I have yet to see ANY PROOF that the CIA or big business controls the media.
Read "Into The Buzzsaw: LEADING JOURNALISTS EXPOSE THE MYTH OF A FREE PRESS". It's written by award winning journalists. These journalists have all had major story shut down by Corporate or Gov't pressure. Most were fired.
You can't comment knowledgeably on this topic until you read that book.
Two friends of mine work in the editing rooms of 2 of the biggest news agencies on Earth. What gets on air is approved.
Not many people are allowed to approve what gets on air. Reporters and editors only work on what management wants them working on. If the "slant" of a story isn't what management wants the story gets re-edited or doesn't air. Very powerful reporters may have some leeway BUT they don't become powerful reporters unless they are management friendly. That's true in EVERY business. If management doesn't like what you're up to you're not promoted. No conspiracy required.
I'm a filmmaker. I know ANY story can be altered massively by the edit and the presentation. Even the "experts" the media chooses to represent each side of an argument skews the argument massively. Hannity vs. Colmes, for instance. It's the WWF. Maybe everything isn't a blatant lie, but it's all "managed". Ann Coulter vs. Code Pink etc.
I recently shot (filmed) something for a medical industry company. Our expert (the best expert) was not attractive enough for the client company. No kidding. We had to find someone else to say the same stuff. Why? Perception. The message is always optimized.
Additionally, there are several positions of the argument that go completely unreported. Those are probably the interesting positions. The way the media FRAMES an argument ALTERS the argument. It's not a lie. But it alters perception.
I recently saw a debate on whether torture "worked". No one brought up the possibility we might be torturing innocent people. No one mentioned Ben Franklin's quote "It is better one hundred guilty persons should escape than that one innocent person should suffer".
This was a "debate" of what level of evil was OK. Not IF evil was OK. That's a disingenuous reframing of a more important question. What does it mean to be America? Is this Liberty?
Richard Clark was drummed off television when he didn't follow the preferred script of the networks in the lead up to last Iraq War.
There are so many subtle ways the media skews a message that any "debunker" can say it wasn't skewed. If you're ignorant of the techniques then it does seem real. And the individuals on TV a very likely genuine. It's the SELECTION of who gets on TV that skews the debate. Sean Hannity doesn't have to be "in on it". He can honestly voice his opinion and tell people he can say anything he wants uncensored. Could be true. He doesn't have a history of saying things management doesn't like.
If you understand persuasion works it's obvious that everything on TV is a managed persuasion effort. It's not all in one political direction either. It's two. Controlled opposition to give the illusion of a fight so people can pick a side and feel they are being represented.
But when you get in on the news yourself you'll see the gray areas. I actually did that in Shanksville PA. I spoke to witnesses there. I spoke to a national reporter that wanted to report his true, controversial findings regarding Flight 93. He was told by his Big New York paper editor "the gov't told us what happened and that's what we're printing". His story was killed.
But a Philly reporter did get stories published regarding Flight 93 from 9-11:
"What is surprising is this: Go to Shanksville and the surrounding farm fields where people actually saw or heard the jetliner go down at roughly 10:06 that morning and there are a number of people - including witnesses - who also think that Flight 93 was shot down, or at least aren't ruling it out.
Laura Temyer, who lives several miles north of the crash site in Hooversville, was hanging some clothes outside that morning when she heard an airplane pass overhead. That struck her as unusual since she'd just heard on TV that all flights were grounded.
"I heard like a boom and the engine sounded funny," she told the Daily News. "I heard two more booms - and then I did not hear anything."
What does Temyer think she heard? "I think the plane was shot down," insists Temyer, who said she has twice told her story to the FBI."
Remember how NBC recently reported only handguns were found inside Sandy Hook. You don't?
Hmm... that would seem to downplay the Assault Rifles are evil spin. So the media forgets it. Even the conservative media forgets it. Why?
Speaking of FOX, Who partly owns FOX? A SAUDI. Does he believe he helps control the message? Yes he does:
Alwaleed said he got the Fox News crawl reporting “Muslim riots” in France changed to “civil riots.” This didn’t make the “Muslim” riots go away, but Alwaleed managed to fog our perception of them.. with a phone call.
One powerful dude makes a phone call and "fogs perception". That's REAL world persuasion. And it's admitted. No conspiracy. Now the FACT that he can do it and brag about it PROVES how malleable the news is. He's just a 5% owner. Rupert Murdock can say the sky is Magenta and they'll color correct the sky to magenta. Or they will lose their posh job. What would you do?
Recently CCN's Amber Lyon was not allowed to report on roadside executions in Bahrain. She alleges Bahrain has paid CNN to report favorably. Amber is no longer with CNN. Bahrain apparently still is.
Now is the CIA involved in "some" way? They'd be negligent NOT to be involved. And they'd be negligent if anyone KNEW IT. They have a long history of CREATING news. Why in the world would they STOP one of their most effective practices? It's nonsensical to even posit the proposition.
"The agency actually did make a video purporting to show Osama bin Laden and his cronies sitting around a campfire swigging bottles of liquor and savoring their conquests with boys, one of the former CIA officers recalled, chuckling at the memory. The actors were drawn from “some of us darker-skinned employees,” he said.
The incubator story in Kuwait that vaulted the first Iraq war into outrage was a CIA fake story:
The CIA can manipulate US news by channeling it through a foreign companies. And CIA paid reporters... including TV:
There's a great quote in that video I'll paraphrase: "I think it's still going on today (CIA reporters) but reporters need to be much more careful than they were in the 70s."
So these are stories from the 50s through the 2000s. Operation Mockingbird never stopped. And why would it??? Don't be naive.
Anyone reading along saying "prove it to me". That's why I've included so many links. But why aren't you looking for yourself? Are you afraid to have your world view messed with? If so, stick with Dancing with the Stars and don't post on ANYTHING ANYWHERE that requires research. Really.
I often research and find I'm wrong about things based on my opinion of the evidence. I don't stop when I find the first article to support my position. That's not what a real skeptic does.
I want to see every side of the issue. Critical analysis is not taught in school.
In the end, many things are unprovable. But at least concede that instead of taking a position like "the CIA said they stopped doing something 30 years ago and i trust they don't lie, so... well... they stopped." The CIA LIES FOR A LIVING. Come on.
Everyone in the movie business knows that if you want military cooperation (vehicles etc) their media relations people need to approve the script. Common sense. Heck, the local church won't let you film there unless they see the script. No conspiracy required.
More food for thought
Who's Mika Brzezinski's Father? What's he do?
Who's CNN Anderson Cooper's mother? (google it, it's worth it). He's the sole heir to the family fortune.
Those two need jobs reading teleprompters??
What was Matt Drudge's biggest complaint about the media when he "broke in". He said it was an insider's game. He was right. But in the past 20 years the job of "journalist" has gone away as the news has gone towards infotainment. It's still an insiders game. And the on air talent may believe every word they say. They should. It's more believable and that's why they got the job. Focus groups showed people believe them.
Consider this: big advertisers don't need to sell crap via a TV commercial. Many already have a distribution monopoly. For instance, drug reps sell drugs to doctors who pimp them to you. Drug companies don't want too many negative news stories. Commercials are the PAYOLA for relatively favorable news. The "tell your doctor you want Viagra" part is icing on the cake. There will be the occasional bad story just to "keep it real".
But Monsanto threatened to pull all advertising off FOX nationwide ($300 Million) and sue them if they ran a local affiliate story about Bovine Growth Hormone. Why? It's was HUGELY profitable despite potentially serious problems for children consuming that milk. That's documented in the Myth of a Free Press book linked above.
BTW - Donahue had the highest ratings on MSNBC and was beating Chris Matthews Hardball when Donahue was cancelled in 2002. He was anti-war. Who owned NBC. General Electric. Where do they make tons of cash? Defense Contracts.
Trivia - What was the largest never bombed weapons factory in Berlin at the end of WWII? General Electric. I hope the dots are starting to connect.
GE and Hitler:
Double think this. WE didn't bomb two GE plants in Germany EVER in WWII. We bombed everything else into oblivion. That might take 3 read throughs before the implications really hit you. GE had enough power to make their factories off limits to Allied bombers. This is documented in the book "Wall St. and the Rise of Hitler".
GE is a HUGE company. NBC is pocket change. Comcast now owns 51% of NBC but GE still owns 49% (wikipedia). If a 5% Saudi shareholder in FOX can alter their news it's a safe bet both GE and Comcast can tune in or out whatever they want at NBC.
Now here's what a real interview looks like - let the witness speak unedited.
Barry Jennings was inside WTC 7 and his testimony is not covered or included in the official NIST report. This inside witness details the EXACT order of events clearly. He states WTC 1 had not yet fallen when he heard explosions going off around him in WTC 7. He clearly states WTC 1 debris did NOT cause WTC 7 to fall. BEST WITNESS ON EARTH.
Here's what an independent journalist looks like:
Who owns the media?
It's a MASSIVE consolidation of power. Truly, probably 50 people control the general tone of the news message worldwide with a few independent voices. That doesn't mean it's the SAME message for every outlet. Remember - the game is controlled opposition and the illusion of honest reporting.
I could go on forever. And ever. Really. If you believe the news isn't rigged when it comes to anything important you simply aren't being intellectually honest.
But, you've been manipulated your entire life. (My degree was in Marketing and I'm a filmmaker. Trust me, we're screwing with you even if it's just to make a buck - but the exact same tactics are used to start wars. Study any marketing or propaganda book then turn the TV back on. You'll wake up.)
Carroll Quigley is the key to understanding:
"Tragedy and Hope" by Carroll Quigley is the only true inside account of the how elite Americans guided the course of the last 100 years. It is not a conspiracy. He was commissioned as a Harvard Professor and trusted insider to write their history. The book was not intended to become public.
Truly, you can't be a skeptic without reading that book.
Also, read the "Reese Commission Report on Tax Exempt Foundations".
If after REAL research you still believe the media is "liberal" or "conservative" or "unbiased" then I give up. I tried.
Remember - CIA, NSA and similar have programs to participate in and alter Internet conversations. Any discussion like this one SHOULD have disinformation posts. Maybe mine is one.
Good Luck and Have Fun.
Start here - it's an easy read: