EXPOSED: The globalists who control the legacy media



In 2024, 90% of the media is owned by just six giant global corporations — while just four decades ago, 50 companies controlled 90% of the media.

“This is the media-industrial complex. The propaganda-industrial complex,” Glenn Beck of “The Glenn Beck Program” comments.

Currently, National Amusements and the Redstone family control CBS, CMT, MTV, Nickelodeon, and so much more. Disney and “the far-left whack job” Bob Iger control ABC, ESPN, the History Channel, Marvel Studios, Lucasfilm, video games, and again, so much more.

TimeWarner and CEO Jeff Bewkes control CNN, Warner Brothers, HBO, Turner, video games, internet, print media like Time, and dozens more. Comcast and CEO Brian L. Roberts control NBC, MSNBC, CSNBC, Telemundo, and the internet.


NewsCorp and the Murdoch family control Fox and National Geographic while Sony controls an incredible amount of music, television, movies, and more.

“These are just a few examples of what these conglomerates own,” Glenn says. “Remember, almost everything you use and consume and eat are owned by, what did I say, 12 companies? And six own what you’re talking about every day.”

“Who’s controlling the information? The big six, taken all together, are valued at nearly $500 billion dollars. You want to know why they fought the little guys so much, and lost by the way, this Tuesday,” Glenn continues, noting that all that money they’ve invested “isn’t working.”

However, he says, “the result of their work is devastating.”

“The way we cut out this cancer is by more competition, more options, ending the partnership between the government and their surrogates, their corporate board members that are all sitting at the tables of the big six,” Glenn says.

“Increase the amount of independent media. No government bailouts. No government startups. Let the system work. Halt the cronyism between the government and the media companies,” he continues, adding, “And the great thing is, that’s Donald Trump’s plan.”

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The fall of the corporate press: A Thanksgiving reflection on the new media era



President-elect Donald Trump's overwhelming victory on November 5 appears to have marked the end of an era for the corporate press. And that is certainly something worthy of gratitude this Thanksgiving.

The outcome of the election revealed that the vast majority of voters were unswayed by the liberal media's relentless attacks against Trump and the Biden-Harris administration's persistent lawfare.

'We could all be fired a year from now.'

Instead, America largely rejected the barrage of propaganda and negative coverage directed toward the Republican nominee, including outlandish comparisons to Adolf Hitler and desperate warnings of fascism.

Even with the most prominent news networks behind it, the Democratic Party still failed in its mission to instill widespread fear among Americans about the prospect of a second Trump administration.

So while the lights may still be on — for now — at the once-powerful media giants, Trump's landslide victory undoubtedly marks the greatest decline in their influence to date. The election results even prompted Elon Musk, a now-Trump supporter who voted predominantly Democrat in the past, to declare to the public, "You are the media now."

Whether the reporters at the legacy media outlets will continue with their bogeyman narratives of Trump throughout his upcoming presidency remains to be seen. Though this scenario seems the most likely, at least for the moment, this holiday season provides a brief respite from the fearmongering as these wildly out-of-touch networks evaluate their missteps and strategize on how to bail out their collective sinking ship.

So far, fresh out of Trump's win, the reaction from the corporate press and far-left reporters has notably been varied, with some trying to regain favor with the American audience and others doubling down on their hatred for Trump.

Following the election results, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, the owner of the Los Angeles Times, announced that he planned to replace the editorial board to realign with voter sentiment.

Jeff Bezos, the owner of the Washington Post, made a similar move, vowing to incorporate more conservative editorial writers. The Post's senior politics editor was reportedly informed that he would soon be removed from that position.

Both newspapers faced significant pushback from their respective newsroom staffers when the owners declined to endorse a presidential candidate during this election cycle.

Over at MSNBC, there appears to be even more internal turmoil. Elon Musk floated the idea of purchasing the network after Comcast announced that it plans to spin off several cable channels, including MSNBC, CNBC, and USA Network. The upcoming reorganization prompted anchor Rachel Maddow's contract to be renegotiated down by $5 million, and other staffers are reportedly concerned about job security.

Last week, MSNBC host Joe Scarborough said, "We could all be fired a year from now."

His co-host and wife, Mika Brzezinski, replied, "Or tomorrow."

Scarborough and Brzezinski's show, "Morning Joe," suffered a steep decline in viewership after the two liberal co-hosts announced they had met with Trump at Mar-a-Lago to reportedly "restart communications."

While the two anchors give the impression of attempting to bridge the divide, other left-wing hosts, such as Joy Reid and much of "The View" panel, have opted to double down on their loathing of Trump, attributing his election win to what they perceive as a cloud of racism and sexism obscuring the judgment of most American voters.

During a podcast episode last week, Joe Rogan commented on the deteriorating viewership of liberal media.

Rogan said, "I was just reading something about CNN's ratings and MSNBC's ratings post-election — they've crashed."

"All these left-wing kooks on YouTube are hemorrhaging subscribers. Where people go, 'You guys are out of touch, you're not accurate, you're delusional,'" he added. "And people are speaking with their subscriptions, and they're speaking with their purchasing of the Washington Post and their purchasing of the New York Times."

This Thanksgiving, let us celebrate the nation seeing through the veil of misleading and biased reporting, inspiring hope among Americans that we might return to the values upon which our country was founded. And let us give thanks for what we stand to gain: a more independent media landscape that is held accountable to the people.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

In Thanksgiving Briefing, Karine Jean-Pierre Thanks The Press For Regurgitating White House Propaganda The Last Four Years

In a largely congenial pre-Thanksgiving press conference, Karine Jean-Pierre served the White House press corps a turkey dinner and expressed her gratitude for all the media have done for the Biden-Harris administration over the past four years. “Thank you. No, really, I mean that,” Jean-Pierre, who was wearing a tall, black pilgrim hat, gushed from […]

GOP senator stops CNN anchor in her tracks to give audience the truth about Pete Hegseth allegations: 'You told one part'



Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) refused to let CNN tell only one side of the story.

Last week, California police released a report accusing Pete Hegseth, the nominee for defense secretary, of sexual assault in 2017. Despite the suspicious timing of the report's release and its salacious details, Hegseth was never charged with any crimes because, as the report seems to indicate, there was not sufficient evidence to prove the allegations.

'He wasn't charged. He wasn't even kind of charged in this. There was no crime committed.'

And yet, CNN anchor Dana Bash tried to use the report on Sunday to smear Hegseth.

Asking Mullin about the report, Bash — instead of framing the discussion around the lack of evidence and no criminal charges — centered the woman's allegations and claims against Hegseth.

Mullin immediately shut her down.

"Dana, if we're going to get into that, let's talk about the whole police report," he interjected.

"First of all, the police report, if you look at it, it's very clear that what Pete was saying, what his attorney was saying, was accurate," Mullin said. "There was no case here. He was falsely accused."

According to Mullin, the police report fortifies Hegseth's innocence because it says that multiple eyewitnesses identified the woman who accused Hegseth of assault as the "aggressor."

— (@)

After Mullin told CNN's audience what the police report says, Bash tried defending herself. She said she "wasn't done" and was, eventually, going to explain why Hegseth was never charged with a crime.

But Mullin wasn't buying it.

"I'm just saying that you told one part of this, Dana — that isn't accurate," he said.

Surprisingly, Bash thanked Mullin for "giving that other side [of the story] for me." Still, she questioned how Mullin could believe Hegseth's story but not the accuser's.

"He wasn't charged. He wasn't even kind of charged in this. There was no crime committed," Mullin fired back. "The police dropped everything."

"What is unfortunate, in today's world, you can be accused of anything, and then especially if it's something like this, you're automatically assumed to be guilty," he added. "If you read the police report from cover to cover, which I have, and I know every reporter has, too, it is clear there was nothing there. There was clear (sic) that there was no crime committed."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Washington Post to remove senior politics editor in wake of Trump victory



The Washington Post will soon remove its senior politics editor as the fallout from President-elect Donald Trump's decisive electoral victory continues to wreak havoc at liberal media outlets across the country.

According to a Thursday report from Lachlan Cartwright of the Hollywood Reporter, Dan Eggen, a longtime WaPo employee and current senior politics editor, delivered the news to his colleagues in a cryptic email.

"I struggled with how to write this message since there is an element of begging to it that is not particularly attractive. But what the hey: I was informed Monday that I will be removed as senior politics editor at the end of the year. I will leave it to others to explain why."

The news certainly comes as a shock, considering Eggen's lengthy career at the outlet. Eggen first joined the paper more than 25 years ago and was promoted to senior politics editor in 2022. Eggen professed to be "crushed" by the decision to remove him, Cartwright added.

Whether Eggen will remain at the outlet following his apparent demotion remains unclear.

In response to a request for comment, a spokesperson told the New York Post that the Washington Post does not comment on personnel decisions.

'Most people believe the media is biased.'

The move comes just weeks after the WaPo refused to endorse Vice President Kamala Harris, the second major left-leaning outlet to do so in the 2024 election. The Los Angeles Times likewise opted not to endorse a candidate, prompting a flurry of resignations and a significant drop in subscriptions.

Both the Washington Post, owned by Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos, and the Los Angeles Times seem to want to change the way they cover the political landscape in the U.S. In an op-ed published on October 28, Bezos admitted that his and other outlets have lost the trust of readers because of political bias.

"We must be accurate, and we must be believed to be accurate. It’s a bitter pill to swallow, but we are failing on the second requirement. Most people believe the media is biased," he wrote, as Blaze News previously reported.

L.A. Times owner Dr. Pat Soon-Shiong has also said that the entire editorial board at his outlet will be replaced and that the new board will include conservative "voices."

"I will work towards making our paper and media fair and balanced so that all voices are heard and we can respectfully exchange every American's view," Soon-Shiong posted to X on November 10.

Print media are not the only outlets to abandon their leftist perches, at least publicly. Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski of "Morning Joe" on MSNBC recently paid Trump a visit at Mar-a-Lago to "restart communications."

"In this meeting, President Trump was tearful. He was upbeat. He seemed interested in finding common ground with Democrats on some of the most divisive issues," Brzezinski said on Monday. "And for those asking why we would go speak to the president-elect during such fraught times, especially between us, I guess I would ask back, why wouldn't we?"

In the days since the announced meeting with Trump, "Morning Joe" ratings have tanked 15%, as liberal viewers reportedly see it as a betrayal.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Vaccine censorship? A senator’s autism inquiry sparks media outrage



Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) used the legacy media's airwaves on Sunday to ask a question that polite society forbids.

The topic: vaccines.

“I think they should be questioned,” Mullin declared on NBC News’ “Meet the Press.”

The question: “Why is America highest in autism? What is causing that?”

“Is it our diet?” Mullin continued. “Or is it some of the stuff we’re putting in our children's system?”

The question is important and needs to be asked, Mullin explained, because autism “used to be almost not even heard of.” Just one or two generations ago, autism was rare. Today, it's extremely common.

If a hierarchy of denialism existed, 'anti-vaxxer' sits just behind 'Holocaust denier' and 'election denier.'

In fact, the prevalence of autism spectrum disorder in the United States has skyrocketed from 0.1–0.4 per 1,000 children in the 1980s — the same decade vaccine manufacturers were immunized from civil liability for vaccine-related injuries and deaths — to 27.6 per 1,000 children in 2020, an exponential increase.

“What is causing that?” Mullin asked again.

“And if it is the vaccines, there’s nothing wrong with actually taking a hard look and finding: Is that what’s causing it?” he continued. “Is it something else that we’re putting in our systems? We do know we’re not as healthy as we should be right now. We’re the most developed country in the world, so all things should be on the table. And if that’s scrutinizing vaccinations, then that is exactly where we need to go.”

Moderator Kristen Welker responded to Mullin's question by repeating scientific dogma.

“I just have to say, no credible expert or study has shown a link between vaccines and autism,” she said.

Anti-vaxxer?

The label “anti-vaxxer” is a modern-day scarlet letter.

In the hierarchy of denialism, “anti-vaxxer” sits just behind “Holocaust denier” and ”election denier.” Each pejorative epithet functions to discredit a person prime facie, a rhetorical move that signals a person is so detached from reality that debating them is pointless.

And unfortunately, Mullin was summarily assigned this scarlet letter after his “Meet the Press” interview.

Mediaite accused Mullin of spouting “anti-vaccine talking points.” Left-wing journalist Aaron Rupar claimed Mullin went “full anti-vaxxer.” The Daily Beast accused Mullin of pushing a “bonkers vaccine conspiracy.”

But is this true? Is Mullin against vaccines?

Not according to Welker, who noted in the interview that Mullin has “been on the record saying” that he does “believe vaccines are safe and effective.”

Never once did Mullin question the efficacy of vaccines in the interview. Rather, he asked a basic question inquiring why the United States is experiencing skyrocketing rates of autism while arguing that “all things” should be investigated to understand the worrying trend.

That Mullin is being labeled anti-vax for merely asking a question — the first step of the scientific method, after all — proves Peter Thiel's point that “science” has become overly dogmatic.

“What has become ‘science’ — I’ll use scare quotes around science — is something that is more dogmatic than the Catholic Church was in the 17th century,” Thiel said in a recent interview.

Speaking of the lack of skepticism on vaccines specifically, Thiel added:

I don't particularly think that vaccines lead to autism. If they did, I don't think our science is capable of figuring it out because the results would get suppressed because it would undercut the lobby for vaccinations. There obviously are a lot of good vaccines, too. If there was some truth to it, that would undercut it. I'm pretty sure that question isn’t being investigated. There has been a dramatic increase in autism in recent decades. We don’t have particularly good explanations for it. Surely it’s something we should be thinking about more.

Yeah. So again, I don’t think vaccines lead to autism. I do think it’s the sort of question that it would be healthy if we were allowed to ask a little bit more than we are. And of course, we just went through this crazy exercise with the COVID epidemic where we somehow cut off skepticism so prematurely so many times where not only was the skepticism healthy, but the skeptics were right.

Questions beget questions

Polite society lectures people like Mullin for even raising a question about autism prevalence while uttering the word “vaccine” in the same breath.

But Mullin’s question — what is causing the high prevalence of autism in the U.S. compared to recent history and other developed countries — raises another question: Why don’t we have a satisfactory, science-based answer for the sharp rise in autism?

Today, the rise of autism is attributed to greater societal awareness of autism and improvements in diagnostics. This explanation implies that autism was always prevalent but previously went unrecognized and was misunderstood because of societal and cultural norms.

Like Thiel, I find this explanation unpersuasive. But we owe it to our children and our children's children to find a satisfactory explanation and course-correct if we can.

The journey to finding that answer must include asking difficult questions — not shutting down anyone who dares question the dogmas of “scientific truth.”

CBS’ Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Election Year

CBS gave Americans good reason to stop believing corporate media was the appropriate medium to facilitate U.S. elections.

Reporter makes big mistake when he ambushes Nancy Mace with woke questions for protecting women: 'You're crazy'



Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) put on a master class Tuesday in handling the legacy media.

Mace ruffled woke feathers this week after she proposed a bill to mandate that House members, officers, and employees use restrooms, locker rooms, and changing rooms inside the Capitol and House office buildings that correspond with their biological sex.

'I'm not gonna allow a man in any female private spaces. Period. End of story.'

The bill became necessary, according to Mace, with the election of Sarah McBride (D-Del.) to Congress. McBride is a biological man who identifies as a woman.

On Tuesday, an ABC News reporter confronted Mace over her proposed legislation, using dishonest and combative framing.

First, the reporter asked Mace if legislation generally should be "targeted at one specific person," and Mace quickly corrected the record.

"It doesn't mention anyone in the legislation," she fact-checked.

When the reporter doubled down, arguing that Mace is specifically targeting Rep.-elect McBride, Mace explained why she refuses to bend the knee to woke outrage.

"I have said it's a result of this. I'm not going to allow biological men into women's private spaces. I will stand in the brink and in the way of anyone on the radical left who thinks it's OK for a penis to be in a woman's locker room or a bathroom or a changing room," she said.

"Hell no! I'm not gonna stand for it," she added. "This is not OK. I'm a survivor of rape, I'm a survivor of sexual abuse, and I'm not gonna allow a man in any female private spaces. Period. End of story."

Unfortunately, the reporter did not back down, following up with a question that suggested Mace is not treating McBride with respect.

"Speaker Johnson has said he wants to treat every new member with the words 'dignity and respect.' Forcing this congressperson to go into a male restroom, is that dignity and respect?" the reporter asked.

"Forcing women to share private spaces with men is not dignity and not respect," Mace fired back.

"I'm absolutely gonna stand in the way of anyone who thinks it's OK for a man to be in our locker room, and our changing rooms, our dressing rooms, and women's bathrooms," she continued. "And, in fact, if you agree with that, you're crazy."

On Wednesday, Mace proposed a new bill that would protect women on all federal property. The bill is called the Protecting Women's Private Spaces Act.

— (@)

"The radical left would rather call me an extremist than admit they are wrong. The radical left says I’m a ‘threat.’ You better believe it. And I will shamelessly call you out for putting women and girls in harm’s way. Women fought for these spaces, and I will not let them be erased to score political points with a small but loud activist class," Mace said in a statement.

"Women and girls shouldn’t have to give up their safety or privacy just because the left wants to win points with their activist base," she continued. "This isn’t controversial — it’s common sense. I’m going to continue defending women and girls from these harmful, out-of-touch, and straight-up weird policies."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Media Lie About Pete Hegseth’s Christian Faith To Falsely Smear Him As Racist

The ultimate goal is to manifest controversy around the Army veteran to scare enough GOP senators into tanking his nomination.

MSNBC's 'Morning Joe' hosts meet with Trump for the first time in 7 years as viewership plummets



Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski, co-hosts of MSNBC's "Morning Joe," announced Monday they had met with President-elect Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago last week in an effort to reopen the lines of communication for the first time in seven years.

Scarborough and Brzezinski, who are married, told the audience that although they disagree with Trump on most issues, they felt it was important to speak with him following the "five years of political warfare" that has divided our country. Notably, this announcement was made after the network's viewership has reportedly plummeted by a double-digit percentage drop since Election Day.

'Joe and I realized it's time to do something different, and that starts with not only talking about Donald Trump, but also talking with him.'

"Over the past week, Joe and I have heard from so many people, from political leaders to regular citizens deeply dismayed by several of President-elect Trump's Cabinet selections, and they are scared," Brzezinski said. "Last Thursday, we expressed our own concerns on this broadcast and even said we would appreciate the opportunity to speak with the president-elect himself.

"On Friday, we were given the opportunity to do just that," Brzezinski continued. "Joe and I went to Mar-a-Lago to meet personally with President-elect Trump. It was the first time we have seen him in seven years."

The co-hosts have been some of Trump's most vocal critics for nearly a decade, as well as frequently hosting prominent Democratic lawmakers on their platform. Despite their differences, Scarborough and Brzezinski noted it was their job as commentators to set aside their disagreements.

"Now, we talked about a lot of issues, including abortion, mass deportation, threats of political retribution against political opponents and media outlets," Scarborough said. "We talked about that a good bit. And it's gonna come as no surprise to anybody who watches this show, has watched it over the past year or over the past decade, that we didn't see eye to eye on a lot of issues. And we told him so."

"What we did agree on was to restart communications," Brzezinski said.

The co-hosts also emphasized Trump's desire to work across the aisle with Democrats and to mend the division our country has experienced over the years.

"My father often spoke with world leaders with whom he and the United States profoundly disagreed," Brzezinski continued. "That's a task shared by reporters and communicators alike."

"In this meeting, President Trump was tearful. He was upbeat. He seemed interested in finding common ground with Democrats on some of the most divisive issues," Brzezinski said. "And for those asking why we would go speak to the president-elect during such fraught times, especially between us, I guess I would ask back, why wouldn't we?"

Brzezinski went on to say that although they personally disagreed with Trump, they wanted to factor in the tens of millions of people who supported him.

"Five years of political warfare has deeply divided Washington and the country," Brzezinski said. "We have been as clear as we know how in expressing our deep concerns about President Trump's actions and words in the coarsening of public debate."

"But for nearly 80 million Americans, election denialism, public trials, and January 6 were not as important as the issues that moved them to send Donald Trump back to the White House with their vote," Brzezinski continued. "Joe and I realized it's time to do something different, and that starts with not only talking about Donald Trump, but also talking with him."

Trump also spoke to Fox News of the meeting, saying it was "extremely cordial."

"In order to Make America Great Again, it is very important, if not vital, to have a free, fair, and open media or press," Trump told Fox News.

"Many things were discussed, and I very much appreciated the fact that they wanted to have open communication," he said. "In many ways, it’s too bad that it wasn’t done long ago."

"And while many others are calling for meetings, I am not looking for retribution, grandstanding, or to destroy people who treated me very unfairly or even badly beyond comprehension," Trump continued. "I am always looking to give a second and even third chance, but never willing to give a fourth chance — that is where I hold the line."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!