to hand out to politicians who obediently read them on the MSM. The so-called journalists do not dare upset the 'message' by asking probing questions which would put the 'messengers' in a bad place since their job is NOT to think about the issues, but to deliver a message unchallenged. Which is why they HATE any form of Independent journalism.
When 'assaulted' by an occasional actual journalist, they are ready with smears and personal attacks. See Greenwald, Wilileaks, any Journalist who raises questions about THEIR narrative.
Labels are prepared to attach to any fact reporting journalist. 'He has an ego, all he wants is attention'. You KNOW these are prepared smears because they are used over and over again. AND they do not ever address the content of what is being said by these journalists.
Tim Russert eg, allowed Cheney, Condi, Rumsfeld et al to go on MTP and blatantly lie, over and over again. He would ask maybe one question, accept the answer, then move on, leaving only the lie, 'Mushroom Clouds coming our way' for the public to try to absorb.
So taking over the media was a big part of their being able to capture the narrative.
I would not dismiss the power of the media at all. If we had had a real, Independent press, we might not have gone to Iraq. The liars would have been exposed when faced with real journalists.
But they didn't count on the Internet during their years of planning to buy up the Media.
If we had not had this medium, there would have been no challenge at all to the lies.
= new reply since forum marked as read
