Is Anderson Cooper More Proof of the Elitists Controlling the Media?

en.wikipedia.org...

I know some of you don't believe Wiki is a reliable source as it's capable of public editing, but I came across this after doing some research on the Elitist families that supposedly control the world.

This biography states that Cooper is of direct Vanderbilt lineage, was a graduate of Yale University, interned at the CIA for two summers, and even has no formal journalistic background despite his status on CNN.

A little fishy, I must say. Possibly deserves a better look from some people who are better at this type of research than I. I knew there was a reason I didn't trust this guy...or maybe I'm just paranoid and looking for signs where they don't exist. Either way, I still think it was worth a mention.

Well, it's not surprising. We all know Anderson Cooper's only there due to looks.

Anderson Cooper is a hack. It kills me everytime Ron Pauls name is mentioned he rolls his eye's. Just watch him and you will see.Our media is such BS that it has become nothing more than yellow journalism.By the way does anyone remeber what show Bill Oreilly did before he was on Fox? He was the talking head for "A Current Affair" a yellow journalism TV show that covered so called news stories that were similar to the National Enquirer.He's not even a real news man.I miss Walter Cronkite.

As far as Anderson Cooper not having any other real journalistic experience... I don't know. I certainly do not claim to be an expert on the man, but I know he has at least some other experience.

When I was in high school (1995-1999) Anderson Cooper was on the Channel 1 news program that came on in our classrooms every morning. Lisa Ling was also on this program, now that I think of it. Anyway, Anderson Cooper was always getting shipped out to cover dangerous places like Bosnia and was always getting shot at and stuff. I thought that was a little bit heavy for a news program that only high schoolers could watch.

Anyhow, AC left that show (I think in '98 or '99) to go work somewhere else, but I cannot remember where. Then a few years later, I see him on CNN. So I know that he has had other work as a journalist, and was pretty good at the time.

he was on both channel 1(an easy way to control the minds of young teens as it is shown in practically every school every morning. perhaps him going to dangerous places was designed for students to think that situations are different from what they are in reality, a la the misconstrued reports of the 1990 Balkan conflict and of Communist Russia in the 1930s) and was an anchor on ABC before going to CNN, but what I'm trying to say is that he never went to school for journalism...he went straight from an internship at the CIA to a journalism job that influences the minds of young people on a daily basis, and now is one of the most widely watched news anchors on American television right now.

As far as I am concerned, the answer is YES! This tool has hosted 'The Mole," for god's sake. How in hell can we now look at him as a serious media power. He is nothing more than the seed of an elitist family whose fortune was won by trampling the little man.

Well, let's hope so

OP, I think you mean 'members of the elite', not 'elitists'.

Look in any reputable dictionary to find the difference.

Let us sincerely hope that members of the elite run the media, and everything else of importance in the world.

Heaven help us if it were left to the rabble.

reply to post by Astyanax


Are you serious???
Rabble?

I take it you are highly educated and are financially independent.

And if you were that doesn't automatically give you 'common' sense.

reply to post by Clearskies

I am serious, though my use of the word you object to was intended deliberately to provoke. I despise shibboleths and cant, and enjoy jolting people out of their habitual tracks of thought.

The management and direction of important organizations and institutions is far too important to be left in the hands of ordinary, unskilled folk. Such work is best assigned to people who have the ability, knowledge, vision and temperament to do it.

I willingly acknowledge that it is at least equally important to safeguard the masses from the depredations of the elite. It is for this reason that we have democratic and legal institutions.

Having these institutions, we must endure the incompetence, the endless self-interested wrangling, the inefficiency, the incompetence and the corruption they engender. Such is the price we pay to protect the flock from elite predators.

We must endure the rule of the people for the people's sake, and I for one would not change it for any other form of government. For their sake, also, they and we must endure the law's dilatoriness and asininity.

But for the love of mankind, let it end there.

The travails and deficiencies of democratic politics and the law illustrate precisely why we need elites to run important things.

Driven by venial hucksters and cynical demagogues, the cult of the common man has metatstasized into a cancer devouring Western civilization. It is high time it was cut down to size -- restricted to its proper scope of function, which is, to repeat myself, politics and the law.

* * *

To answer your personal inquiries, I am reasonably well-educated and have had the good fortune to enjoy an unusually rich and diverse experience of life. I am far from financially independent, but I make a good living in the practice of my profession.

To the degree that I am a committed meritocrat, you're welcome to call me an elitist.

I dont know if he is...and really dont care. I like watching him, even if I dont agree with him on everything he says.

If you want to know more about him, go here:

www.imdb.com...

allthingsanderson.blogspot.com...

[edit on 1-1-2008 by greeneyedleo]

reply to post by Astyanax


so you're saying that leaving the power of high ranking organizations in the hands of the cultural elite(who are mostly born into this status) is a good thing? the problem with the issue of the "elite" is that a small group of interconnected people with unimaginable resources can control the world just due to their "wealth," which is a contrived illusion of ownership, anyhow.

now, don't get me wrong, i do believe that the think-tanks and political advisers should be comprised of well-educated and tolerant people, but the system by which they are appointed is inherently flawed by the fact that people of a corrupt nature can easily come to power under a veil of mass-disinformation

i suppose now is the best time to remember, due to the birth of the new year(in most civilizations), that everyday is a day capable of change. it is important to remember what we all mean to each other and what a group of like-minded people is capable of(which can be construed as either good or evil, but either way people are capable of amazing things by their nature, and this should never be forgotten)

Originally posted by Sacreligion
so you're saying that leaving the power of high ranking organizations in the hands of the cultural elite (who are mostly born into this status) is a good thing? the problem with the issue of the "elite" is that a small group of interconnected people with unimaginable resources can control the world just due to their "wealth," which is a contrived illusion of ownership, anyhow.

You haven't understood a word I wrote, have you?

Never mind. It doesn't matter.

no, i think YOU haven't understood a word I wrote...you're far too busy pretending you're on a pedestal above everyone else. what i'm trying to say is that even though we have democratic and constitutional processes in this country, there are corrupt people that can come into power because the nature of democracy is to give every man and woman a chance at participating. once these corrupt people get in, they can damage it from the inside regardless of the intentions of the founding fathers and the people who are still righteous in our system today.

don't assume that you're the only intelligent person around you, it tends to irritate most people.

Making it absolutely clear

Originally posted by Sacreligion
what i'm trying to say is that even though we have democratic and constitutional processes in this country, there are corrupt people that can come into power because the nature of democracy is to give every man and woman a chance at participating.

I repeat: you haven't understood a word I wrote.

You have now illustrated this twice, the second time by saying precisely the same as I, yet insisting that you are saying something different.

don't assume that you're the only intelligent person around you, it tends to irritate most people.

There are lots of intelligent people around me. A few of them even agree with me. But what in the world has that got to do with your not being able to understand what I write?

reply to post by Clearskies


It is true that one can be well educated and have no common sense, but one can be an ignoramus and have no common sense as well. I have no problem with the notion of well educated people having greater roles of responsibility than those of lesser learning though.

reply to post by Astyanax


I am afraid that I must disagree with you Astyanax -

Elite does not = Intelligent

Look it up smart guy!!!!

In fact, since the elite have everything given to them on a silver platter - including their Ivy League educations no matter how dumb they are (take Bush for example) - that it is quite reasonable to conclude that they have little or no concept as to how the majority of good intelligent people think and carry on their daily lives. The elite are also extremely weak minded because they never have to figure out anything for themselves - everything has just always come too easily.

This in turn makes them completely and preposterously unsuitable to be in positions of power that affect the masses with whom they utterly have nothing in common.





[edit on 2-1-2008 by CyberTruth]

reply to post by Astyanax


we are agreeing on the same points, but the only difference i have in opinion to yours is that you say our democratic and legal processes are in place to protect the common man from the malcontents of the "elite" whether or not they play in the democratic chess game(which is far too easy to find loopholes in), whereas i say they're becoming tools of these "elite" more and more everyday. therefore, the democratic systems we have in place have a weakness that neither the intelligent nor the "rabble" can rebuild.

don't get me wrong, i do agree with you, i just don't think you were stressing the problem of the few higher-ups controlling the majority enough...just more or less trying to defend our legal systems as ways to block the will of these few

I don't trust him. Female demographics are ga-ga for Cooper and this is well known. (The media appeals to sexual urges before reason at all times, I wonder why Glenn Beck is still popular?)

Cooper claims to be an emotional journalist etc. but he is swinging his journalistic bat for the same old team that runs everything. There are plenty of people like him who have been brought through life specifically to fulfill the tasks of others. I'm not sure if this was intentional on his part or if he was manipulated just like every other illuminati-spawn. Just because someone is the descendant of illuminati bloodlines or happens to be a tool for them, doesn't mean they have any clue what they're doing.

Originally posted by Sacreligion
he went straight from an internship at the CIA to a journalism job that influences the minds of young people on a daily basis, and now is one of the most widely watched news anchors on American television right now.

That says it all folks. Sometimes you can spell it out in black and white and you'll come to see that people are just going to go on about how pretty his eyes are etc. What can you do? People should realize by now that anyone involved in the business of disinformation will be a master by the time they are on national television.