Rules For Accredited Journalists


In the age of fake news, accredited journalists are faced with the mammoth task of debunking huge volumes of misinformation on a daily basis. Unaccredited conclusions, bogus claims and inappropriate lines of questioning are broadcasted to millions of people over the unregulated internet every day, without any verification by the accredited media or trusted fact-checking organizations. It is our job to discredit and distract from these lies, while offering approved narratives to replace them.

Accredited journalists employ a number of effective rhetorical writing tools to achieve this, which together are extremely powerful. Much like Saul Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals, these tools allow progressives to dominate the media, just as they dominate academia and social activism.

Rules For Accredited Journalists

Use Double Quotes

Double quotes are an extremely effective tool for mocking and dismissing facts and positions put forward by the right. For example, if somebody refers to a study with a ridiculous conclusion such as more guns leading to less crime, you can refer to it as a “study”. This subtly indicates to the reader that it is not a real study, while maintaining plausible deniability in case someone actually calls you out on this.

Use Catch Phrases

Catch phrases are powerful rhetorical tools which add credibility to your arguments and prime people to accept your position. For example, stating that “this is the 21st century” indicates to readers that your vision is destined to be reality and its time has come, rendering your adversaries helpless to argue against it.

Shame Your Opponents

When people on the right put forward morally deplorable positions, the best thing to do is to simply shame them as morally reprehensible. Responding to these arguments with facts and evidence only legitimizes these deplorable positions and signals that it is OK to publicly express hateful views. For example, if somebody argues that sanctuary cities should be abolished, you can respond by saying “You should be ashamed of yourself – you really should know better!”.

Label Your Opponents’ Arguments

Sometimes it’s more effective to simply describe your opponent’s position in negative terms, instead of coming up with a counter-argument. For example, if your opponent is arguing for Brexit or building a border wall, you can respond by saying that “Your line of thinking creates division instead of unity, and pulls people apart when we should be building bridges between nations”.

Minimize Your Opponents’ Arguments

It’s important to use adjectives that weaken your opponent’s position and make their concerns appear insignificant. For example, if an Islamophobic bigot is condemning Muslims for a series of terrorist attacks, you can refer to the attacks as “rare and isolated incidents”.

Dismiss Your Opponents’ Arguments

In many cases, it’s best to simply dismiss your opponent’s position altogether, by stating something like “That is so ridiculous that I’m not even going to entertain it with a response” or “If you don’t even understand that <insert progressive position here> then you’re not even worth talking to”.


Wow – I’m just going to quickly say how wonderful this advice is, then I’m going to spend a decent amount of time studying these rules to help improve my journalistic abilities.

Thanks MDB – with these clear guidelines we should all be able to do a better job.


I’m sorry, there isn’t a journalist of color in that photo collage. I know that probably half of them are jews, but in this case they are operating as “white” because they tend to support an accusation of racism against Europeans.

It’s very tough for me to even accept that a journalist of noncolor could even be considered accredited anymore. Didn’t you hear Sally Boynton Brown? White people need to SHUT UP because people of color have ALL the answers. To everything.


Use a title that doesn’t necessarely reflect a story. Most people just skip after the headlines and don’t read the whole article. For example after reading a recent headline and skipping the article, I know for sure that Russia has recently decriminalized domestic violence and that a man can now kill his womyn with impunity in that barbari country. This led me to conclude that nuking Moscow twice, not just once, was a humanitarian necessity

Black Lives Matter

I’d say every article needs a quote from accredited experts, like the the ACLU, an Ivy League University, or the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Also, it helps to include stories or quotes from real people, making sure that the contrast is very clear between progressives and non-progressives.

For example, on undocumented immigration, tell a story about a fourteen-year-old with an IQ of 200, already on scholarship to MIT, whose parents fled a war-torn country when the fourteen-year-old was a baby. State that the fourteen-year-old is being threatened with deportation to a country she has never known — as are millions of other children just like her. Also state that experts at [the Cleveland Clinic / Harvard University Medical School / etc.] are concerned because the threat of deportation imposes a deep psychological toll on those affected and poses a significant threat to their health and well-being. On the non-progressive side, instead of telling the story about a person shot or robbed by an undocumented immigrant, or someone who had their identity stolen, use a quote by David Duke. Then say that Duke has been labeled an extremist by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Also, say that Duke’s claims have been “debunked” by experts at Columbia University or something like that for extra measure.


Gosh that’s dreadful BLM – I hope the girl is ok? We need to start a petition so she can stay in the country with her parents and finish her studies. It would also be a good idea if we could start some kind of crowd funding site so people can support her living expenses – as I’m guessing that the scholarship for MIT is fees only?

Black Lives Matter

Yes, and unfortunately the story does not end well. Donald Trump has permanently crushed her hopes and dreams, along with the hopes and dreams of billions of other womyn and children like her who protested Trump during his self-proclaimed “inauguration” (since debunked as illegitimate from Russian hacking). Experts at Yale University blame the tragedy on a lack of funding for childhood education programs.

But fear not. There is a crowd-funding mechanism available. Just make your check or money order payable to “Democrat National Committee c/o Michael Obama for First Transgendered President 2020.” Cash will not be accepted as it is a barbarous relic, like gold, which cannot be eaten.


That’s great “advice”, BLM, I knew that someone like you would give “helpful” input. Goebells, who was an evil nazi, used similar tactics.

Black Lives Matter

We need to fight fire with fire. If Trump’s Nazi goons want to fight dirty, we need to fight dirtier. We have truth, social justice, and seventy-one genders on our side.

Maurice Miner
Maurice Miner

MDB, I’ve looked at your action list of Rules above, and I can see where the problem is:

No. 3: “Shame Your Opponents”
No. 4: “Label Your Opponents’ Arguments”
No. 5: “Minimize Your Opponents’ Arguments”
No. 6: “Dismiss Your Opponents’ Arguments”

67% of your proposal is in response to our “Opponents” – 4 out of 6 action Rules.

If we go to the next level, and either (a) remove all Opponents, or (b) at least make what they say illegal and strictly punishable, then all we need to do as Accredited Journalists is:

No. 1: “Use Double Quotes” and
No. 2 : “Use Catchphrases”.

We do not have to be concerned about steps 3 through 6, as our Opponents will be precluded from making any Fake News argument.

Simple, no?


So grateful to have found this site.

Other peoples’ wrong thinking needs to be high-lighted at every turn and your cheer-leaders in the comments section are usually spot on. Thank you 😉


And stick to the discourse, that must be rule #1.


You forgot the number one rule: be Jewish. This is critical to good journalism.