The media is biased and has an agenda. Not an agenda which they all have a copy of and run everything by before they release it, but a General Agenda which seems to...
=> Gloss over anything Bad against Socialist Figures
=> Give Right Leaning people are Harder Time than Left Leaning people
=> Champion the cause of those who segregate themselves into groups and call themselves Minorities
=> Be Down on Big Business, Medium Business and even Small Business and anything to do with Capitalism
=> Be Anti-Progress (not "progressive" as has been adopted by the radical leftists who so name their asinine ideas of socialism and collective theft, but Progress as in terms of building, infrastructure and so on)
=> Be Anti-Christian and Pro-Muslim
=> And so on and so forth.
Of course, you'll need some Backing up. So let's start with this point...
There are around 6 billion people on this planet living in 200 or so countries and unknown towns and cities. And roughly 150,000 of those die each and every day. That being the case, how come the News seems to show so little of anything? And Who selects what it does show?
A kid gets his hand caught in a drain at school. Considering all that is going on in the world of 6 billion people, who selected That story over Everything else?
Some Muslim Iman has a Complaint about something. Who selects to show That instead of people on the street telling him to Get Over It - or - If You Don't Like It Leave - or - Why should we bow down to how You want it, why don't YOU get along - or - who cares what those idiots think who make their woman dress in black tents and hide away from the world - and so on and so forth as people on the street think? And who decided to show that, instead of something else entirely?
Something happens at a Christian Church. Who decides to show people on the street Bagging the Christians as Backwards? Who decides to show that instead of something else?
Why is it the Media Commentators during an Election will call Right Wing Announcements mere "Election Campaigning to Gain Votes" but Left Wing Announcements "Promises". Why will those same Talking Heads want proof of Right Wing Policies and harshly question the same, while Left Wing Policies are not questioned harshly? Why will they call Right Wing Spending "Buying Votes" and "Wild Spending" and other Adjectives, while Left Wing Spending is not deemed to be "Buying Votes" or "Wild Spending"?
Who decides that Mugabe's efforts in Zimbabwe to Strip private ownership of farms, kick farmers off their land, and give it to unproductive people, is not newsworthy? Who decides that Mugabe's socialism is not worth ripping to bits as plain old wrong?
Go to Google News and search for Right Wing Extremist and then Left Wing Extremist and notice the difference. Apparently, there are not Left Wing Extremists in the news. Despite the Lefties - as I call them - being behind Street Marches and Protests and other disruptions to production.
Obviously, someone is Selecting the News you will get to see. And not only that, but choosing which parts of the News you will get to see.
For instance, a woman buys a car from a car yard. It was a trade-in and not Ready to be sold. But she persisted and didn't want it to be made Ready with a warranty as that would have bumped up the price. She Wanted to buy it "As Is". Later, things went wrong and she was told she'd bought it "As is" and had even signed as such on the purchase agreement. She called the media about it and also complained some more to the seller. The seller, having had enough, got her to bring back the car, Upgraded her for free to a Better Car with Warranty and wished her farewell. She didn't tell the Media who subsequently Interviewed the Car Manager pleasantly. But when it aired... with Creative Editing, it made the manager out to be crook.
I have seen this first hand... the Original Reply and the Broadcast Edited Version. Where a simple answer to "You sold her a car without a warranty knowing it was faulty" of "Yes, and she knew of all its faults as we gave her a list and even have her signed acknowledgment of such but in the end we gave her a car at near Double the price with warranty for free" is broadcast as "Yes" so it looks like a brazen admission of fraud.
It is due to the media's duplicity that Henry Kissinger makes it a rule to Never do a TV interview unless it goes Live to air. This prevents Creative Editing later on to make what was said, seem like something else.
Recently, researchers in Canada made a Cancer Breakthrough where a simple, Non-Patentable digestion enhancing drug could kill cancer without nasty side effects. The media paid this no mind and gave no mention. Of course, the Big Pharmaceutical companies buy a Lot of advertising from them. So it makes Good Financial Sense for the media to not do things which harm their Golden Geese.
And speaking of media advertising... there is not one single place where out-and-out lies, half truths and Deliberate Implies can be seen, more than what's seen on the All Knowing Eye.
Recently, we've been seeing ads where different women talk about Pap Smear Tests and how they've decided to get the Anti-HPV Injections to Help Prevent cervical cancer. To the careful viewer, in Tiny Writing can be seen that this is an ad run by Big Pharma who makes the drug. The same from the Anti Impotence ads which stared famous soccer player Pelé. The same from a Toothpaste ad designed to harden your teeth's enamel.
And while the TV is just a Vehicle... it is up to the individual station owners to set their own standards. And those standards seem to follow a line... whatever can convince you you're not well and cannot make decisions for yourself and you don't own your own hard earned fruits of labor, is pushed by the Mainstream Media. Whatever hints at freedom is ignored or reported on in a downward manner. And while *I* and others like me can spot it clearly, the majority of people do not and are influenced by what they see and hear and read.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment