Dead Media Stumbles again
Dead media walking. ReidOut
‘ReidOut”… or … Out with Reid
The anti-white racist crusader known as Joy Reid (of MSNBC) and her show “Reidout” has been fired by the network's new president, Rebecca Kutler.
Have a listen to some of her rants:
Could it be that the network, suffering its lowest viewer counts in years, has seen the light? Will they now consider even some “middle of the road” anchors for one of their top spots? That answer is absolutely not.
The New York Times reports that they are replacing the “Reidout” show with a show featuring Alicia Menendez, Michael Steele, and Symone Sanders Townsend.
Alicia Menendez is the daughter of convict criminal and ex- United States Senator Bob Menendez, who according to Wiki, was convicted on 16 counts for “political corruption.” A conviction that the rest of us all call bribery. Alicia is considered extremely liberal.
Michael Steele, former chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC). But has since turned against the Republican party and in 2020, Steele formally endorsed Joe Biden for the presidency and has become a robust champion of democrat causes.
Symone Sanders Townsend served as the national press secretary for Bernie Sanders' 2016 presidential campaign, she worked as a senior advisor for Joe Biden's 2020 presidential campaign and later served in the Biden-Harris administration. She is very progressive and another strong critic of President Trump.
The network purportedly is looking for ways to rejuvenate its primetime roster so why this team? Why is MSNBC so set on maintaining a “progressive“ status quo in their newsroom, when it is a failing model for attracting viewers?
It should be noted that MSNBC recorded some of its lowest ratings ever in January.
Let’s be clear: Swapping out one “progressive” voice for three more such voices is not going to affect MSNBC's ratings. In fact, this shake-up will surely backfire, in terms of viewership. This new show is a sinking ship before it ever hits the waters of mainstream media.
MSNBC only reached 734,000 viewers for the ENTIRE month of January, during its primetime hours. Its total viewership for January 2025 was 1.3 million people.
Not to make it about me, but I know my own stats. Consider that my substack reaches almost 10 million direct views per month, and with republishing, that number is probably doubled.
As you all know, I don’t have a podcast but I am on other podcasts almost daily and reach an audience there of about 10 million people a month.
In total, not including social media, I have about 20 million people reading or watching my work a month.
My numbers aren’t Joe Rogan’s, but I do ok. As crazy as it seems, my print and video viewers are about 20 times more than the viewership of MSNBC for the month of January.
Yet, I don’t have advertisers knocking on my door. Very few companies have asked for my endorsement.
And no network, mainstream or otherwise has asked me to join their lineup. Heck, even Joe Rogan doesn’t want me back on his show.
Why not?
Why is Joe Rogan important?
The World Federation of Advertisers won’t allow advertisers to run ads on sites where people like me are featured. Because I am considered a threat to society. As I am a ‘dangerous” spreader of misinformation.
According to a Congressional report, in 2022, Coca-Cola on behalf of the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), threatened Spotify, that if they didn’t remove the Joe Rogan podcast featuring me, and agree to put a CDC warning on my episode, they would risk losing all of its advertising dollars with all the companies affiliated with the World Federation of Advertisers (a WEF-affiliated and founded company). Clearly, there has also been the US government directing what media advertisers are allowed to place ads on.
To this day, major advertisers won’t risk advertising with alternative and even conservative media, as they are frightened of the power of Google, WEF, WFA, the EU, UN, WHO, and even the US government, to limit their reach on mainstream media.
Yet when queried, the AIs will not admit that this has happened to me, and the AI initially outright denied it.
Here is an example. I asked the Perplexity AI as to whether my Joe Rogan podcast was threatened by Coca-Cola on behalf of Garm.
The AI Language model denied that there is evidence that this happened.
Then I pasted into the AI, the link to the Congressional report (link below)
stating their answer above was wrong - I got this response from the AI Language model:
After reading the Congressional report, The AI completely avoided the issue of Coca-cola censoring Rogan over my being on the show.
The documentation is unambiguous in the Congressional record, this really happened:
Yet, even after the profuse apology, the AI language model refused to acknowledge what happened to me. Even when presented with the direct report from Congress.
Could this be the reason why?
So, what exactly are these AI language models using as source material?
To the victor, go the spoils.
It is clear that AI is going to dominate our online lives and if those AI Language models are fed garbage, then the history books will be written to reflect that vomitus. But if the competitive playing field is even, eventually non-biased or conservatively biased AI Language models will be developed and enabled - as long as there is a market for such. That is how capitalism works.
However, the tech industry is dominated by progressives. Those very progressives who run monopolies like Google. It is this inherent bias in the internet, combined with the censorship, that worries those of us who believe in free speech.
Last October, the U.S. Department of Justice proposed a sweeping set of remedies in response to an earlier court ruling that Google violated antitrust laws with its search business. While most attention has focused on the potential partial breakup of Google, as the DOJ has proposed the divesture of Chrome and the mobile Android operation system by Google. This has industry insiders and lobbyists in a state of panic.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) also proposed remedies that include limiting Google's involvement in AI and stipulates that Google divest from investments in AI products. In addition, it would prohibit Google from partnering, collaborating, or acquiring any interest in a company that makes “query-based” AI products.
A competitive playing field
Recently, the AP newsroom was kicked out of their prime spot in the White House Press Corp over a war of words.
The AP stylebook determines what words and style journalists and newspaper can use. It is inherently biased towards a progressive point of view. For instance, the AP stylebook includes (progressive) guidance on terms like transgender, nonbinary, gender identity, and gender expression, among others and in fact, states that gender is not limited to binary categories and advises writers to avoid references to there being two sexes or genders. The AP also refuses to use the Gulf of America in its training book. This book not only influences journalists, it is the stylebook that is used to teach highs school and college students throughout the USA and the world. It is the stylebook that influences authors and publishers alike over the correct language.
The White House is tired of the AP shaping mainstream news media language, books, publishers, as well as students through its advocating progressive and liberal terminology.
The President believes that unless the AP can change its ways, it shouldn’t hold a position of power in the White House. Who gets to enter the oval office and Airforce One should be up to the president, not the courts.
As mainstream media has come to dominate the rarified positions able to access the president, that leaves little room for alternative and conservative media to have access. The president is working to change that, as should be his right.
What has gone on for many years is that organizations like the AP, with the help of the US government, through sponsorship by agencies, such as USAID, have come to dominate the newsrooms across the world.
Our President and our government is now proposing some solutions to level the competitive playing field in media, to stop censorship (via executive order), and to ensure that free speech is once again paramount throughout the USA and the world.
Thank God.
Giving a gift subscription to family and friends is a great way to support our work!
It is also an opportunity for you to provide your less than supportive friends with an understanding of an alternative point of view from their own.
Currently I consider AI to be the same as MSM and the Gov, as it does not have common sense or can AI think for itself, because it can only consider what was input into its database which is no more trustworthy.
Google any medical related issue and you get a very biased menu. According to this article, AI is being used as a faster more sophisticated propaganda tool. We need legal regulations to halt information bias, allowing open access to opposing viewpoints from alternative databases. Otherwise, information will not reflect reality, and eventually everyone will fall into the ditch. A con job can only last so long without dire consequences.