Mainstream Media - It’s Unobjectivity and Propaganda Tactics

The media, in its many forms, is supposed to be an enlightening and informative entity, but too often it is not. The media is influenced too often by politics; usually the editors and the CEOs who run the particular organization, whether it is newspaper, news magazines, et cetera. Those that try to report in an objective manner are often put down by their bosses.

Did you read in the newspaper or read or hear of the three rallies for the troops and what they are doing in Iraq, under the banner of “Surrender is NOT an Option” in the cities of San Francisco, Las Vegas and Carson City? It was sponsored by Move America Forward, a counter to the liberal-progressive entity Move On. When it comes to finding truth amongst the liberal-progressive bias, there is a website entitled News Busters (http://newsbusters.org) and there is also a website that keeps watch on the New York Times, a newspaper infamous for its misprint of what it calls “news”. That can be found at http://www.timeswatch.org.

In one edition of the Move America Forward:

Liberals are engaged in an amazing display of myth-building and revisionism concerning the establishment media’s performance before the war, and it’s not just Bill Moyers. The
Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz revealed on CNN’s Reliable Sources Sunday that “everybody at every news organization I’ve talked to said that the media were not aggressive enough during the run-up to war.” Appearing on the same program, ex-CNNer Bill Press went even further alleging that the press “gave us this war.” He told Kurtz, “the media, in large part, gave us this war, because they went along and repeated everything that George Bush said without asking tough questions. … If they had asked the questions and more – and American people knew what the truth was, as opposed to the propaganda we were getting from the White House, I think there would not have been the support for the war.”
That’s complete nonsense, as anyone who has actually looked at the coverage would know. In the months leading up to the start of the war in March 2003, the much of the media – especially ABC – portrayed the Bush administration as aggressive, impulsive, pig-headed and even blood-thirsty, while routinely doubting the credibility of their public statements. Certainly some liberals may thing the media’s pre-war opposition was noble, while others may see it as the beginning of negative second-guessing that had undermined support for the war. But there’s no doubt that the press was tilted against the war long before it began.
In the congressional debate over using force, for example, all three broadcast networks gave the losing anti-war side much more airtime. An MRC study in October 2002 found nearly three in five of soundbites from members of Congress (59%) opposed the use of force, or roughly double the percentage of Senators and Representatives who actually voted against using force (29%).

 

This political propaganda runs its gamut in the media. Lee Ellis writes in Perpetuation of Puerile Politics & Poisonous Propaganda:

A letter in my local newspaper starts with “Shame on Representative Mary Bono for defying the demands of the American people to end the Iraqi disaster.” Disaster?
I always thought that we had created a success in Iraq by having our armed forces in the heart of the Middle East with a new giant embassy loaded with all kinds of listening devices, thus helping to prevent further attacks on the United States. In addition to creating this island of Freedom in the Middle East, we were also able to rid the world of a corrupt despot who had used WMDs on his own people and had paid each suicide member’s family an award of $25,000. If Saddam Hussein were still in charge, I would hate to think of where his WMDs would be landing today instead of being secretly hidden in Syria, about which many officials have logically speculated. Saddam’s secret financing of terrorism would have doubled the amount now financed by Iran and Syria. …
Dr. Jack Wheeler of “To the Point” writes in his column, The Temper Tantrum that could Kill America, “What voters did not do last November is vote for surrender and defeat in Iraq, higher taxes, more government spending, and national security imperiled.

And the article concludes …

Can we win this type of war? Only if our political leaders and the American people can fully accept this new type of war and understand how they are being manipulated by these current al Qaeda and Democrat de facto Socialist tactics. As President Lincoln said in 1858, “a house divided against itself cannot stand.”

And if they are socialist tactics it is because there are members of that political entity who are socialists or believe that our established system requires a change to be a form of socialism. While the American public has kept the socialist political party entities a minority, they have cleverly infiltrated the curriculum of our institutions of higher learning and voters, thinking they are voting for members of the Democrat Party are actually members whose goals are to change the American government system into some sort of Americanized socialist government process. It is quite evident at times, and other times it is underlying – but clearly visible in the way they view the US Constitution. This problem has also bled over to the judicial system as well. Yet the other main political party, the Republicans no longer are the party of Abraham Lincoln – they either compromise to the point of joining the “other side” of the “political aisle” or give the appearance of being too weak in character and integrity to openly disagree or reprimand the ridiculous rhetoric and accusations of the opposing political entity. Any political party that is a third party whose political platform is based upon constitutional law adherence and the drive to reduce the impact of government (downsizing) upon individual lives of citizens cannot obtain public support enough, thus not able to obtain the funding that the two main big parties acquire in order to make any difference. In recent past, voters attempted to choose either independents or those of parties like the Constitution Party – but to no avail because not enough Americans choose to depart from the traditional main two parties. It is a scenario of “Catch 22”.

Yet, there are sources where one can find objectivity. Fox News started the movement of presenting the news and “letting you decide”. The gist of the idea was to be objective in news reporting and not allow personal or organizational ideology to alter or unbalance the whole news story. Yet, Fox News, like other media organizations, only reports the sensational news and still doesn’t provide news of the good things that are occurring. For example, a person who uses the Second Amendment to protect themselves and others – just the news that reports tragic incidents of someone who misuses that right; or, the death toll in Iraq but not the positive things that are occurring there and places like Afghanistan.

If enough people turn away from mainstream media, that form of media will change its way of doing things. It all has to do with making money. Indeed, newspapers have had to change because of the impact of the Internet providing a wide range of information available and at the same time has opened a world of what Mick Gregory at The End of Elite Media Empire [and Rise of Citizen Journalism) calls “citizen journalism” – commonly known as “Bloggers”.

In this capacity, like Lighthouse Patriot Journal, The Federalist (Patriot Post), by Mark Alexander, to name only two of many, blogs have been created to fill the gap of information available in mainstream media. Of course, some “professional” journalists look down upon this form of journalism for several reasons, but mainly professional jealous; and some bloggers deserve this treatment because they emulate the problems of mainstream media and sometimes are worse than the propaganda machines of some news reporting and commentary entities that have been established.

And, while mentioning Mick Gregory, I would like to point out that his latest article from May 18^th reveals in detail what I mentioned recently – the problem of illegal immigrants with false identification having the capability of voting – and they are NOT citizens! And guess who they vote for? Those that side with them on the issue of amnesty, of course, and what political party started this movement of illegal voters?  The DNC. Mainstream media, as Mick Gregory points out, completely ignores this “constitutional crisis.” As he writes in his posting:

Hundreds of illegal immigrants have registered to vote in Bexar County in recent years and dozens of them have actually cast ballots, canceling out the votes of U.S. citizens, radio station 1200 WOAI News reports. Figures obtained by a reporter show 303 illegals successfully registered to vote, and at least 41 cast ballots in various elections. Bexar County Elections Administrator Jackie Callanan confirmed the figures, but she says a new form of voter registration card, which requires people to swear they are citizens when they register, should help cut the problem, because people who vote illegally can be charged with perjury. And the county has some sly ways to catch them. … While not taking a position on the legislation, Callanan warned that any law that required people present ID at the polling place might actually discourage people from voting. … Democrats in the Legislature have fought the proposal, saying it would keep the poor and minorities, who generally vote Democratic, away from the polls. A key Democratic Senator and Dewhurst got into an argument on the floor of the Senate over the emotional issue.

In the presidential election of 2000, when Al Gore ran against GW Bush, there was an outcry of vote fraud in the form of an electronic system of voting that claimed that voters were confused and/or had not punched out their tabs in a manner where their votes were not what they chose. It became a constitutional crisis and the mainstream media ate it up. However, when the media decided to investigate more thoroughly, they found voter fraud in that and other districts of Florida on the part of the Democratic Party. Then the whole thing died away quickly in the news. That is a prime example of what the American public is dealing with when it comes to mainstream media. If a discrepancy or outright fraud is discovered, it only becomes news if it doesn’t involve the Democrat Party. Plain and simple. So, this tells the American people that our mainstream news is the mouthpiece of the Left – liberal-progressives.

Americans are waking up to this ploy and gradually filtering the news in order to get better information; but it is taking time for the mainstream media to catch on that Americans are educating themselves against this propaganda ploy. And the main reason is because of bloggers like Mick Gregory who make this possible.

I suggest you also read Mick Gregory’s posting concerning the repression by media of Senator Dianne Feinstein’s corruption, and because the Democrats are the majority and too many Republicans are whimps – she remains untouched by a congressional investigation and processes that would throw her out of Washington, DC and send her packing back to the socialist entity from which she came.