You are so right, Alex. Drives me mad that most people think what the TV tells them to think and they have so disengaged their brains they don't even realise they have been given their 'opinions'. Aaaaaarrrgghh
And even when reporting matters of objective, verifiable historic facts, the media often get it wrong, deliberately.
Here’s just NBC:
1993:
NBC Admits It Rigged Crash, Settles GM Suit
In an extraordinary public apology, NBC said Tuesday night that it erred in staging a fiery test crash of a General Motors pickup truck for its “Dateline NBC” news program and agreed to settle a defamation suit filed by the auto maker.
“We deeply regret we included the inappropriate demonstration in our ‘Dateline’ report,” said a statement read by NBC News co-anchors Jane Pauley and Stone Phillips Tuesday night. “We apologize to our viewers and to General Motors. We have also concluded that unscientific demonstrations should have no place in hard news stories at NBC. That’s our new policy.”
The apology, still being negotiated within five minutes of air time, was part of a settlement of a lawsuit GM filed Monday over film used in a Nov. 17 segment of “Dateline.”
In its apology, NBC admitted that it had used incendiary devices to ensure that a fire would erupt if gasoline leaked from the truck being hit by a test car...
“During our investigation it became evident that there was an error made in the production process that we deeply regret. We will be taking the necessary steps to prevent this from happening in the future and apologize to our viewers.”
That apology addresses the “Today” show’s failure to abridge accurately the conversation between Zimmerman and the dispatcher in this high-profile case. This is how the program portrayed a segment of that conversation:
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.
And here is how it actually went down:
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.
Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?
Obviously the selection of stories, how they are structured, what aspects were included or omitted, this is positively ancient in the news business. Originally no one made a pretense of objectivity, you bought the newspaper that shared your outlook or prejudices. Later, though, with the supposed professionalization of the media, we were supposed to believe it at least aimed for objectivity. Of course what we got was Walter Duranty earning the New York Times a Pulitzer Award for covering up the Holomodor, Stalin’s terror-famine in the Ukraine.
But even then, outside of opinion columns, the media didn’t positively coach you on how to think. I remember when the media turned this corner, and started blatantly inserting opinions into news. I just stared at my radio one morning when NPR reported the results of a poll, one asking whether Obama was a Muslim.
Some shockingly high percentage of Americans surveyed thought he was. But the newsreader went on to editorialize, “That’s wrong. Mr. Obama identifies as a Christian.”
Well, yes, but surely
most of those surveyed already knew he went to church. They were answering what they thought Obama REALLY was.
I wasn’t saying that Obama was or was not a Muslim; I was saying that in reporting the results of a survey on the subject, the media don’t get to tell us those surveyed were correct in their opinions.
This little extracurricular indulgence became just rampant in recent years, so whenever President Trump commented on election integrity, his statements couldn’t simply be reported as news, no they had to be additionally characterized as false, debunked, discredited etc
Well I was saying that I knew instinctively, as apparently did many others, that he was Muslim. I was just trying to think back to when I instinctively knew not to believe everything in MSM and I probably would have to say going back to JFK assassination, a
monumental event in my young life, would be the Warren Commission. It just didn't feel believable. So I've been a skeptic all my life. And obviously over the years the cabal has grown ever more emboldened w their lies to where it is becoming obvious to the vast majority. It started long before Obozo he was just a catalyst for all things evil.
I personally strongly doubt Obama is Muslim or has any particular religious feeling. All the causes he backed were those of the most strident secularists.
I will grant you that President Obama might be somewhat culturally Muslim, just as Bill Clinton is culturally Baptist. And Obama muddied the waters himself, saying (in Cairo!) that “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam!” and gave NASA the job of Muslim outreach.
Anyway, the honest way for NPR to have handled the survey would be about like this:
NPR host: “If these survey results can be extrapolated out to the general population, then it seems millions of Americans actively doubt the President’s assurances that he is a Christian. Do you think he has some work to do in this area, to bring the American people along?”
NPR guest: “Oh, most definitely, and the President does have an outreach program in place, staff at work in this area…”
FYI Obumba used to wear some sort of Muslim ring. He was raised w it in Indonesia. What the fool really believes, I could care less, he's as Satanic as the get up he was photographed in at, I believe, Bohemian Grove. The real Muzzies ought to give him the full gay, off the roof treatment in either case.
Very good points, thanks! So, you believe that this opinionated journalism had risen during Obama times? Could it be because Obama repealed the law which banned CIA and the 'deep state' from propagandizing Americans, so they started to do it?
I didn’t know about that, but there was always going to be stateside blowback from US influence operations overseas.
Apart from things like Operation Mockingbird, whose depth and breadth may still be disputed, to make the Congress for Cultural Freedom seem more credible, if other Western countries, the actual targets of secret CIA influence all had chapters, then America would have to have one too
Yeah, well I don’t know about that. The CIA only dates from 1947 and we had all sorts of propaganda people believed before that. As official, accepted policies, we departed from the Declaration about 200 years ago, the Constitution about 100 years ago. Jonah Goldberg’s chapter on Woodrow Wilson is, shall we say, unencouraging.
Goldberg:
““I believe it is no exaggeration,” wrote sociologist Robert Nisbet, “to say that the West’s first real experience with totalitarianism — political absolutism extended into every possible area of culture and society, education, religion, industry, the arts, local community and family included, with a kind of terror always waiting in the wings — came with the American war state under Woodrow Wilson.”
Wilson introduced domestic spying, censorship, violent political intimidation of opponents and economic statism into the American DNA. Pro-Wilson intellectuals celebrated the “social possibilities of war,” in the words of John Dewey. By that they meant the ability to force Americans to, as Frederick Lewis Allen put it, “lay by our good-natured individualism and march in step.” The enduring notion that experts could plan the economy from Washington was largely born in Wilson’s “war socialism.”
It’s not even clear that WOODROW Wilson was doing all this. At some point he was personally somewhat incapacitated, and it was believed in some quarters that MRS Wilson was running the White House: “We have petticoat government!”
There seems to be little if any pushback on the “crime is down” story pushed by the media. What they are not telling the public is that due to a change in FBI reporting methodology (perhaps conveniently timed) there are no reports from jurisdictions covering almost 50% of the US population. There is no data from major crime centers including LA NY San Francisco, Oakland.
"More or less all Western media - both Left and right - are engaged into political propaganda. The only difference is..."
I think another difference is that the leftist media is THE mass media. A lot of Americans still mostly access cable news (all far-left except RINO Fox), local newspapers (all leftist), big newspapers (all leftist), local TV stations (all leftist), big social media (all leftist)...
As long as the leftists control THE MASS MEDIA, they will get the last word and the narrative in the forefront of the public mind will be the leftist narrative.
When commentators expose the government’s corruption/conflicts of interest and lies with cold hard facts I don’t see this as political propaganda. or bias. SNC Lavalin, Aga Khan, McKinsey, Arrivescam to name just a few that commentators rightly condemned the Trudeau government for based on facts and the reality of the Trudeau government’s determination to be totally unaccountable to Parliament and Canadians. Their determination to coverup their corruption is out there in plain sight for rational people to see. Of course the Liberals along with their smear mongering attacks consider this “far right” political bias. Just like Trudeau attempted to smear anyone demanding the truth about Chinese interference as a racist.
Well, I don't think exposing corruption with facts is propaganda. I believe replacing facts with opinions is propaganda. And to be fair, I had seen Left doing this far more often than the right, so I'm on your side here I believe.
You are so right, Alex. Drives me mad that most people think what the TV tells them to think and they have so disengaged their brains they don't even realise they have been given their 'opinions'. Aaaaaarrrgghh
And even when reporting matters of objective, verifiable historic facts, the media often get it wrong, deliberately.
Here’s just NBC:
1993:
NBC Admits It Rigged Crash, Settles GM Suit
In an extraordinary public apology, NBC said Tuesday night that it erred in staging a fiery test crash of a General Motors pickup truck for its “Dateline NBC” news program and agreed to settle a defamation suit filed by the auto maker.
“We deeply regret we included the inappropriate demonstration in our ‘Dateline’ report,” said a statement read by NBC News co-anchors Jane Pauley and Stone Phillips Tuesday night. “We apologize to our viewers and to General Motors. We have also concluded that unscientific demonstrations should have no place in hard news stories at NBC. That’s our new policy.”
The apology, still being negotiated within five minutes of air time, was part of a settlement of a lawsuit GM filed Monday over film used in a Nov. 17 segment of “Dateline.”
In its apology, NBC admitted that it had used incendiary devices to ensure that a fire would erupt if gasoline leaked from the truck being hit by a test car...
www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-02-10-mn-1335-story.html
2012:
NBC issues apology on Zimmerman tape screw-up
“During our investigation it became evident that there was an error made in the production process that we deeply regret. We will be taking the necessary steps to prevent this from happening in the future and apologize to our viewers.”
That apology addresses the “Today” show’s failure to abridge accurately the conversation between Zimmerman and the dispatcher in this high-profile case. This is how the program portrayed a segment of that conversation:
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.
And here is how it actually went down:
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.
Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/nbc-issues-apology-on-zimmerman-tape-screw-up/2012/04/03/gIQA8m5jtS_blog.html
2015:
NBC suspends Brian Williams for six months over Iraq helicopter story
Network says actions of TV news anchor were ‘wrong and completely inappropriate’ and he is being taken off-air without pay
theguardian.com/media/2015/feb/11/brian-williams-nbc-suspends-news-anchor-for-six-months-over-helicopter-story
Thanks for these stories! I'm going to restack them and to show to people, hope you do not mind.
I don’t mind at all, but it’s an older compilation, so the links may not all work by now
Obviously the selection of stories, how they are structured, what aspects were included or omitted, this is positively ancient in the news business. Originally no one made a pretense of objectivity, you bought the newspaper that shared your outlook or prejudices. Later, though, with the supposed professionalization of the media, we were supposed to believe it at least aimed for objectivity. Of course what we got was Walter Duranty earning the New York Times a Pulitzer Award for covering up the Holomodor, Stalin’s terror-famine in the Ukraine.
But even then, outside of opinion columns, the media didn’t positively coach you on how to think. I remember when the media turned this corner, and started blatantly inserting opinions into news. I just stared at my radio one morning when NPR reported the results of a poll, one asking whether Obama was a Muslim.
Some shockingly high percentage of Americans surveyed thought he was. But the newsreader went on to editorialize, “That’s wrong. Mr. Obama identifies as a Christian.”
Well, yes, but surely
most of those surveyed already knew he went to church. They were answering what they thought Obama REALLY was.
Oh please. I saw thru that creep from day one.
I wasn’t saying that Obama was or was not a Muslim; I was saying that in reporting the results of a survey on the subject, the media don’t get to tell us those surveyed were correct in their opinions.
This little extracurricular indulgence became just rampant in recent years, so whenever President Trump commented on election integrity, his statements couldn’t simply be reported as news, no they had to be additionally characterized as false, debunked, discredited etc
Well I was saying that I knew instinctively, as apparently did many others, that he was Muslim. I was just trying to think back to when I instinctively knew not to believe everything in MSM and I probably would have to say going back to JFK assassination, a
monumental event in my young life, would be the Warren Commission. It just didn't feel believable. So I've been a skeptic all my life. And obviously over the years the cabal has grown ever more emboldened w their lies to where it is becoming obvious to the vast majority. It started long before Obozo he was just a catalyst for all things evil.
I personally strongly doubt Obama is Muslim or has any particular religious feeling. All the causes he backed were those of the most strident secularists.
I will grant you that President Obama might be somewhat culturally Muslim, just as Bill Clinton is culturally Baptist. And Obama muddied the waters himself, saying (in Cairo!) that “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam!” and gave NASA the job of Muslim outreach.
Anyway, the honest way for NPR to have handled the survey would be about like this:
NPR host: “If these survey results can be extrapolated out to the general population, then it seems millions of Americans actively doubt the President’s assurances that he is a Christian. Do you think he has some work to do in this area, to bring the American people along?”
NPR guest: “Oh, most definitely, and the President does have an outreach program in place, staff at work in this area…”
FYI Obumba used to wear some sort of Muslim ring. He was raised w it in Indonesia. What the fool really believes, I could care less, he's as Satanic as the get up he was photographed in at, I believe, Bohemian Grove. The real Muzzies ought to give him the full gay, off the roof treatment in either case.
NPR and honest don't belong in the same sentence.
Obumba lol🤣😂
Very good points, thanks! So, you believe that this opinionated journalism had risen during Obama times? Could it be because Obama repealed the law which banned CIA and the 'deep state' from propagandizing Americans, so they started to do it?
I didn’t know about that, but there was always going to be stateside blowback from US influence operations overseas.
Apart from things like Operation Mockingbird, whose depth and breadth may still be disputed, to make the Congress for Cultural Freedom seem more credible, if other Western countries, the actual targets of secret CIA influence all had chapters, then America would have to have one too
Good I told you something new too.
Well, Americans were much more immune to propaganda before CIA began to mindfuck them.
Yeah, well I don’t know about that. The CIA only dates from 1947 and we had all sorts of propaganda people believed before that. As official, accepted policies, we departed from the Declaration about 200 years ago, the Constitution about 100 years ago. Jonah Goldberg’s chapter on Woodrow Wilson is, shall we say, unencouraging.
Goldberg:
““I believe it is no exaggeration,” wrote sociologist Robert Nisbet, “to say that the West’s first real experience with totalitarianism — political absolutism extended into every possible area of culture and society, education, religion, industry, the arts, local community and family included, with a kind of terror always waiting in the wings — came with the American war state under Woodrow Wilson.”
Wilson introduced domestic spying, censorship, violent political intimidation of opponents and economic statism into the American DNA. Pro-Wilson intellectuals celebrated the “social possibilities of war,” in the words of John Dewey. By that they meant the ability to force Americans to, as Frederick Lewis Allen put it, “lay by our good-natured individualism and march in step.” The enduring notion that experts could plan the economy from Washington was largely born in Wilson’s “war socialism.”
Sorry, I meant to make clear that chapter or chapters is found in Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism.
The quote above is from this piece:
https://www.dispatch.com/story/opinion/cartoons/2014/08/07/jonah-goldberg-commentary-pretty-much/23650061007/
Thanks!
Didn't know so much detail on Wilson.
Well, CIA was preceded by OSS, and there was an Intelligence prior to OSS too.
Either way, media propaganda is bad and should be exposed and countered.
It’s not even clear that WOODROW Wilson was doing all this. At some point he was personally somewhat incapacitated, and it was believed in some quarters that MRS Wilson was running the White House: “We have petticoat government!”
Most people are dumbazzes
There seems to be little if any pushback on the “crime is down” story pushed by the media. What they are not telling the public is that due to a change in FBI reporting methodology (perhaps conveniently timed) there are no reports from jurisdictions covering almost 50% of the US population. There is no data from major crime centers including LA NY San Francisco, Oakland.
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2023/07/13/fbi-crime-rates-data-gap-nibrs
(added )
What the reports are saying is that 50% of the population are experiencing vastly more homicides than they were before Biden came to office.
It is hard to believe that the major media are that stupid to not realize they are again lying to the public.
A reminder that the
Russian Dossier,
Natural evolution of COVID and
Russian Disinformation (Hunter Biden Laptop)
stories were all knowingly false to anyone who took a serious look at the available information.
The Biden Crime Reduction Miracle
is another example of real disinformation fabricated by the left to advance their agenda.
Actually I didn't know of this change in FBI reporting methodology, thanks for informing me!
Can you link this info to me so I could save it somewhere?
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2023/07/13/fbi-crime-rates-data-gap-nibrs
"More or less all Western media - both Left and right - are engaged into political propaganda. The only difference is..."
I think another difference is that the leftist media is THE mass media. A lot of Americans still mostly access cable news (all far-left except RINO Fox), local newspapers (all leftist), big newspapers (all leftist), local TV stations (all leftist), big social media (all leftist)...
As long as the leftists control THE MASS MEDIA, they will get the last word and the narrative in the forefront of the public mind will be the leftist narrative.
Great point too, thanks for adding up here!
When commentators expose the government’s corruption/conflicts of interest and lies with cold hard facts I don’t see this as political propaganda. or bias. SNC Lavalin, Aga Khan, McKinsey, Arrivescam to name just a few that commentators rightly condemned the Trudeau government for based on facts and the reality of the Trudeau government’s determination to be totally unaccountable to Parliament and Canadians. Their determination to coverup their corruption is out there in plain sight for rational people to see. Of course the Liberals along with their smear mongering attacks consider this “far right” political bias. Just like Trudeau attempted to smear anyone demanding the truth about Chinese interference as a racist.
Well, I don't think exposing corruption with facts is propaganda. I believe replacing facts with opinions is propaganda. And to be fair, I had seen Left doing this far more often than the right, so I'm on your side here I believe.