I think your

impressions are quite accurate. I look forward to reading more of your posts. I really enjoy what you have to say.

[Tactical Progressive]

37. Thanks

I really like your name, combining what seems like two opposites but which really is the only rational way to be nowadays. The more you realize what is actually going on, the less tolerance you can maintain. Wise but angry indeed.

I think that's how we all feel. Wisdom isn't bringing the peace I always thought it would in today's culture of political, economic and journalistic corruption.

[brainshrub]

49. Back then , there wasn't a financial infrastructure for sites like it.

It's only been in the past year or so that sustainable business models have started making blogs a viable way to make a living.

Speaking from personal experience, maintaining a quality blog takes an enormous amount of time and effort; I suspect that MWO simply couldn't justify the expense.

[kath]

27. Do consider doing a "Presstitute of the Year" poll -

and as TacticalProgressive wrote, Presstitute of the Week & Month would be good as well.

Love your site!

I fully blame the Presstitutes for the fact that Bush ever got in office in the first place. If they'd covered his past and his Texas record like they should have, it never would have been close enough to steal.

[MelissaB]

11. Kicking!

:kick:

[Gregorian]

12. Abusing their position of trust

That sums it up, perfectly, accurately.

Wow. You have things in focus. Without the Fairness Doctrine, it takes focus.

[Jed Dilligan]

13. Great work

I like the title banner, but I'd also like to see more "ugly" stills of the whores themselves--anything you can do to damage their image, you know? The whores you mention deserve every flavor of tar and feather we can imagine, and then some...

[WiseButAngrySara]

16. Bookmarked and K and R!. I will spread the word. The M$M is one

of the major ills of this current century.

:kick: and Recommend.

[RazzleDazzle]

17. False Balance

your example is valid enough, but is by no means that important or powerful, IMO.

The False Balance that gets my goat are those where truth is countered by falsity, and the media doesn't bother to try to sort it out. Certain people in the media now believe that their job is done when they've presented "both sides," and let the public try to sort out truth from fiction. Quite often truth doesn't have a political party or ideology, ya know? (Reminds me of that wonderful riff by Rob Corddry months ago on TDS reporting that "the facts are biased against Bush" on whatever the nominal subject of his "report" was about.

Too, I vividly remember Ted Koppel responding to soemone in the studio about the Swift Boat Veterans debacle that "wekkm they made these charges and isn't the fact that they said all that news?" Such a position, of course, degrades journalism to a level of mere gossip and rumormongering.

[spooky3]

19. I agree, and welcome to DU!

[ananda]

20. Oh come on, they do it because...

1) Their owners are corporo-fascists.

2) They get aroused by power.

3) Ratings.


The solution: do not pay for tv.

And BOYCOTT.

Sue

[The River]

21. What The "Media" Wants, The "Media" Gets

In this post-industrial "information age",
everything hinges on the information people get.
From what brand of soap to buy, to what candidate to vote for.
The power of the Corporate media is not total, we do have the "internets", but the majority of public opinion is shaped by
the information (propaganda) coming from the "msm".

While they can and do act in the public interest from time to time,
when it comes to business, politics and government, they always act in their own best interests.
Remember MADD and Drunk Driving? This was a win-win issue for the media. They jumped right in and helped raise consciousness and helped change the laws.
In this case the media has helped save countless thousands of lives.
Imagine a world in which the "media" decided use its power to persuade
in the interests of average citizens? Would daily coverage and demands in all media outlets for energy independence, clean food, air, water, education, health care, etc. make a difference? Would it move business and government to do the will of the people? We know the answer.
The question is; How do we change the "MSM"?
Your site is a part of the answer.

[WiseButAngrySara]

35. If the media had been true to their support of MADD and Drunk Driving,

they would never have stifled media coverage of the 'drunk' we now have in office. Instead, they chose to cover up this past of his, and threw out 'lies' which were really truth to catch Rather in some sort of 'sin' rather than have to report on the SINS of this POTUS who sends young men off to their deaths, while he and Cheney and all of the other neo-con cronies NEVER served.

If the M$M had done their job, America wouldn't be currently suffering from all of the angst of their collective lies, and B* would be known for what he is: A Drunk Driver, whom MADD should rightly be MAD about, and a Draft Dodger that sends others to death.

[hwmnbn]

22. Thanks for putting up your site...

Very informative. I've bookmarked it. And glad you're here too. :hi:

[corkhead]

23. nice site. Count me in as a new regular reader.

I am in full agreement that the biggest reason we are in the mess we are in is the lapdog corporate press. I think it is treasonous.

[LibertyorDeath]

25. Your doing great work ! Just recently started visiting your site

Keep exposing the "Captive Media" for the fraud that it is.

Good article on this subject
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1104-30.htm

Published on Friday, November 4, 2005 by The Nation
All the King's Media
by William Greider


Amid the smoke and stench of burning careers, Washington feels a bit like the last days of the ancien régime. As the world's finest democracy, we do not do guillotines. But there are other less bloody rituals of humiliation, designed to reassure the populace that order is restored, the Republic cleansed. Let the perp walks begin. Whether the public feels reassured is another matter.

George W. Bush's plight leads me to thoughts of Louis XV and his royal court in the eighteenth century. Politics may not have changed as much as modern pretensions assume. Like Bush, the French king was quite popular until he was scorned, stubbornly self-certain in his exercise of power yet strangely submissive to manipulation by his courtiers. Like Louis Quinze, our American magistrate (whose own position was secured through court intrigues, not elections) has lost the "royal touch." Certain influential cliques openly jeer the leader they not so long ago extolled; others gossip about royal tantrums and other symptoms of lost direction. The accusations stalking his important counselors and assembly leaders might even send some of them to jail. These political upsets might matter less if the government were not so inept at fulfilling its routine obligations, like storm relief. The king's sorry war drags on without resolution, with people still arguing over why exactly he started it. The staff of life--oil, not bread--has become punishingly expensive. The government is broke, borrowing formidable sums from rival nations. The king pretends nothing has changed.

The burnt odor in Washington is from the disintegrating authority of the governing classes. The public's darkest suspicions seem confirmed. Flagrant money corruption, deceitful communication of public plans and purposes, shocking incompetence--take your pick, all are involved. None are new to American politics, but they are potently fused in the present circumstances. A recent survey in Wisconsin found that only 6 percent of citizens believe their elected representatives serve the public interest. If they think that of state and local officials, what must they think of Washington?

We are witnessing, I suspect, something more momentous than the disgrace of another American President. Watergate was red hot, but always about Richard Nixon, Richard Nixon. This convergence of scandal and failure seems more systemic, less personal. The new political force for change is not the squeamish opposition party called the Democrats but a common disgust and anger at the sordidness embedded in our dysfunctional democracy. The wake from that disgust may prove broader than Watergate's (when democracy was supposedly restored by Nixon's exit), because the anger is also splashing over once-trusted elements of the establishment.

more
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1104-30.htm

:toast:

[graywarrior]

26. Bookmarked and appreciated.

[ClintonTyree]

29. Very nice, fills the niche vacated by Media "Horse" Online..

lord knows there's enough of them. I'll bookmark it and check it's content regularly.

A suggestion, if I may? Have a weekly "Pre$$titute of Week" or perhaps a, "Pre$$titute's Hall of Shame", something of that order. Perhaps interactive weekly voting, it would be sure to generate consistent traffic week after week. People LOVE to vote on media whores. I'm not sure how much trouble that would be to set up, maybe it would be too time consuming. You're the only one that can answer that question I guess.

Best of luck with your site and rest assured, I'll be a regular denizen of Pre$$titutes! Thanks, :hi:

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

30. Amy Robach is another "presstitute," though I wouldn't exactly

call her a journalist. She seems an apologist for the * regime. Anyone else notice this?

[WiseButAngrySara]

32. Another kick!

:kick:

[Disturbed]

33. Thank you.

Bookmarked.

Maybe an investigation of "paid" so called reporters will be someone's mission. I suspect that the Corp. Media has a stranglehold on what reporters are allowed to report and most likely feed reporters stories to report.

[baal]

34. WOW!!! What a great site, but do you think its wise to abuse our

best allies in the war against the Shrub? 80% of the press is on our side statistically, nothing wrong with holding them to account, but this kind of treatment is just going to drive the press into some kind of conservative wet-dream of an affirmative action program on behalf of conservatives...CBS is doing it now and soon will be a clone of FOX News
.

[WiseButAngrySara]

38. 80% on "OUR SIDE" ? That must be your wet dream Baaaaaaawwwwlllllllll.

Are you a Fox clone? Fox News is an oxymoran, as they have no news.

[ismnotwasm]

36. As much as I miss MWO

I've bookmarked your site and will visit on a regular basis. Thank you, I know it's hard work.

[Marnieworld]

39. Thank you and Bravo!

I've been a fan of your posts but I didn't go to your site yet until now. I agree with every word and I'll make a daily trip over from now on. :hi:

[GoreDean2008]

40. America's Media Reform Begins Here!

Please let us know how we can make contributions (financial and/or other) for www.pre$$titutes.com.

[Arugula Latte]

41. That's a great site you have there.

I just have to be in the right (or left) frame of mind to visit, because I get so frickin' angry at these media whores that my blood pressure spikes and I gnash my teeth. :grr:

[Douglas Carpenter]

42. excellent -- my highest complements for your excellent work

[mntleo2]

43. Been Watching Since Day 1

You rock! I did not realize I was there day 1 as I thought you had been online awhile. I am not surprised that I went there so soon...word gets around quickly when people are angry about these so-called journalists, who are just parrots in lipstick (or in printer's ink). Every single one of them deserve to get their ass reamed by REAL Americans who actually believe in freedom of the press and then ACT ON IT. I also miss MWO, And you fill the bill quite nicely.

Cat In Seattle

[Roxy66]

44. Excellent...It strikes truth in the face. Thanks for so much hard work

[Presstitutes]

45. BIG THANK YOU!

I was away from my computer for a few hours and just got back to see the great response to this thread. Also really appreciate seeing it on the front of DU!

Thanks everyone for the great feedback!!

[NightOwwl]

46. Been visiting your site for a few weeks now....

it's on my list of Daily Reads. Good job!

:applause:

[Kahuna]

47. Great work! The media should be paying close attention to what..

is happening to bush. In spite of their attempts to whitewash and rehabilitate bush's image, the sheeple have had it with bush AND THEM. It astonishes me how they continue to operate in a vacuum as if they can create reality by just saying it or just writing it. They, like the bushies truly believe the sheeple are powerless and unwilling to fight back.

Al Gore's Internet is a marvelous invention. It allows us to usurp the MSM and get at the truth. They are usually far behind the blogosphere when it comes to covering events that truly matter to people.

So be very careful, pressitutes. And you KNOW who you are. Be careful of the high horse you're riding. Just like we're bringing down the bushies, we will bring you down too.

[brainshrub]

48. It's a very good site.

You didn't even need to introduce the site, your reputation precedes you.

Great work.

:thumbsup:

[hippiegranny]

50. good site!

A welcome addition to my daily blog rounds. I too missed MWO and am glad someone is finally filling that void. Nature abhors a vacuum, yanno!

[stevedeshazer]

51. Excellent, better than MWO

Great stuff. K & R

[norml]

53. Here's one example of pre$$titution that you might use.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5280424

[Francine Frensky]

55. You're doomed to stay minor league until you take the sexual reference out

of your site name. Sorry, but it offends me, and no matter how well-intentioned and well-researched your site is...it's embarrassing to say the name in polite society, so it will always be an underground site that does no good.

just my honest opinion.

[Quixote1818]

61. ?

A Prostitute is not a sexual reference because it's not a sex act it's a person who sells them self for money. The term Prostituting yourself is WIDELY used by people from all parts of society to describe people who "sell out" or sell their souls for money or material gain over doing the right thing. 99% of the population understands this and is not offended by the term.

The name Presstitute is the perfect name for the site as it describes what these members of the press are doing perfectly. When I read the title I knew EXACTLY what the site was going to be about and was interested in checking it out for that reason. In other words the title worked perfectly in every way.

Changing the title would be a big mistake.

[Francine Frensky]

65. It's just not a term used by everyone

which means you are limited in where your site could be mentioned. I know we all know what it means, but I think you are waaay off-base if you think it's not a sexual reference. Come on.

Here's my simple point: I think it will forever limit your appeal to a small group who already think exactly like you. The people you most need to reach, the people who haven't heard yet what you are saying, will refuse to acknowledge anything and everything on your site because the name is such an instant turnoff.

In choosing a name with "ick" factor, that makes you an easy target for critics and will keep you forever out of the mainstream.

I think your work would be more powerful under a different name. That's all.

[Kali]

68. I totally disagree, but am curious as to what you would suggest?

I think it conveys the entire issue perfectly. (and compared to its predecessor, Media Whores Online, its actually much "tamer") Still your objection makes me wonder what you would recommend instead?

[noiretextatique]

62. polite society is a part of the problem

it politely stood by and let the radical right steal two elections, with the "opposition" eventually conceding both times.

[depakid]

56. If there are Mme Defarges out there

(and there probably are)- I sure wouldn't want to be one of these people in the next 5-10 years.

[annabanana]

57. kickety. . . . . . . n/t

[upi402]

59. ---- Vital to retaking our democracy ----

Thank you. I've argued this for 15 years or more. I never cease because I love this country.
It's my little mission I guess.

Wish I could still recommend this thread.

[Native]

60. Kick

[Stockholm]

63. Nice, bookmarked!

n/t

[Skittles]

64. I love Presstitutes

bookmarked it from one of your early postings and I enjoy it very much :thumbsup:

(LOL it's one of those sites that leaves me feeling outraged yet I keep coming back for more)

[sendero]

66. Presstitutes..

... is a great site and kudos to those involved.

But I have a question. In the FAQ, it says they do it "because they can". While I agree with almost every word I've read on this site, I have a problem with "because they can".

"Because they can" is not a motivation, it is an opportunity. I can jump off a cliff, but I'm not going to because there is nothing in it for me.

There has to be a motivation beyond "because they can" IMHO. The motivation could be money (sucking up to the boss and hoping it pays), ideology (wishing to further the 'conservative' cause), trend-riding (trying to hitch your wagon to the rising star) or any number of other things, including Operation Mockingbird, following orders, etc.

I'd be interested in hearing theories about the motivation of these traitors to Democracy.

[sui generis]

67. does anyone remember the Note's brief "hiatus" in 1999?

When they took all the liberal contributors and editors out and tortured and shot them (figuratively)? They announced that the entire intern staff had turned over as well as half of the existing full time staff, and when they came back just before the 2000 election all they did was suck George Bush's dick. Figuratively.

That's when I stopped reading them - after a shake up like that I couldn't trust what I was hearing from them, so I haven't been back.

[Generator]

69. Fantastic post

Thanks for coming into being. About the "liberal media"-one thing that isn't really explained and you hinted at it a bit-is that yes, for example, Chris Matthews may be liberal in the sense that he didn't support the war. That doesn't mean his broadcasting has been critical of the war. And his very wealth and privelege shields him from the realities of war, because HIS son or daughter will never have to make the choice to sign up because there is no other way to get money to go to college. So that airy fairyness of it-that elitism of it-it's just a "job" it's just "politics" it's just a "game" to these "journalists" pisses me off endlessly. NO-what they say influences what happens tomorrow and whether ultimately someone lives or dies. Endless lies of omission and giving an image that isn't based on reality.

They may be liberal personally-they may vote liberal-but they message they give on television is false and often pure propaganda-the same line that every one else is doing. Groupthink. Bush is a leader. Oh yeah? Evidence is lacking. He did nothing on the day of 9/11-when lives were at stake and possibly could been saved-but the media chooses his "bullhorn moment" at ground zero as proof of leadership.

This was worth reading for this line alone- "The cumulative effect of countless implicit and explicit pro-Bush stories and soundbites has been to create the illusion of legitimacy around an individual uniquely unqualified to be president."

Thanks again.

[Dr Fate]

70. I'll book-mark it. Thanks. n/t

n/t

[katty]

71. luv your site-finally a perfect word fit for msm

[Uncle Joe]

72. Presstitutes looks like an excellent site,

and it is long over due.

[Faygo Kid]

73. Thank you. Used to like Norah O'Donnell, not now.

Very pretty. But, one of the worst, out of the mainstream media. She is a BushBot through and through. At least Hannity and Coulter make no bones about their bias (Rush still claims to be unbiased. No further comment necessary). Norah should go to Faux News, where she belongs.