0 votes

The Media and the Disintegration of Society

I worked in broadcast TV for nearly 20 years. I worked at NBC most of the time, but I also worked at other networks and on many shows. I was not a producer, but either a writer or a member of the crew. I worked on Today, Weekend Today, Dateline, various talk shows and some sports programs also. And, once you are past the security guards in the lobby, you have free reign to go anywhere. I often used to go to the back of Dateline's control room and watch them 'cut' a program together. More about that later.

But the important things I learned were not at the TV network, they came from other sources. And I came to understand that our society has been disintegrating ever since the late 1960s, all because of television and, to some extent, other media.

As you probably are aware, the TV networks account to no one except the advertisers. The news is sanitized, vetted and usually biased; and this has gone on for a long time. As a result, the networks continue to hold vast power and influence among the population. They have the potential to be a force for good, for public debate, to encourage human values. To some extent PBS, Discovery and The History Channel do this. But their numbers are small compared to the big four: ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX.

At its inception, TV was pretty good. The early shows were harmless feel-good shows such as Lucy and some game shows. Some of the earliest game shows (which became infamous) such as "21" and the "64,000 Question" tested people on fairly serious topics. The contestents got questions that only Educated people could answer. The only quiz show now that requires some intelligence is "Jeopardy." You may have seen "Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader" with Jeff Foxworthy. This is a program that rewards stupidity, because even the losers get cash. This is where we have come in 50 years. From smart to dumb.

But there is more.

Up to Nixon's presidency, we still had a fairly free press. The networks, the big daily newspapers and other media could report the truth as they saw fit. However, in 1968 a classified document (7,000 pages long) detailed the illegal carpet-bombing of Cambodia, Laos and other targets. Parts of it were leaked to the New York Times - under the title "The Pentagon Papers." This disclosure , in print, embarrassed the administration; and the result was widespread dismay among the public that Nixon, Kissinger and the administration had been lying to the American public.

Nixon, embarrassed, decided to clamp down on the media. High-ranking CIA agents were sent to various news outlets to 'vet' stories. If the media refused to comply then they would be denied 'access.' In short, the White House successfully blackmailed the entire mainstream media: You want White House press credentials? Then play ball.

It didn't happen overnight. The demonstration at the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago was widely covered on the news. There were huge riots - students agains the 'pigs' - and TV covered most of it. The kids chanted, "The whole world is watching!" and they were right. But, after that, news of protests took a back page. The Kent State shootings (1970) were covered, but only briefly. The administration continued to twist arms at the networks and the major dailies.

As a result, the media became the lapdogs of the administration and CIA people vetted every story. No one dare challenge or embarrass the president, or else they would be shown the door. (You may recall when Dan Rather went public with George W. Bush's military record, or lack thereof. He was asked to resign. Rather had been at CBS for decades and was the successor to Walter Cronkite. Rather was out. He later threatened to sue, but it never happened).

The press stopped asking tough questions, and often had to submit their questions in advance prior to any press conference. Among the small, independet outlets, there was a vast uproar. Amy Goodman (formerly of Pacifica) attacked the administration relentlessly in her 'Democracy Now' broadcasts. Yet, the administration did not view her as a threat. Moreover, publications on the left and right did a brisk business and the adminstration could rightfully say, "See? We allow free journalism to flourish!" But comparatively few read Mother Jones or The National Review.

The top media people, such as Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings, George Stephanopolous, et al., were not only given access to the president, they became members of the Council on Foreign Relations, and also attended Bilderburg meetings. They became 'made' guys because they sold out. The era of Edward R. Murrow - who could make a senator sweat - was over.

Worse, the news was 'doctored' to support the administration's views. Some of you may have seen the Alex Jones' video, where a local NBC news crew videotaped, and reported, unexploded bombs at the Murrah Federal Building immediately after the Oklahoma City bombing. Was this reported on the networks? No. I learned that there were two detonations that morning, a few seconds apart. First, the building blew; then the truck. The seismograph at the University of Oklahoma (Norman) showed two distinct and separate detonations.

I happend to be in the back of the Dateline control room when they were cutting (editing) the Oklahoma City bombing piece. They made it look like Timothy McVeigh did it all by himself. I mentioned to one of the producers that there were two detonations and he turned to me angrily and said, "You sound like one of the Freemen!" (A patriot group in Idaho). I said, you can check with the University of Oklahoma." He glared at me. "Why am I just hearing about this now?" I replied, "What do you do for a living?" Well, that ticked him off. He had his marching orders from 'upstairs:' make McVeigh the centerfold and drop everything else.

Broadcast television is divided into two sections: news and entertainment. (Sports is considered part of news). So, while the news divisions were under the microscope of the administration, the entertainment division began to produce darker, more sinister programming. Programs that showed graphic violence, cruelty, adultery, began to replace the "Happy Days" and "Dean Martin" shows. Movies also picked up on this, but TV was in the home and easily accessible to everyone. Ratings went up. People had never seen such stuff on television before. The new violent shows had, what the networks call, a 'lean forward factor.'

The effect of violent programming, especially on children, was the subject of an important study by Dr. Alberta Segal of Stanford University. Young minds, she reported, are affected by extreme acts of violence and these acts encourage the kids to try them out on their friends, classmates and even parents. We started to get wild, lawless kids as a direct result of violent TV programming. Comedy and variety shows disappeared (only to be later replaced by 'Idol' and 'Dancing with the Stars') and grim reality shows, such as 'Survivor' - where people are encouraged to back-stab the other contestants. Mean was in: whether it was Simon Cowell or an unknown contestant in Borneo.

Boxing, once considered a gentlemanly sport, has all but vanished from televison. Now it's ultimate fighting, crazed tattoed jumbos bashing each other in the WWE, or ladies trying to knock each other senseless. Blood means ratings.

The media people still say - in defence of violent and stupid programming - that they create shows that reflect the reality of the world, and this is what people want to see. In truth, the programmers are whores. They would put on naked people smacking each other with broadswords if the censors would allow it. Nudity is next, since naked breasts and four-letter words have found their way past the censors. I'll bet live executions will appear some day. That would be a ratings coup for some 'lucky' network: watching some guy get the electric chair, live and in Hi-Def.

The programming decisions come from gutless, soul-less people who have no interest in anything other than ratings, making money, and getting to the next pay level. They certainly do not care about you, your kids, your family, your community or the truth. If your kid bashes in a neighbor's skull because he has seen it on TV and thinks it might be 'fun' you can point an accusing finger at the programmers and network executives. They don't care. They have lawyers to protect them, and of course the First Amendment. "If you don't like it, don't watch," they say.

The saddest part of all this is that broadcast television began with a bright future. It had (and still has) the power to inform, to uplift, to engender a community spirit, to make people care about others and what is going on in the world. It can be a rallying point and, most importantly, it can report the truth - and not a doctored, watered-down version of it. Just imagine how informed and compassionate we might be as a nation if the networks had not sold out to the administration and to the ratings. It reminds me of the old line from the sci-fi movie: "Why couldn't this genius be used for good instead of evil?"



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Oklahoma truths

Before it was spiked, a CNN reporter said live on TV that she saw two more bombs being removed from the building. Then you heard nothing more about it.

When I first turned on the TV right after it happened, it remember my first thoughts were, there ain't NO amount of fertilizer that could fit in a truck that size that could do that kind of radial shaped damage to a building like that.

Then there were the seismic records which can't be denied, the cameras showing the other men, and the CIA plants at Elohim city.

McVeigh I believe, was convinced to do this so he could be the patsy used to smear the 'patriot' movement during that time when a revolution was stirring. They managed to discredit people enough to stop it all. (See the blog post I just made about how Beck is onto this)

However, they are not going to succeed in smearing whole groups of people now because thanks to the RP campaign that educated so many, the attempt by the Feds to gut this country so they can take over, and the fact that we are all types of people -- young, old, and all colors, and there are 10X as many of us now, it just isn't going to work.

Trying to smear soccer moms living in $500K homes as 'terrorists' is just NOT going to work!

Or for that matter, people who speak out against the IRS, I mean, look they'd have to categorize Daschle, Rangel, Geithner, Killifer, C. Kennedy, and about 3 more since these, as terrorists for all the money they never paid..

Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers

Amen, Jane


Not long after the OKC bombings I heard an interview on WBAI, New York with Ret. General Glenn Parton. He was a demolitions expert in the U.S. military with 20 years' experience. He stated flatly, that the truck bomb could never have produced that kind of damage all by itself; that the building had other detonation devices. He knew what he was talking about. Here is a link to a video talk given by Gen. Parton:

http://generalpartondcpress.blogspot.com/

I also heard an interview with a man who survived. He was at his desk in the front of the building, a little before 9:00 a.m. When the building bombs went off he immediately dove under his desk, for cover. Then the truck bomb went off a few seconds later. Many of the man's co-workers were instantly killed by flying glass and debris. But he was OK, since he had the instinct to take immediate cover. When he got up, the place was devastated and he was the only survivor of his office.

All of the seismic data recorded at the University of Oklahoma (at Norman) and elsewhere were later confiscated by the FBI. As well, all of the videotapes of the cameras across the street from the Murrah Federal Building were confiscated.

Interestingly, Several U.S. Judges, and members of the BATF - all of whom had offices in the Murrah building - were 'tipped off' on their pagers to not go to work that morning. Had they done so, they would probably have been killed.

You are right about McVeigh, Jane. There was also John Doe #2 who, apparently was part of the plot. He was never identified or caught, thought many independent groups learned his identity and that he had a red pickup truck. Had the video surveillance been available, JD#2 would have been seen and probably identified.

Thanks for the informative post.

reedr3v's picture

Interesting observations, zenpiper

thanks for posting your article here.

Much of what you say is true

However, the media ... Hollywood and TV especially ... was never "good" for the people of the United States. It was always used as a brainwashing tool ... meant to take the culture to new lows, step by step, and hawk products that no one really needed. The fact that the disintegration has sped up in the last few decades only attests to the earlier groundwork.

Want proof? Check out the 4-part BBC documentary, "The Century of the Self," (on youtube) about the use of Freudian psychology to control and "sell" us.

This started at the dawn of motion pictures, not in the 1960s. However, by then the government got into the act.

Regarding Oklahoma City ... it was a government operation where patsies, who could be linked to the militia movement, were set up to take the fall. Why? ... to take the heat off the Clinton Administration for the Waco massacre and, most importantly, to give the government the excuse it needed to persecute the growing militia movement. Anyone can read the "official" OKC report and then look at the news footage taken the day of the bombing (where one bomb exploded and two additional bombs were removed from the basement of the building by bomb squads), and figure out who's lying. It's not rocket science!

I agree with much of what you wrote.


However, I don't think that early television was quite into the brainwashing that you suggest. With advertising, yes; there was - and has always been - a effort to make the products irresistable, and that anybody without the latest Maytag dishwasher was not hip. As well there was, for a time, 'subliminal' advertising. An image of a bottle of Coca-Cola would appear for 1/10th of a second and then disappear. It was too fast for the normal brain to see and understand, but the subconscious got it. It planted a seed in the mind of the viewer: I have to get a Coke!

I have not seen The Century of Self, but will take a look.

But, during the 50's - when television really took off - the shows were fairly harmless and straightforward. Ed Sullivan had his variety show every Sunday night, Saturday morning were full of cartoons, and prime time was mostly sitcoms - such as Lucy and The Honeymooners - also Playhouse 90 had some good dramas. Many of the shows engenedered family values. These included Leave it to Beaver, Father Knows Best, and the Danny Thomas Show. If there was brainwashing in any of these programs then I missed it. Certainly there was no real violence, foul language or sexual misadventures. If a cowboy got shot on Roy Rogers' show, there was never any blood; the guy just grabbed his stomach as he fell to the sand. Yes it was violent but we viewers thought, he was a Bad Man and got what was coming to him.

Movies were different and propaganda flourished. Most of us have seen "Reefer Madness." which purported to show the insanity and mayhem that resulted from smoking pot. Prior to that, during WWII, there were scurillous newsreels, feature films and cartoons that stereotyped the Japanese (who all had buck teeth and screamed 'Banzai!') and Nazis (all scowling and unshaven). These were meant to inflame the passions of all good, decent Americans to support Our Boys and the war effort. Yes, the movies always had propaganda. As well, during the 30s and 40s, many of the Hollywood film people felt that communism was superior to our form of government, and some famous people joined the communist party. Whether they were really serious about communism, or merely trying to be 'chic' is moot. The McCarthy hearings, and the subsequent blacklists destroyed the lives and careers of many. That is, until Edward R. Murrow put Sentator Joseph McCarthy on the hotseat and thundered, "Have you no shame, sir?" McCarthy backed down, the HUAC committee was disbanded and many in Hollywood began to breathe easier.

I agree with your assessment of the OKC bombings. Government cover-ups are a disgraceful occurrence in the 'Land of the Free.' Sadly, they still continue.

Continuing the conversation ...

It is quite true that early TV had the appearance of a lamb ... most shows offered wholesome values, high morals, good messages. In order to get a TV into every home in America, IT HAD TO BE THAT WAY. But how long did it take television to slither into the sewer ... 10 or 20 years? Putting it into historical perspective, that's about a nanosecond. Even in the 50's the envelope was being pushed, if gently at first. Incremental pollution of morals is a Communist tool. It's in their own literature. There comes a point where people are so completely demoralized, they will fight for the right to behave like animals, kill their own offspring, etc. At that point (and we're there now) the Communists take over. Demoralized people can't tell right from wrong ... so how can they even recognize the evil in order to fight it?

The reason for life is not to entertain ourselves into a comatose state. God didn't create us to become couch potatoes. Too much television is harmful to children, I don't care how wholesome it is. It creates lazy people ... zombies even. Have you ever seen a child mesmerized by TV? It has a power over the human mind that only pulling the plug can overcome.

Joseph McCarthy was right on the money. Hollywood was full of Communist-Zionists. FDR's government was full of them too and it hasn't changed to date. McCarthy was our last best chance not to end up where we are now. But, the media apparatus vilified the good guy and bestowed victim-hood on the Zionists. And, they've been playing that crappy tune ever since.

Could television be used for good? I suppose that very good people could use television for good. But how many people fit the bill? Television is a powerful tool. The temptation, in a fallen world, will always be to push an ulterior agenda. We'd be far better off and a lot less stupid without it.

I disagree with some of what you wrote


Incremental pollution of morals is a Communist tool. It's in their own literature. There comes a point where people are so completely demoralized, they will fight for the right to behave like animals, kill their own offspring, etc. At that point (and we're there now) the Communists take over. Demoralized people can't tell right from wrong ... so how can they even recognize the evil in order to fight it?

I think you have a few different topics here. Morals is a big territory, and most assume it has to do with 'good' behavior or sexuality. In 1953 Hugh Heffner published the first edition of Playboy. It sent shockwaves around the nation, esp with Marilyn Monroe on the cover. Was this Communist? Not in my view. But it did set off a wave of copy-cat magazines and, later, movies, videos, etc. But there has been porn since the dawn of time, long before Karl Marx: the Kama Sutra is a notable example.

You may have a point about Communism taking over, but I think Socialsm is where we are headed. But I don't yet see anybody 'fight for the right to behave like animals.'

Re: fighting evil. You can only fight, or resist it within yourself. You can't fix another person, no matter how hard you try or how noble your inentions. It's an inside job. Live your life morally and serve as an example. You can encourage others, but that is where it stops.

The reason for life is not to entertain ourselves into a comatose state. God didn't create us to become couch potatoes. Too much television is harmful to children, I don't care how wholesome it is. It creates lazy people ... zombies even. Have you ever seen a child mesmerized by TV? It has a power over the human mind that only pulling the plug can overcome.

You are right about the power of television to harm; it is my initial post. But how does one fight it? There are millions of TVs and millions of kids and adults watching way too much (in my opinion). Again, I have to say that all you can do is to live morally, without trying to force your opinions on another. Instead, gentle persuasion or leading by example is the only possible remedy. You're too smart to try to nanny everybody anywan.

Joseph McCarthy was right on the money. Hollywood was full of Communist-Zionists. FDR's government was full of them too and it hasn't changed to date. McCarthy was our last best chance not to end up where we are now. But, the media apparatus vilified the good guy and bestowed victim-hood on the Zionists. And, they've been playing that crappy tune ever since.

Be careful about combining Communism with Zionism; they are distinct and separate. McCarthy never mentioned Zionists, but he - and the HUAC - committee did go after communists and suspected communists. But if America is the land of the free, then all views ought to be expressed. In theory, it is OK to be a communist in America. However, plotting to overthrow the government is not OK. But the free exchange of views ought to be embraced, even if you don't like the views. Communism would never take hold here voluntarily - it would have to be forced. People in the U.S. cherish freedom and capitalism. It would take a violent revolution to make the U.S. a communist state.

Could television be used for good? I suppose that very good people could use television for good. But how many people fit the bill? Television is a powerful tool. The temptation, in a fallen world, will always be to push an ulterior agenda. We'd be far better off and a lot less stupid without it.

Television programming is often wonderful, esp channels such as Discovery, The History Channel and sometimes PBS. Turner Classic Movies (TCM) has great stuff also, if you like movies. I don't agree with you that all of TV has an ulterior agenda, except to sell advertising and get the ratings up. News, however, is a different story. That is propaganda, all of it - regardless of the network.

But yet, TV can certainly be used for good and often is. But there is so much lousy stuff on TV that it panders to the stupid. Redneck Wedding is a good example of a thoroughly stupid show. But I bet some of the good ole boys watch it and laugh uproariously, not knowing how degraded they have become in the process.

Thanks a lot.

Morals..

By this I think the writer meant morals and right and wrong, like the Feds stealing our money for a higher purpose. The Elitists always think they are right no matter what they are doing because it's for a 'higher purpose'... this is how they justify war, abortion, euthanasia, moving populations, denying people rights, all in the name of 'peace'.

(sounds like the UN!)

Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers

Thanks!

Your post confirms many similar conclusions. At least we have independent reporters on YouTube, etc... for now...

Submit Films..

In the world of film, the Festival de Cannes -- known to many of us as the Cannes Film Festival -- is the largest international showcase of cinematic art. In the world of the yet-to-be-discovered filmmaker, the Cannes Film Festival is a godsend. It's not like the Oscars: Anyone can submit a film, and every submission has the chance to be viewed by representatives of the international movie industry.

Freedom is another way to God...A corrupt government is a straight way to hell.

I believe in Hope & Change..I Hope the government will Change
Spindale-Rutherford County-North Carolina

True, but..


France has always had a free cinema, as has most of Europe. Classic Euro movies such as "M" and "Sundays and Cybelle" would never have been made here. (Both deal with taboo subjects).

I believe it was at Cannes that Michael Moore had his early successes (I may be wrong). Certainly "Roger & Me" had been seen by many before it got a distribution deal in the U.S.. I think it may have won some prizes. Michael did win the "Palme D'Or" with one of his films - either Bowling for Columbine or Fahrenheit 911.

But the U.S. film industry - Oliver Stone in particular - took on hard topics that TV could not. The film industry does not have any regulatory oversight, such as the FCC, so Stone could make "Born on the 4th of July" and "JFK." There was nothing the governmente could do; Stone got his message out.

There have been scores of movie that have exposed corruption or governmental abuses, but the audiences are small compared to TV viewers. Happily, Stone's (and others') movies have been shown on TV, so censorship of the media is not 100%. But that could happen.

Thanks for a smart post.

When the MSM started to

RonPaulLincoln
dog on Ron Paul and that pinhead Carl Cameron asked if Ron Paul had any "electability", I had enough. I called and cancelled my pay TV and I told them exactly why I did. I will not pay to be lied to. While I miss the History and Discovery channels, I also realize my money is no longer supporting the vast amount of other channels that are deceiving us, misleading us and undermining our country. I now get most of my information off of the net and, thankfully, The Daily Paul, and the intelligent, freedom loving patriots here. Besides, I have better things to do with my time then sit in front of a TV! I have been writing letters to all of the newspapers in our county. I would have never done this before while being hypnotized by the "boobtube". The other day I was in the back yard and my neighbor said "hello". He said he had been reading my letters in the paper and asked if was thinking about running for office in our local government. When I go out to the store or something, I run into people who have read my letters and say how much they like them and agree with my point of view. I also have extra food in the cupboard and ammunition and silver in the safe from the money I have saved. All of this simply because I killed my TV!

A little off topic but I bought 500 FTF dvd's to hand out back during the election. When I did, I talked to a person at FTF about broadcasting rights and showing the program on TV. They said to just contact them and they would give authorization for the broadcast. I dropped off a dvd at each of our local tv stations and never heard anything. A couple of weeks ago, one of the stations called me. Seems they want to broadcast FTF. I also dropped of a copy of "Overview of America" and the same thing. All the producers of the program want is to be contacted when it is broadcasted. I would have never done any of this if I still had pay TV! The R3VOLUTION continues!

RonPaulLincoln

Papers biased to the left are folding...



... and in the February tabulation of TV ratings, Fox News Channel, whether you love it or hate it, is #3. CNN is ranked at #15 and MSNBC is at #23. I think this suggests conservatism isn't dead but it is in a fight for it's life. The real problem is that the GOP has abandoned real conservatism and so they can no longer be trusted with conveying the message of true conservatism.



"Men are ruled, at this minute, by the clock, by liars who refuse them news, and by fools who cannot govern."

-G.K. Chesterton

"Men are ruled, at this minute, by the clock, by liars who refuse them news, and by fools who cannot govern."

-G.K. Chesterton

Excellent post!

I wish the CFL would do a money bomb to produce a documentary for the MSM and air in on prime time. The political off-season is the time to make hay!

Nice zenpiper. I think

Nice zenpiper.

I think everyone in the Revolution should check out Edward Bernays book Propaganda and look at the people he greatly influenced (Joseph Goebbels Nazi Propagandist Minister being one of them). Bernays was basically the godfather of our modern day media.

The media IS used as a control mechanism. However, I don't really think that means My Little Pony was a creation of the NWO to make girls rebellious or GIJoe was a device to mold boys into good little soldiers. Many of these shows/movies are made with the express intent of entertainment and to make some money and not really a nefarious NWO plot to destroy mankind.

I agree

.
I hope you did not infer from my essay that toys or some children's shows are part of a plot. I don't think I mentioned them at all. I was talking about unabashed violence.

As a kid I watched Roy Rogers, Gene Autrey, and other shows (including some Disney) that had shooting, fist-fights and mean cattle rustlers. But the violence was never graphic and was pretty minimal. I don't know if I would condone those shows today, but they're a lot easier to take than most of the stuff on TV.

Oh no, I didn't infer that

Oh no, I didn't infer that from your essay at all. Some here probably do though and I just wanted to state my opinion on the matter. Having worked in the visual effects field on hollywood blockbusters I can say that more often than not it's just about telling a good story in a visual narrative format. There are no plots to condition people to the NWO's plans on depopulating the earth or anything like that.

There ARE things like that though but they are pretty obvious. Stuff like An Inconvenient Truth comes to mind. Those are movies we can look at and say definitively they are created with the express purpose of shaping and molding opinion.

"There are no plots to condition people to the NWO's plans" ....

I'm sorry, but I disagree. My 5 year old does watch Nick and Noggin programs, until recently. Has anybody here seen the 2 minute infomercial about B. Obama shown on Nick? If you have, then you realize there most certainly is a plot to condition our children (and people) to the NWO plans.

To Kinsjon

I am an education researcher who speaks all over the state about this and I am VERY interested in hearing about this. Can you email me? Thanks.

Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers

Interesting


I have never seen Nick and Noggin, but what you say does not surprise me. The government has - and has always had - an agenda, and part of it is to get the population to be 100% behind the government and the president.

The broadcasters consider it to be patriotic, but there is no disclaimer and young minds accept what they see as true.

Who's the author?

Very interesting piece...is this properly linked or credited?

Is this yours?

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

I am.

.
I wrote it, Kevin. If you scroll down you can see some of my replies to the posters. I don't know much about politics, but I do know TV and how it works.

Anyhow, thanks.

I liked it.

Refreshing topic and unique personal perspective.

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

Very Interesting!

This is an interesting subject and am glad that it has been brought up. Your unique perspective is appreciated as it shows us some of the inner workings of the media and how truly biased they are, it's absolutely outrageous! Where are all the honest people? Don't we have a conscience anymore? I hope more people will come forward and "spill the beans". Let's take for example the Sibel Edmonds story. I only found out about it because of the internet!! It is a very compelling story! What a brave woman. I thank God for the internet! especially for sites like this, you can find very important stories that are not being reported on or given very little attention in the mainstream media. I hope that they do not find a way to control this medium!! Also in my opinion I have also noticed that the BBC seems to go more in depth when reporting and they also report on many subjects that you just don't see in the States, it's incredible to see them report on stuff that happens in the U.S. and it just gets buried by our media! They are also probably infiltrated but maybe to a lesser degree? What is your take on that? and also do you think that there is a way that they can control the internet?

Fear knocked on my door and Faith answered!

Thanks for the kind words

.
The European news outlets tend to be more open than the American in my opinion but I suspect that there are still some controls. I can't say for sure since I was never 'inside' over there. Radio is still pretty free, especially the Pacifica Network. They have been very fine and do a lot of exposes on various government abuses. Yes they are liberal media, but they exposed corruption - someting the mainstream media would never do.

You are right about the internet and sites like this one. Good information is out there, but of course one must be careful about accepting anything at face value.

Whether the internet will last, or be censored, is a good question. It certainly exists in China and Australia is implementing some controls. Whether that will happen here is anybody's guess.

Thanks again.

Here's why

As a society, we are systematically devaluing the past. We don't honor our parents as much, we don't read old literature as much, we time after time fail to learn from history, we don't follow the constitution, we don't sit down and work to understand the scriptures we claim to follow, and we don't try to learn from those of others. We ditch understanding for novelty; we buy cheap products that are new and flimsy instead of reliable and featureless products of the past. I see this in the workplace - scientists are always looking for the next new toy instead of really trying to solve problems with tried and true techniques of the past.

The contention that I would make is that this is a philosophical extension of the consequences of an inflationary society. That sounds silly, but you can find strong, indirect mechanisms to explain all of these, usually involving profit becoming necessary survival mode (you'll notice how we get pissed of at how once-venerable institutions and individuals have "whored" themselves out) and the social distinction conferred by novelty (see Bourdieu). Inflation fundamentally devalues (material and value) contributions of the past, and by encouraging debt creation and defecit spending, overvalues the future. If we can continue to meet these inflated expectations, we're alright, even if what we're doing is morally questionable. But there's always immense pressure to try new things to keep up - and when we fall short of what we'd hoped for, there's chaos as a whole lot of misplaced value has to unwind itself. The best we can hope for is that it doesn't unwind too violently.

To me, it's perplexing that the government is running simultaneously on both a hope and fear racket... And it's why I'm not bullish on the future.

Now, this is not to say the past is always valuable; a lot of dumb things were said and done in the past. But to, with broad strokes, cast a broad, indirect judgement on everything in the past to have been relatively less important than the future, is dangerous.

Economics, and monetary policy, because it is most universally accepted medium of social exchange, comes around to modify society, even if the changes are so gradual and generational that everybody is duped into thinking that's the way things always were. Unfortunately, the more we devalue history, the less capable we are to identify the mistakes we are making today... and tomorrow... even as debt accumulation means more of society is riding on safe passage through the treacherous waters of the future.

So these days, I'm listening to people who are older than me (although I don't have to agree - learning can be learning from other people's mistakes), and working through how I'm understanding things. I'm working on ways to protect my past, while remaining open-minded about the future. I'm learning history. I'm learning economics. What I'm finding surprising is that it's not as hard as I thought it would be.

Although, I don't think Jeff Foxworthy's
'are you smarter..." celebrates stupidity, it's actually a pretty wry commentary on where we're at, although some of the fifth graders are pretty smart, and usually they are pretty endearing.

Wise and good stuff

.
The Native Americans, as well as other cultures, celebrated the wisdom of the elders, but this didn't take hold much in the U.S.A. It did among farming families, where the older men would show the younger people how to read the ground, the weather, how to plant crops, and so forth. Also tradesmen sometimes teach their kids how to do things like fix cars, build a house, do electrical repairs, fix a washing machine, and so on. In the old days that was how it was done; apprenticeships were common. Not so much any more.

You are right about values also. U.S. society is in such a fast-pace blur now that many of the good things, important things, are left behind. This is just too bad.

You may have a point about the Foxworthy show. Yes, the kid are cute and fairly smart. But for an adult to miss extremely easy qustions and then guffaw about it does not speak well for television, our educational system or the dumb jerk who didn't know the capital of Massachusetts.

It is both sad and maddening...

That these things go on, that this was allowed to happen and no one had the backbone to blow the whistle. And if they did they were eliminated. Sad indeed. That is why I don't watch the media today, I don't let the TV tell me what to do.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.

"Truth is treason in the empire of lies." - Ron Paul

'Field Slave' 2 'House Slave' 'American Prosperity Dream' Matrix

Most of my work with people has been about repairing the damage done by their education and parenting. Their parents and teachers communicated that the highest value a person could hold was to perform well, or at least to appear to perform well. They had learned never to be satisfied with anything less than perfection and always to pretend that everything is okay and improving. Who you are, they were told, is your performance. With such a stress on performance, their whole lives became an act. Then, maintaining and enhancing the act captured all their attention and they began slowly starving to death for lack of the nurturance that comes from commonplace experience.

Almost all of us have been poisoned by such pretense, and few of us grow beyond that. We lie like hell all the time to maintain our systematically indoctrinated image of who we are.

We Americans live privileged lives in a wonderful country with fantastic opportunities and we have been brainwashed since the day we were born. In fact, we are so used to the brainwashing we hardly even notice it any more. We are used to being poisoned on a regular basis so much from within ourselves and outside ourselves that we don't even notice we are feeling sick anymore. As a result, we live in a kind of well-decorated hell together. Telling the truth can help you start to notice how you poison yourself, how you feel as a result, and how you maintain the social structures around you to keep the nausea that comes with maintaining the act. Once that occurs, all hell breaks loose.

Like prisoners of war who together have built our own [ratrace] prison camp, we take pride in what we have built together to survive under the circumstances of imprisonment in the mind, in belief systems that are more advantageous to the limited few than to us and most of the rest of humanity. We beginning to catch on to our conspiracy with each other to take pride in being promoted from “field slave” to “house slave” on the old plantation, while ignoring the issue of economic slavery itself.

~ Practicing Radical Honesty, by Brad Blanton ~
_________________________
"Luther was a profoundly spiritual thinker who was driven to revolt by worldly and incompetent Popes." + "Roses are red. Violets are blue. I'm schizophrenic and so am I" = Practicing Radical Hon(our)sty ColtLaw...

__________________________________________________________
CommonSism: Common Sense Guerrylla Laws 4 a Sustainable Commons

Actually Protestantism leads to radical Individualism ...

(private interpretation = every man his own pope) which leads to isolation of people from each other... The American Way!

I'd say that Luther was profoundly perverted, spiritually speaking. (He was known to have scruples). One of his famous sayings ... "Sin boldly, but believe more boldly still," is an invitation to hypocrisy at best, or even schizophrenia.

Popes are human beings. Some are great, a few were awful and most fall somewhere in between. Being human, they definitely make mistakes (though not when speaking ex cathedra on matters of faith or morals ... but those are rare occasions).

Traditional Catholic culture is vastly different from Protestant culture. Catholicism is a family affair within which soul mates are abundant. Of course, in America, it has always been meek and sickly, due to the desire of most bishops to prove they can "get along" in a pluralistic society (heaven forbid we should convert anyone). Too bad for America that vibrant Catholicism didn't flourish here. And God forgive us for not sacrificing ourselves to convert our countrymen and save our country from Protestant utilitarianism and utter banality.

Very fine observations

.
It's pointless to blame people for being ignorant, since everybody thinks they are smart. And, as you nicely point out, therein lies the problem.

Thomas Merton had a good line: "What do you say to a man who doesn't know he is slapping you?" It's impossible to answer in a good or meaningful way.

As far as whistleblowers go... that is a Very Tough situation, especially for men and women who have jobs, families, plans for retirement, and so forth. All that is put into jeopardy if they expose corruption. And, as you probably know, nothing much happens except the whistleblower loses his job.

I still watch the news because sometimes there are 'feature' segments that are fun to watch; such as a dog who crossed the country to find its owner, or Alex Rodriguez, or what's happening with the European space program. There is some good stuff on the network news broadcasts, it's jsut the news that is lousy.

Thanks for a smart post.

It feels this way too.

With things getting out of hand it has always felt like the media wasn't doing their job. For instance it just never sat well when I asked myself "How could something as big as Iraq be such a huge mistake?"

Now its the age of every American realizing that they have no integrity. Any rational person can sense it. Something is wrong with the media when patriotic Americans are treated like criminals and the criminals are allowed to money launder in D.C.

I hope freejesseventura reads this.

whole post.

Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/

Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/

good post

enjoyed the read.

chinkadaro

Zenpiper...no disrespect intended, but I disagree

We have never had a free press. I understand that you were in the business and have that view. This fact, does not however provide support for the claim that our press was free until Nixon.

Cronkite was ALWAYS an one world government shill....always.

The Sulzbergers at the New York Times have ALWAYS been one world government shills.

The men in power have always maintained control of the "influential" newspapers and the primary drive behind the development of network TV was to use it as a mind control organ.

In the 1930's Prescott Bush and A.E. Harriman founded companies that funded Hitler's war machine. Both of these men plead guilty in Federal Court of "aiding the enemy." Three of their companies were liquidated by the United States Attorney for the district of New York. All of this is on public record.

Harriman ends up as governor of New York.
Bush ends up winning the senate seat in Connecticut.

Where was the Hartford Courant on that one?
This man funds Thyssen, Hitler's primary backer and he gets to be a senator 7 years later?

I guess the Sulzbergers didn't care that A.E Harriman's private bank funded companies that used slave labor during the war. They backed him for Governor and he won.

Free press?

I cannot accept that the above would be considered "isolated incidents."

The City of London is a private corporation, basically it's own sovereign nation. Does our media discuss this? The Vatican is another nation state beholden to no one but the power families of this planet. Any media thoughts on this? Vatican has been around for quite a while.

91% of the land in Nevada is owned by the federal government.this is not a recent development.

Spitzer has had a hooker habit since he was in law school. All of the media and law enforcement in the state of New York new about this habit. Why did the media drop the hooker story when it did? All of a sudden the 20+ year hooker habit is bad?

Every president that has opposed a national bank has been either killed or shot at...this goes back quite a ways...Andy Jackson.

I respectfully disagree, zenpiper. The media has ALWAYS been controlled....as you have observed, they are just more overt about it now.

The goal is to disintegrate our society. In some ways that goal has been achieved except for one thing.

Humans have a conscience. When a person lies the conscience calls to them.This is a force of immeasurable power that the men in power cannot control as God cannot be controlled.

Hate always fails.

Hope and truth are always victorious.

Thanks for the article.

Unify

The press is not free.

And hasn't been since the Rockfellers bought it up in 1925.

I mean how else could the media take a virtually accomplishment-less "fringe" candidate who belonged to the socialist part as recently as 1996 and put him in the White House?

By downplaying his sordid and creepy background. By non-reporting. by doing what they are told.

Many feel he's an agent for a foreign government and I agree and so does Kissinger.

We've been returned to the European oligarchy... and it only took a few hundred years to do it by not only corrupting the media, but the schools and every other social and civic organization along the way.

You can blame it on the 'foundations' -- Ford, Carnegie, Rockfeller, etc etc etc. for poisoning the American experiment.

Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers

Even before that


William Randolph Hearst engineered the Spanish American War in order to sell newspapers..

As far as presidential candidates go, nearly all of them have been placed in office by higher-ups. In recent times, Jimmy Carter, George Bush, Bill Clinton and Bush 43. Obama also, since he selected Brzezinski as one of his foreign security advisors. Brzezinski has been in the thick of the Rockefeller camp, going back to the founding of the Trilateral Commission, and the Carter presidency.

I encourage you to take a look at John Coleman's 10-part series on YouTube. Just search (on YouTube) for 'Coleman Truth' and they will come up. He spills the beans on the Rockefellers, and how they are allied (via the CFR) with the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) and the Tavistock Institute. These are the European oligarchy to which you refer. Also worth a nod is the Bilderburgers, with Queen Elizabeth II and Queen Beatrix (Holland) on the board. But these are all farm teams, compared to the Committee of 300 that Coleman speaks of. Rockefeller is part of that club also, along with various members of the Rothschild family, and members of the 'Black Nobility.' It's worse than most Daily Paulers can ever imagine.

Don't believe it?

Just take it from Rockfeller himself:

"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." - - David Rockefeller from his "Memoirs" (p.405).

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

-- David Rockefeller... Baden-Baden, Germany 1991

Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers

You may be right

.
Certaily governmental corruption has existed since, at least, the time of Lincoln, and probably before. There may have been pressure on some of the newspapers to report favorable (or unfavorable) stories.

Willian Randolph Hearst gave a boost to the Spanish American War ("You supply the pictures and I'll supply the war!") in order to get the scoop and sell a lot of newspapers. Knowing of man's propensity for unabashed greed, none of this would surprise me.

Interesting you mentioned Eliot Spitzer. Spitzer was a good guy, despite the hookers. As I understand it, he was about to expose some widespread corruption that would bring down some important people. He had the evidence and was going to move forward. That is when they busted him for hiring call girls. (Sorry, I don't recall all the details).

A similar thing was reported to have happened to JFK Jr. He was going to go public in his magazine, "George," about various things that the administration did not want made known. It may have had to do with the assassination of his father. But - according to some - his airplane was tampered with, so that it would become unflyable at a certain altitude.

Senators Mel Carnahan (Missouri) and Paul Wellstone (Minnesota) also died in mysterious airplane crashes. Former Democratic Party Leader Ron Brown also met the same fate. Evil-doings were evident in all of the above but the media steered well clear. There have been a lot of political assassinations that the media would not even investigate. Non-political hits included Karen Silkwood and Danny Casolaro. Both knew too much and were going to spill the beans. Colonel Sabow was killed because he was going to go public that the U.S. Forest Service airplanes were used to get and deliver drugs.

Drugs is another whole area that the media would not touch. You may recall the Iran/CONTRA hearings when visitors in the gallery shouted to the panel to ask about the drugs! They were muscled out of the room, but the guys were right: Oliver North, George Bush 41 and Bill Clinton (among others) were engaged in brining massive amounts of cocaine into the U.S. Did the media even touch it?

As far as Cronkite, the Sulzbergers, and others, are concerned, you probably are right. Certainly they were members of the CFR, which was established by John D. Rockefeller in the 1920s. Many important people were allied with the CFR and the Rockefellers. They were convinced that a one-world government was preferable to a lot of little ones. But local newspapers remained untouched for a long time, until the big wire services started feeding doctored news to the local dailies (AP, UPI, etc.)

My post was mainly about TV, and how it has devolved from a family-oriented media, with some pretty good values, to whorehouse of blood and misinformation. It continues to get worse. There's a new show (I don't recall the network) called "Breaking Bad." This continues the trend of lowering the bar.

Thanks for the kind reply.