It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Disturbing Reasons Not to Trust the News (From a Reporter)

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 10:45 AM
Hey all!
This isn't so much an example of disinfo, rather an interesting article about it that I'd like to share:
5 Disturbing Reasons Not to Trust the News (From a Reporter) - Cracked
Unlike many other Cracked articles, this one is thankfully zero on the foul language, so I figured it'd be okay to link it.

If you're too lazy to click through, the 5 reasons are basically:

  • PR Firm control of the news (putting out surveys funded by special interest groups and adding spin to the news). An interesting quote:

    I was at a conference just a couple of weeks ago, and one journalist asked a PR rep if he was allowed to write a story.

  • "Think Tanks" are pretty much just special interest groups with an agenda. Examples of some reports they put out:

    This happens in your country, too: In the United States, there's a man named Richard Berman. He's a former executive from Steak and Ale and currently does PR for much of the restaurant industry. He also owns the Employment Policies Institute, a think tank that, gee whiz, found evidence that raising the minimum wage was bad.

  • Fact-checking is literally non-existent. An example from a completely BS article by Newsweek:

    Politico reached out to Newsweek to ask "What gives?" and Newsweek replied with some classic buck-passing: "We, like other news organizations today, rely on our writers to submit factually accurate material ..."

  • University Press Offices spreading misleading sensationalised news. It gives examples of loads of "Real Minority Report crime solving computers" (that are just predictive algorithms that give percentages of possible criminals depending on their proximity to high-crime areas) and constant "Invisibility cloaks created!" stuff (that is either really just radar-invisible, or laughably ineffective).

  • Respected Journalists Are Often Shills. It gives examples of Malcolm Gladwell's work in the 90s for Tobacco companies, Church of Scientology running ads disguised as editorials and Tom Squitieri (not disclosing that he's on the payroll of a PR firm that rehabilitates the images of dictatorships) defending the government of Bahrain cracking down on protesters.

    His magnum opus was a warning that any decrease in American smoking habits might "put serious strain on the nation's Social Security and Medicare programs." Gladwell was such a hit with Big Tobacco in the '90s that Phillip Morris even included him on a list of media assets. This isn't to say that the man hasn't written some fine books, but if you're looking for someone who places pride in objectivity, Gladwell probably isn't your man.

So....I guess "Respected News Sources" was never a thing, ey?

posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 10:59 AM
reply to post by babloyi

There are still honest journalists around that believe in what they're doing, Glenn Greenwald is one of them. However, free reporting especially big stories is almost impossible these days, especially now that the evil empire can hit journalists with terrorism charges etc. (Check out what's going on in the U.K.).

posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 11:05 AM
There is no such thing as objective journalism if you are getting your news from the TV or newspaper. You have to look hard for it on the computer even.

Sux but that's the way it is.

posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 11:10 AM
reply to post by babloyi

In the same token you might want to take a look at the Global Research Article:


quite interresting!

posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 04:49 PM
reply to post by babloyi

Yeah, you really have to read between the lines these days.
Great thread.


posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 06:38 PM

free reporting especially big stories is almost impossible these days, especially now that the evil empire can hit journalists with terrorism charges etc. (Check out what's going on in the U.K.).

Hi Zcustosmorum
You got me interested, got any links?

posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 11:32 PM
reply to post by babloyi

Great post!- but it's got to the point where I don't know what to believe anymore...unless I can prove or disprove it for myself, and with most things that is almost impossible! *growl*

You can usually pick up on bias or agenda by the adjectives used... but that just doesn't get me far enough. Does anyone have any suggestions?

posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 12:12 AM
I agree wholeheartedly with all of these points, especially the first one concerning surveys. I never trust a survey put out by the MSM due to the bias lean in the agenda. I forbid partaking in any survey over the phone.

Eons ago (when I was a kid) I used to agree to take them until the first few questions it was revealed to be an obvious attempt to skew results. I swear it got so bad that it got to be along the lines of:

Caller: We're doing a survey, would you like to partake?

Me: Umm, OK...

Caller: Do you support (insert agenda) and white puppies or (insert opposing agenda) and eating babies?

LOL, Ok it wasn't that extreme, but these surveys basically steer you to answering in a particular way. The MSM just regurgitates the results like it's all a matter of fact.

I suppose many out there realize they've been had after taking the surveys and vow against taking any further, but I just wonder how many are left that still take them and how culpable they are to manipulation?

top topics


log in