BloggeRhythms

Albert Einstein’s genius has once again has been confirmed, whereas it was he who proposed “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results.” 

In today’s case, his premise applies to the New York Times, whose publisher Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr. was forced to promise last week to “rededicate ourselves” to good journalism. His promise stemmed from many readers feeling news stories in the paper were decidedly favorable to Hillary Clinton and biased against Trump.

And now, today, they’re at it again as reported on FoxNews.com: “Donald Trump resumed his war with The New York Times on Wednesday after a brief respite following last week’s upset victory, going on a Twitter tear over The Gray Lady’s claims that his transition team is in disarray and foreign leaders are struggling to reach him.

“The president-elect made his case in trademark fashion, letting rip a rapid-fire string of rebuttals in an early-morning tweet-storm.” 

Trump’s tweets were provided as examples: “The failing @nytimes story is so totally wrong on transition. It is going so smoothly. Also, I have spoken to many foreign leaders.”

“I have received and taken calls from many foreign leaders despite what the failing @nytimes said. Russia, U.K., China, Saudi Arabia, Japan,”

“Australia, New Zealand, and more. I am always available to them. @nytimes is just upset that they looked like fools in their coverage of me.”

So, here we have a major publication supposedly run by professional journalists, whose personal animosities spur the continuing destruction of their own entity. As a result, their readership has dropped to levels that suggest they may be forced to close the business they’ve built. Yet, they keep on publishing biased fabrications of the truth regardless.

At this point, it’s quite obvious that they’ll continue to battle Trump, railing against his every action, whether their reportage is correct or not. And considering he’s just been elected POTUS, soon to occupy the “Bully Pulpit,” who do you suppose is going to win that one?

On a similar matter, enemies who continue to battle regardless of contrary truths, Detroit Free Press’ David Jesse, writes @.freep.com today: “Speaking at President Gerald Ford's alma mater, The Rev. Jesse Jackson called for President Obama to issue a blanket pardon to Hillary Clinton before he leaves office, just like Ford did for Richard Nixon.

“Stopping short of saying Clinton did anything wrong, Jackson told a large crowd of University of Michigan students, faculty and administrators gathered at daylong celebration of his career that Obama should short-circuit President-elect Donald Trump's promised attempt to prosecute Hillary Clinton for use of a private e-mail server. 

"It would be a monumental moral mistake to pursue the indictment of Hillary Clinton," Jackson said. He said issuing the pardon could help heal the nation, like Ford's pardon of Nixon did. 

Farther along in his column, Jackson drew a comparison in making a point regarding Trump’s campaign strategy, which Jackson now thinks should be corrected.  

Jackson said: “Donald Trump saw an America that was a dry field, and instead of watering it to get the grass growing again, he threw a lit match on it, Jackson said. 

“Now it's up to Trump to take action, Jackson added. 

"The one who set the field afire must be the one to put it out," he told the Free Press in a one-on-one interview. "He had the option to pour water on it (the dry field) and let it grow. He didn't do that — he chose to light it on fire. One of my concerns is that we see the division in America now because of that. We see classmates, roommates in a conflict over the way the campaign turned out.” 

Where Jackson’s argument falls short, however, is that it wasn’t Trump who saw the nation as a “dry field.” The perception came from disenfranchised voters who felt abandoned by a self-serving government. As far as Trump was concerned, his opportunity arose precisely because he was the one who not only noticed that, but vowed to fix it.  

So, if Jackson wants to see Clinton pardoned for her crimes his appeal shouldn’t be made to Trump, he should instead approach the 60,913,096 citizens who voted him into office. Because a huge segment of that number want to see her convicted for her crimes, as any other citizen would. And, for many, that was the whole point of throwing their support behind Trump in the first place.

And then, another publication with close ties to Bill Clinton’s wife suffered a precipitous drop in circulation. Although whether or not the loss in readership stems from that relationship is certainly debatable, the timing of the drop-off indicates a very high degree of probability of reader disagreement with the newspaper’s political positioning.

Keith J. Kelly @nypostcom covered the story yesterday, writing: “The Daily News is a four-time loser, recently released circulation stats show. 

“The embattled newspaper reported sharply lower sales on weekdays and Sundays and on newsstand sales and home deliveries, according to the Alliance for Audited Media. 

“While the entire newspaper industry has been hammered by print circulation declines in recent years, the drop-off by Mort Zuckerman’s Daily News in September was much steeper than the declines at The Post and the New York Times. 

“The News saw its weekday print circulation tumble 11.2 percent, to 207,680, almost double the 6.8 drop at The Post, which fell to 230,634. The Times reported a decline of 5.5 percent, to 551,579. 

“The Post was the No. 1 seller on newsstands, with 169,543 copies sold in September, down 9.9 percent. The Times sold an average 77,994 newsstand copies, down 3.5 percent. The News saw newsstand sales crater by 11.4 percent, to 115,923.” 

According to Wikipedia: “The Daily News's editorial stance is "flexibly centrist" with a populist streak In presidential elections, the paper endorsed Republican George W. Bush in 2004, Democrat Barack Obama in 2008, Republican Mitt Romney in 2012, and Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016. 

While the publication’s history shows that their editorial stance may indeed be “ flexibly centrist," its owner Mort Zuckerman, is a longtime backer of the Clintons.

Back on April 12th, 2016, the Politico staff @politico.com wrote: “The New York Daily News has endorsed Hillary Clinton, just days after the tabloid's editorial board roughed up her Democratic primary rival, Bernie Sanders, in a lengthy interview. 

“Hailing the former secretary of state as "unsparingly clear-eyed about what’s wrong with America," the paper described Clinton as best-suited to take on what it said was the most urgent task of the next president: to "ignite and rebalance the United States economy in favor of the many while also extending an extra helping hand to ease burdens that have grown too heavy for some." 

Although the endorsement was eloquent and most likely heartfelt, it seems readers have now voted with their pocketbooks, choosing to obtain their news somewhere else. 

That's it for today folks. 

Adios