Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Origin Of State Sponsored Propaganda AKA Fake News? #167285
06/27/2018 03:50 PM
06/27/2018 03:50 PM
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,831
A 059 Btn 16 FF MSC
ConSigCor Offline OP
Senior Member
ConSigCor  Offline OP
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,831
A 059 Btn 16 FF MSC

The Origin Of State Sponsored Propaganda AKA Fake News?

By: Caravan to Midnight

Written by: John B Wells

Thursday, June 21, 2018
John B finds The Origin Of State Sponsored Propaganda AKA “Fake News”

The term “fake news” has become used in every circle of social media. Just in the last week, there were people on social media circulating a letter from Vector Marketing, a multi-level marketing company offering teens and college students twenty dollars per sales appointment booked. The Internet proclaimed the letters were an attempt to rope young students into sex slavery. As I saw the posts come across my feed, I got into it, realized it was rubbish and felt a need to set the record straight. Soon the thread stopped, and a few people admitted they were duped. What would have happened if the thread had grown? “Fake news” is dangerous, but is it also a way to confuse and deceive the American people intentionally?

Recently, the Pew Research Center conducted a survey of 5,035 adults over 18 years of age in the United States, and found that only a quarter of them could identify factual statements over opinions. That means that most of us are being duped by “fake news” and we don’t even know it. How did this happen?

Many point to 2016 and specifically to Section 1287 of the National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2017 written in 2016. This section established the Global Engagement Center, the purpose of which is to “…lead, synchronize, and coordinate efforts of the Federal Government to recognize, understand, expose, and counter foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation efforts aimed at undermining United States national security interests.” With such vague wording that could mean that any information the leadership of the country finds undermining to their authority could be considered propaganda and thus they could counter any “propaganda” they wish.

Also, Section 1288 of the same act, allowed for modification of the United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994.

The International Broadcasting Act of 1994 states, “It is the policy of the United States to promote the right of freedom of opinion and expression; including the freedom “to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers,” in accordance with Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”

The most interesting thing about the International Broadcasting Act of 1994 is who is in charge of the Board of Governors that supervise, allocate, and control what information is shared with the media.

That power belongs to the Executive Branch or in other words, The President of The United States. Under the Act, the President of The United States appoints the people assigned to the Board of Governors, and four of those can be part of the ruling party. The President picks the members and the members affect information that is supplied to other countries. The Board is composed of nine members with expertise in the fields of mass communications, broadcast media, or international affairs. Eight members are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The ninth, the Secretary of State, serves ex officio. Why would the President need such a group?

This means a federally funded watchdog group, has now been placed under the control of the President of the United States by then president Bill Clinton in 1994. I see the building blocks of socialism as the leftists were steadily taking federal control over ALL information.

Furthermore, if you view the Broadcasting Board of Governors website, you may conclude that its activities are confined to Voice Of America, Office Of Cuban Broadcasting, Middle East Broadcasting Networks, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and Radio Free Asia. But as one practical example; the Soviet Union is gone, so which repressed people is Radio Free Europe broadcasting to? And why are people in Africa and Western Europe, areas not served by BBG according to their website, being inundated with reports of how stupid and racist President Trump and his supporters are? Why does the so-called ‘narrative’ not differ from that content presented by American Network television outlets?

The answer is- BBG pervades the entire spectrum of information released by the Media both outside and inside the United States. Also note that The President’s budget request for Fiscal Year 2019, sent to Congress on February 12, 2018, includes $661.1 million for the BBG. So effectively we the tax payers are financing our own brainwashing and mind-control.

How did it happen? The Obama administration made this change in Section 1288, SEC 310, of the National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2017 that allows for the Board to use their power to also “counter state-sponsored propaganda which undermines the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States and its allies;” Another vague statement – Who decides what constitutes “state sponsored propaganda” – these few board members controlled by the Whitehouse? Now, this board not only controls information flow within the territory of the United States but also all international information flow as well as decide what is propaganda or not.

Why would this need to be changed? Because this is the point of origin for what has become known as “fake news." The Act was passed by Congress on November 30, 2016, less than 30 days after the election, and signed by President Obama on December 23, 2016, on his way out of the White House.

The year after the Presidential election did not go the way of the Democratic Party more fake stories were being reported than ever before. Coincidence? Most of the stories were targeting conservatives and Republicans. With a Democratic president on his way out of the White House and a media arm installed under the direct power of the Executive branch is it a stretch to believe that the former President of the United States and his political party would not use that tool for their gain?

So many of you are asking, why does “fake news” still exist if the new President can appoint Governors and his Secretary of State is in charge of the board? Well, it is not that simple, as each member of the board serves for 3 years. This means that new members could have been assigned as late as 2016 and they would be serving out their term under an administration they do not agree with and can subvert through foreign media possibly until 2019. Chief Executive Officer, John Lansing was appointed by Obama in August 2015. He was also never confirmed by the Senate. The fake news machine has gone into overdrive again as "Democrat: Whistleblowers" say White House trying to oust broadcast board CEO. - The truth is that he will finish serving his 3 year term in September 2018. The fact that they are up in arms complete with "leaks" and "whistleblowers" on CNN - should tell any person with critical thinking skills, what the narrative is and has been, who controls it and who desperately wants to keep it.

Many news outlets’ sources are "leaks" from inside the White House. Could those "leaks" be members of the former Presidents’ Board of Governors? Could it be that the "leaks" are "counter-propaganda" to other countries who may like the current President but due to disinformation from the Board of Governors they are now accepting what they think is real news but which is actually “fake news” manipulated by this board? Much of the “fake news” has been blamed on Russia, but could that news actually have been spread to the U.S through our own State Funded Board Of Governors?

Then the CIA argues that the public can’t see classified information it has already given to favored reporters. Intelligence officials can selectively release classified information to trusted journalists while withholding the same information from other citizens who request it through open records laws.

Given the current state of affairs, even the media may not always be aware when they are spreading "fake news." Many news articles and even pictures have been debunked including a recent photo of a child locked in a cage crying. The image was attributed to an ICE detention center while in reality the picture was from a protest to call attention to immigration practices at Dallas City Hall on June 10, 2018, and shared on the Facebook account of the Brown Berets de Cemanahuac -Texas Chapter. This type of blatant misinformation is detrimental to the unity and cohesion of the general public inciting anger and violence as well as mental instability among the populace.

ABC News very recently reported with a graphic screen display that Paul Manafort pled guilty to ‘manslaughter’. Deliberate mistake or not? An error like that stuck in someone’s mind to be sure. Did all the audience members ever hear or see the retraction?

When a doctor commits malpractice, that doctor loses the Medical License.

When a lawyer commits malpractice, that lawyer is disbarred.

Why is this not true for journalists, whose words and images have the same life or death effect in many cases as do cases set before a doctor or lawyer?

In my opinion, it is because journalists have what is tantamount to an irrevocable license. Because the State is protecting the media it enables.

As this power and abuse of media and news may have originated in the White House, we call on the Executive branch and The President Of The United States to address this war of misinformation. I wonder if the Citizens of the United States may have legal and constitutional grounds for a massive class action lawsuit against the United States Government, the News Media, and the Board of Governors for mental anguish, and threats of violence due to "fake news" which has separated the country and used its Citizens as political pawns. We must strike back against this bold-faced attack on our collective psyche and hold those spreading “fake news” responsible and accountable for their actions. Fake News is dangerous, sometimes deadly – let’s stop it before it’s too late. - Sign Petition here:


Distinguishing Between Factual and Opinion Statements in the News
[1] National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2017
[1] United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994
[1] National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2017
[1] Brown Berets de Cemanahuac -Texas Chapter

Subscribe to the John B Wells show on Caravan to Midnight today for the truth behind the headlines - Only $5 per month. We are sensitive to the expectations of our audience and remain faithful to our mandate to provide educational, cultural and informational programs independent of commercial obligations or influence.

Former Host of Coast To Coast AM John B Wells is now in control on Caravan To Midnight & Ark Midnight

"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: Origin Of State Sponsored Propaganda AKA Fake News? [Re: ConSigCor] #179554
02/28/2023 01:54 PM
02/28/2023 01:54 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 24,090
airforce Online content
airforce  Online Content
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 24,090
Global Disinformation Index, inform yourself.

The Global Disinformation Index (GDI)—a British nonprofit that smeared Reason as an unsafe news website using dubious criteria—might want to take a closer look at newly uncovered disinformation being spread by… the website of the Global Disinformation Index.

GDI is partly funded by the U.S. State Department, and seeks to discourage advertisers from working with news outlets like Reason on the theory that we misinform our readers. (NewsGuard, a more transparent advising organization, rates Reason 100 out of 100 "for the highest adherence to journalistic practice.") It has recently come under considerable criticism from conservative and libertarian news websites following the publication of an expose in The Washington Examiner.

GDI earned itself additional criticism this week, after the U.S. Energy Department endorsed the lab leak theory of COVID-19's origins. Previous reports by GDI warned advertisers to blacklist news sites that attempted to blame the pandemic on a lab leak, and implied that any website asserting a cover-up on the part of the Chinese government was promoting racist disinformation with the capacity of harming Asian people. GDI's messaging on the lab leak theory was clear and consistent: News websites that explored this topic should be demonetized. According to The Examiner's Gabe Kaminsky:

GDI alleged in a February 2020 report dubbed "Coronavirus: The makings of a disinformation pandemic?" that "adversarial narratives" are emerging as a key "disinformation tactic." The report called out Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) for raising the possibility on Fox News that COVID-19 came from a lab.

"By broadcasting the Senator's words to a national audience, this debunked conspiracy theory is given authority, validation and amplification," said GDI in the report.

One month later, in March 2020, GDI released a report titled, "Why is Ad Tech Funding These Ads on Coronavirus Conspiracy Sites?"

The report, which slammed Google and other companies for "providing ad revenue streams to known disinformation sites peddling coronavirus conspiracies," called out the conservative blog American Thinker for publishing a commentary article titled "The Wuhan Virus Escaped From a Chinese Lab." GDI also took aim at a company selling N-95 masks for advertising in the article.

Portraying the lab leak notion as a dangerous, racist conspiracy theory never made any sense, and journalists, health officials, and disinformation trackers—like GDI—that enforced this narrative should feel profoundly embarrassed.

But that's not all GDI has to atone for.

On Monday, I called out several of the journalists who incorrectly smeared lab leak origin proponents as racists—The New York Times' lead coronavirus reporter, Apoorva Mandavilli, chief among them.

Another journalist who penned an unfortunate tweet about the lab leak theory is The Atlantic's Anne Applebaum, who likened Sen. Tom Cotton (R–Ark.) to a "Soviet propagandist" for merely raising the possibility that COVID-19 escaped from a Chinese laboratory.

[Linked Image]

Applebaum has previously produced some excellent work. She has authored two books on the horrors of Soviet communism: Gulag: A History, on Soviet prisons, and Red Famine: Stalin's War on Ukraine, about the Holodomor. But she erred when she described the lab leak theory as akin to Russian disinformation.

Notably, Applebaum was also listed on the GDI's website as one of its principle journalistic advisors. Given GDI's misguided approach to the lab leak theory, I wondered if Applebaum was partly responsible—or whether she would now advise GDI to change course. So I emailed her.

Her response was surprising, to say the least.

"Until a few days ago I was not aware that I was listed as an advisor on the GDI website," writes Applebaum. "I last spoke to them when they were still raising money—probably 2018 or 2019—and have not advised them on anything or had any contact since. I have asked to have my name taken off their website, which they agreed to do."

GDI misrepresenting Applebaum as a member of its advisory panel is especially hypocritical, given the organization's stated reasons for placing Reason on its list of "ten riskiest online news outlets." GDI dinged Reason for not displaying "information regarding authorship attribution, pre-publication fact-checking, or post-publication corrections processes." It is not clear exactly what the organization meant by this; GDI did not respond to a request for comment.

But GDI's own website has clearly committed a transgression that sounds remarkably similar: It listed an advisor who actually had nothing to do with the organization, and nowhere on GDI's website does it currently explain the mistake. There is no statement along the lines of, Anne Applebaum was erroneously listed as an advisor to GDI and we regret the error. It seems like GDI lacks clarity regarding its own authorship attribution and fact-checking processes.

Time and time again, so-called disinformation watchdogs fail their own tests, but this is a particularly galling example. The State Department has no business funding such sanctimony.

Onward and upward,

©All information posted on this site is the private property of the individual author and and may not be reproduced without permission. © 2001-2020 All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software