It’s nice when a prominent republican occasionally (mostly rarely) stands up to Trump. Today’s John McCain Washington Post op-ed was a welcome addition.
It’s not like the most important issues often make the news. After all, look how long and deeply anthropomorphic global climate change was suppressed. How often is the true reach of the military discussed? Or the reasons for which it is deployed. Bread and circuses, with one disgusting ringmaster and his sycophantic psychopaths on the high wire.
Not exactly. Except for the highly political and highly contentious Peace Prize (Adolf Hitler was a nominee in 1934!), the awards are determined by a primarily Swedish committee, and awarded by the King of Sweden – not Norway. (See ‘The Nobel Prize A History of Genius, Controversy and Prestige’ by Burton Feldman Arcade Publishing, New York, 2000.)
Russia should win the Fake News Awards hands down. Trump should arrange Putin to be there to accept a prize. He should easily win the prize for best fake news story about Hillary Clinton.
The truth is people rarely really want the truth. They want an echo of what they “think” is truth. Not what they “know” to be true. Someone that really wants and needs the truth will search for it high and low.
But it’s hard to argue with his awards when the media got it so vert wrong on so many occasions. If the press would give up their dreams of being the next Woodward or Bernstein, and just honestly report what’s going on, wed all be better off.
I don’t know if the good citizen cares about the actual facts or not, but the primary accusation against Russia is that the Russian government hacked into the Dems’ computers and then released (through wikileaks) a trove of emails that exposed Hillary Clinton’s corruption.
An example of what was exposed is Clinton’s speech to her Wall Street backers, (which she had refused to release) in which she explained the “two-position” theory of modern American Democracy.
“Don’t worry about anything you hear me say out on the campaign trail”, she told her Wall Street backers. (This is paraphrased, not an actual direct quote). “A politician has to have two positions on every issue. A public position to bamboozle the rubes, and her REAL position that supports the agenda of her backers”.
There’s actually no evidence at ALL that the Russians hacked the Dems computers. Quite the opposite, there is convincing evidence that there was no hack at all, but rather that a whistleblower in the Clinton campaign stole the data, downloaded it on a usb thumb drive, and gave it to wikileaks. (The most convincing evidence is in the metadata, which shows that files were downloaded at a speed that is not possible over the internet, but exactly matches the speed of a computer’s usb bus).
There was also a lot of information in the stolen emails that exposed the massive corruption of the Clinton Foundation, which was nothing more than a giant charity scam. (It’s not very lucrative anymore, since it was rooted in influence peddling, and the Clintons no longer have much influence to peddle).
Anyway…No one is even accusing Russia of spreading ‘fake news’. Them dastardly Russkies are accused of interfering in our election by exposing the actual truth to the American people. How DARE they? They exposed to voters what Clinton wanted to keep secret.
The hoopla over the social media ads, (in which there was some ‘fake news’), is absurd on its very face. There was no demonstrated connection to the Russian government. The sum total involved about $100k worth of click-bait ads, (in a $2.4 billion dollar presidential election), over half of which never appeared anywhere until after the election.
I don’t know, of course, who this good citizen, Lrx, is, but contributing to the demonization of Russia, to advance the imperial foreign policy of the US Policy Elites, is not exactly a ‘progressive’ position.
It is distressing to witness people’s naive ignorance here, concerning our mass media, on a ‘progressive’ site.
There is no “free press” in the US. C’mon…this is well established. Some 90% of ALL mass media outlets are owned by just 6 corporations. The other 10% are owned by Super Wealthy oligarchs and/or privately held corporations. The controlling blocks of stock in those corporations are in the hands of a relatively small Cabal of the Super Wealthy Elites.
It’s true that we don’t have government control of our mass media. What we DO have is ownership and control of ALL of mass media by a relatively small Cabal of the Super Wealthy Elites.
We don’t have have government control of our mass media. Our mass media is simply highly centralized and controlled by the SAME Elites that also control our government.
These Elites’ control of mass media is a primary lever of power in controlling the nation, including the government, and government policy. The means of communication are the means of power. Our means of mass communications are ALL under the highly centralized control of those who have our nation under their power.
People get so confused by ‘triangulation’. That’s what’s happening here.
When it’s ‘the good guys’ against ‘the bad guys’, things are easy to understand. But when we have two (or more) rival groups of ‘bad guys’, (and considering ourselves the ‘good guys’), we are often fooled into thinking that if one ‘bad guy’ group seems more immediately worse than the other, then the other ‘bad guy’ group are our allies against what we perceive as the ‘worst bad guys’.
Trump is ‘A’ bad guy, but he is VERY far from being the WORST bad guy.
He is puny and relatively powerless when compared to the worst bad guys. The Super Wealthy Elites, and their deep state forces, the US Policy Elites, all hate Trump, (or pretend to). They, the Elites, are the people who own and control all our mass media. They are using their control of the media against this interloping rival for power, Trump.
When Trump (one bad guy) lashes out against the media (owned by the much more powerful bad guys), and we, the people, (and ‘progressives’ to boot), step up to defend the media, we are allying ourselves with the WORST bad guys.
C’mon, folks. This ain’t rocket science. Triangulation does make things a bit more complicated, but not THAT complicated.
I appreciate the article’s advice, but on seeing the term “media
consumer” I bridled. It’s both erroneous and harmful to refer to the
readers of this and other articles as “consumers”.
It’s erroneous because articles such as this one are not consumed by
reading them. On the contrary, each article can be read over and
over, by any number of people.
It’s harmful because it presents articles, whether published by Common
Dreams or anyone else, as a commodity, suggesting that they are as
interchangeable as bottles of ketchup. This deprecates every article,
including this one.
Please join me in shunning that concept. See