The Corporate Media Continues to Torch Its Reputation. Good.


Source: LibertyBlitzkrieg.com
Michael Krieger
June 16, 2017

Last December, I noted the following in the post, ‘Then We Will Fight in the Shade’ – A Guide to Winning the Media Wars:

It is when you get desperate, scared and panicky that you make the biggest mistakes, and the legacy media is currently desperate, scared and panicky.  As Napoleon Bonaparte allegedly said:

“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”

Whether or not he actually said them, those words still ring true. We mustn’t get in the way of the legacy media’s inevitable self-destruction. Part of this means that we do not self-destruct in the process. We need to recognize that there’s a reason independent, alternative media is winning the battle of ideas in the first place. For all the warts, mistakes and bad actors, the emergence of the internet is indeed the historical equivalent of the invention of the printing press on steroids.

Only a clueless self-important elitist actually believes that the smartest, most informed people in America are the pundits on tv and the journalists employed by the mainstream media. With a handful of companies and a few oligarchs in charge, you’d have to be the most naive fool on earth to not understand that legacy media is driven by well defined narratives, and that these narratives are not in your best interest. The rest of us understand that the Internet has served as a much needed countervailing force, and has been an incredible blessing to human knowledge, connectivity and the marketplace of ideas. Just because some people can’t distinguish truth from fiction, doesn’t negate the incredible progress that decentralized information dissemination provides. It is only those who do not wish to engage in public debate on the issues themselves who want to censor stuff. The rest of us are more than happy to have an open discussion.

In a pathetic attempt to reinflate the discredited and failed neoliberal/neocon status quo political bubble it supports, corporate media has been relentless in its attacks on anyone or anything that offers an alternative vision. These attacks more often than not focus on Donald Trump, but it’s important to note that contempt for Bernie Sanders and his supporters is not far behind. It doesn’t matter what the alternative vision is, if it falls outside the neoliberal/neocon status quo, it must be demonized and destroyed by the likes of billionaire-owned media properties such as The Washington Post and The New York Times.

The alarm bells really went off for me regarding the hatred of Sanders by the New York Times upon reading the paper’s nonsensical endorsement of Hillary Clinton during the primary. You should read the entire article, but here’s some of what I wrote at the time:

One of the biggest trends of the post financial crisis period has been a plunge in the American public’s perception of the country’s powerful institutions. The establishment often admits this reality with a mixture of bewilderment and erroneous conclusions, ultimately settling on the idea people are upset because “Washington can’t get anything done.” However, nothing could be further from the truth. When it comes to corruption and serving big monied interests, both Congress and the President are very, very good at getting things done. Yes it’s true Congress doesn’t get anything done on behalf of the people, but this is no accident. The government doesn’t work for the people.

With its dishonest and shifty endorsement of Hillary Clinton, I believe the New York Times has finally come out of the closet as an unabashed gatekeeper of the status quo. I suppose this makes sense since the paper has become the ultimate status quo journalistic publication. The sad truth is the publication has been living on borrowed time and a borrowed reputation for a long time. Long on prestige, it remains very short on substance when it comes to fighting difficult battles in the public interest. Content with its position of power and influence within the current paradigm, the paper doesn’t want to rock the boat. What the New York Times is actually telling its readers with the Hillary Clinton endorsement is that it likes things just the way they are, and will fight hard to keep them that way. It is as much a part of the American establishment as any government institution.

Truth be told, the paper continues to…

Continue Reading At: LibertyBlitzkrieg.com

Trumps Idea-Man Steve Bannon X-Rays NY Time’s Skull: Empty

1984minstryoftruth
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
January 29, 2017

A few days ago, the NY Times interviewed Trump’s special counselor, Steve Bannon. Bannon wasted no time:

“The media should be embarrassed and humiliated and keep its mouth shut and just listen for awhile.”

“The media here is the opposition party. They don’t understand this country. They still do not understand why Donald Trump is the president of the United States.”

“The elite media got it [their election prediction] dead wrong, 100 percent dead wrong…a humiliating defeat that they will never wash away, that will always be there.”

“The mainstream media has not fired or terminated anyone associated with following our [Trump] campaign. Look at the Twitter feeds of those people [reporters]: they were outright activists of the Clinton campaign.”

“That’s why you [the NY Times and other press outlets] have no power. You were humiliated.”

The Times asked Bannon if he thought Sean Spicer, Trump’s new press secretary, had “lost credibility with the media.”

Bannon said: “Are you kidding me? We think that’s a badge of honor… The media has zero integrity, zero intelligence, and no hard work. You’re the opposition party. Not the Democratic Party. You’re the opposition party. The media’s the opposition party.”

The Times thought they were being clever by getting Bannon’s quotes “on the record.” They knew he would attack the press, and they knew their loyal readers would tsk-tsk and shake their heads as they sipped their morning coffees. O dear, o my, who is this wild man Bannon lashing out at our beloved newspaper?

Bannon knows the game. He understands the Times and the Washington Post, and the rest of the media echo-chamber that bounces agreed-upon stories among themselves. That’s what they did during the presidential campaign, and despite their best efforts, Globalist queen, Hillary Clinton, hit the skids and ended up back in Chappaqua, the Oval Office forever out of her reach. Cry for her, America.

Bannon is right. The media is the opposition party. They oppose the people’s right to know, on hundreds of major stories, and whether you love or hate Donald Trump, the media are criminal rogues in a long-running stage play.

The media believe an election campaign is an event they own. It’s their property. They can twist it any which way.

If something can be printed on page one and put on the nightly news, the media claim ownership. This is why ABC is asserting that their recent interview with Trump cannot be aired by ANYONE after February 1. ABC owns history. They can erase it. (See here and here. Oh, and for good measure, see here.)

Sound familiar? It’s straight out of Orwell’s 1984.

And hold on: since Trump’s election, Orwell’s novel has jumped to number one on Amazon’s list of best sellers. Number one. Its publisher, Penguin, has ordered a new print run of 75,000 to keep up with the demand. 47,000 copies have been sold since Trump won the election.

My God, the basket of deplorables can read.

Something’s happening, Mr. NY Times, and you don’t know what it is.

You’re clueless. You’re outflanked. You’re throwing power-puff punches in the dark.

What’s your next move? An interview with Beelzebub, who says he voted for Trump?

My guess is you’ve got a team down in Mexico right now, talking to your principal investor, billionaire Carlos Slim, begging him for more money to refinance the refinance of your debt, so you can keep paddling along in your vast sea of red ink.

Meanwhile, more and more people will be reading Orwell’s 1984 and identifying you as the Ministry of Truth.

Even readers from Hillary’s camp, taken in by your claim that fake news brought her down, will discover, when they read 1984, that the prime number one faker is the State media apparatus, not 50,000 independent outlets.

You, the NY Times, have been THE State media apparatus for a long, long time.

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

 

7 Actions Individuals Can Take To Navigate Through The Media Minefield

QuestionEverything2

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”
Edward Bernays, Propaganda

“Much of what is reported as ‘news’ is little more than the uncritical transmission of official opinions to an unsuspecting public,” wrote Parenti.  Fox news commentator Brit Hume stated, “What [the mass media] pass off as objectivity, is just a mindless kind of neutrality.” 
– Jim Marrs, Rise Of The Fourth Reich – The Secret Societies That Threaten To Take Over America

TheBreakaway
Zy Marquiez
July 16, 2016

As of late, have had quite a few friends and acquaintances online and in person ask me how is it possible to figure out what information passes muster in our information overload reality of ours.  This got me thinking about the simple things that experience has taught me over time

Below follow some of the tenets that have helped me greatly for nigh a decade in being able to discern more and more what’s what within media.

#1: Don’t believe anything anyone says, including me.

Just because the media states something, doesn’t make it true.  As the Walter Lippman once said, “News and the truth are not the same thing…”.

If we take a cautious approach, we make sure we are not being mislead into opinions being passed off as facts, or a belief-system [i.e. the current race war propaganda nigh everywhere] at the outset that might work against us.  If in the end, the information is still true, nothing is lost.  But when news ‘happens’ to be incomplete, or if its disinformation, misinformation, or downright deception, we as individuals stand to pay a heavy price by believing news without verifying what’s being said.  Be wary.

#2: Remain open-minded, but skeptical, about everything.

Open-mindedness seems to be quite rare these days.  True open mindedness is open to all, and keen discernment will help to gravitate to what’s sensible.  But we need to remain skeptical as well, because there’s many agendas in play with certain information, and many motives behind the scenes.  These can help drive information in numerous directions, which is why it’s hard to ascertain the truth at times these days.

#3: Vet the information with relentless research.

As individuals, it is imperative that we proceed in our search for facts with a devoted approach that’s as flexible as it is trenchant.  Asking shrewd questions is practically mandatory to get to the bottom of things, or at least to follow certain leads.

What are the sources/references of the article, researcher, and people quoted there in?  Is the information presented ironclad?  Has any information been presented by others that repudiates that very information?  Have any of the data points been eviscerated?  Is there a conflict of interest [especially monetarily] involved?  Etc etc.

Only by plotting a course will we get to where we wish to get, which is the truth.  Incisive questions facilitate this task.

#4: Always remain flexible to the information presented.

For instance, when information about the Zika virus came out, at first there were several people within my life that were really concerned.  At the outset, they showed great fear at such possibilities.

However, it was suggested for them to keep an open mind and not be fearful, because it could be that the information was not being presented in a complete manner.

Soon thereafter, it was not only found out that Zika was nothing new since it had been around for decades with no issues whatsoever, but that the issues that stemmed from the Zika allegedly causing microcephaly was hogwash.

Jon Rappoport of NoMoreFakeNews.com & JonRappoport.wordpress.com covers this is at length:

The Zika-microcephaly connection is scientific nonsense. Let me run it down for you.

My analysis is beyond, “But Expert A says…” I am not dealing in appeals to authority, but instead the standards of evidence anyone can see if he opens his eyes.

First of all, the latest figures out of Brazil, the so-called epicenter of the microcephaly tragedy, reveal the following: 854 confirmed cases of microcephaly; and of those, 97 cases show the presence of the Zika virus.

Inference? Zika is not the cause of microcephaly. If it were, researchers would be able to detect it in all, or the overwhelming percentage of, microcephaly cases.“[1][Emphasis Added]

There article provides many important data points to ponder regarding this abstruse subject.

The whole point is, when initially examining an issue, don’t get married to an opinion/statement,  regardless who it’s done by.   Many times evidence surfaces that blows holes in the official story large enough to ferry the titanic through.

#5: Analyze how the information is presented.

Is the information infused with fear, or is it self-empowering? 

Within a lot of the media, be it mainstream or alternative, there is an noticeable undercurrent of fear taking place.  This causes individuals to not only live very limiting lives believing that the end is nigh [in some cases, literally] but also leaves individuals feeling powerless.  That’s unacceptable.

Information can be presented in a manner that is concerning, but still self empowering.  Be mindful of this.

#6: Always ask yourself who benefits from this.

Those who may benefit from certain events might be organizations or they might be specific people [i.e. George Soros].  However, always keep in mind almost always there are large factors at play that couple to institutions, organizations, or secretive groups who benefit from certain events taking place, or certain news being disseminated.

By following that rabbit hole, it will be easier to ascertain what kind of agendas these individuals might have given the discipline involved, the institutions involved, and any other poignant data that would be useful.

#7: Always remain calm.

No matter the issue at hand, a state of total awareness is vastly more beneficial than a state of panic.

When people panic, mistakes are made – big ones.  Mistakes can have great cost.  Don’t set yourself up for failure.

We are all different individuals, so what helps one person might not help another.  For me though, what’s helped me the most to remain calm is meditating, yoga, reading, working out, and mindful breathing.  These five tools help zap nigh all the stress out of my life.

One of my friends loves swimming, a lot.  This helps her stay centered.  Other friends gravitate towards writing and whatnot. Do whatever helps you best.  Either way, be proactive about remaining calm and collected.

To finalize, the basic seven tenets above will help guide individuals towards an incisive discernment in various types of information provided.

As long as we remain self aware and cognizant, we will be able to see clearly when an attempt is made to manipulate information.  Once an individual has practiced this enough, it becomes an automatic tool in one’s repertoire to that nets great results.

Ample benefits await.  All an individual has to do is be inquisitive and discerning.

Your ability to see through the veil of lies if you so choose is boundless  Don’t ever let anybody else tell you otherwise.

__________________________________________________________________
Source & Reference:

[1] Jon Rappoport, NoMoreFakeNews.com, Zika: Message To Purveyors Of Medical Fraud

Understand the Message and Don’t Wait for Others

Source: DailyBell.com
December 31, 2015

Obama’s ‘Boots on the Ground’: U.S. Special Forces Are Sent to Tackle Global Threats … They are taking on a larger combat role in Afghanistan, where the war was supposed to be over. They are headed to Syria to help fight the Islamic State in its stronghold. And President Obama recently ordered nearly 300 of them to Cameroon to assist African troops in their battle against a militant group that has pledged loyalty to the Islamic State. – New York Times

Dominant Social Theme: The US must use special forces to keep the peace and militarism to sustain social cohesion.

Free-Market Analysis: In the other article in today’s issue, we pointed out that the alternative media continues to effectively erode the mainstream media narrative. In this article, however, we will remind viewers that such victories are never clear cut. We’ll use the above New York Times article to explain further.

Establishment publications like the Times and The Washington Post are fond of articles that describe events without being overly judgmental. The tone of this article is to be mildly critical but mostly within the context of reporting an evolving policy.

Certainly such journalism is not focused on alternative scenarios. The article in question is not seen as a place for a significant recalibration. It does the job of substantive journalism by presenting both a thesis and an antithesis but by rigorously controlling the boundaries of the conversation it is able to maintain a disciplined, cohesive message – and to avoid confronting more uncomfortable topics.

Here’s more:

With the Middle East in tumult, radical groups holding swaths of territory in Africa, and a presidential campaign fanning fears of a growing terrorism threat, the White House has steadily expanded the global missions of American Special Operations troops.

Even as Mr. Obama has repeatedly said that he opposes American “boots on the ground” in far-flung parts of the world, his administration continues to carve out exceptions for Special Operations forces — with American officials often resorting to linguistic contortions to mask the forces’ combat role.

…These deployments, as well as other missions being considered, have upended the Obama administration’s goal of withdrawing from countries that for more than a decade have been crucibles of combat for the American military.

The criticism here is of the shallowest kind. Obama is being accused of changing his mind but this is far from the presentation of a critical error. Later on in the article, other criticisms are voiced over the policy, suggesting that it might easily become a “waste of time and money.”

The article even suggests that there is a need for a “global approach” to the problem of terrorism – which implies international military coordination.

Contrast this soft-peddling to Paul Craig Roberts’s recent column, “Why WWIII Is On The Horizon.” The New York Times perpetuates the meme of intervention by avoiding a description of an alternative. Roberts goes in the opposite direction.

Here’s how it begins.

The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 gave birth to a dangerous American ideology called neoconservativism. The Soviet Union had served as a constraint on US unilateral action. With the removal of this constraint on Washington, neoconservatives declared their agenda of US world hegemony. America was now the “sole superpower,” the “unipower,” that could act without restraint anywhere in the world.

And here is the conclusion:

At this point in time, nuclear war can only be avoided in two ways. One way is for Russia and China to surrender and accept Washington’s hegemony. The other way is for an independent leader in Germany, the UK, or France to rise to office and withdraw from NATO. That would begin a stampede to leave NATO, which is Washington’s prime tool for causing conflict with Russia and, thereby, is the most dangerous force on earth to every European country and to the entire world. If NATO continues to exist, NATO together with the neoconservative ideology of American hegemony will make nuclear war inevitable.

Roberts’s point is that the US has abused its “unipower” status and thus placed the world in grave danger as China and Russia begin to push back. The Times article, meanwhile, uses “news” to justify a larger military policy. Roberts is focused on the clear danger of a larger war and is intent on using a historical narrative to help.

Mainstream media articles such as the one the Times has written are cleverly manipulated to create a façade of credibility. Such articles purport to present both sides of a given issue or news item but inevitably thesis and antithesis are used to hedge the conversation not expand it.

Continue Reading At: DailyBell.com