Top German Journalist Admits Mainstream Media Is Completely Fake: "We All Lie For The CIA"

originally posted by: TDawg61
So..the C.I.A manages to dictate to every news sourse on the planet what to present to the entire world?Id ask exactly how that might be accomplished but remebered here at the ats socialist haven any leftist fantasy is a.o.k.

My guess is that the CIA has an anonymous presence at various news organizations, and his job is only to make sure that what stories are published are simply favorable to the agenda advanced by the agency. He would be more of a censor than an actual writer.

a reply to: 727Sky


Yeah, right. So they get paid to do the newsluts? Without paycheck or any further evidence, I guess? Zerohedge in full shallow mode again, sad story.
We're talking cloak & daggers here, not pay to win.

By and large, Britain does not have a free press. Our media is not run by the government, and nor does it engage in widespread censorship. Instead, the media is run by a tiny group of politically motivated moguls, themselves in league with other private interests through advertising or personal networks. Journalists from non-privileged backgrounds are filtered out through unpaid internships and expensive post-graduate qualifications, ensuring the media is a closed shop for the well-to-do. According to a report published by the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission last August, over half of the top 100 media professionals are privately educated. News coverage all too often reflects the priorities, concerns and prejudices of this tiny sliver of the British population. Rather than being a means to hold the powerful to account and fairly report issues, the media is the ultimate political lobbyist for our elite.

Peter Oborne’s resignation shows that the media shouldn’t just serve the rich

Well, well, well. Now that's a nice cloak, innit? And in case installing your agenda throughout the loudest media-outlets isn't enough, you could always kill the messenger and cut loose ends. Remember remember Gary Webb! No money-trail and just another conspiracy theory in the internetz, that should work.
Zero hedge necessary.

After absorbing the information from the link of the OP, there were many new ideas for me but I don't pay that much attention to the MSM... I did like the statement that Dr. Ulfkotte made about new stories not actually being based on journalism and just coming from higher up such as from the CIA. The TED talk on astroturfing was a new term that does illustrate a phenomenon that I have seen happen on the internet and in real life so I will keep the hallmarks mentioned by Sharyl Attkisson in consideration when I get that feeling again of a hidden agenda in a grassroots movement. I have also never heard of Amber Lyon before but she sounded trustworthy and now have the CNN-Georgia, Kazakhstan, and Lebanon connections in my documentation so will look into that further.

Not really sure about the source hedgezero but they appeared to be giving out good information and linked to the website Collective Evolution which I also have as a bookmark. The video with Amber Lyon also mentioned the website iRevolution which had no obvious connection so not sure on their policy of supporting real journalism and if they supported Amber Lyon's story on Bahrain. Was iRevolution the group that supported her documentary on Bahrain?

originally posted by: DupontDeux
a reply to: 727Sky

I need:

1)
Proof

2)
To know what qualifies that German journalist to speak on behalf of the rest of the world's journalist.

Lol proof. Turn on the TV, perhaps? Any schmuck rubbing two brain cells together can figure it out right off the bat.

a reply to: Salander

according to this video you are pretty much correct:youtu.be... Basically the video says the stories are censored either by the US government or a corporate sponsor.

youtu.be...

a reply to: DupontDeux"Among the executives who lent their cooperation to the Agency were Williarn Paley of the Columbia Broadcasting System, Henry Luce of Tirne Inc., Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times, Barry Bingham Sr. of the LouisviIle Courier‑Journal, and James Copley of the Copley News Service. Other organizations which cooperated with the CIA include the American Broadcasting Company, the National Broadcasting Company, the Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps‑Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, the Miami Herald and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald‑Tribune.

By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc..."
CIA Media

a reply to: 727Sky

Really a source known to be the propaganda kings of media...RT, and a movie is what your using as proof of this happening?

You do know that Ron Burgundy is not a real person so anything that uses him as proof of anything is nothing but a joke...I really think youtube has retarded actual thinking of human beings, as it seems many want to believe anything so bad they fall for anything posted on there.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

RT is not near the propaganda source that any of the western "axis of propaganda" sources are. Yes, it presents the Russian perspective and could qualify as propaganda, but it is much more even-handed and neutral than any of the western sources.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

RT is not near the propaganda source that any of the western "axis of propaganda" sources are. Yes, it presents the Russian perspective and could qualify as propaganda, but it is much more even-handed and neutral than any of the western sources.

Except when it completely makes things up. Whatever happened to MH-17? Did they ever get that one sorted out?

a reply to: DJW001

Yes, MH17 is a perfect example of a very large propaganda effort by the "axis of propaganda". Like SB, the western media had it all figured out before the day was over. Why? Because the Pentagon had told them exactly what happened, unnamed sources, the standard for western media lap dogs.

They made all sorts of grand statements, and none of it was ever proved.

Contrast that with RT who reported the story, but also pointed out truthfully that Russia had turned over all its radar and satellite data within days of the accident. The Russian manufacturer of the BUK missile even conducted and recorded an experiment which demonstrated that only early model BUK could have done that, and only Ukraine had the older BUK.

No matter the BUK, the presence of climbing Ukrainian war planes explained the big picture.

It's really become quite comical how little credibility western media has these days. Like US politicians, you can tell when they are lying because their lips are moving. LOL

For everybody wondering HOW the media gets influenced:

Decades ago journalists had to say what they broadcast or write and they had standards and time to do research.

Nowadays it's a simple business. It s a matter of making money. Clickrates and views is the goal (with the related ad revenues).
This means every news outlet wants to be the first to broadcast a story. And we are not talking weeks or days any more, we litteraly talking minutes.

So there is no more time for research let alone money for paying investigative journalism.

Under these conditions it s the best, easiest and most cost effective way if they get a full story sent to them. They will produce without fact checking.

That's why you hear the same wording on every channel, like presented in this clip:



Before the RT-critics come in, here the same from Conan o Brian

a reply to: Salander

So what about the Spanish air traffic controller who never was? The Ukrainian mechanic who saw three jets take off, two return and overheard a pilot muttering about being in the wrong place at the wrong time? And all the eyewitnesses who swore they saw a ground support jet (or two or three) shoot the plane out of the sky? And how is that independent investigation by the Russian government going? It's almost as though the Russian media just wants to forget the whole affair.

a reply to: DJW001

So what about the US sat. images which never showed up? The CIA analyst who saw a whole bunch of Ukrainian Army folks getting drunk next to their Buk?

Remember that certain clip depicting this Ukrainian rebel walking through the debris? You know... the one in which his prayers and respect for the victims was actually cut from the footage to fit a certain agenda.

Only few News outlets told the whole story, sad story. Independent investigation? Another sad story indeed, there never was any. However, blaim the Russians in 10... 9... 8...

I'd say the CIA and other agencies that pass the news along are just the tools the politicians use to lie to the people.

So I'd say in actually the journalist and anchors lie for the politicians.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Salander

So what about the Spanish air traffic controller who never was? The Ukrainian mechanic who saw three jets take off, two return and overheard a pilot muttering about being in the wrong place at the wrong time? And all the eyewitnesses who swore they saw a ground support jet (or two or three) shoot the plane out of the sky? And how is that independent investigation by the Russian government going? It's almost as though the Russian media just wants to forget the whole affair.

It is the western media and governments that want to forget the whole affair. That's why the Dutch are dragging their feet on the "investigation", because they know the evidence does not support the Pentagon story.

The Russians turned over what satellite and radar records they had, within days or weeks.

The US has still NOT turned over anything at all that would corroborate its story, because it is JUST a story, made up to marginalize and vilify Russia.

Always watch the news with a grain of salt, never take anything literally.

Use your own perception and brains to come to a conclusion and its ok to just not really know for sure, the news is NOT the all-knowing source.

This advice is for everyone, but especially FOX NEWS watchers.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

One of the most respected film critics of her time, Pauline Kael had said that it was very common for Hollywood to pressure magazines and newspapers to write positive reviews for major films. She said that she knew many critics who were forced to write positive reviews, or lose their jobs. If filmmakers can determine the whole point of view of an article, one can imagine the influence of the government, CIA, globalist corporations...

The media is nothing but propaganda and brainwashing. People are being mind-controlled at every level, manipulated in the big reality show of American (and western European) culture. And it is highly psychological in nature: michaelcross.net...
The corporate - media oligopoly - government complex doesn't just throw something like an advertising idea out like in an old series such as "Bewitched." Most campaigns to get you to buy something (product or idea) are far more complex and involve weaponized psychology. And unless people are aware of it they will be led around like those old cartoons where the character smells something and suddenly floats in the air towards the source.