Blogger Idiot Alice Broster (Bustle.com) Stupidly Asks “Where Is Adnan Ahmed Now?” In Regards To BBC Panorama Flopumentary
Dumb-Ass Alice Broster Writes Blog About Addy Agame, Without Doing Her Research And Makes Up Lies Out Of Thin Air. Alice Is A Fool And Bustle.com Is Run By A Well Known Sexist.
Apart from being a moronic dumb-ass idiot that lacks research skills and a low-down dirty liar – Alice Broster claims to be a freelance journalist, she’s actually a bum that blogs garbage! Lazy swine Alice Broster claims she has a particular interest in sex and relationships as well as air-head topics such as reality (stupid), astrology (wacky), mental health (she needs more meds) and social justice (yep, says it all, weirdo!)
Basically she’s another crazy radical feminazi brat that mixes sex / relationships with her warped modern sexist views. Alice Broster writes a flimsy plagiarised (and at times made-up) article about Adnan Ahmed, a male dating coach, however Alice touches on the same issues Addy sometimes did; i.e. she writes about, “how to go from friend zone to lover, how to have a long-term relationship, how to talk about sexual health.” We get it Alice, only feminist nutters are allowed to discuss this (not men) in your world of social justice terrorism, you hypocritical sexist witch!
What’s hilarious is that Alice Broster actually writes her filthy feminazi article for bummy loser blog site Bustle.com which is run by a fat bearded man that is a known sexist! The owner of Bustle.com claims his site is aimed at women, but was actually exposed for bashing the women’s publishing business after making stupid comments about it. All Bustle.com seems to aim at women is verbal attacks. Anyway the fat clown CEO had to publicly apologise for his sexist comments. Looks like you found your low-IQ match Alice, girl power, woo hoo!
Ant-brain Alice headlines her article stating; “where is Adnan Ahmed now? The You Tuber is the focus of a BBC Panorama special.” The BBC flop-umentary she refers to is by creep Myles Bonnar, a ball-less low status creep trying to make a name for himself, by literally being a lying snitch. Cowardly racist Myles Bonnar has disappeared into nothingness again after selling himself out for fame (he has no actual skills / talent) by trying to destroy innocent men’s lives because he’s a spineless weasel who women find repulsive.
Back to Alice Broster’s question; Alice this is why you are getting nowhere, you are a lazy researcher! Adnan Ahmed has been in custody since January 2019 over something that is not actually a crime anywhere else in the world! If you’re going to write trash about someone, don’t start your article with obvious questions everyone else knows the answers to, except you, it makes you come across as the faker you are, not to mention you look like a simpleton.
Slacker Alice continued to speak about her lazy life, stating “YouTube can be an awesome source of procrastination,” Broster you absolute bum! Moronic Alice continued; “it’s also the platform used to share tips and coach others in how to approach women and isn’t at all light hearted.” That’s not all it is Alice, but you wouldn’t know, again you don’t really do any research. It’s also about sexual health/ relationships, mental/ spiritual health, sex, self-development, overcoming social stigma and being an all round better person. A little bit like what you’re faking to do Alice! And Alice, grow up, not everything is “light-hearted,” life is not always a joke, unlike your career as a journalist.
Dim-witted Alice continued; “Ahmed labelled himself as a pick-up artist,” no he didn’t Alice you filthy little liar! Adnan Ahmed has always maintained he is not a pick-up artist, he has always said he is a dating/ life coach. It is a sad state of affairs when people are unable to talk to each other face to face, confining society further into dating apps and social media. In this era it is more normal to troll pictures and profiles online, messaging desperately and projecting a false persona to lure others in; whereas starting a random conversation with someone you find attractive face to face during the day is considered not only abnormal, but also criminal. There is more danger involved in meeting someone online than there is in meeting them in person. Plus face to face dating is a much more human and much less time consuming process, that is if Police Scotland don’t arrest you first.
Half-wit Broster continued; “used his channel to post videos of women he approached on the streets of Glasgow with his wing-men, filmed the interactions without consent, bragged about his sex life, and broadcast misogynistic monologues he described as educational.” Typical feminazi whining crap Alice. Anything a man says is “misogynistic,” would it be better if he rambled feminazi monologues full of fake virtue signalling social justice drivel like you Alice, to spare your paper-thin feelings?!
Bugger off you little Hitler. Are you jealous he could back up what he taught, you label it “brag about his sex-life,” is it because you’re so toxic Alice you have no sex-life? Is free speech not allowed in feminazi-land Alice? Not for men, especially ethnic men? Is that what you’re saying Alice? Here’s a link to a video that shows what Addy said on YouTube about women, there is nothing “misogynistic” about it Alice (do your research!)
Come on Alice, you sleazy hack nitwit, can’t you see the ladies faces are blurred out, protecting their identity. Furthermore, you failed to mention it is a dating business, not a day out with friends. And what are they “unsuspecting” of? A fun conversation, ooohhh the controversy. Additionally, the foolish journo failed to report that the majority of videos on Ahmed’s dating site are from cities around the world, not Glasgow!
Woman-child Alice blabbered on; “Ahmed was found guilty at court for acting in a threatening and abusive manner that could cause a reasonable person fear or alarm.” In reality Ahmed was wrongfully convicted by a biased jury who were influenced by an online social media campaign and horrible selective press reporting during every turn of his trial (by Scottish media scum). Even though it was clearly stated in court; “this is not a crime; being confident is not a crime, having a conversation is not a crime, witness is unreliable, asking someone out is not a crime, if you have any inclination of reasonable doubt – he’s innocent, people’s perspectives were skewed by how Ahmed was portrayed in a online/ media hate campaign.” Ahmed was actually wrongfully convicted of section 38 breach of the peace which is equivalent to raising one’s voice too loud outdoors, madness! Here’s how the jury process works in Scotland, there is no screening for racist, feminist, prejudice or psychiatric deficiencies (unlike the USA). 15 members of the public are selected at random and simply told, “don’t go on social media or media” without any enforcement or checks conducted during the trial. Ahmed’s jury was made up of 9 females and 6 males (some of which were programmed by the media to hate him, some pudgy beta males and some angry overweight feminists), the wrongful non-majority “guilty” verdict will be appealed and overturned in the next few months as no crime was actually committed! Ahmed maintains his innocence, 13 charges were dropped before the biased jury got a chance to deliberate on them. Adnan Ahmed did not receive a fair trial and is not guilty of any criminal conduct!
The jury and accusers are asked to take an “oath to God” to ensure an unbiased testimony, without individuals even being screened to see if they even believe in God (in an age of rampant atheist beliefs). It’s a ridiculous board-game style set-up, this is not justice, it’s a farce!
It is the aim of the clowns in the Scottish press to dehumanise Adnan Ahmed, objectify him, troll him and discredit his reputation to write scandalised, sensationalised lies as news stories. They did not write about his girlfriend and his mother being present to support him during the trial, as well as various male and female well-wishers and supporters dropping in and out during the proceedings. They did not report whole testimonials, only select words to demonise Ahmed further. The press even reported incidents Ahmed was found “not guilty” of after the trial finished. This is further grounds for him to sue for defamation!
Weak mousy Alice then spat; “Ahmed a dating and lifestyle coach, said what he did was educational. However, women he had approached told his trial they had been upset and intimidated.” Addy gave a statement at the trial also telling the court; “no one involved (the women) thought anything untoward was going on until their perception was changed by how I was portrayed in the online and media smear campaign in January 2019 (referring to BBC Social’s cyber-hate video). All of a sudden a few warped people said I spoke to them like it was not just a quick chat. I could have asked someone the time and they would have reported it as being uncomfortable or intimidating.” Many legal experts also agreed and re-iterated this throughout the trial.
The reptilian rat continued; “police began an investigation after his behaviour was revealed by BBC The Social.” BBC The Social hounded the Glasgow dating coach for months, he reached out to them and responded with a detailed explanation of his business model and background to his client base as well as the scientific reasoning behind this method of face to face daytime speed dating, which was in large ignored. Instead they used choice sentences to turn up the controversy in order to create a story and demonise an innocent man. The police didn’t act because of online videos, they were aware of them for years, they crumbled because of media pressure because Police Scotland is a Mickey Mouse force of hick villagers.
The sleazy dirtbag journalist continued, “in one video, titled how to f*** girls in alleyways and public toilets, the sleazy website host approaches on Buchanan Street and Sauchiehall Street while an accomplice secretly films the interaction.” Look at the criminal words the journalists use to describe a cameraman, “accomplice,” their vocabulary betrays their own secret perversions, it’s a disgusting use of language. Did the reporters see the video, was there any sex in “alleyways” or “public toilets”? No there wasn’t. And what was the result of the 3 “interactions” on Buchanan Street and Sauchiehall Street? Well they all resulted in all 3 women giving Addy Agame their number! The Scottish media fail to mention this fact because they are either lying or stupid or trying to sell a story, it’s actually all 3.
Let us explain the concept of click bait video titles to you Alice; Agame’s videos did have click bait titles, this was to attract more clientele as daytime dating videos are filmed and uploaded on an almost daily basis all across the UK and this industry is very competitive, having shock value titles is a marketing strategy to trigger more interest from customers.
Ignorant Alice again continued on the defamation route via video titles by stating; ” the YouTuber speaks about how to pick up a girl who already has a partner, how fat girls should blame themselves.” OK Alice, we’re not going to explain the meaning of click bait to you again, but we will address other aspects of your stupidity. Agame did make a video about sleeping with “a girl who already had a partner,” but the buffoon reporter Alice Broster showed her weasel tendencies yet again by failing to explain the context. We also watched this video and it is clear to see Addy is referring to girls in bad relationships, that are coming to an end or who have casual partners they are not committed to. This is totally fine between 2 consenting adults.
Alice Broster is a two-faced spineless reporter that on the one hand uses religious reformer type of biblical judgement shame tactics and on the other hand lies, fabricates and makes false accusations to sell her garbage articles. And fat girls / men should blame themselves for being fat. This total lack of personal responsibility should be addressed in a fake posturing plastic politically correct society that shifts the blame elsewhere, anywhere but on themselves.
Boring Broster continued; “he also posted recordings online of himself having sex with no clarity as to whether the women he was with consented to this.” You are a lying scumbag turd Alice, there was never any pornographic content on Addy’s channel, YouTube would not allow this and he didn’t do this. You don’t have any integrity or honour do you Alice – you even imply non-consensual sex, you horrible troll-like creature, it’s disgusting to accuse anyone of non-consensual sex Alice, you should be ashamed of yourself!
OK Alice, so Addy had consensual sex with these women, some of which was adventurous where a couple films each other, again consensual, then it is used for a dating businesses YouTube channel – with all parties involved permitting it to be shown! Also there is no actual pornographic video and all female participant’s identities are protected because their actual faces are not shown.
Adnan Ahmed even commented on the consented video content in a statement to the BBC Social in November 2018 which was ignored in order to make a video defaming him and not showing his actual views, here is a link to what Addy actually said to the press; http://redpillrights.com/bbc-social-reporter-myles-bonnar-set-up-adnan-ahmed-a-k-a-addy-agame/.
Fascist Alice Broster fumbled on; “it seems hard to believe that behaviour like Ahmed’s could be considered normal or acceptable he’s part of a winder” yes she wrote “winder” instead of “wider”, anyway; “wider community of coaches acting in a similar way.” It is normal Alice, men and women have met face to face for years, it’s totally normal and acceptable, it’s probably how your parents met Alice; instead of sitting like a cowardly weirdo on a phone trolling people’s profiles and pictures like a creep.
Addy Agame is not the founding father of “game” or the dating industry. It is a multi-million dollar industry which comes under the self-help umbrella, which started in the United States and spread all across the globe. Addy has thousands of followers, others have many more. By the sounds of it, all Alice has ever helped herself to do it reach for junk food out of the fridge and order takeaways whilst talking trash on Twitter. Sounds like another low-class Scottish feminist monster!
Alice then employs the same selectively out-of-context misquoting tactics on statements made by Street Attraction. We’re not going to quote Alice’s stupidity and weak attention /approval seeking garbage. Well-respected London dating coach Eddie Hitchens from Street Attraction stated; “everything was completely consensual, we actually help men, we help prevent rape culture to help prevent them getting involved in anything illegal or non-consensual.” Despite this true and honourable statement from Mr Hitchens, the BBC Panorama program reporter and beta-male creep (Myles Bonnar) still selectively edited out of context quotes to demonise Hitchens and his colleague Richard Hood – in order to sway public opinion towards negativity.
Alice boasted; “BBC News’ investigation into global seduction industry was published and YouTube removed over a 100 videos for violating its rules on nudity and sexual conduct.” This so called investigation was a total prejudicial one sided propaganda attack – not an investigation, (by weasel reporter Myles Bonnar to advance his failed career). http://redpillrights.com/street-attraction-eddie-hitchens-richard-hood-statement-regarding-weasel-myles-bonnar-framing-them-to-advance-his-lacklustre-career/
YouTube removed videos because of pressure from the Scottish Media, in order to avoid bad publicity, not because these videos violated any YouTube rules on nudity or sexual conduct. Thousands of these channels still exist and the dating businesses are still functioning. Ahmed’s DWLF channel had been down since January 2019 through his own direction, not because it was deleted. None of Addy Agame’s videos violated any YouTube policies!
For Street Attraction there was no police investigation, no court cases, no more media, no hate campaign – because in England people don’t care, the media are actually concerned with real issues. However in Scotland, the small minded, backward, inbred media made a circus of a non issue and are trying to influence a court of law to convict and what to convict for – this is madness and a disgrace to Scotland. It just shows how far behind England Scotland’s media actually are, the difference is astonishing! Street Attraction’s videos were more “controversial” than Addy Agame’s (both are innocent of any wrongdoing) yet Addy was remanded in custody and had to go to court, whereas globally no one else faced any legal action. This shouldn’t even be entered into a court of law, it’s a waste of tax-payer’s money!
Despite imbecile Alice Broster’s many spelling, punctuation and grammatical errors, she still manages to come across as even more stupid (even though the mis-information in her garbage article is plagiarised). Example, she stated that beta-male “no-balls” racist coward Myles Bonnar made his hate-filled/ racially prejudiced/ sexually jealous, video about Addy in “Summer 2019” – no Alice you embarrassment to bloggers worldwide, it was January 2019, do your research for goodness sake!
Alice also just makes up that Ahmed approached 2 girls and asked them the exact same things; “number, boyfriends, etc,” this is rubbish, even her slime bag counter parts in the Scottish Media reported this as 2 different selectively chosen quotes, from unreliable court testimonials.
Following is what was actually said and selectively reported by the media during Ahmed’s farce of a trial, which Alice failed to research or mention;
“The scummy toerags in the Scottish press stated; “the court heard Ahmed approached 2 schoolgirls in a secluded lane in Uddingston in 2016. They were aged 16 and 17 at the time.” The “schoolgirls” are above the legal age of consent in the UK, 17 and 16. The alleged conversations are said by the two witnesses to have took place around 10am approximately, school had already started. The witnesses stated, “they were in there last year (6th year) of high school in 2016,” to the court. This is several months before a college or university course would begin should students at the late stage of high school wish to continue further education.
The Scottish Press continued; “one witness, who was 17 at the time, said the man told her she looked pretty and asked her if she was married.” Again 17 is above legal age of consent in the UK and this allegation has not been proven. Additionally, to call someone pretty or ask their marital status, is not a criminal offence!
What the reporters conveniently left out was that the witness also said, “it was around 10am, not the usual time people go to school and the lane is attached to two main roads on either side, along with two small open grass fields at either side.” The witness also said that, “this is the common route to the train station that most people coming from that direction would take.”
They quoted the witness as saying; “he asked me if I was at school and what I was doing at school.” The press left out the fact that before this quote the witness told the jury, “he introduced himself then I told him I was at school, he made general conversation, we spoke for under three minutes and parted ways.” This is vital information! The press quoted the witness alleging, “he was asking if I had a boyfriend and I said no.” This is not a crime.
The Scottish Press continued; “she said – he asked me if I was married, as I was wearing a ring, I said no and walked away.” However no “friends” or “teachers” came to court to confirm this. In the woman’s police statement, she said she saw Mr Ahmed several times after the 2016 incident in the same area, but they never spoke again! The 2016 incident was reported to police in January 2019 after the BBC made a video defaming Ahmed’s dating business.
In regards to the second witness the reporter left out that the incident is said by the witness to have taken place again around 10am after school had already began an hour previously, in the same lane attached to two main roads that is the main route to the train station which commuters take. Both these witnesses admit to being linked and both stated that they are good friends. What the Scottish press again conveniently left out was that the witness told the court; “the school is right next to the train station and that the pair parted ways in under 3 minutes in different directions towards their separate destinations!” Mr Ahmed’s defence team have lodged an eye witness in his defence which would like to confirm there was no “intimidation” involved.
The Scottish Press also conveniently left out the testimony Adnan Ahmed gave to the court himself, Addy gave a real honest account of events stating; “it was around 10am, we were both walking on the main route to the train station, it is not a secluded lane, it’s a open main route to the train, I was walking in front of her, waved and signalled for her to take her headphones out, then said – hey you look pretty enough to go for coffee with, that is if your boyfriend is cool with it. She smiled and said, I don’t have a boyfriend. I then said I’m catching a train to the city centre. I thought she was doing the same as she wasn’t wearing a school uniform and it was outside school hours, I assumed she was 19 or 20. She then said – I’m going to school; which shocked me, I immediately asked how old are you? She said 17, I then said – hope you’re enjoying school and shook her hand to say bye, her ring struck my hand when we shook hands, I said – you hit me with your wedding ring as a parting joke, I did not ask her about her being married! The conversation lasted under a minute, I did not ask her for her number or to go for a coffee. I saw her many times around that area for 3 years and we never spoke again, she also confirmed this to the police.”
Click the following link to read about a testimonial by a female who dated Addy, who met him in the same area around the same time – http://redpillrights.com/?p=1086&preview=true
Regarding the second incident, Addy told the court; “it was around the same time and place, again 10 am, on my way to the city, no school uniform, soon as she said she was 16 I left, this girl confirmed to the court I didn’t ask for a number, she confirmed I didn’t ask her out, it was less than a minute of chat. She also said in court she saw me many times after that in the area and we never spoke again. These incidents are said to have happened in 2016 and no one came forward then. only in 2019 after how I was portrayed in the social media hate campaign (referring to BBC Social hate video against him) there was a sudden change in perspective by these girls to say passing comments were a crime that caused them discomfort. I could have asked someone for the time, after the January 2019 media uproar, they would have reported it. They both know each other well and colluded on social media. They are not being truthful! There was nothing sinister or rehearsed or pre-planned as is being suggested, it was spontaneous and quick.”
Hate-mongering liars in the Scottish press spewed more bile by stating; “lawyer, Donna Armstrong defending said; he didn’t want to cause fear or alarm.” What the reporters left out is Ahmed’s brilliant advocate Donna Armstrong also said of these incidents; “the witnesses admit the path to the train station can be walked in under 60 seconds. In our civilised society these girls are considered adults not children, you’ve seen my client talk to girls on video, it is consensual and the women involved gave positive responses, this is evidence of how his interactions are. This is the main route to the train station in Uddingston, not a secluded lane, it has fields of grass either side and the school happens to be right next to the train station. All sides have said it was during the day outside school hours. For talking sake, even if both these ladies had went on a date with him, this would be perfectly legal, this is not a crime, I implore you to find him not guilty!”
Corny lairs in The Scottish press selectively falsified more stating; “a 21-year old female broke down in court when she said Ahmed followed her through Glasgow city centre in 2016. She was 18 at the time.” The press labelled what appeared to be seconds of tears as “sobbing,” the woman then talked as normal in front of the jury. The woman was also asked why it took her 3 years to report it (in 2019) she told the court she didn’t feel there was a crime. The woman also told the court she had anxiety and mental health issues. She also said “I looked a lot better 3 years ago, I was thinner, I didn’t have tattoos on my face,” the court heard.
The Scottish press blatantly lied by saying she was “followed through Glasgow city centre,” no one said this but the slime bag hack journo rodent! This is inaccurate as the woman told the court it was over an hour later, she actually said after the initial approach in Buchanan Galleries she went shopping in various stores, called her grandmother for 45 minutes and headed to Argos in Stockwell street in Glasgow a further 35 minutes later approximately. The reporters then biasedly stated; “he tried to pull me close to him so he could kiss me, so I pushed him away.” The press left out that it was pointed out to jurors that this recollection of events contradicted her police statement, in which she did not say she was “pulled close to him.” The witness responded by saying the police lied. The witness told the court “I did not make physical contact with the man when I pushed him,” however in her police report she said she did, this was also pointed out to the jury by Ahmed’s lawyer.
The court heard, in her police statement she said the man “touched her face and tried to kiss her,” when the woman was cross examined about this contradiction in court she said she didn’t say so at first as she didn’t want to interrupt the questioning (despite being asked numerous times) then suddenly claimed both “the pull and face touch” took place. When the contradictory police statement and court statement was pointed out to the woman in front of the jurors, she sat down from a standing position in the witness box!
The Scottish press left out that the woman also said she was messaged by the man on social media, she told jurors this happened despite her giving a fake name to the man which was not linked to any of her social media accounts as she said she did not tell him any details of mutual friends. She also told the court the man wrote his details on a receipt during the initial meeting, but was still able to contact her despite not having any of her contact details and not even knowing her name! The press continued; “she walked away from him and stood with strangers to be somewhere safe.” Reporters failed to report that these alleged witnesses were not presented in court and that when the woman was asked if anyone saw this she said no, despite people being around her.
Adnan Ahmed’s excellent lawyer Donna Armstrong described this witness to the court as “she is unreliable, on record she changed her story 3 times, you can’t trust the testimony she has given.” Ahmed also took the stand to testify regarding this “unreliable” witness, Ahmed stated; “she’s lying, we met briefly on Buchanan Street, then 2 hours later on Stockwell street. I was with my friend David, he’s an eye witness. I did not try to kiss her, she gave me her number and Snapchat. She changed her story over and over. In court she said I touched her back and not face, in her police statement she said I touched her face with no mention of touching her back. In court she said she didn’t push me physically, in her police statement she said she did.” The “unreliable” woman also said she came forward in 2019 because of the BBC Social video.”
This “unreliable” woman also gave a 3rd story that did not mention any “touching of face” or “touching of back” or “pulling” or “pulling” to the BBC in January 2019, (after the BBC Social hate video dropped) which was not included in the court proceedings (only a bias unfair jury would find a man guilty of breach of the peace for such an obvious lie). Following are links to articles that prove these numerous contradictions;
Police Scotland are quoted as saying Ahmed’s behaviour was “predatory and would cause fear and alarm”, after succumbing to media pressure from aggressive online feminists and blood thirsty journalists. Initially when BBC The Social’s video degrading Adnan Ahmed went viral, Police Scotland are quoted as saying “we cannot follow up on this as there is no actual crime to investigate, no crime has been committed.” They were quick to change their tune after BBC The Social’s video gained millions of views and began a witch-hunt amongst the public because of how it was edited and how it portrayed Adnan Ahmed as a demonic sexual caricature, rather than the responsible understanding life coach that he is.
It’s totally bizarre and shockingly worrying that a country’s police force can’t withstand pressure from online trolls and can be manipulated so easily by faceless crazies on the internet. Yes, Scotland is a very small country, but that does not excuse the stupid backward policing tactics used for this matter. There should never have been an arrest in the first place. The police were aware of Ahmed’s dating business 3 years prior to BBC The Social’s hate fuelled video falsely demonising him. They spoke to Mr Ahmed about it on a number of occasions in casual conversation. Both male and female officers approved of it. There are phone calls and written police reports to confirm this.
Adnan Ahmed worked in conjunction with the police, as his job as a Criminal Justice Practitioner made this inevitable. Ahmed’s behaviour was never “predatory”. He ran an online dating business on YouTube for all to see; his clients, video demonstrations and spontaneous conversations with any women were all during the day on well populated busy city centre streets. He wasn’t hiding anything, so how can his actions be described as predatory, shameful or dangerous?
Police Scotland are supposed to investigate matters neutrally and without prejudice. Instead they contributed to the media mayhem by making comments defaming a man who is not guilty of an actual crime, but was charged, indicted and remanded regardless. The police are now trying to fish for a conviction to cover their mistakes and to not face legal action themselves. At the time of writing this, Ahmed has been on remand for the past 6 months, he has been held in custody, untried and without the option of bail since January 2019.
The Sheriff Court indictment has been designed in such a way to convict Adnan Ahmed on a technicality of Scottish Law (Moorov/ corroboration) rather than using substantial hard evidence, because there is none. Ahmed is not permitted to present vital evidence that proves his innocence because of Scottish court laws that protect prosecution witnesses, even if they are lying.
Check out our next blog post here: http://redpillrights.com/the-deception-game-by-bitch-boy-myles-bonnar-the-man-child-who-made-a-bbc-flop-unmentary-defaming-dating-coaches-in-order-to-kick-start-his-failed-career-as-a-reporter/