The term “fake news” can be interpreted in various ways. Are we referring only to information that originates in the minds of those who serve as messengers . . . journalists, newscasters, news analysts, the cinema, government officials, etc.?
Or, do we include the distortions and misinformation provided to the public through these very same journalistic outlets? The issue and concern is much more expansive than the limited reference applied to it as “fake” news.
The myth of objectivity is certainly a variable that needs our attention. What is objectivity? Does it really exist? To assume that anyone who reports news events is doing so with objectivity is to assume that he/she has no previous life experiences and, therefore, no personal perceptions of the world lived in. In other words, we all come with our personal beliefs, prejudices, and unique understandings that will always color our how we present data.
It is now understood by those who work in the judicial system, that the least reliable evidence of a crime are the eyewitnesses. If you have 5 eyewitnesses, you will get 5 variations of the event. That is the phenomenon that exists for all of us as we journey through our lives.
Not only does the media present news events projecting individual biases but we are also dealing with institutional biases. The mainstream news media are all members of and messengers for the ruling class.
That is why when I participated in an antiwar (Vietnam) protest march in the 1960s in Washington, DC, where over 250,000 people marched around the White House, the N.Y. Times, the newspaper of record that “prints all the news that’s fit to print,” had the coverage appear, or better yet, buried on page 17.
That is why, regardless of the scientific evidence being unearthed by the 9–11 Truth Movement, the media led the fight to marginalize and ridicule the movement and bury the truth.
That is why, in 2003, when the US attacked and bombed Baghdad, all the networks, ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN had their military experts appear on the news programs to explain how the US was using “smart bombs” that only hit the areas targeted and avoided mass civilian deaths. I was in Florida at the time and sat in front of the TV watching these fiery explosions reigning down on a well populated city wondering how smart were these “smart bombs.” I decided to surf from one channel to another looking for any alternative reporting and was unsuccessful. I remembered that humorous comment, “Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?” Never did anyone appear or get interviewed who dissented from the official narrative.
That is why the media refused to question the bombing of Libya and, instead, gave support to the ouster of Muammar Gaddafi, a so-called “tyrant.”
That is why the media has been in the forefront of attacking and demonizing Bashar al Assad, the president of Syria, accusing him of using sarin, a poisonous gas, against the Syrian people, or bombing schools and hospitals, or torturing people.
It is interesting to note that the media has spotlighted the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a one man operation based in an apartment in London, as its source of information about Syria. Yet, two journalists, Eva Bartlett and Vanessa Beesley, who have travelled to Syria on numerous occasions, including Aleppo, have not been asked by the MSM to share their knowledge and perceptions. Not surprisingly, both Eva and Vanessa have identified the anti-Assad news as nothing more than fabrications. Not even the alternative media, Democracy Now or NPR has used either journalist as a resource.
While we have been inundated with anti-Assad propaganda, the media has portrayed the White Helmets as humanitarian heroes and saviors. Who really are these White Helmets? Being part of the White Helmets appears to be a part/time job. The same people have often been identified as participating with the so-called rebels in terrorizing the Syrian people when they are not saving children.
One must ask, why are the US and UK each contributing $20 million annually to this organization? Because, they have been instrumental in portraying the Syrian Army as ruthless murderers of women and children. There have been several videos distributed which show members of the White Helmets rescuing injured children. It is heart wrenching but effective propaganda. Unfortunately, it has been noted that the same children appear at times in more than one video.
Netflix has sponsored a documentary on the White Helmets which, unfortunately, won an Academy Award, despite the revelation that videos of their “heroic” efforts are staged events.
The reality is, those who are labeled pundits and appear on TV or are quoted in print are nothing more than corporate and government shills who are there to follow the official narrative.
To find the truth in the reporting of any news event is difficult. The corporate media have an agenda to promote the will of the ruling class and, therefore, we must be aware of certain variables. What is reported alone is not enough. We must look at how it is reported, what key words are used in the reporting (example: when describing a military battle, one could describe it as people being killed as opposed to people being slaughtered . . . is the reporter using inflammatory words such as labeling the leader of a country a tyrant or dictator), and what is left out and not reported.
The government, along with the cooperation of the corporate media has assumed and promoted an anti-Russia agenda. Putin is portrayed as an ex-head of the Soviet KGB (he was never head of the KGB) and, therefore, a tyrant, a man who is ruthless and not to be trusted, a man who is a clear and present threat to the security of the US.
REALLY?
This is a man who has resisted responding militarily to continuous US provocations and who is mainly responsible, so far, for the avoidance of WW3. In fact, he has tendered the invitation to the US to join with Russia to attack and destroy the terrorists (ISIS, al-Nusra, al Qaeda, etc.). The US has refused and instead, along with its NATO allies, placed thousands of troops and military hardware along Russia’s border and battleships in the Black Sea.
Stephen Cohen is an American scholar and professor emeritus of Russian studies at Princeton University and New York University. His life’s work has been in Soviet and Russian studies. Because his analysis of US policies toward Russia challenge the narrative shared by the media, Professor Cohen has not been asked to share his perspectives with the public on TV or in print.
These are only a small handful of the biased news that you and I are allowed to hear and see. Forget about objective reporting . . . it does not exist. We must not continue to accept the reporting at face value. We must question everything we hear or see. The US is an imperialist power looking to dominate the globe. Its perspective and what it allows the media to report is far from objective.
Dave Alpert has masters degrees in social work, educational administration, and psychology. He spent his career working with troubled inner city adolescents.
RSS
The issue of ‘fake news’
Posted on March 1, 2017 by Dave Alpert
The term “fake news” can be interpreted in various ways. Are we referring only to information that originates in the minds of those who serve as messengers . . . journalists, newscasters, news analysts, the cinema, government officials, etc.?
Or, do we include the distortions and misinformation provided to the public through these very same journalistic outlets? The issue and concern is much more expansive than the limited reference applied to it as “fake” news.
The myth of objectivity is certainly a variable that needs our attention. What is objectivity? Does it really exist? To assume that anyone who reports news events is doing so with objectivity is to assume that he/she has no previous life experiences and, therefore, no personal perceptions of the world lived in. In other words, we all come with our personal beliefs, prejudices, and unique understandings that will always color our how we present data.
It is now understood by those who work in the judicial system, that the least reliable evidence of a crime are the eyewitnesses. If you have 5 eyewitnesses, you will get 5 variations of the event. That is the phenomenon that exists for all of us as we journey through our lives.
Not only does the media present news events projecting individual biases but we are also dealing with institutional biases. The mainstream news media are all members of and messengers for the ruling class.
That is why when I participated in an antiwar (Vietnam) protest march in the 1960s in Washington, DC, where over 250,000 people marched around the White House, the N.Y. Times, the newspaper of record that “prints all the news that’s fit to print,” had the coverage appear, or better yet, buried on page 17.
That is why, regardless of the scientific evidence being unearthed by the 9–11 Truth Movement, the media led the fight to marginalize and ridicule the movement and bury the truth.
That is why, in 2003, when the US attacked and bombed Baghdad, all the networks, ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN had their military experts appear on the news programs to explain how the US was using “smart bombs” that only hit the areas targeted and avoided mass civilian deaths. I was in Florida at the time and sat in front of the TV watching these fiery explosions reigning down on a well populated city wondering how smart were these “smart bombs.” I decided to surf from one channel to another looking for any alternative reporting and was unsuccessful. I remembered that humorous comment, “Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?” Never did anyone appear or get interviewed who dissented from the official narrative.
That is why the media refused to question the bombing of Libya and, instead, gave support to the ouster of Muammar Gaddafi, a so-called “tyrant.”
That is why the media has been in the forefront of attacking and demonizing Bashar al Assad, the president of Syria, accusing him of using sarin, a poisonous gas, against the Syrian people, or bombing schools and hospitals, or torturing people.
It is interesting to note that the media has spotlighted the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a one man operation based in an apartment in London, as its source of information about Syria. Yet, two journalists, Eva Bartlett and Vanessa Beesley, who have travelled to Syria on numerous occasions, including Aleppo, have not been asked by the MSM to share their knowledge and perceptions. Not surprisingly, both Eva and Vanessa have identified the anti-Assad news as nothing more than fabrications. Not even the alternative media, Democracy Now or NPR has used either journalist as a resource.
While we have been inundated with anti-Assad propaganda, the media has portrayed the White Helmets as humanitarian heroes and saviors. Who really are these White Helmets? Being part of the White Helmets appears to be a part/time job. The same people have often been identified as participating with the so-called rebels in terrorizing the Syrian people when they are not saving children.
One must ask, why are the US and UK each contributing $20 million annually to this organization? Because, they have been instrumental in portraying the Syrian Army as ruthless murderers of women and children. There have been several videos distributed which show members of the White Helmets rescuing injured children. It is heart wrenching but effective propaganda. Unfortunately, it has been noted that the same children appear at times in more than one video.
Netflix has sponsored a documentary on the White Helmets which, unfortunately, won an Academy Award, despite the revelation that videos of their “heroic” efforts are staged events.
The reality is, those who are labeled pundits and appear on TV or are quoted in print are nothing more than corporate and government shills who are there to follow the official narrative.
To find the truth in the reporting of any news event is difficult. The corporate media have an agenda to promote the will of the ruling class and, therefore, we must be aware of certain variables. What is reported alone is not enough. We must look at how it is reported, what key words are used in the reporting (example: when describing a military battle, one could describe it as people being killed as opposed to people being slaughtered . . . is the reporter using inflammatory words such as labeling the leader of a country a tyrant or dictator), and what is left out and not reported.
The government, along with the cooperation of the corporate media has assumed and promoted an anti-Russia agenda. Putin is portrayed as an ex-head of the Soviet KGB (he was never head of the KGB) and, therefore, a tyrant, a man who is ruthless and not to be trusted, a man who is a clear and present threat to the security of the US.
REALLY?
This is a man who has resisted responding militarily to continuous US provocations and who is mainly responsible, so far, for the avoidance of WW3. In fact, he has tendered the invitation to the US to join with Russia to attack and destroy the terrorists (ISIS, al-Nusra, al Qaeda, etc.). The US has refused and instead, along with its NATO allies, placed thousands of troops and military hardware along Russia’s border and battleships in the Black Sea.
Stephen Cohen is an American scholar and professor emeritus of Russian studies at Princeton University and New York University. His life’s work has been in Soviet and Russian studies. Because his analysis of US policies toward Russia challenge the narrative shared by the media, Professor Cohen has not been asked to share his perspectives with the public on TV or in print.
These are only a small handful of the biased news that you and I are allowed to hear and see. Forget about objective reporting . . . it does not exist. We must not continue to accept the reporting at face value. We must question everything we hear or see. The US is an imperialist power looking to dominate the globe. Its perspective and what it allows the media to report is far from objective.
Dave Alpert has masters degrees in social work, educational administration, and psychology. He spent his career working with troubled inner city adolescents.