While Occupy protesters continue to rant in select cities around the country, I'm wondering who is shadier: corporate Wall Street or corporate media?
Of course, there's no surprise or secret in saying that the mainstream media (MSM) are biased. Even when the CBS producer inadvertently sent an anti-Michele Bachmann email to one of her own staff members during last Saturday night's GOP debates, her campaign manager confessed it was another evidence of "what every conservative already knows -- the liberal mainstream media elites are manipulating the Republican debates by purposely suppressing our conservative message."
But have you noticed the particularly rapid acceleration of progressive MSM news reports in the last decade? Even for veteran news viewers, it is sometimes difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff. But how fair is that augmented bias for most trusting and unsuspecting Americans who turn to news for objectivity and comprehensive reporting?
Like many of you, my wife Gena and I are avid watchers of local, national and global news. Though we have our own preferences, we try to acquire a broad understanding of the big issues. But for quite some time, if we want to obtain the "complete news," we often have to go to multiple sources. And we feel for other hardworking people (including homemakers) who don't have the time to read and research like we do.
Gone are the days when broadcasters like Walter Cronkite attempted to convey objective and unbiased news. Propaganda seems to be at the heart of most national news. Passions, preferences and political persuasions permeate nearly all the news. Opine is ubiquitous and made obvious alone by many broadcasters' tone of voice or facial expressions.
As reported by NewsBusters (www.newsbusters.org), consider in a single day last week how the MSM angled their reporting in ways to manipulate public opinion and align it with their corporate media (supporters) bias, which ironically (or maybe not so) parallels White House prejudice.
-- "Networks Hit Cain With 117 Stories; ABC: Accusers Seek 'Safety in Numbers' From Cain."
-- "NBC Uses Penn State Scandal to Slam Catholic Church."
-- "NPR Asks Bill Clinton: Obama's Seen As Liberal, 'How'd That Happen'?"
-- "New York Times Spikes Fast & Furious Hearing in Print, Omits Eric Holder's Admission Completely."
-- "CNN to Perry: Convince Us Your Campaign Isn't Finished."
-- "New York Times Twice Omits Obama From Headline to Embarrassing Insults of Netanyahu."
-- "Newt Mocks (CNBC journalist's) 'Funny' Defense of the Liberal Media."
-- "CNN Spins Elections as Republican Setback."
-- "ABC and CBS Spike Ohioans Rejection of ObamaCare Mandate, NBC Sees Voter Call for 'Restraint."
The Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs even confessed that big business monies funneled via the MSM molds and directs the public's social and political viewpoints: "The summits of American business now control or powerfully influence the major media that create American public opinion."
The fact is that the primary networks -- ABC, CBS and NBC -- and their smaller cable channels are owned and financed by an interlocking network of corporate conglomerates and controlled by progressive and politically biased proprietors. Billionaire moguls like George Soros are using millions and millions of dollars not to ensure the second coming or election of President Obama but also to carry out a greater goal of chipping away the very foundations of our republic.
Just a few months ago, Media Research Center's Dan Gainor exposed globalist George Soros' financial connections to MSM and his funding of $52 million to influence and direct journalism in the national networks. Or do you think it's merely a coincidence that Soros has ties to over 30 major news organizations, including The New York Times, The Associated Press, The Washington Post, NBC and ABC, and yet no one hears anything from those networks about his behind-the-scenes finagling and financing?
It fascinates me that Occupiers hate the rich cats unless they help finance their cause or rally at their sides, like George Soros and Michael Moore.
It prompts one to wonder: Why haven't such power relations been reported by the MSM? And would they be so silent if the correlations were between such agents of control and the tea party?
For example, even with its liberal bent, Snopes.com just verified last Thursday that Vice President Joe Biden's attorney son, Robert Hunter Biden, was retained for years to "undertake some lobbying efforts on behalf of Brookfield Office Properties," which just happens to own Zuccotti Park in New York, where the Occupiers rally their national movement.
Snopes.com also verified that New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's live-in girlfriend, Diana L. Taylor, is on the board of directors of Brookfield Office Properties.
And just two months ago in September, the federal government's Department of Energy guaranteed a stimulus "loan" of $168.9 million to Brookfield Asset Management, which is a parent company of Brookfield Office Properties.
But I'm sure those local and Washington governmental associations with Occupy Wall Street are all just coincidental and inconsequential, right?
(In Part 2, during Thanksgiving week, I'll detail George Soros' most recent covert "investment" in the 2012 Obama presidential campaign and detail much further his collective goal and master plan with the MSM and the White House itself.)