.jpg/365px-Hillary_Clinton_AIPAC_2016_Speech_(cropped).jpg)
What do one of the most popular medical doctors in US media and a smart, upstart blogger have in common?
If you guessed that they were both severed from left-leaning media organizations after they had the temerity to report on concerns about Hillary Clinton’s health and health care, you’re quite savvy.
In the span of a week, CNN, one of ‘Murica’s biggest television news networks, dropped nationally famous MD Drew Pinsky’s long-running Headline News show, “Dr. Drew, On Call,” and The Huffington Post, one the most popular political websites, abruptly cut ties with writer David Seaman. The common thread, of course, is that both gentlemen reported on the growing concerns about Mrs. Clinton’s health, medical treatment, and lack of transparency regarding her medical records.
On Sunday, August, 28, a clearly-alarmed Seaman posted a video on Youtube to not only report his sudden abandonment by Huffpo, but also to report to viewers that, given the list of reporters such as Michael Hastings and Gary Webb who died under suspicious circumstances after taking on the leviathan US government, he was not suicidal, not prone to physical clumsiness, and hoped to live a long, fruitful life.
Definitely alarming, perhaps alarmist, but not worthy of dismissal.
Seaman, whose meat and potatoes at Huffpo was reporting on inflation and the need for sound money (surprising subjects for Huffpo to allow on its site), had a 100% success rate for every blog he wrote. In other words, none got denied by editors. In fact, he was so good in the eyes of the Huffpo editors, he was given easier access to post his pieces, being able to pretty much post them on his own without prior editorial approval.
But, when he posted two pieces on the growing chorus of concern over Mrs. Clinton’s health that were rising in the populace and independent media, such as those in a widely-viewed video by Paul Joseph Watson, he discovered the posts he wrote linking to Watson’s video and reporting on the issue were not just removed - he had also been banned from the site altogether. He said he was “a little scared” about it, especially since one of the pieces had been in the top three most-read pieces on Huffpo. Since the cold dismissal, he has posted a timeline of his attempted correspondence with Arianna Huffington, the publisher, and the lack of responses he has received. Nothing has gotten him an audience with the editors.
But, because he has a large enough Youtube audience, Seaman reported on the situation himself, generating attention from ZeroHedge, and in an interview with Canada’s well-known libertarian journalist, Lauren Southern -- an interview in which he explains how his concern was heightened since it came just days after HLN cut ties with Dr. Drew for reporting pretty much the same thing from his medical perspective.
The pop media have been universally silent on Seaman’s story, but not about Dr. Drew, who was popular enough among the intelligentsia that the cancelation of his program did garner some attention.
On August 26th, the Washington Post reported not only the cancelation of the program, but also the odd timing of it, coming just a week after Dr. Pinsky discussed his concerns for Clinton’s health care on a Los Angeles radio program.
Dr. Pinsky is not known to be anti-Clinton. If anything, he is apolitical and liked by people all over the political spectrum. Pinsky’s expressed concerns were with what he saw as clearly bad medical care, based on what he knew to be Mrs. Clinton’s previous troubles.
Perhaps, the network dropped his program due to ratings. But the timing is suspicious, especially given the behavior of many news organizations to dispense with even their pretense to objectivity on the Presidential race. Today, Ken Kurson, writing for the The Observer, noted a growing trend of outright media bias in their coverage of the race, including an overt call by New York Times media columnist Jim Rutenberg for reporters and editors to openly toss away their claims to unbiased coverage and go all out for Mrs. Clinton.
Studying the attacks on Mr. Trump's friends and family, and the lack of reporting on Mrs. Clinton's troubles, Mr. Kurson noted:
“Where are the mainstream investigations of Hillary’s doctors? Or the business practices of Chelsea Clinton? How is it that none of Hillary’s supporters has any industry ‘squirming’?”
Indeed. Coming on the heels of Wikileaks revealing Clinton aides ready to supply questions to CNN reporter Jake Tapper, and NPR discontinuing reader comments on its web stories, one cannot help but wonder if the traditionally leftist pop media are following Mr. Rutenberg’s advice, and ramping up their hostility towards unbiased reporting.
Those of us who have been sensitive to leftist bias in the news have noticed this kind of behavior for years. That is why NewsBusters and the MRC have garnered so many visitors. But to see such brazen behavior at a time when citizens are searching for as much information as they can get before they possibly vote, is alarming.
And it speaks, once more, to the importance of choice in news sources – the kind of choice that is rapidly becoming the purview of the non-traditional, independent, online journalists.