Cincinnati, Ohio (TFC) – The March Against the Mainstream Media took place in cities all over the United States this weekend to protest the sorry state of the us propaganda machine. In Cincinnati, the event consisted of a static protest near the college and a march around the strip of bars that sits outside every college campus. It’s Spring Break 2015 in Ohio and the alcohol was flowing.
Most of those that witnessed the demonstration had one thing to say:
“I know the media is lying to us.”
Six large corporations own 90% of the media outlets in the country. Access to independent media is at an all time low. With no competition, outlets are free to push the agendas of the advertisers and political handlers. It’s easy to say and know that the media is lying. It’s harder to give an example.
Let’s take the last hot-button topic: Indiana’s “Religious Freedom” law. Just so there is no confusion or claims of hidden bias, I was openly against the law. The law has been “corrected” and tempers have died down so rational discussion can now openly take place.
Conservative outlets painted it as either a defense of Christian values or a property rights issue to protect private business owners.
As I discussed at length in an article, discrimination is not and never has been a part of any Bible-based Christian doctrine. Christianity, if practiced in accordance with the Bible, is one of the most inclusive religions on the planet.
The media was actually able to convince people who style themselves as anarchists that gays were wrong for seeking special protection from the state by opposing the law. As is typical with propaganda, it’s a case of framing the issue in a way so that serious thought is required beyond the information provided for the viewer to realize they are being misled.
Who actually attempted to gain special status and protection from the state? Was it a homosexual lobby, or was it a Christian one?
The reality is that homosexuals were specifically targeted by a group seeking special protection from the state. The statute didn’t allow for a general right to refuse service. It only applied to those claiming religious grounds. If this was actually a fight over property rights or an attempt at establishing a freer market, it wouldn’t have been limited to those claiming religious grounds. It created a special class of people protected by the gun barrels of the government. Atheists didn’t have the right to refuse. Religious believers that wanted to refuse on grounds not based in doctrine were also unable to refuse service. The media was actually able to convince anarchists to support a new law that provided state protection to a special class of people. Generally speaking an anarchist should never support the creation of a new law, much less one that creates a special class of people. That’s how powerful the media is.
When this was pointed out, viewers responded by saying:
“It’s a good start.”
There are no training wheels for liberty. Much like a pregnancy, it either exists or it doesn’t. There never would have been a follow up law to provide atheists the right to refuse service to those that don’t share their beliefs. Anarchists and Libertarians jumped on the conservative band wagon because the issue was presented as a “free market” issue.
The real problem with the law was that it lacked definitions and that the law was so vague that it would have had to have been interpreted by judges. Those judges would have to make rulings on what exactly was acceptable doctrine. In essence, the media was able to trick those who believe in freedom the most into supporting a law that would have been used to give the government control over what is an acceptable religious and what is not.
So what is the solution to media propaganda?
Like most things, the solution to media propaganda is decentralization. The media has Americans believing there are “two sides to every story.” In issues of national and international importance, there are always many more sides than just pro and con. The media frames the issues this way to keep it simple for dumb viewers and to polarize Americans so they can easily be manipulated by the political parties.
If you were to ask 30 of your friends where they wanted to eat dinner, you would likely get dozens of answers. However the media has Americans believing that in issues that change the way of life for 300,000,000 people there are only two options.
Easy things you can do to combat media manipulation:
Stop looking for objectivity. It does not exist. Reading an article with hidden biases is far more dangerous than reading openly-opinionated adversarial journalism.
Look for context. If a subject comes up, such as the Indiana religious freedom law, and there is no explanation as to why the law came into being, there is a powerful special interest behind the move.
Look for independent outlets. Strengthening independent media weakens corporate dominance. Here’s a list of outlets supported by The Anti-Media and here’s a list supported by the Pontiac Tribune. (Yes, The Fifth Column is on both lists. That really isn’t too surprising though because I wrote one of them.)
Don’t take anything at face value. With any media outlets, including alternative outlets, continue to research beyond the story. The journalist may have missed something. With most alternative outlets, you can post additional informational and the outlet will give it due respect.
Become a force multiplier. Independent journalists lack the resources and staff that corporate talking heads have. You are our support staff. Your tips, leads, sources, and ideas make our jobs possible. We don’t have time to cover every story much less generate all of the leads on our own. We count on you more than you know.
Use social media. Sharing, retweeting, and liking obviously helps get a message out. Posting adversarial articles in the comments section of mainstream coverage is an amazingly effective tactic for breaking people out of the mainstream death grip.
Don’t get mad. Journalists aren’t perfect. Contrary to what we like to tell ourselves, journalists can be wrong. We might even have differing opinions than you. Good independent outlets allow their journalists to be independent without editorial interference. The outlet that angered you by insulting whatever closely held belief you have, will more than likely have another journalist defend it later. Differing opinions and debate are the only things that will help break the corporate media stranglehold on the population.
You know what the problem is. You know that your voice can help. The only question left is whether or not you are willing to take action.