BuzzFeed

BuzzFeed slammed for ‘bigoted piece of filth’ article claiming white people ruin America

BuzzFeed is being slammed for a racially charged article it published Wednesday titled, “37 Things White People Need To Stop Ruining In 2018,” which lists “America” among the things that whites are supposedly tarnishing. “This article isn’t funny, it’s racist—plain and simple. If a similar piece was written about any other ethnicity, the journalist would be fired on the spot. It undoubtedly would spark public outrage, and rightfully so” conservative commentator Britt McHenry told Fox News. BuzzFeed staff writer Patrice Peck put together a listicle of things she feels that Caucasians have ruined, which features everything from macaroni and cheese to makeup. She blames supermodel Bella Hadid for ruining sneaker culture by talking about shoes like an “undercover cop.” Peck’s story didn’t take much work, as she simply embedded tweets, comments and headlines written by other people in an attempt to make her point that white people are ruining America. Media Research Center Vice President Dan Gainor told Fox News that “openly liberal media have finally outed themselves” and left-leaning media members think “it’s OK to be racist or sexist, as long as their targets are white and male” with conservative values. “The easy test of this is try imagining a bigoted piece of filth like this being written about any other group. Picture the ‘37 Things Black People Need To Stop Ruining In 2018’ headline and then wait for Twitter to shut down your account,” Gainor said. Gainor called BuzzFeed “openly bigoted” but said “major media will let them get it away it” because many would-be critics are just as guilty. “Instead of hating white people, maybe Buzzfeed should thank them. The unemployment rate remains at a 17-year low, and the economy grew last quarter at its fastest pace since 2015. Minorities, including Hispanics and Blacks, are seeing historic lows in unemployment across the country,” McHenry said. Outkick founder and media watchdog Clay Travis echoed McHenry’s feelings about the article, tweeting, “If this is written about any other race every advertiser bails on company & a ton of people are fired.” The story also claims that Kendall Jenner ruined protests, wealthy people have ruined “trees” by installing anti-bird spikes, white Hollywood ruined the Oscars, Adele beating Beyoncé for an award ruined the Grammys and one particular white woman ruined the hit Migos song “Bad and Boujee” simply by posting a video of herself singing along. In fact, Peck says white people ruined the word “boujee” all together. Peck blames white people who voted for President Trump as the ones who have ruined America. She even charges a group of non-Koreans who started a K-Pop band have ruined that genre of music. The list goes on to mention a handful of other hip-hop songs that white people have destroyed by performing – complete with video of a white girl who apparently dislocated her knee while attempting the “Hit Dem Folks” dance. The BuzzFeed staffer also says white people have ruined “any challenge,” “car freestyles” and even hip-hop music in general – which is backed up by a tweet showcasing the amount of white people who currently have hits on iTunes. But Peck doesn’t only think white people ruined rap music, she also lists “classics,” using the Destiny’s Child song “Say My Name” as an example because white actresses Debby Ryan and Ashley Tisdale dared to cover it. The racially insensitive post also claims white people have ruined “childhoods” and links to video of an elderly woman in an argument over a child selling candy outside of a department store. To end the piece, Peck blames white people for ruining the ability to identify as Filipino and black, with links to stories about white people who identify as non-white races. “Eliminating racism means eliminating all commentary like this. Nobody can help the color of their skin,” McHenry said. “Why make fun of people for that? So, Buzzfeed, leave the ‘comedy’ to real comedians.” A BuzzFeed spokesperson told Fox News that it is “important to distinguish entertainment content from News” and declined further comment.

Of course..  Because Buzzfeed is garbage.  In the interest of full disclosure, we have in previous years posted articles, on occasion, from Buzzfeed.  After this, and their “breaking story” regarding the infamously discredited so-called “Trump dossier,” we will no longer do so.  Two strikes, and they’re out!  Patrice Peck is an openly, brazen black racist.  Buzzfeed should fire her immediately, along with whatever editor(s) who allowed her column to be posted, and apologize publicly for such an offensive and breathtaking lack of judgement.

French: The Russia Dossier Story: A Perfect Storm of Clinton Deception, Media Irresponsibility, and Democratic Moral Blindness

Remember that infamous Russian “dossier,” the unverified document that BuzzFeed unceremoniously dumped into the public square earlier this year? You might recall it as making a series of incredibly salacious and completely unproven accusations against the sitting president of the United States. Well, it turns out that it was a piece of partisan opposition research, bought and paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, both of which then denied having anything to do with it after the fact. Last night the Washington Post reported that the Clinton campaign and the DNC used a lawyer named Marc Elias to retain the oppo-research firm Fusion GPS to conduct research on the Trump campaign (the firm had previously worked on behalf of a still-unidentified Republican to investigate Trump). Fusion GPS then hired a former intelligence officer named Christopher Steele, who conducted an investigation and authored the dossier. According to the Post, the Clinton campaign and the DNC used the law firm to pay Fusion GPS right until the end of October 2016. As my colleague Andrew McCarthy notes, it’s a clever arrangement. The use of the law firm adds a layer of deniability, and when controversy arises, Fusion GPS is able to appeal to attorney-client privilege to shield itself from scrutiny. It would be easy, at this point, to start to wander down the rabbit hole, to wonder how much of the so-called “Russia controversy” is based on the Clinton campaign’s opposition research, but let’s not speculate. The truth will emerge. Instead, let’s do something else: Let’s consider how the Russian-dossier story has thus far represented a perfect storm of classic Clintonism, media irresponsibility, and Democratic moral blindness. First, the Clintonism. The New York Times’s Maggie Haberman responded to the Post story with a perfect tweet: “Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year” “Sanctimonious lying” is Clintonworld’s M.O. From Bill to Hillary to key members of her team, they lie constantly, repetitively, and with style, and the lies often conceal no-holds-barred, bare-knuckle politics designed to win races and destroy political opponents. The lies here are important. It’s one thing to review a dossier compiled by a “former intelligence agent” and consider its contents as the product of an objective process. It’s another thing entirely to review that same work as the direct product of an opposing campaign’s opposition research. The goal of an opposition researcher is to collect everything and share everything with the client. A proper intelligence analysis, however, involves separating truth from fiction and provable claims from unverifiable allegations. Those who pitched the Russian dossier treated it not as opposition research but rather as a form of intelligence report. It had distinctive formatting. It used terms of art. It looked like a government document. How many people did it fool? Then there’s the media irresponsibility. There are reasons why news outlets don’t simply publish partisan opposition-research files: they’re full of rumor, innuendo, and sometimes outright lies. Campaigns routinely keep gigabytes of information about political opponents, and those files can contain the most fantastical of allegations. Yes, there are often true allegations alongside the scurrilous ones, but responsible journalists research those allegations before publishing them. Responsible journalists know to treat dirt from opposing campaigns with special skepticism. They don’t simply take a campaign’s work, upload it to their servers, and press “publish.” Yet that’s exactly what BuzzFeed did when it published the dossier in January. We knew then that it was the product of Trump opponents. (After all, which Trump friend would commission such a report?) We did not know it was the product of the Clinton campaign. A news outlet took a rumor-filled document of then-unknown origin, failed to verify its claims, and published it anyway. At the time, BuzzFeed called its work “ferocious reporting,” but anyone can publish an opposition-research file. It was shameful for BuzzFeed to publish the dossier then. It’s even more shameful now. Finally, let’s talk for a moment about Democratic moral blindness. One of the more incredible aspects of the emerging post-election narrative is the hero-worship that greets Hillary in some progressive circles. Sure, there are Bernie Bros and others who are bitterly angry at her, but others greet her with hugs, cheers, and tears. This is absurd. It’s as if some Democrats see the 2016 election as a Lord of the Rings–style struggle of good versus evil, Frodo battling Gollum at the Cracks of Doom, only to see Gollum win. Nope, sorry.

Agreed…and well said, David.  Attorney, and Army Reserve officer (Major), David French is responsible for that spot-on analysis.  David was awarded the Bronze Star for his service in Iraq.

Opinion: Shame on Buzzfeed

When you’re a political writer, journalist, or reporter, you’re a rumor magnet. The amount of information that flies at you can be truly staggering, and much of it is pure garbage. Trust me when I say that almost every prominent politician, no matter how squeaky clean, is the subject of salacious and bizarre scandal-mongering. And if there’s a prominent politician who isn’t the subject of rumors, give it time. The rumors will come. I say this because I was one of the many people who were told that Trump had been “compromised” by Russian intelligence. This is an extraordinarily weighty allegation. It’s essentially a claim that the then GOP nominee (and now president-elect) isn’t just misguided in his Russia policy but under the actual influence and potential control of our primary geopolitical rival. This would be unprecedented. It would create an instant and grave constitutional and national-security crisis. So here’s what responsible people say when confronted with claims like that: What’s your evidence? If the answer is “an anonymously written and anonymously sourced series of memos that no one has yet been able to substantiate,” then you either pass on the story or — if you have the time and resources — try to substantiate the claims. If you can’t, then you pass. It’s that simple. Any other action isn’t “transparency.” It’s not “reporting.” It’s malice. Buzzfeed is malicious. Last night, just before multiple members of its staff publicly wept real tears over President Obama’s farewell address, Buzzfeed published a 35-page “dossier” of unverified, anonymously sourced opposition research against Trump. I won’t dignify the document with a link, but it’s allegedly written by a former British intelligence official at the behest of Trump political opponents, and it paints a picture of Trump as thoroughly compromised by Russian intelligence, in part through claims that the Russians have evidence of personal misconduct by Trump that is embarrassing and humiliating. The claims rocketed around Twitter last night, and instantly Trump became the butt of jokes (at best) and the subject of hysterical fears (at worst). But no one knows whether any of the “dossier” is true. In fact, the only thing we know is that parts are false. CNN has debunked one of its key claims — that a Trump lawyer met with Russian intelligence officials in Prague — and NBC has reported that U.S. intelligence officials believe the dossier is an example of “disinformation” circulating about Trump. Even Buzzfeed acknowledges that parts are plainly false. Yet it released the dossier anyway. Its “justification” for the release is a CNN report last night that intelligence officials briefed Trump that there are those who allege that “Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.” Trump was allegedly presented with these claims in a two-page summary document that referenced the dossier. NBC is now disputing CNN’s report, claiming its sources say that Trump was not briefed about claims that Russia had compromising information on him. Buzzfeed’s Ben Smith defended the release with this ridiculous statement:

To read Ben’s statement, and the rest of this biting op/ed by attorney David French, click on the text above.  What Buzzfeed did last night was inexcusable, and really is “fake news.”

Starnes: ‘Fixer Upper’ hosts’ pastor responds to Buzzfeed’s public shaming

It’s not exactly clear why Buzzfeed chose to publicly shame Fixer Upper hosts Chip and Joanna Gaines. Nor do we know why the online publication attacked the Christian couple’s church. Maybe author Kate Aurthur got a speeding ticket while driving through Waco, Texas? Or maybe she dislikes shiplap? Or perhaps Buzzfeed simply employs virulent, anti-Christian bigots? We may never know. Regardless, their ugly attack on the Gaines family and Antioch Community Church in Waco cannot be undone. “The real shame is not on the Gaines family, but on this media inquisition of Christianity,” National Religious Broadcasters president Jerry A. Johnson told me. Earlier this week, Buzzfeed raised questions about the Gaines’ family church and its position on same-sex marriage. So let’s cut to the chase – is Antioch Community Church anti-gay? “Absolutely not, Pastor Siebert told me in an exclusive interview. “We are not only not anti-gay, but we are pro-helping people in their journey to find out who God is and who He has made them to be.” The pastor told me he was surprised by the controversy surrounding a message he delivered more than a year ago pointing out that people from all different walks of life attend the church. “For us – our heart has always been to love Jesus, preach the word of God and help people in their journey,” he said.

Fair enough.  But, that belief alone is worthy of being shamed by the fascist liberal elites at Buzzfeed on this outrageous witch hunt.  Shame on them!  Thanks to Todd Starnes for bringing this to our attention.  To read the rest of the article, click on the text above.

Opinion: Buzzfeed’s Ben Smith Liberal Bias Exposed

The never-ending sleaze-fest that is Ben Smith’s successful but creepy “journalism” career hit another bump Monday in the form of conservative radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt. Smith has spent the better part of a decade on the national stage posing as an objective journalist while crusading for left-wing causes, and doing so in ways so unethical, even Gawker is shocked. Smith and his site BuzzFeed stepped in it Friday. After the Supreme Court made gay marriage the law of the land across all 50 states, BuzzFeed dropped its pretense as an objective news outlet to openly celebrate the ruling. Like many other left-wing sites, BuzzFeed altered its logo to resemble the anti-Christian gay pride flag. When questioned on it, Smith finally admitted what I have been warning people about since 2007 — that Smith is a left-wing activist, not a journalist. “We firmly believe,” Smith told Politico, “that for a number of issues, including civil rights, women’s rights, anti-racism, and LGBT equality, there are not two sides.” And naturally, if you believe there are not two-sides on those issues, how handy it is that those issues can be used to bleed into every other political issue, be it domestic or foreign policy. And you can bet it will bleed into BuzzFeed’s coverage of the 2016 presidential campaign. Speaking with radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt Monday, Smith not only revealed what a provincial, bubbled elitist he is, Smith exposed his outlet as one willing to take sides against a billion Christians on the issue of same sex marriage, but not one willing to take sides on the issue of evil government regimes and Shariah Law.

To read the exchange between Ben and Hugh Heitt, click on the text above. There is ZERO doubt about Ben’s brazen liberal bias; none whatsoever. So, be mindful of that if you ever surf BuzzFeed.