Now this bias is not limited to the left. It is largely a product of left-wing bias when it comes to certain social issues such as Affirmative Action and “gay” rights. But the right also biases the news when it wants to shape fiscal issues to its benefit. Example, Rupert Murdoch and the China scandal a while back.
I first began my file on the Government-Media Complex several years ago. I noticed an alarming bias, and I knew this could sink the ship of truth. Surely other administrations have had their friends in high media places. Still, there were many voices and many views of dissent that found their way into the national media. But now we have a growing media blackout of some serious crimes and misdemeanors, all unsolved to the satisfaction of those with critical faculties of reason. . . .
Each and every issue as reflected in the old-line news media—that is, the TV network news and the establishment newspapers and magazines—is a parallel reflection of official Clinton policy.
Listen to this carefully if you will. Tell me if you agree. Hoover Institution historian Robert Conquest said that in the former Soviet Union the press was totally under the control of the state. All editors were members of the Communist Party. Here in the United States of America a frighteningly imbalanced Washington press corps exists. Eighty-nine percent of these apparatchiks of the DNC voted for Bill Clinton in 1992!
Let me repeat, “The media is needed by the public to be and remain a thorn in the side of the government in order to keep the government relatively honest. But when the media instead becomes a thorn in the side of the skeptical private citizen, the media then becomes an arm of the government.”
Is this not worrisome? “Beware the Government-Media Complex.”
And today, the Government-Media Complex is more dangerous and more powerful than ever. In a moment, I will show you irrefutable evidence that the so-called mainstream media wouldn’t dare report.
But first let’s take a tour of the Government-Media Complex.
The New Pravda
When I was kid in the 1950s, journalists and government officials didn’t go to school together, marry each other, or go into business together. Journalism was a working-class trade and there were few Ivy League graduates in the newsroom. For that matter, most journalists didn’t even go to college, much less major in journalism. Journalists started out on a beat. They covered city hall or the police department and worked their way up from there, with hard-nosed editors questioning everything that they wrote.
That experience, which often lasted for decades before they were promoted, shaped them into a skeptical jury of ordinary citizens with extraordinary access and information. By the time they made it to Washington, they weren’t impressed by senators, ambassadors, or even presidents. They had covered politicians for decades and knew the breed well. They were suspicious, even hostile. They knew that they were the “people’s intelligence service” and had to be tough to earn their readers’ trust. And they enjoyed catching the politicians trying to pull a fast one.
Today, journalists go to Ivy League schools and start in Washington, D.C. They attend the same schools they send their kids to. More to the point, they attend the same schools as government officials. They socialize with politicians and brag about them coming to dinner parties at their homes.
Let me give you an example of something you’ve never heard in the mainstream media: Tammy Haddad. She’s had a varied career as a producer at CNN, Fox News, NBC, CBS, and MSNBC. She’s the head of Haddad Media, a company that develops Internet and event programming. She’s also the former executive producer of Chris Matthew’s MSNBC show.1 Haddad throws a garden party every year, right before the White House Correspondents Association Dinner, and she eagerly tweets the arrival of every politician to her front yard.
The Correspondents Association Dinner itself is such a love-in between the president and the press that Obama joked at the 2009 dinner, “All of you voted for me.”2 He won huge applause for that line because the nearly 2,000 members of the working press in the room knew it to be true. Surveys repeatedly show that some 91 percent of the broadcast and print media vote for Democrats.3
And the press now marries government officials. Consider the case of NBC on-air reporter Andrea Mitchell, who in 1997 married then-chairman of the United States Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan. Or the case of President Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice. She is married to an ABC News executive. ABC’s Christiane Amanpour is married to a former Bill Clinton State Department spokesman.
Other journalists treat the wall between the press and the people they cover as a revolving door. Chris Matthews was a top assistant to House Speaker Tip O’Neill. After leaving that job, he wrote a book and became a bureau chief for the San Francisco Chronicle, penning a weekly column for that paper. Next, he got his own television show, called Hardball.4
And he’s far from the only one going through the revolving door between government and media. Dana Perino, a former Bush White House spokeswoman, now anchors a show on Fox News Channel called The Five. Bill Clinton’s former ambassador to Morocco, Marc Ginsberg, is now a columnist for the Huffington Post and a producer of Arabic-language television.5 Tony Blankley, a former spokesman for House Speaker Newt Gingrich, is now a syndicated columnist and Fox News talking head.6 Mary Matalin, previously the Republican Party spokeswoman, is now heading a division of Simon & Schuster, the book publishing outfit.7 Her husband, James Carville, a key Clinton campaign operative in the 1990s, writes a newspaper column and regularly appears on cable news programs.8
And so on.
If you’ve wondered why you hear the same thing from every news outlet in the country, it’s because “big media” has such a streak of ideological conformity. It is the same people pushing the same agenda.
It’s why you hear all about global warming, but never about the “climate-gate” scandal.
It’s why you hear all about the need for gun control, but never about the government’s botched “Fast and Furious” operation to sell guns to murderous Mexican cartels.
It’s why you hear all about the benefits of diversity, but never learn about the crimes committed by illegals.
It’s why the media defend the big budgets of the federal and state governments but never mention the fact that the average federal worker ($123,000 annual salary) earns more than twice as much as the average citizen (at $52,000 per year, the median U.S. household income).9
It’s why you hear all about the poor, but never about welfare cheats or “homeless” criminals.
That’s why you hear all about soldiers and CIA agents allegedly violating some terrorist’s civil rights, but never about the brave soldiers or intrepid CIA men who save lives.
The Government-Media Complex is just one big happy family, with journalists marrying or going into business with government officials or becoming government officials themselves. Media and government are now one interchangeable class and, like all aristocracies, they seek power by taking away your rights.
Here’s how they do it.
The Soros-Murdoch Media War
There is a colossal battle going on right now between two of the most powerful media figures on this planet: Rupert Murdoch and George Soros.
Here’s what you need to know about Soros: He owns Barack Obama lock, stock, and barrel. Barack Obama is George Soros’s factotum—it’s not the other way around—and Soros is using Obama and the entire U.S. press to fight Murdoch and to bring him down. And right now, Soros is winning.
Soros’s attack on Murdoch began shortly after Fox News’s Glenn Beck ran a series of attacks on Soros. You might remember that early in 2011 there was a constant stream of anti-Soros material on Fox. The network emphasized the idea that the tax-exempt status of one Soros organization, Media Matters—which is dedicated to pushing Soros’s fascistic, left-wing, anti-America agenda—should be canceled.
I know what I’m talking about. Media Matters staged a five-year attack on me. I think they’re behind getting me banned in Bri
tain. Media Matters took extracts from my radio broadcasts, made over many years, and edited them in order to slander me. They put me through a year of legal hell defending myself against their lies. And now the British government has affirmed that I’m still banned in Britain. Why? Because they say I’m unable to prove that I “did not commit . . . unacceptable behavior.” By those standards, we could accuse anyone of anything we wanted to, then convict him because he couldn’t prove he didn’t do it. It’s nothing less than another indictment of the false and slanderous attacks of leftist governments on those of us who are telling the truth about what’s happening as the world descends into chaos.
But to get back to the Soros-Fox conflict: In fact, it was Beck’s continual hammering of Soros and his connections to leftist causes that led to Media Matters getting Fox News to dismiss Glenn Beck. Beck’s show is no longer on the air at Fox.
There’s no question that Media Matters’ tax-exempt status should be revoked. Media Matters is an overtly political organization and has no business being a tax-exempt corporation. Shortly after this confrontation, Soros’s attack on Murdoch began in earnest, and it’s playing out in the ongoing battle between the two media Goliaths.
It looks to me like Soros is winning.
The one threat to the Government-Media Complex is the truth: the facts and evidence that don’t fit their official storyline. That’s what you find on radio shows and websites like mine. And sometimes, even Fox News Channel departs from the politically correct view of the news. Billionaire media mogul that he is, George Soros can’t stand the fact that Murdoch, another billionaire media mogul, sometimes stands in his way and gives the American people news that threatens Soros’s aims.
Before he was taken off the air, Fox’s Glenn Beck—like me—was always talking about Soros’s complex plans to subvert our democracy. That made Soros hate Fox News even more.
When Fox News went after MediaMatters.org—the website funded by Soros’ millions—Soros’s response, as he told Poltico.com, was to donate $1 million to Media Matters “to hold Fox News accountable for the false and misleading information they so often broadcast.”10
And just so you don’t mistake what Soros’s views are, here are the words of the man himself, speaking on CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS: “Fox News makes a habit—it has imported the methods of George Orwell, you know, newspeak, where you can tell the people falsehoods and deceive them. . . . They succeeded in—in Germany, where the Weimar Republic collapsed and you had a Nazi regime follow it. So this is a very, very dangerous way of deceiving people. And I would like people to be aware that they are being deceived.”11
Get it?
He thinks Fox News is trying to bring a Nazi-like regime to power in America.
Sounds to me like a case of projection—he is imputing to Fox what he intends to do himself: bring about a radical and tyrannical change in America’s government.
Soros is a left-wing Murdoch. He helps fund National Public Radio and has ties to at least 30 other major media organizations charged with policing media bias throughout the industry.12
In other words, Soros is trying to gain control over the media watchdogs.
While this was going on, Media Matters’ head David Brock declared “war”—yes, that’s the word Media Matters used—on Fox News, telling Politico.com that he was launching an all-out campaign of “guerilla war and sabotage” against Fox. He added that he was using a “strategy of containment” to keep Fox scoops from being picked up by other networks or newspapers. He announced that he has a paid staff of 90 people arrayed in a war room near the White House.13
Why Fox? Brock says it is the “nerve center” of the conservative movement.
This is the same strategy that Soros uses in Europe—where they call it cordon sanitaire—to keep popular political parties that question Muslim immigration policies or the welfare state from forming a parliamentary majority and enacting policies supported by the majority of voters. It has successfully prevented the Vlaams Belang, the largest political party in Belgium, from ever forming a government and electing a prime minister, simply because all of the other political parties refuse to go into coalition with it, claiming it has a “racist” anti-Muslim platform.14
In reality, Soros’s minions want to keep the other center-right parties from campaigning or governing on the immigration and cultural issues. The same Soros-inspired cordon sanitaire is in effect in France, Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and Sweden. It’s one of the ways Soros helps keep the illegal migration of Muslims into Europe flowing: by threatening to defame any party or person that would shut it off.
Back to Media Matters and its “war” on Fox News and Soros’s attempts to implement a U.S. version of the cordon sanitaire on the news organization.
Whatever you think of Fox, America is better off with more news channels presenting different points of view. That is why the Founders gave us the First Amendment’s free speech rights. But Media Matters wants to isolate Fox and then destroy it. That means your right to read, hear, and see alternative points of view will be taken away. You will be left with only the Government-Media Complex version of the news.
In other words, you will be left in the dark.
Fox fought back. Media Matters is a tax-exempt 501(c)3 “educational” organization. In order to qualify for tax-exempt status, the organization has to prove it has a valid educational purpose. Destroying the nation’s most popular cable news network is not exactly like teaching little kids about American history. It is pure political partisanship, and that is not supposed to be tax-exempt. So Fox’s news anchors and reporters began producing stories that questioned whether Media Matters should enjoy its special status with the IRS.15
Why do Soros and the establishment media hate Murdoch so much?
What really bothers Soros and the media is that Murdoch offers a profitable alternative that beats them in ratings and readers. Murdoch broke the unions in the United Kingdom and weakened them in the United States, and his papers’ continuous stream of scoops makes the left look lazy and clueless.
Soros has already destroyed Conrad Black’s media empire—Black at one time owned the Telegraph newspaper group, the Chicago Sun-Times, and Canada’s National Post, among other outlets16—the only other conservative alternative to the left’s media monopoly. He wants to do the same thing to Murdoch, so that the public will be denied its right to an alternative free press. He only cares about the First Amendment when it helps him. Soros and his leftist allies really want a one-party press, like Syria or Iran.
When Media Matters was attacked by Fox, Soros fought back. Within weeks of Fox’s coverage of Media Matters, the British press discovered a “scandal.” Murdoch-owned newspapers in the United Kingdom were paying private detectives and listening in on phone calls to get personal information about government officials, professional athletes, movie stars, and even the royal family.17 These are not exactly military secrets, but it made the establishment very angry. They don’t like to be embarrassed. But these gossipy items thrilled readers, who bought Murdoch’s newspapers to read the latest. So, all around the world, newspapers are dying while in Britain Murdoch found a way to make them thrive.
Of course, the rival media barons, stoked by Soros’s front groups, said this was a scandal. And it was. The British detectives appeared to have violated British laws and violated the privacy of hundreds of people over the years.
But the mainstream media in the United States didn’t tell you the full story. Remember, they compete with Murdoch, too, and they love Soros as much as they loathe Murdoch.
Again, I’m not a fan of Rupert Murdoch, but I’m here to tell you the truth, no matter who it helps or hurts.
Here are some things that the Government-Media Complex doesn’t want you to know.
There is a real public benefit to at least some of what Murdoch’s papers did. Murdoch’s News of the World newspaper, while Rebekah Brooks was its editor, violated the privacy rights of convicted pedophiles to
reveal to the public that dozens and dozens of them were out of prison and living in neighborhoods with young families with small children.18
If you had a child and lived next door to a pedophile, do you think the government should protect his privacy rights over the safety of your children?
Neither did most Britons.
When they learned about the dangerous criminal living in their midst, they were angry and demanded changes. That uproar led to the passage of “Sarah’s Law” in the British parliament, giving the public right to access government databases to learn the home addresses of convicted pedophiles. Soros’s minions screamed that the pedophiles’ privacy rights were violated and that they had paid their debt to society, but it didn’t matter. Most of these child-molesting felons were forced to move away from neighborhoods packed with the very children that they once preyed upon.
Another thing that the Government-Media Complex won’t tell you is that most British papers routinely hire detectives and trample on privacy rights. What Murdoch’s papers did was routine in Britain. Indeed, I found a 2006 report called “What price privacy now?”—developed for Parliament by the United Kingdom’s Information Commissioner’s Office—that showed that some 305 journalists from 21 different publications committed some 11,000 violations of the Data Protection Act, Britain’s privacy law. The vast majority of violations were by non-Murdoch publications and the number-one offender was a rival of Murdoch. After a lengthy investigation that year, the Crown Prosecution Service declined to press any charges against any journalists.19
Hacking into the cell phones of Britain’s royal family in 2007 is a different story. That year, the royal correspondent for a Murdoch-owned paper and a private detective were briefly jailed for listening in on the royal family’s voice-mail messages. The story uncovered by the crime was hugely important in Britain though. It revealed that the heir to the throne, Prince William, had injured his knee and that his ability to walk again was in doubt. The royal family hadn’t told the public and the subjects were eager to learn about the health of their future king.20
Trickle Down Tyranny Page 6
