Rappoport documents the death of Fake News

Over 40 years ago, in my doctoral dissertation in philosophy, I claimed that “the line between fiction and fact is very thin.” I might as well have called this statement prophecy, because that is what it was — at the time. Back then, this culture (programmed by positivistic science) considered facts as facts, small hard bullets of info that we actually relied on. Stood upon. They anchored us into “reality.”

Soon, I started to call them “factoids,” instead. Meaning: they were radioactive, with half-lives. I.e., just because one might be “true” at one point, didn’t mean it would stay “true.”

Decades later, I noticed that CNN had picked up my word, and used it for a brief time, until that network, along with all the others, started to grind into dust thanks both the phenomenon of the internet and the rise of independent citizen journalists, plus, now, the Trump Effect.

Jon Rappoport, who has been identifying, naming, analyzing and countering “fake news” for 16 years, has two recent pieces that help give context to the lack of context we have unconsciously allowed to program our minds, ever since at least the ’50s, when tell-a-vision took over. First and most obvious of course, is the Trump Effect.

The evening news and the gunslinger called Trump

Aside from the Trump Effect, Rappoport notices other telling signs of MSM demise. He considers what has followed once the Archetypal Big Daddy Anchors on evening news started to disappear, leaving second or third rate substitutes, with no “authority,”  in their place.

The Collapse of Major Media

Excerpt:

What happened?

Many things—among them, the father figures left the fold. They decided to sell real estate or take corporate work in PR. They saw the handwriting on the wall: the networks were fostering a youth movement, seeking younger and prettier talent. Why? Because Madison Avenue was convinced the younger viewer demographic was the important one, in terms of consumer buying power. Therefore, on-air news faces had to be younger as well. This sounded right, but it overlooked one vital fact. The young news anchors couldn’t pull off the appropriate level of mind control. They were merely bland robots. Friendly, nice, literate to the point of being able read copy. (Lester Holt at NBC is a bit older, but he comes across as a corpse someone dug up at a cemetery for a role in a Frankenstein remake.)

There is another gross miscalculation. The commercials, between news segments, are overwhelmingly pharmaceutical. Those drugs aren’t intended for the youth demographic. They’re for the middle-aged and the seniors, who want to toxify themselves for the rest of their lives.

So the commercials are playing to the older crowd, while the faces of the news are supposedly attracting younger viewers. It’s a mess. The news execs and programmers really have no idea what they’re doing.

They’re basically hoping their game somehow lasts until they can retire.

Ultimately, it appears that the Trump Effect is merely the final blow to an already moribund mind-controlling structure.

I especially appreciate Rappoport’s point of view because not only has he been studying the mass psychology behind the “news” phenomenon for many years, how te-lie-vision has programmed the human mind, he’s also articulate and often bitingly funny. YES!

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *