[Why the media can’t be trusted]
Not too long ago, the media was a trustworthy and valued friend of democracy and the free world. Who, where, why and when ; the long standing pillars of good reporting have (along the way) morphed into something very sinister.
You would be hard-pressed to read any newspaper column or magazine article without being exposed to the author’s opinion of how you should think about the issue at bar.Simple reporting of fact is now regularly replaced with opinions of reporter, teh news reader on TV and the media outlet.
It comes down to this. You and I are simply being told how to think about any given issue. When freedom of the press and free speech turn into you and I being told what conclusion to arrive at, the process is no longer reporting of news, it becomes propaganda.
Adolph Hitler, through his Propaganda Minister ( Joseph Goebbels )said, “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.”
I read all Orwell’s books while in school and am now glad those teachers of the day forced me and the rest of my class-mates to not only read tomes such as “1984” but encouraged us to discuss and debate the contents and concepts in order to form and understanding of what Orwell was speaking about.
In 1949, Orwell finally finished and published what was to become his most popular novel; “1984”. In the days immediately following World War Two, the notion of discussing something in the obscure future such as then distant 1984 was almost pure science fiction. However, Orwell had a deeper intent wherein he was offering cautions of a troubled future that could become reality IF we were careless.
In “1984” (the novel) the world had evolved into a totalitarian state. That totalitarian form of government functioned because each citizen thought exactly the same thoughts and reacted in managed and predictable actions. It created a wondrous efficiency not because collectively mankind was more productive but because, through mind control and state-managed thought-control, expectations were muted and less personal freedom became the new “normal”.
In the “new world order” of Orwell’s “1984”individual freedom was branded as unpatriotic. Word was delivered by way of a “new” logic based upon obedience by way of a thought pattern called, “NEWSPEAK”.
Orwell’s novel (1984) speaks about a binary world of black/white; good/bad in which and all minor variations simply were removed from thought. The central character (Winston), like all other citizens was controlled by way of an insidious ultra-ego voice that was constantly with them broadcast night and day, wherever the citizens were. The voice known as BIG BROTHER told everyone how to think and what to think about. They existed in a totalitarian era where folks were either PARTY (obedient insiders) or considered UNPARTY – which had dire personal consequences.
If you have not read “1984”; I suggest that you may want to.
Modern Day Media
The consolidation of modern media has shrunk the media base and removed choice and alternative points of view. Smaller local newspapers have been digested by way of corporate takeovers. Present day print media (in Canada) is now in the hands or four or five individuals who hold control over 95% of the printed media (newspapers and magazines).
The state of affairs in the electronic media (TV and radio) has contracted much the same as the print media. Thus, less than ten individuals hold control over all that is written and all that is broadcast. In doing so, we have a new BIG BROTHER.
Worst yet; since the print and electronic markets have contracted, the independence of individual “journalists” and legitimate “reporters” (of who; where; when and why)have been replaced by the “new generation” of reporters who willingly comply as “messengers” of any and all messages , dare not ask challenging questions and simply publish opinions held by the publishers. In essence, you are even less likely to hear alternative opinions across the media spectrum than you are to find consistent price variations among “competing” gas stations. I think that we all know and understand how that works out each time we fill up the family car.
Similarly (even worse) that nightly news broadcast you probably think is keeping you informed has morphed into photogenic talking heads telling you their (the network’s) opinions.
Simply, news reporting has vanished and replaced by a few photos or video clips along with (always) a comment to tell you how to think about any given issue.
How truly pervasive are things? Probably more than you care to consider.
I am pretty much “old-school” despite the fact that I take advantage of new technology such as the internet. Fortunately (for me), I am a cynic. Moreover, I have learned to take very little at face value. I have always sought out truth and usually stay away from the Kool Aid of trends.
Fortunately (too) I had been exposed and learned through experience to measure and weigh volumes of drivel and minutia in order to drill down to what is/isn’t truthful.
I consume too much information most days. Sadly, one must consume a lot to derive any benefit in terms of knowledge. It’s much like consuming potato chips in the hope of supplementing lack of protein in one’s diet.
Example of Thought Control
The on-going USA national election campaign has much less to do with Democrat vs. Republican or “left-wing” vs. “right-wing” than it does on our own perceptions than actually being “programmed” to buy into the power-base’s perceptions of which candidate would be easier for them to control after the election. That power base should not be confused with the electors. The actual base of all power turns out to be the same small inner-circle that controls the media or the thoughts that you made to think.
Thus, rogue candidates such as Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump represent high risk unknowns to those who seek to hold onto real power in a democracy without ever being elected. Both Sanders and Trump represented populous movements arriving coincidentally into political orbit at the same moment. Perhaps it was coincidental but, another thought may be that their emergence as candidates was a result of the thirst of the “silent majorities” that had tired of being managed by perfectly predictable candidates who would happily maintain the status—quo. That status-quo produces and maintains record unemployment, unbearable inner-city poverty along with run-away consumer prices. The poor, the weak, the informed and the senior citizens are the disenfranchised victims of that “status quo”.
If you are thinking that I have chosen “sides” in the present USA election; I suppose I have. That choice is for change at whatever side of the spectrum can deliver badly needed change. I suppose that both Sanders and Trump are ready, willing and able to bring change.
Examine the phenomenon of the Bernie Sanders’ populous movement. He was pitted against Hilary Clinton who is (very much) a vanilla and manageable politician. Sanders represented a very popular alternative. But he was also sending signals indicating that he was less manageable. Sanders lost. But these things became known and sadly swept aside. We learned that Democratic Party officials colluded to favor Clinton and also (by way of the wikileaks files) that Clinton was handed the questions that would be asked by the (media) panelists prior to public debates.
Few have the time to cull through this inundation of hijacked emails messages. I did and still do spend hours trying to gain insight into what was taking place. I do so not because it is especially interesting. In fact a lot of it is very mundane. However, it provides a window that reveals how power operates.
I was flabbergasted to witness one of the pretty CNN “talking heads” last evening trying to tell Americans that it was (a) illegal for them to read the wikileaks files; (b) that it was “legal” for him as a member of the media to consume the files and (c) that the media would tell you how to think about the contents. The pretty looking “talking head” said, “Everything you’re learning, you’re learning from us ” which sound a great deal like the voice of Orwell’s BIG Brother. This “Pretty Looking Talking Head” is teh son of a former US Governor.
Here is a link to what this fool said on national television. It is less than half a minute in length and I hope that you do inform yourself by watching it (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DcATG9Qy_A) .
When you actually read the wikileaks files, you will be shocked to read such things as this email message form Robbi Mooks (Clinton’s campaign manager) to close Clinton adviser and “soul-mate” Huma Aberdin informing that George Soros will be pleased with what they are doing. Soros is one of several large financial backers of Clinton, is a leverage buyout artist and filthy rich.
Similarly, while Clinton is feigning disgust over Trump’s bothersome comments about increased scrutiny of muslims attempting to enter USA, one would be wise to read about another of the large Clinton donors; Haim Saban . Saban backed Clinton 8 years with million dollar donations ago when she was defeated by Barak Obama, and now throws millions into her 2016 campaign and is generally known as one VERY “hawkish” guy who, in many ways would make Trump sound like a pacifist. (http://forward.com/opinion/national/325490/does-hillary-clinton-have-a-haim-saban-problem/)
In the words of the late Lenny Bruce, “quid est veritas. Reliquum est mendacium.” (the truth is what is. The rest is a lie)
Follow Lloyd’s articles on Twitter @LloydFournier1
Copyright Thunderbird Rising 2016
The above article is copyrighted. You may use, copy or distribute this article conditional on attributing your source (Thunderbird Rising) and the author (Lloyd Fournier)