Latest Articles [latest first]
Hard Censorship Hits the Internet By Paul Craig Roberts October 08, 2017
US Media Credibility Collapses
According to this report [https://www.naturalnews.com/2017-10-06-youtube-moves-to-shut-down-all-independent-media-coverage-of-las-vegas-shooting-desperate-maneuver-to-protect-the-official-narrative.html], YouTube has shut down all independent media coverage of the Las Vegas shooting in a desperate maneuver to protect the official narrative.
I am aware of books by former insiders that describe the CIA’s alliance with members of the media. When I was a member of the congressional staff, I was warned of the Washington Post’s collaboration with the CIA. And we have the case of Udo Ulfkotte, whose book, “Purchased Journalism,” was a best seller in Germany, but the English translation was yanked from the market. Ulfkotte, an editor with one of Germany’s main newspapers, wrote that he and most European journalists post articles handed to them by the CIA.
The way that the One Percent rules is by controlling the explanations. They do that through official statements endlessly parroted by the presstitutes who have sold their souls.
Remember, the presstitutes sold to the public the false story of “Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction,” the false story of “Assad’s use of chemical weapons,” the false story of “Iranian nukes,” the false stories about Gaddafi, about “Russian invasion of Ukraine,” about Afghanistan, and on and on. When the presstitutes are willing to lie at the expense of the destruction of millions of peoples, the infrastructures of the countries, and millions of refugees inflicted upon Europe, how can we believe the presstitutes about Las Vegas, Sandy Hook, etc., especially when contradictions in the official stories are never cleared up and in place of hard evidence we are given only assertions and photoshopped photos?
Media ConsolidationMedia consolidation
Six corporations - Time Warner, Disney, News Corporation, Viacom, Comcast, and CBS - control roughly 90% of the media in the U.S.
These companies are in business to make a profit.
This is why you'll find plenty of advertisements in the media. Entertainment? Check. Sports? Definitely. Weather? Yep.
You'll also find plenty of "if it bleeds, it leads" stories designed to hook you in. Vendors, witnesses recall Venice hit-and-run horror. Fort Hood trial turns bizarre as shooter grills witnesses.
There's also plenty of political bickering: Democrats said this, Republicans said that. We let you decide (but we never weigh in with any facts or fact-checking).
What won't you hear? You won't hear the "liberal media" discuss the corporate media.
What to make of this
If the media were "liberal," it would serve the public interest and shine a light on issues like the ones above.
More people would also have a better understanding of global warming, peak oil, population growth, political lobbying, government's role in a functioning economy, how much we spend on the military, and countless other issues.
What you’re more likely to see in the media, however, are stories designed to get you to buy their paper, or watch their show, or listen to their radio station. If it bleeds, it ledes. This is why the media is concerned with scandal, celebrities, gossip, and fear.
If anything, our news consists of paid advertisements and outlets too scared of offending anyone to publish much of substance. Investigative journalism is also expensive; entertainment is cheap.
The way this corporate media behaves may not be surprising. I apologize if you feel any of this is beating you over the head.
This Buzzfeed-style list wasn't intended to introduce this idea as new (others have done a much better job), but rather to highlight the sheer absurdity of a "liberal media" for an audience who may not see it.
One way to approach the topic is to simply ask: If we have a "liberal media," where are the liberal stories?
World Press Freedom Day
"One night, probably in 1880, John Swinton, then the preeminent New York journalist, was the guest of honour at a banquet given him by the leaders of his craft. Someone who knew neither the press nor Swinton offered a toast to the independent press. Swinton outraged his colleagues by replying:|
"There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.
"The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes."
(Source: Labor's Untold Story, by Richard O. Boyer and Herbert M. Morais, published by United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, NY, 1955/1979.)
"..a recent study by Columbia University's Project for Excellence in Journalism found that the TV stations owned by smaller media firms generally produce better newscasts" (Phillips, Peter, and Project Censored. Censored 2004: The Top 25 Censored Stories. NY: Seven Stories Press, 2003: 88).
"..Clear Channel is now widely seen as the poster child for what's wrong with our hyper-consolidated media environment...
"In January 2002, a train carrying 10,000 gallons of anhydrous ammonia derailed in the town of Minot, North Dakota, sausing a spill and a toxic cloud. Authorities attempted to warn the residents of Minot to stay indoors and to avoid the spill. But when the authorities called six of the seven radio stations in Minot to issue the warning, no one answered the phones. As it turned out, Clear Channel owned all six of the stations, and none of the station's personnel were available...
"..the so-called "derelict rodeo roundup," in which employees give homeless people a $20 bill, a 40-ounce bottle of malt liquor, and a bus ticket to the edge of town, was pioneered in spring of 2003 by a Clear Channel station in Cincinnati...
"Egregious examples of [Clear Channel's].. unconscionable.. behavior.. [include] banning the Dixie Chicks and more than 200 peace-related songs..; the many station-sponsored pro-war rallies; the intense union-busting; automated on-air programming and the train wreck in Minot, North Dakota; and the "derelict rodeo roundup"" (88-89).
"Clear Channel's.. non-music coverage was dominated by crime, drugs, and violence"(Phillips, Peter, and Project Censored. Censored 2004: The Top 25 Censored Stories. NY: Seven Stories Press, 2003: 90).
Clear Channel Sucks "this powerful company has grown unchecked, using their monopoly to control the entire music industry. If you find this alarming, ClearChannelSucks.org is the place for you"
"Journalists, George Bernard Shaw once said, "are unable, seemingly, to discriminate between a bicycle accident and the collapse of civilization"" (Eric Alterman. "Bush's War on the Press." The Nation, May 9, 2005: 11).
"Why is science in the media so often pointless, simplistic, boring or just plain wrong? Like a proper little Darwin, I've been collecting specimens, making careful observations, and now I'm ready to present my theory. It is my hypothesis that in their choice of stories, and the way they cover them, the media create a parody of science, for their own means. They then attack this parody as if they were critiquing science.
"Science stories usually fall into three families: wacky stories, scare stories and "breakthrough" stories...
"[the bogus stories] help perform a crucial function for the media, which is selling the reader to their advertisers...
"And last, in our brief taxonomy, is the media obsession with "New breakthroughs": a more subtly destructive category of science story. It's quite understandable that newspapers should feel it's their job to write about new stuff. But in the aggregate these stories sell the idea that science, and indeed the whole emperical world view, is only about tenuous, new, hotly contested data. Articles about robustly supported emerging ideas would be more stimulating, of course, than most single experimental results, and these themes are the real developments in science. But they emerge over months and several bits of evidence, not single rejiggable press releases. Often, a front-page science story will emerge from a press release alone, and the formal academic paper may never appear, or appear much later, and then not even show what the press reports claimed it would.
"Scientists never said that tenuous small findings were headline news--journalists did...
"The central theme: there is no useful information in most science stories.
"Remember all those stories about the danger of mobile phones? I must have read 15 newspaper articles on the subject in a single week. Not one told me what the experiment flagging up the danger was. What was the exposure, the measured outcome, was it human or animal data? Figures? Nothing.
"Why? Because papers think you won't understand the "science bit", all stories involving science must be dumbed down...
"Nobody dumbs down the finance pages.
"So how do the media work around their inability to deliver scientific evidence? They use authority figures, the very antithesis of what science is about, as if they were priests, or politicians, or parent figures. And if they want balance, you'll get two scientists disagreeing, although with no explanation of why" (Ben Goldacre. "Don't dumb me down." Guardian Weekly, Sep. 16, 2005: 19).
How the Media Can Restore Credibility"... the Gallup poll finds that 49% of Americans consider the news mostly or completely unreliable...
"... the endemic vices of elitism, unaccountability, and star worship that afflict our journalistic institutions beginning with the top management. It will take more than another pro forma mea culpa to rebuild their eroded creditbility. Systemic changes are essential:
"Journalists shouldn't get cozy with government officials... A reporter's job is to discover and tell the truth... politicians and reporters are natural enemies...
"Press conferences produce lies, not news. What comes out of them should be treated as news only after it has been independently verified.
"Journalists should be accessible. Isolation impairs accountability... Every newspaper byline should carry its writer's direct phone number and email address, and they should be required to return their messages...
"Ban patriotism. While I was covering the war in Afghanistan in 2001, a colleague from a major US paper informed me: "We've captured Kunduz!" We? Never mind editorial independence--she identified with the Norther Alliance because they were backed by the United States. CNN mimicked Fox News' perpetually waving stars-and-stripes logo and TV anchors from Maine to Hawaii sported flag lapel pins--a prop on state television in dictatorships. Even when the US is at war, reporters should remain neutral. Skeptics make better journalists than patriots.
"Embedded reporters are whores... ersatz journalists who rode into Iraq in American tanks and armored personnel carriers... Correspondents who participate in a story--a war, say--deserve to be fired" (Ted Rall. "It's the Skepticism, Stupid." The Progressive Populist, Dec. 15, 2005: 2, 19).