Wall Street
© Wikimedia Commons
On September 7, 2013, the daring website, Cryptome, published and publicized the tax reports filed by one of the dime-a-dozen pseudo alternative online publications-ProPublica. The stunning IRS 990 forms filed by this new flashy tax-exempt online news organization expose a secretive operation funded by millions of dollars received from secret entities:
ProPublica Tax Report for 2011 lists $10,000,000 (Ten Million Dollars) private funding from Anonymous (Secret) Donors: Click Here

ProPublica Tax Report for 2010 lists $10,000,000 (Ten Million Dollars) private funding from Anonymous (Secret) Donors: Click Here

ProPublica Tax Report for 2009 lists $ 6,000,000 (Six Millions Dollars) private funding from Anonymous (Secret) Donors: Click Here
That is correct. ProPublica, in the first three years of its existence and operation, has received $26,000,000 (26 Million Dollars) funding from secret donors.

The tax-exempt, 501 (C) (3) NGO was established and began operation in June 2008. When you look at the established date of their operation, and their first 990 tax form filed in 2009, you see that, right from the start, before even establishing any track record, their founders-operators were able to collect $6,000,000.

Well, if you look at ProPublica's founders and operators the above facts will start making sense:
ProPublica was founded by Paul Steiger, the former managing editor of The Wall Street Journal

Propublica is managed and led by Stephen Engelberg, the former investigative editor of The New York Times

Propublica is run and directed by Richard Tofel, the former assistant publisher of The Wall Street Journal
Let's sum it up: Three individuals, major participants and players from the US mainstream media, from entities long known as intimate propaganda arms of the US government, The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times, got together and said: The alternative media is taking off with the public, so let's set up shop and pose as one. After all, the establishment is smart enough to not put all its eggs in one basket-in this case, the mainstream outlet.

With their established record as mainstream players who understood the importance of government-imposed propaganda and the role of controlled opposition fronts, the trio set up shop with window-dressing that distorted them and made them look like a Watch-Dog Independent Alternative media outlet - in a posh office with an Uber Expensive Manhattan address.

Right from the start, with the government and the establishment's backing they positioned them in the forefront as a major player by: 1-quickly securing $6,000,000 upfront seed money from secret donors; 2-smoothly establishing their shop-business as a tax-exempt 501 (C) (3) NGO with the US government

Isn't it amazing how a supposedly alternative watchdog that is supposedly working to expose dark secret deals for greater transparency and public awareness happens to be a mega-funded business with secret mega-donors?!

I tried my best to comb through their site, hoping to get a glimpse of these generous funders who have given ProPublica $26,000,000. But, no such luck. If I were a betting woman, I'd put my money on the same-o-same-o mega corporate foundations- the 1%: Soros, Rockefellers, Carnegie, Ford ... You know who we're looking at and talking about here, no?

I would say that even more appalling than having $26,000,000 from secret donors is the fact that ProPublica wants much more: They want uninformed and gullible individuals, our average hard-working Janes & Johns, to dish out donations and recurring subscriptions, and enrich the already very rich operators of this so-called alternative business. How bold and daring of ProPublica!

Think about it, during these tough economic times, while even the mainstream is struggling to make ends meet (despite backing from billionaires, government and corporate advertisers), ProPublica has received $26, 000,000 and more from its secret admirers within the mega-billionaire circle. Why? Since when do the Uber Corporate players and their foundations have a desire for transparency-seeking and Pro-Public media sources? Obviously, they don't want any transparency when it comes to their money and where their mega-dollars go. Otherwise, why remain so very anonymous and secret? Right?

Last week I wrote a commentary on the one and only way to operate as a true alternative media source: 100% independence from the corporations, foundations, NGOs and the partisan machines- 100% reliance on public sponsorship and support.
As I have repeatedly stated here at Boiling Frogs Post, to be an independent alternative is to be financially independent of corporate money and agenda-driven foundation-NGO money strings. Okay, so let's say we throw out the venues such as corporate advertisement, corporate foundation (Think Soros, Rockefeller, Ford ...) grants and funds, and government-provided tax strings aka NGO traps. Then how do we expect our alternative model to survive and sustain itself?

...

Who does this We mean? Because there are some mega-corporate players who seem very willing and ready to subsidize media: George Soros does. Rockefellers, Carnegie, Ford ... all do. That is, as long as the alternative is NOT an alternative and the information is NOT independent. You want to read or listen to what Soros or Rockefellers want you to read or listen to, then be my guest - go and pick any of many-dozens of outlets posing as alternatives. You know who I am talking about, no?

Because the only subsidization that makes an alternative real and independent is the people. That's right. It has to come from the people: we the people. There is no way around it. We can't have it both ways: demand and seek real independent alternatives, yet, not be willing to support those who qualify as such.

...
You can read the entire commentary here at Boiling Frogs Post. For my series on Mega-Corporate Foundations & Lap-Dog NGOs Click Here

I would say it is time for people to contact this pseudo alternative and ask for a refund with interest included. I knew the nature of this Wall Street enterprise right from the start. However, had I naively contributed to their enterprise, thinking of it as Pro-Public, I would be screaming for my hard-earned money back. We should all be thankful to Cryptome for this huge exposé.

And on a final note, when you look at ProPublica's gloating of their fame, you see how the ex-partners and teammates of ProPublica operators have been raving about this supposed alternative competitor-from CNN Money to the New York Times, Atlantic and Guardian. Why wouldn't they? After all, as misery loves company, so does the infesting bacteria of the government's propaganda machine.

Note: An update to this story can be read here.