U.S. Corporate Media Watch

Roberto Sirvent: Can you share a little bit about the mainstream media’s coverage of Biden’s decision to withdraw troops from Afghanistan? What are some subtle and not-so-subtle ways that pundits and politicians maintain an imperial and colonial framework in their analysis?

Richard Medhurst: One of the more subtle ways they’ve tried to keep the war going is printing headlines saying that women’s’ rights are imperiled by a US withdrawal. The notion that a bunch of imperialists, who have killed scores of women and mothers, and turned countless more into refugees, suddenly care about the rights of their victims and the people they are occupying is preposterous.

Even if you want to believe Bush and Blair’s excuses to try and justify this war; saying that they were going after Al Qaeda, well this has nothing to do with that. They didn’t say they were invading Afghanistan for the sake of women’s rights – no matter how just or noble that may sound now. So, to try and use women’s rights now to deflect from the horrors they inflicted on Afghanistan, the millions of people they turned into refugees, the scores they killed – many of whom are women– is an attempt to whitewash their crimes and an insult to people’s intelligence.

A less subtle example of how they’ve tried to keep the war going came after the terrorist attack at Kabul airport which left 170 dead people and 200 wounded. Former National Security Advisor under Trump, General HR McMaster, went on CNN and made the ridiculous assertion that the Taliban and ISIS – two sworn enemies – had somehow collaborated on this attack.

I would just caution: how much of a “withdrawal” is it really when Biden drone strikes a family on the way out? We have no clue what private contractors, the CIA and SAS will do in Afghanistan – and on top of that, Congress added to Biden’s already ballooned military budget, raising it to $740 billion .

[blackagendareport.com]

Take to note within the MSCM who they are interviewing. When it comes to X military and intelligence, commanders that were there, these are the same people who for nearly 20 years purposely gave us false and deceiving reports of positive gestures, and now we're suppose to except their analogies today. This is how much they respect us. This is icing on the cake of fake news. They're attempting to force feed us in preparation for more somewhere else.

{In an interview she says: “I don't know if a single University that has actually divested from [Israel].” This extremely telling remark should give you an idea what kind of position is formally held and incorporated into the beliefs of these elite universities regarding Zionism and colonialism.}

There it is again. Israel seemingly owns the US power structure to a high degree.

{This approach would be great if you didn’t have six corporations who own all the news networks in America. When we talk about the Washington Post (now owned by Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos) or CNN or FOX – these networks don’t have a duty to factual, truthful reporting. They have a profit incentive and shareholders to please. This is why we speak of corporate media. These networks make money from advertising overtly, and covertly by manufacturing consent for war and other ills.

You can’t really call that “balanced” when you turn on MSNBC or FOX— two networks (supposedly) on opposing ends of the American political spectrum – and yet both are telling you that Israel massacring Palestinians or stealing their homes is “self-defense”. Or both lying about Syria using chemical weapons to orchestrate a pretext for bombing. These networks are owned by media conglomerates and corporate advertisers, and their principal function is to sell wars and convince Americans to acquiesce to the lack of healthcare, social safety nets, equitable pay and racial and social justice.}

The worlds top elite have approximately 200 people who manage approximately 60 trillion dollars of their money within their capitalist system. They own all the major media, TV, newspapers, radio, about 90%, in which various public relation firms, think tanks, and NGO's manufacture 80% of the information our MSCM feeds us. They are all related to the various security companies running around the globe creating chaos, with intelligence agencies, and weapons makers. Their news shows are littered with supporters of war masked as specialist who are paid to deceitfully encourage more wars as they're attempting to manage your perception that wars are needed as the only answer.

{The goal of mainstream media is not to inform the public, it’s to keep them ignorant. CNN accomplishes this very well by giving the impression of balanced political coverage, when in fact mainstream American political discourse is limited to a tiny spectrum to begin with.

CNN remains a network beholden to the interests of a media conglomerate and bolstered by corporate advertisers. Not only that, but similar to MSNBC, the New York Times and Washington Post, it acts as a loyal mouthpiece of the American national security state. How many times have CNN newsrooms blindly repeated claims that later turned out to be false from unnamed US intelligence officials, such as stories like Russiagate or the alleged Russian bounties in Afghanistan – all of which have been disproved?}

The NYT should have definitely been mentioned there. Countless times they've had to retract their information. Often buried in articles knowing most don't read them all. The damage already done, enabling the lie to live. Limited discourse? You're living it today. What's really being talked about today other than Afghanistan. Virtually nothing. Cuba came and gone in merely 2 weeks because it was quickly exposed as an orchestrated false flag from over seas. Venezuela, actions in Africa that aren't being covered, legitimately anyways. The migration crisis on the border. Growing number of virus cases due to a never ending lack of adherence to a disastrous planning. The only answer they have is to attack the unvaccinated while ignoring their reasons and keeping those from the public. While the current viruses are about to run their course as possibly 2 are incoming that have been reported that the vaccine doesn't appear it work on anyways. You wonder why people won't be involved in a one sided story that also neglects to inform the citizenry of why the negative outcomes have occurred or who they might tend to harm.

{A lot of well-meaning liberals like to say, “We’ve forgotten how to talk to each other. If Democrats and Republicans could just sit down and listen to one another, then we’ll be able to solve a lot of our country’s problems.” As a result, we see a lot of pundits on U.S. corporate media rooting for both parties to work together, to find common ground, to unite, etc. etc. Of course, it doesn’t particularly matter what they unite on—whether it’s imposing economic sanctions on other countries, increasing the military budget, punishing municipalities that want to defund the police, imposing strict austerity measures, expanding the United States’ military presence in Africa, or commemorating mass murderers like George H.W. Bush, John McCain, and Donald Rumsfeld. All that seems to matter is Democrats and Republicans learning to not be so divisive. I’ve even seen local news correspondents celebrate rare moments of bi-partisanship by saying, “Hey, it’s nice to see they’re working together!” Can you explain for our readers how this supposedly noble goal of “working across the aisle” and being “bipartisan” may not be something to root for after all?}

{Well first of all I think it’s important to say that America isn’t actually bipartisan. It doesn’t have an actual left-wing party. Certainly not the Democrats, in any case. Democrats and Republicans are essentially two wings of the same party, they are right-wing establishments by anyone’s standards, and would be certainly viewed as such in other countries. So, when we talk about working across the aisle, we’re really just talking about two wings of the same party; very similar ideologies and policies. Despite what the education system and media would have you believe they are more alike than different.}

Quite frankly, leaving out any administration and a host of representatives since the Reagan era is in itself criminal. Lets not forget also, Carter allowed himself to be drawn into what were facing today. He allowed his administration to become the virtual father of the entire middle east killing fields and growth of terrorist groups that now expand the globe. We've funded and weaponized them to use them, killed them, rinse and recycled that program since the 70's time after time. Who can for all these decades witness this and not ask who the real terrorist are.