U.S. to Invade Newsweek

Seeking to further blur the distinction between news organizations and terrorist organizations, Newsweek recently claimed responsibility for 15 deaths caused by violent protests in Afghanistan. Bowing to pressure from the Bush administration, the magazine claimed responsibility not only for reporting on rumored abuses at Guantanamo Bay, but also for the misuse of the article by militants and for the poverty, instability, and prolonged occupation that made it possible for these militants to foment violence so easily.

Extremists within the news organization have threatened to cause more deaths unless a list of demands are met. Among these demands, editors are asking that Rush Limbaugh go on a diet, that Sean Hannity hire a fact-checker, and that Dan Rather be released from the maximum-security facility where he is serving out his retirement.

When informed of these demands, chief negotiator Scot McClellan said, "There are radicals at Newsweek?"

President Bush initially responded with plans to invade the magazine, but after pressure from the National Press Club, the President has agreed not to attack Newsweek unless the magazine fails to prove that it possesses no more stories of mass destruction.

Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice is currently lobbying other news organizations to garner support for the hostile takeover. In a virtuosic display of diplomatic acumen, Rice has threatened to withhold newsworthy information from recalcitrant news magazines and, if that doesn't work, to put these organizations on a watch list, or, where applicable, to withhold U.S. aid.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in a now famous speech, divided the media into new news, including Fox, Clear Channel, and the National Enquirer, and old news, including PBS, the BBC, and the evidence of one's own senses.

News mogul Rupert Murdoch has announced his fair and balanced support for the takeover. Time Magazine, which is owned by the same company that controls Newsweek, did not offer direct support to the operation, but has agreed under pressure to let the U.S. military march troops through their offices.

Despite this, Time has claimed neutrality in this situation, fooling no one. "Time is on my side," announced Rolling Stones frontman Mick Jagger, although Rolling Stone has yet to take a side. U.S. News and World Report has threatened to use its veto power if the administration gets its requested support. "We've always had a conservative slant," said a U.S. News spokesman, "but this is @#!% ridiculous."

In an attempt to change its image, the Bush Administration has promised that plans for after the takeover will not be half-baked. "Following the liberation of Newsweek," says Rice, "our plans for reconstruction will be fully baked. We will install a democratically elected editorial board of our choosing, and we have every expectation of inviting the reconstructed Newsweek to take its place in the Ministry of Truth^TM.

When questioned about the constitutionality of this maneuver, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales assured reporters that freedom of the press does not apply to international news stories.

In other news, Rupert Murdoch's New York Post and The Sun recently provoked violent protests in Iraq by publishing photographs of Saddam Hussein in his underwear.

When asked if he had any chance to respond, President Bush said, "You know, I don't think a photo inspires murders." Asked whether this was inconsistent with his Newsweek policy, the President said, "You know, some things have a deeper impact. . . . Like they say, a word is worth a thousand pictures."

By David Sklar
ONLINE EXTRA July 2005