• Home
  • Media/ Media Corruption

Sex, Power, and Consent: How to Interpret the Media Frenzy Around Sexual Assault


 
By Joe Jarvis
TheDailyBell.com
 

The same media that covered for the rich and powerful is now delighting in throwing them one by one under the sexual assault bus.

I can’t deny that it is a joy to watch liberal elites like Al Franken and Harvey Weinstein fall from grace.

But a chill goes down my spine when I think, but why now? Why has the media suddenly done a complete 180?

Don’t get me wrong, it is great to hold sexual predators accountable. But the first thing that doesn’t feel right is “convicting” people in the court of public opinion based only on an accusation.

Okay, so for people like Weinstein and Spacey, there are enough people coming forward with enough verifiable evidence that they are beyond a reasonable doubt sexual predators. Al Franken posed in a photo that confirms his harassment.

But could this be the media’s angle? The first step is to accuse all the easy targets. Get the public whipped into a frenzy. Once everyone has the torches and pitchforks, all that will be required is an accusation, and the mob will burn the witches. And at that point, no one will wait to see if the evidence pans out. A simple accusation, true or false will condemn a man and destroy his career.

Unfortunately, these conditions will make liars and exploiters come out of the woodwork. It’s now trendy to accuse someone, and a consensual one night stand might turn into borderline rape in decades-old retrospect. You will have some people who want attention and money. You will also have some people who simply want to ruin a famous person.

And you will have elites picking targets in their games of power. Just consider how Julian Assange and Dominique Strauss-Kahn were accused of rape at opportune times to ruin them. Both charges were later dropped. Perhaps today in the witch-hunt mindset, the charges would have been further pursued.
 

Is the Media Offering a Solution?

It is great that men and women who have been victims of sexual assault and sexual harassment can now come forward and expect mainstream support. It is a serious problem. And just because some will abuse the witch-hunt for their own ends does not mean it is fair to the real victims to ignore or marginalize anyone who comes forward.

In this sense, it seems like the reporting from the media is beneficial. Most of the cases focus on a disparity of power. It is rich and famous people taking advantage of young fans, their students, aspiring actors, interns, or employees.

Maybe people with power will think twice. They may think of their careers, their marriages, their future, and decide it’s not worth it to be a creep.

But doesn’t it also divide society further? It creates suspicion and tension between multiple groups. Men versus women. Rich versus poor. Celebrity versus normie. Politician versus citizen.

And it is worth noting that many accused have been politicians. Unfortunately, the underlying fabric of a society is woven by politicians. They have the power to pass laws and regulations which drastically alter behavior. People even take cues from their government. Debt-laden governments produce debt-laden citizens.

Doesn’t that say something about what kind of society these sexual predators have created? It certainly won’t be one based on consent.
 

The Solution is Consent.

Sounds obvious, right? Sex requires consent at every level.

But on other subjects besides sex, consent is not held in such high esteem. Consent in general, in every aspect of our lives, should be held as the golden standard. Under these conditions, we will see consent respected in all aspects of life, including sex.

This is not a new concept. You’ll know the tree by the fruit it bears. In a society based on consent, fewer people will be taken advantage of sexually.

The root of the issue is a coercive society. It starts with people wanting their kids to be obedient to authority or elders, without ever explaining why. But obedience is not a virtue. As annoying as it can be for kids to constantly ask why, or assert their own attitudes and desires, this is a good thing. It doesn’t mean giving in to every demand of a child. It means recognizing their autonomy and largely allowing them to make their own decisions.

I have discussed how a coercive society breeds psychological distress on those forced to act a certain way. But missing was an assessment of the psychological conditions of those who exert the coercion. The actual coercive agents of the state go equally crazy. But they go crazy with power instead of crazy with desperation to be an individual.

And the rich, powerful, and famous have access to the power of the government. They have access to the same coercion they use against their victims.

The way the government treats the citizens is the exact same way sexual predators treat their victims.

There are different levels of manipulation. Some victims are groomed with gifts and kindness. Sometimes the abuser uses intimidation and threats. Sometimes victims are enticed by the promise of being elevated to the position of the abuser, with all the power that comes with it. Sometimes the abuser downright rapes the victims who won’t comply.

And our political structure is not based on consent. Democracy is not consent, it is mob rule. It is the will of the majority dominating the will of the minority. Nor does living in a society mean you consent to be governed. It should not be up to victims to flee in the face of a threat. Saying everything the government does is fine because you continue to live in a country is like saying if a victim of sexual assault didn’t want it, they wouldn’t put themselves in that situation.

But it doesn’t have to be that way. You can have an organized society based on consent. After all, if the government services are truly desired by the people, why do they have to be forced on them? Why do we have to be forced to pay taxes, instead of enticed with a good offer?

I am not saying ending the abusive relationship between government and citizen will eliminate sexual violence. I am simply saying it will set a consistent precedent for behavior. By acknowledging that all interactions must be consensual, there would be no double standard. These abusers would not get used to operating without the consent of others.

Yes, what I am suggesting means a vast restructuring of society. It certainly wouldn’t happen overnight. But as victims begin to stand up to their abusers, it is time all non-consensual relationships are called out for what they are.

If we really want to get to the root of this issue, we will examine the fundamental nature of the relationship between governments and citizens.

Video: American Pravda, NYT – Senior Homepage Editor Reveals Biased Political Agenda at NYT


New York Times Senior Home Page Editor, Des Shoe, Admits Company Culture of Blatant Bias at NYT is "widely understood to be liberal-leaning..."

NYT Journalists: "if we write about him [Trump], and how insanely crazy he is...maybe people will read it and be like...we shouldn't vote for him."

Calls Trump an "oblivious idiot" and Pence "f***ing horrible" Because of Religious Views

Admits New York Times Report on "what the readers want"

"They call it the Trump bump" Says Shoe, Regarding the Influx of Subscribers Since Trump's Presidency Began

Des Shoe: "The main objective is to grab subscribers. You do that any way that you can."
 

(NEW YORK) - Project Veritas has released a video of the New York Times Homepage Editor Des Shoe, who was caught on hidden-camera admitting that the Times has a liberal bias and attacking President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. This is part three of their American Pravda NYT investigation.

When confronted with the notion that during the election, The Times' front page, for which she is responsible, was completely focused around Trump. She tells the undercover journalist that NYT reporters tried to influence the election with their reporting:

"I think one of the things that maybe journalists were thinking about is like...Oh, if we write about him, about how insanely crazy he is and how ludicrous his policies are, then maybe people will read it and be like, oh wow, we shouldn't vote for him."

She admits that the New York Times has a clearly defined liberal-leaning bias: "The New York Times is not...I mean, it's widely understood to be liberal-leaning. But, American newspapers are not supposed to claim a bias, they're supposed to be objective."

"So the...ahh, but the New York Times is not left?" the Project Veritas journalist asked. Shoe clarified, "I'm not saying that they're not. I'm saying it's widely, widely understood to be left-leaning."

She also tells the undercover journalist that reporting objectively is simply too difficult for the Times: "Our main stories are supposed to be objective. It's very difficult in this day and age to do that."

Shoe blames the business model for the New York Times' lack of fact-based reporting:

"This is what I was trying to say is like the last couple years it's changed for the bad...
"I think the business model itself is just... there's so much panic about what to do that, you know, what else is a company supposed to do?
"That's the conundrum...is that a business model, in this time is built on what the readers want."

The New York Times senior homepage editor goes on to explain the positive effect of Trump's victory: "Since the election, like you know...Speaking on, you know, for The New York Times, our subscriptions have sky-rocketed since...I mean, they call it the Trump bump."

This sentiment was echoed by Nick Dudich, who was featured in American Pravda Part 1 and Part 2. He explains, "I mean honestly, Trump has driven us more business than anybody else. Anytime he says failing, we add a boost of subscribers."

The New York Times responded to Part I in a statement, calling Dudich "a recent hire in a junior position." Later, Executive Editor of the NYT Dean Baquet described Dudich as "a kid...who just started his career in journalism." The same cannot be said for Ms. Shoe, a senior-level employee who has been with The Times since January of 2009.

Des Shoe claims that the New York Times has to chase clicks in the current media environment, "The Washington Post, people who have paywalls up...The main objective is to grab subscribers. You do that any way that you can."

When told the New York Times seems more like a 'click-paper', Shoe replies:

"I mean, you're not wrong. Like, I would love to be able to speak my mind completely about...If I ever leave the Times I'll go back to you guys and tell you exactly what I think. But, I mean, there's stuff like...And this is what I was trying to say is like the last couple years it's changed for the bad."

Shoe finally goes on to explain her personal biases against President Trump, "I feel like Trump is...is just a...is sort of an idiot in a lot of ways. Just an oblivious idiot."

She also attacks Vice President Mike Pence, implying that his religious beliefs make him unfit to lead:

"If you impeach him, then Pence becomes President, Mike Pence, who's f***ing horrible...I think maybe, possibly worse than Trump.
"He's extremely, extremely religious. He [Pence] at one point backed a bill that hinted at conversion therapy for gay people...Which is like electrocution, stuff like that."

"Corruption is inescapable within the mainstream media machine. From the Times editors that dictate the paper's coverage to the journalists that try to sway the public with their reporting," says Project Veritas founder James O'Keefe. "In American Pravda, truth takes a back seat to money, and objectivity takes a back seat to politics."
 

 
 
 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: "The News" is a Social Construct. It is Used to Program You


If all the "alternative" media ever does is report on "the news" (as decided by the MSM), then aren't they just unwitting participants in the mockingbird media system? Join James for this heady thought for the day as he dissects the idea of "the news" and talks about the real value of an outlet like The Corbett Report.

 

 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Washington Post - Instrumental In Coining The Term "Fake News" - Now Wants It Gone


Editor's Note:  It should come as no surprise that the MSM is reporting more fake news claiming now that the term "fake news" came from Trump.  The truth is the media began using it as a way to discredit alternative media reporting and Trump turned it around on them because they were the main sources of all the real fake news.  Of course Hillary Clinton and Democrats jumped on board big time hammering away claiming all news that didn't support their nonsense was fake news.  But, like every other stupid thing they do, it blew up in their faces. 

 

By
iBankcoin.com

It looks like the propaganda wing of the establishment has decided to pull the plug on the whole "Fake News" thing they worked so hard on. Apparently their carefully crafted psychological priming mechanism designed to scatter Orwellian seeds of doubt regarding non-approved news agencies has gone awry - their own invention turned against them. Hmm. I wonder how that happened? It's as if the left and their minions have a credibility problem or something.

Media columnist Margaret Sullivan writes:

…though the term hasn’t been around long, its meaning already is lost. Faster than you could say “Pizzagate,” the label has been co-opted to mean any number of completely different things: Liberal claptrap. Or opinion from left-of-center. Or simply anything in the realm of news that the observer doesn’t like to hear. WaPo

Sorry Washington Post, you had really bad material to work with but you tried your best. Not only did you dutifully participate in bashing President-elect Trump the entire election while downplaying Hillary's record, you were the first ones to the punchbowl to let America know (right before the Electoral College voted) about the CIA's evidence-thin conclusions in the Russian hacking scandal. You also tried to sell us on that whole "Russia hacked the electrical grid" thing, only to have to issue two retractions.

It should also be noted that the Washington Post was instrumental in planting the phrase "Fake News" - along with Buzzfeed, factcheck.org, and The Guardian. Once it gained momentum throughout 2016, Facebook's new fact checkers Snopes and Politifact, along with Vanity Fair, helped push the phrase into unaware and compliant minds towards the end of October.

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Why Is Google Hiring 1,000 Journalists To Flood Newsrooms Around America?


By Tyler Durden
ZeroHedge

So what do you do when you fail to elect your chosen candidate and your former political allies and mainstream media turn against you by painting you not as the 'progressive', open-minded, friendly tech company that you used to be but as an evil, racist, Russian-colluding corporate villain intent upon destroying all that is sacred in the world?  Well, you just buy the media, of course.

As Poynter notes today, after a series of public relations debacles in recent weeks, from the firing of James Damore to news last week that Google's algos served up some fairly disturbing keywords to potential advertising buyers (e.g. "Why Do Black People Ruin Neighborhoods"), Google is ramping up its media presence with the announcement that the Google News Lab will be working with Report For America (RFA) to hire 1,000 journalists all around the country. 

Many local newsrooms have been cut to the bone so often that there's hardly any bone left. But starting early next year, some may get the chance to rebuild, at least by one.

On Monday, a new project was announced at the Google News Lab Summit that aims to place 1,000 journalists in local newsrooms in the next five years. Report For America takes ideas from several existing organizations, including the Peace Corps, Americorps, Teach for America and public media.

Unlike foreign or domestic service programs or public media, however, RFA gets no government funding. But they are calling RFA a national service project. That might make some journalists uncomfortable  – the idea of service and patriotism. But at its most fundamental, local journalism is about protecting democracy, said co-founder Charles Sennott, founder and CEO of the GroundTruth Project.

"I think journalism needs that kind of passion for public service to bring it back and to really address some of the ailments of the heart of journalism," he said.

Here's how RFA will work: On one end, emerging journalists will apply to be part of RFA. On the other, newsrooms will apply for a journalist. RFA will pay 50 percent of that journalist's salary, with the newsroom paying 25 percent and local donors paying the other 25 percent. That reporter will work in the local newsroom for a year, with the opportunity to renew.

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

As Its Influence Wanes, Increasingly Militant MSM Promotes Violence and Censorship



Getty images

Yes, the MSM has admitted they got 2016 exactly wrong and that they are out-of-touch with the average American. What truly terrifies the media about 2016, though, is something that has remained largely unspoken.

 

By John Nolte
Breitbart.com

It is what Trump’s victory said so clearly about the MSM’s inability to influence public opinion and, by extension, the outcome of elections. What has also remained unspoken is the media’s desperate and dangerous reaction to this waning influence.

As a 25 year media-watcher, I have never seen anything close to the propaganda campaign the national media launched to defeat Donald Trump last year. It was 24/7, it was coordinated across every news outlet, it was all-hands-on-deck. And Trump still won. Which can only mean that the media’s influence has eroded to a point where, despite hurling every kitchen sink available, they suffered a humiliating loss last November.

Before I get into the grit of the nit, it is important to keep in mind that our media is nothing more than the communication branch of the Democrat Party. When you look at everything the media does — the lying, the campaigns of personal destruction, the fake news, the focus on stuff like Melania’s shoes — this explanation is the only one that makes sense. The media is a full-blown leftwing political operation run, for the most part, by former Democrat operatives like Jake Tapper, George Stephanopolous, and Chuck Todd, as well as those related to Democrat operatives.

Knowing that, and knowing the long history of leftwing regimes (Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Chavez, Castro), we know what a leftwing political operation does when its influence begins to diminish. Because their ideas are so unappealing and are proven failures, the left ultimately has no choice but to embrace violence and censorship. This truth is as old as the Bolshevik Revolution, and this is exactly what we are seeing unfold today in our own country. Rather than politicians, though, it is our media that has turned dangerously militant.

Rush Limbaugh is absolutely correct, the Democrat party is dead. Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, the party’s two supposed leaders, are non-entities. From top-to-bottom, the party is a feckless pile of incompetence. Knowing this, the media has told Schumer and Pelosi to hold their beer as they seize the levers of power in the leftwing cause. As a result, the media has used billions of corporate dollars to launch a propaganda campaign to unseat Trump and to keep the divisive issue of identity politics thriving.

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Out Foxed


"Fair and balanced"??? How about anything BUT?!?! For the first time ever, this documentary reveals the secrets of Former Fox news producers, reporters, bookers and writers who expose what it's like to work for Fox News. These former Fox employees talk about how they were forced to push a "right-wing" point of view or risk their jobs. Some have even chosen to remain anonymous in order to protect their current livelihoods. As one employee said "There's no sense of integrity as far as having a line that can't be crossed."

"Outfoxed" examines how media empires, led by Rupert Murdoch's Fox News, have been running a "race to the bottom" in television news. This film provides an in-depth look at Fox News and the dangers of ever-enlarging corporations taking control of the public's right to know.

"Outfoxed" first examines media mogul Rupert Murdoch and the Australian company, News Corp., tracing how the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) helped Murdoch break the rules to establish a fourth network in the United States. The film explores Murdoch's burgeoning kingdom and the impact on society when a broad swath of media is controlled by one person.

Media experts, including Jeff Cohen (FAIR), Bob McChesney and Chellie Pingree, provide context and guidance for the story of Fox News and its effect on society.

The team behind "Outfoxed" created a system to monitor Fox News 24 hours a day for months to discover exactly how its shows worked. A team of volunteers around the country scrutinized every hour of Fox News programming, noting examples of bias in its coverage. The result is an intense examination.

 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Orwell Rolls In His Grave


"One of the most popular films on our schedule." -- Free Speech TV

"A marvel of passionate succinctness, Robert Kane Pappas' documentary critically examines the Fourth Estate, once the bastion of American democracy. Docu asks, "Could a media system, controlled by a few global corporations with the ability to overwhelm all competing voices, be able to turn lies into truth?..." -- Variety

 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)