By Daniel Bobinski

In Part 1 about the legacy media I explored some of the history and motives for why they engage in deception. I encourage you to read that piece, but in short, the answers are political sway, political favors, and advertising dollars.

Today’s legacy media has become so absorbed in their own sense of self-importance, they fail to see their practices as immoral, unethical, and in some cases, possibly illegal. Doubt me?

The Project Veritas ABC News video

Let’s consider the fact that for three years, ABC News refused to air a story about Jeffrey Epstein grooming young girls for sex, inviting famous people to have sex with them, and currying all sorts of favors (and money) in the process.

In a leaked video that most of the English-speaking world has now seen, ABC News anchor Amy Robach is caught on a hot mic expressing her frustration that she had the Epstein story for three years, but the brass at ABC News wouldn’t air it.

“It was unbelievable what we had. [Bill] Clinton — we had everything. I tried for three years to get it on to no avail and now it’s all coming out and it’s like these new revelations. And I freaking had all of it. I’m so pissed right now. Every day I get more and more pissed. … What we had was unreal.”  – Amy Robach

Contemplate the timeline. Three years ago, Hillary Clinton was running for President.

Could Bill Clinton’s involvement in these crimes have factored into ABC’s decision to not air the story? It’s one of many unethical reasons, I’m sure, but let’s think about it a bit more deeply:

  • How many additional young girls were groomed and raped by Epstein and his pals because ABC News was protecting the rich and famous?
  • By not reporting to authorities what they knew, could ABC News be criminally liable?

I’m not a lawyer, but I think it’s reasonable to consider the idea that crimes may have been committed by ABC News for failure to report their findings about Epstein’s operation. It is unfathomable that ABC News thought it was okay for even more girls to get sexually molested – over the course of three years – while ABC focused on maintaining its relationships with the rich and famous.

Unethical. Immoral. And quite possibly, illegal.

CNN gets it wrong – again

Sadly, CNN’s Brian Stelter is reported by the Washington Free Beacon as accusing conservatives of weaponizing the video “to harm the media.”

In his CNN Business newsletter, “Reliable Sources,” Stelter wrote, “Tuesday’s video clip caused widespread outrage, particularly on the right, with many commenters using it to stoke hatred of the media.”

Brian, I’ve got a hot news tip for you: The public’s hatred of the media is not undeserved. People hate the [legacy] media because the media does things that are unethical, immoral, and quite possibly illegal.

Put another way, people crave the truth, but you, sir, are simply much too willing a participant in the corrupt, self-serving media circus to see it.

If the legacy media cares enough to regain any credibility, they should report the news for what it is and stop putting their Leftist spin on it. It took me less than 30 seconds of research to notice Stelter was spinning even his Leftist friends over at Vox.

Specifically, Stelter’s Reliable Sources refers a report by Vox’s Jane Coaston, which says,

News of Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged sexual assault and trafficking crimes involving his circle of famous friends could have broken years earlier but was quashed by television network executives, according to video released by a right-leaning activist group Tuesday. (emphasis mine)

But Stelter wrote this:

Vox’s Jane Coaston reports: In a video obtained by a right-wing, pro-Trump activist group, ABC’s Amy Robach …” [emphasis mine]

To repeat, Coaston wrote “right-leaning activist group,” but Stelter wrote “right wing, pro-Trump activist group.”

First, why is Stelter using this story (unrelated to Trump) to stoke his own brand of hatred toward Donald Trump, and second, why does it matter that the organization exposing the truth is right wing? Underage girls were getting raped, but Stelter shows us just how deep – correction: shallow – his compassion is when he writes, “the most troubling part to me is Epstein’s usage of high-profile high-priced lawyers to intimidate news outlets.”

Pardon me for getting personal, Mr. Stelter, but you have a two-year old daughter and a three-month old son. If a shady character like Epstein started grooming your children for sex with the world’s rich and famous, would Epstein’s use of high-priced lawyers intimidating news outlets still be the most troubling thing to you? And for what reason would you give a rat’s patootie that the organization which uncovered a cover up of the operation was right-wing and supported Trump? Wouldn’t you just be grateful someone uncovered it?

Who knows how many young girls – and their parents – must now live with the horrific memories of abuse simply so ABC News could continue A) making fat profits through click-bait headlines about their interviews with people like Kate and Prince William, and B) hope that Hillary would be President so she could make ABC News feel like honored guests at the White House.

The ABC News “Excuse”

People distrust – and yes, perhaps even hate – the legacy media because they regularly and repeatedly lie to us. Even other news networks are shaking their heads as ABC News exposes their own lies and hypocrisy with their statement about why they didn’t run the Epstein story.

When questioned by Fox News, ABC News said the Epstein story wasn’t fit to air.

“At the time, not all of our reporting met our standards to air, but we have never stopped investigating the story. Ever since, we’ve had a team on this investigation and substantial resources dedicated to it. That work has led to a two-hour documentary and 6-part podcast that will air in the new year.”

Really? A two-hour documentary and 6-part podcast that will air next year? At this point, my neighbor’s seven-year old kid could collect enough video off YouTube to do that tomorrow.

Besides, what was uncorroborated, ABC? The photographs Amy Robach mentioned weren’t enough? Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s on-the-record testimony wasn’t enough?

Amy Robach told us straight up:

“She [Roberts] had pictures, she had everything. She was in hiding for 12 years. We convinced her to come out. We convinced her to talk to us. It was unbelievable what we had, Clinton, we had everything.”

Speaking on Tucker Carlson Tonight, Judge Jeanine Pirro said, “I could have proven this case in a criminal courtroom beyond a reasonable doubt, without further corroboration.”

If Robach had everything, what was missing? Robach said, “I tried for three years to get it on to no avail … What we had was unreal.”

Three years! One would think that if ABC’s top brass thought something was missing in a story as big as a former US President involved in sex trafficking, they would have told Robach what else they needed. Being the professional she is, Robach would have gone after it.

I can guarantee one thing: If Trump had been part of the Epstein story, it would have run. ABC would have aired it without blinking, even without any photographic evidence. All one needs to do is look at what happened with Brett Kavanagh’s Supreme Court nomination to know this is true.

ABC double standards

From the moment Christine Blasey Ford emerged with her carefully crafted set of lies, the illustrious ABC News was all over it like hair on a Sasquatch. No waiting to make sure the story was up to their standards. They just pushed it out there to collect advertising dollars – and favors from their Democratic partners in crime.

Even as recent as last month, ABC News showed their “journalistic integrity” with yet another anonymous accusation about Justice Kavanaugh. Here’s the first paragraph from that story:

A woman reportedly involved in a second allegation of sexual misconduct by Brett Kavanaugh during his freshmen year at Yale University had a simple response when asked by ABC News if there are other people who can speak to her story: “All I can say is, ask Brett.”

No investigation. No photographs. No name. No video testimony.

And no journalistic credibility.

As I mentioned in Part 1 of this series on the legacy media, these news organizations want their advertising dollars, and that means maintaining access to the rich and powerful so they can print their click-bait headlines. Little girls getting raped be damned – those advertising dollars are more important.

I know I speak for many Americans when I say this: We are tired of your spin. We are tired of your lies. We are tired of your manipulation of the truth. Your unethical, immoral, and quite possibly illegal approach to conveying the news does not help the country – only your pocketbooks.

 

Daniel Bobinski, M.Ed. is a certified behavioral analyst, best-selling author, columnist, corporate trainer, and a popular speaker at conferences and retreats. In addition to working with teams and individuals to help them achieve workplace excellence through improving their emotional intelligence and improving the way they do training, he’s also a veteran and a Christian Libertarian who believes in the principles of free market capitalism while standing firmly against crony capitalism. Daniel writes on both workplace issues and political issues for multiple publications. Reach Daniel through his website, MyWorkplaceExcellence.com,  or @newbookofdaniel on Twitter.