When a media outlet, tasked with collecting information from around the world and presenting it to the public in an un-censored and impartial manner, has been discovered to be lying or manipulating the facts, it should no longer be protected from the rules that govern freedom of the press, and should be immediately shut down and its members investigated.
Unfortunately, this process has failed to take place for so long, that it is now cliché to talk about the lies of the media, and to accept that they can be paid - using our taxes!! - to mislead us.
A huge segment of the public, who have now been convinced that the government is always telling the gospel truth, and that the media is a loyal servant to the public, are being rallied against anyone who questions or doubts their integrity.
I’m seeing quite a lot of talk from certain people about how media regulator OFCOM should be preparing to shut down GBNEWS.
OFCOM…
The regulator that was in attendance at Davos this year for the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) conference. Along with many media outlets which, to my knowledge, didn’t include GBNEWS.
So this leads me to one or two possible conclusions.
The people who are NOT angry at OFCOM, but are instead pleading with them to shut down a media outlet -
(…that didn’t attend the meeting of a now-widely-recognised terrorist organisation comprised of multiple billionaires and our very own governments)
- are either influential people who are accepting bribes to mislead the public; or are dangerously ignorant and are being exploited.
Either way, they should be considered a threat to every member of the British public.
If our media engines are working correctly, they should all be employing journalists across the spectrum whose job it is to collect information and report it back to the public.
As described at the beginning of this writing, any media outlet failing to carry out that duty, or indeed who is trying to manipulate information before it reaches the public, should be shut down and investigated.
However, if working correctly, then surely one media outlet is as good as the next?
The only reason why anyone could be supporting one media outlet over another is because they have betrayed impartiality rules and are now tailoring the news to the preferences or the pre-conceived views of one particular group.
For example, should one large group of the British public have been convinced that BREXIT was a huge mistake, then surely any media outlet breaking impartiality rules and supporting this view would win the favour of those among the public who voted Remain.
British media has become tribal, and for too long this has been ignored. Until now, we have certain outlets associated with left-leaning values, and those associated with right-leaning values.
No media outlet should be associated with anything but impartial and unbiased reporting of what’s going on in our world.
In short, if you are a member of the public who is calling for a restriction on the information you are given, the result of which would mean you are not able to fully-inform yourself to reach an opinion, then you are surely not very bright.
You are effectively outsourcing your intellect to media outlets, who will guide you not based on what is best for you or your family, but on what’s best for their paymasters and their investments.
As mentioned in a previous Substack entry, I would personally welcome a future where media outlets are completely replaced by an infrastructure of social media platforms that allow direct communication between ordinary members of the global public.
Until then, we must all surely be seeking to defend any media outlet that appears to be presenting a side of our reality that all of the other media outlets are hiding from us. How on Earth do we ever expect to be able to make informed decisions, or form opinions, if the media outlets (owned by billionaires) are hiding truth from us?
To see just how dangerous this could be, why don’t we look at how this kind of thing can be equally damaging in a political setting.
I’ve been watching a bit of American politics recently, and it seems to me that the entire United States has been divided down the middle; Democrats on one side, Republicans on the other.
If a right-leaning media outlets was to discover criminality committed by a Democrat politician, then instead of being angry and seeking justice, Democrat-supporters seem to be much more likely to defend that politician!
Think about how crazy that is!
No longer do politicians need to ever worry about being held accountable for breaking the law, whether in America, Britain or elsewhere, because they have convinced millions of people to participate in tribal politics. They’ve convinced them that, no matter what, the other half of the country is the enemy.
Meanwhile, ALL politicians, from both parties, will no doubt be sharing a beer together, in private, and mocking our ignorance.
This is not democracy; it’s not a free world, it’s theatre, and we’ve all been locked in.
Unity only comes when the media has been re-captured, or removed.
We Must Remove the Media