journalism general



 On ‘journalism’  - there are essentially three types.

1 bimboised bullshit that’s mainly lifestyle – meaning the journalists themselves cannot remove their own internal setting in that they are addicted to bourgeois lifestyle. Big words for, I used to call them the Orielistas. Almost all metropolitan journalists need to reserve the right to be able to also pay a fiver for a coffee, or somewhat more entertaining some modern day equivalent of the Sloane they fancy,  at the number one posing cafe

In other words don’t want to frighten the horses too much such that they will feel uncomfortable sitting alongside the haute bourgeoisie who can only afford them coffees their daddy’s nose in one or other dodgy nosebag which also pays for the popping over the road to their cathedral of John Lewis.


–Bullshit,  what 99% of broadly ‘mainstream’ and also much of the absurd citizen journalist operators online, echoing (poor mainstream opining) has become. see Pilger piece below.

2 rare independent facts/evidence based attempts at more scientific truths in respect of wars/ politics etc even science. The kind that Pilger trailblazed almost alone via his excellent books from early 80s. Huge issue Pilger leaves out that (no disrespect to yoof) but understanding the deeper background – vested interests even in science for example, takes years  - many years of maturity and good reading. And even experiencing tyranny firsthand which often does not happen to yoof almost by default. That tends to come a little later. The average age of journalists has drastically reduced – due large media organisation cost cutting, and its almost impossible for younger journalists to have the depth to practice good sceptical rules. An expert from many years bbc / itv as reporter  - a bit of a conformist chappie as all people from that world are by default said to me a few months ago – April 2021, only thing i watch now is AL jezeera. 

3.  opinion journalism. OUR area as we have no means of going around interviewing all the bigwigs and researching world affairs or even fully researching domestic science or ‘medical’ politics. Clever deep wise opinion journalism. And ONLY ‘character’ keeps the watchers watching. Not foolish but to some extent AUTHENTIC maverick. New takes on it all. I happen to be expert. But ways of actually proving you are authentic need to be woven in. Younger people have one good thing about their pandemic of malaise – they can smell bullshit maybe better than any other generation before them.


Just as trite example made up quickly, human statements need to be applied – the problem with smartarse journos its all so clinical even your Alex Belfields, “ my girlchild is the only person alive i care about fully, and i told her years ago i would only ever try and speak wise truths. And i told her also that if i failed she should disown me” or to the viewer: “ you have my name, please do critique me far and wide online  if i fail to add usefully and intelligently to   the debate..”

The journalist distancing themselves from real life consequences is one of the major problems of the (over ‘professionalised’) age. And worse, using a rantiness for effect,simply harms younger generations by getting the zeitgeist ridiculously huffy.. any licensed huffiness just closes down debate.


Indeed silly backwards snobberies too prevail. It has been the norm for some years now for any younger smartphone owning person to record ordinary daily conversation. I would state to anyone if i had any even quasi public or public self promoting role “ please always record every word i utter ...   i may be doing the same also ....and hold me to account gently on any inconsistencies...we are all in it together.... “


the one issue with the latter being people will use things out of context and context may be over extended encounters. But the fullest record perhaps allays that possibility.


But this unwillingness to accept that we live in a  world where any word we utter may be somehow recorded fails to realise one beauty of it being it is psychologically most healthy if we realise in time every word we utter maybe we will be asked sometime are we operating within the values system we vocally promote. Always. (and at times we will all make mistakes so ‘punishment’ should never be extreme or final). Fait Accompli is one forgotten key to very best peace of mind. Even if it is a baddie turn of events.




IDW  - myself i do not value these operators. I have sat through many of their pieces. Very poor. Not philosophical, too showoff and so so urban and in fact elitist and warped attention seeker class, dressed up as folksy. Peterson perfect example.  A man who as tenured senior medical qualified adult could not manage to follow the obvious many years in fact decades common sense that ALL psychotropic medicines do have serious side effects and will be addictive. My generation knew that 40 years ago. And he calls his failure to know that an ‘illness’ and seeks self pity and even worse includes his daughter in this absurd charade. What example is that? When it is his job to be an example.

Furthermore the initial umbrella term of Intellectual dark web was silly in a fallacious provocative manner and and flawed in that the great majority if one does as i have many times the last few years asked an ordinary person “have you heard of the IDW ...[ because a leading member says x its worth considering]..?” ordinary people look at you as if you may be a childporn peddling terrorist. Far too close to the ‘dark web’ they hear of on their bimbo Sky News or the like. And thus the attempt at adult discourse by referring in to their IDW with others is sidetracked into that first silly phase which makes the discourser, me, sound like a potential nutjob.




HOWEVER, i know one thing and it is all that matters.  Rubin’s band, they are  - were in their loose  group,  and are as individuals, THE most ‘respected’ / valued commentators of the day worldwide, among the rather fey robustly sceptical mind of today. Almost pop stars of so called right thinking modern influencing. Remain so.

And thus saying “Dave Rubin said..” is about the most powerful modern day message from God – if one has a mind. Simply should be on your cv and business plan.


Dave Rubin says at the end...”MAKE YOUR OWN MEDIA..”





Dave Rubin: why the 'Intellectual Dark Web' split up

The group of thinkers now known as the “Intellectual Dark Web” — Jordan Peterson, Sam Harris, Bret and Eric Weinstein, Ben Shapiro — were convened in Dave Rubin's garage and on his YouTube channel, The Rubin Report. And yet he has always suffered the accusation that he wasn’t a 'real' intellectual.


 Boring subject, forgotten in a few years but an example of very bad journalism.

It takes years and years to know anything about any new turn of events 'medically.

In fact your popstar Peterson has recently made up for all his pitiful crass fancypants (handsome man) crying at his zoom camera in that 3 or 4 months ago, a long time tenured senior professor of matters medical actually said  - i paraphrase accurately until i find the piece again, that the overall the net effect of all medicine over many decades has NOT been to improve the human condition on average.

For example  - real worlds these so called journalists leave out, and 'science' cannot keep up with. Summer 2020 i encountered staying nearby - flight from his city, a rather wonderful man in his early 60s. I don't normally bother with any city folk any more. I could trust what this man hilariously discussed as he was a lifelong close friend to a local man i had known well 5 years.

SO our man was a right 'Del Boy'. Very successful. Quite well off. No bullshit.  Over the course of a few visits to enjoy his extremely brash sense of humour he revealed one of his many lines of trade: selling by the van load very potent - i.e. extra strength,  'grey market' Viagra.  Apparently it is shipped in from one or other EU source without too much attention paid to it.  And then he also shared his history dabbling in a range of other recreational pharmaceuticals. Not of the clearly illegal opioid variety but nevertheless apparently there are a range of chemicals that are industrially guzzled for either 'fun' or some modern day notion they enhance. Apparently some 'smart pill' is some new craze.

And here's the thing, someone completely believable regaled how half the over 50s by reasonable estimate in his medium sized city are regularly guzzling one or other form of loosely controlled so called 'medicine'. And all completely off any (societal) books. I.e. no prescriptions - all backstreet but in fact in plain view. Unlikely it all even features in official import records.

Clearly it is known about by the powers that be. It must be. And ignored.  And i will assume that in many other urban areas this kind of lightweight abuse of chemicals is similarly extremely widespread. Chemicals that not only are not necessary but also always have some other affects on the body we don't even understand fully. But there is one thing we do know: 'immunity systems' - a working phrase for all sorts of automatic activity ingoing in all bodies,  are so complex and fragile that any chemical could affect them - downgrade them in some or other way.... which may well lead to a hell of a lot of people not being to fight off some bug that had they not had current or past system compromise by their playful guzzling, may indeed have been naturally processed and binned. 

But of course good looking younger journalists cannot ask such questions as "in this sick stupid society when even half my young good looking friends and most who go to the Oriel are guzzling  unprescribed chemicals bought from Dell Boy around the corner, and government and authority pretend its not at the industrial levels it is cos  they like their Del Boys, could this possibly be feeding in to seemingly far worse outcomes in The Uk especially, and some other so called modern economies.... when in good old AFrica for example where they don't have this societal trendy for of madness,  far lower rates of serious illness seem to be occurring..?" Nope, pretty boys can rarely join dots, or even think for themselves. 


Johan Giesecke one year on: did Sweden succeed?





19 minutes in:



“journalism has given up”