Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

CNN Trying To Deplatform OAN and Newsmax

CNN Trying To Deplatform OAN and Newsmax

“We have to turn down the capability of these Conservative influencers to reach these huge audiences.”

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1350864541333262340

Last weekend, I blogged about CNN targeting cable providers in an effort to get Fox News removed from those services. They’ve now apparently added One America News (OAN) and Newsmax to their cable provider hit list.

CNN’s Oliver Darcy, whom you may recall as playing an integral role in the deplatforming of Alex Jones back in 2018, tweeted about cable companies removing OAN and Newsmax from their services.

And according to the aforementioned former Facebook chief security officer Alex Stamos, they want to limit “the capability” of all “conservative influencers” to reach their existing “huge audiences,” up to and including “people on YouTube for example that have a larger audience than daytime CNN.”

If it’s indeed true that CNN is being beaten for viewers by individual YouTubers, you’d think the response would be a robust internal review of why that is and how to correct course.

It’s got to be humiliating that some guy (or girl, whatever) sitting at home with a laptop is beating their multi-billion dollar operation.  Apparently, though, the solution they seek is to just shut down the competition rather than actually compete with them in a fair and ethical manner.

At this point, CNN’s goal is becoming rather murky.  Are they on the silencing of wrong think bandwagon with the Democrats and Big Tech or are they taking advantage of this current climate to eliminate their ratings and viewer competition? Of course, both can be true at the same time.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

The Friendly Grizzly | January 17, 2021 at 8:14 pm

Translation: CNN can’t compete on their merits.

    Little weasels doing Communist China’s bidding.

    The treason is out in the open.

    We have one person to blame for the loss of our nation to Communist China. One. His name is Wiliam Barr.

      Seems all of our checks and balances were out to lunch. All of the “self-righting” mechanisms we were taught to rely on, failed.

        Bisley in reply to stl. | January 18, 2021 at 10:01 am

        The corruption, and fear of retribution for opposing it, has spread though the political and legal establishments, bureaucracy, etc. until there is no viable opposition left.

        Those in positions of public trust who would stand up for the Constitution and try to set things right are too few to have any influence. The overwhelmingly leftist “mainstream” of the news, tech and education industries has already de-platformed them by refusing to convey their concerns to the public.

        The public might rebel and demand that constitutional government and rights be restored, if they knew what was being done to them. They are continually lied to and deprived of factual information by those who control the generally accepted sources of information to prevent this.

        Talk radio, internet news sites, social sites, etc., run by conservatives, are all the opposition there is. They will be destroyed unless they band together and create an infrastructure independent of the tech and financial industries that control their life-support.

Close The Fed | January 17, 2021 at 8:34 pm

The audacity.

Thankfully, it’s all built on a house of cards. Their frenetic dreaming won’t come true.

It can’t come true.

“We have to turn down the capability of these Conservative influencers to reach these huge audiences.”

Guess what, squirrel nads? That ain’t your decision to make.

What is a stiletto?

Grrr8 American | January 17, 2021 at 9:31 pm

1) OAN is now my primary online / cable news source;
2) But it is only one of many (mainly online) sources I now consult — I don’t even bother with the “mainstream media” (which I refer to as the “blue pill media,” as that is a more accurate description);
3) Even if OAN (and similar) are deplatformed, I’ve taught myself to screencast content from my laptop to TV (mainly to watch content now banned by YouTube);
4) And even if the Progressive media eliminates alternative media, I still won’t watch them. At that point, better to be uninformed than misinformed.

    The TOR browser might be the one to use in the future just to maintain the highest level of confidentiality possible. In a world where our ISP’s and VPN’s are part of the Big Tech world, it’s hard to be too careful.
    .

The Achilles heel of the incoming Communist regime will be the fact that Communism is unable to produce food on a regular basis, let alone anything high tech. The Chinese Communist Party – often held up as the role model for the Biden* administration by the Communists themselves – survives in no small measure due to massive industrial espionage and sucking the financial lifeblood out of smaller countries.

How will Communism survive once America is gutted by normal Communist incompetence? Who will the Chinese Communists loot to keep their dirty noses above water? Even a totalitarian police state requires a minimal amount of technological infrastructure in order to keep from collapsing in anarchy.

    “How will Communism survive once America is gutted by normal Communist incompetence…”

    They’ll survive just fine. Remember: 10 percent will rule 90 percent. The 10 percent will live large.

      “The 10 percent will live large.”

      For how long? The FBI is morphing into the Stasi, and the US military has undeniable Nazi stormtrooper tendencies among some officers and enlisted soldiers, but without “pay and powder” (a great expression for funds and weapons I once heard) how long can they keep the Deplorables in check? Would they even want to?

      Thanks to the lunatic Wuflu shutdowns the US economy is extremely week. The Chinese and American Communists who planned to loot the United States may find the gravy train derailing much faster than they planned.

      Less than 1%. Look at size of Soviet Communist Party verses population of USSR.

    And this analysis would comfort me, in the absence of recent widespread reports that Bill Gates, of all people, seems to be attempting to corner the market on farmland.

      Corner the market with around 400K acres, spread around several states??? We’ve got ranches bigger than that.

        I agree. Trying to corner the market by buying land seems a brute force way, with not much chance of success.

        And it does not fit the Bill Gates MO, which is to use his money to corrupt politicians and government agencies. On a totally unrelated topic: the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is buying politicians in African countries and pressuring European and Asian banks in an effort to ram Western birth control (read: abortion) down the throats of Africans who don’t want or need it. Bill and Melinda Gates think there are too many black and brown children in the world, and want to see the populations of these countries under strict government control. Prenatal care in African countries – according to the Gates – should be about abortion first. Not even the vile apartheid government in South Africa or the most racist European colonialist concocted such an ugly scheme.

        henrybowman in reply to txvet2. | January 18, 2021 at 3:10 am

        I dunno from ranches. Article is here, and states plainly that Gates has become ” the biggest private owner of farmland in the US.”

        https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9152789/Bill-Gates-biggest-owner-FARMLAND-buying-242-000-acres.html

          The largest ranch in Texas is the King Ranch which is over 820,000 acres.

          There is almost 900 million acres of farmland in the US. Gates is a zit on the ass of US farming.

          That’s because the biggest landholders are corporations like ADM, or family groups like the Waggoners.

      Interesting . I did not know Bill Gates was trying to do that.

      But history shows that collective agriculture works only if your goal is to starve millions (see the Soviet Union and Communist China). Gates can use politicians he has paid off if the issue is to suppress other computer technologies from cutting into his monopoly, but Mother Nature cannot be bribed in a similar fashion.

      And frankly I don’t think he can monopolize agriculture the way he used to monopolize computer operating systems. With Windows he was creating a market that did not yet exist, but agriculture had been around for thousands of years, and the American agricultural sector is gigantic. Gates is more likely to lose his shirt if his goal is to corner the market in farmland – he is likely to end up with a lot of unproductive land and not much of a way to make use of it.

      If Gates wanted to control American agriculture he would buy up companies that make farm machinery and use the politicians he already owns to make expensive (or illegal) fertilizers and pesticides (in the name of “saving the planet”). Even that I think would be rather iffy in terms of achieving control.

        I doubt he is trying to monopolize farming… I would guess he is just diversifying his holdings in the face of oncoming hyperinflation caused by out of control government spending.

        You’re right that nobody is going to monopolize farming, but at the same time it is also true that industrial farming has taken over in the US and it’s the big, highly automated and high-tech operations that produce most of our food these days.

And Fascism marches on.

Now that the left has figured out how to never lose an election that is important to them then why not just wipe out the opposition media. Where is the downside?

It’s the GOP – our former party – we have to worry about, unless we loudly and formally ditch them.

Listen to this pig karl rove:

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/gop-establishment-threatens-president-trump-with-impeachment-unless-he-denies-election-fraud/

China is the new role model

Slippery slope comes to mind, for a rival news network to advocate deplatforming strikes me as opportunist and at worst an infringement of free speech with chilling effects. Im all for calling out those with poor journalist standards and instances of error(s) in journalism but this is inherently wrong.

Do the delusional talking heads at CNN think that silencing their competitors will result in more viewers watching CNN?

michaelharris99 | January 18, 2021 at 8:14 am

I am old enough to remember Senator McCarthy led on by the sneering young Roy Cohn. My fear is we are seeing McCarthyism in its worst form. When an insurance company cancels Curt Schilling’s policies because he expresses policies they dislike, we have crossed the bridge. CNN is just amplifying it to thwart competition and satisfy its Socialist employees

    Thing is, while McCarthy’s tactics we dangerous, he wasn’t wrong about commies in society, working to undermine US culture. Look around. This is their handiwork. Hell, FDR’s admin was crawling with them. And he was happy to have them.

At this point, CNN’s goal is becoming rather murky. Are they on the silencing of wrong think bandwagon with the Democrats and Big Tech or are they taking advantage of this current climate to eliminate their ratings and viewer competition? Of course, both can be true at the same time.

And are. Embrace the healing power of “and”.

Typical Lefty: “deplatform” and “turn down the capability” instead of, say, trying to reach those audiences themselves.

    mark311 in reply to ss396. | January 18, 2021 at 11:32 am

    I think the problem in part is lack of counterpoint within any media piece. Balance and fairness are not the order of the day establishment of ones own truth is, whether that be left or right. If media outlets had a duty to offer a balanced view in each segment the issues would be far less prenounced

      randian in reply to mark311. | January 18, 2021 at 2:49 pm

      Angling for a return of the Fairness Doctrine, are we? Heck no!

      txvet2 in reply to mark311. | January 18, 2021 at 3:02 pm

      It isn’t incumbent on OAN or Newsmax to incorporate leftist lies in their reporting, any more than it’s incumbent on CNN to include facts with their propaganda.

      Brave Sir Robbin in reply to mark311. | January 19, 2021 at 8:59 pm

      Why can’t media outlet “1” have opinion “A”, and media outlet “2” have opinion “B”, and let the two compete in the universe of ideas?

      What is grotesque, is media outlet “1” attempting to silence media outlet “2”. If media outlet “1” is given the requirement of helping express and promote opinion “B”, how good of a job do you think they would do?

      This new corporatist fascism is quite disturbing. It’s mean self-interest wrapped in moralism. I find it revolting.

thalesofmiletus | January 18, 2021 at 11:19 am

More tortious interference.

Hey, CNN! What are you afraid of?
.

“Are they on the silencing of wrong think bandwagon with the Democrats and Big Tech or are they taking advantage of this current climate to eliminate their ratings and viewer competition? Of course, both can be true at the same time.”

Yes, obviously. The former called upon to achieve the latter.

Perhaps OAN and Newsmax should call upon the cable carriers to delete CNN instead. Let’s see how that would be received.

If CNN can’t compete, you let CNN fail; you don’t destroy their competitors.

At this stage CNN and every progressive outfit attempting or calling for the elimination of competitors is playing ‘whack a mole’. There are simply too many other options to enable anyone to put the genie back in the bottle.

Websites, Blogs, Podcasts, rival ‘networks’ forming and growing. This isn’t 1954 where one needs affiliate stations broadcasting the program to achieve nationwide market penetration.

Since CNN rode the coattails of cable into American households one would think some institutional memory of their history remained.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend