March and Demonstration on CNN ~ Let's Do This

A little organization and logistics including inviting coverage from all news outlets to include responsible alternative news organizations. Surely we need to be heard in a public setting with as much coverage as possible.

Dedicated Social Media Accounts, a list of their "Fake News" stories detailed to hand out and disperse to media and onlookers. Collusion quotes from the emails. List of sponsors to boycott etc. Maybe Ben Swann will join us as a spokesperson?

Yes, I realize CNN is not the only one, but they seem to have the most blood on their hands. Literal blood from inciting racial and other divisions amongst the populace.

It's the only thing I can think of right now that might do somewhat of an end-around run on the rampant propaganda being spewed.

Dumb idea? Fruitless? Pipe dream? I dunno, but short of giving Anderson Cooper a swirly and Wolf Blitzer a wedgie it seems to hold some promise for expressing the outrage many of us feel.

I'm in if the ideas gain some momentum.

Yes.

a reply to: The GUT

BEST thing to do:
If you watch CNN...watch something else.

More Proactive: Make a list CNN's sponsors and go on to their FB pages and websites, telling them you won't buy their product because they help finance CNN.

a reply to: The GUT

I dunno, but short of giving Anderson Cooper a swirly and Wolf Blitzer a wedgie it seems to hold some promise for expressing the outrage many of us feel.

Perhaps you are outraged because you're listening to your own brand of propaganda a bit too much.

It's funny how this fake news issue has evolved. It's discovered that the Right Wing was/still is being trolled by foreign websites that create fake news bits for click-bait revenue and the knee-jerk reaction was to label every media source they disagree with as fake news... in order to hide their embarrassment and obfuscate. Very immature reaction, truth being told.

CNN is not fake news. They are biased and factually incorrect at times, but they are not the equivalent of those websites/outlets whose's sole purpose was to make money from pushing complete lies.

frankly, until we define "fake," specifically, I don't think it's possible to judge whodunnit, what they done, or what should happen from there. There is what never happened; then, there is what happened but was an act; and finally, there is what happened but what was planned to happen......fake encompasses a lot of things, really.
regards and hope you are well, gut. Happy New Year.
tetra

originally posted by: introvert
Perhaps you are outraged because you're listening to your own brand of propaganda a bit too much.

I think I'm outraged because my background is "MSM" news and I see that real journalism/journalists have been pretty much excluded from the propaganda business. "Biased and factually incorrect" IS "fake news" to any journalist with integrity.

It's funny how this fake news issue has evolved. It's discovered that the Right Wing was/still is being trolled by foreign websites that create fake news bits for click-bait revenue and the knee-jerk reaction was to label every media source they disagree with as fake news... in order to hide their embarrassment and obfuscate. Very immature reaction, truth being told.

See statement above and don't forget the Left fake news websites. I do my research and have zero embarrassment. You seem kind of embarrassed about something, however, if your apologetics are any indication.

originally posted by: Black_Fox

Thanks! It's certainly not for sissies.

Just troll their YouTube channel by flagging it for supporting terrorism and fraud

a reply to: Ohanka

Thanks, O, I will add that to my list. Need more public exposure methinks though.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
BEST thing to do:
If you watch CNN...watch something else.

Unfortunately it's on a lot in the background around here. Having said that: It's also good practice, imo, to keep up with narratives as they can be very revealing and telegraph a lot. Catch 22.

More Proactive: Make a list CNN's sponsors and go on to their FB pages and websites, telling them you won't buy their product because they help finance CNN.

Agreed.

a reply to: tetra50
Happy New Year, tetra! Hope all is reasonably well your way!!

a reply to: introvert

Hey they and their ilk have distorted our peoples entire reality for generations now, but as long as they play like DINO's and pay a wee bit more lip service to liberal talking points (which they've all helped craft into the dicourse btw) then o-okie-dokie no worries from the liberal horde coming after them. They'll be able to count on them to go out online defending them when issues like this come up. Just more left/right politics, all of our focus group study results show that there wont be any real backlash, no worries. So and so on the ATS forums has our backs!

Actually, my little sarcastirant there just got me thinking, maybe this explains why where all of the media are controlled part of the same Corporatocracy system, how the majority are slanted one way with only Fox pointing the other way, I think it's safe to say that liberal types are far more prone to protesting and such so they need more pointing on that direction to placate (that and the logic becomes so backwards when you add it all up that they need to pump that message out 5 times as much for it to take and keep hold at a neat & tidy 50/50 rate across the populace).

a reply to: The GUT

I think I'm outraged because my background is "MSM" news and I see that real journalism/journalists have been pretty much excluded from the propaganda business.

Go on.

What exactly is your background, and what have you *personally* seen to bring you to this conclusion?

Serious question.

a reply to: Liquesence

Floor Director, Shooter, Editor, Producer duties for a network affiliate in one of the largest markets and top-rated news shows before I left in disgust at seeing well-developed and important stories "Killed" for political or corporate sponsorship reasons. It sickened me.

The few real journalists were bypassed for Anchor positions in favor of "Readers." Readers don't develop their own stories or fact-check nor do they care to. It's celebrity status they seek. Hope that answers your questions.

Hey Gut: I also think this should be recognized: that during Reagan's tenure as POTUS, "disinformation" was not only legal, but the preferred way to control the matter at hand, and was openly acknowledged as such.

“There is no central war room,” protested former CIA Director Bill Colby the first day Denton’s committee met. Colby wanted them to know that no single government, not even the Evil Empire, was directing the orchestra. But before the spymaster could finish his thought, Denton commenced a monologue about the contribution of the American press to the American defeat in Vietnam.

The audience murmured, the press corps gasped and committee counsel Joel Lisker fidgeted as the chairman said, “It was extremely disheartening to prisoners of war to hear Radio Moscow come out with a new line, to hear that new line rebroadcast two days later by Radio Hanoi, and three days later a brand new line articulated in precisely the same phrases by some members of the press or even some members of Congress.”

He meandered finally to his key concern — disinformation. ”It is not subverting a journalist. It is not the KGB getting to a journalist. It is the journalist responding to what he believes to be a noble purpose. There is something wrong, and he went after it. But I say we’ve got to be careful.”

and, as well worth pasting, I think:

Senator Denton was certainly careful enough about security for his hearings: hours before each session dogs scoured the room for bombs as a security force installed metal detectors at the entrances. Plainclothes cops stood guard during the testimony. He was also careful to select witnesses who reinforced his world view.

And to make sure the epidemic nature of terrorism was fully understood, he had his committee use a new definition of the word, developed by the CIA. Henceforth, terrorism would mean “the threat or use of violence for political symbolic effect that is aimed at achieving a psychological impact on target groups wider than its immediate victims.” Any insurrection anywhere could now be called terrorism.

There is a lot more on this topic, and the CIA's involvement in it, how it hinges to McCarthyism, etc....at the following links, as well:
(this is nothing new, folks)

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.That creepy quote above has been widely attributed to Former CIA Director William Casey.

Casey was the 13th CIA Director from 1981 until he left in January 1987. He died not long after of a brain tumor in May 1987. Dead men tell no tales, as they say.

LINK"

Thanks, Gut. Take care.

Another thing Reagan gave us was the Star War's satellite system, that was supposed to keep us all really, really safe. Hmmmm. Just wondering what else those satellites might be used for, and who and what they are keeping us "safe" from.....
tetra

a reply to: IAMTAT

That would only make a difference if you had a Neilson box.

originally posted by: The GUT
a reply to: Liquesence

Floor Director, Shooter, Editor, Producer duties for a network affiliate in one of the largest markets and top-rated news shows before I left in disgust at seeing well-developed and important stories "Killed" for political or corporate sponsorship reasons. It sickened me.

The few real journalists were bypassed for Anchor positions in favor of "Readers." Readers don't develop their own stories or fact-check nor do they care to. It's celebrity status they seek. Hope that answers your questions.

Morals above ego- you my friend, are a true American. The pay the sucks, and the job is hard- but honor is earned, never bought or given.

And there's this that figures into this long held, wholesale tactic of control of the dynamics here, as well:
Extreme Rendition: from this LINK

After the attacks against the United States of September 11, 2001, the Central Intelligence Agency conspired with dozens of governments to build a secret extraordinary rendition and detention program that spanned the globe. Extraordinary rendition is the transfer—without legal process—of a detainee to the custody of a foreign government for purposes of detention and interrogation.

The program was intended to protect America. But, as described in the Open Society Justice Initiative’s new report, it stripped people of their most basic rights, facilitated gruesome forms of torture, at times captured the wrong people, and debased the United States’ human rights reputation world-wide.

To date, the United States and the vast majority of the other governments involved—more than 50 in all—have refused to acknowledge their participation, compensate the victims, or hold accountable those most responsible for the program and its abuses. Here are 20 additional facts from the new report that expose just how brutal and mistaken the program was:

Now, you may ask, what do fake news, disinformation and extreme rendition have to do with each other?
Quite a lot, most likely. It shows a prevalence and preferrence for the means justifying the ends, to the point, that the ends are no longer very clear, and those participating have lost their souls. Disinformation, read lying.....
Extreme rendition: a backhanded attempt to justify what's already been done, by villifying those taken into custody, regardless of their leanings.

Shall we move on to "narrative collection and study," now, to make it all crystal clear. DARPA has been involved with narrative collection for quite some time. Hmmmmm.....

Frankly, given all I've written and provided links to so far, and the history it evokes, it's difficult for me to believe that too many people got involved with journalism after, say the 70's, and didn't actually know something about what was going on.

Perhaps these lyrics put it in a harsher, sharper light: "the bubble headed bleach blonde, she comes on at five. She can tell you 'bout the plane crash with a gleam in her eye....."
regards,
tetra

a reply to: The GUT

I would have to respectfully disagree.

Is CNN biased?
Yes.
Is CNN bigoted?
yes.
Is CNN untrustworthy?
Yes.

But even biased, bigoted, untrustworthy media companies have a right to spew their garbage.

They are a for-profit industry though. So a boycott may prove to be more effective than a march.

Just my opinion.