Hey, there! Log in / Register
Wellesley company hopes to raise $2 million for conservative Web site in Boston
By adamg on Fri, 06/26/2015 - 8:16am
Boston Media Networks of Wellesley says it has raised $1.14 million - and hopes to raise another $860,000 - to start up the NewBostonPost, which will offer up Boston-based news and commentary.
In a filing with the SEC this week, the company, which shared founder and President Christine McCormick's address, says 16 people have provided the initial funding.
In a YouTube video introducing the site, McCormick said that as a mother of five and an immigrant from western Europe, she loves all that Boston and America have to offer but that she is disturbed by what she said was 20 years of excessive cynicism in the media about America, in particular, the media's "hostility to traditional American values." The new site, she says, will work to rebuild our "commmon patriotic spirit" even as it offers the latest news, commentary and arts and entertainment information about Boston, featuring original reporting and blogging and aggregation of news from other sites.
Brian Maloney, who will serve as co-CEO, currently runs Media Equalizer in Plymouth, which offers conservative critiques of the media.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
hostility to trad values?
[snore] doesn't fox, savage, o'reilly, carlson already cover this beat?
also, hope they know that the zake (their logo) was dedicated to a man known for building bridges, not removing them.
Exhibit A why this media
Exhibit A why this media venture will have an audience. The incessent sneering and intolerance of different ideas by local media is sickening.
Fox and the Herald are low quality populist or corporatist rags and there is demand for a high quality news source with tradtional American values.
If conservatives don't like
If conservatives don't like people calling their ideas stupid then they should stop having stupid ideas.
By immediately resorting to
By immediately resorting to calling people names rather than arguing over the merit of an assertion you've already proven their point.
Statements of fact aren't
Statements of fact aren't name calling.
Do tell
What exactly are "traditional american values"?
Apparently this woman from
Apparently this woman from Europe will tell us in her Wellesley based paper about Boston.
How does news have a value
News is news. If you want conservative opinion, fine, but don't call it news, journalism or reporting.
Point taken.
But if the New York Times and MSNBC call themselves news, anything is fair game.
They cover it nationally.
They cover it nationally. Locally we just have the Herald and the local Fox affiliate. Let's face it, Howie Carr is an exemplar of traditional values like Brsitol Palin is of chastity or Michelle McPhee is of sobriety.
I'm not sure which is worse: cynicism in the media about
"traditional American values", or the kind of cynicism in right-wing media that allows it to make billions by weaving an alternate reality out of science denial, racism, xenophobia, homophobia, religious bigotry and general fear-mongering, thereby undermining informed civic debate and greatly harming our democracy.
Oh, wait: actually, I do know which is worse.
It'll devolve to wingnut welfare readily enough.
That was probably the whole point in the first place. There are plenty of right wing assholes with lots of money to waste on contrived feel good drivel to evoke something that barely existed.
Think of how much Sheldon Adelson wasted trying to get rid of Barry Bamz or the princely sums the Koch bros blow only to fail.
Shrewd grifters can spot this well buttered bread and make a pitch to these venal swine for a big score as they are to blinded by avarice and animosity to know when to fold.
Funny the same can be said
Funny the same can be said about the liberal media.
And that's why more competitive media sources keep being created each year. People are sick of established biased outlets and want alternatives.
"The same can be said about the liberal media"?
What: that they foment science denial, racism, xenophobia, homophobia, religious bigotry and general fear-mongering?
Sorry, no. Right-wing media owns that brand completely.
The anti-vaccine "craze" for
The anti-vaccine "craze" for one is an anti-science left wing movement.
Except that there's no connection between vaxxers' politics and
their pig-ignorance about science. Meanwhile, liberal media outlets routinely labor to debunk anti-vaccination junk science.
By diametrical contrast, right-wing science idiocy, like global warming denial, is actively promoted and reinforced by right-wing media.
Alternatives?
You mean like the maggots still feasting on the corpse of the dead scumbag Andrew Breitbart?
Wallowing through that "new media" leaves one in desperate need of a shower afterwards. Their comments section alone is a hive of hate.
So please, spare us the nonsense how this lady who looks like she's trying to be the right's version of Ariana Huffington is the face of a "competitive media source".
Seriously,
the left doesn't engage in disingenuous bullshit? Really? Because it's not unique to the right. Radical true believers are by nature irrational and prone to craziness, regardless of ideology.
I don't want a one party dictatorship, it will inevitably turn into a Frankenstein-type monster and devolve into smug arrogance and intolerance. It's healthy to have a wide range of views heard and rationally debated. Many who describe themselves as left, liberal, 'progressive' bitterly complain about the fact media who self describe themselves as conservative are popular, while almost no media that self describe as 'progressive', including talk show hosts (entertainers btw), reach the same level of popularity or ratings. Instead of whining, try being more innovative and oerhaps better connecting with people who, for example, watch Fox.
I myself don't really watch or listen to any of the entertainers and media outlets 'progressives' on here, and elsewhere, constantly whine about. The answer is DON'T WATCH, LISTEN or READ them. Same for self described conservatives and left media, entertainers, etc. As a person in the middle, an Agnostic so to speak,I want to hear ideas and genuine facts, not a bullshit narrative or talking points.
I found it's best to avoid
I found it's best to avoid wingnuts of both sides. I'm afraid there aren't many outlets for those of us who don't want "journalists" opinions intertwined with news. That specfically includes our two dailies the Globe and Herald.
I don't have a problem tuning out the right-wing noise
machine, but saying, "Just don't watch them if you don't like them" is the ostrich response. Half the country gets its news from Fox News, which means that half of news viewers are swallowing an outrageous distortion of reality that exacerbates their ignorance and bigotry.
A hysterically misinformed, science-denying electorate is a serious threat to our democracy. Rail against bias in left-wing media all you want, but it's not making people stupider, more frightened and more hate-filled the way Fox News and its ilk do.
And those that rely on MSNBC,
And those that rely on MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS? Do they bother you as well?
"A hysterically misinformed, science-denying electorate is a serious threat to our democracy. Rail against bias in left-wing media all you want, but it's not making people stupider, more frightened and more hate-filled the way Fox News and its ilk do."
Are there monsters under your bed as well?
You are lumping in whole swaths of people that watch Fox News to this? I have family that do watch Fox news, along with other news sites and none of them are stupid, frightened or anything you suppose. They are far from hateful.
The thing is, there's no alternative. You just have to pick which wingnut you want to hear at any given time, I suppose.
But I do refrain from grouping people into categories as you do.
If you think ABC is liberal
If you think ABC is liberal then you might be a wing nut.
How many ABC employees now
How many ABC employees now work for the current administration?
Some extremists are more about science denial and
pandering to bigotry, though. Hint: they're on right-wing media, not left-wing media. You can pretend that's not so if you like. I imagine it's uncomfortable to find yourself defending that.
While you're at it, go ahead and ignore the studies that show Fox News watchers are the worst-informed Americans on political and scientific issues, scoring lower than people who watch no news at all, and that the best-informed are NPR listeners.
I got as far as 19 seconds
I got as far as 19 seconds into the video when she said "I and a team of .... " and I had to stop the video. My questions are:
(1.) Does she know that "I" isn't supposed to come first in a compound sentence?
(2.) What ever happened to the traditional value of starting a project on a shoestring?
(3.) 2 million dollars?
You and the other bigots here don't accept immigrants
English isn't her native language, so pardon her.
There's no grammatical basis for forcing "I" to the end of a
compound subject. It's a stylistic choice, one that doesn't hurt clarity, and pretty common in my reading experience.
(I suppose you could argue against it on the grounds of its seeming egotism, or for it for its slightly more stilted, formal feel, but not on the grounds of grammar.)
In any event, it is not a reflection either way on her language skills.
indeed...
...I know the difference between YO and NOSOTROS and I am basically illiterate
1.14 million divided by 16 is
1.14 million divided by 16 is over 70k a pop. does "traditional American values" and "common patriotic spirit" include pointing fingers at the minorities, queer folks, and the poor while the rich buy out our government and ransack the country and environment for all they can? or is that just my "excessive cynicism" talking.
"Strange accent?"
She seems to be angling for the crowd who dislike immigrants with "strange" accents but who like "The Sound of Music." Can't wait to see their Arts & Entertainment coverage.
I can see it now.
♫ The hillllllls are alive
With the sound of
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS STREAMING OVER THE BORDER TO TAKE YOUR JOBS ♫
They seem to be honoring at least one traditional American value
The long-standing American tradition of "grifting off the politically disaffected by appealing to their sense of grievance, pretending complicated political problems have 'common-sense solutions,' and informing them that they're the Real Americans, and they can Assert Their Real Americanism with just a small non-tax-deductible donation."
I predict that this enterprise will fall flat on its face, McCormick et al. will run off with the money, and the 16 people who managed to pony up $1.14m will be left holding the bag, shaking their fists at the Librul Media What Discriminated Against Them.
Hard-hitting journalism from the people behind Media Equalizer
Like this thoughtful, scathing takedown of The Homosexual Agenda:
http://mediaequalizer.com/brian-maloney/2015/06/seattles-rainbow-crosswa...
And actually this one is so damned offensive that I can't even make fun of it:
http://mediaequalizer.com/heidiharris/2015/06/harris-the-difference-betw...
No, the difference between Charleston and Baltimore is that, ever since the abolition of slavery, black people in the United States have rioted for precisely two reasons:
1) in anguish over the assassination of Martin Luther King, obviously a one time event
2) in reaction to illegal police brutality
Other than the MLK assassination, there's not a single instance in US history of non-enslaved black Americans rioting against private acts of racism. Not one. It's always been directed at the government, and that is the difference between Charleston and Baltimore.
Hey, now!
Brian Maloney is as important a voice as the guy from Talkers Magazine whose name I can't be bothered to look up.
Traditional values like
Unwed pregnancy - Bristol Palin on her second now
Leaving your wife after she gets cancer - Newt Gingrich
Child Molesting - Josh Duggar
Hating everyone except for rich people and fetuses - basically all of them
Hypocrites.
Hypocrisy is worse than
Hypocrisy is worse than capital crimes, which themselves are forgiven if of the right ideological bent.
Roman Polanski anyone?
Better to have values and fail at them being imperfect beings then to revel in having no values at all.
What?
I have no idea what Roman Polanski's politics are, but I doubt he's active in the U.S. Democratic party.
The point is that left-leaning folks aren't the ones trying to dictate the behavior of everyone else under the cloak of "traditional values," while doing whatever the heck they want to do themselves. At least socially. Economically, there are a lot of leftist hypocrites.
Just because leftist values might not be in alignment with yours doesn't mean that they don't have values.
I agree with you on the
I agree with you on the supposed "traditional values" argument, but you can't get away with saying those on the far left are not trying to dictate behavior.
Of course they are! You have to admit wingnut lefties are not a very tolerant bunch. It's their way or; you are a racist, bigot, homophone, etc.... pick one. It's the only way they can win an argument sometimes, or that's what it boils down to in about 5 seconds.
I am not saying wingnut righties are any better - they're not, but please, fairs fair.
Polanski is mentioned because he was/is a Hollywood darling, Hollywood being a liberals utopia it seems.
Oh really
Nevermind that liberal feminists had been working to have him both brought to justice and have his financing cut off for a good decade before anyone seemed to care.
Very tenuous connection, at best.
Meanwhile, a quick google search yields several judges appointed by or who ran as "conservative" GOP politicians doing things like, um, saying that a man who raped a 3 year old didn't intend to harm her, or that a serial pedophile who happened to be wealthy should serve no jail time because he "wouldn't fare well in prison", or that an 8 year old "was asking for it" when she was raped.
Yeah.
Isn't Conserving Good?
So they are going to promote conserving the lovely planet God has given us? Delightful!
Wait! What? They are going to promote the destruction of our shared planet? For private profit!?
How the hell is that "conservative"?
Huh? They are going to promote giving more power and money to those who already have plenty of power and money?
I'm confused.
-kb
Teddy Roosevelt created the
Teddy Roosevelt created the national park system and Nixon created the EPA.
So tell me again how much Republicans hate the general concept of environmental conservation.
Remind me again when they served
And tell me if either could win a Republican primary in 2016.
You're right, JFK would be
You're right, JFK would be the republican nominee in 2016 as he would never make it past a dem primary. My how things have changed .
The Democrats now....
... are somewhat to the right of Eisenhower on lots and lots of issues. The Republicans today are well to the right of the John Birch Society. Yes, things have changed.
And Lincoln freed the slaves!
But the fact is that Lincoln, TR, Nixon, and even Saint Ronnie would all be castigated as traitorous liberals in the modern Republican party. Nixon's environmental efforts were among the greatest accomplishments of his presidency; too bad his Republican successors have been so diligent and successful in their efforts to dismantle them.
It's like saying: "Yeah, but Democrats used to be the party of racism." True, that, but they flipped on that three generations ago, ushering in the civil rights era. Republicans responded with the Southern Strategy they pursue to this day, cultivating the votes of white racists and xenophobes. It's no coincidence that the map of states that went for McCain and Romney eerily overlap that of the Confederacy.
Bragging about how Nixon was a green Republican 45 years ago is equally disingenuous and contemptible. The GOP is now the party that panders to racists and supports corporate profits over clean air and water, to say nothing of broader planetary health. Nice that you were once on the right side of those issues decades ago. What have you done for us lately?
In one respect, I'm grateful that greedy billionaires have managed to co-opt the extreme fringe of the party to force otherwise moderate GOP candidates to tack hard right to win the nomination, thus ensuring their defeat in a general election where those positions are repugnant to the moderate Americans who actually elect Presidents.
It will be interesting to see if the next GOP nominee can shake that Etch-a-Sketch to different effect this time. It has been a losing strategy for eight years now. The stakes are higher this time: the next President is likely to appoint a couple of Supreme Court justices whose influence in the long term will vastly outstrip the executives and legislators we choose in the next few election cycles.
The business model has a sunset expectation
with the demo filling cemeteries faster than a Scalia dissent goes off the rails. There is a limited yet generous market for catheter sales, hair replacement surgery, divorce lawyers just for men or male enhancement products. I like to briefly listen to Boston's version of 1952 just to see whats being advertised. Its hilarious. Sell..Sell..quick..faster.. faster...before they die!!!
1952?
More like 1852.
But you're right: the warped, frustrated old men who follow Rush and Howie and their ilk are rolling steadily toward the grave. The panderers to the fringe right have the same problems as the tobacco industry: their core audience is dying off, and smart businesses don't want to get their evil stink on them.
1952
Yikes. That was MY year...