THE MEDIA IS CONTROLLED??!?!?!?!?!?!?! How Come They Didn’t Care When Conan Pointed It Out?

media consolidation
Media Consolidation has gotten even worse since 2012. Now even fewer than six companies own all of the most accessible media companies.

The Freakout Over Sinclair Isn’t About Bias. It’s About The Wrong Bias

It’s America. Feel free to tune to your favorite opinions.

By 

Last month, news anchors at Sinclair Broadcast Group’s TV stations were required to read a script critical of “fake stories” and general bias by the major news networks. Because some of the phrasing mirrored President Donald Trump’s overcooked critique of liberal media outlets, the story triggered widespread and overwrought warnings about “authoritarianism” and the rise of state-run media.
…read more…
http://thefederalist.com/2018/04/03/media-doesnt-care-sinclair-stations-bias-wrong-bias/

Why wasn’t anyone concerned in the decades leading up to now as we watched media ownership and control funneled into fewer and fewer companies and individuals…

The CFR Media Empire
The Council of Foreign Relations, The Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission Control the Entire Mainstream Media

 

Corporate Media’s Fake News is so Obvious

When I first saw this it was like, see?! Isn’t it clear how major companies coordinate the media message?
Then I found out today, since Trump’s tweet about how CNN is much worse than the Sinclair Broadcast Group, this is now being called pro-Trump fake news by people like Jimmy Kimmel and John Oliver.
 
What!?!
First of all, love him or hate him, Trump is right about the corporate media being fake news. It’s not just Trump that has been outspoken about fake news, there are many more people who’ve been calling out media consolidation for years.
The CFR Media Empire
Conan O’Brien made some famous mashups like this in 2012, …years before the Trump phenomenon, and NOW Jimmy Kimmel and company think it’s dangerous to democracy?
 

Fact Checkers: Who Watches the Watchmen?

Kermit Reporter and the Fact Checkers

Reston, VA – With the rise of the term “fake news,” many individuals have turned to self-proclaimed fact-checking sites like Snopes and PolitiFact; the objectivity of these sites tends to be questioned by conservatives as having a covert liberal bias.

On Tuesday, the conservative Media Research Center unveiled a new project entitled “Fact-Checking the Fact-Checkers,” which is designed to “ensure the fact-checkers themselves are reliable, or exposed as liberal partisans if they aren’t.”

The Media Research Center explained in its announcement:

Sometimes you have to check the fact-checkers.

More and more, major news outlets are relying on “fact checkers” to, allegedly, ensure that the news is factual, sources are reliable, and statements are accurate.

In theory, this is admirable. In practice, it has proven to be simply another opportunity for the media to push their leftist agenda.

Fact checking groups — such as PolitiFact — routinely cast judgments while failing to disclose their own left-wing bias. Their allies in the media try to cast these groups as neutral third parties when, in fact, they are card-carrying members of the liberal echo chamber.

It’s no wonder that the public has so little faith in the fact-checkers. A 2016 Rasmussen poll found that an astonishing 62% of American voters think the fact-check-ers are biased.

The Media Research Center is flipping the script on these faux-fact-checkers. It’s time to turn the tables and give the public the real facts.

Read More: http://truthinmedia.com/new-project-fact-check-liberal-bias/

The Media Goes for the Big Drugs-and-Porn Ratings

Storymy Daniels Dilated Eyes

Stormy Daniels’ Dilated Pupils Spur Allegations She Was High For ‘60 Minutes’ Interview

Twitterers took to the social media site Sunday to note that Stephanie Clifford — aka Stormy Daniels — looked weird on “60 Minutes.”

Read more: https://www.dailywire.com/news/28679/stormy-daniels-dilated-pupils-spark-allegations-joseph-curl

Widely Reported Haspel CIA Torture Claim Was Fake News; Retracted By ProPublica

ProPublica-Soros-Feel-the-Hatred-Flow

Virtually the entire media complex megaphoned a 2017 report by Soros-backed news outlet ProPublica, and to a lesser extent a similar report in the New York Times, claiming that Trump’s new pick to lead the CIA, Gina Haspel, oversaw a “clandestine base” in Thailand where she participated in, and mocked the torture of suspected al-Qaida leader Abu Zubaydah.

The claims were retracted by ProPublica in an embarrassing correction.

On Feb. 22, 2017, ProPublica published a story that inaccurately described Gina Haspel’s role in the treatment of Abu Zubaydah, a suspected al-Qaida leader who was imprisoned by the CIA at a secret “black site” in Thailand in 2002.

The story said that Haspel, a career CIA officer who President Trump has nominated to be the next director of central intelligence, oversaw the clandestine base where Zubaydah was subjected to waterboarding and other coercive interrogation methods that are widely seen as torture. The story also said she mocked the prisoner’s suffering in a private conversation. Neither of these assertions is correct and we retract them. It is now clear that Haspel did not take charge of the base until after the interrogation of Zubaydah ended.

Of note, the ProPublica article was published right after the Trump administration promoted Haspel to the CIA’s #2 job in early February, 2017 in what appears to be nothing more than a political hit piece.

ProPublica’s conclusion was drawn from “declassified agency cables” and CIA-reviewed books which referred to Haspel “chief of base.” The name of the official was redacted, as well as an online post from former CIA counterterrorism officer, John Kiriakous, who wrote “It was Haspel who oversaw the staff” at the Thai prison.

That’s it. Redacted cables and a book which did not state the name of the base chief, and an online post by a CIA counterterrorism officer saying it was Haspel is all it took to smear a woman placed in a top position within the CIA – weeks after the Trump administration gave the 30-year veteran the promotion.

The first clue that something was off in the report was the CIA’s statement to ProPublica for the original 2017 report in which an agency spokesperson said “Nearly every piece of the reporting that you are seeking comment on is incorrect in whole or in part.”

While Haspel – according to former colleagues, did run the Thai base – the New York Times published a recent piece placing her arrival in late 2002, after the waterboarding of Zubaydah.

And while the MSM glazed over the fact that Trump appointed the CIA’s first female director this week, the media ran with the torture narrative – hard. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) even demanded that the CIA declassify documents detailing Haspel’s ties to the torture program.

Abu Zubaydah’s lawyer, Joseph Margulies, penned an angry op-ed in TIME. “In short, all we know for sure is that Haspel was in charge of a site where torture took place,” Marguiles wrote. “And make no mistake: it was torture.”

ProPublica‘s retraction continues:

James Mitchell, the psychologist and CIA contractor who helped to direct the waterboarding of both suspects, said in a broadcast interview on March 14 that Haspel was not the “chief of base” whom he described in his book as making fun of Zubaydah’s suffering.

“That chief of base was not Gina,” Mitchell told Fox Business News. “She’s not the COB I was talking about.”

Mitchell’s book, “Enhanced Interrogation: Inside the Minds and Motives of the Islamic Terrorists Trying to Destroy America,” referred to the chief of base in Thailand as both “he” and “she.”

We erroneously assumed that this was an effort by Mitchell or the agency to conceal the gender of the single official involved; it is now clear that Mitchell was referring to two different people.

So in an effort to smear a Trump appointee that the MSM would be fawning over if Obama had appointed the first woman to lead the CIA, the entire mainstream media complex and Dianne Feinstein relied on a report from a Soros-backed news outlet and the New York Times, which both published hit pieces right after the Trump administration promoted her the first time, and were both wrong.

That said, the correction doesn’t completely excuse Haspel from her involvement in the program, as she still reportedly ran the base at which “enhanced interrogations” occurred, and advised her boss to shred 92 tapes of Zubaydah’s waterboarding, which he did. It also doesn’t take away from arguments against enhanced interrogations in general.

The CIA’s office of public affairs, meanwhile, praised Haspel’s service.

Dean Boyd, director of the CIA’s office of public affairs, praised Haspel’s 30 years of public service and said Thursday in a statement that her qualifications and capabilities would be evident in the hearing process.

“It is important to note that she has spent nearly her entire CIA career undercover,” Boyd said. “Much of what is in the public domain about her is inaccurate. We are pleased that ProPublica is willing to acknowledge its mistakes and correct the record regarding its claims about Ms. Haspel.”

Read More: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-16/widely-reported-haspel-cia-torture-claim-was-fake-news-retracted-propublica

Media and Politicians’ Truth Problem: Russian Bots Did It?

Russian Bot

The Internet Research Agency indictment accuses a troll bot farm of trying to influence the election in what the media claims is the worst attack on America since Pearl Harbor. 9/11 need not apply.

Bots are everywhere.

“Bots Are Trying to Help Populists Win Italy’s Election,” claims Bloomberg. “Russian Bots Are Using 2016 Tactics to Hijack the Gun Debate,” shrieks Vanity Fair. ABC spins that bots are trying to make Black Panther look bad. “Rampaging Twitter ‘bots’ bred in Suffolk farmhouse,” the London Times asserts.

This media madness might make you think that bots are some sort of new and advanced technology. But you can see them in the comments and they’ve been around forever. Automated programs that log into social media accounts are not a new technology. Internet users of a bygone era remember seeing them in chat rooms and on bulletin boards without ever rampaging around Suffolk farmhouses.

Bots have become a convenient media scapegoat. The new formula is “Bots + Thing We Disagree With = Proof We’re Right”. That’s why there are stories claiming that Russian bots are tweeting against gun control or Islamic migration. And it explains the “Russian Bots Rigged the Election for Trump” meme.

Bots are an informational technique. Media spin reverse engineers the technique to discredit the idea. Not only is that a fallacy, but bots just piggyback on popular trends to gain influence. Russian bots don’t tweet about gun control because they care about guns, but because they get retweeted. The same was true of the bots promoting Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. There are a million brands doing the same thing with bots and influencers. But that’s okay because they push politically correct messages.

And that’s the bot double standard.

When Russian bots and trolls push Black Lives Matter, Bernie Sanders or Dakota Access Pipeline protests, their programmed actions don’t reflect on leftist causes, organizations and politicians. But the revelation that Russian bots and trolls tweeted about the Bill of Rights, Islamic migration or Trump is spun by the media into a conspiracy that indicts the ideas and discredits the previous election.

Read More: http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2018/02/the-big-bot-conspiracy.html

The “Fake News” Meme Was Created to Discredit the Truth

Fake News Was an Agenda to Discredit the Truth

How You Can Distinguish Fake News from Real News, According to the Expert

By The Daily Bell Staff – February 15, 2018

What kind of fake news is most damaging? Is it the kind that puts out a conspiracy theory with no evidence? Or is it a headline story that can easily be debunked, designed to ride a wave of viral clicks which only lasts hours or days?

Those aren’t the most dangerous types of fake news. The real problem is when trusted mainstream media sources roll out a propaganda campaign. And that happens basically every day.

In fact, the whole “fake news” agenda is part of a campaign of disinformation.

In a recent Ted Talk, investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson says it all started when Obama gave the media their marching orders.

He insisted in a speech that he too thought somebody needed to step in and curate information of this wild, wild West media environment. Nobody in the public had been clamoring for any such thing, yet suddenly the topic of fake news dominates headlines on a daily basis.

It’s as if the media had been given its marching orders. Fake news they insisted was an imminent threat to American democracy.

But as somebody who studied the industry that seeks to manipulate all of us on behalf of paid interests, I know that few themes arise in our environment organically.

A noted propagandist told me, “It’s like a movie,” he said, and it gave me chills at the time.

“Nearly every scene or image that crosses our path in daily life,” he said, “was put there for a reason. Often by someone who paid a lot of money to place it there.”

What if the whole anti-fake news campaign was an effort on somebody’s part to keep us from seeing or believing certain websites or stories by controversializing them or labeling them as fake news?

Read More: http://www.thedailybell.com/news-analysis/how-you-can-distinguish-fake-news-from-real-news-according-to-the-expert/

Story of Shooting at NSA is Buried in the Media | SUV was Trying to Exit not Enter

The SUV Was Trying to Escape the NSA

NSA shooting: Officer injured at Fort Meade security gate, three in custody

Alison Knezevich The Baltimore Sun

Three people were injured at Fort Meade early Wednesday when the driver of an SUV attempted to enter the National Security Agency compound, authorities said.

The driver and two passengers in the black SUV were taken into custody after the incident shortly before 7 a.m. at Gate 1 on Canine Road off Maryland Route 32. A spokesman for the FBI’s Baltimore field office said late Wednesday that investigators are examining the possibility that the driver might have made a wrong turn into the complex, but it is not the only theory they are considering.

Injured were an NSA police officer, the driver of the SUV and a civilian bystander, said Gordon B. Johnson, special agent in charge for the FBI’s Baltimore office. He said the SUV had three occupants.

Johnson described the encounter as “an isolated incident.”

“I cannot emphasize enough that we believe there is no indication that this has a nexus to terrorism,” Johnson said.

The FBI is taking the lead in the investigation. Johnson told reporters Wednesday that only limited information was available to be shared.

He said shots were fired during the incident, but did not believe any of the injuries were caused by gunfire. He would not say who opened fire, but said it appeared the gunfire was “directed at the vehicle.”

Read More: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-fort-meade-shooting-20180214-story.html