Mainstream vs. Alternative

[Gracy]

I've been observing the push/pull between mainstream media, and alternative media, for some time now. Namely, the degree of faith that people in general hold for either or, and if possible, why.

The why part is the tricky one, even if keeping with just say, the mainstream side of the equation. For instance I'm very close to people who swear by MSNBC as the sole source of good information and reporting.

I'm also very close to people who swear by FOX NEWS as the sole source of good information and reporting.

Of course there are others too, and they all cater to their varying demographics to varying degrees, but in the end they're all still corporate mainstream media, I just chose FOX and MSNBC to demonstrate the vast differences even within corporate media. It's obviously not just one big all encompassing microphone.

Neither the two will ever mix, at all, and that's understandable these days, but both camps have one thing in common: They will both dip their toes into the world of conspiracy, but they will always be at polar opposites as to which ones they may or may not adhere to.

Which brings us to alternative media. Now I, personally, don't see alt media as speaking with one huge united megaphone either, any more than mainstream media. There are certain factions here as well, demographics if you will, and people tend to settle into the ones that suit them best, same as in msm.

So to get around to my question. Is msm always 100% inaccurate? Is any given major newspaper spewing pure propaganda 100% of the time? Do they lie most of the time, but sometimes they're accurate to varying degrees? Or does it depend on what faction we're talking about?

Same with alt media. Is alt media across the board reporting with 100% accuracy? Is any given outlet usually right, but sometimes gets it wrong? Or does it depend on what faction we're talking about?

I reckon we could also make it more nuanced, leaving accuracy out: Could it be said that msm almost always has a negative agenda behind they're reporting, while alt media at least almost always has the purest of intentions behind they're reporting?

Might there be varying degrees of either? And might that yet again be dependent on factions?

So I hope this doesn't come across as divisive, that is most assuredly not the intent. I'm truly curious of people's opinions on this subject. It probably wouldn't be a good idea to dive into these waters with my msm watching friends and family. Whatever source they trust, that's the truest news source to be found and it's not to be questioned.

But Avalon is different, it's a discussion board aimed at burrowing down into all kinds of subjects, from the benign to the controversial. I hope that explains my intentions.

Perhaps my overall question isn't even entirely clear, that's possible as this can be quite the tangled web of a complicated, very nuanced issue. If so, let me know and I'll attempt to clarify as needed.

[ExomatrixTV]

This chart is obvious subjective, but it may help a bit to see how they see themselves ;) with help from their own confirmation bias voters!


https://www.allsides.com/sites/default/files/AllSidesMediaBiasChart-Version5_0.jpg


source (https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-chart)

🇳🇱 Top 300 Dutch Real Alternative Media Rankings: tinyurl.com/Alternatieve-Media-NL-2021 (http://tinyurl.com/Alternatieve-Media-NL-2021) 🦜🦋🌳 << working very hard to update it on a daily bases and add more extras every day!

When using PC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_computer) not smart(death)phones click on me (http://itools.com/tool/google-translate-web-page-translator) to translate most Dutch Alternative Media sources in to: English or German or French or Spanish or Chinese etc. etc.

[Open Minded Dude]

This is a very US American situation. In many European countries of the Western world we only have one rather leftist MSM and no right-wing counterpart. The Alternative Media are just the internet only, no TV. Of course they used to be on YT but as we all know they have been purged largely from there but you can find some gems still existing who might get some videos removed but keep staying there.

So again. You Fox vs. CNN situation is very US-centric to me. Maybe you are even lucky with this as at least you have still somewhat two sides on the outside, while in reality they are just two sides of the same foul coin.

[Dennis Leahy]

I have to laugh at the chart indicating that there are any of those entities (corporations?) listed as "Center", like the Wall Street Journal and NPR. It also promotes the new definition for the "left", as I see no corporations listed as "left" or "left-leaning" that are actually anti-war, anti-corporatist, and pro-ecology, which is what "LEFT" and "LEFT-leaning" used to represent. The corporations being listed on the left side of the chart is as close as any of them get to actually being the "Left." ;)

A much better way to label the chart headings would be "Democrat-leaning, pro-corporatist, militarist, imperialist, ecocidal, propaganda outlets", and "Republican-leaning, pro-corporatist, militarist, imperialist, ecocidal, propaganda outlets."

Gracy, someone compiled a statistic a few years ago, which showed that fully 80% of what the people who read/watch the news hear is actually read directly from corporate press releases and State Department/US gov offices. Directly read off the paper/teleprompter. I'd guess that about 99% of it is lies, "sins of omission" (that which is never covered), and social-engineering propaganda. And the other 20%, well, that's the "cat in a tree rescue" and high school football scores, which are actual, real, true stories/news.

I wouldn't say that mainscream media never hits a single point of truth, but even then, it is wrapped in an agenda and used (twisted, spun, massaged) to confuse, to propagandize, not inform. Alt media is a great place to find out the true data, the true data points, and then to cogitate your own analysis. Probably the biggest problem with the alt sites is that the commentators often present the data wrapped in their own analysis of the data, and spend time trying to convince others that their analysis is correct. There's no question that mainscream media is basically nefarious pro-corporate propaganda, but that doesn't automatically make the "alt news" websites the final say in the analysis of data that they dare to present - but they are the only places to find the real data to start ones own analysis.

[TomKat]

I've been observing the push/pull between mainstream media, and alternative media, for some time now. Namely, the degree of faith that people in general hold for either or, and if possible, why.

The why part is the tricky one, even if keeping with just say, the mainstream side of the equation. For instance I'm very close to people who swear by MSNBC as the sole source of good information and reporting.

I'm also very close to people who swear by FOX NEWS as the sole source of good information and reporting.

Of course there are others too, and they all cater to their varying demographics to varying degrees, but in the end they're all still corporate mainstream media, I just chose FOX and MSNBC to demonstrate the vast differences even within corporate media. It's obviously not just one big all encompassing microphone.

Neither the two will ever mix, at all, and that's understandable these days, but both camps have one thing in common: They will both dip their toes into the world of conspiracy, but they will always be at polar opposites as to which ones they may or may not adhere to.

Which brings us to alternative media. Now I, personally, don't see alt media as speaking with one huge united megaphone either, any more than mainstream media. There are certain factions here as well, demographics if you will, and people tend to settle into the ones that suit them best, same as in msm.

So to get around to my question. Is msm always 100% inaccurate? Is any given major newspaper spewing pure propaganda 100% of the time? Do they lie most of the time, but sometimes they're accurate to varying degrees? Or does it depend on what faction we're talking about?

Same with alt media. Is alt media across the board reporting with 100% accuracy? Is any given outlet usually right, but sometimes gets it wrong? Or does it depend on what faction we're talking about?

I reckon we could also make it more nuanced, leaving accuracy out: Could it be said that msm almost always has a negative agenda behind they're reporting, while alt media at least almost always has the purest of intentions behind they're reporting?

Might there be varying degrees of either? And might that yet again be dependent on factions?

So I hope this doesn't come across as divisive, that is most assuredly not the intent. I'm truly curious of people's opinions on this subject. It probably wouldn't be a good idea to dive into these waters with my msm watching friends and family. Whatever source they trust, that's the truest news source to be found and it's not to be questioned.

But Avalon is different, it's a discussion board aimed at burrowing down into all kinds of subjects, from the benign to the controversial. I hope that explains my intentions.

Perhaps my overall question isn't even entirely clear, that's possible as this can be quite the tangled web of a complicated, very nuanced issue. If so, let me know and I'll attempt to clarify as needed.

A main difference between the two is that the mainstream media coordinates their lies, whereas the alternative side comes up with multiple stories (tall tales). A lot of people my age put credence in the mainstream media, even after they spent 2016 to 2020 proving beyond a shadow of doubt that they are mostly fake and the united voice of the state. I now refer to it as the "OSwald Killed Kennedy media," to remind people they've been fake from the get-go.

[Ernie Nemeth]

Couldn't have said it any better, Dennis.

The MSM has an agenda that has nothing to do with unadulterated data and facts. There is always an official spin that obscures the pertinent information behind half truths and excuses.

The alternative news sites at least let us see the hidden side of the news stories, often correcting the MSM narrative. The problem is that the alternatives are fighting an uphill battle against the vast majority who get their news each night from the TV. So there is an unquestionable bias that has to be weeded through.

Sites that go into crazy conspiracies and narrate all day about their pet disaster scenario and latest woo insight are just as guilty of spreading misinformation as the MSM. Channels and the masters of woo are not helping except perhaps as unsubstantiated sources of hope, but often marred by an under-current of fear and apocalyptic prophecy.

In the end, no source can be trusted. And no source can be taken at their word. It must be checked and verified by the individual. Even so in most cases it will be merely a best guess situation, with no certainty possible.
Like my dad loves to tell me, 'People like me and you can never know the truth.'

[Gracy]

Here's another wrinkle to add to this: I'm sure we're all aware of "Operation Mockingbird", the intent being to basically infiltrate all U.S. media, and have them corral the populace into harboring ideas and opinions that would be advantageous to what we now call Deep State. Once aware of this, it's quite easy to see its continued effectiveness to this day on mainstream media outlets.

But does it make sense that the relatively small percentage of breakaways, would be safe from such influence by merely crossing the border into the alternative information universe, same as a fugitive used to be free of pursuit once they crossed the border from the U.S. into Mexico?

Not likely, which means the hard earned discernment filters still need to be kept on alert, once crossing over this imaginary border into the promised land.

[TomKat]

I've been observing the push/pull between mainstream media, and alternative media, for some time now. Namely, the degree of faith that people in general hold for either or, and if possible, why.

The why part is the tricky one, even if keeping with just say, the mainstream side of the equation. For instance I'm very close to people who swear by MSNBC as the sole source of good information and reporting.

I'm also very close to people who swear by FOX NEWS as the sole source of good information and reporting.

Of course there are others too, and they all cater to their varying demographics to varying degrees, but in the end they're all still corporate mainstream media, I just chose FOX and MSNBC to demonstrate the vast differences even within corporate media. It's obviously not just one big all encompassing microphone.

Neither the two will ever mix, at all, and that's understandable these days, but both camps have one thing in common: They will both dip their toes into the world of conspiracy, but they will always be at polar opposites as to which ones they may or may not adhere to.

Which brings us to alternative media. Now I, personally, don't see alt media as speaking with one huge united megaphone either, any more than mainstream media. There are certain factions here as well, demographics if you will, and people tend to settle into the ones that suit them best, same as in msm.

So to get around to my question. Is msm always 100% inaccurate? Is any given major newspaper spewing pure propaganda 100% of the time? Do they lie most of the time, but sometimes they're accurate to varying degrees? Or does it depend on what faction we're talking about?

Same with alt media. Is alt media across the board reporting with 100% accuracy? Is any given outlet usually right, but sometimes gets it wrong? Or does it depend on what faction we're talking about?

I reckon we could also make it more nuanced, leaving accuracy out: Could it be said that msm almost always has a negative agenda behind they're reporting, while alt media at least almost always has the purest of intentions behind they're reporting?

Might there be varying degrees of either? And might that yet again be dependent on factions?

So I hope this doesn't come across as divisive, that is most assuredly not the intent. I'm truly curious of people's opinions on this subject. It probably wouldn't be a good idea to dive into these waters with my msm watching friends and family. Whatever source they trust, that's the truest news source to be found and it's not to be questioned.

But Avalon is different, it's a discussion board aimed at burrowing down into all kinds of subjects, from the benign to the controversial. I hope that explains my intentions.

Perhaps my overall question isn't even entirely clear, that's possible as this can be quite the tangled web of a complicated, very nuanced issue. If so, let me know and I'll attempt to clarify as needed.

A main difference between the two is that the mainstream media coordinates their lies, whereas the alternative side comes up with multiple stories (tall tales). A lot of people my age put credence in the mainstream media, even after they spent 2016 to 2020 proving beyond a shadow of doubt that they are mostly fake and the united voice of the state. I now refer to it as the "OSwald Killed Kennedy media," to remind people they've been fake from the get-go.

The various fake coverage over the decades has created an opportunity for public figures to covertly announce their membership in the deep state. Any time they support the official (ridiculous) story or belittle criticism of it, it signals they are privvy to the cover-up. For instance, Obama said that anyone who questioned the Great Boxcutter Theory (my words) was tantamount to a Holocaust denier. Peter Jennings, before he died (perhaps to secure his place in hell) did an elaborate show "proving" (poorly) the Oswald theory. I remember G Gordon Liddy (suspected of shooting Officer Tibbs) on a few occasions telling his audiece he believed the official story, when his guest speculated that LBJ hitman Wallace was responsible. Anyway, if any public figure belittles the "conspiracy theories" of any of these events, it's a good clue they were privvy to the cover-up, or want to have been.

[Ernie Nemeth]

Gracy, from my perspective at least, it is not the truth that is important - because the truth is mired in so many biases and prejudices and pet beliefs and just plain old nasty ignorance. It even could be argued that there is no actual objective truth at all. Since we come here not knowing our own true selves how can we know truth in any objective sense?

I find the truth is not as important as an alternative viewpoint. I think it is necessary to be exposed to as many sides of an issue as possible, so that all the facts are presented and are on the table. In this world so many viewpoints are not allowed public exposure because they are dangerous to the powers that be. Unadulterated truth is dangerous to all forms of power structures because it includes the idea that perhaps the PTB are not correct or are taking an unfavourable position. Truth holds the potential for opposition and the loss of the reigns of power.

Truth is only conducive to one form of governance: Democracy, or government by the people. That is, it is not the current crop of politicians that is important but that the dialog remain open and the truth remain transparent so that good decisions can be made by the people on who to elect and who to remove from power.

That is why truth has always been a threat to those in power. It is also why the truth is so vital and a free press so absolutely essential to a democracy run by the people and for the people.

Without truth there is only tyranny.

[Gracy]

Not sure I'm following along here Ernie.

You started out with this:


Gracy, from my perspective at least, it is not the truth that is important - because the truth is mired in so many biases and prejudices and pet beliefs and just plain old nasty ignorance. It even could be argued that there is no actual objective truth at all. Since we come here not knowing our own true selves how can we know truth in any objective sense?

And ended with this:


That is why truth has always been a threat to those in power. It is also why the truth is so vital and a free press so absolutely essential to a democracy run by the people and for the people.

Without truth there is only tyranny.

I do wholeheartedly agree that it's "necessary to be exposed to as many sides of an issue as possible", that goes straight to the heart of America's 1ST Amendment.

I also agree that truth can be in the eye of the beholder, just like the old saying "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".

Tricky business for sure, under the best of circumstances, then start sprinkling in purposeful dis and mis information, it just makes it that much trickier.

I do believe there are objective truths out there, for sure, no different than it's an objective truth to look outside to see if it's raining or sunshine. I reckon the problems arise in what obstacles are in place to deter or hamper that clean, unobstructed observation.

[Ernie Nemeth]

I see I use the word truth with a cavalier attitude, my mistake. There is no truth as such, only information.

When you looked outside and saw a sunny sky, I looked out and it was raining. The truth wasn't the state of affairs in my neighbourhood, that is just information. The truth is there is a thing called weather. And weather is a consequence of many other 'truths' not all related specifically to weather. Truth is absolute and comprehensive. Information is contingent.

To me the truth is the access to the information on hand. Not quite truth but a place where truth might just be lurking, and I might find it if I am discerning enough to uncover it. Or better yet, if I listen hard enough, perhaps another will find it and share it with those with ears to hear. I hope I am cultivating a receptive attitude toward that end.

But that 'receptive attitude' comes with a caveat. I must also actively shun what I deem to be unproductive lines of inquiry or manipulated data sets or misleading arguments based on unverified or false data. Of course that means I must have a bias both for defence of what I think I know and for furthering my search.

It is a bitch to tear down a whole edifice of 'truths' that at one time served as belief in my ability to understand reality, only to find it lead nowhere in the end. That takes dedication and humility and the ability to pick up the pieces and move on from there still heeding the call, yearning for clarity and a truth that can encompass and make sense of all the diverging threads of available information.

[Mypos]

So to get around to my question. Is msm always 100% inaccurate? Is any given major newspaper spewing pure propaganda 100% of the time? Do they lie most of the time, but sometimes they're accurate to varying degrees? Or does it depend on what faction we're talking about?

Same with alt media. Is alt media across the board reporting with 100% accuracy? Is any given outlet usually right, but sometimes gets it wrong? Or does it depend on what faction we're talking about?



Hi Gracy. To answer your question how i see it is this. MSM is mainly half truths mixed with lies. I think there has to be enough truth in it because on some energy level people feel when something is just blatant lies.

Alternative media is alot of truth but also alot of disinfo because tptb try to sabotage these news outlets as much as possible.

So in the end for me it comes down to "feeling" what resonates with you mixed with logical thinking. Thats how i try to weed my way trough this info and disinfo war.

[Vangelo]

When I was 17 I was a bystander to an event that became a riot. Unfortunately, I was in the center of the event and almost got killed. I saw what lead up to the riot and how it ended. It was during the Boston Public School busing fiasco. I remember watching the local nightly news on TV and was confused because the local news got the story wrong. The national news also covered it and got it wrong, but they were consistent with the local news even though it was a different TV network. The Boston Globe (the largest newspaper in the area) the next morning published an article that was complete fiction but supported the themes of the TV news. The only paper that got it correct was the Boston Herald American (I think that was its name at the time). I even went to Harvard Square and purchased the New York Times to see if they published an article and it was a variant of the lie. For years I wondered how they all could have gotten it so wrong. Today, I ingest many different news sources and draw my own conclusions. My bias is to believe an independent news source much more so than the MSM.

[iota]

one of the primary components that is definitive, NOT a "nuance" of the MSM is that:

they are PAID to lie to us, to divide us, to undermine us any and every way they can

they are our enemy by their own declaration, and they make sure that message is CLEAR and not a nuance

when someone has an agenda? Truth automatically gets distorted, muddied, introduces confusion, division

this is to obfuscate facts, the primary fact being > their INTENTION to deceive us to divide us

here is a fact > without DECEPTION? they can NEVER "win"

they are actually cowards who HAVE to lie, cheat, steal in order to TRY to "win" a game that wouldn't stand a chance of victory, if played in straightforward TRUTH and CLARITY

for example, if they came and said "we are here to enslave you" the answer would be "like heck you are!"

their ONLY chance of winning? is by CHEATING ...

those who are committed to TRUTH speak with CLARITY have NO need to hide, or pretend or use subtleties or nuances ~ ~~ therefore, camouflage , obfuscation, deception are easily detected and are detested

YET despite ALL the efforts to lie, to hide, to prevent discovery lest they would be "chased down and lynched" as Bush Sr said


"If the people knew what we had done, they would chase us down the street and lynch us."


-- George H.W. Bush

to journalist Sarah McClendon, December 1992, in response to the question, What will the people do if they ever find out the truth about Iraq-gate and Iran contra?

one reference here (https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_H._W._Bush)

btw? Bush's statement? ~ completely validates my points!

at THAT time? all their cowardly scurrying? was STILL cloaked under an "appearance of propriety"

there were laws in place that prohibited the use of propaganda on American citizens. specifically, The Smith-Mundt Act.

unfortunately that changed in 2013 when Obama removed that prohibition through an insertion in the NDAA of 2013
(the National Defense Authorization Act of 2013)

you can read about it here (https://www.rt.com/usa/smith-mundt-domestic-propaganda-121/) and here (https://www.dogpile.com/serp?q=obama+repeals+smith+mundt+act&sc=_9tcQfj7eH7brKj0rZTVqRZnPN3_u29xmGsP51CVq8OU_bT8B74xtfUheYVwsL_Y0wl0MERmAATTmCqsfoOITbP-4KPGkHBpHX9mqIH32EtLBwrtsvrDclXVYm_64mGzTRdsf-cLT1obn8giDnbNt5wz3xAvGXZQQtcPk6qdTY7FqsswvJvNuBCIEmgjzjNdH3SFs-AlQ-u9OZnMT5Ky_A2l1sTwQNqXgOeSEILAAkb8MrPrUWamLnR9S3l3Dk-uqaKDDEE49NqdcfOa2E1b__k3FR8jdcgVqc2XWvwAJCzvKrvuFJutFaDlWILrFLW_ln31m0vFo5szAJgXCN_ehtbF-qBUnFe36wKb7-ZaHLEvb27I9ERtIvLUujwkSdc3svk1EXAkXFxYPkQiiKwnwpTKIOM8QC9gkJqiz3PulfeDoo2JJEmTi6W7P-c7kSzkge9M3Gi7OWmESI5UOwthPrMkmtzW3Nt6WWbrAerUOxk8Qe8i1htSY_hPSXHSvO9Veme-3dlmXLjgUp8C48xBhR8WJhLoKnDTqTDOsA8RbI6laNm75GgkE4AbwanrXPy0uO4yfEQIJfq-PI305n9goa1xyvWPfa8R7UrigTfbeGP6Qc_bQbEQ_3_wLd3VspxcaitQOYzHAw8ohbofdOPwNKzhqG9oO8aw1O3uk8x-WuFCJq8RC7YO8c3rMQOy_RmockYQwu0bXixFMQgAhj2NwHiheEPzbmSC8UpCQHSh_oAdt1RrMK74T1eNQ3cpQF_3C1De7UeJG5Wh WB-GUfqVnoGffwpmtUynnv_R23-d3p5D-MHdmqOsUl0fNLM6xm67q1bFdYdGHplAlA3nVanEgtPf4_Bhm3geTtNjBedMh2OY7w9hVC4g3XreAefDkckWqWkE8k-RqPCX6_3yW70__Av0DLxpZTTaMB2bljYIMpofIMbFqiLdyFjo9LSdZ4f3J1iu3VMN1Rjyuh4QQL99F9YCrU77U07atVcMQA47ejc 8cM_qMjuU1iqRKJ14Y1EEg2FVNe8XV-QtAtQgUi83WRP1pGYxWp6rX5WJyyMm510k-PurdCbH5VIEADyGXtNXkMs3t5Uro-68CRnPTxxi-JjXqWkCZu8WJHAvSzDco87orM9lWZu-DPqzTXgrh4TdbWFiiyLAFTxKIBbhWkgBwBB_Dx2-XH1xSshC72zockkf82jvhnNdMqjbWTxWDqIlpmKlNjDvNKKVOScH0KDRR9Nay-5Y7XWflSScYPplXGvT42SGlWrDqnVY25OD7w-73NCofcPDZZc9N9j04MLrPYs75YNQZDqnCVyV3G9VTPWz9rQk9BfLohNRPg0dfQPpHbVs5Li4dL-uxcnc-g_7syTgsw4xWbR0HEdYW8CQp0H4amPRAdQHRJRPj0f2YpolUal1eUtham3ADsgzBJ5GFI18TQJh2QgClmsVaqrJrNzBgs1O08cSE Co4kuVOz5mJ4GsmCewNCSoUdlb3tfT2L3ReKqkPpaohJWL-PkRilRPZ94IqBgKOfThWPsSAalORhRzIIIHaGMds3pOLKFrbIH54uZQ6-I8yZVy1Ck0gsqGWuyvU1E_eeENLzC3Z-aEWf8nS2wMqLGWy4TaRhWukJYUsM2JFESrSfKd7ahH514wjMlcIqDLYQYnPVb8CCqq_uwTPTdfMwkKYBn3iG8B-gM9tNq9w-nzYNaUB7x5ZRq-UvVuxZDwhbSltwXmhvAOJDHgv54GVorfaeUCCRukKy9UJtm0GNhCzzz5DE4vDubHwBfQE44L5mMJ1OH6gQA70guaPMk8LAfVigQj y8bdFCThcdOuSS5Nt528O49VN3JTZk3-NJ_Z8tNNrklfJvfL1znMRj_CeYuTdBEj_NwgWfv3lF4u658dz5V2FobeXibtWLFgo9UGwJC6BqKvuNEUc6--WLL3NeGfqmAAlWNT7a9C7sJ_kFyqWKBXa82XAAJW-VWcnnDR9ctHtDBQ941KbQTKvJw)



45653

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/attachment.php?attachmentid=45653&d=1609590186&thumb=1

THAT move? to permit LIES through the Media?

IS what brought me into this world of politics. THAT specific act.

to catapult me into action? due to immediate threat? is something i don't undertake lightly

i HATE lies and those who promote them or excuse them

i'm trying to help people > they're intent on destroying them

i'm trying to empower people > they're intent on demeaning and undermining them

i'm trying to make the world a better place > they are engaging in an organized and systematic destruction of our planet

I’m trying to bring CLARITY and operate in TRUTH > they continuously introduce confusion, redirect focus AWAY from TRUTH

and their standard mode of operation?

IS DECEPTION


we ARE opposite ... both in agenda and objectives

and to the degree of commitment to TRUTH and CLARITY that exists?

the easier it becomes to immediately spot what is NOT TRUTH or CLARITY. mine? is a LIFELONG commitment

so, AS Tomkat aptly pointed out, the lies DID exist! they were just illegal. Obama made deception in the media LEGAL

ever since THEN, the "news" has NOT been reporting "news" > it has been FABRICATING a NARRATIVE

and THAT is a FACT

a fabricated narrative they EXPECT us to obediently be-LIE-ve ?

another fact is that this generation of a Social Narrative is for the EXPLICIT purpose of CONTROL and domination ~ over US!

again, they are NOT our friends

but yet ANOTHER difference between MSM and the alternative media and those of us who are their audience?

MSM is a very organized, synchronized, methodical malevolent attack that they are PAID to perform:



hWLjYJ4BzvI

the TRUE alternative media? is born of the heart, the desire for Truth, to assist, to support humanity AS our friends

have they been infiltrated? of course, i just did a whole post on their blueprints that was already several years old that spoke about plants, infiltration into social media, engagement for the purpose of division and specific goal to UNDERMINE movements particularly gaining positions of authority to avoid being suspect and further "groom" and "condition" unsuspecting and trusting members

i will look up post and place it here. (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?116594-Truth-Social-Trump-launches-social-media-platform&p=1458743&viewfull=1#post1458743)

i highly suggest a thorough understanding of the source i provided. because to engage in a discussion without a CLEAR understanding of the FACTS can't really arrive at any type of conclusion above the realm of speculation

please see here (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?116594-Truth-Social-Trump-launches-social-media-platform&p=1458743&viewfull=1#post1458743) and here (https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/)

one further point. those alternative media AND assets utilized for the purpose of subversion? (telling us lies, intentionally misleading)

ARE under the DIRECT control of those that control the MSM

they are just wearing a different "hat"

therefore, they are NOT in fact, alternative media are they?

[PurpleLama]

There are a few real journalists out there. None have stayed with mainstream media, and while their work is not as sensational as a lot of what has come across PA over the years,it is oftentimes scarier to know the truth. I bet I could make a list that disaffected liberals and disaffected conservatives could agree upon. That said, there are a lot of alt media personalities on the right that came out in the last few years that are worse than useless, they are full blown agitprop.

[iota]

There are a few real journalists out there. None have stayed with mainstream media, and while their work is not as sensational as a lot of what has come across PA over the years,it is oftentimes scarier to know the truth. I bet I could make a list that disaffected liberals and disaffected conservatives could agree upon. That said, there are a lot of alt media personalities on the right that came out in the last few years that are worse than useless, they are full blown agitprop.


these are two VERY different entities and agendas




MSM is a very organized, synchronized, methodical malevolent attack that they are PAID to perform:


hWLjYJ4BzvI

the TRUE alternative media? is born of the heart, the desire for Truth, to assist, to support humanity AS our friends

have they been infiltrated? of course, i just did a whole post on their blueprints that was already several years old that spoke about plants, infiltration into social media, engagement for the purpose of division and specific goal to UNDERMINE movements particularly gaining positions of authority to avoid being suspect and further "groom" and "condition" unsuspecting and trusting members


i will look up post and place it here

i highly suggest a thorough understanding of the source i provided.

please see here (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?116594-Truth-Social-Trump-launches-social-media-platform&p=1458743&viewfull=1#post1458743) and here (https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/)

because to engage in a discussion without a CLEAR understanding of the FACTS can't really arrive at any type of conclusion above the realm of speculation

eta:
the fact is that a rose? by ANY other name? is STILL a rose


just because they wear the "hat" of alternative media?

if the paycheck or alignment is the SAME as that of MSM?

then they are NOT , in fact, "alternative" are they?

[iota]

by the way, as i mentioned, this was THE issue that catapulted me into action

awoke me from my deep slumber

and since 2013?

i have had hundreds of conversations on this EXACT issue

and NOT ONE

including a former FB_ agent? (who was an ACTUAL agent at the time the conversation took place?)

FAILED to understand the FACTS i presented

particularly AFTER 2016 when Trump introduced "FAKE News" into the national narrative

BECAUSE as i would point out?

they TOLD us it was "FAKE News"

it is NOT THEIR fault that WE laughed

:shielddeflect:

once you commit to TRUTH?

what is false? stands out CLEARLY




https://i.pinimg.com/474x/04/1c/12/041c1295b1c298749d2bcf15be48732c--christian-quotes-about-life-christian-sayings.jpg

[PurpleLama]

It was actually someone on CNN, in reference to the "shooting" at Comet Ping Pong Pizza, that said something to the effect of "when fake news hurts real people", and when Trump heard that, he picked it up and ran with it. I recall, as I was tracking pizzagate pretty closely at the time.

In regards to wanting to know the truth, that is the essential purpose of this forum, and upon that desire we can all agree. We should be wary of throwing out too much "friendly fire" against our allies here, because so much of apparent politics can be far less essential than seeking truth above all.

It is really unfortunate to see would be friends attack each other over what some of us see as mere superficial personalities made for TV, while others might be caught up in the moment and imagine some sort of loyalty to such figures we could never know, not like we have this opportunity to know one another here on this board.

[iota]

It was actually someone on CNN, in reference to the "shooting" at Comet Ping Pong Pizza, that said something to the effect of "when fake news hurts real people", and when Trump heard that, he picked it up and ran with it. I recall, as I was tracking pizzagate pretty closely at the time.

In regards to wanting to know the truth, that is the essential purpose of this forum, and upon that desire we can all agree. We should be wary of throwing out too much "friendly fire" against our allies here, because so much of apparent politics can be far less essential than seeking truth above all.

It is really unfortunate to see would be friends attack each other over what some of us see as mere superficial personalities made for TV, while others might be caught up in the moment and imagine some sort of loyalty to such figures we could never know, not like we have this opportunity to know one another here on this board.

from all that i've seen? THAT is one of their primary objectives .. to divide

this is done by careful orchestration of engagement into insignificant issues that have the potential to divide and RE-direction of focus AWAY from TRUTH

and the MAIN agents of dissemination AND direction of the Social Narrative?

IS the MSM, it is through THEM that the people of this country are being deceived

and now they seek to infiltrate alternative media for the same purpose

to both DIVIDE and UNDERMINE our movement

which would be UNSTOPPABLE if left unimpeded

they KNOW this and therefore do ALL within their power to undermine us

it is WHY i oppose ALL tenets of the Social Narrative

they are sourced in deception

If it is aligned with the social narrative? Its intent or purpose?

I am opposed

irrespective of the individual SOURCE of dissemination

:flower:

[rgray222]

I think most people believe that the lions share of the mainstream media is dishonest and corrupt. it is almost impossible to put a percentage number on how much news is fake, fabricated or just misinformation. It is difficult because most of the media pepper real news with lies. Also, a favorite tactic of the media is lying by omission, when an important fact is left out in order to foster a misconception. It also includes the failure to correct pre-existing misconceptions. Another favorite tactic of the mainstream media is word choice. For instance, we spend on defense but yet we invest in education and food stamps. It may seem like a subtle difference but it is an ingenious use of words that make a huge difference over time.

Most people focus on lies when in fact it is the manipulation of the public by the media which is so evil. The media have gotten so bad about manipulating the public for political gain that they will occasionally acknowledge what they are doing and justify it by saying it is for the good of the people.
I do believe the mainstream media are speaking with one large amplified megaphone. This became "hugely" apparent during the Russian Collusion investigations.

I am not even sure who the alternative media is anymore. They used to be free of large corporations and government influence but that does not seem to be the case anymore. They used to be free from monetary influences, now it is all about book sales and/or clicks on websites. We also see a host of alternative media notables being accused of doing the bidding of the government and/or corporations. Who knows the truth. The alternative media used to give voice to such groups and cause as Black Lives Matter or the 'metoo' movement. Now such movements and groups are strongly supported by mainstream media and even the government because they recognize the power and money in politics.

It is extremely hard but not impossible to get to the truth. It takes time and effort whether you are walking through the mainstream media or the alternative media minefield.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

I was was going to write out a long considered response, but then saw post #4. Dennis laid it all out in a gold-plated nutshell. Besides, I've written many a post about the MSM before, and the rampant decay of that once noble profession called journalism. There's no 'news' anymore, only 'narrative'.

Avalon is pretty much my primary news outlet. That doesn't mean I believe all that I hear and read. Far from it. It doesn't really matter though. We don't have to believe anything, really - do we?

I already believe, and know, the only true things that are important. Love, liberty, peace, God, etc... I simply inform myself with what interests me these days, and store it away. F**k the rest, it will only have you turning in circles.

Below sums up my feelings on the matter.

47855

[Open Minded Dude]

I also avoid MSM like the pest. I even turn off the news of my favourit rock radio station when it comes up at full hour. It is that extreme. I cannot stand these suckers anymore. Any MSM news I get indirectly from the alternative sources or by accident (e.g. walking past a newspaper stand and not being able to look the other way).

[Gracy]

I also avoid MSM like the pest. I even turn off the news of my favourit rock radio station when it comes up at full hour. It is that extreme. I cannot stand these suckers anymore. Any MSM news I get indirectly from the alternative sources or by accident (e.g. walking past a newspaper stand and not being able to look the other way).

While I'm certainly no fan of mainstream news, I still tune in here and there just to keep tabs on what's going on from that perspective, and how it's being presented depending upon which venue it is of course. It's usually fairly predictable.

I guess I just don't get the reflexive knee jerk reaction to it. Yes I know there's the usual propaganda, urging us to think this way or that, and of course the old "if it bleeds it leads"; but it doesn't ruin my day or anything, and besides, is there none of that in alt media as well?

I certainly see myself being led down certain paths there as well, along with all the trappings of "if it bleeds it leads", it's just done differently, for a different audience.

If I had to choose one or the other of course I'd choose alt media, but I fully see and acknowledge that swamp critters abound there as well. It's certainly no safe space...

I can just hear ole Mick Jagger now, as if warning the unwary taking either path:


Let me please introduce myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
And I laid traps for troubadours
Who get killed before they reached Bombay

[iota]

I also avoid MSM like the pest. I even turn off the news of my favourit rock radio station when it comes up at full hour. It is that extreme. I cannot stand these suckers anymore. Any MSM news I get indirectly from the alternative sources or by accident (e.g. walking past a newspaper stand and not being able to look the other way).

i agree with you wholeheartedly

there is ABSOLUTELY NO point in continuance of participation or "playing along"

they are insulting our intelligence

and now they are guilty of promoting death to multitudes through complicit intentional deceit with the vaccines

crimes against humanity for a paycheck and the loss of their soul

those our enemies have hired to POSE as alternative are criminals as well

but AS i made QUITE clear ...

those are NOT, in fact, "alternative"

they are FRAUD > PRETENDING to be alternative

which are TWO different things

a rat can pretend to be a rose all it wants > and it still is and will ALWAYS be just a rat

each day, as death tolls increase

as our freedom is threatened

our very way of life is slowly unraveling

i become more and more convinced

this issue of DECEPTION in the media NEEDS to be resolved if we EVER hope to regain our Freedom

there TRULY is no way around it

they are both agitators AND instigators committing treachery with smiling faces

President Lincoln correctly named them enemies and addressed this very point


… ‘Must I shoot a simple soldier boy who deserts, while I must not

touch a hair of a wily agitator who induces him to desert?’

Obama made this legal and THAT must be redressed

but that alone, will not stop them

i think there should be mandatory imprisonment for them

and those who are paid to infiltrate the "alternative" side

THINK ... HOW can we move forward? much less succeed when we are constantly subjected to lies, manipulation and control mechanisms in order to enslave us

THIS forum has thousands upon thousands of posts ALL attempting to decipher

their CODES
their LIES
their STEERING

INSTEAD ... of playing along?

effort should be put to a SOLUTION

it NEEDS to END

is there another?

WHAT is solved by ALLOWING its continuance, exactly?



https://pics.me.me/people-dont-realize-how-hard-it-is-to-speak-the-26053345.png

[Bubu]

There is a mainstream NEWS an alternative NEWS and there is "MY NEWS". in trying to formulate my conclusion of almost anything. I give a 90% weight on "my news" ( the things I observe with my 6 senses) 10% on the alternative and 0% on the MSN

[ExomatrixTV]

How Many Different "Cognitive Biases (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases)" Are There?

Before you watch the list ... test yourself: how many you think there are versus how many actually are the list in above link shows!

I predict vast majority have no clue ;)

cheers,
John



These biases affect belief formation, reasoning processes, business and economic decisions, and human behavior in general.

[Gracy]

Gracy, someone compiled a statistic a few years ago, which showed that fully 80% of what the people who read/watch the news hear is actually read directly from corporate press releases and State Department/US gov offices. Directly read off the paper/teleprompter. I'd guess that about 99% of it is lies, "sins of omission" (that which is never covered), and social-engineering propaganda. And the other 20%, well, that's the "cat in a tree rescue" and high school football scores, which are actual, real, true stories/news.

The thing I notice most from msm is that the base storyline, necessarily so, is always rooted in an objective fact. Like say when NBC trots out their wonder boy Chief Foreign Correspondent Richard Engel to report/repeat on the latest war or hot spot.

Sure enough he's in that place, it's a real country and there certainly is something going on there, but soon as he starts breaking down for the viewer the how's and why's of it, that's when I know I'm watching a Pentagon sponsored dog and pony show aimed at getting me to see things their way, and support whatever it is they want to do.


Alt media is a great place to find out the true data, the true data points, and then to cogitate your own analysis. Probably the biggest problem with the alt sites is that the commentators often present the data wrapped in their own analysis of the data, and spend time trying to convince others that their analysis is correct. There's no question that mainscream media is basically nefarious pro-corporate propaganda, but that doesn't automatically make the "alt news" websites the final say in the analysis of data that they dare to present - but they are the only places to find the real data to start ones own analysis.

A couple things there, so let me break that down into pieces, but not Richard Engel style lol:


Alt media is a great place to find out the true data, the true data points, and then to cogitate your own analysis.

True, to a point, but what about say, the flat earth presentations? Corey Goode's blue birds, or Fulford's white hat ninjas coming to save the day any time now? (to point out just 3 examples)

That's what I mean by people seeing and escaping the mainstream narrative, only to run head long into this kind of crapola. Human nature dictates that people tend towards information that "feels" right to them, so they think they've found the motherlode of unadulterated truth in alternative, and they'll nestle into any corner that "feels" right for them.

And then off they flutter into never never land. I did that for a while, following different examples, and it took some time for me to slowly realize that my head was so firmly planted up my hind side, I didn't even know which way was up.

I had found the place where certain truths can indeed be found, but I had to learn the hard way that finding them is like navigating one's way through a pasture full of cow patties, on a moonless night without a flashlight.

It's still that way, but I went and bought a flashlight to help avoid some of the stepping in it.


Probably the biggest problem with the alt sites is that the commentators often present the data wrapped in their own analysis of the data, and spend time trying to convince others that their analysis is correct

Now that's news and commentary, and common with both mainstream and alternative. "Here's the news, and here's how you'll look at it if you're smart".


There's no question that mainscream media is basically nefarious pro-corporate propaganda, but that doesn't automatically make the "alt news" websites the final say in the analysis of data that they dare to present - but they are the only places to find the real data to start ones own analysis.

I may be nitpicking here Dennis, but I do think this hair splitting is important. Here's how I would amend the final sentence of your point: "but they are the only places that you may find the real data to start ones own analysis, and you'll have to pick your way through an awful lot of those cow patties to get there".





How Many Different "Cognitive Biases (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases)" Are There?

Before you watch the list ... test yourself: how many you think there are versus how many actually are the list in above link shows!

I predict vast majority have no clue ;)

cheers,
John


Nice list John. My confirmation led me to what I believe is the mother of all bias in that list, a detriment to the ultimate goals any researcher:


Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values.[1] People display this bias when they select information that supports their views, ignoring contrary information, or when they interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing attitudes. The effect is strongest for desired outcomes, for emotionally charged issues, and for deeply entrenched beliefs. Confirmation bias cannot be eliminated entirely, but it can be managed, for example, by education and training in critical thinking skills.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

[Dennis Leahy]

Gracy, someone compiled a statistic a few years ago, which showed that fully 80% of what the people who read/watch the news hear is actually read directly from corporate press releases and State Department/US gov offices. Directly read off the paper/teleprompter. I'd guess that about 99% of it is lies, "sins of omission" (that which is never covered), and social-engineering propaganda. And the other 20%, well, that's the "cat in a tree rescue" and high school football scores, which are actual, real, true stories/news.

The thing I notice most from msm is that the base storyline, necessarily so, is always rooted in an objective fact. Like say when NBC trots out their wonder boy Chief Foreign Correspondent Richard Engel to report/repeat on the latest war or hot spot.

Sure enough he's in that place, it's a real country and there certainly is something going on there, but soon as he starts breaking down for the viewer the how's and why's of it, that's when I know I'm watching a Pentagon sponsored dog and pony show aimed at getting me to see things their way, and support whatever it is they want to do.
I think you're making a good point here, but I'll nit-pick it anyway: One of the most egregious actions of the MSM is the deliberate omission of critical information, critical details, even the omission of entire stories. The overall big picture is severely compromised by, eclipsed by, the missing information and missing news stories.

I don't think it's a fair characterization of MSM media to say their stories are rooted in objective fact, either. That war correspondent staged in front of a partially destroyed building (that US missiles probably destroyed) presents an opening glimpse into "the situation" in a highly biased way, and the first few words often hammer home the underlying propaganda, "I'm here in civil war-torn Syria...", and the audience hears yet another repetition that Syria actually had a civil war, not a CIA/MI6/Mossad regime-change black-ops operation a la John Perkins' recipe. You also likely know that some "news" segments that allegedly did show a correspondent on or near a battlefield were actually in a TV studio in front of a green screen. So even the reality of, "I'm here in Kabul..." isn't necessarily so real after all.

I also don't see alt news stories that are not rooted in an objective fact (the inverse of your statement.) I don't believe that starting a news story with a known fact is an attribute solely of the mainstream media, just a well-known and well-worn technique for setting the hook to accept the author's conclusion, already drawn.



Alt media is a great place to find out the true data, the true data points, and then to cogitate your own analysis. Probably the biggest problem with the alt sites is that the commentators often present the data wrapped in their own analysis of the data, and spend time trying to convince others that their analysis is correct. There's no question that mainscream media is basically nefarious pro-corporate propaganda, but that doesn't automatically make the "alt news" websites the final say in the analysis of data that they dare to present - but they are the only places to find the real data to start ones own analysis.

A couple things there, so let me break that down into pieces, but not Richard Engel style lol:


Alt media is a great place to find out the true data, the true data points, and then to cogitate your own analysis.True, to a point, but what about say, the flat earth presentations? Corey Goode's blue birds, or Fulford's white hat ninjas coming to save the day any time now? (to point out just 3 examples)

That's what I mean by people seeing and escaping the mainstream narrative, only to run head long into this kind of crapola. Human nature dictates that people tend towards information that "feels" right to them, so they think they've found the motherlode of unadulterated truth in alternative, and they'll nestle into any corner that "feels" right for them.

And then off they flutter into never never land. I did that for a while, following different examples, and it took some time for me to slowly realize that my head was so firmly planted up my hind side, I didn't even know which way was up.

I had found the place where certain truths can indeed be found, but I had to learn the hard way that finding them is like navigating one's way through a pasture full of cow patties, on a moonless night without a flashlight.

It's still that way, but I went and bought a flashlight to help avoid some of the stepping in it.
Yes, I could modify my wording on that to add the caveat of "discernment required", of being faced with both real data and BS manufactured crapola on alt sites. The salient point (to me at least) is that the MSM sites don't even have the data or information at all. I think the caveat that discernment is still required regardless where one picks up information is a given, but I do see your point that I could have included it as a reminder.

I'm also kinda talking out of my butt on the general term "alt sites", because I really don't visit many of them at all and others not really enough to make sweeping statements about them. I dropped a number of them one by one as their biased, Empire-serving messages metastasized and devolved them into faux-alt-news sites. But, I stand by my assertion that the alt news sites are the only place you're going to find the hidden information (hidden to protect the status quo corporate Empire) to even begin to discern and analyze the truth.



Probably the biggest problem with the alt sites is that the commentators often present the data wrapped in their own analysis of the data, and spend time trying to convince others that their analysis is correctNow that's news and commentary, and common with both mainstream and alternative. "Here's the news, and here's how you'll look at it if you're smart".


There's no question that mainscream media is basically nefarious pro-corporate propaganda, but that doesn't automatically make the "alt news" websites the final say in the analysis of data that they dare to present - but they are the only places to find the real data to start ones own analysis.I may be nitpicking here Dennis, but I do think this hair splitting is important. Here's how I would amend the final sentence of your point: "but they are the only places that you may find the real data to start ones own analysis, and you'll have to pick your way through an awful lot of those cow patties to get there".
Actually, I don't find that to be true of Project Avalon, the "alt" site I do frequent. "Woo" tales, like Corey Goode's, aren't really what I would consider as either "news" or "alternate news." News is news (real events are real events), but it is the presentation or deliberate omission of pieces of the information that distinguishes news from alt news. In fact, the term "alternate" indicates that what is being presented is being presented from a non-mainstream alternative, compared to mainstream perspective (including the missing data to make an informed analysis.) The mainstream wants to use those 'cow patties', like Good's tales, to discredit and dismiss alt sites entirely, to remove any narratives competing with the Empire-approved narrative.

It's not a good idea to walk through a cow pasture blindfolded and barefoot; discernment is required regardless where the info comes from. On the other hand, MSM is more like walking over a giant pile of manure and black holes (missing information), where you are deliberately propagandized as their primary objective.


...

Stop nitpicking me, you commie! :ROFL:

[iota]

pretty sure a "knee jerk reaction" is EXACTLY the intent here


https://v.redd.it/lnhdv8vklly71/DASH_96.mp4

when the TRUTH?

was/IS actually THIS


3ZRcN7CG8G8

this 30 second video explains the video above

[/URL][URL]https://streamable.com/3vs1ip (https://streamable.com/amp_player/3vs1ip)

https://cdn-cf-east.streamable.com/video/mp4/3vs1ip.mp4?Expires=1636893300&Signature=O-Uqi3S4ECt1-d~lAorssG8mBxUSO51beL4MgS2XMKqVt60n~6uqNK0T-kFQyfJJNix8OwS8CVBPuPUC0ed45wEs6TG4F~ZrAlPn4QcQBZXV0yqCWrJ06951fPm-JCGS57dDW1Lnk6UUzLQ6NJuJojEnUHACs54ZZ9DJVEzDV~iuOqYhY74W7WTY1uDpdsGEtwAuZ2ArOxYZBBZJVU8q-kD6~VnrbN2PF1Xxl~aaqJjWtChBvp4uXVoqVKHT40XaQvJgh6maYQoqND6y6MGDYgEo6xywkdP--WagAc7U7wOczuD0rH3PjRv2Cwx4vp2GcB7nPnX62KV5ONJ1Vza5KQ__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIEYUVEN4EVB2OKEQ

it is a flat out insult to intelligence

and has ZERO merit!

no self respecting person i know would subject themselves to this

or waste their time other than to know what they are "peddling" next ...

but certainly not to take them seriously .. they are detestable and despicable

and their lies? now have blood on their hands ...

i will never forget that

:(

[Mike Gorman]

We have seen very clearly how rapidly the corporate/legacy media organizations were coopted in the SARS-CoV2 event: there was virtually NO critique or any analysis provided for the lock down policies, they have consistently stuck with the official narratives, offering only disgusting smear campaigns and discrediting anyone who dares to offer alternatives to the official codes. The Vax has been promoted, absolutely and consistently, MSM is NOT 'mainstream' because it is not universally accepted or consumed.
The reason for this dearth of analysis and critique is complicated, it is a rabbit hole which could consume entire lifetimes if taken on!
While the WWW has provided a powerful platform for mind control, and official propaganda it has also given independent media and disenfranchised non-core medical people a means to communicate with us all, thank God for Blogging, and those brave souls who try to build their own media platforms.
I agree, don't be drawn into the MSM cultural web, but we have to 'know our enemy' so I tend to keep an eye on what is being pushed out. Always take the time to meditate and sit quietly, withdraw from the maelstrom. These are difficult days for us all. I wish you well.

[Sunny-side-up]

Gracy

While I'm certainly no fan of mainstream news, I still tune in here and there just to keep tabs on what's going on from that perspective, and how it's being presented depending upon which venue it is of course. It's usually fairly predictable.

Same here Gracy, but even that level of observation (contamination) misses up my mind, damages my emotions etc :(

[AutumnW]

Wow, I am astonished that people don't realize that online media is as much or bigger a problem than mainstream, at this point. Nobody watches mainstream anymore, except a few elderly people, high on their own supply...of geritol.

Alternative media is driven by the same perverse incentives as mainstream. It really shines in some areas though, gotta say. But as Gracy describes it's diamonds in dunghills.

And Fox News? Bwah haha. I remember reading the business section of some fairly good site and they were doing a simple breakdown of how media, in general would cover Biden. And it was this simple. Murdoch will put the screws to him, if he DARES to mention raising taxes on the super wealthy. That simple.

The upshot was, if Biden didn't raise taxes on the wealthy, Fox would be right behind him and support him. But hey, if people want to make it all complicated and about anything other than that, they are free to do it. I think Biden is a senile ass too.

We are drawn to certain interpretations of reality for many different reasons--often emotional ones. We then edit out what doesn't conform to our emotional desire. I just posted an objective piece on Pierre Kory, based not on what I want to believe, but what I have to face is true. 26 people have looked at it so far and not one 'like.'

That's because Kory has filled the role of the alienated hero, so ably and nobody wants to feel bad about him. Kory makes a lot of people just feel good about him and about his medical claims. It perfectly conforms to their ideas about the way life works. There is only one problem, it turns out, he's not honest. But alternative media did hand springs and back flips supporting him and God knows what it will take for the same media to actually report to their followers what is going on.

[AutumnW]

A great podcast


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plLmTWHeKrI

[iota]

Wow, I am astonished that people don't realize that online media is as much or bigger a problem than mainstream, at this point. Nobody watches mainstream anymore, except a few elderly people, high on their own supply...of geritol.

Alternative media is driven by the same perverse incentives as mainstream. It really shines in some areas though, gotta say. But as Gracy describes it's diamonds in dunghills.

And Fox News? Bwah haha. I remember reading the business section of some fairly good site and they were doing a simple breakdown of how media, in general would cover Biden. And it was this simple. Murdoch will put the screws to him, if he DARES to mention raising taxes on the super wealthy. That simple.

The upshot was, if Biden didn't raise taxes on the wealthy, Fox would be right behind him and support him. But hey, if people want to make it all complicated and about anything other than that, they are free to do it. I think Biden is a senile ass too.

We are drawn to certain interpretations of reality for many different reasons--often emotional ones. We then edit out what doesn't conform to our emotional desire. I just posted an objective piece on Pierre Kory, based not on what I want to believe, but what I have to face is true. 26 people have looked at it so far and not one 'like.'

That's because Kory has filled the role of the alienated hero, so ably and nobody wants to feel bad about him. Kory makes a lot of people just feel good about him and about his medical claims. It perfectly conforms to their ideas about the way life works. There is only one problem, it turns out, he's not honest. But alternative media did hand springs and back flips supporting him and God knows what it will take for the same media to actually report to their followers what is going on.

so ... gracy called you in huh?

pathetic

and subversive ...

truly ...

**UPDATE**

i should have added the word "action" to the end of this to clarify what i meant''

"pathetic and subversive actions" not people

this misunderstanding precipitated RunningDear, Dennis's and PurpleL

ALL to respond to what they thought was intended

which caused ME to NOT understand WHY they were posting as they did ...

thankfully, all of it has been straightened out here (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?116814-A-Conversation-that-MUST-be-had&p=1462879#post1462879)

[PurpleLama]

so ... gracy called you in huh?

pathetic

and subversive ...

truly ...

I think this is unfair to say.

[RunningDeer]

so ... gracy called you in huh?

pathetic

and subversive ...

truly ...


I think this is unfair to say.

http://paula.avalonlibrary.net/smilies/read-paper.gif
Membership Guidelines (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/faq.php?faq=avalonguidelines#faq_membershipguidelines)



Personal attacks on threads, singling out and ‘targeting’ any member in a derogatory or disrespectful way, is totally against the principles we seek to embody and represent.
Posts shouldn’t really be directed to any specific individuals such as Bill Ryan, or any specific witness or alternative media personality, unless a discussion has already opened. We’d strongly recommend directing your comments, questions and concerns to the forum as a whole, so that anyone may answer you. This simple guideline promotes community discussion, rather than individual confrontation.

[Dennis Leahy]

so ... gracy called you in huh?

pathetic

and subversive ...

truly ...

I think this is unfair to say.In addition, these aren't shills that you're pointing out. Autumn and Gracy are a couple of strong and intelligent women that are stating their perspective, and some of that may be quite different than yours. That's far from them being traitorous scum working for evil bastards and on a mission to inject the bad guy's agenda into the forum - which is the vibe of the accusations being leveled. (And if that was their mission, they suck at it.) You really gotta chill on this and debate points where you differ with these people if you want, but even passionate disagreement has to stop short of accusations of bad character or motive.

There are members here that don't like me and have probably wondered about my motives and character when I have expressed no support for Trump and/or expressed that I think Q is a just a Trump supporter/Trump shill/"Deep State=Democrat" believing idiot gamer. That sure as hell doesn't put me on the side of the psychopathic self-proclaimed elite bastards that are actually our common enemy, but it sure as hell does rub some people the wrong way, and some let me know it. So, I'm more than aware of getting cast in a negative light, and know it is distracting and counterproductive to any sort of goal in opposition of the real bad guys.

[Heart to heart]

The MSM lost its attraction for me many years ago when another world opened up to me via the SEEING of the SEERS I was working with. It was then my heart began to resonate with truth. Yet as one is given more knowledge so one’s perception of truth changes. What is truth for one does not necessarily have to be true for another and this is where acceptance enters the equation. Some will read the daily news, some will watch without assessing what is truth and what is fabrication, it depends upon the knowledge and understanding within and the level of their ability to use that assessment.
Truth belongs to a higher frequency than lies and when one continues to maintain a high frequency then one will continually draw further truth.
There is no such thing as the ultimate truth as perceptions are never constant but always changing. The constant is the search, not the truth.
Your heart will always let you know your truth because it will resonate with it until you change your thinking.
However, here on Avalon I am quite happy to dip in here and there to much that I find enlightening, entertaining and uplifting so I thank all of you for your very interesting posts, it is my “go to” place of an evening when I find time to relax.❤️

[RunningDeer]

To Dennis: http://paula.avalonlibrary.net/smilies/hug-two.gif

With heart,
Paula ♡

http://paula.avalonlibrary.net/smilies/pluck-stars.gif






so ... gracy called you in huh?

pathetic

and subversive ...

truly ...

I think this is unfair to say.In addition, these aren't shills that you're pointing out. Autumn and Gracy are a couple of strong and intelligent women that are stating their perspective, and some of that may be quite different than yours. That's far from them being traitorous scum working for evil bastards and on a mission to inject the bad guy's agenda into the forum - which is the vibe of the accusations being leveled. (And if that was their mission, they suck at it.) You really gotta chill on this and debate points where you differ with these people if you want, but even passionate disagreement has to stop short of accusations of bad character or motive.

There are members here that don't like me and have probably wondered about my motives and character when I have expressed no support for Trump and/or expressed that I think Q is a just a Trump supporter/Trump shill/"Deep State=Democrat" believing idiot gamer. That sure as hell doesn't put me on the side of the psychopathic self-proclaimed elite bastards that are actually our common enemy, but it sure as hell does rub some people the wrong way, and some let me know it. So, I'm more than aware of getting cast in a negative light, and know it is distracting and counterproductive to any sort of goal in opposition of the real bad guys.

[Arcturian108]

I created the following meme about three years ago to reflect my own opinion:

"The only thing I believe in the New York Times are the recipes."

[iota]

hi everyone

i'm very glad to see an opening to have this discussion at long last

i have opened a thread in members only section here (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?116814-A-Conversation-that-MUST-be-had&p=1462640#post1462640)

grabbing a cup of coffee and see you in a bit!

:flower:

[Gracy]

I created the following meme about three years ago to reflect my own opinion:

"The only thing I believe in the New York Times are the recipes."

I hear ya, and by and large I agree, but see here's another facet of how I'm looking at this here critter: I look at the New York Times as very similar to The Washington Post, usually the pages would be useful only as good old fashion outhouse material, but there are exceptions. Like the old saying "there's an exception to every rule".

So let's take The Washington Post for example, last December they released "The Afghanistan Papers", detailing all of the fraud waste and abuse that had been going into that horrible and endless war.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/investigations/afghanistan-papers/afghanistan-war-confidential-documents/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=acq-nat&utm_campaign=channel-search&utm_content=&utm_keyword=afghanistan%20papers&campaignid=12916814389&adgroupid=127664223725&adid=558671287608&gclid=CjwKCAiAm7OMBhAQEiwArvGi3HU2u2S3lsHuN6yrb1kqBq7p1ktDTUQeX3tPkYUCtZhO94PiWoHQphoCI4QQAvD_BwE

Now that was some good s##t, nothing to sneeze at, and predictably the story never caught fire in the rest of mainstream media, but they did put the story out there, and I have to give credit where credit's due.

For me, this whole "mainstream vs. alternative" basically boils down to two main talking points: Nuance, and consistency.

Mainstream media as a whole is raked through the mud here, rightfully so, and I have no problem with that. For the most part it's well deserved so let's make that crystal clear!

But what I do have a problem with for instance is seeing the New York Times for example, dragged through the mud one day, but headlined like a poster child the next because they happened to report something that is favorable to the overall narrative.

That's not being consistent! Either the NYT is outhouse material or it's not, it can't be both depending on convenience of what and how they may be covering at any given time.

Here's a good scenario: Out of nowhere, the NYT publishes an article detailing how Donald J. Trump has been wronged in a certain area, and they (for a change!) are pointing it out. It's not consistent to constantly harp on msm is 100% BS, but then turn around and triumphantly post that headline because it's pleasing to one's confirmation bias.

That's something I take issue with, just be consistent is all. If all of msm reporting is 100% fake news, then it should never, ever, be the source of a news event.

Of course the flip side of that coin is alt media is 100% correct, but that's for a different scenario, and it goes straight back to nuance.

[Arcturian108]

I created the following meme about three years ago to reflect my own opinion:

"The only thing I believe in the New York Times are the recipes."

I hear ya, and by and large I agree, but see here's another facet of how I'm looking at this here critter: I look at the New York Times as very similar to The Washington Post, usually the pages would be useful only as good old fashion outhouse material, but there are exceptions. Like the old saying "there's an exception to every rule".

So let's take The Washington Post for example, last December they released "The Afghanistan Papers", detailing all of the fraud waste and abuse that had been going into that horrible and endless war.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/investigations/afghanistan-papers/afghanistan-war-confidential-documents/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=acq-nat&utm_campaign=channel-search&utm_content=&utm_keyword=afghanistan%20papers&campaignid=12916814389&adgroupid=127664223725&adid=558671287608&gclid=CjwKCAiAm7OMBhAQEiwArvGi3HU2u2S3lsHuN6yrb1kqBq7p1ktDTUQeX3tPkYUCtZhO94PiWoHQphoCI4QQAvD_BwE

Now that was some good s##t, nothing to sneeze at, and predictably the story never caught fire in the rest of mainstream media, but they did put the story out there, and I have to give credit where credit's due.

For me, this whole "mainstream vs. alternative" basically boils down to two main talking points: Nuance, and consistency.

Mainstream media as a whole is raked through the mud here, rightfully so, and I have no problem with that. For the most part it's well deserved so let's make that crystal clear!

But what I do have a problem with for instance is seeing the New York Times for example, dragged through the mud one day, but headlined like a poster child the next because they happened to report something that is favorable to the overall narrative.

That's not being consistent! Either the NYT is outhouse material or it's not, it can't be both depending on convenience of what and how they may be covering at any given time.

Here's a good scenario: Out of nowhere, the NYT publishes an article detailing how Donald J. Trump has been wronged in a certain area, and they (for a change!) are pointing it out. It's not consistent to constantly harp on msm is 100% BS, but then turn around and triumphantly post that headline because it's pleasing to one's confirmation bias.

That's something I take issue with, just be consistent is all. If all of msm reporting is 100% fake news, then it should never, ever, be the source of a news event.

Of course the flip side of that coin is alt media is 100% correct, but that's for a different scenario, and it goes straight back to nuance.

Good propaganda tells the truth some of the time.

[iota]

Gracy i have asked you a question here
(https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?116814-A-Conversation-that-MUST-be-had&p=1462640&viewfull=1#post1462640)

PRIOR to AutumnW's entrance on the thread:

did you or did you not discuss it with him ?

[AutumnW]

Gracy, as to your point the New York Times featured a long self critical piece by one of their journalists. It was about how the lies of one of their own distorted the hell out of coverage of (I think it was) war in Syria. She was referring to 'terrorists' and then bull****ting about being in their company and how scared she was...a true Perils of Pauline major story. They went so far as to roast themselves and then further went on to explain how it distorted not only their coverage of events but other media who ran with their story.

And this could have been for purely self serving reasons, like, they were losing market share, but still they did stoop to admit they were wrong.

No 'self respecting' youtube influencer rube shouting at the top of his lungs would ever admit to being completely wrong and apologize to his audience. Maybe it's happened but I can't remember when, unless there was a lawsuit pending.

[Vangelo]

Gracy, as to your point the New York Times featured a long self critical piece by one of their journalists. It was about how the lies of one of their own distorted the hell out of coverage of (I think it was) war in Syria. She was referring to 'terrorists' and then bull****ting about being in their company and how scared she was...a true Perils of Pauline major story. They went so far as to roast themselves and then further went on to explain how it distorted not only their coverage of events but other media who ran with their story.

And this could have been for purely self serving reasons, like, they were losing market share, but still they did stoop to admit they were wrong.

AutumnW, referring to the bold text above, what is your point? Are you implying that the NYT is therefore more believable? Or are you suggesting something else?



No 'self respecting' youtube influencer rube shouting at the top of his lungs would ever admit to being completely wrong and apologize to his audience.

Again, I am not quite sure what your message is with the above quote? Please elaborate.

BTW: Many of the independent news channels I follow have retracted erroneous statements when circumstances warranted it.



... Maybe it's happened but I can't remember when, unless there was a lawsuit pending.

You seem to be suggesting that only YouTube influencers would retract something in response to a legal threat. I guess you have never seen the Project Veritas Wall Of Shame (https://www.projectveritas.com/wall-of-shame-retracto/)

[AutumnW]

Vangelo, To be more specific, I meant podcasters who shout, use clickbait, ridicule, casual with the truth and on a spectrum from left to right. Do these people ever apologize when confronted? No, they just blow past it, ignore obvious facts, play hackey sack with facts.

Now the NY Times, I read very selectively because they are pompous and have ties with the CIA. They are definitely cheerleaders for war and empire. So it really struck me as something fantastic when they traced the etymology of their own text back to its roots and described how it spread like a cancer and how damaging it was -- and damaging in a global way.

Have they turned a corner? I don't read enough of their political coverage to get a sense of it. I like their science and economics section and the magazine on Sundays.

[jaybee]

I don't know where we would be if it wasn't for the 'Alternative' Media....

There is bound to be some infiltration by organized dishonest (dark) forces - that's how they would try to destroy from within - confuse - muddy the waters - create disunity - and one of the main things as well, I think, would be so those who are following the Government / Global Elite line have something they can pull out of the bag and feel that they have some evidence on their side.... like pushing such and such a person can't be trusted because they did this or that -

But the MSM are working for the cabal of mega rich individuals and families 24/7 - the perpetrators, couldn't have pulled the Pandemic Hoax + 'Vaccine' agenda off - and the ongoing social engineering off, without the total integration and control of the main media outlets.... not just the news - the Soaps - - the adverts - entertainment - 24/7 propaganda -

Our only relief from that is the Alternative Media and so Alternative Media is bound to be a target of those wanting to create doubts in that direction...

The process of censorship has been creeping in stealthily and some indication of who the wanna~be dictators fear is who they get rid of - I believe one of the first to be de~platformed and removed from social media was Mike Adams aka the Health Ranger... . then Alex Jones - and probably others who aren't so famous but were probably judged to be potential serious threat....

They couldn't just get rid of everyone who doesn't toe the line in one big swoop because the plan is to do it gradually so it isn't too obvious - some high profile people with large followings still manage to survive the purge - Jimmy Dore for example - and Tim Pool -

Even though we get all this stuff - mainstream and alternative through the internet / TV and not face to face - I do believe that intuition, telepathy etc still comes into play - and you can kind of feel who to trust and who not to trust - by the effects they create and the general vibe...

just a little ponder on the subject...

[Gracy]

I don't know where we would be if it wasn't for the 'Alternative' Media....

Same here jaybee, and thank you for putting it that way! Let me share my own quick story on how that's true for me as well, and why:

I was slow to catch on, late to the party so to speak, on realizing what I had really seen on that fateful day of 9/11/2001, and how deeply I had brought into the ensuing propaganda by that time. I bought it all hook, line, and sinker. /They hate us because of our freedoms!/ they're gonna keep doing it so we need to harden our airports/the war on terror starts in Afghanistan, and then Iraq, then wherever it has to go we'll leave no stone unturned!/ we need The Patriot Act!/ And yada yada yada, you know the whole ridiculous war mongering spiel.

A few years later, while still mightily buying into it, came home from work one day to see someone had been passing out leaflets in the neighborhood, and there was one hung on my doorknob. Just scanned it briefly with my usual disinterest in such things, it was from an outlet called "InfoWars", and they were saying 9/11 was a false flag same as the Reichstag fire that put Hitler in power. Well I had never even heard of a false flag, or any Reichstag fire, but they gave a nice concise overview of both, and that was that.

Didn't give it much thought afterwards, although here and there I'd catch wind of people saying similar things about 9/11, they always reminded me of that initial flyer, but then it was always quickly dismissed. Like if there was something to it, the t.v. would have mentioned something about it right?

FOX NEWS was my news source at the time, I believed them 100% down the line of both their news and commentary, and by goddess they would tell me, just like my President George W. Bush, who would NEVER lie to me!

Come along around 2011, that little flyer kept nibbling at my sub conscious, it started to bother me more and more, until one night I couldn't sleep because of it, and finally decided to put it to bed once and for all by going to the computers in the wee hours and go scouring around until I could disprove of the whole matter once and for all, move on with my life, and start getting some sleep to boot!

Well guess where I wound up rather quickly, InfoWars LOL! That very night was where my old life came to a screeching halt, and a new life was born. By the time the sun was coming up I was nearly in a state of shock, had seen sufficient video, ways of looking at the footage of the towers crumbling that I was previously blinded to, and by the point it was time to get ready for work, all I could think was "holy s##t, it's TRUE!!!"

Next thing you know I had devoured a David Icke book, and there was no turning back...

But here was the catch, and this is what I'm trying to point out. I had recently found out msm was full of it, but I was still way too new and naive in all this stuff, and wound up getting hopelessly lost down, what were in retrospect, rabbit holes; and some of them were really starting to make me angry and paranoid! "They're coming to get me! They're already putting people in FEMA camps! Time to arm up because this may come to a shootout! etc...

It literally destroyed my life for a couple of years, and friends started distancing themselves because I would try to get them to see the menacing threats I was seeing all around us, they were everywhere! Again in retrospect, most of them were not figments of my imagination, the threats were there and they still are, but I was so freaked out by the magnitude/the shock of what I had been exposed to, my imagination was exaggerating those very real threats by orders of magnitude.

My husband even left me, he couldn't take it any more, and during the months I found myself totally alone, there came that low point where I had to come to grips with what was happening to me. I slowly began to realize I needed to take a deep breath, take a nice big pause, and step back from it all.

If for nothing else, then for the sake of my own peace of mind and sanity...

It took a while, but what had happened was I had been so out of balance one way, believing everything mainstream media told me, that I had rocketed to that polar opposite and was believing everything, and I do mean EVERYTHING, that alt media was telling me. I was under the great misconception that I had escaped the great lie, and found the great truth; but that's not how it works, and I took some serious lumps in learning that lesson in the cruelest of hard ways.

Turned out the message an elder of mine who had witten the following with the greatest of care in my high school yearbook, had been spot on accurate all those years ago: "Gracy, always remember, moderation is the key to success".

So back to topic, yes, there are many great truths in alternative media, and there is little to learn from mainstream media. Alt media save me from being a propagandized walking zombie for the rest of my days; however, there are a great number of pitfalls in alt media, they will grab you by your ears and take you for Mr. Toad's Wild Ride if you're not careful, if you haven't honed that proper discernment skills.

And I still carry those deep scars to prove it.

Hopefully my little story helps clarify my view of media vs. alt media. It's by no means a slam on alt media message, it's a be careful message from someone who's been there done that.

[AutumnW]

Thank you, Gracy. That was really interesting and very honest and it's a route so many have taken, but are having a tough time extricating themselves from, as they are surrounded by the like minded, online, and not subject to modifying influences of being in a real world community. It's a new social phenomenon and one that has no easy answers. Blessings:dog:

[jaybee]

discernment

exactly

noun
the ability to judge well.

and it comes with observation, critical thinking and practice ....

[Dubsy]

It literally destroyed my life for a couple of years, and friends started distancing themselves because I would try to get them to see the menacing threats I was seeing all around us, they were everywhere! Again in retrospect, most of them were not figments of my imagination, the threats were there and they still are, but I was so freaked out by the magnitude/the shock of what I had been exposed to, my imagination was exaggerating those very real threats by orders of magnitude.

My husband even left me, he couldn't take it any more, and during the months I found myself totally alone, there came that low point where I had to come to grips with what was happening to me. I slowly began to realize I needed to take a deep breath, take a nice big pause, and step back from it all.

If for nothing else, then for the sake of my own peace of mind and sanity...

It took a while, but what had happened was I had been so out of balance one way, believing everything mainstream media told me, that I had rocketed to that polar opposite and was believing everything, and I do mean EVERYTHING, that alt media was telling me. I was under the great misconception that I had escaped the great lie, and found the great truth; but that's not how it works, and I took some serious lumps in learning that lesson in the cruelest of hard ways.

Turned out the message an elder of mine who had witten the following with the greatest of care in my high school yearbook, had been spot on accurate all those years ago: "Gracy, always remember, moderation is the key to success".


Such an honest and heartfelt description , Gracy :flower:

I found myself smiling, even though your description was nothing to smile about, - as I was ticking off the exact parallel experiences and emotions in my own life.

A teacher once wrote on my report -- 'Dubsy' is a model student. Unfortunately he isn't a working modal.

I never had a problem digesting and regurgitating book learning and passing exams. I was seen as disruptive to many because I would openly disagree and question. -- I also know that the teacher who wrote that and caused me no end of grief with my parents, plagiarized his very smug 'quote' ....... as I've read it elsewhere since.

Back to topic - We really have to be thankful for any type of alternative media, good and bad.

It is up to us to be the 'proof readers' in a very literal sense.

One persons' truth will seem abhorrent and offensive to another guys. - In these 'enlightened' times, many are shackled by the list of boxes we have to first tick off before we begin to even consider whether a written article is a truth or a dud. Factors include ......... core beliefs, political persuasions, gender specifications (as if any these things matter and are relevant in discerning how we should position ourselves in order to understand truths from propagandized fictions ).

It has to be said that there are many people who will use these filters like they are mind controlled automatons, and hence will never get past the first sentence of a fair, albeit challenging article.

I can give the example of my host country that has zero alternative media. -- I am unwilling to give actual examples here now ...... but there actually is. :clapping:

There are keywords, meme expressions that are constantly changing, that allow people here to communicate within the most draconian AI enhanced censorship the world has ever seen.

In conclusion -- I dont feel at all bad with people not agreeing with everything I say ( why should they ) I'm just so very happy that some of us can disagree on our own terms without being led by a corrupted media

[Gracy]

Back to topic - We really have to be thankful for any type of alternative media, good and bad.

It is up to us to be the 'proof readers' in a very literal sense.

Well Dubsy, I'm for sure thankful for the good alternative media, but the bad? Not so much, except that it's of course useful in keeping those discernment skills nice and sharp.

But keeping with your point, I think the way you say 'proof readers', and I say discernment skills, could probably be used interchangeably.

I think the recent hubbub about Mike Adams teaming up with David Wilcock is another good example of why we need to keep sharp, even while swimming in supposedly safe friendly waters. There are no safe friendly waters. As has been already highlighted, just because one finally realizes the programming on mainstream media that they used to think was useful information, and flees into the open arms of alternative media, does not mean they have landed in safe friendly waters, where only bitter truths reside.

We can be taken for a ride just as easily here, as there, if we're not diligent. Sleazy used car salesman types swim in all waters... Which brings us back to Mike Adams...

I used to really like Mike Adams just a few short years ago, same as his old buddy Alex Jones, and I would always like it when Mike would fill in for Alex on his show, because I was sure to get a good rant about the 2ND Amendment, or something along those lines. But then slowly but surely I've been watching the wheels come off, to the point where as of late the rants are more and more about zombies and melting brains sort of crap.

So at first blush when I saw he's gone and interviewed our old buddy David Wilcock, I was like "well that sounds like kind of an odd combination"; but the more I thought about it, the more I came to the conclusion that "well, if you've gotten to the point where hair on fire hyperbole has become your bread and butter, then why not? In that case you'll team up with anyone who you think you can reach a larger audience, and make more money with".

So warning to newbies fresh out of the clutches of mainstream, and are all happy and wide eyed in this new and great land of opportunity. Careful with your choices, and watch your step, lest you wind up hitching your wagon to a David Wilcock or a Mike Adams type of alternative flashy, smooth talking used car salesman.

Truth does abound here, but the trick is in separating the wheat from the chaff...

P.S. Dubsy. I had troubles in school as well, was never quite able to keep in rhythm with that darn drummer lol. More than likely same as you, it took me years and years in retrospect to figure out why that was.

[ExomatrixTV]

I researched (& produced) Alternative Media for 31 years now and there are all kinds of A.M. vs MSM examples! (Good, Bad and The Ugly).

Any generalization for or against is not doing justice to the full spectrum of the truth, lately I do not even bother to correct certain way of "reasoning" as it does not help me nor the other ... most with strong opinions do not liked to be "corrected" nor being challenged (even in a friendly way) on top of that people easily can misunderstand and/or misinterpreted my intentions ... As everything is energy I have to chose my focus wisely ;)

cheers,
John

[Gracy]

I researched (& produced) Alternative Media for 31 years now and there are all kinds of A.M. vs MSM examples! (Good, Bad and The Ugly).

Any generalization for or against is not doing justice to the full spectrum of the truth, lately I do not even bother to correct certain way of "reasoning" as it does not help me nor the other ... most with strong opinions do not liked to be "corrected" nor being challenged (even in a friendly way) on top of that people easily can misunderstand and/or misinterpreted my intentions ... As everything is energy I have to chose my focus wisely ;)

cheers,
John

That's perfect John, the good, the bad, and the ugly of the whole deal across the spectrum is an even more concise way of describing the gist of this thread. (I've always a big Clint Eastwood fan by the way!)

Of course with your 31 year record of studying and challenging both mainstream and alternative on the merits of their cases, and not whether you agree with them or not, I'm obviously preaching to the choir where you're concerned, and kudos there!

But as you well know all too often in alt media circles (and forget about mainstream circles!), I tend to see only one sided views of any given current issue at hand.

[Dumpster Diver]

MSNBC = Mostly Satanic National Broadcasting Company

[Gracy]

MSNBC = Mostly Satanic National Broadcasting Company

Well DD, while I appreciate the sentiment, and am certainly no fan of that outlet as well, but for serious conversation and analysis I respectfully request that we keep things a little more "professional" if you don't mind.

I mean obviously it goes well in a room of majority conservatives; but what about people reading here who may be at the time unknowingly open to alternative ideas other than what places like MSNBC preach.

Maybe they're subconsciously open to new ideas like I was at one point as described here, but rather than draw them in a I eventually was, you drive them away because of a cheap and gratuitous insult...

Even though David Icke has called it this, how receptive would many of us be upon hearing someone of different ideas and ways of coming at things, but flippantly refers to FOX NEWS, as FIX NEWS? Well either example is going to go over like a lead zeppelin, the two parties shall never speak again like two ships passing in the night, and the chance of possibly gaining a friend, or even possibly an ally, has been forever squandered.

It may be just me, but I don't feel either slur, whether from the right or the left, is a good look for the outstretched hand of well meaning alternative media trying to fight the good fight.

Now if we just want to keep to our own little bubble here and screw the rest "of them", well that's a different conversation, that conversation has a very low ceiling height of possible participants, and is not a conversation I'm interested in to possibly bring in new people eager to break whatever programming they may have just discovered they've been subjected to their entire lives.

[Gemma13]

MSNBC = Mostly Satanic National Broadcasting Company

Well DD, while I appreciate the sentiment, and am certainly no fan of that outlet as well, but for serious conversation and analysis I respectfully request that we keep things a little more "professional" if you don't mind.

I mean obviously it goes well in a room of majority conservatives; but what about people reading here who may be at the time unknowingly open to alternative ideas other than what places like MSNBC preach.

Maybe they're subconsciously open to new ideas like I was at one point as described here, but rather than draw them in a I eventually was, you drive them away because of a cheap and gratuitous insult...

Even though David Icke has called it this, how receptive would many of us be upon hearing someone of different ideas and ways of coming at things, but flippantly refers to FOX NEWS, as FIX NEWS? Well either example is going to go over like a lead zeppelin, the two parties shall never speak again like two ships passing in the night, and the chance of possibly gaining a friend, or even possibly an ally, has been forever squandered.

It may be just me, but I don't feel either slur, whether from the right or the left, is a good look for the outstretched hand of well meaning alternative media trying to fight the good fight.

Now if we just want to keep to our own little bubble here and screw the rest "of them", well that's a different conversation, that conversation has a very low ceiling height of possible participants, and is not a conversation I'm interested in to possibly bring in new people eager to break whatever programming they may have just discovered they've been subjected to their entire lives.

Gracy thank you for this reminder!  Always needed.

It is so hard to not feel jaded about the crap sold and swallowed out there, and some days all I want to do is scream profanities at it all because it makes ME feel good.

But it isn't helping if I let it spill over to where it will do harm not good.  And, sigh, I know that.  I force myself to retreat and censor at those times to regain balance, so I can rise above and hopefully use the wiser approach more often than not.  A constant daily challenge on this planet though!

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

MSNBC = Mostly Satanic National Broadcasting Company

Well DD, while I appreciate the sentiment, and am certainly no fan of that outlet as well, but for serious conversation and analysis I respectfully request that we keep things a little more "professional" if you don't mind.

MSM= Mostly Satanic Mind-control.

There you go, I fixed it for both of you. :)

:beer:

[ExomatrixTV]

MSNBC = Mostly Satanic National Broadcasting Company


MSNBC = Mostly Satanic National Brainwashing Company

[ExomatrixTV]

What will journalism look like in 2025 (https://www.journalism2025.com/scenario/03.html)?

This is a corporate "think tank" in The Netherlands admitting the power and rise of Alternative Media and "how to deal" with it.

cheers,
John

[Dennis Leahy]

Narrative control. The ability to set the stage, to narrate a perspective purporting to be reality, rather than reflecting reality. Obfuscation of reality. That's the major crime of mainstream media, especially msm that uses the word "news" in their title. It's a fantasy world that rolls by on the reader's teleprompter and flows into the non-discerning mind.

Whether you know it or not, the mainstream fantasy narrative has either completely formed your views or heavily influenced them. Where do you think your opinions of the different countries around the world came from? For example, what are your opinions about "the Middle East situation?" Is Israel the major aggressor in the region? Is Israel an occupier, slowly genociding Palestinians and stealing Palestine, occupying part of Syria and stealing oil there? Was Syria really in a civil war, or simply yet another victim nation that the USA, Inc. attacked in various ways over decades, for Israel? Not much in the mainstream 'news' about the USA, Inc. Navy assisting in starvation "sanctions" against the people of Yemen, is there?

Virtually every word you've ever heard about the countries in the Middle East came from the Washington think-tanks and the US State Department PR office to your ears. How about Venezuela, where the USA, Inc. is at war using starvation 'sanctions' and crippling international trade sanctions and international criminal indictments to subjugate the country with the most oil and most gold in the world (economically disruptive of Ameri-centric Empire.) The USA, Inc. is at war with Venezuela and the mainstream media doesn't even mention it. Giant corporations and their niche rackets (food, medicine, housing, energy) completely control the narrative within their sectors.

A whole, entire illusory world is created and broadcast as if real. Kind of the opposite of H G Wells 'War of the Worlds', where mainstream media hides the ongoing wars rather that hyping them. Worst of all is that you/we remain in a state of suspension of disbelief, and in a state of acquiescing to the false reality narrative. The mainstream "news" is insidious gaslighting; it's not innocuous prattle. Look at the quantity and ubiquitous nature of "news" corporations promoting mRNA experimental pre-treatment jabs with the deliberate false notion of immunity, and immunity's socially beneficial attributes. With narrative control, they don't need electric fences - our indoctrinated brothers and sisters will keep us in line.

[mozo33]

Narrative control. The ability to set the stage, to narrate a perspective purporting to be reality, rather than reflecting reality. Obfuscation of reality. That's the major crime of mainstream media, especially msm that uses the word "news" in their title. It's a fantasy world that rolls by on the reader's teleprompter and flows into the non-discerning mind.

Whether you know it or not, the mainstream fantasy narrative has either completely formed your views or heavily influenced them. Where do you think your opinions of the different countries around the world came from? For example, what are your opinions about "the Middle East situation?" Is Israel the major aggressor in the region? Is Israel an occupier, slowly genociding Palestinians and stealing Palestine, occupying part of Syria and stealing oil there? Was Syria really in a civil war, or simply yet another victim nation that the USA, Inc. attacked in various ways over decades, for Israel? Not much in the mainstream 'news' about the USA, Inc. Navy assisting in starvation "sanctions" against the people of Yemen, is there?

Virtually every word you've ever heard about the countries in the Middle East came from the Washington think-tanks and the US State Department PR office to your ears. How about Venezuela, where the USA, Inc. is at war using starvation 'sanctions' and crippling international trade sanctions and international criminal indictments to subjugate the country with the most oil and most gold in the world (economically disruptive of Ameri-centric Empire.) The USA, Inc. is at war with Venezuela and the mainstream media doesn't even mention it. Giant corporations and their niche rackets (food, medicine, housing, energy) completely control the narrative within their sectors.

A whole, entire illusory world is created and broadcast as if real. Kind of the opposite of H G Wells 'War of the Worlds', where mainstream media hides the ongoing wars rather that hyping them. Worst of all is that you/we remain in a state of suspension of disbelief, and in a state of acquiescing to the false reality narrative. The mainstream "news" is insidious gaslighting; it's not innocuous prattle. Look at the quantity and ubiquitous nature of "news" corporations promoting mRNA experimental pre-treatment jabs with the deliberate false notion of immunity, and immunity's socially beneficial attributes. With narrative control, they don't need electric fences - our indoctrinated brothers and sisters will keep us in line.

the delusion we are in is spiritual, which has everything to do with identity in relation to our soul ... what is playing out here in the natural is but a mirror/reflection of it ...

[Dennis Leahy]

Narrative control. The ability to set the stage, to narrate a perspective purporting to be reality, rather than reflecting reality. Obfuscation of reality. That's the major crime of mainstream media, especially msm that uses the word "news" in their title. It's a fantasy world that rolls by on the reader's teleprompter and flows into the non-discerning mind.

Whether you know it or not, the mainstream fantasy narrative has either completely formed your views or heavily influenced them. Where do you think your opinions of the different countries around the world came from? For example, what are your opinions about "the Middle East situation?" Is Israel the major aggressor in the region? Is Israel an occupier, slowly genociding Palestinians and stealing Palestine, occupying part of Syria and stealing oil there? Was Syria really in a civil war, or simply yet another victim nation that the USA, Inc. attacked in various ways over decades, for Israel? Not much in the mainstream 'news' about the USA, Inc. Navy assisting in starvation "sanctions" against the people of Yemen, is there?

Virtually every word you've ever heard about the countries in the Middle East came from the Washington think-tanks and the US State Department PR office to your ears. How about Venezuela, where the USA, Inc. is at war using starvation 'sanctions' and crippling international trade sanctions and international criminal indictments to subjugate the country with the most oil and most gold in the world (economically disruptive of Ameri-centric Empire.) The USA, Inc. is at war with Venezuela and the mainstream media doesn't even mention it. Giant corporations and their niche rackets (food, medicine, housing, energy) completely control the narrative within their sectors.

A whole, entire illusory world is created and broadcast as if real. Kind of the opposite of H G Wells 'War of the Worlds', where mainstream media hides the ongoing wars rather that hyping them. Worst of all is that you/we remain in a state of suspension of disbelief, and in a state of acquiescing to the false reality narrative. The mainstream "news" is insidious gaslighting; it's not innocuous prattle. Look at the quantity and ubiquitous nature of "news" corporations promoting mRNA experimental pre-treatment jabs with the deliberate false notion of immunity, and immunity's socially beneficial attributes. With narrative control, they don't need electric fences - our indoctrinated brothers and sisters will keep us in line.

the delusion we are in is spiritual, which has everything to do with identity in relation to our soul ... what is playing out here in the natural is but a mirror/reflection of it ...
I agree on your overarching point, but what we are discussing here is the physical side. The spiritual delusion (of being separate beings from Oneness) really is a different issue. This issue is mundane, earthly, the realm of embodied souls in day-to-day incarnated physical reality. Food, clothing, shelter issues, physical societal issues, starvation, propaganda, bombs, missiles, injections...

...and where we should/could go (mainstream or, and/or, alternative sources) for information about the physical world and its governance.

[mozo33]

Narrative control. The ability to set the stage, to narrate a perspective purporting to be reality, rather than reflecting reality. Obfuscation of reality. That's the major crime of mainstream media, especially msm that uses the word "news" in their title. It's a fantasy world that rolls by on the reader's teleprompter and flows into the non-discerning mind.

Whether you know it or not, the mainstream fantasy narrative has either completely formed your views or heavily influenced them. Where do you think your opinions of the different countries around the world came from? For example, what are your opinions about "the Middle East situation?" Is Israel the major aggressor in the region? Is Israel an occupier, slowly genociding Palestinians and stealing Palestine, occupying part of Syria and stealing oil there? Was Syria really in a civil war, or simply yet another victim nation that the USA, Inc. attacked in various ways over decades, for Israel? Not much in the mainstream 'news' about the USA, Inc. Navy assisting in starvation "sanctions" against the people of Yemen, is there?

Virtually every word you've ever heard about the countries in the Middle East came from the Washington think-tanks and the US State Department PR office to your ears. How about Venezuela, where the USA, Inc. is at war using starvation 'sanctions' and crippling international trade sanctions and international criminal indictments to subjugate the country with the most oil and most gold in the world (economically disruptive of Ameri-centric Empire.) The USA, Inc. is at war with Venezuela and the mainstream media doesn't even mention it. Giant corporations and their niche rackets (food, medicine, housing, energy) completely control the narrative within their sectors.

A whole, entire illusory world is created and broadcast as if real. Kind of the opposite of H G Wells 'War of the Worlds', where mainstream media hides the ongoing wars rather that hyping them. Worst of all is that you/we remain in a state of suspension of disbelief, and in a state of acquiescing to the false reality narrative. The mainstream "news" is insidious gaslighting; it's not innocuous prattle. Look at the quantity and ubiquitous nature of "news" corporations promoting mRNA experimental pre-treatment jabs with the deliberate false notion of immunity, and immunity's socially beneficial attributes. With narrative control, they don't need electric fences - our indoctrinated brothers and sisters will keep us in line.

the delusion we are in is spiritual, which has everything to do with identity in relation to our soul ... what is playing out here in the natural is but a mirror/reflection of it ...
I agree on your overarching point, but what we are discussing here is the physical side. The spiritual delusion (of being separate beings from Oneness) really is a different issue. This issue is mundane, earthly, the realm of embodied souls in day-to-day incarnated physical reality. Food, clothing, shelter issues, physical societal issues, starvation, propaganda, bombs, missiles, injections...

...and where we should/could go (mainstream or, and/or, alternative sources) for information about the physical world and its governance.

they are not separate ... cause and effect ...

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Here's a good example of media spin and bull****. I'm seeing this in a lot places:

47941

Some people have gotten it into their heads that Kyle Rittenhouse murdered some black people, therefore he's some sort of nazi, and the white supremacist patriarchy let him off - or some rubbish.

Why have they got that idea? Or rather, where, did they get it?

All the people who died in the Kenosha shootings were white.

I really hope the penny drops, and soon, before somebody gets hurt over this.

[Gracy]

Here's a good example of media spin and bull****. I'm seeing this in a lot places:

47941

Some people have gotten it into their heads that Kyle Rittenhouse murdered some black people, therefore he's some sort of nazi, and the white supremacist patriarchy let him off - or some rubbish.

Why have they got that idea? Or rather, where, did they get it?

All the people who died in the Kenosha shootings were white.

I really hope the penny drops, and soon, before somebody gets hurt over this.

That's a good example of typical, mainstream style of BS Star Mariner. IMO that case may ultimately have some merits exclusive of racism, and that's for the courts to decide in a hopefully neutral setting; but it's inexcusable for outlets of a certain bias to be adding in their own narrative to please the demographic they are beholden to for the typical reason of ratings, and the ultimate bottom line, which is of course the almighty dollar.

The same can be said for other outlets operating in a similar manner but with the opposite bias, aimed at pleasing a totally different demographic, but for the same exact reasons as their counterparts.

I'll use as an example the smearing of illegal immigrants, putting forth the narrative that they are by and large either diseased, MS 13, rapists, killers, or something of the like. Surely a certain percentage is indeed that, but it's unfair to broad brush people like that.

Stories like these and countless others are often extremely complicated and nuanced, it does none of us any good to have them presented as though they are black and white (so to speak).

[ExomatrixTV]

9-SKkvH_AUc

[Gracy]

9-SKkvH_AUc

No food for thought John? Just another stand alone Jimmy Dore video when he suits the cause?

Come on, penny for *your* thoughts, not Jimmy's.

[rgray222]

Stories like these and countless others are often extremely complicated and nuanced, it does none of us any good to have them presented as though they are black and white (so to speak).


Here's a good example of media spin and bull****. I'm seeing this in a lot places:

47941

Some people have gotten it into their heads that Kyle Rittenhouse murdered some black people, therefore he's some sort of nazi, and the white supremacist patriarchy let him off - or some rubbish.

Why have they got that idea? Or rather, where, did they get it?

All the people who died in the Kenosha shootings were white.

I really hope the penny drops, and soon, before somebody gets hurt over this.

Today newspapers from around the world (Holland, Brazil, Argentina and many more) had to run corrections because they believed the three people shot in the Rittenhouse case were black. They had this notion because the reporting of the American mainstream media gave people this impression. I am absolutely sure that there are millions of people all over the world that also believe this lie and now they think that our court system is in favour of releasing young white men that shoot black people. These are horrific lies intentionally told to the world by the mainstream media.

I truly believe that there are also millions of Americans that believed this lie for most of the trial and possibly still do today. While the media did not report that those shot were black they certainly implied it and made no effort to correct this lie.

We are now in a place where the mainstream media views virtually everything in the world through the prism of race. It gives them power, it renders their enemies powerless and most of the time it allows them to control the narrative. This is exactly why this case became so high profile and important. It is an opportunity for normal men and women of all races to tell the media we are not going to accept their dishonest reporting anymore and we want them to stop using race as a weapon.

I posted this on another thread but I think this is representative of where we are today (at least in the USA).
https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/254687810_210961794513503_6591967046551705685_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=kc8byMfzU-0AX-GKULe&_nc_ht=scontent-iad3-1.xx&oh=8082a767af9ecd02aca66d5aab8a200e&oe=619989E3

[Mike Gorman]

Here's a good example of media spin and bull****. I'm seeing this in a lot places:

47941

Some people have gotten it into their heads that Kyle Rittenhouse murdered some black people, therefore he's some sort of nazi, and the white supremacist patriarchy let him off - or some rubbish.

Why have they got that idea? Or rather, where, did they get it?

All the people who died in the Kenosha shootings were white.

I really hope the penny drops, and soon, before somebody gets hurt over this.

MSNBC and the Washington set have been promoting this, with Joe Biden suggesting Rittenhouse is a 'white supremacist' well before the verdict was given (illegal I would have thought to presume an outcome of a court case)-if the police force had been doing its job that night individuals would not have felt the need to protect businesses, and Rittenhouse would not have been present.

[Sue (Ayt)]

waxamillionpehhgasus posted A thread here (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?116603-Interview-w-Propaganda-Heavyweight-on-the-Pharma-Scam-AIDS-Vaccines-Deception-Metaphysics-the-Void-and-more...) with this interview that I find quite eye-opening and relevant to this discussion.:



by waxamillionpehhgasus

"This is a must-read document that goes far beyond any one single conspiracy theory."
https://www.pearl-hifi.com/11_Spirited_Growth/10_Health_Neg/04_Pandemics/01_AIDS/Rappoport__Ellis_Medavoy_Interviews_291pgs.pdf
Interviewer: Jon Rappaport of the legendary nomorefakenews.com

Following along these lines, Miles Mathis suggests that the entire Kyle Rittenhouse incident and trial was entirely staged from the start, likely with the divide and conquer, chaos/solution agenda in mind.
http://mileswmathis.com/genup.pdf

Does make you wonder just how deep the spin actually goes...

[Gracy]

Stories like these and countless others are often extremely complicated and nuanced, it does none of us any good to have them presented as though they are black and white (so to speak).


Here's a good example of media spin and bull****. I'm seeing this in a lot places:

47941

Some people have gotten it into their heads that Kyle Rittenhouse murdered some black people, therefore he's some sort of nazi, and the white supremacist patriarchy let him off - or some rubbish.

Why have they got that idea? Or rather, where, did they get it?

All the people who died in the Kenosha shootings were white.

I really hope the penny drops, and soon, before somebody gets hurt over this.

Today newspapers from around the world (Holland, Brazil, Argentina and many more) had to run corrections because they believed the three people shot in the Rittenhouse case were black. They had this notion because the reporting of the American mainstream media gave people this impression. I am absolutely sure that there are millions of people all over the world that also believe this lie and now they think that our court system is in favour of releasing young white men that shoot black people. These are horrific lies intentionally told to the world by the mainstream media.

I truly believe that there are also millions of Americans that believed this lie for most of the trial and possibly still do today. While the media did not report that those shot were black they certainly implied it and made no effort to correct this lie.

Thank you for the well thought out comment rgray, and it will get no argument from me. Mainstream media being not to be trusted, was one of two central points of this thread, and this case is an excellent example of why not.

However, the other point of this thread seems to have been left by the wayside, that being to put alternative media under the scrutiny microscope as well. Heinous and blatant as the outright misrepresentation you and others are correctly pointing out in the mainstream, is this by default implying that the hands of alternative media are clean in this respect?

[rgray222]

However, the other point of this thread seems to have been left by the wayside, that being to put alternative media under the scrutiny microscope as well. Heinous and blatant as the outright misrepresentation you and others are correctly pointing out in the mainstream, is this by default implying that the hands of alternative media are clean in this respect?

Gracy, I am not attempting to be funny or sarcastic but who are the alternative media? There are many places that discuss the news (like Avalon) but don't report it. There are a host of others sites that I consider alternative media but I also view them as opinion and not necessarily factual. What sources would you consider alternative "news"?

[Gracy]

However, the other point of this thread seems to have been left by the wayside, that being to put alternative media under the scrutiny microscope as well. Heinous and blatant as the outright misrepresentation you and others are correctly pointing out in the mainstream, is this by default implying that the hands of alternative media are clean in this respect?

Gracy, I am not attempting to be funny or sarcastic but who are the alternative media? There are many places that discuss the news (like Avalon) but don't report it. There are a host of others sites that I consider alternative media but I also view them as opinion and not necessarily factual. What sources would you consider alternative "news"?

Thank you for offering me the opportunity to clarify rgray. For clarity, and to keep it real simple, I'll refer to just any sources posted here on this forum.

As is said around my parts, that should keep matters good and simple like. I hope?

[Mike]

Here's a good example of media spin and bull****. I'm seeing this in a lot places:

47941

Some people have gotten it into their heads that Kyle Rittenhouse murdered some black people, therefore he's some sort of nazi, and the white supremacist patriarchy let him off - or some rubbish.

Why have they got that idea? Or rather, where, did they get it?

All the people who died in the Kenosha shootings were white.

I really hope the penny drops, and soon, before somebody gets hurt over this.

That's a good example of typical, mainstream style of BS Star Mariner. IMO that case may ultimately have some merits exclusive of racism, and that's for the courts to decide in a hopefully neutral setting; but it's inexcusable for outlets of a certain bias to be adding in their own narrative to please the demographic they are beholden to for the typical reason of ratings, and the ultimate bottom line, which is of course the almighty dollar.

The same can be said for other outlets operating in a similar manner but with the opposite bias, aimed at pleasing a totally different demographic, but for the same exact reasons as their counterparts.

I'll use as an example the smearing of illegal immigrants, putting forth the narrative that they are by and large either diseased, MS 13, rapists, killers, or something of the like. Surely a certain percentage is indeed that, but it's unfair to broad brush people like that.

Stories like these and countless others are often extremely complicated and nuanced, it does none of us any good to have them presented as though they are black and white (so to speak).


Gracy I think you're unknowingly using the same rhetorical trick frequently deployed by those in the mainstream, which is to take a very reasonable point - in this case the dangers of illegal immigration - and then to suggest that's all the other side (in this case the Republicans) are talking about, and to suggest they're not doing it with any nuance at all. I've seen some bits on Fox news about ms 13 and human trafficking etc, but when it comes to illegal immigration the narrative isn't that the immigrants are bad and should therefore not be allowed to come in; the narrative is that no matter how wonderful or terrible they are they shouldn't be allowed to come in...unless they go thru the proper channels and do it *legally*. There are many, many reasons they need to come in legally, and I've seen them all discussed in equal doses. The things you listed are but a few of dozens.

Yes, the right is trying to exploit the situation for political points...but even the purely political point of showing that some people crossing the border are human traffickers and gang members isn't meant to smear the character of all immigrants; it's to highlight the negligence of the current administration. The accusation that the right are smearing all immigrants unfairly is a tactic used to distract from the real accusation being made, which is to do with the incompetence of Biden and co's border policies

********

I don't think all mainstream news channels should be lumped together. Some are more good than bad and some are more bad than good. The Rittenhouse trial demonstrated that pretty clearly. I've watched the reporting on this very closely, and while the left were trying to exploit the situation to perpetuate their racial divisiveness crusade, the right were reporting the facts. Occasionally they'd go off the deep end a little by calling Rittenhouse a "hero," or something like this, but their spin is much less sordid and sinister than that of their leftist counterparts.

It's become sort of commonplace for those in the alt media to slag off mainstream media, to say they're all corrupt and biased mouthpieces for one party or another. And that has some merit obviously. But when I watch a guy like Tucker Carlson, i see a very reasonable and measured individual. Ditto Laura Ingraham. They are not without their faults; they're playing the game like all the other news pundits...but they at least seem to *believe* what they're saying, as opposed to just uttering sh!t that will get ratings, appeal to the base, or to win some kind of political spat( of course they do that stuff too sometimes, but the ratio of sincerity to f#ckery is substantially higher at FOX than say CNN or MSNBC) And say what you want about FOX news, but they openly admit to being a mouthpiece for the Republican party. CNN is *still* pretending to be an unbiased news source! And that is simply astounding.

To say all mainstream news reporting is untrustworthy is just as low resolution as blindly aligning with political party A or political party B. I don't think either the Republicans or the Democrats are going to get us to the promise land ultimately..but right now, in this moment in time, one party is clearly going insane while the other has remained relatively grounded. And since we are stuck with this 2 party system atm, I'm aligning with the grounded group. I think it's the responsible thing to do.

[jaybee]

9-SKkvH_AUc


Thanks...

Excellent coverage by Jimmy Dore - illustrating that genuine 'alternative' media at it's best isn't about left or right or any other division...

Just about truthful, sincere analysis....

A breath of fresh air dispersing the stench of lies coming from the propaganda based MSM...

cheers

[Dennis Leahy]

...
...
I don't think all mainstream news channels should be lumped together. Some are more good than bad and some are more bad than good. The Rittenhouse trial demonstrated that pretty clearly. I've watched the reporting on this very closely, and while the left were trying to exploit the situation to perpetuate their racial divisiveness crusade, the right were reporting the facts. Occasionally they'd go off the deep end a little by calling Rittenhouse a "hero," or something like this, but their spin is much less sordid and sinister than that of their leftist counterparts.

It's become sort of commonplace for those in the alt media to slag off mainstream media, to say they're all corrupt and biased mouthpieces for one party or another. Say what you want about FOX news, but they openly admit to being a mouthpiece for the Republican party. CNN is *still* pretending to be an unbiased news source! And that is simply astounding.

To say all mainstream news reporting is untrustworthy is just as low resolution as ...
...
They are pretty trustworthy on local events, football scores, weather forecasting. But if they took part in covering up the truth of the largest events of our lives, and they all did, and they present a distorted, fantasy worldview day after day in their teleprompter reading, which is propaganda, then you didn't get the news you got propagandized. The MSM is the narrative control department for the bad guys - they tell you what they want you to hear. They program you with distorted and missing facts so you can't possibly make an informed decision about anything major. They are the PR/media department for the thugs. Just because they might report a shooting case accurately doesn't undo the consistent and constant distortion of reality that is presented as news. I just can't see defending them as credible when we know otherwise.

The MSM news organizations have deliberately omitted the truth about (what I'd consider) the 4 major conspiracies of my lifetime.* All mainstream news coverage was part - a critical part - of the coverup. You can't just give them a pass because they covered a story or two honestly. That's like congratulating a serial rapist for that one time he didn't rape that one woman.


I'm aligning with the grounded group. I think it's the responsible thing to do.

What you're describing as 'right' and 'left' are really corporate neocons and corporate neolibs. You can find virtue in both the left and the right ideologies, but not in the corporate neocons and corporate neolibs - their fuel is psychopathic greed. The Democrats are a corporation, inextricably tied to and enmeshed with and beholden to the Global Corporate Network. The Republicans are a corporation, inextricably tied to and enmeshed with and beholden to the very same Global Corporate Network. Both corporations serve their corporate masters, not the people. You can prove this to yourself if you go through every piece of legislation passed in the past 50 years, and regardless of some doublespeak titles, you will have a massive pile of pro-corporate legislation but won't find any legislation that is actually pro-citizen or pro-environment. The Republican corporation may seem more "grounded" to you... (and to me, I'd add more honest: they do tell you to your face that they are about to perform a proctoscopic exam, and then do it; Democrats lie to you while they are doing the same exam.) ...but 'grounded' doesn't mean much when it is steeped in a background of obfuscation, lies, and cover-ups on the biggest stories of our lives.

The 2 political corporations in the US are a full-on disgrace, a pack of pirates and thugs connected to and controlled by the Global Corporate Network - the same global corporate network that owns all the mass media that continually lies to us, propagandizes us, gaslights us, from cradle to grave.

I don't think either political corporation should be lauded or followed or supported, even in times when one corporation's actors are more insane. Duopoly control of the US government is held together by pragmatism in the masses, choosing a 'lesser evil' rather than rejecting the 2 choices offered.

[ExomatrixTV]

For me it is extremely easy to decipher what talking points & "scripted events" are serving Dystopian Agenda2030 (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?111148-The-Great-Reset) ("Build Back Better") "The Great Reset" done by both (Deep State) Left & Right MSM outlets ...

But the Left MSM seems to love to push it blatantly over the edge! ... Over the top, way to extreme in how they push false narratives 24/7 with help from corrupt part of the (Deep State) FBI (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?116747-Project-Veritas-Under-Attack-by-FBI-and-DOJ) & corrupt Judges. etc. etc.

I sense that most people do not bother to comprehend this (https://intelligence.weforum.org/topics/a1Gb0000000LHN2EAO?tab=publications) (WEF 'Global Governance') or they just do not want to see it, that is why I do not bother to repeat myself in-depth anymore.

https://whynotnews.eu/pix/what-ppl-understand.png

When the LEFT becomes extreme, the "center" becomes the "normal left" and because of all of this the "normal right" are further away from the madness and that makes the "normal right" seem "extreme" to the left!


This insight has been explained by many independent mass media analysts who are neither and use common sense, logic & being fearless.

cheers,
John Kuhles aka 'ExomatrixTV'
November 20th, 2021

2 picture below is just a tiny fraction to comprehend what is going on:


https://whynotnews.eu/pix/corrupted-msm.jpg

https://whynotnews.eu/pix/media-corruption.png


For the record: I was raised in a classical liberal dutch family with liberal friends ... and voted "classical liberal" too ... but stopped doing that the moment I saw the bigger picture!

[ExomatrixTV]

Project Veritas, Assange, and the Authoritarian Decree of Who Is a "Real Journalist":

https://sp.rmbl.ws/s8/2/p/_/5/H/p_5Hc.caa.mp4


source (https://rumble.com/vp9ozz-project-veritas-assange-and-the-authoritarian-decrees-of-who-is-and-is-not-.html)

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

The Democrats are a corporation, inextricably tied to and enmeshed with and beholden to the Global Corporate Network. The Republicans are a corporation, inextricably tied to and enmeshed with and beholden to the very same Global Corporate Network. Both corporations serve their corporate masters, not the people.

I totally agree, and there is no doubt that this is true. But I can't do a damn thing about macro-politics, about the money magic and warmongering of this "Globalist Corporate Machine". Left/Right, they're the same in this regard. But with the left's constant push to re-engineer (butcher) the moral and social fabric, hell yeh I'm going to plant my flag. And it isn't on the left anymore. I'm still pro environment and anti war, and stand for things like nuclear disarmament and many more classically liberal values, but the left today is insane. It's gone dark. Like evil dark. Thus now, in opposition to that, I consider myself "socially" conservative.

A different method of weighing the virtues (or hidden goals) of one side against another, is to consider who the cheerleaders are. Consider, for a moment, the blue checkmarks, the Hollyweird elites, who can ALWAYS be relied upon to prop up those MSN narratives. When the MSN starts a'bleating, they start a'tweeting the same song and dance, in the most vitriolic and divisive way possible and usually with "race card" in hand. It's like they don't have another setting. One gets the sneaking suspicion that...they're all in cahoots(!?)

It's another reason that I look more suspiciously askance upon the Left media than the Right media: because while the Right media are attacked, the Left media is constantly stroked and applauded, by members of a satanic/paedophilic death cult.


47950

Left-wing Hollywood celebrities experienced a collective meltdown after a jury in Kenosha, Wisconsin, acquitted 18-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse of all charges on Friday. “I weep for this country,” one star lamented, while another claimed the verdict represented a victory for “white supremacy.”

Celebrities including Sophia Bush, Patton Oswalt, and Josh Gad took their cues from the establishment media by insisting on a racial angle to the verdict, even though all the parties in the case were white. Other celebrities simply vented their rage, like Alyssa Milano, who hurled expletives at her TV as the verdict was read.

“This is white supremacy in action,” Sophia Bush tweeted.

“So…the white guy goes free. Is that the message?” author Stephen King wrote.

“****ing not guilty,” Alyssa Milano despaired.

In one bizarre instance, ABC’s Scandal star Kerry Washington paid tribute to the two men Rittenhouse shot and killed out of self-defense — Joseph Rosenbaum, a pedophile sex offender, and Anthony Huber, a habitual woman beater.

https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2021/11/19/kyle-rittenhouse-not-guilty-verdict-breaks-hollywood-i-weep-for-this-country/

[rgray222]

What you're describing as 'right' and 'left' are really corporate neocons and corporate neolibs. You can find virtue in both the left and the right ideologies, but not in the corporate neocons and corporate neolibs - their fuel is psychopathic greed. The Democrats are a corporation, inextricably tied to and enmeshed with and beholden to the Global Corporate Network. The Republicans are a corporation, inextricably tied to and enmeshed with and beholden to the very same Global Corporate Network. Both corporations serve their corporate masters, not the people. You can prove this to yourself if you go through every piece of legislation passed in the past 50 years, and regardless of some doublespeak titles, you will have a massive pile of pro-corporate legislation but won't find any legislation that is actually pro-citizen or pro-environment. The Republican corporation may seem more "grounded" to you... (and to me, I'd add more honest: they do tell you to your face that they are about to perform a proctoscopic exam, and then do it; Democrats lie to you while they are doing the same exam.) ...but 'grounded' doesn't mean much when it is steeped in a background of obfuscation, lies, and cover-ups on the biggest stories of our lives.

The 2 political corporations in the US are a full-on disgrace, a pack of pirates and thugs connected to and controlled by the Global Corporate Network - the same global corporate network that owns all the mass media that continually lies to us, propagandizes us, gaslights us, from cradle to grave.

I don't think either political corporation should be lauded or followed or supported, even in times when one corporation's actors are more insane. Duopoly control of the US government is held together by pragmatism in the masses, choosing a 'lesser evil' rather than rejecting the 2 choices offered.

Dennis, I believe what you are saying has been true for quite some time, essentially the left and right are just different sides of the same coin doing the bidding of corporations. Around the world, today corporations have the power and the money so they get to dictate how things work. Americans (and most of the world) think their politicians have their best interest at heart nothing could be further from the truth. Modern legislation is sub-contracted to a segment of DC operations known as K-Street. That’s where the corporate lobbyists reside. Corporate lobbyists write the laws; congress and the media sell the laws; Corporations then pay congress lucrative commissions for passing their laws. That’s the modern legislative business in DC. When we talk about paying-off politicians in third-world countries we call it bribery. However, when we undertake the same process in the U.S. we call it “lobbying”. (Sadly, in today's world there is not a single person in congress writing legislation or laws.)

Now that being said this corrupt system in place today may still be much better than any alternatives that have shown up over the centuries, such as Socialism, Marxism, Dictator, Monarch, Oligarch and Autocracy or any hybrid form. I suppose that is for another discussion at another time.

My point here is that both political parties in the USA are undergoing massive change. The right is moving into the realm of the working class while the left is moving further into the world of elitism, big business and one-world government. Who would have ever believed that the working class and the anti One World Government are aligning on the right and their media (small as it is) is starting to reflect this change. The metamorphosis on the left seems to be much more extraordinary, the progressives are moving the party off the reservation towards Socialism, Marxism and a form of world control. This extremism poses a real dilemma for the progressives because they absolutely need big tech and big banks to accomplish their ultimate goal. So the political parties are no longer two sides of the same coin. They are two entirely different coins attempting to accomplish entirely different goals.

All this political sea change will eventually put the media into a very difficult political predicament. The vast majority of mainstream media are left-leaning and so far they seem to be siding with the progressives but I am not sure that is going to be in their long-term best interest. The progressives in the name of one-world government have been destroying institutions one at a time and two of the last institutions that they will jettison will be mainstream media and big tech. It remains to be seen how the media will respond to this change, so far not well and they appear to be on a self-destructive path.

Gracy my apologies for getting somewhat off track.

[Gracy]

It's another reason that I look more suspiciously askance upon the Left media than the Right media: because while the Right media are attacked, the Left media is constantly stroked and applauded, by members of a satanic/paedophilic death cult.


47950

Left-wing Hollywood celebrities experienced a collective meltdown after a jury in Kenosha, Wisconsin, acquitted 18-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse of all charges on Friday. “I weep for this country,” one star lamented, while another claimed the verdict represented a victory for “white supremacy.”

Celebrities including Sophia Bush, Patton Oswalt, and Josh Gad took their cues from the establishment media by insisting on a racial angle to the verdict, even though all the parties in the case were white. Other celebrities simply vented their rage, like Alyssa Milano, who hurled expletives at her TV as the verdict was read.

“This is white supremacy in action,” Sophia Bush tweeted.

“So…the white guy goes free. Is that the message?” author Stephen King wrote.

“****ing not guilty,” Alyssa Milano despaired.

In one bizarre instance, ABC’s Scandal star Kerry Washington paid tribute to the two men Rittenhouse shot and killed out of self-defense — Joseph Rosenbaum, a pedophile sex offender, and Anthony Huber, a habitual woman beater.

https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2021/11/19/kyle-rittenhouse-not-guilty-verdict-breaks-hollywood-i-weep-for-this-country/

This is true Star Mariner. Point well taken!

But here's the catch: Most of us watch news that fits our overall narrative of how things are going on out there, and why. Corporate left media will always play to their demographic and howl at things that don't fit that narrative, and applaud those that do.

In this instance you used Breitbart, which is a corporate right outlet news source that does the same thing, they play to their demographic. If that verdict would have gone the other way they more than likely would have howled, but it turned out the way that fits their running narrative, so they applauded it.

I wasn't in that court room to see all the evidence, pro and con, that was presented, neither were any of us. So how do we know for ourselves whether Rittenhouse was really guilty or innocent in a (hopefully) neutral environment?

In this case from our perspective, I think it' was easy to root for Rittenhouse all along, based on the ridiculous narratives put forth from the corporate left.

What if the verdict had gone the other way? Now obviously it didn't, but there *may* have been evidence presented that he was indeed guilty, but for other reasons set totally aside from race relations, BLM, outside chatter, or whatever. It may have just been good old fashioned manslaughter, or something of the like...

We'll never know, but I wonder how Breitbart may have presented a guilty verdict to their particular audience?

And of course, vice versa with corporate left media?

I think that might be fairly predictable.

[Mike]

Hey Dennis, your position has always been: if B and C are mostly beholden to A, then B and C are utterly worthless and hopelessly corrupt and nothing but the plaything of globalists and should therefore be dismissed entirely. I don't think that way!:) It is completely and totally dismissive of the thousands of individual constituents making up B and C (some very good people believe it or not); and, while their ability to function autonomously in a globalist run structure is limited, there is still quite a bit they can do to improve the lives of everyday people.

The war I'm concerned with now is the culture war. It's the most dangerous threat affecting us atm. Our very sanity hangs in the balance. This is all being pumped thru the left. At the moment, the only thing stopping them is the right. So this is pretty simple for me. I'm not at all convinced that they're playing for the same team, certainly not overtly and I don't think covertly either(as rgray222 and Star Mariner explained so well). I don't mean to sound unfeeling, but atm I don't care who is bombing who in the middle east or elsewhere, because I live here and I only have so much energy to go around and I'm being forced to use it all defending myself from this lunacy.

******

Stephen King:facepalm: he's another uninformed idiot who thinks a white guy shot some black guys in Kenosha. Wow. I saw a few interviews with some NBA players last night, and they all appear to believe the same thing. Amazing! I want to see all their faces when they are finally made aware that a white guy killed 2 white guys. A white guy can't even kill other white guys without it being "white supremacy":bigsmile: Think about that one for a moment!

****

Heres how I see it: If the the main criticism of the mainstream media is that they're mostly beholden to their corporate masters, then the main criticism of the alternative media is that they're mostly beholden to a spirit of endless cynicism towards the mainstream. It's all very dark, I'll grant you that, but I'm still looking for shafts of light

[jaybee]

[snip]

Stephen King:facepalm: he's another uninformed idiot who thinks a white guy shot some black guys in Kenosha. Wow. I saw a few interviews with some NBA players last night, and they all appear to believe the same thing. Amazing! I want to see all their faces when they are finally made aware that a white guy killed 2 white guys. A white guy can't even kill other white guys without it being "white supremacy":bigsmile: Think about that one for a moment!

[snip]



Just pathetic how uninformed Stephen King and others are about basic facts in the Rittenhouse Case -

It's actually quite frightening how supposedly intelligent people can be so stupid...

After seeing your post I went and looked to see what he was tweeting and saw this...from last night when you would have thought he would have caught up with the fact about the dead men being white... but no retraction if he did..

https://twitter.com/StephenKing/status/1461781415318769668


So...the white guy goes free. Is that the message?
7:40 PM · Nov 19, 2021

I remember when the term 'white supremacist' was being deliberately inserted in Official Narratives run by the MSM - a few years ago around the beginning of the Trump presidency and I thought - aye aye what are they up to here... and the psychological operation around spreading this 'white supremacy' thing has grown and grown -

As far as I'm concerned it's all about destroying Western Culture and even eventually possibly removing the White Race itself... (in a kind of staggered genocide) and idiots like Stephen King (et al) are helping it happen...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Anyway - to get back to the thread topic more... Tim Pool, like Jimmy Dore is an example of honest sincere Alternative Media...

He says in this video that he has lost friends over the Rittenhouse Case -

Media CONTINUES Lying About Kyle Rittenhouse, They Keep Doubling Down (11:54)


QOsRJuUtgl8

[Mike]

Hi Jaybee, well I've just done it - I made my first tweet!:bigsmile:

I informed King that the victims were all white. Perhaps I've done my duty for the day.

However, he could have very well meant that white people, in general, get let off the hook, in general, whenever they commit a crime. Regardless, I sent him a condescending message anyway because, well...it just felt good lol

:focus:

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

In this instance you used Breitbart, which is a corporate right outlet news source that does the same thing, they play to their demographic. If that verdict would have gone the other way they more than likely would have howled, but it turned out the way that fits their running narrative, so they applauded it.

Where in the article did they applaud it? I didn't see any editorialising in the article at all. They were doing only what journalists should be doing - reporting on a story. In this case the collective meltdown of Hollyweird celebs responding to the Rittenhouse case.

They provided only basic facts, with this quite even-handed summary:


Kyle Rittenhouse was acquitted of all charges on Friday following three days of jury deliberation. The 18-year-old faced two charges of murder, one charge of attempted murder, and two charges of reckless endangerment stemming from last year’s Black Lives Matter riots that saw large parts of Kenosha burn to the ground.

Rittenhouse’s attorneys argued their client acted in self-defense when he was attacked while helping to defend property against violent rioters. Rittenhouse shot and killed two rioters after they threatened him — Joseph Rosenbaum, who reached for Rittenhouse’s rifle, and Anthony Huber, who hit Rittenhouse in the head and neck with a skateboard, and reached for the rifle.

Hollywood celebrities didn’t appear concerned with the details of the case when they reacted with rage to the jury’s decision.

Then they proceeded to list, one-by-one, the tweets and outbursts in question.

I don't know if Kyle Rittenhouse is truly guilty or innocent either. No courtroom on this earth can do that with 100% accuracy. Personally I neither condone or condemn his acquittal. And I find it just as distasteful to celebrate the kid as a hero, as damn him as the devil. But I don't see Breitbart doing anything here but reporting on a story - without spin, hyperbole, or melodramatics. That they're right-leaning, to me, actually means they're relatively sane and grounded.

[jaybee]

Hi Jaybee, well I've just done it - I made my first tweet!:bigsmile:

I informed King that the victims were all white. Perhaps I've done my duty for the day.

However, he could have very well meant that white people, in general, get let off the hook, in general, whenever they commit a crime. Regardless, I sent him a condescending message anyway because, well...it just felt good lol

:focus:


Indeed you have done your duty for the day and good job - :)

:thumbsup:

[Gracy]

In this instance you used Breitbart, which is a corporate right outlet news source that does the same thing, they play to their demographic. If that verdict would have gone the other way they more than likely would have howled, but it turned out the way that fits their running narrative, so they applauded it.

Where in the article did they applaud it? I didn't see any editorialising in the article at all. They were doing only what journalists should be doing - reporting on a story. In this case the collective meltdown of Hollyweird celebs responding to the Rittenhouse case.

They provided only basic facts, with this quite even-handed summary:

You're right Star Mariner. My bad! I did what I usually don't do in this particular case, that being taking due diligence in reading, before commenting.

I conflated seeing applause elsewhere in reaction to the verdict, Breitbart's focusing on extreme reactions from the other side, and the banner at the top displaying trending subjects below (which of course are all Right leaning), and lumping them into a conclusion that simply was not true.

I do still think the Right in general was looking for not guilty, but as you correctly point out, the actual reporting from Breitbart was pretty straight forward:


RITTENHOUSE NOT GUILTY - COVID-1984 - DEM SPENDING BONANZA - BIDENFLATION - CLIMATE CRAZIES - BORDER CRISIS



That they're right-leaning, to me, actually means they're relatively sane and grounded.

Now this opinion I still find arguable. Obviously we agree there's a lot of hyperbole coming from the Left, but I see a lot of it coming from the Right as well.

[Ernie Nemeth]

In this case, I don't need the media to tell me their conclusion. I watched the footage and saw the thing unfold. After watching many videos from many angles I concluded the man acted in self defence.

If I now want more information, I have to find outlets that have concluded the same thing, as only they will know where to look for the info I want. I don't care about rhetoric, agendas, or questions of should he have been there in the first place. I want to know if justice will be served, and I am concerned about how the media in general will portray the incident.

This trial by public opinion, instigated by the media and special interest groups, is something I have to find a way around to get to the truth because they are so obviously slanting the narrative.

[Gracy]

Anyway - to get back to the thread topic more... Tim Pool, like Jimmy Dore is an example of honest sincere Alternative Media...

Hi jaybee,

Funny you mention Jimmy Dore, big fan here. Not taking a jab here, it's just an opportune time to bring up something that's been bothering me about his popularity gaining traction here. Jimmy's more of the old fashioned true lefty that despises this abomination of what the corporate left represents, when that's not really even left at all, and he would love nothing more than to see them all sent packing. He was all gung ho for "The Squad" early on, but once he saw them starting to line up behind the likes of Nancy Pelosi, they came into his crosshairs as well.

So while I think it's great seeing him gaining more attention, the problem (as I see it) is that it's only when he's railing against the "left" (and much deservedly so!). But somehow when he rails against say, Donald Trump for example, those videos are passed over.

That he possesses the objectivity to stand by his passionate principles and calls out bulls**t on both sides, wherever he finds it, is why I originally took such a liking to him in the first place. That tells me he's a straight shooter, call 'em like he sees 'em kind of a commentator, and that's what I look for.

It's just kind of a bummer seeing only his anti left videos being used as another sledge hammer against them, when there are others like the one below that never seem to see the light of day here, and don't show the other side of his work, rendering it one sided.
cZD3QJi3xO0

[jaybee]

Anyway - to get back to the thread topic more... Tim Pool, like Jimmy Dore is an example of honest sincere Alternative Media...

Hi jaybee,

Funny you mention Jimmy Dore, big fan here. Not taking a jab here, it's just an opportune time to bring up something that's been bothering me about his popularity gaining traction here. Jimmy's more of the old fashioned true lefty that despises this abomination of what the corporate left represents, when that's not really even left at all, and he would love nothing more than to see them all sent packing. He was all gung ho for "The Squad" early on, but once he saw them starting to line up behind the likes of Nancy Pelosi, they came into his crosshairs as well.

So while I think it's great seeing him gaining more attention, the problem (as I see it) is that it's only when he's railing against the "left" (and much deservedly so!). But somehow when he rails against say, Donald Trump for example, those videos are passed over.

That he possesses the objectivity to stand by his passionate principles and calls out bulls**t on both sides, wherever he finds it, is why I originally took such a liking to him in the first place. That tells me he's a straight shooter, call 'em like he sees 'em kind of a commentator, and that's what I look for.

It's just kind of a bummer seeing only his anti left videos being used as another sledge hammer against them, when there are others like the one below that never seem to see the light of day here, and don't show the other side of his work, leaving it one sided.



I always actually thought that (although Jimmy Dore is basically honest and sincere) he misunderstood Trump (being a Populist) and he could have made more use of his presidency than he did - he (Dore) is only human at the end of the day and there was obviously a lot of pressure from the left for him to do some anti Trump stuff.... so he did a bit (not much I don't think..) to try and keep the balance - that's how I see it -

Now I haven't watched all the Jimmy Dore Show videos but I remember when Trump authorized a bit of bombing in Syria... that I was against.... and I remember Alex Jones actually cried on air about it - Jimmy asked on a show.... who in the MSM has spoken out against it? and the question was answered in the comments that Tucker Carlson had done an anti war piece on it -

Jimmy has been on the Tucker Carlson Show a couple of times and I think he got a lot of stick about that from the 'left' - and in the same way I think he could have got some mileage out of Trump - but he never went there...

He (Dore) has made comments that Biden is worse than Trump - and as you know he is very critical of the Democratic Party - putting a lot of pressure on them when he can - like forcing the vote on medicare... think it was Medicare For All... and he really lays into the 'squad' about it...

So - in conclusion - and to keep it brief.... I don't think he has done all that much anti Trump stuff and I think he's more interested in holding the Democrats to account -

[ExomatrixTV]

Would Darrell e Brooks Jr (https://www.google.com/search?q=Darrell+e+Brooks+Jr) a rapper known as "MathBoi Fly (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_OFO20Xu0A)" have done what he did (killing/murdering 5 people and heavily injuring others with his SUV car (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sport_utility_vehicle)) if Liberal part of Mainstream Media did its job correctly & honestly dealing with Kyle Rittenhouse mass media coverage last months?

cheers,
John

AfTLrl6VLwc

[Dennis Leahy]

ExomatrixTV John, RGray, Star Mariner, and Mike, did you read my post? https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?116759-Mainstream-vs.-Alternative&p=1464379&viewfull=1#post1464379 The reason I ask is because I don't want to reiterate the same points.

John and Star Mariner, I think it is important to recognize that the Democrat usurpers that pretend to be "the Left" have no overlap at all with "the Left." The US Democrats are (overt) globalist corporatists and militarists. (The US Republicans are militarists as well, and globalist corporatists that pretend to be just "pro-business", but anyone who has seen the graphic of the Global Corporate Network realizes that there is no such thing as a separate network of American corporations. There is only one Global Corporate Network. It has no national borders. All who are corporatists are globalists supporting globalism, regardless the spin of their propaganda or their God Bless America lapel pins. No one is defending the virtues of "the Left" ideological positions, and to repeat and repeat that what Democrats are doing is "the Left's" ideological positions being expressed is powerful propaganda. Who in the hell (who hears what Democrats are doing while being mislabeled as the Left) would ever want any sort of "Left" policies?

Let's just call them Democrats and Republicans, and stop pretending either of these 2 mobster gangs is Left or Right ideologically.

I know that semantically it's comfortable to assign the value of "Left" to the dominant US duopoly party that presumably opposes the US duopoly party that defines itself as "right", but it is a powerful misnomer, it propagandizes the word "Left" into the degrading reality of neoliberalism (which in itself is really rebranded neoconservatism on steroids.) There really is a "Left" viewpoint ideologically and philosophically that is citizen-centric, anti-corporate control, anti-military beyond an actual defensive force, pro-environment, pro-individual freedom within the confines of not harming others, and pro-sharing by citizens of the nation's resources. That's not the Democrats.

It shouldn't be impossible to speak of the US political theater as a battle between corporate Democrats and corporate Republicans rather than a battle between "Left" and "Right" when it's really two corporatist rugby teams fighting over possession of the football.

Mike, there definitely is a culture war going on, and it is important to point out the bullsh!t, but a guy in a dress in a woman's bathroom just doesn't hold my attention very long while the US Empire's life/death/subjugation stranglehold issues are glossed-over. I also consider it flag-waving bullsh!t to cherry-pick some perceived good words from some US high office politician or mainstream news reader as if there are some good guys within those organizations slogging it out for the people (and that it could lead to meaningful change.)

The mainstream "news" and US federal government are currently critical participants in the covid-19 plandemic conspiracy and cover-up, just as they were for 9/11, JFK's public execution, and the suppression of advanced non-fossil energy technology conspiracy.

You mentioned that you have watched "The Power Principle" and so you now know the real history of US-corporate-military imperialism, at least in Central America. John Perkins handed us the playbook of how it really works, how the US military and CIA and Empire thinktanks (in concert with global central banks) operate national takeovers, and how the mainstream media ignores/suppresses the real story. We are currently being lied to via MSM, propagandized by the US federal government and the deep state about Venezuela, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Russia, China, Israel, Palestine, AI, the surveillance state, covid-19 and 'vaccines', and maintaining lies (mainly by omission) about previous major conspiracies. Shouldn't that reality be at the forefront, rather than lauding some little snippets of truth (or quasi-truth) that squeak out of the machine occasionally?


RGray, you speak of the corporate mass media (the existing mass media) as if they have independence from the corporations that own them, and the corporations that partially own or are tied to them. This has been fantasy for a long time. 80% of what the "news" reader reads was literally written directly by the State Department and/or from corporations PR departments. There is no "Fourth Estate" anymore - even the alternative Fourth Estate's lead guy is rotting in Belmarsh prison. The job of the mainstream media, the corporate mass media, is to conceal reality from you. They conceal the really big underlying reality and replace it with pop reality (true crap about celebs), news that is innocuous to Empire, distorted managed manipulated doctored spun stories and bold lies that cover-up reality and promote false reality on big stories and corporate agenda, and local (true) stories. You are completely missing the big picture of what mainstream media actually does when you sift through the vomit and find a little piece of undigested carrot (a "news" story you believe is accurate.)

[ExomatrixTV]

ExomatrixTV John, RGray, Star Mariner, and Mike, did you read my post? https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?116759-Mainstream-vs.-Alternative&p=1464379&viewfull=1#post1464379 The reason I ask is because I don't want to reiterate the same points.



already explained myself a bit further here (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?116759-Mainstream-vs.-Alternative&p=1464387&viewfull=1#post1464387)

cheers,
John

[Mark]

Everybody is right and wrong. When I first ran for office, I got interviewed by a local television station. I was working on criminal justice reform, the interview happened in 2019 early in the process. Hadn’t been in office long and wanted to share a truth about me, as it was pertinent. Namely, that I’d been arrested before.

Since it was my first time on camera in an interview format I was nervous as hell but I told my story as succinctly as possible. I felt better afterwards, confident that I’d said enough and it would no longer be an issue. That folks could reference the interview when and if it got brought up later to be used against me, as did indeed happen in the fall of 2020.

Well, imagine my surprise when I watch the interview and, right out of the gate, there are two things stated that I never said. Those two things were integral to my story and later implicated me as lying, when I did no such thing. I told the truth, but what I said wasn’t included in the media clips. The reporter, in her characterization of my experience, misstated what I said, deliberately or not, I have no idea.

There was some good truth in the interview and there were some bad lies in it. I was later given the great advice not to speak in sound bites when it is important. To make long statements that can’t be cut up and parsed to stand alone and used against me. The MSM is aggressive and reactive and the AltCom has become more like it to compete, utilizing hyperbole and gross mischaracterizations and false equivalencies to draw connections that may not truly exist.

I consider it all the news cycle and the echo chamber of spin these days and pay little in-depth attention to either. I watch the news for emergencies only. Not to learn a thing.

[Mike]

Dennis I read everything you said! I read your reply to me twice actually. And it's pretty much exactly what you always say when it comes to this stuff: there's neocons and neolibs, and they're on the same team - the globalist team - and they're all irredeemable trash, and everything they touch is irredeemable trash, and if you think you're getting any truth out of them or anything they touch or breath on, whatsoever, you're hopelessly naive and lost etc. I got it!:)

Respectfully, I think you've had your head buried in that playbook for so long that you're missing some important details. To begin with, I don't view these globalists as just one big blob of homogeneous agreement. Within the globalist ranks there are, I would strongly guess, numerous factions with various agendas..all competing over this and that. And I would imagine that there are some factions that are opposed to some of the evil being perpetuated by the other factions. It's much more likely that there's a non-stop power-play between the competing factions - factions with varying levels of malevolence and benevolence - than one harmonious, irredeemably evil crime family making decisions on who to bomb over wine and linguini.

My guess is that some of those factions actually disagreed with (and maybe even tried to prevent) some of the tragedies we've witnessed in the not too distant past, like 9-11 for example. I think the relationships between the groups/factions that make up the globalists/illuminatti/ controllers/international cabal - or whatever one wishes to call them - are much more complex and complicated than you're giving them credit for.

For example: I think this culture war sh!t - which you're dramatically underestimating btw, and you know this - has all been socially engineered by one of these globalist/illuminatti factions. But I don't think it has the endorsement of all of them. Just look around, it's obvious. So what does that mean? It suggests to me that the various factions are slugging it out..and the fight is trickling down to the mainstream media, alternative media, social media, etc. To simply reject it all outright is missing the plot as far as I'm concerned.

One thing you may not have considered is this: it may just be that, despite all the corruption and greed and evil that does indeed exist across all levels of bureaucracy(and beyond) that we're actually remarkably fortunate that things aren't infinitely worse. Maybe, just maybe there'd be 9-11's every week if it wasn't for certain factions in this globalist group preventing it from happening. Who knows?

[Dennis Leahy]

Dennis I read everything you said! I read your reply to me twice actually. And it's pretty much exactly what you always say when it comes to this stuff: there's neocons and neolibs, and they're on the same team - the globalist team - and they're all irredeemable trash, and everything they touch is irredeemable trash, and if you think you're getting any truth out of them or anything they touch or breath on, whatsoever, you're hopelessly naive and lost etc. I got it!:)

Respectfully, I think you've had your head buried in that playbook for so long that you're missing some important details. To begin with, I don't view these globalists as just one big blob of homogeneous agreement. Within the globalist ranks there are, I would strongly guess, numerous factions with various agendas..all competing over this and that. And I would imagine that there are some factions that are opposed to some of the evil being perpetuated by the other factions. It's much more likely that there's a non-stop power-play between the competing factions - factions with varying levels of malevolence and benevolence - than one harmonious, irredeemably evil crime family making decisions on who to bomb over wine and linguini.

My guess is that some of those factions actually disagreed with (and maybe even tried to prevent) some of the tragedies we've witnessed in the not too distant past, like 9-11 for example. I think the relationships between the groups/factions that make up the globalists/illuminatti/ controllers/international cabal - or whatever one wishes to call them - are much more complex and complicated than you're giving them credit for.

For example: I think this culture war sh!t - which you're dramatically underestimating btw, and you know this - has all been socially engineered by one of these globalist/illuminatti factions. But I don't think it has the endorsement of all of them. Just look around, it's obvious. So what does that mean? It suggests to me that the various factions are slugging it out..and the fight is trickling down to the mainstream media, alternative media, social media, etc. To simply reject it all outright is missing the plot as far as I'm concerned.

One thing you may not have considered is this: it may just be that, despite all the corruption and greed and evil that does indeed exist across all levels of bureaucracy(and beyond) that we're actually remarkably fortunate that things aren't infinitely worse. Maybe, just maybe there'd be 9-11's every week if it wasn't for certain factions in this globalist group preventing it from happening. Who knows?
Hey, Mike

I guess I was hoping you'd point out something specific I said that you disagree with on this topic. I'm not speaking in hyperbole about the overall effect of the corporate mass media, and that its primary function is to paint a picture, to create a plausible illusion of reality that makes the fascist overlords look like boy scouts. They even got you a little.

" I think the relationships between the groups/factions that make up the globalists/illuminatti/ controllers/international cabal - or whatever one wishes to call them - are much more complex and complicated than you're giving them credit for." The topic of my overall big big big picture observations is outside of this thread, but I'll say here that your guess missed the mark. I think I need to reference the graphic 3D chart that is the fingerprint of the Global Corporate Network. I see little evidence of a tiny select group of controllers from whence all the bad juju flows, but I repeatedly see evidence of clusters of corporations, sectors of industry and commerce (like the pharma sector is doing now), and sometimes solo corporations (like Monsanto did), surging forward in establishing, maintaining, and building their self serving (evil) agenda. The effect on the Global Corporate Network follows that, it doesn't start "from the top", because in many ways, there is no top. No tip-top king of the underworld that makes all the decisions. But the entire Global Corporate Network is fed when any node is fed. All of their yachts do rise together with the rising tide.

I'll have to find a reference to the article that I read that was the result of a study of where the news came from. I'd guess that most of us are under the illusion that the news is written by reporters and investigative reporters, journalists, and edited by editors at news organizations. The study showed that 80% of what we hear as news is really written directly by corporate PR departments and agencies of the US federal government. Unsurprisingly, the corporations are always shown with a positive spin, no matter how heinous the reality, and by god, none of the heinous reality will be discussed. The words written by the federal agencies are pure propaganda (now it's legal propaganda, thanks Obama.)

When one asks about comparing the mainstream news or alternate news for credibility, it isn't the news organizations and TV personalities that we are really talking about, since they don't write the news, they just read it. Tucker Carlson sneaked in some truth (about Syria) in one of his pieces once, but he's an "opinion" guy, not the news guy. They didn't let the news guy say that. News organizations have sheets of paper from the White House that very carefully tell the (official, bullsh!t) narrative, and the news reader guy reads the words.

Almost all the "news" stories about the US federal government broadcast on mainstream TV were written by the US federal government agency paid propagandists and spin doctors. If you believe in white hats, surely you can see that they are never the ones writing stories to be released as news. (I used to think there are good factions within the US federal government. The "white hats." I don't see any evidence of it. I see the agenda makers and the complicit.) Even more powerful is the omitted news ("If the public knew what we have done...") that no white hat in the government is sneaking into the news nor mass media teleprompter guy is reading.

I know it's sobering, but this isn't an emotional "Debbie Downer" thing or just bitch-slapping mainstream media. It's honest observation. I think I would be very disingenuous (or ignorant) to recommend to someone that they can find out the true story, the truth, on any big issue from mainstream news corporations.

[ExomatrixTV]

Rittenhouse does have a case for defamation: Emily Compagno:

TB9n9r4rTVU

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

I also read everything you said Dennis, and largely agree with it.


I think I would be very disingenuous (or ignorant) to recommend to someone that they can find out the true story, the truth, on any big issue from mainstream news corporations.

At the end of the day I already know the true story. I speak only of the wider picture: what's right and what's wrong; what's good and what's bad; what's of the light and what's not. All the myriad details and complexities of things like geo-politics and its factions and agendas are secondary and out of my hands. They are beyond my reach to change.

There's really no point in calling out the Emperor, his Sith minions, or even the storm-troopers. That's not a battle we can win. Not even an inch of ground we can gain. All we can do is spread the Jedi truth and keep it intact.

Because what concerns me most at this present time is what's happening to Western culture: the tearing of its fabric, the cracking of its foundations. We can talk sincerely and persuasively all day long about right wing / left wing and our collective opposition to "establishment", but what good would it do? What chance do we have as a species when society itself is dissolving before our eyes?

We are entering a world of surveillance, mandates, maybe even segregation. A world of enforced conformity, a place where common sense is hate speech, and obedience integrity. A world where virtues are redefined and universal values inverted: I call it upside-down world (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?112057-Meme-Your-Memeist-Memes-Thread&p=1451136&viewfull=1#post1451136), populated entirely by lunatics and hypocrites. Which is probably what they want: a world of woke, godless NPCs, utterly controlled and utterly distracted/divided, and therefore utterly passive when it comes to opposing this Global Corporate colossus.

That's the only picture I was trying to paint. Because when I hear the left media, I'm like, "that's manipulation," or "that's race baiting," or "that's just bullsh!t." But when I find myself watching or listening to the right-leaning media on these cultural or social talking points I'm like, "yup, that's true," or "yup, that's the way I see it," or "yup, I totally agree."

Make no mistake, there is a war raging against us and around us. At stake are our minds and our very souls. I firmly believe that. And the only ones in the mainstream media who seem to be taking any kind of stand, offering any kind of antidote to the insanity, are the right-leaning ones.

For me, it's as simple as that.

[Gracy]

That's the only picture I was trying to paint. Because when I hear the left media, I'm like, "that's manipulation," or "that's race baiting," or "that's just bullsh!t." But when I find myself watching or listening to the right-leaning media on these cultural or social talking points I'm like, "yup, that's true," or "yup, that's the way I see it," or "yup, I totally agree."

Make no mistake, there is a war raging against us and around us. At stake are our minds and our very souls. I firmly believe that. And the only ones in the mainstream media who seem to be taking any kind of stand, offering any kind of antidote to the insanity, are the right-leaning ones.

For me, it's as simple as that.

I'm glad this is finally being laid out squarely on the table on this thread. To me there's nothing wrong with being right leaning, left leaning, or whatever way of leaning, any way of leaning is legitimate in my book. Even if it's disagreeable.

If one prefers right leaning media, then they are preferable to a right a leaning way of looking at the world; and conversely, one who is preferable to left leaning media, is preferable to a left leaning way of looking at the world. There's just no way around that.

But up until just recently here on this thread, I was finding it quite confounding that even though pretty much the only news *and* commentary being presented across the full forum spectrum has been right leaning since the advent of Trump, but for some reason it couldn't be said.

Now again I think that's just fine, it's totally legitimate, I'm just happy it's coming out of the closet so to speak.

I do still have a problem with outlets such as FOX, OAN and Newsmax not being considered mainstream news, because they most certainly are, they aren't exempt just for the fact that one may find their presentations palatable.

Speaking of which:



Rittenhouse does have a case for defamation: Emily Compagno:

TB9n9r4rTVU

John, please, save for the fact that FOX NEWS is part of the mainstream vs. Alternative universe, this post is way off topic, and should have gone to a different discussion like the breaking news thread or something.

[ExomatrixTV]

Alternative Media vs. Mainstream 2012: History, Jobs, Advertising - Radio-TV-Film, University of Texas

FCyxfWa4yj8
Alternative Media 2012 are media (newspapers, radio, television, magazines, movies, Internet, etc.) which provide alternative information to the mainstream media in a given context, whether the mainstream media are commercial, publicly supported, or government-owned. Alternative media differ from mainstream media along one or more of the following dimensions: their content, aesthetic, modes of production, modes of distribution, and audience relations. Alternative media often aim to challenge existing powers, to represent marginalized groups, and to foster horizontal linkages among communities of interest. Proponents of alternative media argue that the mainstream media are biased in the selection and framing of news and information. While sources of alternative media can also be biased (sometimes proudly so), proponents claim that the bias is significantly different than that of the mainstream media because they have a different set of values, objectives, and frameworks. Hence these media provide an "alternative" viewpoint, different information and interpretations of the world that cannot be found in the mainstream. As such, advocacy journalism tends to be a component of many alternative outlets. Because the term "alternative" has connotations of self-marginalization, some media outlets now prefer the term "independent" over "alternative". Several different categories of media may fall under the heading of alternative media. These include, but are not limited to, radical and dissident media, social movement media, ethnic/racial media, indigenous media, community media, subcultural media, student media, and avant-garde media. Each of these categories highlights the perceived shortcomings of dominant media to serve particular audiences, aims and interests, and attempts to overcome these shortcomings through their own media. The traditional, binary definition of alternative media as stated above has been expanded in the last decade. Simply comparing alternative media to the mainstream media ignores the profound effect that making media has on the makers. As producers and actors within their community, modern alternative media activists redefine their self-image, their interpretation of citizenship, and their world. Clemencia Rodriguez explains, "I could see how producing alternative media messages implies much more than simply challenging the mainstream media ... It implies having the opportunity to create one's own images of self and environment; it implies being able to recodify one's own identity with the signs and codes that one chooses, thereby disrupting the traditional acceptance of those imposed by outside sources." With the increasing importance attributed to digital technologies, questions have arisen about where digital media fit in the dichotomy between alternative and mainstream media. Blogs, Facebook, Twitter and other similar sites, while not necessarily created to be information media, increasingly are being used to spread news and information, potentially acting as alternative media as they allow ordinary citizens to bypass the gatekeepers of traditional, mainstream media and share the information and perspectives these citizens deem important. Additionally, digital media provide an alternative space for deviant, dissident or non-traditional views, and allow for the creation of new, alternative communities that can provide a voice for those normally marginalized by the mainstream media. However, some have criticized the weaknesses of the Web. First, for its ability to act as both "alternative and a mass medium brings with it the tension of in-group and out-group communication." Second, the Web "rarely lives up to its potential" with constraints to access. Digital technologies have also led to an alternative form of video more commonly known as citizen generated journalism. Individuals and smaller groups have the potential to describe and make public their interpretations of the world. Video shot on camcorders, FLIP cameras, and now cell phones have been utilized by the alternative media to commonly show human rights abuses. In turn the mainstream media picks up on these videos when it fits their narrative of what it deems "newsworthy".

[Ernie Nemeth]

It's is not that simple.

To propose platitudes that the left leaning mainstream media is just another slant on the news, is incorrect.

My buddy believes, and he is no sloucher but now he has me wondering, that the vax is perfectly safe, no one has died from it, and that it has some sort of palliative effect only on the most severely ill. He also believes that only the unvaccinated are in the ICU. He also believes the unvaxed are spreading the waves of infection. These are all talking points of the talking heads on the mainstream news channels. It is lies and misrepresentaion. It is dangerous when these agencies pretend to be delivering the news, and people believe it. And it is a joke that they spew their lies about covid and then the commercial is paid for by Phizer. Give me a break.

The MSM does not get a pass. Had they done their jobs we would not have to mass migrate to alternate sites.

[ExomatrixTV]

Media Bias Revealed? This "Blind Spot" Website Attempts To Show You.

7Y4d-hQi5-w

[Gracy]

These two on "Breaking Points" I've come to trust in their news and commentary, and that's not easy let me tell you LOL! He's on the right and used to be a White House reporter, she's on the left and got purged from MSNBC, and they make a good odd couple team.

But both have one thing in common from their mainstream experience: they've learned to not be bashful in critiquing their own side when deserved, which is taboo in the U.S. cable news regular operating procedures, and have found freedom of expression out on their own.

I wouldn't classify Saager and Krystal as mainstream or alternative, they are more a product of Independent Media, after having learned from the school of hard knocks in the mainstream.

They comment on how it is verboten to go on a left wing, or a right wing outlet, and go off script by critiquing the particular network or point of view that is interviewing you. You're expected to critique "the other", and by committing the ultimate sin of not abiding by that unwritted golden rule of partisan cable news, one can quickly find themselves, and the place they come from as well, given the cold shoulder and not be invited back.

This is so true, and a big reason for America's ever widening great divide, they illustrate this perfectly in the following 7 minute segment:
e_lDRKRR5tw

[Wind]

5okSlrbgELA

[Gemma13]

These two on "Breaking Points" I've come to trust in their news and commentary, and that's not easy let me tell you LOL! He's on the right and used to be a White House reporter, she's on the left and got purged from MSNBC, and they make a good odd couple team.

But both have one thing in common from their mainstream experience: they've learned to not be bashful in critiquing their own side when deserved, which is taboo in the U.S. cable news regular operating procedures, and have found freedom of expression out on their own.

I wouldn't classify Saager and Krystal as mainstream or alternative, they are more a product of Independent Media, after having learned from the school of hard knocks in the mainstream.

They comment on how it is verboten to go on a left wing, or a right wing outlet, and go off script by critiquing the particular network or point of view that is interviewing you. You're expected to critique "the other", and by committing the ultimate sin of not abiding by that unwritted golden rule of partisan cable news, one can quickly find themselves, and the place they come from as well, given the cold shoulder and not be invited back.

This is so true, and a big reason for America's ever widening great divide, they illustrate this perfectly in the following 7 minute segment:
e_lDRKRR5tw

Great short starting point clip to pass on to status quo friends/family that replaces having to put alternative journo's in their face which many will dismiss immediately as being conspiratorial.

Kindergarten stuff for Avalon members but let's face it, many people we know are still peeing in nappies.

[ExomatrixTV]

Former Corporate Journalist Exposes Mainstream Media, Pins Down Exactly When Journalism Went Wrong:

1SxTgPcFZsA

[ExomatrixTV]

What James O’Keefe found at a “Rise and Resist” Protest outside NYYR Gala

oRm33TnZxmI
When blind MSM followers are confronted ... listen carefully how they explain themselves to justify smearing/defaming/misrepresenting James O’Keefe




James O'Keefe's Lawyer on the FBI Raiding Project Veritas' Homes | The Megyn Kelly Show

MunGydx8qSg

[ExomatrixTV]

Joe Rogan DESTROYS MSM As Jon Stewart SLAMS Its LIES:

F9liMQMYPJw

[mojo]

Very interesting seeing the posts in this thread is very telling but Ill leave that up to you...

[ExomatrixTV]

Jeff Zucker - The gift from CNN that kept on giving:

3HQFzgff6LQ
Ethical Values


Rule #1 – Truth is paramount. Our reporting is fact based with clear and irrefutable video and audio content. Truth is paramount. We never deceive our audience. We do not distort the facts or the context. We do not “selectively edit.”
Rule #2 – We do not break the law. We maintain one-party consent when recording someone is inherently moral and ethical. We never record when there is zero-party consent. In areas where we are required to have consent from all parties, we seek legal guidance regarding the expectation of privacy’s impact on our right to record.
Rule #3 – We adhere to the 1st Amendment rights of others. During our investigations we do not disrupt the peace. We do not infringe on the 1st Amendment rights of others.
Rule #4 – The Zekman Test. The undercover investigations we pursue are judged by us to be of “vital public interest” and “profound importance.” The Zekman Test is our baseline. Undercover investigative reporting is necessary because, “...there’s no other way to get the story...” Whereas the Society of Professional Journalists allows for undercover techniques, if undercover techniques are necessary to expose issues of vital public importance; we believe they are not only allowed but required.
Rule #5 – We Protect the Innocent When Possible - Embarrassing private details are not to be investigated. We stay away from irrelevant embarrassingly intimate details about private citizens personal lives. We look for individual wrong-doing and judge its public importance. The irrelevant religious or sexual dispositions of our targets are not to be investigated.
Rule #6 – Transparency. Our methods & tactics must be reasonable and defensible. We use the “Twelve Jurors on Our Shoulder” rule. The work has to be done with such a degree of integrity that it can withstand scrutiny in both law & ethics. We are comfortable with transparency. We must be willing to be ready to disclose our methods upon publication.
Rule #7 – Verifying and Corroborate Stories – Evaluate impact on third parties and Newsworthiness of Statements Alone.We consistently consider the probable truth or falsity of statements, examine any reasons to doubt the veracity of underlying assertions and whether the assertions are newsworthy. When possible, we will confirm with our subjects that their statements captured on video are accurate & truthful. At the very least, we will give our subjects an opportunity to elaborate and/or respond. In all matters, we rely on the 1st Amendment to protect our ability to publish newsworthy items after our internal deliberations. On whether there is an obligation to ensure the veracity of statements made on video, 1.) consider whether the remarks may potentially impact an innocent third party. (Factors in support of releasing the content) and 2.)The Newsworthiness of the statement alone by itself. (Factors against releasing the content).
Rule #8 – Raw Video. In certain circumstances we may release the “raw” video to the press and or the public. But as a rule, we do not.
Rule #9 – Subject Anonymity. We investigate & question sources before promising anonymity. Once we confirm, we will do everything in our power to protect the identity of our confidential sources.
Rule #10 – Being Accountable. Admit mistakes & correct them promptly.
Rule #11 – We do not manufacture content. We do not put words in our investigative subjects' mouths. We do not lead the horse to water. Our purpose is to elicit truth.
Rule #12 – With Great Power comes Great Responsibility.

[ExomatrixTV]

The Legacy Medias Astroturfed Joe Rogan "Controversy" is Backfiring Badly:

https://sp.rmbl.ws/s8/2/2/S/_/a/2S_ad.caa.mp4


source (https://rumble.com/vu4dh2-the-legacy-medias-astroturfed-joe-rogan-controversy-is-backfiring-badly.html)

[ExomatrixTV]

Is CNN Just a Demented Sex Club Masquerading As a News Network?:

61feae891713c5068468746b

[ExomatrixTV]

TV Anchor Blows the Whistle on The Left's Takeover of America's News:

60aec34f7bbded51c5757fa8

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1368471939765858304/Jte7SlGF_400x400.jpg

Banned.video/channel/Kristi-Leigh-TV (http://https://www.banned.video/channel/kristi-leigh-tv)
KristiLeightv.com (https://www.kristileightv.com)
Twitter.com/KristiLeighTV (https://twitter.com/KristiLeighTV)
Facebook.com/KristiLeighTV (https://www.facebook.com/KristiLeighTV)
Rumble.com/user/KristiLeighTV (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/Rumble.com/user/KristiLeighTV)
Youtube.com/KristiLeighTV (http://youtube.com/KristiLeighTV)
instagram.com/KristiLeighTV (https://www.instagram.com/kristileightv)
linkedin.com/in/KristiLeighTV (https://www.linkedin.com/in/kristileightv/)

vSjwYkFPrfI




Kristi Leigh says she's stepping away from traditional media, cites "national news" as bias (https://news.yahoo.com/kristi-leigh-says-shes-stepping-183600429.html)

[ExomatrixTV]

https://archive.org/download/banned.video_-_kristi_leigh_tv_2021-2h/2021-07-19T23%3A11%3A16.774Z%20-%20mRNA%20Vaccine%20Inventor%20Rails%20Against%20the%20Establishment%27s%20%22Noble%20Lie%22%2F2021-07-19T23%3A11%3A16.774Z%20-%20mRNA%20Vaccine%20Inventor%20Rails%20Against%20the%20Establishment%27s%20%22Noble%20Lie%22.mp4


source (https://archive.org/details/banned.video_-_kristi_leigh_tv_2021-2h)



Kristi Leigh TV (2022-1H (https://archive.org/details/banned.video_-_kristi_leigh_tv_2022-1h))

[DeDukshyn]

ivegf9THOf8

[ExomatrixTV]

Jimmy Dore: The Establishment Are Sh**ting Their Pants:

1MGXPUl15TQ

[ExomatrixTV]

Brian Stelter ROASTED By College Freshman:

ARA1PmIx4xg


'The Five' Reacts to CNN's Stelter schooled by college kid:

v8m__SOmpGo


CNN Host Confronted Over Misinformation By College Student:

qlRwMU2_mq0

[ExomatrixTV]

From Mainstream TV Anchor to InfoWars guest || Kristi Leigh:

Pxf_w73HVrU
Kristi Leigh is a former mainstream TV news anchor who most recently worked for Sinclair Broadcasting. She has been speaking out about media bias especially related to Covid reporting and did so on InfoWars with YouTube's first big name censored host... you know who I mean.

[ExomatrixTV]

See also: Whitewashed Lies (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?118442-Whitewashed-Lies) :dog:

[ExomatrixTV]

Joe Rogan vs. CNN: Joe Gets 2 MILLION Sub Boost Off "Cancel" & CNN Plus Can't Get 10,000 Viewers!

RsMomD5S5ss

[ExomatrixTV]

eqp4eEeRB8c
source (https://www.bitchute.com/video/eqp4eEeRB8c/)

[ExomatrixTV]

Why CNN’s Streaming Service Was a Catastrophic Failure:

AaKSrmz3iX0
How did a $300 million streaming service by one of the biggest media companies collapse in just 3 weeks? In this episode we discuss the failure of CNN+

[ExomatrixTV]

CNN Claims They're Going To Eliminate Opinion And Focus On Truth In Pathetic Statement:

eqTE_Hop0cM