Tag Archives: Media

May 30, 2023 · 13:48

My boiling point

Yup, I have one and the Guardian pushed my button. We all have buttons that can be pushed. If you sing “It’s a cruel Summer, leaving me, leaving me here on my own” really off key to Summer Mcintosh there is a chance she’ll blow a gasket too (it is based on classical music by Ace of Base, 1992). Some dislike the limelight, others (like me) have other buttons. And there is the start for today. The article by Rupert Neate a wealth correspondent (whatever that is) is by their own submission a reporter on covering the super rich and inequality, again whatever the hell that is. But let’s look at that article (at https://www.theguardian.com/news/2023/may/29/2-tax-uk-rich-list-families-raise-22bn-year-reform-inequality) where he starts by hiding behind ‘could’ making him some clueless labor tool. The text “A modest wealth tax on the richest 350 families in the UK could raise more than £20bn a year – enough to fund the construction of 145,000 new affordable homes a year – according to research by fairer taxation campaigners” and there is the emotional useless stage. ‘Constructing 145,000 new affordable homes a year’ We will not get the equations there. We do not get locality because that pricing leaves London far outside of the scope. No his goal is limelight, to hide behind ‘could’ and emotions. Then we get “A 2% tax on assets above £10m held by all members of the Sunday Times rich list could raise as much as £22bn, according to analysis by Tax Justice UK, the Economic Change Unit and the New Economics Foundation (NEF).” And still we get no equations or justification on these numbers. We get another emotional ‘tax the rich’ by an emotional tool. And he merely ‘emotionally validates’ some Sunday Times list without justification. 

You see, lets take a look at the Guardian from June 2017 where we were given (at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/21/battersea-power-station-affordable-homes-almost-halved-by-developer ) ’Battersea Power Station developer slashes number of affordable homes’, there we see how Malaysian investors slashed 40% of the agreed affordable homes. How did that end? Nothing (and nowhere), you useless tool! Where is the prosecution of exploiting foreign investors? Where are your values there?  In my personal opinion Rupert Neate needs to buy a lollie, sit in a corner, suck on that and shut the fuck up (pardon my language). 

It is always labour minded idiots that are heralding ‘inequality’ and that is a larger problem. I am not against PROPER taxation, but these people according to taxation law paid their fair share and then some. You see in 2022 according to one source “629,000 people paid the additional rate of income tax is 45%, and is paid on earnings above £125,140 a year”, so these people already are in the 45% bracket (don’t worry I have a solution). They have paid their fair share, yet there is another matter. I am not blind to certain levels of inequality. You see fair taxation is also needed on corporations, Apple didn’t become a trillion dollar industry because of their devices. Their tax write offs are unheard of and that had to change decades ago. I wish them all their profits, yet there should be taxation. Retail Gazette gives us ‘UK Apple stores paid less than £800,000 tax despite £971.5m of sales’ did that useless wealth correspondent look at that part? And they are merely one of dozens of companies that are legally stretching the lines of taxation laws. Then we are given “Those on the rich list include the prime minister Rishi Sunak and wife Akshata Murty at number 275 out of 350, with £529m, and the 32-year-old Duke of Westminster, with £9.9bn, at number 11.” And that might be true, so did they pay their taxation? It seems Apple didn’t. And that list grows, whilst the useless people are focussed on people who paid their dues according to tax laws. You see, there is another income stream. We get so much emotional garbage from magazines and newspapers that they should LOSE their 0% VAT setting, we can set that to 6% or 10%, there is your income right there. If you cannot properly report the news, you should be taxed. You forgot about the mirror image you see when you get up in the morning. So I give you another income source. If you cannot properly do your job, you get to be taxed as well.

Issue solved!

You see, if we are to believe the HMRC, six hundred and twenty nine thousand people pay their fair share and then some. So this rich list is utter BS, I say we tax the media, lets see how long they can play games whilst letting some useless wealth correspondent continue their ‘labor’ needs. Yes, this is personal, but we see this come again and again whilst no one is doing anything about tax laws or exploiting investors. Why not? It seems that the Guardian has a few fences to mend and I suggest that they hop to it, I reckon that they could spring that 10% VAT bill, but there is a chance that they will cry like little bitches, just like they did when the Leveson report was released. 

So, they pressed my button and this was my response. So, have a nice day whilst I kill a few people in Skyrim with a bow (we all unwind in our own way), they will never know what hit them.

Advertisement

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 17, 2023 · 05:23

Confirmation and standards

That is what I was confronted with over the last 5 hours. I got a message a little before that and we will talk about it. I mentioned it in my previous article. It connects to more, but that is not important right now. What set me off was the article (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2268696/saudi-arabia) where we are given ‘Saudi energy minister: Kingdom will not sell oil to any country that imposes a price cap’. In this I agree, even if it hurts me badly. You see the US has been crying on expensive oil, but the price is set as well by Brent oil, an American firm. One that has the BIGGEST production of oil on the planet.

So when we are given “Spare capacity and global emergency stocks are the ultimate safety net for the oil market in face of potential shocks. I have repeatedly warned that global demand growth will outpace current global spare capacity, while emergency reserves are at a historic low.” I have no other thought but to agree. This has been going on for the better part of 2 decades. No one was complaining when oil was $40, but the setting differs. The US will not buy from Russia (which makes sense) and neither is Venezuela an option. The Arab nations are united in getting the best deal FOR THEM, which is done on a global scale in many commodities, but oil is not the US point of trade, it is THEIR anchor, yet no one looks at Brent oil and what it does, weird, isn’t it? We have seen the massive need to drop dependency on oil and in 2 decades nothing was done. The blame is all on governments for not acting, then 5 years ago an optional sidestep could be made, but the US government pissed of Elon Musk, whilst giving a free ride to that previous Twitter owner, that Dorsey thingamajig. But the Media on a global level REFUSED to ask him the hard questions. And now that it is too late, now that we see that a battery change was required 3-4 years ago, the Governments (especially America) start crying like little bitches. 

When a well can pump 10 cups of water an hour, and there are at any given moment 25 people needing water, some will go thirsty and that setting has been clearly there for over 2 decades. Why was nothing done? So when I see “NOPEC refers to a No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels bill, proposed US legislation that could leave members of OPEC+ open to prosecution under American antitrust laws. The bill, which has been periodically proposed for several years, was revived this month by a bipartisan group of senators in Washington amid ongoing concern about high energy prices.” And here the thought “Are you insane?” pops up. In the first why is Brent Oil not mentioned? And it is so easily fixed. Saudi Arabia (Aramco) could deliver 20% less oil to the US and Europe and sell that to China, everyone happy, or not? It is not a concern for high energy prices, it is the bloody mess of inaction which can be clearly shown for well over a decade and when there was a solution, you pissed off the industrial that could have aided you. So how is that for stupidity?

The second reel
The second reel is different, it is not connected to oil, but optionally to stupidity (as I personally see it). I have seen now confirmation on two of the branches that this will work and due to a few changes, there would be a growing need for the third branch as well. For me it could be good, and could is the operative word as Google was asleep at the wheel and let it pass and Amazon doesn’t seen to be waking up to the billions they can get in this. At present my hope lies with Kingdom Holdings and one other party. That one might not give me the full price, but it is better than nothing, in addition, keeping Microsoft away from there is prime concern, they can only screw up the IP, blame others, point fingers and then refer to miscommunications. I can do without that. There is a small option that Apple might pick it up, but it is not really their turf, so I feel uncertain about that thought. So it is in some regard inverted from oil. Oil everyone wants, and seemingly my IP no one wants. I reckon that the first one that buys it and see what they stand to gain, at that point everyone will come calling, like a Credit Suisse banker with an empty wallet, but that is my weird sense of humour.

The idea that I am right is nice, but I have seen enough confirmations in several directions to know I am right, but that is just me. I still check all forms of verifications, not merely to proof that I am right, but to confirm I was never wrong. That too matters, because I am where banks and oil consumers needed to be, in a place of checks and balances, something both parties require very very fast.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 8, 2023 · 22:24

As media proves itself useless

Yes., I have been on this horse a few times, but I never expected this to happen, well, not a first tier media outlet. Yet, lets not give away the game just yet. Lets first look at the evidence. It started with one person correcting another. 

The correcting party is a Dutch man named Ties Joosten (@TiesJoosten). We get the information that the retweeted man was not a farmer, more importantly the man was not from Frisia (a province in the north of the Netherlands), we also get that this story was copied from Facebook, from a man who is a Frisian farmer. The man who retweeted it was from Zeeland (a province in the south west of the Netherlands). Yet, that message is also incorrect. They made reference that they were peak loader as such there were troubles. 

Ties found out that the Frisian province (@provfryslan) had not designated anyone as peak loaders, none of the provinces of the Netherlands apparently had named anyone a peak loader. The statement is that they are forced to close. More importantly Ties learned from @provfryslan and @FTM_nl that there were no forced closings. More important, this farmer volunteered to be bought out. So there was no forced closing, more important, even as the buy out numbers would be confidential.

What is public is that this farmer received for hundreds of thousands of euros subsidised payments which was found through @provfryslan. 

Which gets us to the final image which gives us the alleged disinformation bringer @Evavlaar brought a message from a farmer who is not a farmer, gives a setting whilst the real farmer in question volunteered to be bought out.

And that is the end of the intro. You see, this problem is a lot larger than you think. It is Forbes who have seemingly lost the settings. With the article (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/dianafurchtgott-roth/2023/03/06/climate-driven-technology-forces-out-europes-farmers/) we get “Thousands of Belgian and Dutch farmers are being sacrificed on the altar of climate change. They are losing their livelihoods as their governments crack down on emissions of nitrogen oxide (from manure) and the use of ammonia in fertilisation.” So which Dutch farmers are losing their jobs? Who was sacrificed? This is on the editor of Forbes Randall Lane. Even as the article comes from Diana Furchtgott-Roth, the editor is responsible. So can we get a list of these thousands of farmers? Can we get a top-line write-out of the numbers? As I personally see it Randall Lane has three options remaining, he fixes the mess we see here, he becomes an uber driver or a barber. That is more options than I ever had. 

The media is showing themselves to be every bit as useless as they always were. With this one event Forbes moved from the shelf of top tier magazines to a mere third tier. We always has issues with materials published, but now we have additional pressures on the quality of the magazines and newspapers. Too lazy to vet the information, to lazy to check numbers. It is all about deadlines and having the juiciest story, accuracy be damned. If it wasn’t for a man named Ties Joosten, we would think that the Dutch government is the big evil, instead we now see that the media is allegedly the big stupid.

Have a great Wednesday!

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

March 6, 2023 · 01:36

The wicked chaser

This all started on February 26th when I wrote ‘Surprise, surprise’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/02/26/surprise-surprise-3/). To be honest, I thought that this would be the end of it, but to my disgust there are more issues and it is with western sport reporters. Especially the wanker at the Guardian, BBC, Australian and New Zealand media. They are so all up in arms about Cricket and we accepted that notion, but that was not the real deal was it? It was only when national interests are at stake, thats when these losers wake up.

It is strict, direct and it is unforgivable. 

You see, it was a few hours ago when the Arab News alerted me to ‘Saudi Arabia overcome Bahrain to win ACC Men’s Challenger Cup 2023’ (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2262701/sport) and there we are told “Dominant 10-wicket victory in final means Kingdom’s team maintained perfect record of 5 wins from 5 matches”. Now we can spin this any way we like, but the Saudi Team played 5 matches and won all five of them. This matters, it makes Saudi Arabia a contender on the larger cricket field. This does not mean that they are about to defeat Australia or New Zealand (England possibly), but they should matter. If cricket is to grow its pool of nations in there, it very much matters. And we are given “Saudi Arabian Cricket Federation Chairman Prince Saud bin Mishal told Arab News from Thailand: “I’d like to congratulate our leadership for the endless support we’ve always received, and the board of directors, the managerial team and especially the players. They’ve played excellent cricket, resulting in winning the cup.”” Now, I never watched the match, so I merely see what is printed in Arab News, but as I see it the bulk of the Western papers ignored the entire event. I saw one Australian media on page 2 of the Google search and it merely gave a score. I think that you can find a sport journo to wrote a few lines when the game is won, but that might merely be me. 

You see, we are also given “Saudi Arabia will now enter the ACC Premier Cup, to be played in Nepal next month, full of confidence as bigger challenges loom on the horizon”, as such what are the chances that the western media ignores that cup too? I reckon that we need to consider that we are on the wrong side of a losing track, when sports are trivialised like this it really matters, we need to do some soul searching to say the least.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, sport

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

January 26, 2023 · 23:08

And I was right (yet again)

This all started for me on the 8th of January when I wrote ‘Little shits’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/01/08/little-shits/) I asked questions then which was mere hour after the event. Now the BBC gives us (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-64406295) ‘Three warnings before US boy, 6, shot teacher – lawyer’ a mere hour ago. We get to see “This included a request to search the boy and a report from another child who said the boy had shown him a gun. The teacher – Abigail Zwerner, 25 – is recovering after being released from hospital last week. In the fallout, the school’s superintendent has now lost his job.” I had clear questions which did not reflect on the quotes. I wondered why the mother had not been taken away on suspicion of attempted negligent manslaughter, there is a case to be made for co-conspirator for grievous bodily harm, none of that happened. And when we get to “The removal of Mr Parker happened only hours after Ms Zwerner’s lawyer, Diane Toscano, announced plans to sue the district, saying the shooting was “entirely preventable”.” It is sacrificing superintendent Parker to make the optional damage less. But that is not the case, it is actually a lot worse. It is seen with “Virginia law prohibits anyone from recklessly leaving a loaded, unsecured firearm in such a way that may endanger a child under 14 years of age.” The added “the gun used by the boy had been legally purchased by his mother. The boy’s family said the weapon had been “secured”. Police have not responded to this claim” merely makes this worse. You see, if it was secured a 6 year old should not be able to get to it, you do get that, don’t you. I saw this in the first instance, questions should have been asked and they are brushed away on a few levels, so as I see it, the monetary claim for the shot teacher will go into the millions and she will win. When her lawyer Diane Toscano has a go at the people still there, this case will be decided for the teacher and I expect this will be a quick decision. And it also shows how much of a joke American schools are. They are all about safety and no guns and basic security is overlooked as the article clearly shows. So when I hear another idiot shout gun laws, I will tell them to get a clue and leave their young child at the Richneck Elementary School in Virginia. The quote “The official allegedly responded: “Well, he has little pockets.”” Merely angered me more. 

You see, I can kill a person with a simple Derringer .22. A gun is a tool and the army trained me to use this tool properly. One you see the elements that make for a gun, a flintlock pistol can be just as deadly as a magnum .44, the bullet kills and the bullet does not need to be large, a decent understanding of anatomy gets you there. So the entire Richneck Elementary School farce is a big joke from start to finish and I saw the elemental issue on January 8th, it seems that the BBC is only catching on 2 weeks after the fact and they aren’t even there yet. If they were the articles would have been a lot more aggressive and the media as a whole failed people and future victims in all of this. A stage that has been visible for weeks and no one acted, more important, the media isn’t asking any questions. With all the anti gun sentiments, are you not curious why?

Consider “The boy’s family”, no mention of the father, the mother and the mother is only mentioned to the smallest degree. So who was responsible for keeping the firearm secured? How did a 6 year old get to it? It might be an acceptable reason, but that also sets the bar for Doli Incapax higher and the mention of “the family of the young boy said he suffered from an “acute disability”” just doesn’t cut the mustard. This case stinks to high heaven and the media isn’t doing it job. Why not?

 

1 Comment

Filed under Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

January 9, 2023 · 21:52

United States of Criminality

That is a strong expression, but it is a valid one. This all started for me when I took a first look at the Richneck Elementary School shooting. Now there are two stages. The first is the legal setting of Doli Incapax. A six year old cannot decently be prosecuted for this and I accept this. I get it, there is an issue. But there is a larger issue with the media and the news and I am looking at the Washington Post in this case. They have blatantly made claims against Saudi Arabia, they made blatant claims against many and they have at times lost the plot. Like losing that columnist no one cared about. In this case a mere 7 hours ago, they give us dribble, loaded useless dribble on this case. I started this 2 days ago when I wrote ‘Little shits’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/01/08/little-shits/) the Washington Post, NY Times and a few others have had 2 days and no one asks the questions that matter. The parents should have been arrested for questioning. I get that they in the end cannot be arrested for the crimes, but they are clearly covered in responsibility here. Where did the gun come from? There is no arrest, no intelligence on whether the parents had any firearms, perhaps even THAT firearm. Why not? It would have been the first thing I did. And the parents can suffer the experience, THEIR CHILD shot a woman with a gun at the age of six. 

The police might not have been forthcoming in the first hour, but it has been two days. They should have something by now, even if it is to state that no evidence came forward from inspecting the lifeline of the gun. This was a clear hatchet job from the first hour I looked into this. The missing settings and the non-available facts made this from my point of view a simple case of orchestration. 

You can disagree and that is OK, but see for yourself. How much facts have the media exposed to you? They are all about emotion, about flammable events. It is what I personally call ‘whoring for digital dollars’ am I wrong? Even the Washington Post has nothing to offer. 

And when we see the closure of the school, which makes sense, and how stable the teacher is, which is good. Nothing on the child and more important nothing on the parents. Is anyone waking up? Then there is CBS who used the line “a handgun was used”, was that all? There are over 170,000,000 of handguns in the US (according to one source) there are thousands of brands. I think that the police from day one could have done better than “a handgun was used” and the media never followed up on it, at least not from the dozen or so sources I saw. So why not? What makes this case different? Who are the parents? I let you simmer on this.

1 Comment

Filed under Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

December 18, 2022 · 12:21

The unsettling realisation

There is a stage we all see, it is not the same for all. We see it, but the words do not completely come, there is a sort of disjointment between what we see, what we perceive and what we think is right. It was all over the field when it came to blow in my mind with a Reuters article. Weirdly enough they gave the pieces, the missing pieces to form the new image, an image I did relate to and as such the article becomes a reality.

The article in question is the article (at https://www.reuters.com/technology/elon-musks-twitter-suspension-journalists-draws-global-backlash-2022-12-16/) giving us ‘Elon Musk restores Twitter accounts of journalists but concerns persist’, you see, the elements start with “The reinstatements came after the unprecedented suspensions evoked stinging criticism from government officials, advocacy groups and journalism organisations from several parts of the globe on Friday, with some saying the microblogging platform was jeopardising press freedom” My initial response is that if these idiots did their job, their proper jobs, their credibility would not be on level -23. They did this to themselves. 

When you whore for digital dollars there in a consequence. In addition players like the NY Times print not properly vetted information (see one of my previous articles on the subject). The press does not bring freedom. It brings us filtered information. Information that is approved by share holders, stake holders and advertisers. So stop talking about the freedom of the press. Start doing your bloody jobs or become Uber drivers, they have a shortage at present. So when we get “A Reuters check showed the suspended accounts, which included journalists from the New York Times, CNN and the Washington Post, have been reinstated.” We do not get a clear picture on why certain issues happened, in case of the NY Times I could speculate but this is larger. These people REFUSED to do their jobs when there was time to openly ask Jack Dorsey for answers, there was time to give a clear response towards a stage where a company was overvalued by close to 100%, but you did not do ANYTHING, did you? 

And for the man blocking Elon Musk with a facial covering with license plate CJ82G38? Did you do anything, did you report on who the man was, was the car stolen, was there anything? No, you merely try to collect on digital dollars, didn’t you? 

In that same setting there is an issue with “The German Foreign Office warned Twitter that the ministry had a problem with moves that jeopardised press freedom.” We get that, but when the press isn’t taking its ‘responsibilities’ serious, should we give them any consideration? And with that we get the second part that rubbed ME the wrong way. It was “Melissa Fleming, head of communications for the United Nations, tweeted she was “deeply disturbed” by the suspensions and that “media freedom is not a toy.”” Well, see what pot is calling the kettle black. The UN made its own bed with stupid settings regarding Jeff Bezos (an anti-Saudi stage) and a few others. If the United Nations actually get things done and focussed on areas like Syria and Yemen and got communications on Houthi terrorist events started the people might get informed at some point. For example the Middle East Monitor gives us “The US Special Envoy for Yemen, Tim Lenderking, said on Wednesday that the Houthis’ “maximalist demands” had hindered UN efforts to renew a six-month truce in the country that ended in October.” As such, these so called ‘culled’ papers. How much did they expose to the public of this? I think that Miss Fleming has other problems and making sure that the Press covers the actual news might be a clear first. It comes with the stage where she claims that media freedom is not a toy and it applies to the media just as much, in case she forgot.

So, I got that off my chest. You see, I cannot see if Elon Musk is guilty of anything at all, because we keep on getting one sided news from the media and they have no credibility left (as I personally see it). 

I will let you consider who is correct and consider what you are shown, and what is trivialised by the media.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 6, 2022 · 16:06

The other white paper

Yes, there are always white papers, but which one is true? You see, they are all true, they are all a point of view. Yet the truth from a point of view is relative, that has always been the case. This is why we have peer criticism for academic papers. Yet that is not the case for the media, they are all fighting to remain around with some feigned form of value. This has been the case for over a decade and now the BBC gives us (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-63869013) ‘Meta threatens to remove US news content if new law passes’, you see the truth of the matter is that the people no longer need the news, the news is no longer if value. It started when the media starting soliciting (aka whoring) for digital dollars. Flamed bring revenue, actual news not so much. The events surrounding Elon Musk, the abstinence around Jack Dorsey and a dozen other cases made it so. The newspapers are irrelevant and they know it, so in a last gesture to remain not completely irrelevant they rely on laws to force funds from social media. Even as the shared instances from places like the Australian link to paywalls, they are all about ‘lost revenue’ And the Australian is not alone, loads of American newspapers and media (like Forbes) do EXACTLY the same thing. They will tell you the scoop AFTER you pay, so how is that lost revenue? Not all papers are like that, but many are and now we get “It would give publishers and broadcasters greater powers to collectively bargain with social media companies for a larger share of ad revenue”, I believe this is to be a false setting and Meta gives it to you in the form of “Meta claims their platform, in fact, provides increased traffic to struggling news outlets.” They are correct. Consider the truth, it I simple, how many times did you go to the news site? How many times was this because THEY shared news on social media? This has been the case for a decade and now that Meta is taking off the gloves, we see how irrelevant the media has become. In the last year alone I highlighted close to a dozen cases of incompetency and a lack of information vetting by the media, so why should they get paid for shortcomings? It is almost like the decapitated chicken.  It’s running around, but it is already dead, the rest of its body did not figure it out yet. Is it fair? Does it matter? No, the media had the option to evolve, it merely decided that is was cheaper and more profitable to hang onto someone else’s coattails. It did not work out well for them and now they cry foul, almost like the yellow pages. Their era died and they just never adjusted in time and I am adding to the pain as my 5G seemingly goes to China. Setting a new stage in several ways and taking advertisement power away from all and leave it where it should have been all along, with the advertising people. With the locations of advertising and that is the lesson that they never picked up on, and it is not their fault. A place like Google missed it too and I mentioned it at least twice this year. 

A stage that is moving away from them faster and faster and if Meta makes the move it is threatening to a lot of players in the media world will be done for. Such is life, Media Erectus is getting eaten before passing on its whinges. So do not focus on the whinge, consider the place technology had for almost 2 decades and see where the media is not, and they have not been where they needed to be for almost a decade and now that they are about to become irrelevant they cry laws. Bu the way these same people never championed law changes to the environment, law changes to taxation and they simply went for the emotional targets, it had more expected digital dollars, so where are these dollars now? 

And when we see “Media companies argue that Meta generates huge sums of money from news articles shared on the platform.” So where is THAT evidence? Meta generates advertisement towards people through free accounts, and this gets me to (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2H8wx1aBiQ) the congress statement April 2018 where the answer is ‘We run ads’ a setting that was in place for well over a decade. The news was never an element and as such the media better be quick with presenting ACTUAL evidence in that case.

When I see how irrelevant the media and Microsoft have become and I see them cry like little chihuahua’s all whilst they screw up options left right and centre, what the actual F*** (censored word) the world around them is doing protecting something this irrelevant is beyond me, it actually is.

We can debate things but look at the numbers. the Paris based World Association of Newspapers, which represents 18,000 newspapers gives us that there are a lot more. The world has 8,000,000,000 people, which implies that there is an average of 445,000 people per newspaper. When you start doing the math, you will see that the numbers o not add up. The newspapers that are still relevant are so as they have well over 2 million subscriptions. The Washington Post has 3 million, and The Wall Street Journal 2.4 million subscriptions. The Dutch Telegraaf had in 2001 807,000 subscriptions, in 2017 it was only 393,000. The larger national newspapers are losing ground and now we see the larger play. There are 195 countries in the world. So why are there 18,000 newspapers? They nearly all rely on Reuters, making at least 17,000 irrelevant already. But these are the numbers no one looks at, and they are all vying for advertisements. Look at ANY newspaper and look how many advertisements they have and how much they charge and you will see their actual loss. They are no longer a relevant advertisement group, digital media replaced them, they lost relevancy by allowing to become a family of 18,000 brothers and sisters and that is before you see the rest of the media relying on advertisement sales to qualify their existence. But no one looks at that side are they?

The other white paper that no one gets to see is the one no one in media wants to look at, it merely shows how irrelevant they have become.  

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

November 8, 2022 · 14:05

The anger within

We all have it, something sets us off. It is not always fair and just, but to some extent, the buttons pushed are getting to us all, and I am no different. It all started (again) this morning with 

Here we see a retweeted Tweet. We get to see dozens a day and we cannot verify the truth on most of them, people with hatred of Elon Musk whilst no one is asking that procrastinating wanker (Jack Dorsey) to properly explain himself. If Musk has a case to fire thousands, then the previous custodians fucked up, they screwed it all up royally and it is all about floating the value of the company, but the media (with less credibility than a crack pusher) refused to set the stage of asking serious questions and it is the bulk of all media, the little who asked seemingly critical questions asked too little of them and they never followed up on them or reported on the simple fact that Jack Dorsey did not elaborate. His feigned apology was all we got and the media helped him massively. We still have no clear stage of the bots, a clear stage of fake accounts and hen this comes to light it will be too late, Dorsey took the billions and ran, with massive help from the media. Media is now slapping Elon Musk every chance he gets and he is waiting time on answering whilst setting the stage for a trimmed and optionally more profitable Twitter. This sinking ship came with a $45,000,000,000 cost. Did you think that it was a hand off to get Dorsey to buy a more luxurious coffin for himself? 

Then we get the Financial Times with the claim that Twitter use went up. OK, fair and also a lot seemingly (what I saw) based on people spouting negativity regarding Elon Musk and no one asking clear questions on the changes that came AFTER Dorsey left. Some things do not add up. Several accounts losing hundreds and some claim to have lost thousands. Why would changing the guards have such a setting? Yes, a few hundred might have bailed to an alternative, but when the alternative does not deliver, they will come back. Their ego’s will make them come back and then we will see the excuses of ‘Lets give him a chance’ all whilst that should have been the starting position. I get that some might create a Mastodon (or was that a Megaladon, sorry Jason Statham) account. Makes perfect sense, especially if that person is an influencer, they will go where the masses are, but the right influencer would have a Mastodon already. The stage of one person having a dozen accounts to butter the conversation are in a stage that they do not know where their ‘powers’ are going. That makes sense too, but I would need clear data to identify that part. I do know someone who has that but he is too busy looking after other things. 

I do not get the stupidity of the attacks on Elon Musk, even the clearly presented lies and misrepresentation. It goes nowhere, in the end we merely cut ourselves. It is clear that Twitter needs time to get itself on  a new path and the media seems very driven to not let this happen. Especially when you consider how much leeway they gave Jack Dorsey, months of reporting constitutes that evidence. You merely need to Google search ‘Twitter’ and see how much critical questions were asked of Jack Dorsey and how much non-accusation based questions were asked of Elon Musk, the numbers should scare you and most people  with their attack on Elon Musk are part of that trend. I? Well I do not know what will happen, so I will await until the dust settles and see what happens next. I will fall several steps as I see no need to buy a blue checkmark and more important will be reduced in the seek algorithm. I will not care, I will see the people I follow and I should see their tweets. Only if that fails will I consider moving. We need to take care who we follow with their loud mouths and their needs for attention with failing evidence. Yes there are parody accounts, but we either follow them or we might not care. The anger within is fuelled by the loud making statements that evidence does not support and why is that? It is their ego, or their need for attention as they try to become influencers. There is of course the singular person seeking the limelight for self, but they are seemingly a huge minority. Happy to see them go into the dusk of yesterday. Oh and that statement of government making statements regarding Twitter. I think we should seek these people and their links to Jack Dorsey. Because the loudness of that equation does not make sense, it only makes sense when we consider who they cater to, especially in the beginning of a new equation, they never did that in the age of smoking or anything else, only two hours past the 11th hour did we see the government react to smoking dangers. They had filled their pockets s much as they could and that is a dangerous stage, I get that. But to filter Elon Musk in hour 1 seems adversarial actions that seemingly have no foundation, especially as they never bothered asking Jack Dorsey several serious questions, but that is merely my speculative view on the matter. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

October 31, 2022 · 20:47

That screwed up media

Here I was, relaxing, looking at tweets when suddenly a tweet Elon Musk passes by (see below). 

Now I had a hard time here. You see I do not trust the media, but the top shelf media (LA Times, SF Chronicle, Boston Globe, and Washington Post) were always above board. Actually there was one more, but it seems that the NY Times now joins the third tier newspapers right next to the Daily Mail (UK). How could any newspaper be so stupid to give us the article (see below). 

The idea that a newspaper does not properly vet the information they have is not new, but in the past the NY Times was always above board. Whether they hate Elon Musk, whether they have other needs (like towards former Twitter owners) or whatever the reason, not vetting information is a problem, it is one I have been talking about for years. When the media cannot differentiate between real news and fake news the media has a problem, they merely hand over the news to TikTokkers like the one claiming that there are a large number of UFO’s over Australia (a TikTok ad), so now you know.

Now what was one the huge and mighty NY Times is now a bringer of debatable fake news, which will deteriorate any other news they bring. Although, I do realise that if Elon Musk was not honest my goose is cooked. Yet Elon Musk has a lot more credibility than most media ever could hope to have, so I am presently siding with the E Musk group. I could not read the whole article because the subscription nag overlapped my article again and again, so there might be an ulterior reason for the NY Times.

In this day and age when we trust the media less and less, they need to bend over backwards to vet the information again and again and hiding behind a mention of Reuters no longer does the trick.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,