Tuesday, 27 June 2017

How deliberately evil are the international mass media? Very much so

A couple of days ago my home city was the number one headline news item in the world because of mass media lying with strategically evil intent.

Of course, this kind of thing is part of the daily diet of corruption and inversion which we are fed by globally-coordinated, demonically-inspired dishonesty; but the instance is instructive because the evil intent is so obvious and the consequences so widespread.

What actually happened is that a (still un-named, apparently) black African Muslim woman attended Eid celebrations at a mosque with family; then afterwards badly lost control of the car she was driving and ran into several of the other worshippers, badly injuring them.

A horrible accident.

And all this was instantly known by everybody at the event and by the police who later arrived and arrested the woman.

But instead, what was headlined - internationally, immediately, stereotypically - words presumably deriving from some combination of the police and mass media - was the likes of: "Car 'ploughs into families' near Newcastle Mosque", "6 injured as car hits crowd celebrating Eid in the UK", "Two children fighting for their lives after car hits crowd during Eid celebrations".

And at some point in the articles, the phase was used - 'not terror related' or not 'believed' to be terror related - which was, of course, always known for sure from the very beginning.

So - if this was an accident, happening in a field among Sunday worshippers, since it was known for sure not to be terror related, and to have been perpetrated by a co-worshipper - then why was it featured the number one international headline news?

To do harm, by calculated misrepresentation - clearly. 

What actually happened was not international news; but what was deliberately implied by the headlines was. This headlining, and prominence accorded the story, is not just 'irresponsible' - by contrast such contrivance is fully-responsible, and carefully calculated harm-doing.

The reason is in what the headlines don't say - and what the fact of them being headlines implies, in a context of several recent deliberate so-called terrorist attacks on pedestrians by religiously or politically motivated drivers.

The mass media are using the fact that shocking headlines create a lasting psychological impact which is not undone by later revisions or additions; even when these revisions or additions occur later in the article - but especially not undone when modifications or corrections occur some hours or days later.

In my book on the mass media, Addicted to Distraction, I call this 'First-strike framing' of news:

http://addictedtodistraction.blogspot.co.uk

Of course, most people - around the world - will see or read only the headline - and draw the apparently obvious, but known to be false, conclusions. Because the false conclusions have been engineered, this is the very worst kind of lie: the deliberately-misleading but deniable dishonesty. 

The mass media are thereby - quite deliberately, and in a planned and coordinated fashion, and in harmonious cooperation with other institutions and bureaucracies - stoking-up an agenda of fear, resentment and conflict, in the UK and internationally.

How evil is that? Very evil indeed - and let's not all get so blase and cynical that we fail to notice the fact.

The media take a known accident, perpetrated by someone who is obviously not a terrorist; but treat the story in every way as if it was a terror incident. Consequently, people understand and remember this event as if it had been a terror incident. 

But for the Global Establishment, this is all in a day's work; quite normal; quite usual - it is the mass media's mainstream modus operandi...

Bear This Fact In Mind.




3 comments:

  1. I'm the proof of what you're saying here. I saw the headline and assumed it was something similar to the recent incident of a clearly mentally disturbed person (i.e. in no sense a political terrorist though it was presented as such) driving into a crowd outside a London mosque. The point is I didn't read any further and until seeing this thought it was something like that instead of a tragic but 'normal' road accident.

    ReplyDelete
  2. @William - Indeed. I heard the account and also that it was 'not terrorism' - but interpreted this to mean it was a deliberate killing (otherwise why report it?) but 'not terrorism' because the act was individually-motivated (some insane or hate-filled person, presumably) rather than done for ideological reasons.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I would have never noticed this without you writing something. I've been busy for the last few days and this would have dropped off my radar entirely.

    I've read part of addicted to distraction and I am finding more ways that the powers behind this are pushing towards their goals.

    ReplyDelete