Who do you trust the media? How do you know what you see or hear on TV, the radio or the Internet is true? It’s getting more difficult as technology becomes better at delivering messages across the Internet.
Here’s what I’ve learned, and the story of the standoff in Oregon is a perfect case in point.
I can no longer skim a news article and believe it to be true.
I can no longer view Fox or MSNBC and know I’m getting the whole truth. There are reasons for this skepticism.
First, the news outlet is a business. It has to pay the bills and it wants to make a profit. We must look at who’s buying the time and paying the bill. Follow the money.
Second, media owners typically have a passion for getting a particular message out. Their religious beliefs – or lack of – and their political philosophy have an influence over the content they want to produce.
Third, a mundane story encourages remote-holding couch-potato channel surfing. A hot story causes the remote to stop and stick. A sticky remote that captures a couch potato makes money.
I have learned that if I want to comment on a news story or event or policy, I need to do the work, put in the research time, and most of all, find out WHO’S FUNDING it, what they believe and what their political philosophy is. I don’t get much sleep. Evidence: It’s now approximately 3 AM and I’m researching and writing.
Such is the case with the current situation in Harney County, Oregon. When I first learned of their occupation of the Wildlife Refuge, I was so fascinated by it, I spent an entire day and through the night until 4:30 AM searching every possible media report. As I type the key words and do the searches, I look at the source of information.
I’m already aware that the major media outlets owned by people whose political – and religious – philosophies are counter to mine, namely they are socialist, anti-family, anti-religion, multinational, environmental and globalist organizations whose goal it is to usurp sovereign authority from the US Constitution and our unalienable rights protected therein in exchange for a centralized, tyrannical model. Strike one against them. They rarely get it right.
I’m also aware that even the more conservative media outlets have ownership at the top that is also counter to my religious and political philosophy as enumerated. Strike two against them. They sometimes get it right. I’ve watched them as stories break. One outlet will take the lead, the story goes out on the wire, and then all others begin parroting that message. Very little original source research takes place in these fast-moving newsrooms.
I have firsthand experience with this. In 2002, a news release I sent out over the wire was picked up by numerous outlets across the nation. One major media outlet blasted it out first, but got some details wrong, and all the rest simply copied and pasted. No one called me to get the facts straight, except for some radio show hosts and Fox News, who interviewed me in studio.
I’ve also been at enough events where the media has reported, and when I return home and read the story, I sometimes hardly recognize the event I just attended. If it’s a conservative event, with a liberal outlet reporting, it’s not uncommon to read, “A few hundred people attended…” when it was actually – by my own count – a thousand or more. Or to attend a liberal event and read, “A few thousand people attended…” when it was only a few hundred.
As far back ask 1977, I attended a UN event and noticed the feminist women in charge and creating the narrative were behind the scenes parading with hammer and sickle and Marx signage. Those photos never made it to the newspapers. It would have been unbelievable back then. Not so much today, however.
When I was finished with my research on the ranchers occupying the Oregon refuge, I had enough information to know that the liberal media was once again not only mischaracterizing the events, but also, as they are prone to do, grossly exaggerating, and also encouraging confrontation. I believe they actually WANT altercations. It makes more provocative news and provocative news makes money.
With this story, it was fascinating. The Washington Post was among the first reporting. Their facts were so flawed and biased, they were lying and deliberately mis-charactering the events and the people. That story led other organizations to follow suit. The blind was leading the blind, but the progressive media especially doesn’t care. If it’s an attack on Liberty, it’s open range.
The conservative outlets that should have been at least politically on the ranchers’ side were creating distance from what the liberal media had already branded as a bunch of nutcases and wacky anti-government militia men. The “they’re dangerous” hoopla made them the hot potato.
Glenn Beck, Alex Jones, Fox – not only backed off, they also joined in echoing the false labels. Some of Utah’s best land rights warriors in the state legislature also distanced themselves and heavily criticized them for setting back the advances in the movement. Rather than join them and provide supports, they stayed away and denouncing these protestors.
That might sound strange, if they were sincerely passionate. But then, I recognized a pattern.
First: The most vociferous critics were supporting one form or another of a constitutional convention. To have a group of citizens use a constitutional measure called “nullification” effectively would make moot and irrelevant their entire campaign and the major source of income for their causes.
Second: Conservatives do this to themselves. Many are mild-mannered folk. They have taught to be “reverent” in church and not to make waves. So when someone does something that pushes the envelope, they criticize – “That’s not who we are!” or “That’s not how we do it!”
Third: And of course, may I mention ego? Our elected officials for the most part share one common character trait: arrogance. “The arrogance of officialdom” Cicero called it. Legislators can kill a good cause for want of their name to be on it.
Right out of the gate, when the ranchers entered the refuge, these critics were howling and whining about how these ranchers were going to mess it up.
By Tuesday, I was in contact with people on the ground in Oregon to confirm my suspicions of the lies the media were publishing. I was ready to fire back on the air. And we did. We ran eye witness interviews, and we are continuing to do so.
So here’s a perfect example of how you know who’s who and who to trust. I did some quick research on the group that called for the arrest of Cliven Bundy in Nevada. Here’s the news report, followed by my expose of just who this group really is calling for this arrest. Perhaps you won’t be surprised.
Check out the board members of the “Battle Born Progress” group here.
Spoiler alert: These radical LIBERAL extremists, include a representative of Planned Parenthood abortion rights (who regards the preservation of animals higher than humans), a socialist Democrat operative who supports the land grabs of socialist Sen. Harry Reid, a socialist community organizer defending union bosses, a social justice organizer who helped Barack Obama get elected, and a former state senator that championed gun control and environmental causes.
Honestly, folks, if the people don’t know who they’re listening to on their TV’s, they deserve the Liberty they are losing. They have been so dumbed down by our pathetic education system, they don’t even know what Liberty is anymore.
We hope you will support our new media campaign on The Liberty Lineup Radio Show. AM 630, SLC, www.k-talk.com, 10-Noon Mountain time, M-F. To donate to help us out, please click on the donate link above.
We will do our best to give you the most accurate news we can find. If ever we get it wrong, please let us know.
And finally, please pray for the Bundy’s, Finicum’s and the Hammond’s and others who have joined them to sort through years of this mess.
PS – I thought it might be of interest to you to hear from someone who has gone to Oregon four times since January 2nd. He has a perspective worth reading: