First Look Media

First Look Media First Look Media is a new model media company born out of today’s digital culture and devoted to supporting independent voices across all platforms, from f
(5)

A bold, independent spirit defines everything we do at First Look Media – from journalism that holds the powerful accountable, to arts & entertainment that shapes our culture. Launched by eBay founder and philanthropist Pierre Omidyar, First Look Media is built on the belief that freedom of expression and of the press, and fiercely independent perspectives, are vital to a healthy democracy and a vibrant culture. From The Intercept, dedicated to fearless, adversarial journalism to Topic, our Academy Award™-winning (Spotlight) entertainment studio, we develop, produce and finance content for all screens including feature films, television, digital series and podcasts. First Look is also home to Field of Vision, the filmmaker-driven documentary unit, and the Nib, a site for the most provocative satirical and political comics.

Mission: Provocative, independent storytelling – from journalism that confronts powerful institutions to arts & entertainment that shapes our culture.

First Look Media is proud to take part in #StopHateForProfit by halting our paid ad spend on Facebook and its platforms ...
07/15/2020

First Look Media is proud to take part in #StopHateForProfit by halting our paid ad spend on Facebook and its platforms during July to send a clear signal that they must stop spreading hate and misinformation.

Supporting and amplifying underrepresented voices is at the core of our mission and is something we will continue to do. We proudly stand together with so many other businesses to put people over profit.
https://www.stophateforprofit.org/productrecommendations
stophateforprofit.org

First Look Media and the Press Freedom Defense Fund are proud to join the #HoldTheLine Coalition as a founding member to...
07/09/2020
Petition : #HoldTheLine: Sign to support Maria Ressa and independent media in the Philippines | Reporters without borders

First Look Media and the Press Freedom Defense Fund are proud to join the #HoldTheLine Coalition as a founding member to support Maria Ressa and Independent Media in the Philippines.

You can sign the petition here: https://rsf.org/en/free-mariaressa

An internationally celebrated Filipino-American journalist, Maria Ressa is best known for two decades covering South East Asia for CNN and founding the multi-award winning Philippines news website Rappler. On 15 June 2020, Ressa was convicted of “cyber-libel,” alongside former Rappler colleague ...

George Floyd. Michael Brown. Ahmaud Arbery. Breonna Taylor. Eric Garner. Trayvon Martin and too many others.  Black peop...
06/02/2020

George Floyd. Michael Brown. Ahmaud Arbery. Breonna Taylor. Eric Garner. Trayvon Martin and too many others. Black people have been victims of structural racism and police brutality for centuries. It must change. Everyone must work to make it better.

First Look Media is an organization committed to driving positive societal change. One of our core tenets is to shine a light on social injustices. We will continue to shine that light on injustice and abuses of power through our journalism, film, documentaries, TV, podcasts, and our Press Freedom Defense Fund. We will continue to make noise, make people uncomfortable, and push for change. We will use our platforms in the most powerful, impactful ways possible. Black Lives Matter.

04/17/2020
Topic

If you missed the premiere of The Second City Presents: The Last Show Left on Earth, you can catch it on Topic now!

Tune in next week for a brand new episode.

Watch the series premiere of The Second City Presents: The Last Show Left on Earth in full now! Join us for some laughs with host Jack McBrayer, musical guest Jeff Tweedy of Wilco and the legendary Fred Willard.

Come back next Thursday at 9PM EST/6PM PST for episode 2.

Need a laugh? Topic teamed up with The Second City for The Second City Presents: The Last Show Left on Earth, a weekly s...
04/16/2020

Need a laugh? Topic teamed up with The Second City for The Second City Presents: The Last Show Left on Earth, a weekly sketch comedy series. The first episode will be hosted by 30 Rock alum, Jack McBrayer and feature Wilco singer Jeff Tweedy!

Tune in tonight at 9PM EST/6PM PST for the premiere.


Watch it on Topic's page.

Shoutout to Reza Aslan's new Topic series 'Rough Draft' in LA Weekly.
12/17/2019
Reza Aslan: The Multi-Hyphenate Narrativist Blazing His Own Trail - LA Weekly

Shoutout to Reza Aslan's new Topic series 'Rough Draft' in LA Weekly.

Aslan is first and foremost a progressive scholar of world religions and author of helpful considerations of religious history. But increasingly, his writing has turned toward screenplays. Plus, the world has been encountering him as an on-air personality, partner in a busy media studio and the face...

Vulture names Headlong: Running From COPS among the best podcasts of 2019.
12/09/2019
The Best Podcasts of 2019

Vulture names Headlong: Running From COPS among the best podcasts of 2019.

In a noisy year for the medium, some of the best projects turned out to be personal, individualistic, and quiet.

Topic films The Climb, Dream Horse, The Nowhere Inn, The Fight, and Mucho Mucho Amor are all going to Sundance Film Fest...
12/04/2019
2020 SUNDANCE FILM FESTIVAL: 118 FEATURE FILMS ANNOUNCED

Topic films The Climb, Dream Horse, The Nowhere Inn, The Fight, and Mucho Mucho Amor are all going to Sundance Film Festival!

Drawn From a Record High of 15,100 Submissions Across The Program, Including 3,853 Features, Selected Films Represent 27 Countries

Topic GM Ryan Chanatry joins Digital Trends Live to discuss Topic's streaming launch. Watch here:
11/21/2019
Digital Trends Live: Join Us Live Every Weekday | Digital Trends

Topic GM Ryan Chanatry joins Digital Trends Live to discuss Topic's streaming launch. Watch here:

Tech moves too fast to watch last week’s news. So watch it unfold live on Digital Trends! Every weekday, join us live as we digest what’s happening now, grill guests, show off the hottest products, and let our expert editors take you behind the scenes in our gadget nerve center. Ask questions. C...

PAHOKEE is an intimate cinematic yearbook of life for high schoolers in rural southern Florida. See it at DOC NYC on Nov...
10/30/2019

PAHOKEE is an intimate cinematic yearbook of life for high schoolers in rural southern Florida. See it at DOC NYC on Nov. 13th: docnyc.net/film/pahokee/

Congratulations to Topic for IDA nominations in the Best Audio Documentary and Best Short Form Series categories!
10/24/2019
Female Directors Dominate in IDA Documentary Awards Nominations

Congratulations to Topic for IDA nominations in the Best Audio Documentary and Best Short Form Series categories!

Six of the 10 Best Feature nominees, and all of the films nominated in the new Best Director category, are directed or co-directed by women

Kate Kunath and Topic made the International Documentary Association award short list for 'Show Me The Way'.
10/11/2019
IDA Documentary Awards 2019: Shortlists

Kate Kunath and Topic made the International Documentary Association award short list for 'Show Me The Way'.

Announcing the shortlists for Best Feature and Best Short categories. The 2019 Awards will be presented during a ceremony at Paramount Studios in Los Angeles on Saturday, December 7.

Birds of North America was featured in WBHM.
09/30/2019
Drawing a More Diverse Crowd to the Outdoors | WBHM 90.3

Birds of North America was featured in WBHM.

There’s a growing number of outdoor enthusiasts who say nature isn’t just for white people. They want recreation groups to do more to attract people of color. The Birmingham Audubon Society organized a trip where black birders led a group to Hale County.

Topic Studios' LEAVE NO TRACE is #57 on The Guardian's the 100 best films of the 21st century list! https://go.topic.com...
09/16/2019
The 100 best films of the 21st century

Topic Studios' LEAVE NO TRACE is #57 on
The Guardian's the 100 best films of the 21st century list!
https://go.topic.com/2lU4AED

Gangsters, superheroes, schoolkids, lovers, slaves, peasants, techies, Tenenbaums and freefalling astronauts – they’re all here in our countdown of cinema’s best movies since 2000

First Look Media's cover photo
07/03/2019

First Look Media's cover photo

Topic
06/24/2019

Topic

Here are some shots from our event this past Saturday in New York, where John Cameron Mitchell, Jason Ward, Sam Green, Britt Julious, and a bunch more great storytellers told amazing stories about sound and music. Thanks to all who came! (📸: Mengwen Cao)

Congratulations to The Intercept!
06/20/2019
Edward R. Murrow Award Winners Announced

Congratulations to The Intercept!

The Radio Television Digital News Association is out with its 2019 Edward R. Murrow Awards, which honor outstanding achievements in electronic journalism. Read the list of winners below. The hardwa…

Topic
06/04/2019
Topic

Topic

Music lifts us up in ways nothing else can. This month we have stories about music moving spirits, moving units, and moving forward change. Get in tune.

Address

114 5th Ave
New York, NY
10011

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when First Look Media posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Videos

Nearby media companies


Comments

THE TRUTH CONCERNING ALLEGED RISING INEQUALITY IN THE USA Background It is a fact that inequalities exist in America but they are almost always solidly rooted in immutable psychological traits such as IQ, industriousness, honesty, creativity, courage, etc. [See: AEI Monograph (1998) "Income Inequality and IQ" ]. Take IQ. According to the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth by age 28 to 36, the top 10% in cognitive ability have a median earned income 4.8 times the median for the bottom 10%. Indeed, "The Bell Curve" (1994) in part one, "The Emergence of a Cognitive Elite", found that IQ is one of the best single predictors of job productivity. For proof that all psychological traits are firmly riveted in nature and not in nurture one need only read Prof. Robert Plomin's new book, "Blueprint: How DNA Makes Us Who We Are", (Nov. 2018) which is the most recent scholarly work on the psychology of human genetics. In "Blueprint" Plomin, one of the very top experts in the field of behavioral genetics asserts that "A century of genetic research shows that DNA differences inherited from our parents are the consistent life-long sources of our psychological individuality -- the "Blueprint" that makes us who we are." Prof. Plomin also reports that "... genetics explain more of our psychological differences -- not just mental health and school achievement but all psychological traits, from personality to intellectual abilities. Nature, not nurture is what makes us who we are." [Note: The Dec. 14, 2018 issue of Scientific American contains a very brief essay by Prof. Plomin titled "In the Nature-Nurture War, Nature Wins." and in it, Plomin admits that "Environmental influences are important … too, but they are largely unsystematic, unstable and idiosyncratic -- in a word, RANDOM." (Emphasis added) Plomin continues "These findings call for a radical rethink about parenting, education and the events that shape our lives. It also provides a novel perspective on equal opportunity, social mobility and the structure of society."] In spite of this contrary scientific evidence that inequality is not rooted in economic factors, countless left-leaning economists, law professors, and political scientists insist, without foundation, that capitalism is the source for much of our nation's inequality. One needs only to read Prof. Joseph Stiglitz's "The Price of Inequality" (2013) or Prof. Thomas Piketty's tome, "Capital in the 21st Century" (2014) or Prof. Thomas Shapiro's "Toxic Inequality" (2017) and their calls for redistribution to understand that their driving motivation is a search for almost totally equal economic outcomes. They undertake this crusade in spite of the fact that even Lord Keynes believed that efforts to fight inequality hinder economic growth. [See: Foundation for Economic Education Aug. 11, 2018]. Even the IMF got it wrong. In a 2015 report titled "Causes and Consequences of Inequality," this organization errantly asserted that "Widening inequality is the defining challenge of our time. In advanced economies, the gap between rich and poor is at its highest level in decades." Interestingly, this barrage of unsupported claims prompted an author like Edward Conrad to produce a book, "The Upside of Inequality" in which he mistakenly states that capitalism is a cause of inequality but asserts that the overall impact is positive in that growth (rising GDP) has markedly improved everyone's standard of living. But the unifying and driving force exhibited by all of these millenarian collectivists is a desire to eliminate economic inequality of outcomes. This deep-seated human drive for equality likely stems from our ancestral days living as small hunter-gatherer bands that wandered the several continents (except Antarctica) for over 100,000 years. Sharing the "wealth" was a possible adaptation that probably helped to ensure the survival of the group. Individualism likely played a subservient role to the collectivism of each clan. Of course, these people all lived on the edge of starvation at a level of servile poverty that is almost unimaginable today. [See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-gatherer ]. Then about ten millennia ago humans mastered the science of agriculture which resulted in a more stable food supply and as a consequence population levels of our lineage began to rise. But, our farming forebears still lived in a condition of almost total abject poverty. [See: http://j-bradford-delong.net/TCEH/1998_Draft/World_GDP/Estimating_World_GDP.html ]. This state of affairs continued uninterrupted for almost 10,000 years until the advent of capitalism (individualism) in central England about 1765. [Note: Highly regarded economic historian, Prof. Deirdre McCloskey, places this critical conversion in the northern Netherlands roughly 100 years earlier but the result is the same.] With the development of capitalism the Industrial Revolution began, GDP surged ahead and human-kinds overall levels of economic well-being soared, increasing according to some estimates by up to 5,000% at the turn of the 21st century. [See: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/KnowledgeBank/how-has-growth-changed-over-time ]. In all of history, things had never gotten better for everyone any faster. [See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Divergence.] The following graph shows this remarkable upward trend in life expectancy, GDP per capita, energy capture, democratic governance, and war-making capacity along with a remarkable decline in extreme poverty. Moreover, in a 2001 essay titled "The Law of Accelerating Returns", Ray Kurzweil opined that the rate of technological change is exponential. [See: https://www.kurzweilai.net/the-law-of-accelerating-returns ]. Thus the sharp upward trend in these measures of well-being has continued and even accelerated since 2000 and it is not unreasonable to believe that the shift of ever-improving living standards and the rest will stretch further into the future. [See: https://fattailedandhappy.com/rise-of-asia-global-growth-since-2000/ ]. Regrettably, ever since Jean Jacques Rousseau wrote his famous essay, "Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men" in 1754 some (many?) collectivist scribes have sought to return our species to its hunter-gatherer roots when everyone was equally hungry and always desperately poor. [See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseau ]. As evidence of this ill-advised tendency, every day I read an almost endless array of pro-socialist and anti-capitalist articles in a variety of newspapers, magazines, and web sites and almost all of these focus on alleged rising levels of inequality. A single recent example should suffice. In a June 6, 2019 article in the NY Times, titled "The World is a Mess. We Need Fully Automated Luxury Communism", Aaron Bastini insisted that "We live in a world of low growth, low productivity and low wages, of climate breakdown and collapse of democratic policies. A world where billions, … live in poverty. A world defined by inequality." Next, I ask myself -- How could so many bright well-informed authors be so apparently unaware of the actual realities concerning the facts regarding the imagined phenomenon of increasing income and wealth inequality in the US? [See: https://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/0691143617/ref=acr_dpx_hist_3??ie=UTF8&filterByStar=three_star&showViewpoints=0 ]. These unfounded claims of growing income inequality and the exaggerated concentration of wealth in the US due to capitalism are easily rebutted. Many left-leaning economists are at heart closet "levelers" who favor more equal economic outcomes and these same people therefor support almost any move towards socialism. They thus espouse every misleading set of statistics that they can find in an effort to attain their goal. This is often called "data mining" and it is not useful. In his 1954 book, "How to Lie With Statistics" author Darrell Huff coined the word "statisticulation" by which he meant "statistical manipulation" which also describes very well the work of these many current day egalitarians. For example, some socialist commentators have contended that with a slew of data, Thomas Piketty confirmed what those on the left had long believed: that extreme inequality and the clustering of wealth are the natural outcomes of capitalism. [See: https://newrepublic.com/article/154186/bernie-sanders-democratic-socialist-failure-envision-world-without-capitalism ]. But, income inequality in the US has not risen in the last 60 years and the US Census Bureau data (along with Kitov & Kitov 2012) [See: https://www.academia.edu/4383266/The_Dynamics_of_Personal_Income_Distribution_and_Inequality_in_the_United_States ] prove it. Since 1960 the Bureau's Gini coefficient (one of many important measures that almost all economists use to track inequality) of income for "All US Persons" (individuals) has remained almost totally flat. [See: Table PINC-01 Selected Characteristics in the March Supplement which is published each year by the US Census Bureau as part of its Annual Demographic Surrey or visit https://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/search?q=gini#.XR4aendFwuU ]. Thus there has been virtually no increase in US income inequality for individuals for six decades. [See: https://voxeu.org/article/human-capital-and-income-inequality ]. Also, most collectivist writers do not know that Prof. Piketty in 2015 quietly recanted much (most?) of what he wrote in "Capital in the 21st Century". [See: "About Capital in the 21st Century" American Economic Review 2015, 105(5): 48-53 or go to http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20151060 ]. What has been skewing upwards is the US Census Bureau's Gini coefficient for "US Households" (and "US Families"). [Note: In 2009 Prof. Robert Gordon found that "The rise in American inequality has been exaggerated both in magnitude and timing." See: https://www.nber.org/papers/w15351 thereby confirming the assertion that Alan Reynolds made at the Western Economics Association's July 2007 meeting that "... inequality in income, wages, consumption, and wealth among the US population as a whole does not appear to have increased significantly since 1988." See: https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/has-us-income-inequality-really-increased ]. But nearly 100% of any increases have been caused by sociological (and not economic) factors (i.e. alterations in the size, make-up, and constitution of both US households and families.) For context, any divergence of these two data sets from the stable status of the statistics for "All US Persons" (individuals) began about 1970. [See: https://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/search?q=gini#.XTMahXdFwuU ]. But as Stanford economist, Thomas Sowell, put it in his book, "Economic Facts and Fallacies" (2008), "Income comparisons using household statistics are far less reliable indicators of standards of living than individual income data because households vary in size while an individual always means one person." Later Prof. Sowell continued "Household income data can, therefore, be very misleading, whether comparing income differences as of a given time or following changes in income over the years." Perhaps a single specific example of this household trend will help to dismiss the lefts baseless trope regarding rising income inequality in the US. If a young woman in the 1950s became pregnant out of wedlock she almost always married the father thereby forming one new household (and one new family) with one caregiver and one breadwinner. Twenty years later mounting numbers of young women began bearing children without any serious intention of matrimony (today this figure in the US stands at 39.8%) [See: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/unmarried-childbearing.htm ] and this results in the formation of two new families (and two new households) one with a caregiver but no breadwinner and another with only a breadwinner. Both of these freshly formed households (or families) are each poorer than the combined single household (or family). Obviously, this emerging cultural (not economic) change began shifting the income inequality for households (and families) upward. There are many other sociological (but not economic) trends that have resulted in similar skewing of the household (and family) data. These include (but are not limited to) elevated levels of divorce which split one household (and family) into two needier units; increasing numbers of elderly women who outlive their spouses; rising instances of assortative mating (i.e. In the 1950s a doctor often married his nurse but today she marries another doctor or lawyer which results in a very high two-income household and family. Indeed, according to Greenwood et.al. (2014), the US Gini coefficient in 2005 would have fallen from the observed 0.43 to 0.34 if all US mating had been random. And the authors of this research thus concluded that "... assortative mating is important for income inequality.") [See: https://www.nber.org/papers/w19829?utm_campaign=ntw&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ntw ] [Note: For a contrary point of view see:https://www.nber.org/papers/w20271.pdf ]; and numerous other sociological kinetics which markedly raises the Gini coefficients for both families and households but not for individuals. In their 2016 book, "Unequal Gains", Profs. Lindert and Williamson begin by dismissing in a footnote the US Census Bureau's data as "faulty official numbers" but later admit that the racial and gender inequality gaps have been converging since 1970 along with a declining gap in the North-South levels of inequality. But these two authors are unable to reconcile why these American "countercurrents" are moving in the opposite direction of their "new" measure of inequality which is the "tax unit" research of Piketty & Saez (2001). [See: https://www.nber.org/papers/w8467 ]. Lindert and Williamson revealed their true colors in "Unequal Gains'" last paragraph. "If there were any fulcrum at which historical insight might be applied to move inequality, it would be political. As we have said, no nation has used up all its political opportunities for leveling income without harming economic growth." Even worse, these two liberal economists asserted that "The South was the richest of the colonies, and even its slaves had higher living standards than did the poorest in England." Most collectivist economists (including LIndert & Williamson) always examine inequality using only pre-tax data and before taking into consideration any government transfer payments which each highly distort the real situation in America. The following graph depicts the true status: [See: https://www.cato.org/blog/different-look-after-tax-income-inequality ]. This certainly is no picture of rising income inequality in the US. For context, one should also note the following: According to the IRS data from 1992 to 2014 over 70% of "tax units" (a very close proxy for families) were among the top 400 individual US taxpayers for only a single year while only 3% were among this top tier for ten years or more. [See: https://taxfoundation.org/turnover-among-richest-americans/ ]. Thus, most US taxpayers had ultra-high incomes only one time in their careers. Also, in 2017 a US household needed $421,926 to be in the top 1%. [ See: https://www.epi.org/multimedia/unequal-states-of-america/#/United%20States ]. This is a very handsome sum but far less than many would imagine. Turning the alleged accumulation of wealth due to capitalism. This misleading claim made by many collectivists also lacks important framing. Augustus Caesar was worth an estimated $4.6 trillion but economic historians name Mansa Musa I (1280 - 1337) of the Mali Empire in sub-Saharan Africa as the richest man of all time. Jakob Fugger (1459 - 1525), a German merchant, amassed a fortune worth an estimated $400 billion in today's dollars more than 250 years before the onset of capitalism. Today the world's richest man is Jeff Bezos with a net worth of about $125 billion. He is followed by Bernard Arnault with just under $108 billion and Bill Gates at slightly more than $107 billion. [See: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/arnault-overtakes-gates-to-become-worlds-second-richest-person/ar-AAEqfUQ?ocid=spartandhp ]. Basil II, Alan the Red, Nicholas II, William the Conqueror, and Muammar al-Qaddafi, along with all of the "Robber Barons" of the late 19th and early 20th centuries were also far wealthier than Mr. Bezos in US dollars adjusted for inflation. [See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wealthiest_historic_figures ]. As an aside and for further context, several large family fortunes have been divided by inheritance. The combined Walton family fortune today stands at $191 billion, the Mars estate has a total worth of $127 billion and the Koch family wealth is now $125 billion. [See: The Jewish Journal reporting from Bloomberg Aug. 11, 2019]. In the May 15, 2014 edition of Foreign Affairs magazine in an article titled "The Inequality Illusion" economists Wojciech Kopczuk and Allison Schrager reported that "... there is limited evidence that wealth inequality has actually worsened in the US in the last 30 years." A year later Zucman & Saez in a scholarly paper, ("Wealth Inequality in the US Since 1913") found that wealth inequality was not rising quickly below the top 0.1%. [See:https://berkeley.edu/~saez/saez-zucmanNBER14wealth.pdf ]. According to Harvard professor and economist, Martin Feldstein, this increase in the wealth statistics among the top 0.1% was due almost entirely to the 0.01%'s conversion from reporting their taxes as "C" corporations to "sub-S" corporations after the 1986 tax act. [See:https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/anti-piketty.pdf ]. Thus, there has been little or no concentration of wealth in the US since 1970. For some unexplained reason many socialists confine their analysis of inequality to measures of income (annual earnings) and wealth (accumulated economic assets less debt) thereby ignoring many other important benchmarks (mortality, morbidity, literacy, consumption, gender, race, etc.) and one might assume that these other unmentioned norms may not support their collectivist claims of inequality that is skewing out of control. [See: https://mortality.org/ ]. The simple truth is that these other metrics are both: getting better fast and converging while not diverging as many on the left would have us believe. [See:https://www.un.org/esa/desa/papers/2005/wp2_2005.pdf ]. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has firmly asserted that "Economic growth is the most powerful instrument for reducing poverty and improving the quality of life in developing countries." [See: www.oecd.org/derec/unitedkingdom/40700982.pd ]. Of course, many collectivists want to halt the expansion of human economic well-being asserting that things are good enough today. [See: https://www.amazon.com/Lets-Get-Rid-growth-Globalization/dp/1484036557/ref=sr_1_28_sspa?keywords=capitalism&qid=1564929398&s=books&sr=1-28-spons&psc=1 ].Thus, any effort that might slow economic growth via socialism would be a virtual "death sentence" for our planet's needy. Interestingly, Michael O'Sullivan in his new book "The Leveling" insists that while globalization has ended the next major trend will be a worldwide equalizing of wealth, income, consumption, etc. In further support of the OECD's assertion Prof. Raghuram Rajan, an economist at the University of Chicago and former chief economist for the IMF, in his latest book, "The Third Pillar" (2019) reports that "We are surrounded by plenty. Humanity has never been richer as technologies of production have improved steadily over the last two hundred fifty years. It is not just developed countries that have grown wealthier; billions across the developing world have moved from stressful poverty to a comfortable middle-class existence in the span of a generation. Income is more evenly spread across the world than at any other time in our lives. For the first time in history, we have it in our power to eradicate hunger and starvation everywhere." This is capitalism's real historical economic record. Moreover, the editors of The Economist magazine on May 23, 2019, opined that "Capitalism is improving workers' lot farther than it has in years … (and) … the zeitgeist has lost touch with the data." They added that the bleak picture painted by the left "... is at odds with reality." In other words, many news outlets are apparently not reporting the economic truth about capitalism. Indeed, Prof. Richard Baldwin, president of the Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR) in London, in his 2016 book, "The Great Convergence" notes that "From 1820 to 1990 the share of world income going to today's wealthy nations soared from 20% to 70% and that share has recently been plummeting. Today, their share is now back to where it was in 1914." According to Dr. Baldwin "This new trend … is surely the dominant economic fact of the last two or three decades." This leads one to inquire -- Why does this critical new trend go virtually unreported? Summary One should compare all of these facts with socialism's record of rendering almost everyone to be only equally poor. Thus, liberals imagined emphasis on rising inequality in the USA due in-part to capitalism represents one of the world's biggest economic hoaxes.