Connect with us

Media

How we will put 1,000 conservative journalists to work, and Google will pay for it

Published

on

Google wants to help fund 1,000 journalists in local newsrooms.

If this is you: a person of high net worth who’s willing to give Google a run for their money, now is a good time to act.

Partnering with an organization Report For America (RFA), Google wants to build a national service project around journalism. They’re even afraid of the term: “That might make some journalists uncomfortable – the idea of service and patriotism, said co-founder Charles Sennott, founder and CEO of the GroundTruth Project.”

“But at its most fundamental, local journalism is about protecting democracy, he said.”

Here’s how RFA will work: On one end, emerging journalists will apply to be part of RFA. On the other, newsrooms will apply for a journalist. RFA will pay 50 percent of that journalist’s salary, with the newsroom paying 25 percent and local donors paying the other 25 percent. That reporter will work in the local newsroom for a year, with the opportunity to renew.

Of course there’s a catch.

RFA is a partnership between Google News Labs and the Groundtruth Project. The Groundtruth Project’s mission is (from its website):

The GroundTruth Project is a non-profit media organization dedicated to supporting a new generation of international correspondents and documentary filmmakers to go out in the world to produce social justice journalism that enlightens and informs,

It’s not just any journalism. It’s “social justice journalism.”

Proper pedigree

I would guess that diversity, inclusivity, open-mindedness, and all the other hallmarks of “protecting democracy” will be the norm for RFA. So, that being the case, I would assume they won’t ask about views on abortion, or Christianity, or global warming, or evolution, or home schooling, or political affiliations, or if the emerging journalist seeking employment owns a pickup truck.

RFA also gets support, and its reporters will get training, from the Center for Investigative Journalism, the Lenfest Institute for Journalism, the Solutions Journalism network and the Knight Foundation (which funds my job covering local news at Poynter).

The executive director and CEO of the Lenfest Institute for Journalism is Jim Friedlich. Like many journalists, he hasn’t given directly to candidates, but in 2016 he did give $1,776 to a group called “We’ve Got Your Back.” In turn that group gave to groups like “Art Not War” that also received cash from Moveon.org, Priorities USA Action, et al.

I suppose I could go down the list of all the executives and leadership of all those groups hunting for someone who isn’t a far-left liberal, and I might find one tucked away in the cobwebs, just one word away from a ball gag and duct tape. But that would take a lot of time, and I think the results would be what I expected.

Game the system

Not to worry, though. Every system can be gamed. What we need to do is find several thousand emerging journalists to apply through RFA, and media newsrooms to employ them. The more the merrier.

If Google wants a thousand journalists, let’s give them ten thousand.

At least some of these journalists might make it through the pedigree check. My guess is the majority will be sent away, having failed the “character” element of selection criteria.

But that in itself is a story. Because if a Christian baker can be made to bake a gay wedding cake and deliver it to the ceremony, performed by a Christian pastor at a Christian chapel, all impressed against their wills by the power of the state, then surely Google and RFA can be made to accept a conservative journalist into their program.

Right?

Or possibly, the bad publicity might force them to shut it down.

What publicity? Because the existing liberal media will bury the story.

Well. Maybe that approach won’t work.

Do it ourselves

Conservative journalism is suffering. Even the main power centers of conservative media: talk radio, are experiencing a bit of a dip from the division over President Trump.

It’s not that the audience isn’t there, it’s just that friendly fire has taken a toll.

This will not be forever, but I suspect that liberals see an opening here, leading to Google’s effort to stuff the minor leagues, so to speak, and load the benches for the next 20 years.

This need not happen. If Google and RFA won’t take conservatives, then we must find deep pockets in conservative circles who will fund our own effort.

If this is you: a person of high net worth who’s willing to give Google a run for their money, now is a good time to act. I can think of many worthy recipients (starting with this website) that struggle to pay emerging conservative journalists.

Now is the time to fight the battle for the next generation of journalists. Doing it in 20 years isn’t an option.

Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Democrats

Leftist media pushes back on Green New Deal criticism

Published

on

Leftist media pushes back on Green New Deal criticism

It’s been an up-and-down couple of weeks for proponents of the Green New Deal. Before details were released, it was already being heralded as the greatest thing since President Obama’s election. Then, the details came out and even many on the left were taken aback by the ambitious and incoherent provisions of the deal as detailed in a FAQ section on Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s government web page.

But that was just a draft. They took it down. At least that was the story.

Unfortunately for proponents, they were caught a little flat-footed as questions started pouring in about, well, all of it. Even if we dismiss the less-draconian concepts such as eliminating air travel or the less-sane ideas like taking care of those who are unwilling to work, the left is still stuck with a proposal that the most frugal estimates put at costing around $7 trillion while other’s consider the decade-long cost to be in the HUNDREDS of trillions of dollars.

This is, of course, ludicrous. There’s not enough money in the entire world to pay for the proposal if its cost is somewhere between the lowest and highest estimates, but that hasn’t stopped leftist media from regrouping. Now that the dust has settled a little bit, they’re doing everything they can to recommit to this concept. It’s not that they suddenly believe in this fairy tale. It’s that they don’t want this to be the issue Republicans attack in the 2020 elections.

One article in particular that I read from CNN (yes, sometimes I need to see what the other side is thinking) really struck me for its honesty about the situation. Though I stopped reading it in paragraph two when it referred to “non-partisan” PolitiFact, I went back to it just now to digest the awfulness fully (see the sacrifices I make for our readers!).

To be clear, much of what this article says is correct. It asserts the GOP will take the tenets of the Green New Deal and use it to scare voters into thinking it’s even worse than Obamacare. From 2010 through 2016, Republicans attacked Obamacare incessantly and it worked, giving them the House in 2010, the Senate in 2014, and the White House in 2016. Unfortunately, they stopped there and didn’t actually go after Obamacare with the same fervor they held in their campaign rhetoric and now the Democrats have turned the issue on its head.

But here’s the thing. Obamacare may have been bad, but the Green New Deal truly is worse. It’s not even close. Even if we take at face value the notion that the Green New Deal is simply an ambitious framework around which real legislation can be forged, we have to look at the core issues entailed in order to see the true damage it can do. This is a socialist document. It’s a call for the same levels of insanity that drive the Medicare-for-All movement. Within its frivolous attempts to change perceptions of air travel, cows, and job creation is a deep-rooted desire to convert Americans to needing more government.

NOQ Report needs your support.

The Green New Deal represents the far-left’s desire to make more American dependent on government. At the same time, it aims to increase the levels of dependency for those who are already in need of assistance. It wants Democrats to latch their wagons on the notion that if we become a militantly environmentalist nation, that will serve the dual purpose of giving us fulfillment while saving the planet.

I believe most leftist journalists understand this, but they see in the ridiculous framework a path through which Republicans can be defeated wholesale in 2020 as long as the left can control the narrative surrounding the Green New Deal. They fear another Obamacare counterinsurgency that would wipe out the anti-Trump gains they made in 2018, so they’ve adopted a stance that the Green New Deal isn’t as bad as Fox News says it is. Meanwhile, they’re doing everything they can to say, “look over here and not at the Green New Deal.”

The politics behind what the Green New Deal represents is more in play than the tenets of the proposal itself, at least in the eyes of leftist media. It’s not that they want to promote the concept. They simply don’t want the concept to derail their party in the next election.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Media

NOQ Report drops ads, goes 100% crowdfunded

Published

on

NOQ Report drops ads goes 100 crowdfunded

There’s nothing pleasant about asking people for money. Over the last six months, we’ve experimented with various types of revenue streams to see what could help propel this site to more people. In a society dominated by fake news and leftist media, getting a foothold as a limited-government conservative news outlet is challenging.

Unfortunately, there seem to be only three options. The first one is a non-starter – corporate sponsorships. There are very few organizations, PACs, and companies we trust enough to allow to be corporate sponsors, and while we may someday work with the few that we trust, we don’t have the luxury of waiting for them. We’ve had some corporate sponsorship offers, but invariably they want a say in the editorial component. Some want all-positive Republican coverage. Others want more positive Democratic coverage. Our goal has been and always will be to present the news, opinions, and quotes from a pro-American perspective. That means we call it how we see it.

Option two has been a disaster for multiple reasons. Most websites are driven by advertising, which is fine as long as it both pays the bills and doesn’t flood the site with spam. We’ve used Google, Amazon, and a handful of smaller ad networks to try to generate enough revenue, but it’s challenging when we have limited control over what’s being served. I’d get emails regularly saying we were advertising for Planned Parenthood or Ashley Madison or other websites that didn’t match our values at the site. This may be the easiest way for the site to pay its bills, but it’s not worth the trade-off.

Option three is the tough one. It’s the way that requires me to do what doesn’t come naturally – asking for money. We want to be 100% crowdfunded. That means we need you, the readers, to donate whenever possible. It can be single donations to give us a boost. It can be a recurring donation to help us plan for the future. Literally anything and everything helps.

We have tiers of $10, $50, $5000, and everything in between. Of course, there’s an option for supporters to name their donation amount, so there really isn’t a limit to how much or how little you contribute. Every penny makes a difference.

Here are some of the upcoming expenditures we need covered in order to keep the site moving forward:

  • $25/article – Paid writers and expenses. Currently, all of our writers are volunteers. We appreciate their efforts and we want to reward them. We also need to hire more freelance writers in order to expand the perspectives. Eventually, we will need to budget around $12,000 per month for full-time staff writers, but just getting started with around 1/5th that amount will be a wonderful down payment.
  • $3000/mo – Editors. For the last six months, I have put my time and effort into editing the site. I don’t mind working for free as it’s a labor of love, but it’s unsustainable. I’ll either need to hire editors so I can work full time again or I’ll need to start paying myself. Either way, this is a top priority.
  • $350/mo – Facebook promotions. It’s amazing how much attention we can drive to the site with every little money spent. $10 per day gets the message out to several thousand additional people on Facebook. Add in a little in Facebook reserve to push harder on some of the more important stories and we can start boosting exposure dramatically.
  • $625/mo – Graphics. Whether for videos or articles, the need for help from a graphic design perspective is ongoing.
  • $2000/mo – Advertising. Like-minded conservatives, classical liberals, and limited-government federalists need to know about NOQ Report. By advertising on other sites, we not only get to reach more people, but we also get to support sites that can also use financial help.
  • $200/mo – Stock photos. Using the royalty-free sites limits what we can use as artwork and photos for our articles.
  • $525/mo – Stronger server. There have been a few occasions where the site has gone down because we have a good but not great server. To have a server that should be able to handle the load of daily activity plus the occasional story going viral is a bare minimum around $525 per month. Thankfully, this also includes service, so it alleviates the need for an IT person as well.

This started out as a labor of love, but over the last year we’ve been accepted into Google News and have strong followings sharing the content on social media. It’s time for this site to branch out and start making more of an impact on American society, presenting conservative, Christian ideas that this world needs now more than every.

We appreciate all who have helped. It is our hope that our mission of spreading proper conservative and Christian messages to the masses is one our readers share. Please consider donating today.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Why didn’t the Green New Deal include the issue of Liberty Control?

Published

on

By

Why didnt the Green New Deal include the issue of Liberty Control

The latest expression of the fraud of socialism failed to mention gun control. Why?

Socialism has always been a fraudulent ideology, abounding with fallacious promises of free health care, free college, free housing, free food, and free income in the case of its latest abomination in the embodiment of the ‘Green New Deal’. The new wrinkle is that people won’t have to feel guilty about receiving stolen goods because they are saving the planet.

Curiously enough, while it had just about every socialist ‘justice’ cause under the sun, there was no mention of guns, ‘gun safety’ or even ‘gun reform’ (whatever that means). Why does it seem as though the subjects of socialism and Liberty [gun] control are now on parallel political tracks?

Up until a few years ago, it could be guaranteed that Leftists would parrot certain lies and talking points on both the subjects of Liberty control and alluding to the need for socialism. In the case of Liberty control, it would be calling for more and more laws overlaid on all the other laws. In the case of socialism it would be calling for implementation of the policy agendas of this ideology without the use of the word itself. Then recently it all seemed to change.

First came the opening of the socialistic floodgates

For the most part, even though the Oxford English Dictionary definition of Left was closely tied to socialism, Leftists tended to deny this obvious connection. Then along came Bernie Sanders and this seemed to serve to rip the mask off the Left as to their true identity. Now they embrace and revel in the label. Suddenly people who vehemently denied being socialist, almost tacitly admit to the decades of lies on the subject.

The false narrative is that we on the Pro-Liberty Right are somehow ‘afraid’ of them now. That this fear meme traces its roots back 500 years to the book ‘Utopia’ is a subject for another time. Suffice it to say that it began Karl Marx’s horrendous tome from over 170 years ago up to the words of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez today.

Then over time, the Left’s gun confiscation obsession came into focus

We have this Leftist obsession well documented and as in the case of hiding their obvious socialist national agenda, they also tended to lie about this as well. Even to this day they are trying to parrot the line that ‘No one is talking about confiscating guns’ despite over 70 instances that were a variation on that theme.

As of late, they have essentially dropped the mask, but still fail to be honest about their final solution to the Liberty problem. Most major Birdcage liners have openly demanded gun confiscation, sometimes with multiple instances spanning several years. With more gun confiscation demands being added to the list at the occasion of every serious crisis.

There’s something happening here, but it’s not exactly clear

Oddly enough, with both Leftist obsessions out in the open they never rhetorically connect them. Witness the present example of the Green New Deal, just about every Leftist dream ‘imaginable’ except for Liberty control.

Why are they reluctant to connect the tight control of the population and wealth redistribution with the common sense human Right of Self-preservation? Why would they avoid connecting the taking of one’s property with denying the right of self-defense?

The Takeaway – the answer should be obvious by now

They can’t exactly connect up these two issues because it would make it entirely obvious why they obsess over gun confiscation. One can’t forcibly take property from people who have the means to ‘resist’ [to coin a phrase] this governmental theft. Making it perfectly clear that this had nothing to do with ‘safety’ or ‘The children’ [Only after they are born, and in some cases, not even that]

The Left cannot mention gun confiscation and Liberty control in the same breath as socialistic theft because they cannot make it obvious that our right of self-defense throws a spanner into the works. Better to try to keep people perplexed as to their true intent for as long as possible until it is entirely obvious they only care about power.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report