Thouights on the Mainstream Media

 I'm writing this post in response to a friend who wrote the following:

I think that part of the problem is that we are not on the same page about major institutions that provide enlightened investigative reporting and editorial positions.  For me the New York Times and the Washington Post and similar newspapers have top notch reporters who have specialized skill sets that allow for in-depth analysis of important issues.  This is overseen by an editorial crew who assure that high levels of journalistic integrity are maintained.  I myself have less confidence in blogs because there is a lack of careful attention, and there certainly is no editorial review.  So--we are ending up getting our news from different sources.  And, this could have the effect of taking us in different directions. 

My feeling is that The New York Times and Washington Post and similar newspapers have deeply compromised reporters that follow the editorial imperatives of their elite sponsors.  They do not practice journalistic integrity, but rather have risen to positions of prominence because they are willing to spout the company line.  Ultimately, the bulk of the media money goes to large organizations that support the United States led global empire against perceived enemies such as Russia, China, Iran, and socialists at home and abroad.  Honest reporters have to work elsewhere, and there are many alternative outlets which provide more balanced and factual reporting and analysis.  

My opinion is not based upon inherent distrust of the establishment.  I have gone back and forth throughout my life as to the degree that I trust establishment media outlets.  Generally, I have been trusting.  But I've noticed that the major media outlets have been broadcasting information from unspecified "intelligence sources" and that this information has been proven faulty in many instances, leading to horrible mistakes both at home and abroad.

Here are some of my previous writings on the subject, along with some analyses from other sources:

• The NY Times is a Propaganda Outlet for the White Supremacist Chauvinist U.S. Empire
  (my blog, 9/5/2020)
• Media, Military Intelligence Complex, and Other Ramblings  (my blog, 2/22/2020)
• Masks, Hydroxychloroquine, and a Reason to Vote Green  (my blog, 8/4/2020)
• The Post-Objectivity Era (Matt Taibbi, 9/19/2020)
• Fake News on Russia and Other Official Enemies, The New York Times, 1917–2017 (Edward Herman in "Monthly Review", 7/1/2017)
• Politics is an American Industry (Steve Randy Waldman, 9/17/2020)
• The World: What is Really Happening (Craig Murray, 5/25/2019)
• Our Press Sucks (my blog, 6/10/2019)
• The Intelligence Community Tells Us What's Happening (my blog, 5/19/2019)
• The Terrifying Rise of the Zombie State Narrative (Crain Murray, 1/2/2020)

This is certainly an important topic.  Our country is horribly polarized due largely to a polarized media landscape.  From Matt Taibbi

We live in a time of incredible political division. Many of us have had the experience of talking to someone whose idea of reality seems to be completely alien to our own. It’s become difficult to have an argument in the traditional sense. People with differing opinions no longer seem to be working from commonly-accepted sets of facts. It’s a problem that has a lot to do with changes in how we receive and digest information, especially through the news media...  

Fundamentally, this means the press has gone from selling a vision of reality they perceive to be acceptable to a broad mean, to selling division. For technological, commercial, and political reasons this instinct has become more exaggerated with time, snowballing toward the dysfunctional state we’re in today...

Audiences are completely siloed. A Pew study that just came out showed that of the people who say Fox is their primary news source, 93% describe themselves as Republicans. For MSNBC, the number is 95% Democrats. The New York Times is 91% Democrats. Even NPR is now 87% Democrats:

So one channel is talking almost exclusively to one group of people, while other channels are talking almost exclusively to another group of people.

So it's understandable 

2 Views on Biden and Democrats

1. Our country is deeply and dangerously polarized.  Biden represents the moderation we need if we are not to tear ourselves apart.  He is inclusive and open to conservatives, as demonstrated by the support he has received from Republicans, and will therefore defuse the tension while advocating for better policies in areas such as the environment, education, and economic equity.
   
   
2. The Democrats have been the weaker party since 1980 when Reagan was elected.  In 1980, the Democrats controlled the presidency and had large majorities in both chambers of Congress.  The only Democratic presidents during this time frame have been Clinton and Obama, and the Republicans were particularly contemptuous of Obama, openly declaring that they would make his presidency unsuccessful.  Beginning with the election of Trump or slightly before, the Democrats began responding to the Republicans in kind, openly opposing Trump, regardless of facts, including an unfounded accusation of treason.  It is this movement that has driven the Biden candidacy and plunged the country into deep and dangerous polarization and nationalist madness, employing various spy agencies to set the national discourse.  The election of Biden would validate this dangerous and disturbing turn by the Democrats.  Biden must be defeated to provide space for a more intelligent and moral leadership.

2 Views on Trump and Republicans

1. Trump should be fought tooth and nail because he brings out the worst in Republicans.  For example, there are racist and violent elements in the Republican base, and Trump legitimizes these elements and brings them to power.  Get rid of Trump and people will see that such behavior cannot be successful in our country.
   
   
2. The country indeed has racist and violent people, and the Republicans have been playing with fire for decades in courting and encouraging these people.  Trump is a particularly inept figurehead for the Republican party and exposes their weaknesses.  Get rid of Trump and we may get something worse, especially if the replacement is weak and of questionable legitimacy.

The NY Times is a Propaganda Outlet for the White Supremacist U.S. Empire

I don't generally like the term "white supremacist" as it has come to be used as a reference to any injustice in our current system of governance.  "Capitalist" is better, but still too broad.  So here's a stab at a better title:

The NY Times is a Propaganda Outlet for the Chauvinistic U.S. Empire

Chauvinism is a form of extreme patriotism and nationalism, a fervent faith in national excellence and glory. It is an irrational belief in the superiority or dominance of one's own group or people, who are seen as strong and virtuous, while others are considered weak or unworthy.

That's better, in my view.

Here's an example that recently caught my eye:

RUSSIAGATE: NYT, FB & FBI Say Anti-Trump Site, Now Shutdown, Was Russian Effort to Help Trump Win – Consortiumnews

Misgivings about who ran this site, however, can co-exist with legitimate alarm about the combined attacks by the FBI, the Times and other corporate media on the political nature — and not the accuracy — of the published content. That presents the spectacle of a leading news outlet and two social media companies joining a state security agency in an effort to trample press freedom...

PeaceData was accused of being funded by the St. Petersburg-based Internet Research Agency, which the Times says “was very active in the 2016 presidential election, and a recent bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report detailed Russian interference in support of Mr. Trump’s election.” In fact, half of IRA’s Facebook ads were purchased after the 2016 election and half of those before the election supported Hillary Clinton, and the other half, Trump. The IRA spent about $100,000 on the ads, compared to the $6.5 billion spent by the Clinton and Trump campaigns.

“Now Facebook and Twitter are offering evidence of this meddling,” the fourth paragraph of the Times story begins, although nowhere in the rest of the article is any evidence presented. The Times says Facebook made its decision based on a report — which the Times does not link to — written by a company called Graphika.

While spotlighting PeaceData’s purported links to the Russian government, the Times fails to provide readers the same service when it comes to Graphika’s own official connections, in this case to the U.S. government.

This pattern of lockstep chauvinism on the part of the U.S. establishment, including many mainstream Republicans as well as Democrats, is why I consider Democrats the bigger threat to the downtrodden of the world than I do Trump and his supporters.  The world is a big place, and there is tremendous institutional and legal support for the rights of black Americans.  This is great.  But the militarized chauvinism of Republicans and Democrats which destroyed the Middle East is on the loose, with the NY Times leading the charge.  

Putin was right about Iraq WMDs; Mueller and the New York Times were wrong. The pattern has continued and intensified in recent years, in my opinion.  I could be wrong, as only the secretive intelligence agencies know the truth of such matters.  But my best guess is that our intelligence agencies have been on the wrong side of critical stories related to war in the Middle East, domestic U.S. politics, and relations with Russia.

Accuracy matters.  And that's why I've used the term propaganda in the title of this post.  

Propaganda is communication that is used primarily to influence an audience and further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be presenting facts selectively to encourage a particular synthesis 

I believe in the enlightenment ideals upon which the U.S. was founded, and which have been improved upon through the abolition of slavery, suffrage for women, and granting of legal rights to other minorities.  The world is a cold, cruel place in terms of power politics, and I appreciate that the NY Times and other establishment institutions are trying to spread the enlightenment, and fight back against Trumpian efforts to diminish enlightenment ideals. 

I'm a humanist and look forward to engaging constructively with as many people, whatever background or political persuasion, as possible.