The Washington Post: Freedom Fighters

Next time the “respectable” / “reasonable” media (although it’s the WaPo we’re talking about here, it doesn’t really apply) whine about being unfairly treated — or just considered — by the general public and/or the current politicians with their new, erratic, worrying and populist style (that’s the key argument for assuming, often quite rightly, that we’re naturally going to be on their cute, innocent side, if only by default), we should remember this 2019, January 24th tweet.

I’ve just highlighted bits, I swear I didn’t change a word.

1. OPINION. That’s the wording you need to start your tweet with, if you don’t want to be thrown stones at, and yet still manage to take an absolutely untenable position. But WHY?!… It makes no sense, unless you suddenly decide — fuck it: at the end of the day, we kinda agree with all this shit, even though we pretend we don’t OR we know that if we say this, however stupid, hypocritical and dangerous printing it could be, it’s gonna sale paper and, well, it’s not that easy those days, we’re going through hard times. Whichever it is: congrats.

2. Right. Democrats at this stage, even the most corrupt ones, are not going to compromise on dead or dying kids, which can only mean one thing: they’re kids too, thus the empathy. The adults are the ones who are playing with and placing bets on (not-too-white) kids’ life. It is indeed a very interesting angle that should  as such be advertised all over the Web on behalf of a  respectable, serious newspaper for (white) grown-ups.

This is what you learn about the, er… artist, if you first click on the link on Twitter, then on his name on the article’s page on the WaPo site.

3. “Columnist” is generic enough, which is probably better considering the regularity with which this LOBBYIST whose name was not even mentioned in the WaPo tweet (pity, I mean, his background is quite illuminating to fully appreciate his “controversial” – that’s the modern cool term to say “far-right”, without being unnecessarily vulgar), when he’s actually occupying incredibly valuable space (you know, the respected « op-ed » pages) in this old and venerable journalistic institution, read and celebrated all over the world (just joking obviously: not anymore, except for a couple of weeks when one of their journalists is tortured, chopped to bits and killed without any repercussion — the opposite of repercussions, in fact — from the grotesque man they’re courageously defending here — probably because, in the Saudi case too, he did obviously act like the adult in the room).

4. I can understand that some journalists possibly felt that the end of the previous paragraph was a bit, what?… Nasty? Gratuitous?… Oh no, I know. I’ve got a better and slightly more up-to-date catchword: “cynical”… I understand that they FEEL like it, yes. But the problem is, they’re just plain WRONG. They need to come to terms with the fact that we don’t trust them anymore for good reasons, that we don’t believe for a second that they have a clear editorial line or work ethics, or just that collectively, as human beings, and not as journalists defined primarily as a corporation (that, they’re very good at, in fact that might be the only thing they’re still consistently successful at), unless they can agree with us at some point that something really is pure evil, should be fought against at all costs, and that, as a result, everything else is completely irrelevant until further notice — you know, like stupid sensationalism for the sake of selling paper, for example… We increasingly think — and we find it sad too, don’t get us wrong! — that they are completely irrelevant.

Oh, and the fact that they’ve asked their graphic designer to rethink the papers so as to separate « op-ed » sections from the rest, in order to pretend being super objective while simultaneously pushing more radical right-wing views without taking responsibility for them, this is not fooling anybody anymore, by the way. Are they aware of that?… They should be, by now.


Even though the above-featured tweet is an impressively extreme and ridiculously lame case in point, it is still rather telling, way beyond the actual tweet itself and the sole case of the Washington Post. So, from now on, dear journalists: please, PLEASE refrain from whining. Please refrain from telling us that democracy will disappear if we don’t protect your livelihood (and yours alone, strangely enough, because when it comes to other people’s livelihoods you’re quite prompt to organise endless debates with unquestionable experts, who are all agreeing that destroying them is absolutely essential to our collective survival)… You know it’s not true, AT ALL: you’re no fucking symbol of democracy, in no fucking possible way. You’re just saving your own asses with catchphrases and clichés, like « the press (me me me me me, that is) = democracy » — which is kind of despicable, really.

And, well… we see you. Honestly, we do.

Just stop it.

Dear journalists: you don’t get to be the embodiment of democracy and freedom, and whatever other insane fantasy you have, until you act like it.

OK? OK. Thank you.