If we look back at the last 14 years of this mess rule, as we look back at this gaggle of
obdurate, arrogant, stubborn, unrepentant, heartless, self-serving bunch of a**holes
who have spent the last 14 years trying to keep their useless megalomaniacal political party
together while sleepwalking the country into a kitchen blender. A kitchen blender.
Hey everybody, I have a question for you. What makes something true?
So for this, let's go to the 1894 Webster's International Dictionary, Unabridged.
Just huge and very heavy. Truth. The quality or state of being true.
True. So what's true? Let's go back a page and figure out what true is.
Conformable to fact in accordance with the actual state of things, correct, not false,
erroneous, inaccurate, or the like, as a true relation or narration, a true history,
a declaration is true when it states the facts. When we first started this channel,
I was just making a joke, a snarky play on words. What would the mainstream media be called
if the entire purpose of its existence was hinged upon telling people the truth
about what's happening, or at least aiming for the truth as a goal
without some other agenda getting in the way and twisting the narratives?
The Fourth Estate has claimed that they stand ready,
twist America and peril, a bulwark to creeping fascism, our media.
Because mainstream is a pretty interesting word. As an adjective, it apparently didn't even exist
until 1955. Our subject, new marketing patterns, which have arisen in these United States over
a surprisingly short span of years. The wonder which has made it all possible, of course,
is the Cyclops we have come to know as television. Did you know that? I didn't know that. I was
actually looking that out. I looked it up randomly for a totally different video,
and now here I am making this one because I just found this very fascinating,
the definition of mainstream, which has definitely been evolving over the years.
I appreciate this opportunity to stress the vital place of television in our national life.
So we keep a bunch of dictionaries here. We try to keep one from
every decade of the 20th century. And I couldn't find the word mainstream.
The first dictionary I had that I could find it in was actually this one here,
which I think is from 1967. Yeah, 1967 for the word mainstream. Let's see.
Where'd you go? And all it meant was a prevailing current or direction of activity or influence.
Papaganda has an art. Sabotage has a business. So now they're influencing. Then you have this one
which is from 1991, but it also says 1988, 1989. So the late 80s, early 90s.
It says, the middle of a stream where the current is strongest, the part of something
considered to be the most active, productive, lively, busy, etc. A major or prevailing trend
as of thought, action, literature, music, etc. A prevailing trend.
It is non-matte selling force, to be sure, but television is more, far more.
Nothing in this definition, either one of these definitions has anything to do with
truth just by the way, or informing people of what's true.
It is more than entertainment, more than the means of commercial communication.
Stated simply, television is the greatest power yet created for cultural and educational development.
The first time I saw mainstream media as a phrase get used in the newspaper archive was
actually 1973. Oddly enough in reference to a court case that ended up going all the way to
the Supreme Court, where a theater manager in Georgia was convicted of the crime of, quote,
distributing obscene material for showing the 1971 American comedy-drama film,
Carnal Knowledge, starring Jack Nicholson and Anne Margaret.
And his conviction went all the way to the Georgia Supreme Court, which upheld it,
and then ultimately all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which overturned it on first
amendment grounds. But now, when you consult the Miriam Webster Dictionary online,
it says mainstream means, quote, having reflecting or being compatible with the prevailing
attitudes and values of a society or group. The advertiser, who was fortunate enough to tie in
with this home and family acceptance of television, gains the advantage no other medium can offer.
But the Cambridge Dictionary takes it a step further and defines mainstream as, quote,
considered normal and having or using ideas, beliefs, etc., that are accepted by most people.
So what do we actually have here? We have an entity that has risen in a post-World War II Cold
War era that exists to reflect and be compatible with what are claimed to be the prevailing
attitudes and values of our society. But as many of us have since figured out,
it never really did work that way, did it? The mainstream media wasn't
reflecting ideas back to society about what was going on in reality. The mainstream media
was creating ideas for society to have about that reality. It was giving people a lot of
their ideas, ideas they wouldn't have if they weren't told them under the guise of it being,
quote, news coming from the mainstream media. So it was giving people their ideas, cultivated,
implanted, force-fed, whatever. Choose your word there. But
was there ever a time since television was created, where it was simply unbiased reporting
of what was happening in the world around us without an agenda of any kind? Was there
ever a time where that was the case? Personally, I think there are some people in the older
generations who would really like to believe there was a time like that. But after spending a decade
up to my elbows in archive footage, and with the magical superpower that is hindsight,
I'm just a tad more cynical than that. It has become increasingly obvious in the
not only is incredibly biased one way or the other. Everybody in the mainstream press
is calling all of Bill Clinton's crimes infidelities. Rape, sexual assault, and sexual harassment
are not infidelities. But will ignore stories together? Like they will all get together
and ignore something completely? I was told I could not release any information on this increase
in SIAs or mention any of the arrests. The administration was trying to convince the public
there was no threat at the border. Public health officials were intellectually dishonest. They
lied to the American people. And not talk about it, even though everyone else on social media is
talking about it. We're all seeing the same thing in public. And the White House has
been trying to say, oh, don't worry in private. He's this very sharp, robust leader,
even if you don't see it in public. So the Wall Street Journal was deeply reported.
But the only ones who would go on record were Republicans, even though a lot of Democrats
were saying the same thing. This is North Korea level style propaganda.
Anybody with a minimal amount of shame would refuse to do. But these partisan outlets have
none of that shame. I mean, they're counting on trying to tell American people,
the American people, that what they're seeing, they should not believe.
They will all get together and pair it the exact same talking points.
I mean, somewhere in those cases, there's a memo that obviously gets sent out,
and those people stick to it.
The final days of the campaign can get a little salty.
As you probably noticed, the final days of the campaign have been,
Well, you might call them just a little salty.
I mean, it could be that just six major corporations
own 90 plus percent of the world's media.
I mean, we're living in a time where the same media
is constantly reminding us how important diversity is.
But you pull the curtain back
and go into the back room of this media.
It's not really all that important.
But that concentration of media
into very small amount of companies,
all of that has an effect of reducing the appearance
of different points of view about what's going on out there.
It makes it seem like everybody's thinking
this one way or these two ways.
Is that really a true reflection of society?
Or is that what's being imposed on society by this media?
You've got to be especially wary of journalists
when they're all saying the same thing.
Hi, I'm Fox and Antonio's Jessica Hedley.
And I'm Ryan Wolfe.
Our greatest responsibility is to serve our Treasure Valley communities.
The El Paso Las Cruces communities.
Eastern Iowa communities.
Mid-Michigan communities.
We are extremely proud of the quality,
balanced journalism that CBS4 News produces.
But we are concerned about the trouble
of the country and irresponsible,
one-sided news stories playing in our country.
And so it's not really a surprise at all,
especially with the rise of social media
where people can actually talk to each other
about what's going on out there.
And it's not all concentrated
in just the hands of the official media
that the trust overall in the mainstream media
has been plummeting year after year.
I mean, there are many polls that show
that this trust in the media is tanking.
Gallup does polls on this all the time
and it's near record lows right now.
In fact, just 7% of Americans
who have participated in this Gallup poll of 2022
have a, quote, great deal of trust
and confidence in the media.
I did find it interesting that 70% of Democrats
trust the media while only 14% of Republicans
and 27% of independents do.
But young Democrats also don't trust the media.
So it's actually just older Democrats
that are mostly trusting the media.
This is a historic low that's going on
and it has just been dropping
and dropping and dropping since 1972.
To the point that in May,
the Christian Science Monitor put out this article,
trust in the media has taint.
Are we entering a post-news era?
And I read through this,
just wanted to show you something
I thought was kind of interesting.
Way down here, where'd it go?
It says, cable news,
the original disruptor for TV network news in its day
now serves a largely baby boomer audience.
The median ages of viewers of Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC
are between 67 and 71 years old.
That's a very small window of ages.
So this mainstream media knows
that it is becoming irrelevant
and that the majority of people aren't watching it
and the majority of its audience
is a very small window of people
in their late 60s and early 70s.
In fact, according to Pew Research Center,
adults under 30 now trust information from social media
almost as much as from news outlets.
And especially young adults are getting their news
from places like TikTok,
which kind of makes it interesting
that TikTok underwent that whole thing
where they were trying to ban it not that long ago.
G.I., I can't imagine why.
The sharing of biased and false news
has become all too common on social media.
More alarmingly, some media outlets
have published policies that claim they are true
without checking facts first.
Unfortunately, some members of the media
use their platforms to push their own personal lives
and agenda control to exactly what people think.
And this is extremely dangerous for our democracy.
In fact, trust in media is so low,
according to Fortune, that half of Americans
now believe the news organizations
are deliberately misleading them.
That is the level that the news is at.
This is extremely dangerous for our democracy.
Maybe we as a human race are just outgrowing
the mainstream media.
Maybe large portions of us are tired of being told
what we should consider normal about events,
especially when you look at some of the things
that mainstream has been attempting to normalize.
These are really desperate times for legacy media,
newspapers, magazines, local TV newscasts, and so on.
They are dealing with economic models that no longer work
and audiences that mistrust them as never before.
Because knowing keeps us free.
But when given crucial informational tasks,
they instead build us prisons
of what the fuck are you people talking about?
So as that is going on on one hand, on the other hand,
it really is no surprise at all
that suddenly we have misinformation
being touted as a science.
They're touting it as a science now.
I mean, here's what's going on.
So you have a majority of Democrats,
according to this Gallup poll.
This is a Gallup poll from 2022.
Says here, 70% of Democrats trust the media, okay?
Remember that number.
And now I want to show you this chart.
The political leaning of misinformation experts.
Take a look where the majority of people
who support the idea of misinformation are,
also Democrats.
Okay, and I just wanted to jump in here really quick
because I went and hunted down the paper
just to show it to you.
This is from the Harvard Kennedy School
misinformation review,
which apparently is a thing from July 2023,
volume four, issue four.
A survey of expert views on misinformation,
definitions, determinant solutions,
and future of the field.
And it starts off,
we surveyed 150 academic experts on misinformation
and identified areas of expert consensus, right?
Which sounds like a sentence they wrote,
but if you go down here into the appendix
of their own review, it says right here,
experts leaned strongly toward the left
of the political spectrum,
and then they break down the numbers of people
who were very right wing, fairly right wing,
slightly right of center, center,
slightly left of center,
fairly left wing and very left wing.
And if you take the slightly left of center,
fairly left wing and very left wing group
and you stick that all together,
out of 150 experts they surveyed,
126 were left of center.
That means 84% of their respondents were left.
In fact, they only had seven people
out of the whole thing that were slightly right of center
and the other 15 people were center.
And I guess the other two people just didn't even say.
So 84, a whopping 80,
they should have just named this survey.
We interviewed a bunch of liberal experts
in liberal universities to tell us their opinion
on misinformation.
Don't worry though,
we're sure it's not politically biased.
That could be the subhead.
This information experts largely lean
in a single direction politically.
This skew can, will and does impact
which information is deemed legitimate or not.
And you could say, well, that doesn't really matter,
but then responding to this post was this person
who is a professor at NYU,
but also a chief AI scientist at MEDA,
a researcher in AI, machine learning, robotics,
a touring award laureate who is over here saying this.
People studying misinformation lean left for two reasons.
One, scientists lean left regardless of specialty
because they care about the facts.
I mean, if this was a high school debate class,
you could own this in two seconds.
This is not a logical argument.
Two, misinformation today primarily comes from the rights
which makes it worth studying and fighting against
for people leaning left.
I mean, how is that not a completely biased opinion?
And it doesn't matter how many times
left leaning news organizations have been called on
promoting stories that have turned out later to not be true.
Quote unquote, borders are.
Vice president Harris was not a border czar.
In time vice president and border czar,
Kamala Harris facing some backlash.
What he said about Harris and immigration was not true.
She was never appointed border czar.
Her first visit to the US Mexico border region
since she was appointed as the border czar.
People gonna have to counter the misinformation.
You already hear folks talking about the border czar.
She wasn't the border czar.
President Biden tapped Kamala Harris,
Vice President Kamala Harris to be the border czar.
She wasn't the border czar.
That's what Republicans labeled her.
They were very critical of Kamala Harris,
especially in her role as border czar.
Folks lying about her border record,
calling her a border czar.
She was the border czar.
Calling her sort of the border czar,
which wasn't necessarily the case.
So the border, if they weren't planning to address it
in a major way, do not make her your border czar.
And right leaning news organizations have done the same.
So, but this is the dynamic that we're seeing right now.
You know, when this person works at Metta,
which is a place that has a lot of influence
over what billions of people see and read every single day,
and therefore are going to think about their reality.
Today, we're gonna talk about the Metaverse.
This is really disturbing that this is the way
this person thinks, and this is the position of power
that they're in over information.
Like, that's pretty disturbing to me.
And the fact that they're calling it a science
when it's so-called scientists are talking
in such a biased manner is pretty crazy, too.
You know, up to now,
I kept thinking that everything science did was good.
My training, I suppose, now I'm not so sure.
It does make science as a concept almost meaningless.
In fact, it does.
It turns what is supposed to be science
into something more like scientism.
It becomes absolutely meaningless
when you start talking this way.
Do you need to convince your shareholders
and regulators that your products are safe and effective?
Concerned, they're not seeing things your way.
Why not give them a new perspective?
Throw some professionals science at them.
But the only reason I'm showing this to you
and pointing it out is to say that
every time a system's power is threatened,
historically speaking, censorship gets pushed.
In some way, shape, or form,
misinformation is not even a new concept,
and I've shown you guys that before on this channel.
That is something that has been used throughout time
to shut down opposition to whatever system is in power.
Censorship was the norm under British kings.
That's why freedom of speech and press
is enshrined in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights.
I mean, that's the reason it's there,
because those people lived under a system
where they weren't allowed to talk of parliaments,
they weren't allowed to speak and say certain things outright.
But it isn't just under that system.
You could go back further.
Censorship is a weapon that is always used
by corrupt, tyrannical power systems.
It doesn't matter what kind they are.
We're just now in a digital era,
so it's gonna have a digital overlay,
but it's the same idea,
and it's been done again and again and again.
The greatest weapon on earth is not a bomb,
but it can be delivered by an army,
an army of paid teleprompter readers.
Unfortunately, if they are the one thing
that stands between America and chaos,
we are in trouble because rarely has there been
an institution that has such a distance
between its aspirations and its execution.
Who care more about their careers in the spotlight
than telling people what is actually going on
around them?
Because the historical pattern with the media is
lie, lie, lie again when proven to have lied
hide from accountability.
Which is supposed to be what you do
if you're a journalist and you work in the news.
At least that's what I thought.
When I was little, that's what I thought.
Of course, you know,
when I was really little, I believed in Santa too, so.
This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.
I mean the whole business with the corporate media
people repeating things from the same script over and over. It's unnerving, but it's also ludicrous
because they're pretending that the quote threat to democracy comes from rogue or independent or
uncontrolled news agencies when it's the corporate-fed fake news that's giving the
false impression to people that's making the choices of quote democracy unworkable
or at least unmeaningful. I'm back and that certainly was validating of the establishment,
but the president's remarks today sure garnered a sharp response and depending on this station's
identification with liberals or conservatives we're damned fired up or we certainly applaud.
The creepiest part of this to me is when they try to introduce themselves by name and their
little local affiliation and act like they're a member of your local community when the fact
is that these are people who have willingly given up their identity and tried to assume this corporate
Borg scripted identity. They're reading a script and they've trained themselves to speak like a fake
person. I've actually known people who've done this. A girl from my high school who was on
newspaper with me went on to become a member of a local TV news station and I saw her after
college when she had this job I was working in the media and she talked differently. She had
changed the way she speaks not only when she's on air but just an ordinary conversation and she
had trained herself to speak like a fake television person and I saw this also when I was in college
I was you know as a film student at UT in Austin and we met in these big studio classrooms
that were huge and right next door to it there was a class for news journalist and I happened to walk
in there one day and their 20 or 30 students were lined a couple feet apart in this large studio room
and they were each practicing speaking that fake news cadence so that they sound like a fake person.
I mean yes of course it makes sense to try to pronounce and speak clearly so everyone
can understand you but where did this come from who invented this idea that you're supposed to
talk like a fake person who is reading the news in an authoritative fashion men do it women do it
every there was no difference everyone tried to learn to speak like a fake person as though
that makes you a real accredited journalist when the fact is just as these clips show
they read prescripted news and try to make it sound like it's their own personal spin.
Up next we'll bring the brutality of war into the comfort of your living room
because it's our job to sell it to you. There were better journalists on my high school newspaper
not because they knew anything about life or had lived a lot of experience but because when they did
a story they approached it from their own eyes and tried to investigate or report on what was
happening in an honest way that was honest to themselves and that's not what these anchors
do they read a script and regurgitate a viewpoint that some corporation wants you to have about some
topic that is either overtly or subtly political and that's supposed to make you feel good about
what you know about democracy and make you feel like you learn the news for the day or for
that cycle. I mean it's absurd they're pretending that the threat comes from random people who
are not necessarily affiliated independently investigating or reporting on what's happening
in our world it's it's not it's never been anything that you've seen on these TV anchor shows.
What they do is something else it's something very creepy and fake they literally train and
learn and practice faking. The greatest weapon on earth is the control of information
the control of what people see and hear and ultimately think about what is happening in the
world and the space around themselves. How could you tell if your mind has been brainwashed or your
mind has been hacked or you've been subjected to mind control or hypnosis or undue influence?
The walls are closing in walls closing in on him walls are closing in the walls closing in
closer and closer closer and closer and closer. So the mainstream media not not defined as something
that's there purely to inform defined as something that's there to be the mainstream of thought and
influence. Why is it that everything the other side says is propaganda or we call what we say
information? People don't trust them anymore they have failed to earn large majorities of
people's trust and droves of people are no longer relying on this media to create their image of
what's going on in the world anymore and it seems like there's one group of people however
who very much are reliant and trust this media even though it has repeatedly been shown to lie
to them but they still are hanging on to that media to create their reality for them and they
want to use censorship tactics to force everyone else to do so as well and it's not going to
work. This media seems pretty desperate to keep itself alive in any way possible and if they
have to do it through a vehicle of censorship that's a pretty last gasp of a dying empire type of
situation. Tonight we're talking about the news media and the mainstream media through the medium
of news has been shaping and defining society's perceptional reality for hundreds of years
in different versions of itself going all the way back to the days of newspaper
it's part of how we got here and why we are where we are right now so everyone keeps talking about
the war war in Ukraine war in the Middle East are we going to have a civil war is there going
to be a world war three there is a war right now and the war is over the narrative of reality and
what you're allowed to think and say about it there is a global crackdown going on on freedom
of speech because the control of the narrative of reality is slipping out of the hands of the
controllers as the only time in history when you see censorship prevail is when a corrupt system
that's in power becomes threatened because if a system that's in power is not corrupt it has
nothing to fear from freedom of speech it has nothing to fear from a free press but the war
itself is over the narrative of reality and what we're allowed to think and say about that
and that is why they've gutted this channel they don't want us to they allow us for a little
while to be able to widely enter the algorithmic pool but now they've shoved our channel down
into that that area that you see when the rain recedes and like part of the stream got sucked
away from the rest of it and there's like the tadpoles and they're just barely making it in
there and you know like another hot day in the sun they're probably going to not be there anymore
that's what that's what it feels like they've done to our channel at this point because they don't
want us to widely be able to speak to people about these things because it's pretty obvious that
somewhere what we're saying is not appreciated by this power structure anyways we get reminded
all the time how much our channels reach has been gutted and we don't even really have to be
because it's been getting increasingly hard to keep things going around here we've been limping on
for a while now because we're trying to get done with the shining this film we've been working on
for years and we have a series after that so anything you guys can do if you're if you're
out there listening and you can help us out we have a patreon we have subscribe star the links
for those are in the description at the underneath this video and really truly every little bit
helps it really does help because we take what we do around here very seriously i'm not here for
somebody else's agenda i'm here to try to figure out what's going on and we believe the truth
actually does matter anyway love you guys i'll talk to you later ice cream you scream you know the
rest ice cream you scream you know the rest ice cream you scream you know the rest ice cream
you scream you know the rest ice cream you scream well you know the rest ice cream you scream
well you know the rest ice cream you scream we all well you know the rest ice cream you scream you
know the rest ice cream you scream we all know the rest ice cream you scream you know the rest
ice cream you scream well you know the rest ice cream you scream you know the rest ice cream
you scream we all know the rest ice cream you scream well you know the rest ice cream you
You scream, you know the rest.
I scream, you scream, and you know the rest.
I scream, you scream, you know the rest.
I scream, you scream, well, you know the rest.
I scream, you scream, well, I think you know the rest.
I scream, you scream, and you know the rest.
I scream, you scream, and everybody knows the rest.
I scream, you scream, well, you know the rest.
I scream, you scream, you know the rest.
I scream, you scream, and you know the rest.
I scream, you scream, you know the rest.
I would like to solve the puzzle.