more on the Wild Hunt bullshit. I’ve never thought particularly highly of Cherry Hill — too much PC nonsense and not enough theology — this does not change or improve my opinion. God damn it, our communities deserve better than this bullshit. There is a difference between journalism, that conveys information and tells us the who, what, where and how and “activist” journalism that seeks to brain wash, influence, control information and is little than propaganda that compels action from the readership. We have a right to clear, unbiased journalism in our communities or why the hell are we supporting TWH. Do you only want them doing hit pieces on groups? (Think about it doing a hit piece on your group). Journalism is there to protect our freedom of speech and to give people the information they need to make their own choices. What we are seeing instead, is “oh, this is neutral which means it supports blah blah blah let’s yell fire.” Being exposed to ideas that one disagrees with is not oppression.
I’d hoped never to comment on this nonsense again, but as there is at least one Wild Hunt columnist who clearly believes he (who by his own admission is not a journalist) has the facts straight about my resignation, and his column remains despite my specific request that it be retracted, I do have something more to say.
The blogger who has been allowed to publish “a public apology from the Wild Hunt” demonstrates that he is, indeed, not a journalist. After praising a retraction (which, after the last time she pulled an article due to pressure, the managing editor swore to me would never happen again; she regretted the clear hit to the agency’s credibility and her clear claims of support for freedom of the press), the blogger writes this: “The Wild Hunt is also working on internal changes to ensure that journalistic standards are more consistently maintained…
View original post 359 more words