Melissa Zimdars, an assistant professor at sleepy Merrimack College, has mysteriously taken down her hit list of so-called “fake news” websites after her radical left-wing political leanings were uncovered.
Zimdar’s subjective, unscientific list is being touted by liberal mainstream media to discredit conservative news outlets in a move to delegitimize, silence and censor conservative viewpoints.
Shockingly, mainstream media embraced and gave widespread credence to a list posted on Facebook by an obscure communications professor who has only been working at a small private college for 15 months.
Since Zimdars published her list on Facebook, it has gone viral after being accepted as gospel by mainstream media using it to urge its readers to disregard the “fake news” websites she named.
The list of alleged “fake news” websites are mixed with conservative, established websites such as WND, Red State, Independent Journal Review, The Blaze, Breitbart and BizPac Review.
Most of these conservative news websites get more traffic than mainstream media sites, so it’s not surprising that the attempted take-down came from an ultra-liberal academic who hates Donald Trump and embraces radical leftist groups like Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter.
On Melissa Zimdars’ Twitter profile she describes herself as a “feminist and activist.” In her spare time, Zimdars contributes to Little Village Magazine – a left-leaning magazine for social justice warriors, WND reported.
Before switching her Twitter account to private, Zimdars disdainfully mocked Trump and urged her followers to donate to Black Lives Matter.
Zimdars launched her so-called “fake news” list after soliciting feedback from her Facebook friends (very scientific, as you can see).
Zimdars explained that she wanted to compile a list as a teaching guide for her students.
She did not call it a research paper or project, because that normally requires rigorous vetting. At one point, a friend asked her to add Breitbart to the list, even though it was already on it.
Another friend suggested that Fox News be added to the top of the “fake news” list. Even liberal media that disagree with Fox News’ political leanings would never call it a “fake news” outlet.
Zimdars admitted that she included websites on her “fake news” list that weren’t even unreliable most of the time. “Some sources waffle back and forth,” she wrote.
While Zimdars’ list has been widely circulated on the Internet and on TV, there’s no discussion of her qualifications or background to make such a list that is now being accepted as gospel.
Who gave this obscure teacher the moral and journalistic authority to judge which news organizations are legit or fake? Zimdars is a junior-level assistant communications professor (we’re not even sure if she’s tenured) at a college most people never heard of.
News organizations such as CNN, the Washington Post, Boston Globe, New York Magazine, USA Today, Business Insider, the Austin American-Statesman, the Dallas Morning News and others spread the list like gospel and cited it in their reports.
But nearly none of them considered Zimdars’ political leanings or questioned her criteria or qualifications for determining which news sources should be included on her list.
After WND published its story, Zimdars took her list down, but it continues to be widely cited by mainstream media and circulated on the Internet.
PJ Media’s Stephen Kruiser remarked: “It’s no surprise that a college professor compiled this list; what’s galling is that the Los Angeles Times ‘reported’ on it without mentioning that it’s complete garbage.”
BizPac Review called Jim Chiavelli, the VP of communications at Merrimack College, to comment on Zimdars’ list and the potential avalanche of defamation lawsuits it could trigger.
Chiavelli replied curtly: “The college is not commenting,” and promptly hung up on us.
Ironically, no mainstream liberal media was included on Melissa Zimdars’ “fake news” list even though many reporters from outlets like CNN, ABC, NBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Huffington Post, MSNBC and Politico enjoyed a cozy relationship with Hillary Clinton‘s camp during the election cycle, and attended secret dinners where they colluded on pro-Clinton press coverage.
Conservative media were not invited to these secret press gatherings, which went on for more than a year.
And the public would never have found out about Clinton’s army of “friendly helper reporters” had it not been for Wikileaks.
Some members of the media, including reporters for Politico and the Huffington Post, even ran their stories past the Clinton camp for approval before publication.
If colluding with politicians and tailoring positive news coverage with the people you’re supposed to cover OBJECTIVELY doesn’t make you a “fake news” journalist, then what does? Apparently being politically conservative is the main criterion.
Given the sham state of mainstream media, is it any wonder that 94% of Americans say they do NOT trust the media?
— r/The_Donald (@alomikron) November 17, 2016