Blackrock appears to control Yahoo Finance and MSNBC

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by 101101, Oct 3, 2020.

  1. 101101

    101101 Well-Known Member

    When the robber barons of the last century were determining how they would protect their interests and help convert democracy into robber baron supporting oligarchy they determined they would need control of the boards of 1/4 of the newspaper- the only real media outlets at the time and also need decades of time.

    What is Blackrock? It is the number 1 financier of fossil fuels globally- despite lip service about divesting. Who owns Blackrock? Its number 1 share holder is Vangard group, Its number 2 is Blackrock fund advisors. Who owns Yahoo finance? Verizon. Who owns Verizon: Its number one share holder is Vanguard and its number 2 is Blackrock
    Who owns MSNBC (and all the other NBCs)? Comcast. Who owns Comcast? Its number one share holder is Vanguard group, its number 2 share holder is Blackrock- but there is an oligarchic family there with voting power. Who owns Vanguard. Its number one investor is Blackrock Fund Advisors group.

    Why doesn't Blackrock just become the primary owner? Too obvious. But Vanguard = Blackrock and Blackrock =Vanguard and together they are #1 and #2 or vice versa Mutal and ETF investors in the world and all of it equals Blackrock Fund Advisors Group and that equals some other stuff like Blackrock Capital Management group and it all goes down a black hole from there. Blackrock is also the largest shareholder in natural gas pusher Deutsche bank.)

    Come on Vanguard is in majority a mutual fund company owned by its own customers what's wrong with that? 1. Passive investing by shareholders is just wrong beyond belief- a recipe for total disaster on so many levels like automatic loss socializing investment in fossil fuels. 2. Vanguard has actively managed funds which are more of a problem for influence- Vanguard wouldn't even commit to lip service moves on climate like Blackrock, you could say by implication its management is hostile and where it has green fund they were still found to be investing in oil and gas.

    Are you noticing a hint of a pattern? In practice these are not news outlets they are fossil fuel propaganda and oligarch protection outlets first and foremost. That is their primary reason for being. They exist to placate the public against its own interests. But MSNBC and CNBC are liberal? No they are only liberal in the good cop bad cop sense like the members of the DNC including including the co-signers of the GND who strangely had to sign an no fossil fuel money pledges but turned around and took fossil fuel money (see open secrets.org) which includes all the big names. Captured media only give straight information as a means to set up for a misrepresentation or omission. It also acts as a placating safety valve. It is also a gate keeper on candidacies. It makes sure under this bribery based system of media that no candidate the sponsors (oligarchs) don't pre-approve and continue to support gets any mind share. And it actively discredits anyone they lose control over. Having or allowing a fake media is a litmus for a fake democracy.

    Here is a quote from NBC Wiki: "Others have argued that MSNBC has a bias against progressive politics. Phil Donahue's show was canceled in 2003 due to his opposition to the Iraq War, and Donahue later commented that the management of MSNBC required that "we have two conservative (guests) for every liberal. I was counted as two liberals."[92] Cenk Uygur, after his departure from MSNBC in 2011, said that MSNBC management had told him "people in Washington" were "concerned about [his] tone,"[93] and that he "didn't want to work in a place that didn't challenge power."[94]"

    There was a time when ISS was pushing Sue Wagner former Blackrock Vice Chair and current Blackrock board member for the board of Tesla. What they were trying to do to Tesla is what they do to media companies.

    Why is MSNBC called "MSNBC"? Because it is Microsoft NBC. When Microsoft divested why didn't it change its name? Because Microsoft still soft controls it. Gates helped it new owner Comcast and the oligarchs behind it get set up.

    Gates was called "underwhelming" and Tesla's break out record quarter is curiously called "underwhelming" by MSNBC. Just prior to the Nikola GM deal Gates was saying Tesla's semi can't work. Microsoft Board member Jeff Ubben is on the board of Nikola. Ubben was found saying the semi could fill up in 8 minutes. The Nikola CEO said over and over in videos 10 minutes to fill up. . Internally the Nikola head of tech head was saying 45 minutes- was it really a lot more like 450 minutes? How would we know?

    The mechanisms of control include interlocking boards (which need to become illegal again)
    and consolidation and concentration (only 6 firms dominate the full US market and they recycle each other's oligarch sponsored bs) and sponsor leverage or undue influence.
    All sponsor influence is undue and criminal by any just legal system's standards- because if you allow it you lose democracy and it is going to be cumulative misrepresentation or numbing to a culture of misrepresentation.

    Oligarchy likes to hide under democracy- it is the truest conspiracy for it is pure criminality. It is rule by money or arbitrary might makes right. And it becomes pure idiotic despotic tyranny. You can find the photo ops of the Clinton's and the Rothchilds and there was no damn reason ever that the family members of former presidents should ever under any circumstances have been allowed to hold federal office or even run for high elected offices because that is getting into idiotic hereditary rule and oligarchy and dumb bloodlines. Real opponents (as opposed to the canned ones we have) every time would have been like get the F! off the stage you're not legitimate!!!!

    Gates was publicly giving lectures against not having inheritance taxes and allowing wealth based bloodlines to set up but then was apparently found to be privately lobbying for it. He apparently put 23 billion into Monsanto. That would be like putting 23 billion into IG Farben.

    Seeking Alpha had an ad (article) by a claimed Nikola investor group saying you can't oppose Nikola because it backed via name dropping by old money European oligarchs like the Rothchilds and by implication by Gates through Microsoft's board member Jeff Ubben who was big at Fidelity. The message was you can't oppose natural gas because they are too big to fail (more might makes right bull sht.) They were also saying oligarchs have decided their legacy is going green by saving natural gas. That is the legacy of people on their way out including bloodlines on their way out!

    Lets look at who the top 4 'owners' of Tesla are. 1 Vanguard Group (well its just a mutual right- WRONG!) 2 Ballie Gifford 3.Blackrock Advisors (the core of darkness at Blackrock) and 4 Fidelity (surprise, surprise- but its just a mutual right?) 5. Blackrock as part of its lip service joined the Climate Action 100+ but Vanguard refused- Vanguard has funds it says are green that still invest in oil and gas- if you're green you're not invested in oil and gas in any capacity!

    What is the saboteur of actual green doing buying up Tesla shares to the point of becoming the top shareholders? Many reasons. Surely they want to push through idiot initiatives like a simple majority to mess with the bylaws and effect a soft hostile takeover to derail climate change. They want to use OPM to hedge their 80 billion in Tesla shorts (not all of it theirs) with 40 billion in longs. But they really want to pump and dump so they take any positive Tesla events which should generate positive news and spin them negatively in through their shill media firms and then time sale of Tesla shares through both institutional and individual accounts they control to sow disillusionment with Tesla. So it is presumably not just their institutional longs its also some shill individual investor accounts that they use to dump on good news with. It is equivalent to trying to demoralize Tesla shareholders by booing good news and setting a feedback look to support negative expectation in order (and this is crucial) to stop their own bull sht offerings from being further de-capitalized. Denying or delaying timely S&P access was another attempt. Remember also Tesla isn't will to pay tribute to their rigged media with ads and they don't support paid propaganda. Think how outrageously idiotic those pop ups are where they want someone to pay MSNBC or NY Times be force fed its lame ads and propaganda because they call themselves 'independent'? Why, for instance, would Carlos Slim want to own the NY Times? The LA times became utter crap after an oligarch took it over.
     
  2. 101101

    101101 Well-Known Member

    The problem with oligarchy and its rule by money and warped power is besides it being arbitrary its very narrow, more so than nationalism or even racism. It is not about the color of your skin or religion or culture, and not about conduct or ideology. Its more narrow and ugly than any of that. With oligarchy the money and power are not based on virtue, or doing the right thing or the public interest or based on intelligent decisions it only comes down to who people are screwing and who they are related to by screwing and hence its endless scandal, inequity and injustice. The only social mobility is through becoming a concubine or marrying up. You can't have this crap as the basis of your society especially not in the presence of existential tech.

    There is more to it than that. People in these oligarchic clans are born exiled. They can never be their own person or develop naturally. As soon as someone finds out their last name they are always defined by who they are related to, it is a status as problematic as being a known fellon. They almost always have to worry someone is out to get their money or take advantage of them or is fearful or assumes the worst motives. They can't trust. And from the other side there is no trust and a presumption that these people aren't real and never did or never could do anything on their own and they are defined by the public personhood of their lowest common denominator relatives. They are born public persons which is the worst way to become a public person and they have the drawbacks even if the public never heard of them.
     
  3. 101101

    101101 Well-Known Member

    Noticed also that there is this utter BS about 'first family' and 'empire' and a first spouse and an office for all that royalistic BS. There is no place for that ever. That utter BS has to be stamped out. Its public service pure and simple nothing more, not ever! Also violating emoluments and this idea that a president is above the law or needs privilege or special treatment- this is all about trying to enshrine special status for oligarchs and that is all utter BS that has to be ended.
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2020
  4. SouthernDude

    SouthernDude Active Member

    This post 1000% belongs in off topic.
     
  5. gooki

    gooki Active Member

    FWIW Vanguard is owned by its members. So when you see Vanguard as a shareholder you really need to see it as millions of individuals.
     
  6. 101101

    101101 Well-Known Member

    Now see it would help if you read the OP.
    Because it seems the largest investor in Vanguard is Blackrock fund advisors the group that controls Blackrock. And every where you look they are like two peas in a pod, there is no greater friend to Blackrock than Vanguard and no greater friend to Blackrock than Vanguard. The seemingly uncorruptible Vanguard appears highly corrupted by the trim tab of Blackrock. A clue is Buffet recommends them as a passive investment- guessing down to its active funds its not so passive. Investing can't be passive!

    Funny the bribery based sponsor captured press which exists to mislead the public about the public interest for the benefit of parasite oligarchs is whining about having no access to Tesla anymore.
    Shill rag Road and Track said it would lead to no more Tesla vehicles being reviewed. I had thought that was because firms like BMW were paying (remember sponsorship is bribery in practice- also can't have democracy if you have a sponsored media) them not to do reviews because BMW and other laggards were so far behind it was not even possible to tell convincing lies in their favor in such reviews.

    The sponsored media which is oligarch captured to spin the cultural narrative to exclusively benefit oligarchs seems to be a public enemy. What else could it be. Its not hard to have media without conflicts of interest- one key is subscription but obviously no ads. Needs to be owned by its subscribers one share perscription and one subscription per person only. If there is a board its members can't sit on other boards or be married or related to or be in the same damn secret society... you build the charter around finding and eliminating all conflicts of interest first and foremost money based conflicts of interest. Even a reasonable suspicion should be grounds for termination.

    I think current captured media is a public enemy by almost anyone's definition.
    I think the same thing about the fossil fuel industry. It is underming and compromising one way or another every human life present and future. There is no "what about the business case" which is moronic anyway. There is no what about the 'profit' or the rent seeking or the thieving on behalf of privilege. There is just bans followed by injunctions followed by being labled criminal orginzations followed by having the terrorist label which the fossil fuel firms have cultivated applied to the fossil fuel firms and intelligence agencies directed against even the domestic fossil fuel firms and sanctions applied over continued fossil fuel trade and emmissions and taxes increased over unnecessary carbon content in the bill of materials. The profits will be stopped because with fossil fuels that has always been a case of pure corporate welfare so easy to stop. And the lies like Hyllion is trying to push eg NG can be carbon net negative (it can't not even close and they surely know it) will be stopped.
    There is no right for any organization to continue to exist that is undermining human existence nor even a right for one to exist that is highly likely to be undermining human existence. There is no deference that is owed because a lot of apparently unintelligent unvirtious drunk while investing people's wealth is at risk- on the contrary that requires expedition and fast tracking! Look where you invest and try to attach strings the world doesn't need less freedom trough extractive malevolent rent seeking.
     
  7. 101101

    101101 Well-Known Member

    The only reason you care about what category its in is because you're a shill.
    You're even claim to invest in power plug.
    Clear troll plus shill.
     
  8. SouthernDude

    SouthernDude Active Member

    >eVeRyOnE i DiSaGrEe WiTh Is A sHiLl
    Uh. This belongs in off topic because it's a psychotic conspiracy theory rant that has nothing to do with EVs. No, fossil fuels are not some crazy conspiracy surrounding fossil fuels.
     

Share This Page