The mainstream media is in free fall collapse. Big outlets are laying off workers by the hundreds, the masses have low trust for politically correct articles, entire TV networks are getting pushed around by the likes of Donald Trump, crushing lawsuits are making their unethical practices obsolete, and their blatant hoaxes are being immediately called out instead of slipping under the radar. We are firmly in the eye of a turbulent storm that will lead to a new order for news.

The siren node


Right now there is opportunity for “siren nodes” to start their own news outlet. A siren node is an individual who has built up enough trust within his network that he is fed scoops before it reaches the desks of mainstream journalists. All the big guys you know in the alt sphere, including myself, are siren nodes, a position that we can then leverage into forming a rudimentary news organization along the the likes of Charles J Johnson’s Got News. Once Johnson became an entrenched siren node, people began sending him daily tips without him having to seek them out.

The biggest problem with the indie news approach is that the profit margin is razor thin. News is the most expensive non-video content you can produce, and competition is incredibly high. If you’re just one hour late with your story then you will get scooped and miss out on tens of thousands of pages views, losing out on untold recognition and glory. If you want to do news, you must have cat-like readiness to the smallest perturbation of the news cycle and be more on-call than an emergency room doctor.

Another problem is that advertising alone will not be sufficient to keep indie news operations afloat, especially in a time where readers are getting annoyed at ads and seeking out blocking solutions. If the mainstream guys can’t make a profit, with their in-house MBAs trying to monetize even inch of content, it won’t be easy for the little guys either. This means that indie news outlets will certainly be required to use crowd-donation efforts (Kickstarter, Patreon, etc.) or sell their own products.

Why the old media won’t completely die


Old media will find it impossible to run a profit, but most outlets will continue to survive as pet projects for oligarchs who need to push out their agenda in the form of propaganda. One oligarch will buy Newspaper A to focus on his global warming agenda, another oligarch will buy another Newspaper B to aid his immigration agenda, and so on. These oligarchs will accept their money-losing outlets as merely the cost of doing business. What’s a $100 million a year loss for your own personal Pravda if it’s making you $1 billion a year through favorable government policies and modified consumer behavior?

You’ll always see the big names like Washington Post and Guardian exist, but their news desks will be gutted and replaced with cheap scribes who pump out Buzzfeed-like garbage with the occasional propaganda piece thrown in. It will be a race to the bottom in terms of quality, pushing additional readers away from these outlets to indie news, especially as the narrative continues to fade away. Oligarchs will have no love for the “news tradition,” putting thousands of veteran journalists out of a job to be replaced by low-wage millennials who believe that rape culture is the number one problem in the world. Most of the journalists who wrote attack pieces against me and Return Of Kings in February will be out of a job within five years.

How indie news will evolve


Indie news sites will start niche, focusing on specific areas, and out-scoop or embarrass old media outlets that will find themselves in an increasingly small box of political correctness. Each indie news site will be relatively small, serving under 1 million users a month, and so there will be a logical push for them to merge and create outlets that look very similar to old media. Until then, expect indie news to be rough around the edges with typos and a lack of fancy multimedia content like custom charts and original photography.

The best example of how a large indie news outlet will look like is Info Wars. It started as small news site that piggybacked off of Alex Jones’ radio show but now pumps out 40 articles a day, much of it original reporting. They have a TV studio and a growing staff of journalists. Their main way of making money is not through advertising but through the sale of supplements that fit the overall conspiracy and survivalist theme of the news it offers. Within a few years, you will see several additional outlets that are similar to Info Wars in providing both print and video coverage.

Indie media outlets will compete head-on with a zombified old guard composed mostly of “true believers” to the social justice cause. Old media will be able to survive on brand recognition for many years until they get driven into the ground, and then the oligarchs will simply buy the indie media sites before destroying them, just like they did with Vice.

Another option I anticipate is for old media to create outlets that appear indie, such as the billionaire-owned The Intercept, but still share massive overlap with the establishment on umbrella issues like feminism and immigration. It’ll be increasingly important for you to know who owns the outlet you’re reading, and which agendas that owner has vested interests in.

Why I won’t get into news


As of now I have no intention of starting a news outlet that goes beyond the occasional news article you see on Return Of Kings. Other than being a low profit business, the news business is too much of a grind. The news never stops, and you can’t even rest after a successful scoop because the insatiable public demands more. I’d be more inclined to get into news if I had an agenda that was monetarily tied to my business, such as if I was a globalist who needed massive amounts of cheap labor. I also don’t have a go-getter or fast-paced nature that is required for news operations.

I will move into focusing more on timeless content that doesn’t go stale after two days, and which can give value to the reader for years. Such “long tail” articles are also more friendly to advertising revenues and promotional tie-ins, but this means I will miss out on the daily action and fun of being a part of the hectic news cycle. There are always trade offs.


The news industry is being realigned as we speak. The old media will lose a lot of jobs and readership, but still maintain enough influence that it’s worthwhile to run for those with money-driven global agendas. Indie news will rise forth and cause a lot of pain to the establishment but remain niche until they mimic the old guard and form more professional outlets along the model of Info Wars. Either way, opportunity has arrived, and I have no doubt that ambitious men will take advantage of that. I just won’t be one of them.

Read Next: My Press Conference With The Washington DC Media


  1. Anonymous March 23, 2016 at 9:01 am

    One of the few media outlets I still trust is Al Jazeera. And that’s primarily because they aren’t owned by the Zionists.

    1. jz95 March 23, 2016 at 9:10 am

      Breitbart seems to be a pretty reputable news site.

      1. ShadowRising March 23, 2016 at 7:01 pm


    2. Blinko23 March 23, 2016 at 11:36 am

      Al Jazeera is a deep cover US Intel operation. Wikileaks outed them years ago:

      Yes, much of their news *appears* to run counter to US foreign policy but on the key points, they run in lockstep with the Globalist agenda.

      1. spicynujac March 24, 2016 at 9:31 am

        Well shit. I guess it was an obvious clue when so many messages from supposed bad guy bin laden were coming through Al Jazeera.

        I still say foreign media is your best choice over domestic. While the upper levels may be corrupted / have agendas, the average reporter from BBC or Al Jazeera or whatever who isn’t American is just merely reporting on the facts he finds in America. Kind of like if I did a story on the German tourism industry–I have no preconceived ideas, know none of the players, and have never been there, and hence would merely be reporting whatever I find.

      2. Blinko23 March 25, 2016 at 12:03 pm

        Agreed. The only way to get to the truth is to dig deep across mostly foreign and alternative media. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people just don’t have time for such research projects and hence the masses remain stuck in dangerous ignorance.

      3. Concerned Citizen March 26, 2016 at 11:20 am

        I would suggest you watch Russia Today as well.
        In any case, comparing each media outlet’s propaganda to one another, will help you better understand what’s going on.

        However, understanding what is going on will not make a difference. Knowing what kind of bacteria has infected you is not the cure. Eliminating the bacteria is the cure.

      4. Stadtaffe March 29, 2016 at 4:22 am

        Some fantastic documentaries from RT..

      5. me March 26, 2016 at 5:53 pm

        If you really thing the Marxists from BBC are merely reporting on the facts in America, I have a bridge to sell to you.

      6. spicynujac March 27, 2016 at 5:21 pm

        You know, it’s so easy to throw around labels, I would really appreciate some examples if you’re going to slam a whole international news organization. And no, it’s not perfect, and they’re only going to cover larger stories, ie those with international appeal, but I find foreign media to be far more reliable than domestic media, which have an agenda, or are bought and paid for by one side or the other.

      7. Da Mac March 31, 2016 at 2:37 am

        Indeed, American media is a total joke compared to the rest

      8. Da Mac March 31, 2016 at 2:35 am recently became

        Does that tell you everything you need to know about the BBC as far as where it was versus where it is now?

        They are even more extremely pro-feminist now and vehement against Trump (in a subliminal fashion, of course).

    3. Duuuude March 23, 2016 at 12:49 pm

      Al Jazeera is actually owned by Zionists and crypto Zionists, as is Infowars, and now it is obvious that Roosh/ROK is part of that. ROK articles are not even subtly pushing Trump as a saviour instead of the controlled opposition he is, as well as the Muslim bad guy trope.

      This guy just showed his colours. He’s not a free-thinking Persian, this site is part of the intelligence community.

      1. Tom Dane March 23, 2016 at 1:54 pm

        No way

      2. $136606304 March 23, 2016 at 7:58 pm

        Sad to say but I agree with you …

      3. Steve H March 24, 2016 at 10:23 am

        Al Jazeera is owned by Kratom kingpins.

      4. bonehead March 24, 2016 at 11:12 am

        And the intelligence community ultimately works for the Bilderbergers, and there is the last word on who runs the world.

      5. Blinko23 March 25, 2016 at 12:06 pm

        Uh, no. Sounds more like YOU are the zioshill, attempting cognitive infiltration of the alt-right, to sow as much confusion as possible.

        The only thing you got right is that Al Jazeera is ultimately a zionist operation. But everyone knows that already.

        Infowars and ROK might have their flaws but they are in no way “controlled opposition”

        Now just go away and next time don’t use such an obvious try-hard manosphere username, Duuuude….

      6. Concerned Citizen March 26, 2016 at 11:27 am

        However uncomfortable that may be to some, NOT every Jew (put in here your “enemy” of choice, be it Black, Muslim, etc.) is your enemy.
        There is a large enough percent among those who you consider your enemies, who are actually your friends. Not playing that card correctly, leads to alienating possible allies.

        People need to realize that Israel itself is in danger due to liberal Jews. Yes there are Jews who are logical people, who want the obvious (to preserve their heritage and existence) and there are Jews
        People need to understand that most Jews are NOT sitting on the table of the global conspirators. They are simply doing their thing, living their life, and yeah quite possibly taking advantage of any connections they have.
        People need to understand that American Jews are simply not having enough kids anymore to sustain their numbers … They ‘re dying out, so how can they be plotting to take over ? The only Jews that are having a lot of kids are Orthodox Jews. They are the ones who mostly vote Republican and who fuel Israel’s birth rates.

      7. Da Mac March 31, 2016 at 2:48 am

        Exactly. Not to be forgotten is that the most accomplished and outspoken critic of American foreign policy, also in its blind support of Israel, was himself born to a Jewish family: Noam Chomsky.

        That said, there is credence to the Zionist control concerns, but that is indeed far from equivalent to referring to Jews at large.

      8. me March 26, 2016 at 5:54 pm

        Gee, I wonder who might be behind this D&C post…

    4. Mr Reynard March 24, 2016 at 8:44 pm

      You mean El Joozeera ??

    5. JohnDSee March 24, 2016 at 10:48 pm

      My concern is that the oligarchy/government /whomever, will just shut it all down. They could, quite literally, shut off the internet and, in the most extreme case, make pamphlet printing nearly impossible. Ever made your own paper? I did once. At EPCOT! Am I being too paranoid? Can a person ever be too paranoid? End rant

      1. Concerned Citizen March 26, 2016 at 11:29 am

        If you want to eliminate a problem, you have to eliminate the problem. The problem is that most people couldn’t even eliminate eating food that kills them …

      2. Da Mac March 31, 2016 at 2:50 am

        No, the government definitely could not shut down the internet without the help of the private corporations that own almost all of the physical, and even logical, connections.

  2. redpillyogi March 23, 2016 at 9:17 am

    A lot of people say Jones is controlled opposition but my gut tells me he is the real deal. I’ve been watching him for over 5 years and he appears to be a straight shooter.

    1. Blinko23 March 23, 2016 at 11:39 am

      I’ve been watching AJ now for 15+ years and there is no way he is controlled opposition. Over the top and sometimes wrong on some issues – yes. But controlled op, very unlikely to the point where it would make no sense for the elite to have as asset that far out.

      The attack on Infowars was originated by Obama appointee Cass Sunstein and is part of a plan to sow confusion and mistrust within alt-news outlets:

    2. Thorverine March 23, 2016 at 5:28 pm

      And he has openly acknowledged that he has a Jewish wife, yet people still claim that he hides it

  3. Michelle Steelemen March 23, 2016 at 9:26 am

    If anyone in the nascent news business wants to partner with me, let me know.

    I was part of the group that broke the Michelle Fields Hoax story.
    We put together a video narrative Sun before last at about 6:30AM.
    Roughly 19 hours later, both she AND longtime contributor Ben Shapiro were forced out.

    Here is the video.
    Video is simply a much more powerful way to present news.
    We can crank out video to supplement your story if you have enough reach.
    My videos have been incorporated in stories by media ranging from Rolling Stone Magazine online to Breitbart itself.

    1. Michelle Steelemen March 23, 2016 at 9:29 am

      NOTE: While this video has a lot of views now, it had LESS than 1K at the time of the Fields/Shapiro departure. We niche targeted it to a group of passionate Trump fans on TWTR. It spread instantly, like wildfire, and with EXTREME efficiency.

      Video used in Rolling Stone:

      Video just used by Breitbart:

      1. Michelle Steelemen March 23, 2016 at 9:33 am

        NOTE: The original headline on this video targeted Michelle Fields. Once it was a clear mission accomplished, we re-purposed the video with a new title – targeting Megyn Kelly for her role in the farce.

      2. buggers March 24, 2016 at 4:06 am

        So, Trump was right, yet again, in his characterization of Ms. Kelly as a no-talent hack who shouldn’t be posing as a journalist.

    2. buggers March 24, 2016 at 4:03 am

      Well done. Ms. Fields (not the good cookie lady) had just started to receive her just desserts. I hope the lawsuits quickly follow.

  4. PhenixRising March 23, 2016 at 10:01 am

    “Old media will find it impossible to run a profit, but most outlets will
    continue to survive as pet projects for oligarchs who need to push out
    their agenda in the form of propaganda”

    What’s old is new again. How do you think newspapers got their start? They were originally political party-based. (St. Louis Globe-Democrat, Quincy Herald-Whig, Tallahassee Democrat, Springfield (Mass.) Republican).

    At least they were honest about it, and you knew what you were getting.

  5. Chris Brony March 23, 2016 at 11:24 am

    The owners of the media use it as leverage on the politicians.

    The owners may use it to promote their own agenda – as Roosh says above – but they also use the media to buy influence. In the UK there are about a dozen titles that are owned by just three or four owners. Front pages of newspapers still shape the agenda and provide talking points on TV. So by being one of these owners, the politicians (who control billions of spending and control business regulations and policy) can be influenced or supported in return for favourable treatment and policies.
    For many business people it is good value to take a loss of £30-£50 million a year on a few newspapers to be able to influence government policy to their advantage. Owning a newspaper buys them influence and power, and prestige. It also buys them access to the people in power.

    1. Michelle Steelemen March 23, 2016 at 5:52 pm

      “Front pages of newspapers still shape the agenda and provide talking points on TV.”

      What ARE these things you speak of….

      1. Michelle Steelemen March 23, 2016 at 5:56 pm

        No, actually I RELY on television……

        …….to poop on.

        What we do is media criticism – Show their narrative compared with reality.
        Quite effective. But, we NEED them to keep propagandizing.
        Otherwise, what’s to critique!
        Watch again….

  6. buggers March 23, 2016 at 12:03 pm

    News? What is news? What’s touted as news is nothing more than 24×7 talking head commentary, opinion, so-called expert analysis, and pure speculation. It’s more appropriately called info-tainment. It’s meant to keep eyeballs looking at ads for Cialis, Depends, and Coke.

    Indie news is a natural product of the power of the individual to Twitter, Facebook, What’s App, and Youtube what’s happening in real-time. Youtube and Liveleak have better raw video feeds than the censored and sanitized videos of the mainstream media. I regularly get better more timely news from a handful of obscure websites than I every do from CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, Fox, CNN, etc. And since those news outlets are merely filling dead air with bubble head commentary, any dude with a smartphone can be as much of, and sometimes even more, of an anchor or reporter than anyone on the payroll of a mainstream news outlet.

    Indie news is here and has been for some time. Since it’s produced and distributed freely by unpaid amateurs with the current global communications technology, there is virtually no cost of production and distribution. Consequently, there no money in it. However, real people doing real reporting aren’t in it for the money, as the mainstream must be. Individuals posting up authentic man-on-the-street reports of everything from an airport bombing that they were party too to crazy cats doing cute things is as unbiased as it gets, Individuals do not answer to advertisers or agendas. Even if individuals inject their own opinion and commentary into a story they’re breaking, it’s often more accurate and relevant than anything the corporate beholden mainstreamers provide.

    As for expert analysis of more in-depth issues, there are more experts proving their worth on Youtube than the establishment experts with titles and former job as xxx at some guberment staff position at alphabet agency ABC. The ability to comment on, critique and correct what people post regarding a news story provides the vetting and peer review that long left respectable journalism decades ago, if it ever really existed,

    The current business of advertising funded news is years outdated. Advertising has migrated to the Internet via Google and others. The problem for mainstream outlets on the Internet is that they are still beholden to the old guard advertisers, and still attempt to implement old-school business models such as paid subscriptions for information that is readily and freely available on 1000 other outlets. The idea that mainstream preselection and edition of news by journalistic experts to some journalistic standard of excellence is laughable, as the mainstream media lost virtually all credibility long ago. So Bob in Boise who videos the Brussels Bombing that he’s 20 feet from on his smartphone is much more valuable than the Brussels Fox correspondent who’s at least 45 minutes from getting anywhere near what’s happening with his usual crew and gear. And, since he has no eyewitness account to report as valuable as Bob who’s stuck inside behind the police perimiter, the correspondent can only blab away with useless scant details, ping-ponging back and forth to the anchor who knows even less, and the growing panel of blundering bubbleheaded experts who provide static to cover otherwise gaping holes in information and reporting. At best. correspondents seek out the people who are part of the story, who have already reported to the world in real-time what’s happening via Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, etc.

    So where’s the value proposition for anything we know as traditional news? Sure they rule the airwaves (or more appropriately the satellites and cables). But that’s of rapidly declining value. So it’s time for dinosaurs to die and let the cockroaches of the new news evolve into their full being — the new news for humanity.

  7. Marshallaw March 23, 2016 at 3:05 pm

    I’m weaning myself off the msm. Books and periodicals relevant to my business, leisure interests will be all I spend my time and money.

  8. Brock Robinson March 23, 2016 at 3:09 pm

    Love the idiocracy reference in the main picture. Yes that is what we’re headed for. I couldn’t help but think of their clown pornstar/pro wrestler president in that movie when Kanye west announced he thought he might run in 2020. Entertainers will be leading nations soon.

    Very nice forecast on how the news industry will go. Very important to always check who owns the information (propoganda) that’s being churned out so you know what agenda theyre biased towards. People still haven’t caught on to that and just trust the news as if they’re still watching Walter Cronkite.

    1. Concerned Citizen March 26, 2016 at 11:36 am

      The only news you need to know is that there is civl war taking place as we speak in America. These are the 2 fighting sides :

      The bad guys :
      Blacks who hate white people
      Hispanics of native american descent who hate white people
      White people who are retarded, or who hate themselves
      Elite bastards who use all of the above to control the good guys

      The good guys :
      Blacks who love white people, and who don’t want to see the white race disappear. Blacks who understand that America needs to remain a nation of mostly whites of European descent.
      Hispanics of native american descent who love white people, and who don’t want to see the white race disappear. Some of the same people who understand that America needs to remain a nation of mostly whites of European descent.
      Logical white people
      The good Elite

      There’s your war for you. No need to keep whining like Tyler Durden that “our great depression is our lives”. We have a REAL war in our hands.

      1. Stadtaffe March 29, 2016 at 4:25 am

        It’s binary really, you just need a small LED to deliver your news and it goes from green to red if there’s a civil war..

    2. Concerned Citizen March 26, 2016 at 11:37 am

      BTW …
      While all of the above are fighting each other, Islam is taking over the world one birth at a time …

  9. splooge March 23, 2016 at 3:19 pm

    check it out vice use to be awesome now its hijacked by feminist narative. Even using the word “consent” on mental pateients for treatment. ANd exposing a loop hole among divorce(same as west) and ignores the other side of the family. Literally taking feminists and mental patients word for it

    1. spicynujac March 24, 2016 at 9:37 am

      Creator Gavin McNewsome sold out for big bucks. He makes some good youtube videos. I can’t say I fully blame him–he is simply taking advantage of the wall street system where you can receive millions of artificially created duckets for a popular product.

  10. ShadowRising March 23, 2016 at 6:47 pm

    The dilemma is, we need news of some time. How would we know what’s going on in the world without someone out there finding out and reporting it to us? These journalists and editors also need to get paid, which means they need to make money, and corporations have a say so over the news. If we took the totalitarian model and allowed the government to financially sponsor the news, then that’s another problem unto itself. So this is a big problem. How are we supposed to get news that’s fair and reliable and where a journalist doesn’t have to live on food stamps to survive?

    And a problem with indie media is that they may not have the highest journalistic standards. You’ll get a lot more crackpots and people with niche agendas, such as in Alex Jones case, a lot of tinfoil hat conspiracy. Although he’s often right about some things, you have to always have your bullshit filter on with Jones.

    1. redpillyogi March 24, 2016 at 5:19 am

      we don’t NEED news. We need the carbon cycle (sunlight, water, co2 and O). We need shelter. We need clothes. We need food. We need community/tribes. We don’t need news. You sound like someone who has a vested interest in the status quo.

      1. ShadowRising March 25, 2016 at 12:54 pm

        Excuse me but I like to know what the fuck is going on outside of a 5 mile radius. My bad.

  11. Clark Kent March 24, 2016 at 9:03 am

    “Another option I anticipate is for old media to create outlets that appear indie, such as the billionaire-owned The Intercept, but still share massive overlap with the establishment on umbrella issues like feminism and immigration. ”

    Great point

    1. Concerned Citizen March 26, 2016 at 11:40 am

      ANYONE who promotes multiculturalism IS the enemy.
      ANYONE who promotes “to strive for integration” IS the enemy.

      A society needs to be homogenous. PERIOD.
      Trump knows this, he just can’t say it … Don’t worry, we begin with the wall.

  12. spicynujac March 24, 2016 at 9:43 am

    I heard someone on infowars the other day use the phrase “thousand mile stare” referring to some feminist… made me laugh hard. Pretty obvious they are a ROK a reader (think it was PJ Watson).

  13. spicynujac March 24, 2016 at 10:01 am

    One thing I think could have worked, had it “gone viral” or whatever is something like indymedia. As a college student, I signed up, as I have an interest in writing and photography. Basically it’s a system of distributed non-hierarchical news reporting where the public in the field with their smartphones and cameras can observe and submit stories, instead of stories being driven from the top down from an editor. They had some sort of skeletal structure, ie a dozen or so regional networks that you would submit your stories through.

    It looks like they still exist, and for all I know they may be successful and a good news source.. I just never see any of their stories, ever. I guess that’s another struggle.. How do you become reputable and well known without having corporate influence?

    I think wikileaks could have had a news division that did this well, but they were tarred and feathered as evil terist sympathizers by the powers that be. They even got the major credit card companies to shut down donation lines to them! Unreal.

  14. spicynujac March 24, 2016 at 10:04 am

    I’ll reprint a comment I made months ago that just appeared in my upvote feed:

    Most people are stupid and ignorant, yes, but the mainstream media is a sideshow. Fox News is the top news network (sad but true) and can’t even get 2 million viewers on its #1 rated show in a nation of over 300 million. Not even 1% of the population. Do you think more than 1% of the populace are going to alternative sites like infowars, reading blogs like ROK, etc.? I sure do.

    Most of the public are idiots. Still, I wonder how much political correctness hides people’s true feelings. In other words, how many people agree with you, but are afraid to admit it, unless you are good friends?

    1. Clark Kent March 25, 2016 at 9:04 am

      I can speak to this.
      This Wednesday for a theory class I had to give a lecture on a classic feminist manifesto written from a science fiction angle. I initially chose the paper based on its general theme of post-humanism, didn’t know what I was getting into.
      Anyways… I gave a pretty heavy presentation and didn’t sugarcoat this sensitive topic the way the other students and professors have for the whole course so far.
      At one point I said that I sympathized with women’s frustration with being 3D printers for men throughout most of history, but that the conflict between the masculine and feminine forces is essentially one of using each other. One feminist chick said that we could overcome this dualism by adopting feminist ideals, and I retorted that we could overcome this dualism by creating artificial wombs.
      I held myself back from saying what was on my mind so often in this class that being put in such a comical situation seemed like a once in a lifetime kinda thing. My presentation was intellectually rigorous, well-organized, faithful to the primary text, I even made a powerpoint when it wasn’t necessary, but I definitely broke some of the rules of political correctness.

      I almost felt a sense of nervousness coming to the university the next day until I arrived to the tune of “great presentation!” by a few of my male classmates. There were a few people who I clearly offended, but the benefit is I very quickly got a sense of who are the blue-pillers, purple-pillers, and the red-pillers in my program.

      Just bear in mind I didn’t say anything illogical or without reason. The notion of artificial wombs for example might actually be something that feminists have to contend with in the future, they just aren’t used to be confronted with difficult ideas in their safe-space…. I mean university.

      1. spicynujac March 25, 2016 at 1:10 pm

        Well done, my friend. Don’t underestimate the power of this kind of public action. There are many well-intentioned blue pillers who have been fed propaganda their whole lives and accept feminism out of a sense of compassion for women, not realizing that it actually harms both men and women. This presentation could very well be the first crack in the dam, something they will think about from time to time and eventually lead them to taking the red pill and seeing the world as it truly is.

  15. Juice Lee March 24, 2016 at 1:16 pm

    Hey Roosh, did you catch the Emory Trump chalk story? I think this is an absolutely fantastic idea. Chalk is perfect, cheap, easily concealed and not permanent (no vandalism charges). We need to have as many of our people chalking out “Trump 2016 ” as possible, at random times and spaces. It’s a prime piece of 4GW that gets into our adversaries’ heads and demoralizes them. Like the vietcong or hashishin of old, we must be everywhere and nowhere at once. This tactic needs to go viral on college campuses, and you are the man with enough influence to get this started.

  16. Another Mike March 26, 2016 at 1:43 am

    Roosh, women at the bar keep asking me to take them home — but my wife is already home. Any tips? Or has this become the politics blog?

    1. Roosh March 26, 2016 at 8:23 pm

      Get a hotel or leave your wife.

      1. Another Mike March 26, 2016 at 10:31 pm


  17. Leykis4Life March 26, 2016 at 7:14 am

    Drudge, Infowars, WND, RT, Zero Hedge, Breitbart and Right ON is where i get the vast majority of my News from as well as ROK.

    I stay as far away from MSM after having worked in it (Sydney Morning Herald)

  18. storm March 27, 2016 at 8:35 am

    When artists and scientists were patronised by oligarchs, they produced some of the best content.

    We may see a golden age in news as it moves away from profitability and towards idealism, which is what historically we expect from a oligarch-patron model. One might expect deep journalistic scoops, the sort which today’s ten second attention span papers would otherwise be unable to find.

    The cost is that they would not be impartial, but let’s be realistic: they never were and certainly today are not.

  19. Stadtaffe March 29, 2016 at 4:36 am

    Am very happy to read about this, can feel it is happening anyhow. „Lügenpresse halt die Fresse!“ In addition to timeless content that doesn’t go stale and red pill content relevant to the declining times we live in, I like to also read about traffic accidents, knifings, fires in my local area as well as economic things, emerging products, restaurant reviews. There is of course the odd wildlife thing, either domestic animals or some event between carnivores in Africa or bears in Russia. Wars hopefully in other countries, not here. News is like some kind of habit or kick, I don’t believe it furthers a person much in life though..

  20. Hermes von Ironfist April 7, 2016 at 2:34 am

    Not a single media is without manipulation. But the least bad ones are wiki news sources made by users, and soruces of leaked documents (wikileaks and so on, great research work and nobody denies the leaked documents).