Posted on 08/21/2017 7:45:43 AM PDT by Hojczyk
Many Americans are eagerly watching the devolution of traditional news with relish because they agree with the prevailing narratives, whether based on true facts or imagined fiction. But others are growing skeptical of nearly every news item they see or read. Some have stopped consuming news altogether.
That serves the goal of the interests that are pulling our strings. It’s in the PR playbook. If they can do nothing more than confuse an issue, they’ve accomplished their mission. They throw so much information into the mix that ordinary people disregard all of it, including the truth that would have damaged the interests.
I think there are millions of people, particularly those who live outside of Washington, D.C., New York City and Los Angeles, who would like their news straight up: News that they don’t have to discount because they’re placing odds on the political and corporate interests of the reporters. Yet, we don’t hear these desires because we’re trapped in an echo chamber of our own creation.
I’m commonly asked, “Can ‘the news’ be fixed?” In simple terms, there are two components necessary to do so: We must correctly identify (and admit) our problem, and then take steps to correct it.
We have yet, as an industry, to take step one.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
The media has no desire to address the issue, as they have willfully gone from biased observers to full-blown propagandists.
Even if news was presented unfiltered, there is still the fact of bias by omission.
Not surprised.
Media?
Previously called controlled media, msm, even TEW (Enemy Within, Etc. on occasion,,,
Sounds like there needs to be a "Reporters Anonymous"!
From a 1995 secret Clinton White House memo: Communication Stream of Conspiracy Commerce:
OVERVIEW
COMMUNICATION STREAM OF CONSPIRACY COMMERCE: The Communication Stream of Conspiracy Commerce refers to the mode of communication employed by the right wing to convey their fringe stories into legitimate subjects of coverage by the mainstream media. This is how the stream works. First, well funded right wing think tanks and individuals underwrite conservative newsletters and newspapers such as the Western Journalism Center, the American Spectator and the Pittsburgh Tribune Review. Next, the stories are reprinted on the internet where they are bounced all over the world. From the internet, the stories are bounced into the mainstream media through one of two ways: 1) The story will be picked up by the British tabloids and covered as a major story, from which the American right-of-center mainstream media (i.e. the Wall Street Journal, Washington Times and New York Post) will then pick the story up; or 2) The story will be bounced directly from the internet to the right-of center mainstream American media. After the mainstream right-of-center American media covers the story, Congressional committees will look into the story. After Congress looks into the story, the story now has the legitimacy to be covered by the remainder of the American mainstream press as a "real" story.
[clip]
In order to fully understand the Whitewater story, it is important to understand how conservative groups are, and have been. able to generate a media frenzy over the Whitewater story.
The "Media Food Chain"
The media food chain is the system by which right-wing activists feed conspiracy theories and innuendo from the. fringes into the mainstream media. The "food chain" starts with activists such as Willie Horton creator Floyd Brown, Sheffield Nelson and Larry Nichols. These activists feed the partisan conservative press. publications such as the American Spectator, the Washington Times and the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal. The mainstream press then picks up on these reports.
The "Blow-Back" Strategy" One specific "food chain" strategy is the "blow-back" The blow-back starts with conservative groups feeding material to the British tabloids, such as the Sunday Telegraph. Conservative American tabloids and mainstream American media then report on the British reports.
[clip]
Liberals accused conservatives of doing this in 1995 to hurt Bill Clinton, so it's natural to assume that Democrats were originally doing this all along.
They still are.
-PJ
“Some have stopped consuming news altogether.”
Wrong. Many have stopped consuming PROPAGANDA altogether.
“That serves the goal of the interests that are pulling our strings.”
No it doesn’t. Those of us who don’t swallow their crap anymore are no longer tied to their strings. We’re liberated.
“News that they don’t have to discount because they’re placing odds on the political and corporate interests of the reporters. Yet, we don’t hear these desires because we’re trapped in an echo chamber of our own creation.”
Exactly. But it is precisely because reporters invariably have political and corporate interests (we all do) they can’t be trusted to be totally unbiased. The best way to watch out for our own self interests is to always be aware of the interests and motivations of the messenger, and then judge accordingly. Caveat emptor!
“I’m commonly asked, “Can ‘the news’ be fixed?” In simple terms, there are two components necessary to do so: We must correctly identify (and admit) our problem, and then take steps to correct it.
We have yet, as an industry, to take step one.”
I like Sharyl Attkinson, I think she’s conscientious and tries her best to present facts as she knows them. But it’s the nature of the human beast to be biased, so even the best of reporting will contain some unconscious preferences.
Like a food diet, it is really up to the consumer of news to conscientiously “feed himself” a good balance of information to achieve the correct view of reality. Most importantly he must be aware of his own weaknesses for the “sweets” in his news diet, i.e. those stories that naturally appeal to his own biases.
Sheryl asks, “Can ‘the news’ be fixed?”
I say, probably not.
The news has damaged their reputation for so long.
Once we have been lied to, deceived, reputations damaged, then no one wants anything to do with them. They have proven to be liars. No one wants anything to do with them. They are shunned, ignored. (The same thing with groups on social media boards, such as here, FR.)
The current news organizations will never be trusted again.
New news organizations can be created. But, it would take for the news to be completely truthful. And even then, they would not be trusted for many many years. And it would take only once lied to, only once deceived, and then what little trust developed would evaporate.
As a VietNam combat veteran, I started distrusting the media on Jan 31, 1968.
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.