In the theatre, they call this “emoting”
Puke Alert: The following post includes a graphic description of actual content from The New York Times.
The world’s leading media voice for international communist totalitarianism, in the most glaringly disrespectful, cynical, life-disavowing act of agitprop since those famous pictures of Joseph Stalin smiling with a happy little girl in his arms, has decided to fill its first page on Sunday, May 24th, with a thousand obituaries of people who (according to their death certificates) died of COVID-19.
That little Soviet girl’s parents were killed in Stalinist purges two years later. Similarly, NYT has about as much sincere concern for “the coronavirus dead” as the secret police had for little Gelya, whose identity was erased and reinvented in the photos after her parents were officially branded enemies of the state.
In a solemn act of respect for the dead, the NYT shared an advance copy of its planned front page with its “competitors” at CNN and beyond, a day ahead of the grand unveiling.
And here is the account of this grave decision offered by the NYT itself, via some illiterates at “The Wrap”:
Josh Crutchmer, the NY Times’ print planning editor, shared an image of tomorrow’s paper, which describes the death toll as “An Incalculable Loss.” The entire front page will be dedicated to paying homage to the human loss from the pandemic. The 1,000 obits reflect only a [sic] 1% of the total causalities [sic] in the United States.
Interesting typos there. It’s true that coronavirus represents only about “a 1%” of the total “causalities” of death in the United States, although I suspect the writer meant casualties, which is how one describes those who died in war, of course.
As for the NYT’s chosen headline for this nonsense, “An Incalculable Loss,” what is incalculable about it? Or if it is somehow incalculable, then does this make all deaths from illness incalculable? If not, why not? What is more “calculable” about non-coronavirus-related deaths? The answer is nothing, of course. The adjective, like the agitprop to which it belongs, reveals pure dishonesty, hyperbole, disrespect for the dead — all the dead — and, most of all, incalculable hatred for the living.
On Broadway, they would call this phony performance “emoting,” overdoing it for the audience — bad acting. Trumping Trump’s grand phony gesture of lowering all federal government flags to half-staff, his establishmentarian allies atop the world of “fake news” follow-up by turning the private deaths of real human beings, and the private sadness of their real families, into a garish public display of self-righteous attitudinizing and profiteering sentimentality.
Have they been doing this at the end of every year’s flu season, to honor the sixty thousand or so who died of influenza? Are they in the habit of devoting the front page of the Sunday New York Times to the five hundred thousand who die of cancer — oh sorry, I mean to some representative sample of that total, like the thousand obituaries here, which only adds to the dehumanizing fakeness of the whole thing by effectively declaring in bold letters that the real lives and identities of the dead are of no consequence or significance to the editors whatsoever. This is all about staging, refilling the deflated public fear machine, and continuing the progressive media’s solemn fight for greater profits, along with greater authoritarian regulation of the lives of the few humans left alive after the coronavirus has finished decimating a nation of over three hundred million people.
Using a thousand recently deceased private citizens as anonymous props for a cheap, manipulative publicity stunt in the cause of money and power for yourself and your friends in the ruling elite. That’s about as low as it gets.
But this will be the biggest-selling issue of The New York Times this year, without a doubt. Humans nauseate me these days, largely because they are so predictably willing to serve as reliable, anonymous props for the greedy and tyrannical. Anything to feel involved, right?