+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: How the US Propaganda System Works...

  1. Link to Post #1
    United States Avalon Member spiritguide's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th April 2011
    Location
    Minnesota, U.S.
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    13,369
    Thanked 7,730 times in 1,479 posts

    Exclamation How the US Propaganda System Works...

    Educational article from Consortium News.

    Article lead in...

    How the US Propaganda System Works
    May 9, 2014

    Americans are told that other governments practice censorship and propaganda, but not their own. Yet, the reality is quite different with many reasonable viewpoints marginalized and deceptive spin put on much that comes from officialdom, writes Lawrence Davidson.

    By Lawrence Davidson

    Many Americans assume the U.S. government speaks “the truth” to its citizens and defends their constitutional right to “free speech” (be it in the form of words or dollars). On the other hand, it is always the alleged enemies of the U.S. who indulge in propaganda and censoring of “the truth.”

    In practice it is not quite that way. Washington, and many local American governments as well, can be quite censoring. Take for instance the attempt to censor the boycott of Israeli academic institutions – institutions engaged in government research that facilitates illegal settlement expansion and the use of Palestinian water resources.

    In this case, the fact that a call for boycott is an age-old, non-violent practice also falling within the category of free speech, is mostly disregarded. Instead we get a knee-jerk impulse on the part of just about every American politician to shut down debate, even to the point where various state legislatures threatened their own state colleges and universities with a cutoff of funds if they tolerate the boycott effort on their campuses.

    It is not only American academics who suffer censorship at the hands of a government that claims to defend freedom of speech. Academics of countries deemed unfriendly to the U.S. have been subjected to the same treatment. Take, for instance, Iranian academics. U.S. trade sanctions on Iran, put in effect in 1980, included strict curbs on academic exchanges.

    Later, a few in Congress managed to ease these with a “free trade in ideas” amendment, but the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sabotaged the effort. That office violated the spirit of the congressional amendment by asserting that while there could now be exchanges of information with academics in sanctioned states, say, in the form of manuscripts submitted to U.S. journals for publication, they could not be “enhanced” by such practices as editing for style purposes. Violation of this regulation could result in fines and imprisonment for journal editors.

    On the other hand, as far as we know, no OFAC official was ever fined, fired or imprisoned for violating the intent of Congress.

    Several organizations, including the American Association of Publishers, took the U.S. government to court over the issue in 2003. In 2004, the matter was settled out of court, granting the right of publishers to use standard editing procedures for manuscript submissions from Iran.

    However, the OFAC has failed to officially promulgate this change in regulations, and as a result many journal editors are ignorant of the revised regulation. Many still “play it safe” and simply return submissions from Iran marked “denied due to sanctions.”

    More generally, there are now reports that the Internet provider Yahoo, which is used by a 63 percent of Iranians communicating through the worldwide web, has decided that it will not allow Iranians to create new e-mail accounts.

    Cutting off access to Yahoo will require many in Iran to use the e-mail service provided by the Iranian government – which, of course, censors communications. Yahoo thus becomes complicit in the process of censoring millions of people.

    Media Manipulation

    Perhaps the grossest ongoing censorship of all is the culturally conditioned, narrow range of opinion fed to the vast majority of Americans by their own media. The differences in story lines and opinions in the “news” given by well-watched television channels such as ABC. CBS, NBC and CNN, or those of the nation’s major newspapers and news magazines, is minuscule.

    One venue that stands out is Fox TV, and its “news” and opinion offerings verge on the mendacious. The narrow range of views offered creates a uniform background noise hiding most of what is at variance with the standard message. In other words, media practices constitute de facto censorship.

    So well does this process work that it is probably the case that many news editors and broadcasters and most of the public taking in their reporting do not understand that their reductionism has rendered the constitutional right of free press ineffectual.

    Really meaningful contrary opinion and reporting (particularly of the progressive persuasion) is so infrequent and marginalized that it stands little chance of competing with the orthodox point of view.

    An exception is to be found on the TV channel Comedy Central. There Americans can find the popular “Daily Show with Jon Stewart.” This show presents the only ongoing, nationally televised critique of the foibles of U.S. government leaders and their policies. But, of course, it all must be done in the form of comical political satire.

    As successful as media conditioning is, some elements of the U.S. government feel they must go the extra mile to guarantee that the public receives an acceptable view of events. Take the revelations given in a recent report by Amnesty International on the trial of the so-called Cuban Five (five Cuban residents of Florida arrested for espionage on the part of the Cuban government).

    Amnesty’s official report on the trial of the five defendants alleges that “the United States [government] paid journalists hostile to Cuba to cover the trial and provide prejudicial articles in the local media asserting the guilt of the accused.”

    Under such circumstances the “free press” was transformed into a vehicle for government propaganda and this, in turn, helped to generally devalue the right of free speech. We do not know how often the government acts in this corruptive way.

    Link to rest of the article...

    http://consortiumnews.com/2014/05/09...-system-works/

    Just more information on how they program us.

    Peace!

    Educational video.....

    Last edited by spiritguide; 12th May 2014 at 16:34.
    Perceive beyond the box!


    " A warm handshake and a smile will lift more people than any elevator in the world. " - L. Hamel

  2. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to spiritguide For This Post:

    Bluegreen (4th March 2020), Frank V (12th May 2014), Jean-Marie (12th May 2014), joeecho (12th May 2014), Kryztian (28th January 2020), shaberon (30th January 2020), yelik (12th May 2014)

  3. Link to Post #2
    Great Britain Avalon Member
    Join Date
    2nd May 2014
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,282
    Thanks
    6,142
    Thanked 6,648 times in 1,188 posts

    Default Re: How the US Propaganda System Works...

    In the UK, the media is probably more corrupt and controlled than in the US, especially with our effective state controlled BBC and it's world wide network. To be honest I rarely watch mainstream news. I can look at it in about 5 mins on my phone and still be better informed than an hours worth of TV news and related articles. I find Aljezera, ex BBC channel, to be more a bit more honest, most of the time.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to yelik For This Post:

    Bluegreen (4th March 2020), spiritguide (12th May 2014)

  5. Link to Post #3
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Posts
    3,536
    Thanks
    23,950
    Thanked 29,963 times in 3,473 posts

    Default Re: How the US Propaganda System Works...

    Worldwide Propaganda Network Built by the C.I.A.
    Dec. 26, 1977
    https://www.nytimes.com/1977/12/26/a...e-network.html

    Not long after :Cohn Kenneth Galbraith, the Harvard economist', arrived in India in 1961 to take up his new post as American Ambassador, he became aware of a curious political journal called Quest that was floating around the Asian subcontinent.

    The following oracle is bused on rcporting by John M. Crewdson and Joseph B.Treaster. It was written by Mr. Crewd son.

    “It had a level of intellectual and political competence that was sub‐zero,” Mr. Galbraith recalled in an interview. “It would make.you yearn for the political sophistication of The National Enquirer.”

    Though an English‐language publicaI ion, “it was only in some approximation to English,” he said. ‘The political damage it did was nothing compared to the literary damage.”

    Then the new Ambassador discovered that Quest was being published with money from the Central Intelligence Agency. At his direction the C.I.A. closed it clown.

    Though perhaps less distinguished than most, Quest was one of dozens of English and foreign language publications around the world that have been owned, subsidized or influenced in some way by the C.I.A. over the past three decades.

    Although the C.I.A. has employed, dozens of American journalists working abroad, a three‐month inquiry by a team of reporters and researchers for The New York Times has determined that, with a few notable exceptions, they were not used by the agency to further its worldwide propaganda campaign,

    In its persistent efforts to snape world opinion, the C.I.A. has been able to call upon a separate and far more extensive network of newspapers, news services, magazines, publishing houses, broadcasting stations and other entities over which it has at various limes had some control.

    A decade ago, when the agency's cornmunications empire was at its peak, embraced more than SOO news and public information organizations and individuals, According to one C.I.A. official, they ranged in importance “from Radio Free Europe to a third‐string guy in Quito who could get something in the local paper.”

    Although the network was known officially as the “Propaganda Assets Inventory,” to those inside the C.I.A. it was “Wisner's Wurlitzer.” Frank G. Wisner, who is now dead, was the first chief of the agency's covert action staff.

    Like the Mighty Wurlitzer

    Almost at the push of a button, or so Mr. Wisner liked to think, the “Wur‐1 litzer” became the means for orches‐1 tracing, in almost any language anywhere in the world, whatever tune the C.I.A.; was in a mood to hear.

    Much of the Wurlitzer is now dismantled. Disclosures in 1967 of some of the C.I.A.'s financial ties to academic, cultural and publishing organizations resulted in some cutbacks, and more recent disclosures of the agency's employment of American and foreign journalists have led to a phasing out of relationships with many of the individuals and news organizations overseas.

    A smaller network of foreign journalists remains, and some undercover C.I.A. men may still roam the world, disguised as correspondents for obscure trade journals or business newsletters.

    The C.I.A.'s propaganda operation was first headed by Tom Braden, who is now a syndicated columnist, and was run for many years by Cord Meyer Jr., a popular campus leader at Yale before he joined. the C.I.A.

    Mr. Braden said in an interview that he had never really been sure that “there was anybody in charge” of the operation and that “Frank Wisner kind of handled it off the top of his head.” Mr. Meyer declined to talk about the operation.

    However, several other former C.I.A. officers said that, while the agency was wary of telling its American journalistagents what to write, it never hesitated to manipulate the output of its foreignbased “assets.” Among those were number of English‐language publications read regularly by American correspondents abroad and by reporters and editors in the United States.

    Most of the former officers said they had been concerned about but helpless to avoid the potential “blow‐back'—the possibility that the C.I.A. propaganda filtered through these assets, some of it purposely misleading or downright false,’ might be picked up by American reporters overseas and included in their dispatches to their publications at home.

    The thread that linked the C.I.A. and its propaganda assets was money, and the money frequently bought a measure of editorial control, often complete control. In some instances the C.I.A. simply created a newspaper or news service and paid the bills through a bogus corporation. In other instances, directly or indirectly, the agency supplied capital to an entrepreneur or appeared at the right moment to bail out a financially troubled organization.

    It gave them something to do,” one C.I.A. man said. “It's the old business of Parkinson's Law, a question of people having too much idle time and too much idle money. There were a whole lot of people who were underemployed.”

    According to an agency official, the C.I.A. preferred where possible to put its money into an existing organization rather than found one of its own. “If a concern is a going concern,” the official said, “it's a better cover, The important thing is to have an editor or someone else who's receptive to your copy.”

    Postwar Aid for Journals

    The C.I.A., which evolved from the Office of Strategic Services of World War II, became involved in the mass communications field in the early postwar years, when agency officials became conterned that influential publications in ravaged Europe might succumb to the temptation of Communist money. Among the organizations subsidized in those early years, a C.I.A. source said, was the French journal Paris Match.

    No one associated with Paris Match in that period could be reached for comment.

    Recalling the concerns of those early clays, one former C.I.A. man said that :here was “hardly a left‐wing newspaper in Europe that wasn't financed directly from Moscow.” He went on: “We knew when the courier was coming, we knew how much money he was bringing.”

    One of the C.I.A.'s first major ventures was broadcasting, Although long suspected, it was reported definitively only a few years ago that until 1971 the agency supported both Radio Free Europe, which continues, with private financing, to broadcast to the nations of Eastern Europe, and Radio Liberty, which is beamed at the Soviet Union itself.

    The C.I.A.'s participation in those operations was shielded from public view by two front groups, the Free Europe Committee and the American Committee for Liberation, both of which also engaged in a variety of lesser‐known propaganda operations.

    The American Committee for Liberation financed a Munich‐based group, the Institute for the Study of the U.S.S.R., a publishing and research house that, among other• things, compiles the widely used reference volume “Who's Who in the U.S.S.R.” The Free Europe Committee published the magazine East Europe, distributed in this country as well as abroad, and also operated the Free Europe Press Service.

    Far more obscure were two other C.I.A. broadcasting ventures, Radio Free Asia and a rather tenuous operation known as Free Cuba Radio. Free Cuba Radio, established in the early 1960's, did not broadcast from its own transmitters but purchased air time from a number of commercial radio stations in Florida and Louisiana.

    Its propaganda broadcasts against the Government of Prime Minister Fidel Castro were carried over radio stations WMIE and WGBS in Miami, WKWF in Key West and WWL in New Orleans. They supplemented other C.I.A. broadcasts over a short‐wave station, WRUL, with offices in New York City, and Radio Swan, on a tiny island in the Caribbean.

    The managements of those stations are largely changed, and it was not possible to establish whether any of them were aware of the source of the funds that paid for the programs. But sources in the Cuban community in Miami said it was known generally at the time that funds from some Federal agency were involved.

    One motive for establishing the Free Cuba radio network, a former C.I.A. official said he recalled, was to have periods of air time available in advance in case Radio Swan, meant to be the main communications link for the Bay of Pigs invasion, was destroyed by saboteurs.

    Radio Swan's cover was thin enough to warrant such concern. The powerful station, whose broadcasts could be heard over much of the Western Hemisphere, was operated by a steamship company in New York that had not owned a steamship for some time.

    Radio Swan was also besieged by potential advertisers eager to take advantage of its strong, clear signal. After months of turning customers away, the C.I.A. was finally forced to begin accepting some business to preserve what cover Radio Swan had left.

    Radio Free Asia began broadcasting to mainland China in 1951 from an elaborate set of transmitters in Manila. It was an arm of the Committee for Free Asia, and the C.I.A. thought of it as the beginning of an operation in the Far East that would rival Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty.

    The Committee for Free Asia, according to former C.I.A. officials, was founded as the Eastern counterpart of the Free Europe Committee. It later changed its name to the Asia Foundation. It still exists, though its ties to the C.I.A. were severed a decade ago.

    The Asia Foundation was headed for years by the ‘ late Robert Blum, who, several sources said, resigned from the C.I.A. to take it over. The foundation provided cover for at least one C.I.A. operative and carried out a variety of media‐related ventures, including a program, begun in 1955, of selecting and paying the expenses of Asian journalists for a year of study in Harvard's prestigious Neiman Fellowship program.

    Emergency Airlift Fails

    It was only after Radio Free Asia's transmitters were operating, according to sources familiar with the case, that the C.I.A. realized that there were almost no radio receivers in private hands in mainland China. An emergency plan was drawn up.

    Balloons, holding small radios tuned to Radio Free Asia's frequency, were lofted toward the mainland from the island of Taiwan, where the Chinese Nationalists had fled after the Communist takeover of the mainland in 1949. The plan was abandoned when the balloons were blown back to Taiwan across the Formosa Strait.

    Radio Free Asia went off the air in 1955.

    The C.I.A.'s involvement in the field of publishing extended around the world and embraced a wide variety of periodicals, some of them obscure and many of them now defunct. In some instances, sources said, there was no effort to mold editorial policy despite sizable subsidies, but in others policy was virtually dictated.

    One of the C.I.A.'s ventures in this country involved the subsidization of several publications whose editors and publishers had fled from Havana to Miami after the Castro Government came to power in 1959. The subsidies — in some cases they amounted to several million dollars — were passed to the publica Lions through a C.I.A. front in New York called Foreign Publications Inc.

    The dozen recipients of these subsidies reportedly included Avance, El Mundo, El Prensa Libre, Bohemia and El Diario de las Americas. In addition, the C.I.A. is said to have financed AIP, a radio news agency in Miami that produced programs sent free of charge to more than 100 small stations in Central and Latin America.

    The C.I.A. intially intended to clandestinely distribute copies of the subsidized publications into Cuba, but that plan was dropped after the Cuban exiles who had agreed to take them by boat refused in the last minutes to approach the Cuban shore.

    The subsidies continued anyway, and the publications were widely read in the Cuban community in Miami and, in the case of Bohemia,‐a weekly magazine that reecived more than $3 million altogether, throughout Latin America as well.

    The intelligence agency's onetime support of Encounter, the British journal, has been reported, but agency sources said that the Congress of Cultural Freedom, the Paris‐based group through which the C.I.A. channeled the funds, also supported a number of other publications, many of them now out of business.

    Ties to Agency Were Cut

    The congress, which was founded in 1950 as a response to a conference of Soviet writers that year in Berlin, has since cut its ties to the American agency, reconstituted itself and changed its name. But during the years when was a C.I.A. conduit, it provided financial support to the French magazine Preuves, Forum in Austria, Der Monat in West Germany, El Mundo Nuevo in Latin America and, in India, the publications Thought and Quest.

    In the United States, Atlas magazine, digest of the world press, occasionally used translators employed by the C.I.A.

    African Forum and Africa Report were published with C.I.A. money passed to the American Society of African Culture and the African‐American Institute. In Stockholm the publication Argumenten received C.I.A. funds through a channel so complex that even its editor was unaware of the source of the money. So did Combate, a Latin American bimonthly.

    In Nairobi, Kenya, the C.I.A. set up The East African Legal Digest, less as a propaganda organ than as a cover for one of its operatives. In the United States, the Asia Foundation published newspaper, The Asian Student, that was distributed to students from the Far East who were attending American universities.

    In Saigon, the Vietnam Council on Foreign Relations, modeled after the American version and financed entirely by the C.I.A., published a slick, expensively produced magazine that was distributed during the Vietnam War to the offices of all senators and representatives in Washington.

    Among the more unusual of the C.I.A.'s relationships was the one it shared with a Princeton, N.J., concern called the Research Council. The council, founded by Hadley Cantril, the late chairman of the Princeton University psychology department, and his associate, Lloyd Free, derived nearly all its income from the C.I.A. in the decade in which it was active.

    “They were considered an asset because we paid them so much money,” a former C.I.A. man said. Mr. Free confirmed that he 2nd Dr. Cantril, an acknowledged pioneer in public opinion polling, had “just sort of run” the council for the C.I.A.

    The council's activities, Mr. Free said, consisted of extensive public opinion surveys conducted in other countries on questions of interest to the C.I.A. Some, he said, were conducted inside Eastern Europe, the Soviet bloc.

    The governments of the countries, Mr. Free said, “didn't know anything about the C.I.A.” Nor, apparently, did Rutgers University Press, which published some of the results in a 1967 volume called “Pattern of Human Concerns.”

    Book Publishing Ventures

    The C.I.A.'s relationship with Frederick Praeger, the book publisher, has been reported in the past. But Praeger was only one of a number of publishing concerns, including some of the most prominent in the industry, that printed or distributed more than 1,000 volumes produced or subsidized in some way by the agency over the last three decades.

    Some of the publishing houses were nothing more than C.I.A. “proprietaries.” Among these were Allied Pacific Printing, of Bombay, India, and the Asia Researcn Centre, one of several agency publishing ventures in Hong Kong, which was described by an agency source as “nothing but a couple of translators.”

    Other, legitimate publishers that received C.I.A. subsidies according to former and current agency officials, were Franklin Books, a New York‐based house that specializes in translations of academic works, and Walker & Co., jointly owned by Samuel Sloan Walker Jr., a onetime vice president of the Free Europe Committee, and Samuel W. Meek, a retired executive of the J. Walter Thompson advertising agency and a man with close ties to the C.I.A.

    A spokesman at Franklin confirmed that the publisher had received grants from the Asia Foundation and “from another small foundation for an African project, both of which were exposed in 1967 as being supported by C.I.A.” The spokesman added, “Franklin was unaware of that support then.”

    Mr. Walker said through a secretary that his concern had never “printed books on behalf of the C.I.A. nor published any book from any source which was not worthy of publication on its merits.”

    Other publishing houses that brought out books to which the C.I.A. had made editorial contributions included Charles Scribner's Sons, which in 1951 published “The Yenan Way,” by Eudocio Ravines, from a translation supplied by William F. Buckley Jr., who was a C.I.A. agent for several years in the early 1950's. Also in 1951, G. P. Putnam's Sons published “Life and Death in Soviet Russia,” by Valentin Gonzalez, the famous “El Campesino” of the Spanish Civil War.

    According to executives of both houses, Putnam and Scribner's were unaware of any agency involvement in those books, as was Doubleday & Company, which in 1965 brought out, under the title “The Penkovskiy Papers,” what purported to be a diary kept by Col. Oleg Penkovsky, the Soviet double agent. The book even used C.I.A. style in the transliteration of the colonel's name.

    Also unaware of the C.I.A. connection was Ballantine Books, which published a modest volume on Finland, “Study in Sisu,” written by Austin Goodrich, an undercover C.I.A. man who posed for years in Scandinavia as a freelance author researching a book about Finland.

    Authorship Used as Cover

    Another C.I.A. operative who employed the cover of a freelance author in search of a book was Edward S. Hunter, who roamed Central Asia for years collecting material for a work on Afghanistan that eventually was published by the prestigious house of Hodder & Stoughton of London.

    Other C.I.A. men worked abroad while writing books, including Lee White, an employee of the Middle Eastern Division who wrote a biography of General Mohammed Neguib of Egypt, and Peter Matthiessen, the writer and naturalist who began work on a novel, “Partisans,” while with the C.I.A. in Paris from 1951 until 1953, where he also helped George Plimpton found The Paris Review.

    As with Mr. Hunter, Mr. White and Mr. Matthiessen used their careers as authors only as covers for their intelligence activities. There is no evidence that the C.I.A. attempted to control what they wrote or that it atempted through Mr. Matthiessen to influence the Paris Review.

    Several C.I.A. efforts in book publishing were well received by critics, and a few were commercial successes. “At least once,” according to a report by the Senate intelligence committee, “a book review for an agency book which appeared in The New York Times was written by a C.I.A. writer under contract” to the agency.

    The report did not identify the volume or the reviewer, but the book is said to have been “Escape from Red China,” the story of a defector from China published by Coward, McCann and Geoghegan. Jack Geoghegan, president of the company, said he never knew that the book had been prepared for publication by the C.I.A.

    The book was reviewed by The Times on Sunday, Nov. 11, 1962, by Richard L. Walker, who is now director of the Institute of International Studies at the University of South Carolina and is a frequent book reviewer for the newspaper. Professor Walker said in a telephone interview that he had been under contract to the C.I.A. as a consultant and lecturer before and after the review appeared, but not at the time he wrote it. Nor, he said, did he know that the book had been produced by the C.I.A.

    Another successful book that intelligence sources said was published in 1962 with the assistance of the C.I.A. is “On the Tiger's Back” by Aderogba Ajao, Nigerian who had studied at an East German University and returned home to write about his disillusionment.

    A Yugoslavian Connection

    The Praeger organization, which was purchased by Encyclopaedia Brittanica in 1966, first became involved with the C.I.A. in 1957 when it published “The New Class,” a landmark work by Milovan Djilas, a disillusioned official of the Yugoslav Government who wrote extensively about his personal rejection of Communism.

    Mr. Djilas, who had become a source of embarrassment to his Government before the work was published, had difficulty getting the last portion of the manuscript out of Yugoslavia.

    Mr. Praeger said that he had appealed to II friend in the American Government (though not in the C.I.A.) for assistance in obtaining the final pages. The manuscript was eventually carried from Belgrade to Vienna by Edgar Clark, then a correspondent for Time magazine, and his wife, Katherine.

    Mr. Clark said that neither he nor his wife had ever had anything to do with the C.I.A. But the manuscript ultimately reached the hands of’ a C.I.A. officer named Arthur Macy Cox. Mr. Cox, who later worked under Praeger cover in Geneva, set in motion an effort by the agency to have the book translated into variety of languages and distributed around the world.

    “It was my first contact with the 1 C.I.A.,” Mr. Praeger said, but he added that at the time he had “no idea there even was a C.I.A.”

    Mr. Praeger said that he later published 20 to 25 volumes in which the C.I.A. had had an interest, either in the writing, the publication itself or the postpublication distribution.

    The agency's involvement, he said, might have been manifested in a variety of ways—reimbursing him directly for the expenses of publication or guaranteeing, perhaps through a foundation of some sort, the purchase of enough copies to make publication worthwhile.

    Among the Praeger books in which the C.I.A. had a hand were “The Anthill,” a work about China by the French writer Suzanne Labin, and two books on the Soviet Union by Giinther Nollau, a member of the West German security service and later its chief. Mr. Nollau was identified in a New York Times review only as “a West German lawyer who fled some years ago from East Germany.”

    Dozens of foreign- language newspapers, news services and other organizations were financed and operated by the C.I.A.—two of the most prominent were said to have been DENA, the West German news agency, and Agenda Orbe Latino American, the Latin American feature service.

    The C.I.A.'s Newspapers

    In addition, the C.I.A. had heavy investments in a variety of English-language news organizations. Asked why the agency had had a preference for these, a former senior official of the agency explained that it was less difficult to conceal the ownership of publications that had ostensible reasons for belonging to an American and easier to place American agents in those publications as reporters and editors.

    The Rome Daily American, which the C.I.A. partly owned from 1956 to 1964, when it was purchased by Samuel W. Meek, a J. Walter Thompson executive, was only one of the agency's “'proprietary” English‐language newspapers.

    There were, it was said, such “proprietaries” in other capitals, including Athens and Rangoon. They usually served a dual role—providing cover fur intelligence operatives and at the same time publishing agency propaganda.

    But the C.I.A.'s ownership of newspapers was generally viewed as costly and difficult to conceal, and all such relationships are now said to have been ended.

    The Rome Daily American was taken over by the C.I.A., it was said, to keep it from failing into the hands of Italian Communists. But the agency eventually tired of trying to maintain the fiction that the newspaper was privately owned and, as soon as the perceived threat from the Communists had passed, sold it to Mr. Meek.

    Even after the agency sold the newspaper, however, it was managed for several years by Robert H. Cunningham, a C.I.A. officer who had resigned from the agency and had been rehired as a contract employee.

    A former C.I.A. official said that the agency passed up an opportunity to purchase another English‐language newspaper, The Brussels Times, which was being run by a C.I.A. man but had no other ties to the agency. The official said the agency responded to the offer by saying that it was “easier to buy a reporter, which we've done, than to buy a newspaper.”

    In addition to the C.I.A.'s “proprietary” newspapers in Athens, Rangoon and Rome, agency sources said it had also had investments in The Okinawa Morning Star, used more for cover purposes than for propaganda; The Manila Times and The Bangkok World, now both defunct, and The Tokyo Evening News in the days before it was purchased by Asahi, the publishing organization.

    “We ‘had’ at least one newspaper in every foreign capital at any given time,” one C.I.A. man said, and those that the agency did not own outright or subsidize heavily it infiltrated with paid agents or staff officers who could have stories printed that were useful to the agency and not print those it found detrimental.

    Agents Placed on Staffs

    In Santiago, Chile, The South Pacific Mail, though apparently never owned by the C.I.A, provided cover for two operatives: David A. Phillips, who eventually rose to become chief of the C.I.A.'s Western Hemisphere Division, and David C. Hellyer, who resigned as Latin American editor for the Copley newspaper organization to join the C.I.A.

    Other newspapers on whose staffs the C.I.A. is said to have placed agents over the years included The Guyana Chronicle, The Haiti Sun, The Japan Times, The Nation of Rangoon, The Caracas Daily Journal and The Bangkok Post.

    And before the 1959 revolution The Times of Havana, owned by a former C.I.A. man, contributed to the “cover” of Mr. Phillips by signing him on as columnist.

    The C.I.A. reportedly had agents within a number of foreign news services, including LATIN, a Catin American agency operated by the British news agency, Reuters, and the Ritzhaus organization in Scandanavia.

    Although there were C.I.A agents in the overeas bureaus of The Associated Press and United Press International, the C.I.A. is said to have had none in Reuters because that agency is British and thus a potential target of the British Secret Intelligence Service.

    But sources familiar with the situation said that the C.I.A occasionally “borrowed” British “assets” inside Reuters for the purpose of planting news articles. Asked about the much‐publicized assertion by William E. Colby, the former Di‘ rector of Central Intelligence, that the agency never “manipulated” Reuters, one official replied that “it wasn't manipulation because Reuters knew” that the stories were being planted by the C.I.A. and that some were bogus.

    Desmond Manerly, Reuters's managing editor for North America, has said that such charges were “old‐hat stuff to us.” He noted that Reuters's managing director, for Gerald Long, had asked for evidence of such manipulation but that none had been forthcoming.

    A number of news agencies were owned outright or were heavily financed by the C.I.A. One, the Foreign News Service, produced articles written by a group of journalists who had been exiled from Eastern European nations. In the early 1960's the articles were sold to as many as 300 newspapers around the world, including The New York Times, The Christian Science Monitor and The New York Herald Tribune.

    Boleslaw Wierzbianski, a former Polish Minister of Information and the onetime head of the news service, said that as far as he knew, the C.I.A.'s only involvement was financial and the agency never tried to control the service's output or use it as a cover.

    Press Credentials Supplied

    By contrast, an outright C.I.A. proprietary was the Continental Press Service, which had headquarters in Washington and was run by a C.I.A. man named Fred Zusy. One of its principal functions was to supply official — looking, laminated press credentials to agency operatives in urgent need of cover.

    Editors Press Service was an established feature news service with clients throughout Latin America when, accordmg to two former C.I.A. officials and third authoritative source, it became channel of dissemination for agency-inspired propaganda. One former C.I.A. man said that the service, owned at the time by Joshua B. Powers Sr„ was an outlet for what he called “cliché stories, news stories prepared by the agency or for the agency.”

    Mr. Powers acknowledged that for years he was a close friend of the late Col. J. C. King, longtime chief of the agency's Western Hemisphere Division; that he had served as an officer of the C.I.A.financed Henry Clay foundation, and that it was he who had purchased The South Pacific Mail from David A. Phillips and owned it during the period, in the mid1960's, when it was being used for cover by David Hellyer.

    Mr. Powers could recall only a single connection, however, between Editors Press and the C.I.A. He said that in the mid‐1960's he had used C.I.A. funds to finance the Latin American travels of one of his writers, Guillermo Martinez Marquez, the exiled editor of a Cuban newspaper. Mr. Marquez said that he had never known that the money he received from Mr. Powers had come team the C.I.A.

    Perhaps the most widely circulated of the C.1.A.‐owned news services was Forum World Features, founded in 1958 as a Delaware corporation, Forum Information Service, with offices in London. Forum was ostensibly owned during much of its life by John Hay Whitney, the publisher of The New York Herald Tribune, which ceased publication in 1966. According to several C.I.A. sources, Mr. Whitney was “witting” of the agency's true role.

    A secretary to Mr. Whitney said that he was too ill to respond to questions about his involvement with Forum.

    Also aware of a C.I.A. role, according to former and current agency officials, was Brian Crozier, the conservative British journalist who the officials said had been a contract employee of the agency, and Robert G. Gately. Mr. Gately, Forum's executive director in the early 1960's, was a career C.I.A. man who went on to hold cover jobs with Newsweek, as Far Eastern business manager, and with Asia Magazine in Tokyo.

    Newsweek executives, like those of nearly all the major news‐gathering organizations said to have been involved with the C.I.A., have said that while they are certain that no one presently employed has any ties to the agency, there is no way to be certain that no such connections existed in the past.

    U.S. Papers Among Clients

    Though the C.I.A. has insisted that never attempted directly to place its propaganda in the American press, at one time Forum World Features had 30 domestic newspapers among its clients, including The Washington Post, and tried, without success, to sell its material to The New York Times.

    The sale of Forum's material to The Washington Post and other American newspapers, one C.I.A. official said, “put us in a hell of a dilemma,” The sales, he went on, were considered necessary to preserve the organization's cover, and they occasioned a continuing and somewhat frantic effort to insure that the domestic clients were given only legitimate news stories.

    Another major foreign news organization that C.I.A. officials said they once subsidized was Vision, the weekly news magazine that is distributed throughout Europe and Latin America. However, none of those associated with the founding of Vision or its management over the years Said they had ever had any indication that the C.I.A. had put money intp the magazine.

    Next: The C.I.A.'s Network of Correspondents.

    Associated Press

    Tom Braden, now a columnist, was first to head propaganda unit
    Last edited by Kryztian; 28th January 2020 at 13:50. Reason: Formatting

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Bluegreen (4th March 2020), Franny (28th January 2020), shaberon (30th January 2020), Tintin (28th January 2020)

  7. Link to Post #4
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Posts
    3,536
    Thanks
    23,950
    Thanked 29,963 times in 3,473 posts

    Default Re: How the US Propaganda System Works...

    James Corbett discusses the above NY Times article, how it is both a source of information about the CIA, and how it is also a "limited hangout."


    Source: https://www.bitchute.com/video/2Y9P47MBctY

  8. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Franny (28th January 2020), shaberon (30th January 2020), Tintin (28th January 2020)

  9. Link to Post #5
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Language
    English
    Posts
    22,262
    Thanks
    47,756
    Thanked 116,550 times in 20,694 posts

    Default Re: How the US Propaganda System Works...

    COVID-19 and Riots: the operational connections
    by Jon Rappoport
    June 4, 2020
    https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020...l-connections/

    "The COVID-19 operation was fraying badly:

    Protests against the lockdowns were expanding.

    The public-health measures (distancing, isolation, masks) were being attacked from all sides, as unnecessary, useless, overbearing, and unscientific.

    Many mainstream researchers, doctors, and even public health officials were exposing the fact that the pandemic was no pandemic at all. The adjusted case and death numbers didn’t warrant excessive concern.

    It was becoming obvious that the players setting the COVID agenda were there simply because they had been appointed to high posts; not because they were perceptive or honest scientists. In other words, COVID was political.

    On top of all this, economies were beginning to re-open; for the public, that was the main focus, not the threat of catching a disease.

    There was a great need for an operational shift. How and why didn’t particularly matter, as long as the populace was riveted by some new catastrophe.

    This shift would also stall the economic engine (again). After all, stripping away the mountain of lies about COVID, the core at the center of it WAS an economic attack.

    And now it’s been done. All across America. Riots, burning, looting, violence, race conflict, curfews.

    A new reason for a different form of lockdown.

    The daily protests in the streets overtake and replace the former protests against the COVID lockdown.

    One operation covers another.

    Television news producers wipe all the COVID coverage off one side of the screen, and bring riot coverage in from the other side of the screen. It’s exactly like theatrical scene shifts on stage, between act one and act two of a play, as the crew rapidly moves flats and props while the certain is down.

    Elite Global planners like Bill Gates obviously think this is their moment. Under the pretext of the COVID story they’ve created, they want to install the next phase of their technocratic Brave New World.

    Planetary surveillance, at a level that supersedes the present system—deploying thousands of new satellites—is the leading edge of this phase. “We must do it, in order to mount an early warning system for new pandemics.”

    Kicking technocracy into a higher gear requires sustaining the COVID fairy tale. Since that tale was falling apart, hide it under the storm of the George Floyd riots and protests sweeping across America.

    Covering one operation with another is standard business in the covert ops field. The 9/11 attacks in 2001 were, as planned, followed by justified wars against Afghanistan and Iraq. “That’s where the terrorists have their bases.” Among other purposes, the wars cemented in place the false 9/11 narrative and guaranteed that narrative a place in history.

    Among other purposes, the Great Depression of the 1930s covered and buried the planned 1929 crash of the stock market.

    Consider this fictional illustration. In an area of forest 30 miles from a town, people discover a large patch of dead trees. Some have fallen over. Others, leafless and gray, are still standing. At first, no one takes action. Then, it’s obvious the patch is growing larger. More trees are falling down. More branches and leaves are drying up and dropping on the ground.

    This event is an operation.

    It needs a second operation to cover it. And here it is:

    The town newspaper, aided by pronouncements from local officials, runs a story about a fire. There was a fire in that part of the forest. It was “so severe and hot, its effects are still being felt.” NOW, people begin arguing about the cause of the fire. It was a lightning hit. Someone set a blaze, using flammable liquid that burned at an exceptionally high temperature. Drug dealers fought with one another and burned up the drugs.

    Actually, six months ago, a town firm that secretly sells a dangerous and illegal pesticide, believing they were about to get busted, sent employees with drums of the poison into the forest to dump them. That’s what happened. That was the first operation.

    But the second op, the fire story, is now so ingrained in minds, few people will consider there was no fire…THERE HAD TO BE A FIRE.

    And just to make sure, agents of the pesticide company now set a few fires in the surrounding area of mountains. The town paper runs a story: “Who is setting ALL THESE fires?”

    One operation covers another.

    There are different variations on this central theme. Sometimes the second op is laid on to justify or explain the first one. Sometimes the second op simply smothers the first one.

    Regardless, covers work. They’re used. They grab attention, cause fear, shift focus away from an op that is running out of steam or is about to be exposed.

    In the middle of a city, a great edifice stands. It took a hundred years to build. Every day, when citizens pass by it, they salute, they leave offerings, they even kneel and pray. It’s clearly understood that this magnificent structure will last forever.

    But one day, people notice one wall is beginning to crumble. Stones have been falling out. There are holes. And when people peer in, they see empty dusty rooms, and smell acrid odors. This news must be spread to the populace.

    But suddenly, out of nowhere, a great mob appears. They’re carrying torches and setting fire to other structures.

    Run. Hide. THIS is a terrible threat. This is the true crisis. Not the hundred years of deception."
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    RunningDeer (6th June 2020)

  11. Link to Post #6
    Canada Avalon Member kfm27917's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th June 2019
    Location
    Garymede
    Language
    German
    Posts
    712
    Thanks
    14,597
    Thanked 5,420 times in 685 posts

    Default Re: How the US Propaganda System Works...

    After reviewing the "No Planes " videos on another forum and then listening to the news here in British Columbia
    (Global News) it finally dawned on me how the manipulation works:

    the anchor person talks about a problem or situation. Then 4 or 5 "ordinary" persons are interviewed who
    experienced this situation themselves.

    Voila, it is now confirmed news and will spread to social media, newspapers, etc. as a fact.

  12. Link to Post #7
    Netherlands Avalon Member ExomatrixTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2011
    Location
    Netherlands
    Language
    English, Dutch, German, Limburgs
    Age
    57
    Posts
    22,999
    Thanks
    31,389
    Thanked 127,273 times in 21,091 posts

    Exclamation Re: How the US Propaganda System Works...

    Hollywood Libs Blindsided After New Mark Dice Book Exposes Their Darkest Secrets:
    No need to follow anyone, only consider broadening (y)our horizon of possibilities ...

  13. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to ExomatrixTV For This Post:

    Elainie (14th October 2020), Harmony (15th October 2020), Ioneo (14th October 2020), Maknocktomb (15th October 2020), Mercedes (14th October 2020), Sue (Ayt) (14th October 2020), toppy (15th October 2020), yelik (15th October 2020)

+ Reply to Thread

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts