Posted on 02/06/2017 6:41:47 PM PST by ProgressingAmerica
I recently wrote an entry about Walter Lippmann, in which I made the case that his book "Public Opinion" makes him the founding father of fake news. It's important to understand, "fake news" does not end with "journalistic objectivity", fake news begins with "journalistic objectivity". It has to, because if "fake news" doesn't begin with "We are objective, you can trust us" then you'll get lost in the quagmire of thousands of years of people who, while they did report things inaccurately, did not do so because it was their ideological drive. They either lied because they were told to do so by the king, or they lied because they wanted to sell more papers.(which doesn't make it right, but neither helps us understand journalistic ideology)
With that very important fact laid out, there is another critical name to understand when it comes to using news as a source of manipulation. That's William Thomas Stead, he is the grandfather, or godfather if you will, of fake news. Now, Stead was a tabloid man. He didn't proclaim objectivity, he was honest that he was manipulating people. That's a hugely important distinction to enunciate and understand. Manipulating people through the news was his deeply held ideological belief. Still, Stead authored a piece called "Government by Journalism", which, unlike "Public Opinion", it's not a 400 page book. It's only an essay,(22 pages long) which means that its easy to read, and also quick to listen to.
Now, Stead's work "Government by Journalism" is full of mind-blowing quotes, such as this one:
They decide what their readers shall know, or what they shall not know.
Yes, he means journalists. Journalists decide what their readers shall know, or what they shall not know. I told you he was honest about his ideology.
But why would I care about a tabloid man, the sensationalist? He's not proclaiming objectivity! The tabloid man is only important, because of who his protege was. William Thomas Stead's protege was William Randolph Hearst, and Stead was very proud of this. Stead wrote that: (alt)
I have been long on the look out for a man to appear who will carry out my ideal of government by journalism I am certain that such a man will come to the front some day, and I wonder if you are to be that man.
Stead writes that after his discussions with Hearst:
It was almost immediately after that midnight talk that Mr. Hearst began to realise the ideal of a journalism that does things. He took up the question of municipal ownership. He engaged Arthur Brisbane, the son of Brisbane the Fourierist, to write editorials. He began the battle against the Trusts; he made the Spanish-American war. For weal or for woe Mr. Hearst had found his soul; for weal or for woe he had discovered his chart and engaged his pilot, and from that day to this he has steered a straight course, with no more tackings than were necessary to avoid the fury of the storm.
The final crucial point to understand, is that "Objective journalism" was a reaction to Hearstism, which really didn't exist. Hearst was merely implementing Steadism, and Hearst spread Steadism around the globe. But if you read Walter Lippmann, here's the one thing you won't read:
"We realize that Hearst is manipulating, and we want the manipulation to stop".
Instead, Lippmann spends 400 pages obsessing over stereotypes, and obsessing over how to manipulate people without them realizing that they're being manipulated, how to employ those stereotypes to profound effect.
The "why" is important. That, I believe, is a reasonable and fact-based reason as to why "fake news" begins with "journalistic objectivity". Or else, if we do not nail down journalistic ideology, we'll be chasing our tails and discussing John Norvell or any others who, while again, they got plenty of things wrong, they didn't set out to manipulate people and they certainly didn't claim to be objective in the process. And that's the point.
When it comes to today's "objective journalists", we need to nail these S.O.B.s down and use their own history against them. As you can see, they are very adept at using their institutions to spread lies and propaganda. Notice how they omit "objective journalism"? The ideology must be protected at all costs.
"Government by Journalism"
But neither Stead nor Hearst claimed "objectivity", not that I'm aware of.
In grade school I heard about how Yellow Journalism helped the Spanish-American War to erupt. I consider that the first instance of fake news.
From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_of_the_Spanish%E2%80%93American_War
Men such as William Hearst, the owner of The New York Journal was involved in a circulation war with Joseph Pulitzer of the New York World and saw the conflict as a way to sell papers. Many newspapers ran articles of a sensationalist nature and sent correspondents to Cuba to cover the war. Correspondents had to evade Spanish Authorities; usually they were unable to get reliable news and relied heavily on informants for their stories. Many stories were derived from second or third hand accounts and were either elaborated, misrepresented or completely fabricated by journalists to enhance their dramatic effect.
Ted Turner
The Spanish-American War began after Spain was blamed for the sinking of the USS Maine. But the war was provoked by powerful U.S. newspapers and served the interests of big banks. By James Perloff
Spanish-American War: Trial Run for Interventionism
http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/history/item/12338-trial-run-for-interventionism
"They(journalists) decide what their readers shall know, or what they shall not know." (1886)
Much food for thought here. Thanks.
When Americans see the bizarre responses of the mainstream media and the progressive politicians to tragedies such as the Tucson shootings — for instance, the proposal to ban rhetoric or symbols perceived to be violent — many wonder how the country has come to this strange place where elitists are moving to gain control at the expense of individual liberties. Perhaps one need not look past the Woodrow Wilson administration for the answer.
Today’s politicians and progressives seem to have taken some notes right out of the works of Edward Bernays, President Wilson’s propaganda master. The author of books such as Crystallizing Public Opinion (1923) and Propaganda (1928) — both of which were heavily utilized by Adolf Hitler’s Nazi propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels — Bernays has been credited with manipulating public opinion about such varied subjects as World War I, smoking, and even bacon. He has been dubbed the “Father of Spin” and the “Godfather of modern public relations” because of his extraordinary ability to alter public opinion.
Hearst learned everything he knew from Stead. That includes his manipulations that led to the Spanish American War.
Walter Cronkite.
I read a letter from a Confederate Soldier to his wife. This would have been around 1863.
He mentioned to her that he had read a Richmond newspaper and they were giving credit to Virginia troops for winning some unknown skirmish.
He said in fact it was the Florida companies which had won the battle.
I think Alexander the great took reporters along with him to send news back to Macedonia and Greece. Don’t know if they made stuff up tho.
Bernays is a very interesting man. He did start out as a journalist at university. But by the time he started doing his freedom torches and other campaigns, he wasn’t in the news field anymore.
That’s why he’s regarded as the father of public relations, that was his field.
Wouldn’t that make Bernays the grandfather of Alinsky community organizing?
I bet they did. There is nothing new under the sun. We are not smarter, nor dumber than the people that stumbled out of the garden of Eden.
Fake News was alive and well in the eighteenth century.
Walter Cronkite or the teamsters union?
The New York “there is no starvation in the Ukraine” Times?
There was that time when Cain(?) dressed up in animal fur to trick his dad into giving him the birthright from his brother Able. I’m guessing it was news to the dad when he found out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.