Our entire news ecosystem is putrid trash. Even our most prestigious and respected outlets are pumping out a constant stream of genocide apologia right now. Manufacturing Consent is decades old and should've ended the New York Times, and that was before they cheerlead our war into Iraq.

Allowing advertising to decide which content is allowed and which isn't won't do anything but punish sites that deviate from mainstream orthodoxy and reward bland corporate friendly bullshit. Here's what that Internet looks like.

Jezebel

Why can't we just believe people (corporations) when they tell us straight-up who they are?

Generally agree. Though I'm not inclined to apply labels like "edgy" as if that's accurate (or a negative thing). Covering tough topics is important. So are opinion pieces about it. That said...

“It’s lamentable but not surprising that Jezebel shut down because they covered provocative topics, topics that the electorate needed to be informed about and topics that people care about and that attract interest,” he added. “But advertisers are abdicating their responsibility to support news out of an unfounded fear that they might harm themselves.”

Suggesting it's the responsibility of the advertisers to prop up news is wild. These two things should have been divorced years ago. I don't know what the proper model is for sustainability of independent journalism, but the advertising model has always been one with acute influence problems.

Funny it doesn't go both ways. Blue-chip companies are glad to rainbow up in June even if they show a history of underemploying LGBT folk and failing to acknowledge gay families. Heck, some of them support anti-LGBT activist groups while still flying rainbws.

I suspected it was about silencing Jezebel even though they are way less radical than the far-right interests they regard as stil brand safe... or are glad to support until the public notices.

Anger and outrage are different than sad and upset though.