#adam johnson

[eretzyisrael]

The Intercept Dishes Up Math in the Service of Malice | HonestReporting

The Intercept claims U.S. media favors Israel. But its “study” relies on double standards, missing context, and anti-Israel bias.

by David Lange

Key Takeaways:

The Intercept’s claim that American media is biased against Palestinians collapses under scrutiny, relying on opaque methodology, selective framing, and glaring double standards.

The article argues that many of its examples merely reflect basic journalistic realities: Israel is a sovereign state responding to a terrorist attack, while Hamas is a genocidal terror organization that systematically embeds itself among civilians.

By stripping away legal, moral, and factual context — while promoting grotesque anti-Israel smears — The Intercept turns ideological activism into pseudo-scientific “media analysis.”

The Intercept has published a piece by Adam Johnson, who claims to have statistical findings that the American media is biased against Palestinians and systematically favors Israel.

Yes, you may want to read that sentence again.

After all, that would erase 25 years of HonestReporting, not to mention invalidating the past few years of witnessing virtually every major Western outlet amplify Hamas casualty figures, platform anti-Israel ‘activists’ and antisemites, obsess over Palestinian suffering, and scrutinize Israel’s every military move in microscopic detail while often stripping away the context of October 7 and Hamas’ strategy of embedding itself among civilians.

But Johnson claims the exact opposite in his new book, How to Sell a Genocide: The Media’s Complicity in the Destruction of Gaza, which he dutifully plugs in the piece. And while his so-called proof is presented with the aesthetic authority of data journalism, don’t be fooled.

The Methodology to the Madness

Let’s start with the most fundamental problem of his findings: we have no idea how any of this was actually counted.

Johnson claims to have examined “over 12,000 articles” and “5,000 TV segments.” But how? What was his methodology? Did he count them himself, or have others assist? Did he use AI? And if so, did he check the accuracy of the results? Were the searches for keywords conducted with any controls for context, or did every mention of “Israel’s right to defend itself,” for example, count equally, whether it appeared in a news report, an op-ed, or a quote from a foreign official? Curious minds want to know.

This isn’t a peer-reviewed study, or even a white paper. It is an anti-Israel person supposedly counting things in ways they don’t explain, to support a conclusion they announced before counting began. It is confirmation bias wrapped up in pseudo-science.

Apparently, International Law Is “Bias” Now

Johnson presents as proof of bias how Israel’s “right to defend itself” was mentioned on CNN and MSNBC 94 times more than Palestine’s equivalent right. But consider the obvious alternative explanation: the “right to defend itself” framing was overwhelmingly deployed by the Israeli government, American officials, and Western leaders in their public statements – statements that journalists are obligated to report. Measuring how often journalists transmitted this phrase tells us about the rhetorical landscape of the conflict, not necessarily about journalists’ own editorial biases.

Yet elsewhere in his piece, Johnson does claim to have filtered out quotes from officials and commentators (notably the “emotive words” charts), but not here. This inconsistency is never explained, so one could assume he did not employ such filtering here.

[askyea-poesy]

The truth is, though, that you don't need to die to know what it's like to be a ghost.

Adam Johnson

[ehghtyseven]

devastating news about adam johnson [x] [x]

[ap article about the incident]

[taylor’s article about the incident - contains some graphic description]

[taylor’s article about adam ahead of his penguins debut in 2019]

[parfannette]

🎬 Mythica: Stormbound, 2023

The action takes place years after the destruction of Szorlok. A new evil threatens the world, and new heroes will rise to combat it. According to other sources, the events unfold 19 years after Szorlok's fall. The people of Deira drove the Vitalians from their land, but the country remained lawless and disorganized. After the death of the gods, magic gradually faded from the world, and all traces of mages and wizards vanished, but Szorlok's magic did not vanish into oblivion. A new evil is growing over the world, and new heroes will confront it.

[ghostlyarchaeologist]

"You alright?" "What? Why wouldn't I be alright?"

The Outpost S03E05 Under Yavalla's Control.

[litsnaps]

[hannahwatcheshorror]

FROZEN (2010)

“What do you think the worst way to die would be?”

Who says you can’t make an entire movie centered around a ski lift? The movie Frozen, created just three (3) years before the much more popular movie Frozen… Bet it sucks to say, “Yeah, I was in Frozen… No, the other one (1).” But that’s coming from someone who hasn’t been in any movies, so, who am I to talk? This was a decent horror thriller that keeps you tense (some even say their muscles were Frozen…). Featuring a ridiculous plot, but who comes here for realism? Three (3) friends, two (2) fifties (50’s), and one (1) ski lift. What could go wrong?

⭐⭐⭐

Trigger Warning Incest Jokes, 9/11 (Randomly), R-Word, Urination

Our leading lady is Emma Bell (Final Destination 5), her male companions are Shawn Ashmore (It Feeds, The Following, & The Boys), and Kevin Zegers (Dawn of the Dead 2004, & Vampire 2011). They are all going on a fun snowboarding/skiing day together. “I’m not dating you, you don’t have to make my life suck.” WHAT A LINE. Simple, elegant, and to the point! We are only about twenty (20) minutes into the film but I have to point out that the movie poster only shows two (2) people on the chair lift, one (1) is clearly the girl (Parker) and the other is one (1) of the boys, dangling off of the lift. An absolutely wild spoiler to give right off the bat, but here we are! Not sure which boy is dying first (1st) but based on the fact that Parker is only dating one (1) of them, I’m going to guess the surviving dude isn’t going to be her boyfriend (because that’s going to be more dramatic). I could be wrong, but then I’ll just delete the guess and nobody will be the wiser! The way they get stuck on the lift is stupid, it’s basically just two (2) small errors which seems like way too few errors for something so dangerous to occur, do you know what I mean? The three (3) immediately go to doom-and-gloom and ask each other about the worst ways to die. Parker brings up 9/11? Wild. Absolutely wild (raise your hand if you’ve ever been asked to stop talking about 9/11). Also as soon as the resort turns out the lights Parker is sobbing, which, I sort of understand, but also, (bitch, you should have just eaten something) she just needs to chill out, it has only been dark for a moment. A man in some sort of snow vehicle comes by and they throw things at him to get his attention but he doesn’t see them and drives away.

Dan, Parker’s boyfriend, is concerned about the frostbite starting on her cheek and decides to jump off of the lift to go for help (I’ve seen this act described as “jumping the shark” and I think that is incredibly accurate). Wack and a half that he straight legged it all the way down. He didn’t roll or anything. He absolutely wrecked his legs, broke them in half with the bones sticking out. I’m not exactly sure what I would have tried to do (if I would have jumped) but I like to imagine I would have attempted some type of roll to avoid injury… Joe asks if Dan can slide down the hill… “No, I can’t slide down the fucking hill! I’m bleeding to death, man!” This is the point, as anyone who read “The Interlopers” in English class knows, the wolves appear. I think this is a little silly since this is a very populated skiing trail but also, what the Hell do I know? While at first they are able to scare the wolves off, but they eventually come for Dan and all his juicy leg blood. Dan nobly tells Joe not to let Parker look as the wolves rip him apart, but here is the thing. I watch a lot of movies. I also love animals. I know when a trained wolf is doing their job (and enjoying it). Those wolves were just having a fun time. So while Joe and Parker were crying and acting their hearts out, and Dan and the wolves were also acting their hearts out, I also knew that those wolves were having the time of their lives playing with Dan. So, yeah, I wasn’t so devastated when Dan died, because it was sort of adorable. Until he was gone, that is, then I straightened up and got a bit more serious. 

Joe made an attempt (while Dan was still alive) to shimmy across the cable (to a pole and a subsequent ladder) but it cut through his gloves and he had to come back to their chair. During some useless part in Parker and Joe’s arguing one (1) of them says to the other (does it matter who?) “Why’d you let him jump?” Which is wild and hurtful. Dan jumped down on his own accord and neither Parker nor Joe stopped him (neither of them knew what carnage would follow). They sleep through the night and in the morning Parker pees her pants, which I understand to a point, but she also just needs to put her fanny in the wind to relieve herself so she isn’t wet and she can stay dry and warm… UGH. She also woke up with her hand wrapped around the metal safety bar so she had to rip her skin off of it… Gross! Joe and Parker make more conversation (They talk about Dan and (weirdly but also sort of sweetly) Parker’s dog) before Joe tries (again) to climb to a pole/ladder. On his way up Joe somehow loosens the chair Parker is sitting in so now it is barely hanging on. The camera keeps cutting to the wolves below, because, somehow, they are aware of what is going on many feet above them and they have skin in the game. ABSOLUTELY WILD. “You can do it! Please do it.” Great pep talk, Parker. You could be a cheerleader! Joe makes it to the pole, climbs down the ladder, fights off the wolves, then slides down the mountain telling Parker he will be back with help…

The next morning when Parker wakes up she realizes that since help isn’t here yet it probably isn’t coming. She realizes that, for the first time in this entire movie (since the very beginning) she is going to have to actually do something for herself. Parker starts to maneuver in her chair but it finally starts to fall, Parker lands first, then the car falls on her leg/foot, injuring her (though not nearly as badly as Dan). The wolves are nowhere to be seen and Parker begins to slide/tumble down the mountain. Near the bottom she sees blood and runs into body parts (presumably Joe) and the wolves. The wolves are too busy with the meat to care about her so she can continue gliding on. She makes it to the road and is able to flag down a car who is taking her to the hospital when she hears Dan’s voice in her head one (1) last time before the title flashes and the credits roll.

-----------------------HANNAH WATCHES HORROR--------------------

[marrymemurray]

On My Way to Fight Gary Bettman

Yes, that is the title of this as it is saved on my computer. I originally wrote this at the end of the NHL season in 2023, so I did go back and revise some things, as well as add in a whole paragraph. I never originally shared this because I felt as though nobody would care but now I would like to put it out there for everyone. References are included at the end if anyone wants to read the articles that I pulled my information from.

We’ve been warned about the dangers that come with playing sports ever since we were children. People have gotten injured and died from not having protections in place to keep them safe. As sports have evolved and gotten more popular, professionals are continuously working towards implementing safety precautions and standards to lower the risk of injury or death. Hockey is among the list of sports like this. But what happens when the commissioner of the NHL denies a connection between the sport and a very serious disease that can affect anyone from the ages of six to thirty-six, or maybe even older? Parents and players believe him instead of the facts, causing their risk to increase. Hockey is an inherently dangerous sport, but there are several things that can be done to lower the danger level.

The first thing one can look at to help lower the risk of injury is equipment. There are safety regulations that can be changed and standards that can be updated to help fix part of the problem. The National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE) and the Hockey Equipment Certification Council (HECC) work together on standards for helmets, as well as face and eye protection. But having standards on only those two categories isn’t enough. In 1998, during a Stanley Cup playoff game, Chris Pronger was hit in the chest by a puck while blocking a shot from Dmitri Mironov. After getting up and taking two strides, Pronger collapsed, his heart suffering from Commotio Cordis. Commotio Cordis is when an object hits your chest directly over your heart during a certain part of the heartbeat and causes sudden arrhythmia. Chris Pronger was the first athlete to survive this, but he’s one of very few. This risk can be reduced incredibly if equipment companies were forced to add protection over the heart in shoulder pads just like men’s lacrosse shoulder pads and lacrosse chest protectors for goalies.

There are other injuries that can occur in hockey too- just not as severe as sudden arrhythmia. Two good examples come from the 2022-23 NHL regular season. In October of that season, Jake Guentzel of the Pittsburgh Penguins, now a player for the Tampa Bay Lightning, took a shot to the ear, causing him to immediately start bleeding. Guentzel was forced to miss four games in a row due to the injury. Players are not required to have ear protection on their helmets, but companies going ahead and making them permanent anyways would help lower the chance of the same thing happening to another player. In December, Ryan O’Reilly of the Nashville Predators , then a player for the Buffalo Sabres, suffered from a broken foot after blocking a shot. There is currently minimal protection on the side of hockey skates, where your metatarsal, the most fragile bone in your foot, is located. By adding some sort of extra padding or more of a hard shell on the skates, the risk of a broken foot can be brought down as well.

Another injury that can occur may possibly be the most dangerous. Several parts of your skin may be exposed during play- from the wrists to the neck. A cut from a skate blade on the wrist may easily be stopped by an athletic trainer and the help of a tourniquet. However, a sliced neck is not as easy to treat and could ultimately lead to a player's death. This was the case for Adam Johnson on October 28, 2023. The former Pittsburgh Penguin suffered a skate blade cut during the second period of a game in the UK. A referee helped skate him towards the bench while the athletic trainers came out to attend to him. Unfortunately, he succumbed to his injury and passed away. Clint Malarchuk also suffered a slice from a skate blade in 1989, that cut through his jugular vein. He barely escaped death. He was interviewed in the wake of Johnson’s death and said that his experience left him with PTSD, which could easily happen to anyone who goes through that. Almost a year after Adam Johnson passed away, the AHL mandated that all persons on the ice must wear cut-resistant neck protection. At the moment, the NHL cannot mandate players to wear neck protection due to the collective bargaining agreement with the NHLPA. However, if they can regulate players to wear helmets during warmups, then why can they not come to another agreement to mandate cut-resistant neck protection when the current CBA expires in 2026? Not only would it be a measure to ensure players physical safety, but their mental safety as well.

The fourth and arguably the second most serious injury that can occur in hockey is a concussion. They occur from a fall or a hit to the head that causes the head to rapidly move back and forth. There are new stories all over the internet about players suffering from them. In 2021, during the Stanley Cup playoffs, John Tavares of the Toronto Maple Leafs got a knee to the face and suffered from a concussion. In 2011, Sidney Crosby of the Pittsburgh Penguins suffered from two concussions, as well as a soft tissue injury that caused swelling in his top two vertebrae. He suffered from a third one in 2016 as well. Equipment could be changed by adding more padding and protection on the inside of helmets similar to the way football helmets are padded. The NHL also does not force all players to wear helmets during warmups- only those who have been in the league post-2019. By changing this rule to include all players, the risk of a concussion during warmups can also be reduced. Rule 48.1 states that “a hit resulting in contact with an opponent’s head where the head was the main point of contact and such contact to the head was avoidable is not permitted.” I propose that this rule should be changed to include all contact with the head, even if it wasn’t avoidable just like in women’s lacrosse. That means the referees will have to stop making judgment calls on intent to injure and avoidability, and instead just call a penalty no matter what. Doing so will discourage just behavior and limit the risk of a concussion substantially.

Gary Bettman is the commissioner of the NHL, which means he is in charge of protecting the integrity of the game and preserving the public’s confidence in the league. However, he refuses to acknowledge the correlation between a deadly disease called CTE and the sport of hockey. CTE stands for Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy, and it is a neurodegenerative disease associated with repeated traumatic brain injuries. It can cause you to have memory problems, confusion, depression, and suicidal thoughts. Several professional hockey players have passed away from CTE, including, but not limited to Stan Mikita, Bob Probert, Jeff Parker, and Wade Belak. According to a study conducted by Boston University in March of 2022, a person’s chance of developing CTE increases by 23 percent each additional year that they play. This means that starting from the age of five, players are already at risk of developing and dying from the disease later in life. Another study conducted just four months later by leading experts in the field came to the same conclusion: there is a link between hockey and Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy. You may think there is nothing we can do as the public to force him to acknowledge the link, but there is. Emails, phone calls, peaceful protests- all viable options. Until Gary Bettman accepts the evidence, players and their families are going to believe him and more people will continue to die from CTE.

One final rule that could be changed for the betterment of the sport is Rule 8.1. This rule states that “when a player is injured so that he cannot continue play or go to his bench, the play shall not be stopped until the injured player’s team has secured control of the puck. If the player’s team is in control of the puck at the time of injury, play shall be stopped immediately unless his team is in a scoring position.” I believe that this rule should be changed to immediately stop play if a player is injured and unable to continue to play or go to his bench, regardless of whether his team has the puck or not, let alone in a scoring position. This change will help prevent further injury for the player, as well as the others on the ice, and allow the medical team to assess them immediately.

In conclusion, even though hockey is a dangerous sport, there are changes that could be made to help lower the danger level. These include equipment specification and standards being changed, rules being changed, and Gary Bettman finally admitting that there is a correlation between hockey and CTE. There are still more safety precautions that could be put in place and if they aren’t soon, then players are only going to continue to get not only seriously injured, but suffer even more mental health problems than they already do. 

References