Do the members of the press no longer care about reporting the facts, or do they prefer to act as publicity agents for government instead?
Terence P. Jeffrey's news piece "Expunging Support for Socialism," which can be found here courtesy of Front Page Magazine is not new news. It is simply pointing out the obvious. The fact that it took so long for anyone to find such blatant evidence of it may be surprising, but then when the president's swatting a fly takes precedence over major national and international events, it should not be surprising. The free and independent press, which existed for so many years, has now abdicated its role as watchdog, except for a small portion of the industry, (Yes, I mean Fox News) and those remaining are subjected to barrages of criticism on a daily basis for failing to do so.
This is not to say that the system was ever perfect. Back during the first half of the 20th century when newspapers were the primary source of information and careers in the press were seen as action packed and even somewhat glamorous, it was common for the different publications to be distinctly politicized. Clark Kent's role as a newspaper reporter was not only because it was a good place to find jobs for Superman. The 1940 release "His Girl Friday" starring Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell showed how the papers were involved in attempting to manipulate events and promote political candidates. What was different about the situation then, was that the many different publications, each with its own agenda created competition that made certain that the correct information eventually got out. Further, since the newspaper business was sales driven, each paper wanted to "scoop" the others by getting a big story out first; even if it meant deserting the party line for a while.
Today we still see some competition, and the occasional "scoop." Everyone should remember when Matt Drudge broke the lid off of the Clinton / Lewinsky scandal. This one incident put the Drudge Report on the map, and deservedly so. Yet, the story would have eventually surfaced somewhere else. The important fact was that Drudge got there first. The problem we face is that people willing to buck the system and report the facts are becoming scarce today, particularly where the White House is concerned.
Photo ops and access to the inner halls of government have become more and more a matter of providing favorable publicity to that government. Asking hard questions and informing the public, is now in the back seat. The press has found itself vulnerable to government coercion. They can be excluded, their credentials revoked. Then the IRS attacked World Net Daily some years ago, at the apparent instigation of the Clinton White House. So much for honesty, transparency, and good government. And the press, instead of pointing out to the public how they have been poorly treated, have decide to fall in line and do as they are told. Or, is it that they no longer care about reporting the facts, and prefer to act as publicity agents instead.
Freedom of the press was included in the Bill of Rights for a reason. The founders of this nation expected the "fourth estate" to keep government honest by informing the public of the truth. When the press becomes a creature of government, and freely declines to report fully, completely and honestly to the public then it is no longer free. It has enslaved itself, and has become a Ministry of Propaganda, worthy of Mao's China, Stalin's Russia, and of course, Hitler's Germany, where they actually had a Propaganda Minister named Joseph Goebbels. (See photo, above)
Thomas Carlyle credited British politician and philosopher Edmund Burke with creating the term "fourth estate." The first three were the clergy, the nobility and the common folk. According to Carlyle, Burke opined that the Press was the most important of them all. This belief, if not absolutely correct, is not far from it. If the press refuses to provide information to the people at large, it becomes impossible for them to think and act in their own best interests. Information is the foundation of action. If the public knows nothing it cannot protect itself. Strangely, this is the basis of so many of the conspiracy theories, which keep arriving on the scene periodically. The bottom line is that transparency is the best policy, but it is secrecy that provides power, which is why authoritarian governments keep their affairs out of the public eye. This is at the heart of why our current government is trying to ram its policy goals through in less than a year. It prevents the spread of sufficient anti-policy information and makes public reaction and discourse more difficult. It is effectively trying to create secrecy through speed.
We now hear that on June 24, ABC Television will provide Barack Obama with free time, pre-empting prime time entertainment for what amounts to an infomercial promoting nationalized health care. Of course, they have no intention of doing the same for the opposition. They have ceded their independence and become lapdogs to the government. They have become part of what Laura Ingraham calls the Razzle Dazzle. Words to not coincide with reality. The past changes to suit the current needs of the administration, and the public are treated as if they won’t notice.
Once upon a time, there was an ethic in the news business articulated by the late Richard Salant who was president of CBS News:
"If newsmen do not tell the truth as they see it because it might make waves, or if their bosses decide something should or should not be broadcast because of Washington or Main Street consequences, we have dishonored ourselves and we have lost the First Amendment by default."
Now, in a large portion of the business, Bernard Goldberg best describes press ethics in the title of his recent publication as follows:
"A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (And Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media."
My thanks to correspondent Carl Spitzer who provided some of the material appearing in this column.
When I was in high school, 3 books on every reading list were "Brave New World", "1984", and "Animal Farm". 1984 doesn't seem to be familiar to today's students, judging from the reaction when I mentioned it.
And, no wonder. We are in a society where Freedom of Speech means that speech that is "appropriate" is free (otherwise, disallowed), Freedom of Religion means that as long as you don't practice any religion, you are free NOT to do so, and Freedom of Assembly means that approved gatherings will be tolerated.
I honestly never thought that the repression could be so complete, so seemingly soon. It really wasn't that quick, but the groundwork was laid long ago. It was helped along with the unwitting assistance of the educators, who enjoyed the increased "professionalism" of today's educational establishment (but, sadly, with lower scores).
The "covenant patrol" has breached the walls of common and rich speech which we have found in American stemming from our agricultural and ethnic backgrounds. They have virtually eliminated very humourous and clever colloquialism.
In the late 70's and early 80's the Media Elites were making very noticeable inroads into Propaganda.
Fran Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop appeared in Seattle to speak about Moral Absolutes and Universals. 4000 plus entered into the evening with anticipation to listen to Truth. They were not disappointed. It was brilliant.
Outside 12-20 (my recollection) protestors walked in a tiny circle outside the building. The News report for the nite was a short interview with a protestor (I knew her then).
Profound truths are daily left unspoken. The Media has blinded us with their Hidden Agenda. The Elite are moving for total domination. Control of information throughout History has led to unspeakable violence toward the citizenry.
Thanks
Dale