Media Manipulation Of Your News

Every day, the information we all receive from the media is cunningly manipulated to fit the agenda that the Media Class is pushing. More and more ordinary people realize that various news sources are biased. Because of this, there are many websites on the Internet, including this one, that provide alternative news sources and comment.

There is now an excellent website that does a good job revealing the Leftist propaganda spewed out by the BBC. It would though be an even better site if it covered the Beeb’s mistreatment of the British National Party. Instead, it seems preoccupied with covering the Beeb’s anti-Israeli bias to the exclusion of much else. One has to assume that the website is more interested in monitoring BBC anti-semitism than in its dishonest reporting of nationalists. Still, the website does a good job in so far as it goes.

What the website misses, like many others, is the broader picture. The BBC is the UK’s equivalent of the New York Times, that is to say it is the overt mouthpiece of the Media Class, setting out its daily political and social agenda. Like the New York Times, the BBC still enjoys a reputation for integrity that is wholly unjustified and it is similarly pompous and arrogant. Its bias deserves to be exposed, whatever the topic.

Unfortunately, the Media Class agenda is not confined to a few sources, but permeates all news and entertainment, and even people who recognize the dishonesty of reporting in the two “venerable” institutions mentioned above, are likely to be manipulated by every other media outlet.

Here are two examples of cunning news manipulation taken from the Wall Street Journal, which also enjoys an undeserved reputation for integrity and is read by conservatives and business people who are almost certainly unaware that the paper is infested with Leftist journalists.

On 25th July 2006, reporter Alistair MacDonald got front-page exposure (with two more columns on page 8) with a piece headlined “London is so dry, its planting cactus in place of begonias”. This light- hearted intro is used to take the reader into the very serious topic of the water shortage that increasingly afflicts the southeast of England. MacDonald tells us that England is facing its worst drought for a century and has had two drier than normal winters. He also tells the readers that Mayor of London Ken Livingstone is blaming global warming and that people in London are using too much water in their dishwashers and other modern gadgets. Nowhere in the article does he mention population growth in England, and the alarming growth of population in the southeast in particular. That “Red” Ken should be getting positive media publicity for his efforts to encourage water conservation in Londoners’ gardens is rather ironic given that this is the man who has done everything in his power to swamp London (and thus the nation) with immigrants, both legal and illegal. Livingstone built and still maintains his political power base by knitting together a coalition of immigrant minorities and people with “alternative” lifestyles and he has never paused in his efforts to pander to minority groups at the expense of the native citizens of a once-great city. One consequence of Livingstone’s efforts is that the southeast of England is sinking under the weight of increased population, almost all of it “diverse”. Of course, Livingstone is no longer alone in actively drawing in countless Third world peoples, as most politicians now curry favor with the Media Class by forcing the immigrant doorway ever wider. The government plan for the southeast envisages ever more housing and roads to cope with the expected growth of immigrant population. The water shortage is not going to impede this conspiracy to make the British people a minority in their own land. The media connives in this by never linking water shortage and other detrimental consequences of over population, to the topic of immigration. Thus the problem of water shortage is always placed in the context of global warming and over use. The native British people are not breeding fast enough to replace themselves, so dramatic population increase can only be due to immigrants and their offspring. MacDonald must be aware of the central cause of water shortage in England’s southeast, yet he totally ignores it! He and his editor are, of course, deliberately furthering the agenda.

The next day in the Wall Street Journal, Alan Murray had his business column. Those who read it regularly and carefully will know that he too, is always politically correct and tilts to the Left, despite writing for the business reader. It is possible to nod in the direction of market economics and still have a job on a newspaper, provided a reporter is on board with the social agenda of the Media Class. Murray passes this test. His article (by-lined from San Francisco) on the 26th July is ostensibly about the problems Ford Motor Company is experiencing under the leadership of Bill Ford. The reader could be forgiven for concluding after reading it that one important reason that Ford Motor’s sales are dropping alarmingly is because one Michael Brune (executive director of the Rainforest Action Network) has started to target the company because its vehicles guzzle gas. Murray tells us a lot (six big paragraphs, in fact) about Brune and his past campaigns against Big Business in the cause of environmentalism and he also tells us about one Patricia Wolfe who runs the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility.

This obscure little Leftist group is described by Murray as one of “the ever-growing gaggle of more mainstream activists”. Murray tells us that Wolfe intends to engage with Ford on “human rights, global labor standards and HIV-AIDS, as well as global warming”. And Murray calls this ‘more mainstream’? Squeezed between these two “problems” for Ford is a paragraph that mentions the American Family Association and its boycott of Ford cars because “the company continues to advertise in gay and lesbian publications”.

You might not know it from Murray’s article, but the two Leftist organizations he mentions are tiny fringe groups who can only exist with the connivance of the media, which always amplifies their activities and occasionally orchestrates them. The American Family Association by contrast is a very big organization that works not only through the Internet but also through countless churches and their rank and file members. In the campaign against Ford, the AFA has mobilized large numbers of consumers and really dented Ford’s sales. The real story here is the stubbornness of Bill Ford on the issue of support for homosexual organizations. By advertising Ford products so extensively in homosexual publications, Bill Ford is signaling that he would sooner his company and its shareholders lost millions of dollars than back down to Christian activists. What Ford is doing is pouring money into homosexual activism under the guise of sales publicity.

It is easy to miss a very salient point. When Ford Motor Company advertises in mainstream newspapers and magazines, it is not missing homosexual customers any more than it is missing dog lovers, gardeners or railroad enthusiasts. Homosexuals read and listen to the mainstream stuff just like the rest of us and can learn what Ford Motors has to offer. Their specialist publications are for activists and mostly are preoccupied with militancy and sex and Bill Ford is indirectly financing these activities with his paid advertisements. Of course, he has a right to do so if he wishes to help further the campaigns and activities of homosexual groups, provided his shareholders are happy.

Similarly, the AFA has a right to encourage Christians and others to boycott Ford products. The issue here is Murray’s misleading presentation of what is going on. Make no mistake whose side the Media Class is on and it is not the AFA. That organization will not get six full paragraphs of sympathetic publicity from any journalist or news outlet, no matter how many people it mobilizes and no matter what financial impact it has on commercial companies.

As I said at the beginning, the news you get from the mainstream media is cunningly manipulated from beginning to end and furthers an agenda.

What's Your Opinion?