By Cathy Smith

Opednews, alternative media, independent journalism, media credibility, editorial bias, censorship, government surveillance, Rob Kall, writer bans, social injustice, civil rights, media accountability, fake news, financial illegitimacy, IRS Tax EIN, writer experiences, ideological bias, transparency, dissenting voices, audience trust, media landscape, digital journalism, ethical concerns, Opednews controversies, reader trust issues, free speech, dissent suppression, alternative viewpoints, audience engagement.

In an era where mainstream media faces intense scrutiny for bias and sensationalism, platforms like Opednews have emerged as crucial venues for alternative viewpoints and independent journalism. Founded with the explicit goal of amplifying dissenting voices, Opednews has garnered both praise and criticism for its editorial decisions and operational practices. The knowledge of Opednews's IRS Tax EIN being deficit, and their deceit goes back years and is still spreading – one commentator, Ned Lud, called them No-caf, no-fat diet honesty.

However, the platform's financial legitimacy, ideological biases, and treatment of contributors raise significant concerns that demand a thorough and comprehensive examination. This analysis delves into the complexities surrounding Opednews, exploring its origins, biases, and writer experiences, ultimately assessing its role in the broader media landscape. OpEdNews is considered a hamster wheel of deceit and (faux) dissent or dissidence lite.

Financial Legitimacy

One of the primary trust concerns revolves around Opednews' financial practices. The platform solicits tax-deductible donations, implying a charitable status that ostensibly supports its operations. However, the absence of an Employer Identification Number (EIN) from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), a requisite for organizations seeking tax-exempt status, raises significant ethical questions. This lack of transparency not only undermines the platform's credibility but also risks misleading donors about the tax implications of their contributions.

Claims of Surveillance and Control

Allegations that Opednews functions as a government surveillance operation, akin to the FBI's COINTELPRO initiative, warrant scrutiny. COINTELPRO was a covert program designed to surveil and disrupt domestic political organizations deemed subversive. Critics, including writerAndrew Stergiou, assert that content moderation practices on Opednews reflect patterns that suppress dissenting narratives. Articles challenging mainstream perspectives—particularly on sensitive topics like government policy and civil rights—are often removed or suppressed.

This subversion of democracy and free speech raises questions about the motivations behind these editorial choices. Are they genuinely aimed at maintaining quality, or do they serve a broader agenda of controlling dissent? An interesting twist: Rob Kall rejected articles about ​Cointelpro, Operation Chaos, and Project MKUltra – claiming "these programs never existed, or he (Kall) would have heard of them. Kall implied that people who believed in Chaos, Cointelpro, and MKUltra also wore tinfoil hats.

This is frequently Rob Kall and Meryl Anne Butler’s answer to extremely close to home, germane inquiries. The bearer of the inquiry wears tin foil hats. Odd, that apologists for Chaos, Cointelpro and MKUltra would give so much substance to Electromagnetic Weapons, Particle Beams, Scalar Weapons, Laser Weapons, Microwave Weapons, Directed Energy Weapons, Laser Systems, High Energy Laser Weapons, Non-lethal Weapons, Kinetic Energy Weapons, Thermal Weapons—which all easily disable tinfoil hats. Is Kall also an apologist for the Department of the Navy’s Particle Beams?

Further examination of the writer's experiences reveals that contributors have faced bans for expressing divergent views. These bans often occur without clear justification, contributing to perceptions that Opednews prioritizes specific ideological viewpoints. Such practices echo historical precedents of censorship, warranting deeper investigation into the platform's editorial integrity.

Opednews.com's Rob Kall's annual or biennial writer purges (frequently described as Chaos andFBI Cointelpro for writers) saw 40-50 writers at a time banned for life by Rob Kall, Meryl Anne Butler and others, who claimed the writer bans "were free speech." It was not just Andrew Stergiou but also Ned Lud, Ruth Hull, Tracy Turner, Brett Redmayne-Titley, Robert Singer, and at least 400-500+ other writers banned in a decade. Free Speech, proving OEN is Orwellian, 1984-esque Rob Kall made it his business to have Rady Ananda's work banned from Google. Rohn Kenyatta Moisés Ibrahim Blackism Mau Mau.

It is one thing for OEN's Kall to reject articles or ban writers for life—it is another thing for him to have Google delist web pages on his competitor's websites because he "does not like the content." He also considers this "his editorial free. Speech." It is pointless to argue with Kall, as he uses circular logic to argue everything pointlessly—often ending with a glowing text-oratory about the glorious "power of story." Have you paid your IRS taxes and back taxes, Rob? You have a tinfoil hat, and there was never any FBI CointelPro or the power of story.

Origins and Development

The roots of Opednews trace back to its founder, Rob Kall, who developed the platform's architecture. Speculation surrounding Kall's technical capabilities has led to rumors of potential ties to intelligence agencies, including the CIA. While many media platforms have straightforward origins, Opednews's secretive beginnings foster conjecture. Critics argue that the complexity of its content management system and the breadth of its articles suggest possible involvement from government-affiliated developers. This culture of secrecy can reinforce narratives of ulterior motives, detracting from its mission as an "independent media" outlet.

Editorial Bias

To understand Opednews's ideological leanings, a thorough analysis of its published articles is essential. Many headlines reflect themes that some interpret as anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Caucasian, and pro-Israeli apartheid. A qualitative and quantitative examination of article themes can reveal whether Opednews consistently promotes a particular narrative. Analyzing a representative sample of headlines over time, categorizing them by theme, and assessing overalltone can yield compelling evidence of the platform's biases.

Opednews biases such as no confirmation, uniform selections, replicated framing, and partisan bias is rampant. These biases impact how information is presented and skew public perception, negating Opednews's overzealous claims of being a neutral space for diverse perspectives.

- Biases such as confirmation bias, selection bias, framing bias, and partisan bias are present in Opednews's content, influencing how information is presented and potentially impacting public perception. - The findings suggest that Opednews is far from neutral or progressive in its coverage and may have underlying biases that shape its narrative and perspective. In one hyphenated word, it is Fasci-Communism.

Writer Experiences

Writers' experiences on Opednews provide critical insights into the platform's internal dynamics. Numerous accounts exist of contributors facing bans who need clear reasoning or transparent appeals processes. Collecting these testimonies reveals a troubling trend: many writers encounter bans every one to two years, raising questions about the platform's claims of free expression.

This practice not only diminishes Opednews's credibility but also poses existential threats to its community of writers—not to offend, but some former writers would not submit anything to Kall, not for billions of dollars. By marginalizing dissenting voices, Opednews risks alienating its audience, undermining its mission as an alternative media outlet, scaring talent away, and collecting dregs; their Similar web numbers bear this out.

Ethical Concerns and Controversies

Investigating ethical concerns surrounding Opednews reveals alleged censorship and manipulation of articles. Reports suggest that platform critiques may be suppressed or removed entirely. Such practices compromise journalistic integrity and create a culture of fear among contributors. Whistleblower accounts and public discussions could further illuminate these issues, reinforcing suspicions regarding the platform's operational integrity—Zero-calorie ethics with aspartame content.

Hypocrisy and Contemporary Issues

Examining Opednews's editorial stance on contemporary issues highlights potential hypocrisy. While the platform claims to advocate for social justice, free speech, and democratic values, its practices may contradict these assertions. Analyzing its coverage of significant social and political issues—such as civil rights and media accountability—reveals inconsistencies undermining its credibility. If Opednews positions itself as a champion of free speech, banning ​writers presenting alternative viewpoints raises significant questions about its commitment to diversity of opinion. A recent casual analysis shows writers towing the party line, with no mention of opposing views—none seen.

The investigation into Opednews reveals a complex tapestry of claims, practices, and contradictions. While the platform presents itself as a bastion of alternative media, issues surrounding financial illegitimacy, censorship, and ideological bias overshadow its operations. As readers and writers navigate the evolving landscape of independent journalism, understanding the dynamics within platforms like Opednews is crucial for promoting transparency, accountability, and genuine discourse in the media landscape. It will continue shrinking if the platform continues to lose readership amid allegations of fake news and subversive practices.*

Decline in Readership:

• In 2007, Opednews was ranked around #53,000 among U.S. websites.
• As of September 28, 2024, its ranking has dropped to #752,673, representing an increase (increase means very bad) of approximately 699,673 places.

Reader Trust Issues:

• If approximately 2/3 of former readers have left due to allegations of fake news, this suggests significant trust issues with the platform.

Top 10 Article Categories at OpEdNews.com, in order (add lite, diet, or fat-free after each):

1. Politics
2. Social Justice
3. Environment
4. Health
5. Economics
6. War and Peace
7. Media and Journalism
8. Education
9. Culture
10. Technology

Years of analysis show that OEN tends to pressure writers to write the status quo repeatedly. Anticipating Kall’s lies—It is not that the articles are too perfect, no, they are the antithesis of perfect, they all conform to Kall. It is Bush’s Brain, Karl Rove, in Progressive Drag.

Writers are then banned or voluntarily quit and are replaced by another crop of unpaid slave-writers. The articles have no hint, not one-whisper, of any viewpoint other than Rob Kall's and Meryl Anne Butler's. The writers succumb to the cryptic, "anonymous" emails and become trained poodles jumping through OEN's hoop. It is unethical and illegal not to compensate ​writers for their work. If you come across any websites or businesses engaging in such practices, I recommend reporting them to the appropriate authorities or organizations that deal with labor rights. It is essential to support fair compensation for writers and creators. OEN, the dietetic employers.

Being accused of being a front for Federal Government Agencies is not "a fun hoot" or "a compliment." Rob Kall, Meryl Anne Butler, and OEN have never explained how they went from nothing to a full-blown site overnight, nevertheless a Diet-Truth site that eats writers alive in the name of “progress.” Rob Kall is not an inventive genius; he cannot even hand code a few PHP, Apache, or HTML lines. Rob Kall, System Architect. Somebody put this man in a locked room and unlock it after he writes six-lines of solid code. It was not and is not a compliment. You appeared out of nowhere, just like the FedGov fronts Google and Facebook, and you are just the minuscule, insignificant of the three.

One-line writers state that smoke is one thing, Two means fire, or 250+ means OpEdNews is a front for the federal government. The means Poopednews. "Your" former writers (Rob Kall uses my, his, our, and writers in the same sentence over the phone. He is one of my writers. I've heard him say so. But this is just Weightless Protest, Fat-Free Journalism.

The Pennsylvania State Distract Attorney has barred (banned) OpEdNews from collecting donations from Pennsylvania residents (recognizing snake oil). The US IRS has failed to do the same – ask yourself why the IRS would not go after Rob Kall; why won't the Federal Government eat of its flesh? Rob Kall claims to be leading a crucial journalistic movement, the Land of Non-Dairy Milk Movement. But to all trained and untrained eyes alike, Opednews finally appears to be sinking back into the FBI Cointelpro Sewer it sprang from. But it will never go bankrupt; no amount of self-inflicted pain stops its vastly diluted message. Run, hamsters, run, Bully Rob Kall is coming.

*OpEdNews has repeatedly engaged in writer/commentator/member purges – suffered large deficits in readership and has shown subsequent desperation for cash. In their illustrious history, they seem to make themselves go broke, beg, make themselves broke—but never go bankrupt. This survival mode, interspersed with the hatred directed at self, then blamed on innocent writers, is not logical; it is a perversion. Kall will read this and brag about the FBI middleware running “his” (the strawman’s) website. Then ban 50 more writers as “free speech” in supressedville, u.s.a.

-###-

By Cathy Smith
Unmasking Opednews: Credibility, Control, and Controversy in Alternative Media