tagged w/ Media Propaganda
Major progressive media stars have recently lost their platforms, while the Huffington Post eschews progressivism -- both worrying developments in the media war with the right.Major progressive media stars have recently lost their platforms, while the Huffington... more
2 years ago
Saturday night, ringing in the New Year took on a whole different meaning for the citizens of Beebe. Around 11:30 p.m., enforcement officers with Arkansas Game and Fish Commission began getting reports of dead black birds falling from the sky in the city limits of Beebe.Saturday night, ringing in the New Year took on a whole different meaning for the... more
Lately, we’ve seen a massive marketing make-over of environmental modification (ENMOD) programs. What has been a clandestine and hostile military application now is promoted as a “futuristic” solution to corporate pollution. Debunking mass media’s mischaracterization of geoengineering as “futuristic” is in order. Below we take a closer look at those organizations planting such disinformation and offer sources on the harmful effects of geoengineering.
Here is a sampling of quotes from mainstream media on the use of geoengineering:Lately, we’ve seen a massive marketing make-over of environmental modification... more
America was founded in an attempt to escape the oppression of not only religious expression, but also the misrepresentation from a monarchist system that cared only for the proliferation and interests of the elite class. After 250 years, we have found ourselves in the same position as those who left Europe for these shores so long ago: oppressed by a system that only wants to serve itself before the citizens that support it. They say history repeats itself, and nowhere is this more evident than in the case of modern America’s politicians, putting their corporate puppet masters and damaging agenda of faux patriotism before the needs of the people.
To understand how we have been led to the erroneous conclusion that America is somehow a free nation, one must come to an understanding of what type of political system exists in this country and how it adds to or detracts from our social system as set up by our forefathers. We also must recognize the erosion of our system under the watch of the overzealous quasi-patriotism which has served to initiate the current Police State in place and growing in America.
First and foremost, it is important to understand that we do not live in a democracy as most people have been led to believe; America is a republic where we are granted the opportunity to elect representatives to make decisions for us. Our forefathers were learned enough to understand that a pure democracy was not possible in a complex society, especially the one they were setting up. In a democracy, although touted as the ideal system for freedom of the people to decide all matters of State, the minority only has those privileges granted by the dictatorship of the majority. In a democracy the sovereignty is in the group, whereas in a republic the sovereignty is in each individual person.
The problem with a republic, though, is that the inherent rights of the people are surrendered upon the casting of a vote for representation. After this action has taken place, our fate lies in the hands of politicians who, with the innate human deficiency of sin, represent our interests. This type of system was set up because the idea of a complex society deciding all aspects of government and the minority becoming unrepresented was unrealistic. The thought that we the people could effectively be served by those who are concerned not with the continuation of our liberty but with the development and proliferation of self-service has been greatly discredited by the reality of this, our modern model of representation.
To understand our freedom, or lack thereof, it is important to recognize what type of political system exists within our social structure into which we put our faith each election period. This country is currently run and controlled by a two-party system that determines for us, the “free” voters, who we can vote for. The choice of candidates is determined by the parties themselves as the proper representatives of their interests, rather than the interests of the American people. Even the self-labeled “freedom party” or Tea Party, is just an extension of this old, two-sided coin. We can either vote for the lesser of the evils, or suffer the consequence of others doing the voting for us.
Regarding words by James Madison on the American political system, Jack N. Rakove of Stanford University writes:
Madison assumed politicians . . . would be able to command the allegiance of large numbers of voters. Once in office, they would act with a broadmindedness that would elevate the very quality of public life. They would think not in terms of the immediate interests of their constituents, but of the larger public good which was synonymous with the concept of the public itself. The virtue which could no longer be expected to reside in the populace might still be found, he hoped, in its rulers.
It is clear from today’s system that this assumption was wrong. Our modern politicians are largely self-serving, and the quality of our lives is directly relative to our freedom to vote for true representation.
Read More: http://globalpoliticalawakening.blogspot.com/2010/11/americas-misconception-of-freedom.htmlAmerica was founded in an attempt to escape the oppression of not only religious... more
Propaganda is something you might expect from a dictatorship government but what about the United States? In the early 1980s, the US State Department launched a covert propaganda war against its own people. Founder and President of the Institute for Public Accuracy Norman Solomon says that US government propaganda continues today through mainstream media as an extension of the government.
Where Has Journalism Gone?
So-called Alternative Media Are Wannabe MSM Cowards
READ MORE: http://globalpoliticalawakening.blogspot.com/2010/11/mainstream-media-us-propaganda.htmlPropaganda is something you might expect from a dictatorship government but what about... more
Venezuela has an election for its national assembly in September, and the campaign has begun in earnest. I am referring to the international campaign. This is carried out largely through the international media, although some will spill over into the Venezuelan media. It involves many public officials, especially in the US. The goal will be to generate as much bad press as possible about Venezuela, to discredit the government, and to delegitimise the September elections – in case the opposition should choose to boycott, as they did in the last legislative elections, or refuse to recognise the results if they lose.
There's no need for conspiracy, since the principal actors all know what to do. Occasionally some will be off-message due to lack of co-ordination. A fascinating example of this occurred last week when Senator John McCain tried to get General Doug Fraser of the US Southern Command to back his accusations that Venezuela supports terrorist activities. Testifying before the Senate armed services committee on March 11, General Fraser contradicted McCain:
"We have continued to watch very closely … We have not seen any connections specifically that I can verify that there has been a direct government-to-terrorist connection."
Oops! Apparently Fraser didn't get the memo that the Obama team, not just McCain, is in full campaign mode against Venezuela. The next day, he issued a statement recanting his testimony:
"Assistant Secretary Valenzuela [the state department's top Latin America official] and I spoke this morning on the topic of linkages between the government of Venezuela and the Farc. There is zero daylight between our two positions and we are in complete agreement.
"There is indeed clear and documented historical and ongoing evidence of the linkages between the government of Venezuela and the Farc … we are in direct alignment with our partners at the state department and the intelligence community."
Well it's good to know that the United States still has civilian control over the military, at least in the western hemisphere. On the other hand, it would be even better if the truth counted for anything in these Congressional hearings or in Washington foreign policy circles generally. The general's awkward and seemingly forced reversal went unnoticed by the media.
The "documented and historical and ongoing evidence" mentioned by General Fraser refers to material alleged to come from laptops and hard drives allegedly found by the Colombian military in a cross-border raid into Ecuador in 2008. Never mind that this is the same military that has been found to have killed hundreds of innocent teenagers and dressed them up in guerrilla clothing. These laptops and hard drives will continue to be tapped for previously undisclosed "evidence", which will then be deployed in the campaign against the Venezuelan government. We will be asked to assume that the "captured documents" are authentic, and most of the media will do so.
US secretary of state Hillary Clinton's attacks on Venezuela during her trip to South America were one of the opening salvos of this campaign. Most of what will follow is predictable. There will be hate-filled editorials in the major newspapers, led by the neocon editorial board of the Washington Post (aka Fox on 15th Street). Chávez will be accused of repressing the media, even though most of the Venezuelan media – as measured by audience – is still controlled by the opposition. In fact, the media in Venezuela is still far more in opposition to the government than is our own media in the United States, or for that matter in most of the world. But the international press will be trying to convey the image that Venezuela is Burma or North Korea.
In Washington DC, if I try to broadcast on an FM radio frequency without a legal broadcast licence, I will be shut down. When this happens in Venezuela, it is reported as censorship. No one here will bother to look at the legalities or the details, least of all the pundits and editorial writers, or even many of the reporters.
The Venezuelan economy was in recession in 2009, but will likely begin to grow again this year. The business press will ignore the economic growth and hype the inflation, as they have done for the past six years, when the country's record economic growth cut the poverty rate by half and extreme poverty by 70% (which was also ignored). Resolutions will be introduced into the US Congress condemning Venezuela for whatever.
The US government will continue to pour millions of dollars into Venezuela through USAid, and will refuse to disclose the recipients. This is the non-covert part of their funding for the campaign inside Venezuela.
The only part of this story that is not predictable is what the ultimate result of the international campaign will be. In Venezuela's last legislative elections of 2005, the opposition boycotted the national elections, with at least tacit support from the Bush administration. In an attempt to delegitimise the government, they gave up winning probably at least 30% of the legislature.
At the time, most of the media – and also the Organisation of American States – rejected the idea that the election was illegitimate simply because the opposition boycotted. But that was under the Bush administration, which had lost some credibility on Venezuela due to its support for the 2002 coup, and for other reasons. It could be different under an Obama administration.
That is why it is so ominous to see this administration mounting an unprovoked, transparently obvious campaign to delegitimise the Venezuelan government prior to a national election. This looks like a signal to the opposition: "We will support you if you decide to return to an insurrectionary strategy," either before or after the election.
The US state department is playing an ugly and dangerous game.
picture: (http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2009/04/24/alg_chavez_obama.jpg)Mark Weisbrot
Venezuela has an election for its national assembly in September, and... more
A new YouTube video raises the question of whether CNN's coverage of the clean coal debate has been biased by a multi-million dollar advertising campaign purchased on CNN by the coal industry through Americans for Balanced Energy Choices, a coal front group since renamed the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity.
The ad campaign, which began a year ago, was created by Waylon Ad, a firm representing both ABEC and the National Mining Association. A coal industry website describes the purpose of the CNN ad campaign: "The St. Louis ad agency's spot, which follows a debut effort that broke in April, suggests coal use is economically efficient and environmentally friendly.
In the latest spot, a panorama of people and faces, including a man in the middle of a field with an electric guitar, is shown as a voiceover touts coal use." The low budget video piece was posted on YouTube June 24.
Watch it for yourself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKR-6Szlv0g
A new YouTube video raises the question of whether CNN's coverage of the clean... more