Connect with us

Alternative News

The History Channel’s America’s War On Drugs: How Accurate Was This Docu-Series?

Published

on

For a long time, the truth about the war on drugs was only known by high-level politicians and “conspiracy theorists,” as many people couldn’t fathom the idea that the U.S. government, which claimed to be “against drugs,” was the very institution facilitating the drug trade. Nevertheless, over the years, more of the truth behind this propaganda campaign has come to light, allowing society to further understand the role the government plays in drug trafficking and how that relates to the prison system and other aspects of society.

advertisement - learn more

Now, America’s war on drugs is finally starting to be addressed in the mainstream. Last year, the Netflix documentary 13th was released, which discussed the link the war on drugs has to the prison system and the mass incarceration of black people (you can read about this here). Last week, the History Channel released a four-part docu-series titled America’s War on Drugs, highlighting some of the key elements of this propaganda campaign.

It’s truly inspiring to see mainstream media (MSM) finally address what was once considered a conspiracy theory. The term “conspiracy theory” was actually created by CIA “media assets,” as evidenced in the design laid out by “Document 1035-960: Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report,” a report issued in early 1967 to Agency bureaus all over the world. The government strategically introduced that term in order to cast doubt upon the public and influence the narrative.

So many people blatantly cast off different topics, deeming them “conspiracy theories” without ever actually looking into them. This is precisely why the CIA introduced this term in the first place, to encourage the public to cast doubt upon subjects that seemed too corrupt or disturbing to be true, favouring government programs like MK Ultra and propaganda campaigns like the war on terror and the war on drugs.

At this point, there are so many government documents, whistleblowers, and high-level politicians and government employees who have exposed the war on drugs that MSM can no longer deny it. The History Channel’s special about the war on drugs was surprisingly informative, especially for those who are unfamiliar with the topic, and ultimately seemed to be a step in the right direction toward increased transparency and disclosure. However, the docu-series (unsurprisingly) left some elements of the war on drugs out.

Background Information: What is the “War on Drugs”?

The war on drugs was a propaganda campaign that was created by U.S. President Richard Nixon in 1971. Disguised as a tactic to decrease drug usage across the nation, it was actually a strategy to incarcerate people by the masses, particularly black citizens. Even the elite were in on this plan, as some of the regulations that helped mass incarcerate people became known as the “Rockefeller drug laws.” Between 1970 and 1980, the U.S. prison population increased from around 300K to 500K.

advertisement - learn more

John Ehrlichman, Nixon’s former Domestic Policy Chief, explained:

The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.

Ronald Reagan’s era was no different, as police continued to arrest people by the masses for minor crimes, and the U.S. prison population grew to 700K in 1985 and reached approximately 1.2 million by 1990. With the rise of the Clintons, the situation worsened significantly. Bill implemented the “three strikes” rule, whereby an individual, once convicted of three crimes, would go to jail for life. At around the same time, Hillary Clinton coined the term “super-predators,” a racially-coded word for black criminals.

By 2000, the U.S. prison population had almost doubled, skyrocketing to over 2 million. By the time Bill Clinton left the Oval Office in 2001, the U.S. had the highest incarceration rate in the world. Despite the fact that Bill has apologized for playing a substantial role in mass incarcerating Americans, he recently exposed his true colours by defending his and his wife’s actions. This was briefly addressed in the docu-series, mentioning the effect that the three-strike rule had on hippies and black people, but ultimately did not go deep enough into it to truly understand the gravity of the situation.

The irony of all of this is that the U.S. government and many corporations were benefiting heavily from the rise in drug usage in the U.S. because they were the very institutions perpetuating this system. The CIA was actually one of the most prominent drug traffickers/dealers in the world, and they were ultimately to blame for the rise in heroin, LSD/acid, and many other drugs.

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was even created in part to increase drug trafficking. When the volume of trade increased, it got easier for cartels and the CIA to traffic drugs across the border because U.S. border control wasn’t able to perform searches as thoroughly as they could before. The History Channel actually did a wonderful job of explaining this and criminalizing the CIA, highlighting its role as one of the most powerful drug dealers in history.

The CIA is no stranger to money laundering, performing dangerous tests on unwilling patients, and even committing murder over drugs. Two of the drugs the CIA had focused on for decades were LSD, through a CIA-sanctioned program called MK Ultra, as well as heroin, which is created using opium. Though the History Channel did accurately portray parts of the CIA’s role in mass distributing both of these drugs, they left key elements of these programs out.

What Did the Docu-Series Leave Out Regarding LSD/MK Ultra?

The CIA designed LSD with a Swiss manufacturer as part of the MK Ultra program in hopes that they could force people to take it and convince them to do unspeakable acts, all of which they’d forget the following morning, once the drugs wore off. Testing started with unwilling participants being lured into a hotel room by prostitutes, who would then slip the drugs into their drinks. A CIA agent would then watch the test subjects as they tripped out behind a wall of the hotel room.

The particular project within MK Ultra that the prostitutes were involved with was called Midnight Climax. This eventually turned into full-blown brothels in the U.S. run by the CIA, whereby the women working there would lure men into them, but instead of receiving sexual favours, were unknowingly drugged and then observed by CIA agents.

The CIA then started to test willing patients in lab settings, observing their reactions to LSD and asking them questions. To their disappointment, instead of helping them control their patients’ minds, LSD actually freed their minds. Despite the propaganda campaign on the war on drugs, whereby the government was telling people they were against all drug use, it was the government who brought LSD over and put it in the hands of the public. This was actually very well documented by the History Channel, which is remarkable given that MK Ultra was one of, if not the, most corrupt program in the history of the U.S. government.

However, the History Channel left out a lot regarding MK Ultra and the role that drugs had on its participants. The History Channel made it seem like the test subjects were tripping out on LSD peacefully, as doctors observed them and asked them questions. In reality, “The drug program was part of a much larger CIA program to study possible means for controlling human behaviour. Other studies explored the effects of radiation, electric-shock, psychology, psychiatry, sociology and harassment substances,” as a 1975 document addressed to the President stated.

Many of the participants were unwilling adults and children, subjected to different methods of sexual abuse and physical abuse including intense electroshock therapy and sensory deprivation. What these victims were forced to endure was cruel and inhumane, and many of the participants didn’t just walk away unaffected like the History Channel made it seem. Many victims are still under mind control today or are still suffering the effects from the experiments, and some people were severely injured or died. You can read more about what the History Channel failed to disclose regarding this subject in a CE article I wrote here.

What Did the Docu-Series Leave Out Regarding Opium & 9/11?

The CIA actually owned and operated a covert drug smuggling airline, referred to as Air Americawhich was used to transport numerous goods, including heroin. In Southeast Asia (SEA), during the Vietnam War, the CIA worked alongside Laotian general Vang Pao in an effort to help make Laos the world’s largest exporter of heroin. The CIA then flew drugs all over SEA, allowing the Golden Triangle (parts of Burma, Thailand, and Laos) to become the world hub for heroin.

Agents from the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs managed to seize an Air America aircraft that contained large amounts of heroin, but the CIA ordered the agents to release the plane and halt any further investigations.

The CIA wasn’t just involved with the transportation of the drugs, however. The heroin was refined in a laboratory built at the CIA headquarters in Northern Laos. After about a decade of U.S. military intervention, SEA represented 70% of the world’s opium supplier. Unfortunately, many of the operatives became addicted to the heroin themselves. At the same time, SEA also became the main supplier of raw materials for the U.S. heroin industry. Though Air America apparently stopped operations in 1976, the CIA’s involvement in the opium and heroin industries continued in other parts of the world.

This is where the History Channel’s explanation of the CIA’s role in the heroin industry got a little blurry. Thus far, the series had been fairly transparent in its explanation of Air America and the CIA’s operations in Laos, but when it came to the next world leader of heroin, Afghanistan, the series sort of fell short. Yes, it did address the war on terror and how the opium trade only increased since the U.S. government invaded Afghanistan, but it didn’t discuss the why.

This is where the opium trade involves false-flag terrorism, specifically 9/11, so it’s no surprise that the History Channel didn’t discuss the truth behind 9/11 and how that related to the war on drugs. It’s interesting because it did discuss the war on terror and how it intertwined with the war on drugs, almost encouraging viewers to look deeper into the motives that the U.S. government had for 9/11.

Let’s start with a brief history of the opium production and trade in Afghanistan. In the 1980s, CIA-supported Moujahedeen rebels were heavily involved in drug trafficking heroin. The CIA supplied trucks and mules, which were used to transport opium. In addition, many of the individuals trafficking the drugs in Afghanistan were actually trained, armed, and funded by the CIA at the time.

Opium production came to a gradual halt thanks to Taliban rule. By 2000, the Taliban had completely banned opium production, practically eradicating 90% of the world’s heroin. The following UN diagram outlines the history of opium production in Afghanistan:

After 9/11 occurred and the U.S. invaded Afghanistan, opium production suddenly skyrocketed. There have been tons of photos of U.S. soldiers guarding the opium fields, yet today, more than a decade later, they still have not destroyed them (view some of the photos here). The CIA is no stranger to drug trafficking, so it’s possible they saw this as an opportunity to commit a false flag terrorist attack (9/11) in order to justify the invasion of Afghanistan so they could take over the opium drug trade. The motive would make sense, as the American war on drugs was still raging in 2001.

To read more about the 9/11 link to the opium trade and the CIA’s involvement in the heroin industry, read this CE article I wrote here.

What Was Left Out Regarding Corporate Involvement?

By the fourth and final episode of the docu-series, the show discussed Big Pharma’s involvement with fuelling the war on drugs. It was actually refreshing to see the History Channel paint a picture of Big Pharma in a more accurate light than what we often see on American television. The series referred to pharmaceutical drugs as the “elephant in the room” that’s “silently killing” thousands of Americans.

In case you didn’t know, prescription drugs are the 4th leading cause of death in America, as stated by Harvard University. Many Americans are completely unaware that new prescription drugs have a 1 in 5 chance of causing serious reactions, even after being approved by the FDA. Approximately 1.9 million people are hospitalized annually due to properly prescribed medication (not including any overdoses, self-prescriptions, or mis-prescribing) and 128,000 people die every year in the U.S. from drugs prescribed to them.

Doctors are paid by Big Pharma to prescribe drugs (and you can actually see how much your personal doctor makes here), Big Pharma heavily lobbies the government, and the U.S. is one of the only countries that’s allowed to advertise for pharmaceutical drugs. Countless issues surrounding misinformation and propaganda through these advertisements have arisen, yet the U.S. government allows this to occur and rarely steps in. All of these actions taken by Big Pharma are motivated by profit and have directly contributed to the war on drugs, as these companies secretly drug more and more Americans.

The docu-series expressed many of these issues in the documentary, but didn’t necessarily highlight the true gravity of the situation as they mostly focused on the overly prescribed oxycodone/opium epidemic. Big Pharma is not looking to heal you, but rather profit off you. It makes sense that these drugs have adverse side effects, because they benefit from your illnesses. It’s not just opiates, it’s practically all drugs, even those that are prescribed to children (read more about that here).

However, Big Pharma isn’t the only industry that profited off the war on drugs. Many corporations reap the benefits from the privatization of prisons, particularly thanks to ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council), a private special interests group of politicians and corporations. ALEC often plays a significant role in influencing, and in some cases even writing, laws.

Some of the legislation ALEC helped develop supports harsher and longer prison sentences as well as the privatization of prisons. It’s important to note that one of the organizations that funds ALEC is Corrections Corporations of America (CCA), which means that the more bodies that are in prisons, the more CCA profits, and thus the more money ALEC gets.

The American Bail Coalition (ABC), an organization that profits from the privatization of bail, also holds close ties to ALEC. ABC was one of the few corporations that actually stayed with ALEC after their involvement in creating the Stand Your Ground law in Florida came to the spotlight. This law was particularly controversial because it essentially allowed George Zimmerman to get away with stalking and murdering a black teenager, Trayvon Martin.

The entire U.S. prison industrial complex is a money-making machine, producing a grand total of $80 billion per year. Many corporations also profit from prison labour, which could reasonably be considered slave labour in North America, as some prisoners are paid as little as 12 cents an hour for their services. Examples of corporations that “employ” prisoners and pay them practically nothing include Victoria’s Secret and Walmart.

ALEC and the corporations that profit off the prison system were never mentioned in the History Channel’s docu-series, despite being directly correlated to the war on drugs. You can read more about ALEC here.

Final Thoughts

All in all, the History Channel’s America’s War on Drugs is a great place to start in your research of this propaganda campaign. They actually covered a lot of grounds for only a four-part series, and much of the content was probably honest enough to upset the powers that be.

However, it’s interesting to note that the History Channel is owned by A&E, which is in turn owned by Disney. Disney is one of the six corporations that control over 90% of the media, and so the motive behind this type of transparency is questionable. This could be the government and the elite’s way of informing the public of their past wrongdoings, maybe things just got so bad that they could no longer hide it from the public, or perhaps they’re just giving viewers a drip of information in order to keep the truth at bay.

Either way, this is a step in the right direction and hopefully this docu-series and this article inspire people to look further into this subject!

 

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

It is the world's first and only conscious media network streaming mind-expanding interviews, news broadcasts, and conscious shows.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media videos, that you won't see anywhere else.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

IKEA Plans To Switch From Styrofoam Packaging To A Mushroom-Based Alternative

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Styrofoam is harmful to our planet, which is why it's great to see IKEA switching all styrofoam packaging products to a compostable mushroom-based alternative.

  • Reflect On:

    If more sustainable options exist why wouldn't we implement them now? As consumers we have a say in creating the type of world we want to live in.

The cat’s out of the bag, by now the vast majority of us are aware that Styrofoam is bad for our environment as it doesn’t decompose and, in its production process, leaches toxic chemicals into our environment. Yet, despite this awareness, it is still being used on a massive scale to package anything from your new flat screen TV to your late night sushi rolls. As consumers we can choose to either support the companies that are contributing to the waste epidemic on our planet — or not.

Thankfully, as awareness grows, some large corporations like furniture giant IKEA are leading the way and choosing more sustainable and harmonious products. No doubt these sustainable options will appeal more to the conscious consumer and even though we can’t be clear as to whether or not these decisions are being made because of a general concern for our environment or because of growing consumer awareness, it doesn’t really matter because, regardless of the why, things are shifting for the better.

Compostable Alternative

Ikea has announced that they will be looking to switch all of their packaging materials from Styrofoam to a new substance called MycoComposite, which is made out of mushrooms and other organic materials. This material is entirely natural and compostable; it grows within a week and will decompose within 30 days. It can also be reused if it is kept dry.

This was a product we wrote about 7 years ago! And here it is today, finally getting the attention it deserves.

The process to create this packaging material is quite simple really–from Intelligent Living:

advertisement - learn more
  • Agricultural byproducts such as hemp, husk, oat hulls, and cotton burrs are pressed into the desired shape that can fit around items as packaging.
  • Then, it is seeded with mushroom spores that sprout mycelium (a root structure) after a few days.
  • The mycelium threads rapidly through the structure and binds it together to form a shock-resistant and durable packaging material.
  • The last step is to heat-treat the material to kill spores in order to arrest further growth of the fungus.

Mushroom-based packaging uses only about 12% of the energy that is used in plastic production and produces 90% fewer carbon emissions than plastic/Styrofoam production. Non-petroleum-based packaging is just another step towards ending our reliance on fossil fuels; there are plenty of alternative options available, we just need to look. In some cases we simply need to put on our thinking caps, we are a creative, problem-solving species and no doubt there are much more harmonious alternatives for many of our current processes.

The SWOT Analysis below conveys the advantage that Mushroom based materials has over plastic.

Strengths

  • Biodegradable
  • Easily grown from agricultural waste products which are plentiful
  • Strong, lightweight, mouldable
  • Produced using less energy
  • No waste or pollution from the process itself
  • Inexpensive
  • No health risks

Weakness

  • Takes longer to produce than most plastics
  • Less variability and range of products can be produced
  • Not as fire resistant/good as Styrofoam

Opportunities

  • Replace plastic products as a socially and environmentally safe alternative
  • Research is ongoing to improve and create more products
  • Community development through GIY initiatives

Threats

  • Compete against already strongly established plastic dependence (suppliers, manufactures, buyers)
  • Opposition to fungus grown product, misinformed views

One Small Step Towards Massive Change

Just think for a moment, not even just about the hundreds of IKEA stores worldwide, but consider all the big box retailers like Amazon and ALL OF THE STYROFOAM packaging that is being used and where all of that ends up. The fact that technology even exists for us to use a compostable alternative should leave the other substances completely behind. Because why would we continue using materials that are harmful for our planet if working alternatives already exist? That’s a whole other topic, and I’m sure you already know all about the why.

IKEA’s Head of Sustainability, Joanna Yarrow, said this was the retailer’s “small yet significant step towards reducing waste and conserving ecological balance.”

Another Ikea spokesperson told The Telegraph, “IKEA wants to have a positive impact on people and planet, which includes taking a lead in turning waste into resources, developing reverse material flows for waste materials and ensuring key parts of our range are easily recycled. IKEA has committed to take a lead in reducing its use of fossil-based materials while increasing its use of renewable and recycled materials.”

Yes, it may be a small step, but just think of how big this step really is, and we can only hope that other retailers will follow in the footsteps of IKEA. Maybe it goes without saying, but we do have a say in the matter. If other retailers aren’t willing to give up their use of Styrofoam, then we can choose to shop elsewhere, and if enough people do the same, then these other retailers will have no choice but to change their ways. This is why raising awareness is so important.

Much Love

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

It is the world's first and only conscious media network streaming mind-expanding interviews, news broadcasts, and conscious shows.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media videos, that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

ABC & CBS Fire The ‘Leaker’ of Video Showing Anchor Amy Robach Commenting On Jeffrey Epstein

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A producer at CBS was fired after ABC said she was the person who had leaked the video detailing how ABC prevented the airing of a sensational interview with a prominent victim of Jeffrey Epstein.

  • Reflect On:

    Are the recent testimonies from mainstream media insiders starting to hone our discernment about what is real and what is fake in our perceptions of the world?

In the wake of a firestorm of criticism being heaped upon mainstream media companies ABC and CBS as a result of their response to a leaked video featuring ABC anchor Amy Robach, more and more people are awakening to the possibility that Mainstream Media is more in the business of hiding the critical truths humanity needs to know rather than reporting on them. Indeed, phrases like ‘the news you need to know’ is sounding more like a parent shielding children from information that would actually help them grow up.

The latest episode started about a week ago, with the surfacing of a video featuring ABC anchor Amy Robach complaining that the network had refused to air her interview with a prominent accuser of convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. This is some of what she had to say:

I had this interview with Virginia Roberts. We would not put it on the air. First of all, I was told, “Who’s Jeffrey Epstein? No one knows who that is. This is a stupid story.” Then the palace found out that we had her whole allegations about Prince Andrew and threatened us a million different ways.

It was unbelievable what we had, Clinton, we had everything. I tried for 3 years to get it on to no avail… There will come a day when we realize Jeffrey Epstein was the most prolific pedophile this country has ever known.

The fact that Robach freely implies that Buckingham Palace had prevented her news organization from broadcasting an interview damaging to them is very telling. Joe Martino discusses Robach’s testimony more in-depth in this article he wrote right after it happened.

ABC Goes Into Damage Control

Predictably, ABC News downplayed the significance of the video, saying that Robach’s Epstein story wasn’t fit to air at the time. They were quick to try to convince their counterparts at Fox News that everything is all on the up-and-up:

advertisement - learn more

“At the time, not all of our reporting met our standards to air, but we have never stopped investigating the story. Ever since, we’ve had a team on this investigation and substantial resources dedicated to it. That work has led to a two-hour documentary and six-part podcast that will air in the new year.”–ABC Spokesperson

Uh-huh. So it’s taken them three years to fully suss out the validity of this interview, and there’s still another year to wait before we get to hear the story? That’s some pretty tough and thorough standards.

But wait a minute: isn’t this the same news organization that recently made the lightning-fast decision to broadcast a video from a 2017 Kentucky gun exhibition showcasing the awesome power of new military weaponry and try to pass it off as the current-day slaughter of Kurds by the Turkish army?

‘Leaker’ Gets Fired

ABC’s efforts to ‘rectify’ the situation has only left them with more egg on their face. It is no surprise that they completely discount Robach’s claim that outside influence (Buckingham Palace) had any bearing on their decision not to air the interview, as well as Rorbach’s claim that this interview really ‘had everything’; but if Robach’s claims were just their anchor’s erroneous and self-inflating testimony about the integrity and value of her story, would the network really have reason to be so upset that this video came out?

In a move designed to clearly send a message to other would-be leakers of ‘sensitive’ internal information, ABC has worked hard to identify the employee suspected of leaking the Robach video to watchdog group Project Veritas.

Their investigation led them to Ashley Bianco, a former producer on ABC’s “Good Morning America” who joined “CBS This Morning” last month. After ABC executives informed their counterparts at CBS of their suspicions, she lost her job.

There’s just one problem, though. Bianco adamantly denies that she is the leaker.

Bianco Speaks Out

“I did not leak the tape,” Bianco told journalist Megyn Kelly in an interview posted on YouTube. “I’m not the whistleblower. I’m sorry to ABC, but the leaker is still inside.” She said she was fired by CBS after the network received a call from ABC informing her new boss that she once had access to the leaked video.

Bianco told Kelly that she doesn’t know who leaked the tape because “everyone” at ABC was aware it existed. She also insisted she had never heard of Project Veritas before this week. “I begged, I pleaded, I didn’t know what I had done wrong,” she told Kelly. “I wasn’t even given the professional courtesy to defend myself. It was humiliating, it was devastating.”

Compounding this was the fact that Project Veritas published a note from the alleged real “ABC insider” it claimed was behind the leak.

Using the pseudonym ‘Ignotus,’ the alleged leaker began the piece published by Project Veritas by stressing, “I did not and do not seek any personal gain from this information whether it be financial or otherwise,” and expressed their desire to make the information public out of “anger, confusion and sadness.”

“I’ve walked the halls experiencing similar feelings we are all having right now,” wrote the supposed leaker, addressing ABC employees. “All of you regardless of your own personal differences in one form or another do an outstanding job. I sincerely enjoy working with each and every one of you and will continue to do so throughout our careers.”

Ignotus then addressed “those wrongfully accused,” an apparent reference to Bianco:

It is terrible that you have been lashed out at by the company. I know some may put the burden of guilt on me, but my conscience is clear. The actions of the company towards you are the result of their own and not anyone else. The public outcry, from coast to coast, of all people, creeds, and political affiliations, is clear. I have not one doubt that there will always be support for you, and you will have prosperous careers. For neither you, nor I, have done anything wrong.

NewsBusters managing editor Curtis Houck highlighted the hypocrisy by saying that this is ‘an example of how the liberal elites have decided that the very journalistic ethics that are extolled in journalism schools and advocacy groups are no more than empty promises.’

Indeed, more and more signs are coming out that mainstream media is breaking apart from the inside, as the many honest and hard-working employees like CNN’s Cary Poarch and this most recent whistleblower become emboldened to extol the true journalistic virtues of integrity, fairness, and neutrality, and show how the current mainstream media machine has become anything but a proponent of those values.

The Takeaway

One of our highest aims here at CE is to examine and understand the distinctions between how the world really is, and how we are perceiving it as a result of social engineering and mass perception-building strategies that have been in place in various forms for ages. The current revelations about the hypocrisy of mainstream media provides fertile grounds for our growing discernment of this.

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

It is the world's first and only conscious media network streaming mind-expanding interviews, news broadcasts, and conscious shows.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media videos, that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

How Facebook Has Become The Strategic Media Mouthpiece For The Global Elite

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Facebook has made deals with mainstream media outlets to pay for their news content, further turning Facebook from a neutral social media platform into a conglomerate that supports a political bias and the agenda of the global elite.

  • Reflect On:

    What can conscious media outlets do to overcome growing censorship and mainstream bias from the big tech companies and ensure that you continue to get neutral, agenda-free news coverage and commentary on the issues of the day?

It’s not clear whether Facebook was truly conceived by an innocent genius with noble intent, but one fact has become abundantly clear: Facebook is now a mouthpiece and tool for the proliferation of mainstream perception. This is specifically designed to enrich the global elite and continue to disenfranchise ordinary citizens and any attempts to bring important truths to light that would threaten the elite. And, of course, Mark Zuckerberg is now a ‘junior partner’ in this global elite.

The episode of the Jimmy Dore show found in the video below, which is worth watching to get the full context of the discussion, introduces whistleblower Vikram Kumar, a former promoter of third-party videos on Facebook. Dore brings interesting insights into Facebook’s latest strategies in terms of controlling the news commentary. He explains how Facebook is proliferating the establishment’s narrative while limiting and blocking alternative voices which, of course, Facebook characterizes as ‘Fake News’. Here, Kumar discusses Mark Zuckerberg’s testimony in Congress to this effect:

Back in 2017 there was that TechCrunch report that said that Facebook was taking measures to stop the spread of ‘Fake News’ by banning certain political accounts from promoting their videos on their newsfeed. So when I heard Mark Zuckerberg in 2018 telling Congress that he would be doing the same thing, I thought, what changed between 2017 and 2018? Are they taking new measures, are they re-taking the measures?  And it wasn’t until a week later that I realized that Variety Magazine reported that Facebook Watch, which is Facebook’s media platform, had reached a multi-million dollar deal with CNN, Fox News, ABC, and large media outlets.

The congressional testimony was the perfect opportunity for the political establishment, the media establishment, and the tech companies to form an alliance against small media outlets.

Returning Media To The Global Elite’s Control

The process of bringing fundamentally liberating technologies like social media under control has been a difficult process, but the global elite seems to feel they are getting a handle on it. Since the big media giants Google, Facebook, Youtube and others are now strictly following the global elite playbook, with special algorithms and thinly-veiled censorship strategies, the process of promoting the elite agenda while suppressing dissenting voices is in full swing.

advertisement - learn more

One of the biggest issues to remedy was the lack of viewership that traditional mainstream media was getting from young people, which is really the target market not only for advertisers but the social engineering wing of the global elite as well. Here’s how Kumar describes it:

As you know, young people, they don’t watch cable… the viewership of Fox News, CNN, and ABC are dying off, they’re getting older and older, and so what Facebook is, is access to young people, right, and so they viewed small anti-establishment media outlets such as yourself as an existential threat to their next generation of revenue.

Tech companies view media companies extremely valuably, you could go back to 1996, there was that merger between Microsoft, General Electric and NBC to create MSNBC.com. A lot of people don’t know that the ‘MS’ in MSNBC stands for Microsoft, and the reason why media companies and tech companies are so intertwined with each other is ’cause you can influence young people so much when you have the distribution network of something like Facebook, and with Facebook Watch, and their media platform, and their deal with CNN, Fox News, and ABC, they’re able to indoctrinate the next generation of young people. And so they want to take viewership away from shows like yours, and put those young people that haven’t been paying attention with cable news back into the pockets of companies like Fox News, ABC, and CNN.

Every media company wants some of that Facebook Watch dough. And so the companies that have coverage that Facebook doesn’t like are out of there, and new companies that have coverage that Facebook likes are back into the deal. And so Facebook is already taking steps to craft the political landscape in the framing that they find positively. And so you get that whole thing where Facebook shuts down over 800 political pages and accounts, and even legitimate political pages that expose things like police brutality… you’re already seeing a coordinated effort from the establishment media and tech companies to kind of craft the narrative for young people.

This is how that Variety Magazine article Kumar talked about characterizes the deal between Facebook and Mainstream Media:

After going through the fake-news wringer, Facebook is shelling out money on original news content. The strategy is partly aimed at driving up viewing on its Facebook Watch platform — but it also is supposed to demonstrate the social-media giant’s commitment to funding trustworthy journalism.

A corporate conglomerate now giving itself the authority to judge what is and isn’t trustworthy journalism. What could possibly go wrong?

Is Facebook Still Just A Tech Company?

The slippery slope that Facebook is trying to anchor itself to is as clear as the nose on Mark Zuckerberg’s face. He continues to want us to think about Facebook as a social media platform whose objective is still ‘to make the world more open and connected,’ yet at the same time he wants Facebook to become the prime arbiter of the ‘news that is fit to print,’ or in this case, to decide which sources of news will benefit and not benefit from Facebook’s tremendous reach. The same Variety article reinforces the idea that Facebook is trying to have things both ways, gaining the advantages of defining itself as a tech company, and not taking on the liabilities inherent in being a media company:

In the past, CEO Mark Zuckerberg has remarked that Facebook is a technology company — not a media company. Asked whether Facebook is now in fact a media company, given that it’s paying for a growing slate of content, Brown responded, “Having worked for big media companies, I don’t think Facebook is a media company. But are we responsible for the media on Facebook? Yes.”

The fact is that we have entered into somewhat uncharted territory in terms of what defines a media company since the rise of the Internet. We can only hope that we will collectively awaken to the fact that Facebook has clearly gone beyond being a platform that provides equal access to all voices and commentaries, and has given in to the temptation to control the flow and proliferation of information. As this Wired article starts off,

FACEBOOK STEADFASTLY RESISTS categorization as a traditional media company. Instead, CEO Mark Zuckerberg insists on calling the social network a technology platform—even though nearly half of all American adults get their news on Facebook. These old arguments no longer work, especially as Facebook starts making its own video content.

It is incumbent upon the awakening community to clearly grasp what is happening here and to act accordingly in terms of our future engagement with social media sites like Facebook. It is important to see how Bill Clinton’s Telecommunications Act of 1996, which allowed media cross-ownership that led to mergers between tech companies and media companies, was a seed that has already started to bear the fruit of an Orwellian dystopia, where the global elite are permitted to continue to proliferate mainstream propaganda and limit exposure to alternative views that are a threat to their agenda.

The Takeaway

Conscious media outlets, like us here at Collective Evolution, are in the crosshairs of the recent efforts on the part of Facebook and other large media conglomerates to selectively control the proliferation of information. Our best hope in these times is that the awakening community makes deliberate choices in terms of which sources to tune in to. While the global elite may have the power, the wealth, and the technology, they are still pushing an agenda, which to discerning minds looks and sounds very different from the unbiased truth.

Our hope is that a growing number of people are seeing through the agenda of the global elite enough to be motivated to ensure that conscious media survives, and then thrives. One of the future goals of our Conscious Media Movement campaign is to strengthen an alliance between ourselves and other conscious media outlets and work together to find ways we can amplify the voice of truth and neutrality.

One of the first steps we are taking in our CMM campaign is to fund an Investigative Journalism team to join our efforts here at CE. To help support this, click here. 

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

It is the world's first and only conscious media network streaming mind-expanding interviews, news broadcasts, and conscious shows.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media videos, that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Pod

Censorship is hiding us from you.

Get breaking conscious news articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!