By Stella Morabito
Monday, November 21, 2016
“They’ve decided
you’re to go into journalism. It’s a great honor. We have to strengthen the
press. It’s full of bourgeoise elements and reactionaries. We don’t send just
anyone there.”
—In the screenplay
“Angi Vera,” newspaper editor and Communist Party hack Anna Trajan speaks to
her young protégé, groomed to destroy anyone standing in the way of the party’s
narrative.
President-elect Donald Trump’s win proved how useless is
the current state of journalism for investigating and conveying real news about
real people. And that’s putting it kindly. Not only were mainstream journalists
blind to the pain of so many in the country—particularly the long-neglected
Rust Belt voters who showed up in droves to elect Trump—but they shamelessly
cheered Hillary Clinton’s campaign and smeared all Trump voters while doing so.
The quote above, from an old foreign film, gives us a
glimpse into how power elites seek to control the media and subvert objective
journalism. I’ll elaborate on that below. But the high level of collusion we
see today between Democrat power elites and the media goes back a long time.
The collusion continues post-election, as the media gives lopsided coverage to
angry anti-Trump protests organized by Moveon.org, which are stirring up calls
for violence.
So it’s high time we analyze more closely the
relationship between the media and power elites. To do that, we need to look at
how and why elites conscript journalists, and why journalists can’t resist the
bait. The enticements come as access, privilege, prestige, fame, influence, and
very high salaries for those in the limelight.
Not all mainstream journalists are fallen, but those who
resist bias tend not to be household names. For example, I highly recommend
this superb post-mortem on the election by
Will Rahn of CBS News. It is more introspective and insightful than
anything else I’ve seen. In the end, we should remember that journalists’
weaknesses are simply human weaknesses. There are several reasons their level
of prejudice has risen so high. But prime among them is how much our society
has come to de-value the old ideals of virtue and honor.
Power Elites Will
Always Recruit Messengers
An interesting study in corruption—and of journalism in
particular—is the 1978 Hungarian film “Angi Vera,” which I quoted above. The
setting is Stalinist Hungary in 1948, just after Soviet forces imposed a
communist system there. The entire human infrastructure of the nation,
including journalists, teachers, medical personnel, and factory foremen, is
being replaced by people trained in education camps to comply with the
Communist Party line. Politically incorrect administrators, officials, and
thinkers are discredited and purged wherever they are found.
The movie superbly displays the predatory nature of
one-party states. Its title character, an angelic-looking young nurse named
Vera, is an orphan from a working-class family. She has a superb instinct for
pushing all the right buttons and kissing up to all the right people in a
system based on psychological manipulation. In the end, Vera earns herself a
comfortable life as a well-connected elite journalist in a rigged system.
Vera’s brown-nosing and betrayals did cost her others’
trust. That upset her. For a while. But she kept her eyes on the prize, and in
the end it’s clear she’ll get used to a life of material and social privileges
in a society built on planned scarcity.
The film (which only recently came out on DVD, with
English subtitles) is a little-known masterpiece. It may not be a direct study
of the corruption of journalism. But it definitely serves as a window to the
personal qualities—corruptibility, malleability, and conformity—that power
elites look for when recruiting journalists, and rewarding them.
How Does
Journalism Become Propaganda?
Objective journalism is actually a very new idea. A
fourth estate that serves as a back-up check against abuses of power doesn’t
sit well with power-mongers. As the quote above attests, those in power always
hope to prevent any perceived critic from having a voice. Those who believe in
a fourth estate expect to have critics. But totalitarians find it compulsory to
turn journalists into their propagandists.
Of course we often behave as though objective journalism
is a given. I mean, what other kind is there, right? But, alas, the human
species has a thing about power. No doubt, evolutionary psychology can explain
a lot. Whatever the reason, that quest for power seems to be the default
setting of Homo sapiens.
But somewhere along the line—perhaps beginning with
Aristotle and moving down the centuries of Judeo-Christian thought and greater
recognition of natural law—a new idea started to dawn on more and more folks.
All of that law-of-the-jungle stuff was a waste of human potential. So, maybe,
just maybe, if we just put checks on power so no one could so
easily lord it over others, well, that social balance would open more avenues
to the pursuit of happiness. In fact, it would evolve into a system tailor-made
to abolish slavery in all forms. A republic of sorts.
Central to this: all people would have access to
objective information. That could only happen by prohibiting laws that abridge
freedom of religion, speech, the press, and, perhaps most critically, freedom
of association.
The whole idea was based on de-centralizing power: preventing too much power in the hands of
too few people. In such a system, people could actually live in peace. They
could trade freely, raise their families in peace, and build self-governing
communities without meddling from the central state, the Leviathan.
In fact, all could prosper in a system that protects the
natural right of every human being to express his beliefs, exchange his ideas,
and have real conversations with others without being gagged. For centuries we
considered the First Amendment a no-brainer. Yet today free speech is blatantly
under attack on multiple fronts, in all of our institutions, especially in the
very place where it was supposed to be most enshrined: the universities, where
even the idea of having a conversation about having conversations is being shut
down. What happened?
Back to the
Default Setting
Somehow, large parts of our civil society have succumbed
to that base but instinctive drive in people to lord it over others. That
drive, as always, motivates those who tend to seek the reins of power. History
is filled with unsavory characters determined to reset the universe so it
revolves around them.
They have always—always—had
major quibbles with the free flow of information. They view objective
journalism as a bad joke, or in the words of Vera’s mentor above, a “bourgeois
and reactionary” thing.
The point is that freedom of expression, when legally
protected and practiced universally, stands in the way of their accumulation of
power. So the first order of business for a power-monger is to break down free
expression, to control the language. That’s a tall order when the public is
well-informed. To combat a high-information public, community “organizers” have
been hard at work pushing policies that cultivate ignorance, vulnerability, and
scarcity.
As they march through the institutions of a society,
these conditions produce a culture of confusion, dependence, fear, and
resentment. Once power-mongers control all the outlets of
communication—particularly the media, Hollywood, and academia—their propaganda
can do its work. The work of propaganda is to condition people through
political correctness to get with their program. This, in a word, means to
promote the elites’ accumulation of power in perpetuity.
Journalism in the
United States of America
Obviously, those whose job it is to report the news are
never going to please everyone. That’s always been the case, and complaints of
biased journalists have always been with us. But today’s journalism has an
especially blatant disregard for objectivity, not to mention the old concept of
honor. Precious few media outlets permit deviation from politically correct
agitprop.
Pre-election there were copious examples wherein
journalists colluded with the Democrat Party machine. WikiLeaks emails from
Clinton operative John Podesta confirmed that the media lavished all kinds of
special favors on the Clinton campaign. Democrat strategist and CNN commentator
Donna Brazile fed interview questions in advance to Clinton’s campaign.
Undercover Project Veritas interviews exposed how Clinton
operative Robert Creamer bragged about inciting violence at Trump rallies,
operations that had the apparent consent of the Clinton campaign. None of this
was investigated by the media. The mainstream media’s coverage imputed this
violence to Trump supporters, while ignoring incidents of fire-bombing against
Trump headquarters in North Carolina.
On other fronts as well, particularly in defense of
Planned Parenthood, the media colluded with the powers that be. Media
compliance with Clinton’s campaign turned the recent re-opening of the FBI
investigation of her email server into a media investigation of FBI Director
James Comey. (It worked, as Comey did a 180 with a second “exoneration” of
Clinton.) Then there was the utter lack of media interest in looking at the
Clinton Foundation’s highly questionable operations, including its
money-laundering and pay-to-play schemes.
Of course, the list could go on and on and on. Today’s
media is hopeless at independent reporting or thinking. Most people can see
this. A recent USA Today poll
revealed that people believe—by a 10 to 1 margin—that the media wanted Clinton
to win the election. In a Suffolk University Boston poll asking 1,000 people
what they thought was the primary threat to election integrity, 45.5 percent
named the media, followed by 27 percent claiming it was the political
establishment.
How Does a
Journalist Get This Way?
Corruption on such a mass scale is most likely in a
culture that rejects the idea that humans are by nature highly corruptible.
This false assumption allows people to operate under the illusion that they are
not susceptible to manipulation. That illusion provides optimal conditions for
manipulation.
Again, as Communist Party operative Anna Trajan stated to
her protégé Vera in “Angi Vera:” “You’re to go into journalism. It’s a great
honor.” Indeed, journalists see great privilege in having access to purveyors
of influence, and then enjoy their approval and continued access when affirming
their narrative. This is especially true in a rigged system like communism, in
which privilege is the only currency of value in a stagnant economy. The
shameless pandering of our current cast of journalists proves our system is
also not immune to this perverse symbiosis.
Political correctness is the job description of most
journalists today. It aims to saturate the masses in the elite’s preferred
narrative while suppressing any competing narrative. The idea is to make sure
that only those willing to play this intimidation game get a piece of the power
pie. In that way, the cronyism worms deeper into the system. There is no
logical end point, as it can only keep feeding on itself and get more extreme
and polarizing unless something from the outside manages to stop it in its
tracks.
It’s plain old-fashioned hubris, dangerous and
commonplace. So journalists get this way the same way anybody gets this way:
through pride, through greed, and all of the other oh-so-quaint “seven deadly
sins” that our elites would tell us do not exist. Left unchecked, these tendencies
metastasize. If we allow ourselves to be unaware of the dangers of unchecked
pride and greed—or for that matter envy, anger, sloth, lust, and gluttony in
all their forms—we fall. That’s a law of human nature, just as gravity is a law
of physics.
No One Checks the
Checkers
Why do people even go into journalism? Is it because they
really want to report the news? Is it because they have natural curiosity
and—like cub reporters of old—want to sniff out a story and really report what
happened no matter whose goose may get cooked in the telling?
Not so much anymore. I would guess most now do so for the
prestige, and if they have a sense of purpose it is to change the world, to be
heroes as so many “social justice warriors” like to see themselves. They are
already pre-disposed to a narrative that matches up with the “social justice”
power agenda of elites who run the show.
Anyone who tries to report objectively won’t make it
through the meat grinder of political correctness and the filters they must
penetrate. This drives any hint of independent thought out of journalists who
may have been inclined towards independent reporting.
Now combine a lapdog mentality in the media with elites
who have a problem with freedom of information because it levels the playing
field. Freedom of information results in the most equal distribution of power
possible. Well, that can’t be good for power elites intent to keep and exercise
power, right? So wherever power elites regulate the flow of information, you’re
only going to get propaganda instead of hard news.
The News as 24/7
Thought Reform for the Masses
What do you see when you tune into any of the networks
today? Or social media, which is shamelessly in the pocket of the Democrat
Party? For the most part, it is cherry-picked “news” that gets re-hashed and
re-cycled ad nauseam based on the agendas of the political elites who have
enlisted journalists as their messengers.
Today, when I hear a news outlet talk about its
“programming,” I can’t help but think of programming computers or cult
recruits. Listening to the news is more like an exercise in thought reform—in
which you are being told or nudged in how to think about an issue—than it is
the objective flow of actual news you can digest and think through on your own.
Obviously, conservative talk radio is biased. We all know
that. But what is the only response to talk radio on the Left these days? It’s
a taxpayer-funded gig that pretends to be objective: National Public Radio. One
cannot listen objectively without noticing that its FM-subdued voices are blatant
shills for the Borg government it represents at every turn. NPR’s claim of
objectivity is stunning, although I imagine its hosts do believe their own
propaganda.
This goes for the recent explosion of infotainment
programs as well. From Oprah Winfrey to Ellen DeGeneres to so many TED talks,
the formula is pretty much the same, even if the format differs. You have an
oh-so-earnest host or presenter who massages a passive audience into accepting
ideas they deem “worth spreading.” Yesterday it was the idea of the pregnant
man. Today it’s the idea of assisted suicide. Tomorrow, who knows? Groupthink
can go pretty far when pushed to the limit. Then what about those news-comedy
schticks, like Stephen Colbert’s or Jon Stewart’s, that are neither
particularly newsy nor funny?
The tragedy is that without real journalism and a free
flow of real information, people lose the ability to exercise real thought.
Without being able to actually think things through with the grounding of
objective morality, there is no morality, period. Unchecked propaganda that
suppresses real communication is extremely dangerous because it turns all of
the above into a certainty. Sadly, journalists have become all too complicit in
that.
No comments:
Post a Comment