Thursday, August 11, 2016

Corporate Media Rigging Elections By Rigging Coverage

Before the DNC leaks exposed epidemic levels of corruption in the Democratic Party and that they were colluding with many of the biggest media outlets, these media outlets consolidated into six large conglomerates that control over ninety percent of the media in the country, especially the media that reaches the entire country. Small alternative media outlets can reach the entire country but if no one knows about them they won't check them.

Several researchers including Robert McChesney, author of "Rich Media Poor Democracy" and "The Problem With the Media," have exposed the details of how they consolidated; but in summery the consolidation escalated in the eighties when Ronald Reagan eliminated the fairness doctrine and escalated even more when Bill Clinton allowed them to consolidate into six oligarchies. Both George W. Bush and Barack Obama tried to consolidate them even more; however they were faced with enormous grass root opposition.

Unfortunately the damage is done and we have already demonstrated with traditional establishment that the best we can hope for from them is to slow done the corporate take over of the government, not to reverse the damage they've already done, even though it will eventually escalate to cause escalating destruction to both the environment and enormous income inequality.

Some of the consolidated control of the media has become so routine that it is treated as if it is normal and justified including a recent article that dismissed on scandal by indicating that it is what they portray as a larger sex scandal. Not that I think sexual harassment by Roger Ailes isn't a big problem along with his other activities but the following exceprt and it's implications have hardly been noticed by most people:

Fox News Host Andrea Tantaros Says She Was Taken Off the Air After Making Sexual-Harassment Claims Against Roger Ailes 08/08/2016

..... Fox’s attorneys dispute this. The network says Tantaros was suspended with pay because she violated company policy by not allowing Fox to vet her 2016 book, Tied Up in Knots: How Getting What They Wanted Has Made Women Miserable. Fox attorneys told Burstein the network was embarrassed by her book’s cover, which depicts Tantaros bound by ropes. .... Complete article

By now a relatively small percentage of the public is well aware that the vast majority of good non-fiction books get little or no promotion from the traditional mass media and they aren't placed very prominently in chain book stores, unless there's an enormous demand created by word of mouth from people accustomed to reading alternative media outlets. This includes books, that expose epidemic levels of corporate bias, like the ones previously mentioned by Robert McChesney, books that expose advertising indoctrination methods like "Born to Buy' by Juliet Schor, "Consuming Kids" by Susan Linn, "No Logo" and "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein, "Big-Box Swindle" by Stacy Mitchell and many more that the vast majority of the public don't know about.

Non-disclosure agreements or agreements to allow corporations to vet books before publishing are almost never mentioned at all by traditional media so hardly anyone even thinks about them or realizing that they exist at all, let alone realize how big the implications are for them.

Major celebrities have enormous potential audiences from the beginning simply because they're famous abut they couldn't become famous without the help of large corporations that require non-disclosure agreements which most of us aren't even allowed to know about.

What many people familiar with non-fiction books about a variety of subjects might realize is that the ones promoted by the traditional media that get enormous sales thanks to these promotions are among the least credible ones once fact checking is done with more credible books that are peer reviewed.

This includes books about how to prevent violence from escalating starting with early child abuse and bullying, while books from Nancy Grace get enormous promotion; books exposing how war based on lies are routine, while those from traditional war mongers like Bill O'Reilly get lots of promotion and turned into movies; books about school privatization from authors like Diane Ravitch or school segregation by Jonathan Kozol, while propaganda from Bill gates get enormous coverage and many more. If Andrea Tantaros's book is typical of the empty gab that comes from media pundits it is probably useless yet this is what they make a big deal out of; and this was true even before the DNC leaks exposed how corrupt the media is.

The media is already starting to move on and if the majority of the public forgets quickly enough then little or nothing will change from this but the majority of the scams exposed in these leaks haven't even been discussed in the traditional media any more than they discuss whether allowing a small fraction of one percent of the public controls well over ninety percent of the media, while the rest of us could be restricted to "free speech zones" where no one is listening is exactly what many of us were taught the first amendment was supposed to prevent.

Instead of preventing this from happening a perverted interpretation by the Supreme Court has been used to bring this about creating the greatest threat to our democracy since they can rig election by simply refusing to cover honest candidates and giving enormous coverage to clowns like Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

If not for media malpractice could either of these two have ever even come close to getting the nomination with their outrageous records and incredibly high disapproval ratings?

* Wink and Nod Bribery Tactics * Hispanic and Other Demographic Groups Indoctrination Tactics * Betraying Karla and other Latinos for Political Reasons * Long List of Demagogues Selling Out Pretending to be Progressives * Bipartisan Worship of War * Infighting at the DNC including biased rigging of the Primaries for Hillary * Collusion with Consolidated Corporate Media to rig coverage so only Corporate candidates have a chance * Coverage of protests almost absent from traditional media * Russian or Mika Conspiracy Theories * Highlights of Additional Leaks *

Collusion with Consolidated Corporate Media to rig coverage so only Corporate candidates have a chance

The previous post about "Convention War Mongering Demagoguery Result of Indoctrination Research" already covered some of the collusion by the media to provide coverage favorable to the Clinton campaign over Bernie Sanders; I tried to provide links to most if not all E-mails even if some other reports don't however if I missed any or some of the sources don't do so simply use Wikileaks search engine to find the E-Mails or confirm them. In some cases if they don't turn out the E-Mail, before concluding that they're fake try a different spelling, since that occasionally causes legitimate E-Mails not to turn up in a search. The following are more stories or leaked E-Mails covering additional collusion and planting of questions or censoring of information that DNC didn't like, Starting with the New York Times, which is considered to be among the most reliable sources by many liberal politicians or voters:

New York Times Edited Bernie Sanders Article For Hillary Clinton’s Campaign by Edison Starkweather 07/27/2016

Emails hacked from the Democratic National Committee reveal that Nicholas Confessore suppressed information about Hillary Clinton’s victory fund in an article he wrote about Bernie Sanders. The New York Times political correspondent made the omissions at the request of Hillary Clinton’s campaign lawyer, Marc E. Elias, and DNC officials.

The emails, published by Wikileaks, also appear to show that Confessore made other edits to the article at the request of former DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz. After Confessore’s revisions, DNC National Press Secretary Mark Paustenbach suggested that the DNC Chairwoman grant an off-the-record interview to a group of New York Times writers.

In an email to Paustenbach, Miranda writes, “We were able to keep him from including more on the JVF, it has a mention in there, but between us and a conversation he had with Marc Elias he finally backed off from focusing too much on that.”

The initials JVF stand for: joint victory fund, a name DNC staff use interchangeably with Hillary Victory Fund. On April 18, Bernie Sanders’ campaign questioned whether the DNC is using the victory fund as a way of “improperly subsidizing Clinton’s campaign bid by paying Clinton staffers.” Complete article

Re: NYT: Bernie Sanders and Allies Aim to Shape Democrats’ Agenda After Primaries 04/25/2016

DNC Wikileaks Email Hack Confirms CNN is in Bed With The Democratic Party 08/0/2016

In his piece entitled “DNC Wikileaks hack reveals Politico in bed with Dems,” American Thinker editor Thomas Lifson recently busted an “influential reporter” at Politico for running an article past a Democrat official for review before he submitted it to his Politico editor.

Now, another email made public by Wikileaks documents Jason Seher, Writer/Producer of The Lead with Jake Tapper, coordinating the content of an interview between Tapper and a representative of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), Pablo Manriquez (AKA: “Pablo”), DNC Director of Hispanic Media. Complete article

Window closing on this. Need to know asap if we want to offer Jake Tapper questions to ask us.

Re: Pablo! 04/28/2016

Leaked emails reveal Politico reporter made 'agreement' to send advanced Clinton story to DNC 07/22/2016

An influential reporter at Politico made an apparent "agreement" with the Democratic National Committee to let it review a story about Hillary Clinton's fundraising machine before it was submitted to his editors, leaked emails published by WikiLeaks on Friday revealed.

Reporter Kenneth Vogel sent an advanced copy of his story to DNC national press secretary Mark Paustenbach in late April.

The email's subject line read: "per agreement ... any thoughts appreciated."

"Vogel gave me his story ahead of time/before it goes to his editors as long as I didn't share it," Paustenbach wrote in an email to Luis Miranda, the DNC's communications director. Complete article

Fwd: per agreement ... any thoughts appreciated 04/30/2016

Wikileaks Reveals Mainstream Media’s Coziness With Clinton 08/08/2016

Wikileaks E-Mail: Platform Rollout Plan 05/22/2016 w/o Chairwoman. I have pasted below some Q and A l thought might be helpful for everyone to see before the call. (Prepared questions and answers ahead of time for possible planted interview in Washington Post.)

RE: Tv coverage of protest great 05/12/2016 Yes, but going forward, when our allies screw up and don't deliver bodies in time, we either send all our interns out there or we stay away from it (Apparent discussion about sending interns to appear to be grassroots protesters when organizers from allies don't come through, and indication that the media is consciously covering establishment sanctioned "protests" more than real grassroots protests)

Wikileaks E-Mail RE: Video Request: msnbc right now 05/18/2016 Can we pull the commentary segment right now on msnbc? Talking about the DNC and the relationship between the DNC and the Clinton campaign With rush transcript please once it wraps up. Christina Freundlich

Re: Chuck, this must stop 05/18/2016

Numerous additional stories about conflicts of interests between reporters and politicians have been reported in the past; however they're generally reported very briefly and forgotten so most people don't suspect how often it happens. Even some obvious conflicts of interest like having a revolving door between political operatives like George Stephanopoulos who started out as a leading part Bill Clinton's rapid response team in 1992 before becoming a reporter claiming to be impartial covering Hillary Clinton campaigns and even donating to their foundation are routine, but rarely mentioned by media so only those who pay attention recognize this conflict of interest among the consolidated press.

Poof! CNN's Jake Tapper disappears from Clinton Foundation website: Column 05/20/2015

Journalists are supposed to report the news, not be part of it.

Yet another high-profile TV newsman may find himself embroiled in controversy over his connections to the Clinton Foundation.

Until late Tuesday afternoon, the Clinton Foundation website listed CNN anchor Jake Tapper as a "speaker" at a Clinton Global Initiative event scheduled for June 8-10 in Denver. After USA TODAY asked CNN about the event, Tapper's name was swiftly removed from the Clinton Foundation website.

One reason for CNN's quick reaction is easy to understand. Last week, ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos, once a political operative for former president Bill Clinton, was widely attacked after he failed to disclose $75,000 in donations to the Clinton Foundation even as he covered the Clintons. Complete article

The most effective way the consolidated commercial media rigs elections in favor of the two established political parties is to simply refuse to cove alternative or "third party candidates;" However when they gain enough support, despite medias refusal to cover them, they're pressured to provide a minimal amount of coverage on them; and they respond by discussing them as if they're fringe or trivial to give the public the impression they don't have a chance. Even when it is overwhelmingly obvious that these alternative media outlets are the only parties addressing many of the most important issues which the two establishment parties refuse to do so as demonstrated in Third party candidates won’t really matter in November 08/04/2016; where they portray them as a lost cause, trying to ensure that is what happens.

Of course unbiased news reporters don't celebrate when candidates that they don't officially support win even if some news stories make appear that they do like Watch CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Drink Wine and Dance in Total Not-Celebration of Hillary Clinton 07/29/2016 CNN claims that he was "only celebrating the end of the network's coverage of both parties' national conventions" Perhaps he has good reason to celebrate along with a few of the other high profile talking heads that practically never cover grassroots candidates like Jill Stein or Gary Johnson or many others that don't even get as much coverage as these two considering how much a few of these pundits get paid.

Some of these estimates may fluctuate; but they can be confirmed either through the sources cited here or by searching each individual on Google:

Wolf Blitzer Net Worth: $16 million Base Salary: $5 million

Rachel Maddow Net Worth: $20 million Base Salary: $7 million

Chris Matthews Net Worth: $16 million Base Salary: $5 million

Anderson Cooper Net Worth: $100 million Base Salary: $11 million

Bill O’Reilly Net Worth: $75 million Base Salary: $18-28 million

Sean Hannity Net Worth: $80 million Base Salary: $29-30 million

Megyn Kelly Net Worth: $15 million Base Salary: $6 million in 2013

'Megyn will demand a salary equal to Bill O'Reilly': Kelly's threat to quit Fox 'is a bargaining chip to give herself a pay rise to $15million' already up to $9 million now 04/08/2016

If they had a free market for people willing to cover the news including grassroots candidates I have no doubt that they could find people for much less money; however if they provided fair and balanced coverage I find it hard to believe that they could get advertising revenue from corporation profiting off of political corruption at the expense of the vast majority of the public.

They aren't paid to do a good job giving the public the most accurate information they need to participate in the democratic process; they're paid to maximize profits for corporations by indoctrinating the public with propaganda while suppressing coverage on grassroots candidates!

Coverage of protests almost absent from traditional media

Not surprisingly when the media is colluding with the DNC or almost certainly the RNC as well to cover protests that they help stage, they're much more reluctant to cover real grass roots protests. On the rare occasions when they do cover a fraction of them they often present them as interruptions while only selectively reporting on their concerns, at best. It takes time to cover the details well on many subjects but the best protesters with the most rational concerns rarely ever get that time in the mainstream media and get portrayed as trying to interrupt other speakers, which the establishment give plenty of time to speak, often even implying that it is the protesters trying to interfere with the speakers free speech rights.

If we had equal rights to free speech and the protesters had their chance to provide opposing views to the majority and they still interrupted speeches then I might agree that they're interfering with other people free speech rights; however when the same people repeat the same propaganda over and over again and the most important issues are not discussed fairly remaining silent while protesters are relegated to "free speech zones" or blog posts where hardly anyone knows to look then remaining silent about the real censorship is far more justified than the consolidated media

During the DNC there was so much protest that even the mainstream media couldn't completely ignore it; however there was much more than they let on; and they quickly stopped covering the protests even though some of them continue on a regular basis at rallies. They only cover a fraction of those as well. Searching alternative news outlets on the internet does a far better job finding out what is really happening. This clearly indicates that this democratic process isn't remotely legitimate and isn't addressing the vast majority of concerns of the people that pay attention to many issues.  They also show some of the tactics the Democratic Party use to cover up some of these protests as much as they can get away with.

The mainstream media would have the public believe that those that are more interested in sports or celebrity worship or other issues all support the agenda of multinational corporations; however these people are the least informed and even many of them are outraged.

The following are a much large sampling of the protests at the Convention as well as some from before or after; however it is still only a small fraction of the protests outraged with epidemic levels of corruption. For additional information click on articles or pictures most of which have additional details for the protests.

‘What A Disaster’: Boos, Catcalls Mar Hillary Clinton’s Coronation Speech 07/28/2016

Here’s What Philly Cops Thought of the DNC Protests 07/29/2016

How DNC protesters say Philly police are treating them 07/31/2016

Why America Couldn’t Hear Or See Bernie Protesters During Hillary Clinton’s Speech 07/30/2016

"No More War": Protesters Disrupt Ex-CIA Director Leon Panetta's DNC Speech 07/28/2016

Boos and shouts of 'shame on you' then a minute's silence from anti-war protesters outside parliament after MPs vote to bomb ISIS in Syria 12/03/2015

PHOTOS: 13 Greatest Protest Signs at Democratic National Convention 07/25/2016

Chaos on Convention Floor: Protests, Boos and Chants of "Bernie" Mark Opening of DNC 07/26/2016

As Obama Speaks at DNC, Hundreds Protest Against TPP 07/28/2016

Backers of Sanders Mobilize to Overthrow DNC Platform's Pro-TPP Stance 06/30/2016

Behind The Booing: A Sanders Delegate Reflects On DNC Protests 08/11/2016

It should be clear that by refusing to cover the vast majority of the concerns of the public the media and the political establishment are trying, intentionally or not, to "make peaceful revolution impossible," fortunately there is an enormous grassroots movement trying to avoid making "violent revolution inevitable." Perhaps the best chance to avoid what the political establishment is pushing us towards is Jill Stein who does a far better job than the two clowns addressing the issues. She also does a better job than Gary Johnson and Bill Weld, who both came from the establishment they're now opposing, even though they're also far better than the two clowns nominated by the establishment.

No comments:

Post a Comment