And if you think the "corporate media" blacked out this story, you obviously aren't reading the newspaper.

Well YOU obviously aren't reading the blog entries -- did you not see where it said that NewStandard helped break the story -- thereby implying general non-coverage prior to NewStandard's article?

Oh my god! You also put "corporate media" in scare quotes too! What a satirical little genius you are. You have powerfully refuted the thesis that dominant mass media institutions are major capitalist corporations selling upper-scale audiences to other major capitalist corporations(advertisers), thereby biasing in the interests of concentrated private power the media product. I collapse in awe of your brilliant arguments against this idea.

"By the way, you are aware that Znet is incorporated, right? Thus, Znet is "corporate." Ooooh, the evil."

Don't play semantics games you pompous knob, you know perfectly well what people mean what they use the term. If you don't, I feel extremely sorry for your mentally deprived condition, and would direct you to my above comments.

if you think that Chavez and his political motivations for offering discounted or free fuel is a background story, you are woefully ignorant to the motivations for Chavez

The stupidity never ends, as you choose to regale us with an utter non-sequitor. Obviously one does not need to be "woefully ignorant to the motivations for Chavez" to regard them as a background story to the main story of the rejection of discounted Venezuelan fuel. Apparently you do not comprehend elementary logic.

And Chavez' motives are perfectly obvious to everyone who knows anything about the topic. Namely, to build sympathy among the citizens of the country whose leadership openly supported a military coup against his elected government, and is presently lavishing financial aid on groups that supported it - a coup which before being overturned declared the rescinding of the 1999 Venezuelan constitution, introduced under the "tyrant Chavez", that enshrined such tyrannical things as proportional representation, recalls and direct democracy (citizen-iniated referenda and law making), which greatly improved the Venezuelan political system.

There is also, of course, Chavez' well known general pan-Americanism and his desire to raise hemispheric political consciousness in a preferred ideological direction.

Wow, if you think that Chavez and his political motivations for offering discounted or free fuel is a background story, you are woefully ignorant to the motivations for Chavez to make the offer and why this is news in the first place. And if you think the "corporate media" blacked out this story, you obviously aren't reading the newspaper. By the way, you are aware that Znet is incorporated, right? Thus, Znet is "corporate." Ooooh, the evil.

Every media outlet in the world is biased. What policy, political parties, people(s) and countries you support or do not support, is based on what you report, what you don't report, and how you report it. I think it's obvious for pretty much anybody who and what the corporate media support. Not surprisingly this is their owners, ie big capital interests and the elites. TNS is different. Like Z and numerous other outlets they are not on the side of corporate interests, but on the side of the public. If you find this troublesome I assume you also are on the side of corporate interests. It's the only rational conclusion really. Pangaea Oslo, Norway

Commenter #2 above raises a number of questions but none of them seem to address anything of substance. I will try to answer #2's questions because I'm in a good mood... I don't think TNS can "fail in the market" it explicitly rejects. TNS could easily raise its revenue by incorporating banner and google ads. It would, however, lose readers (like me, for example). An internet news source isn't "free" if its readers are subjected to advertising. People pay one way or another. And one shouldn't confuse opinion and commentary sites with hard news. Maybe some people are willing to pay because they want their news ad-free. Perhaps others are interested in supporting the economic model of TNS. Others may find the reporting and writing simply better than elsewhere. There are plenty of reasons why users should have the option of financially supporting TNS. As for bias, TNS seems to take the side of social, environmental, and diplomatic sanity, which is fine by me. On to Chavez: that a background political figure in a news story happens to hold a different ideological persuasion from you should not define its news worthiness. Correct? The story wasn't about Chavez, and if TNS blacked out the story (as corporate news organizations chose to) it wouldn't be much of a news organization. "Poor people ride for free." Seems like a good idea to me. I can't really make sense of that last paragraph. Anyone? Keir The Hague

you are so afraid of chavez, tell me what other fear you have, are you afraid you will have to convert to islam? let me guess, the Islamist are right at your door, they want to break the door, they are coming with chavez and you feel you must call GWB so he save the nation from threats that do not exists right? Rudy, does the CIA have a greater ability to lead an operation such as 9/11 over Al-Quaida?

Let's say TNS doesn't raise the needed funds to stay in operation - what does that say? That it failed in the market? That there are so many free news sources on the net that paying for one doesn't make sense? That people aren't interested in a news source that is blatantly biased versus one that is indirectly biased? Take for instance the above linked article about Chicago's refusal to accept free fuel from the tyrant Chavez (how's that for blatant?). Chavez put conditions on the acceptance of the fuel: poor people ride for free. Was Chicago's rejection of the condition politics or just plain smart for avoiding a huge headache and the further growth of government? Why should one class of people ride for free and another not? Who determines the income cut off? Who administers the cut off? Who monitors the program? How long does the program last? When you decry "corporate media," what you're really saying is "they aren't biased in a manner in which I approve" and "The people are not smart enough to draw their own conclusions and need a source to draw a conclusion for them." It's ironic, you're asking for the dumbing down of the media and its readers, but only towards a political end that you find acceptable.

Thanks for bringing this up. I'm assuming this will make the top page at ZNet soon. Right? Meanwhile everyone with a blog, or just an internet connection, should be spreading the news. Along with making/increasing donations, making TNS indispensable for more people is essential (and not just for its own survival). Keir The Hague