Without mainstream media there would be a hole where no light gets in …
Branded - that's not the way to lie!
Mainstream society loves to use the mainstream media as its whipping boy … skinning what they see as the wicked messengers.
For years now, since the advent of social media – that pretend voice of the people – propagandists and conspiracy theorists, like the once smuttily funny Russell Brand and generally uncomprehending new-age media commentators, have taken an almost rabid joy in tearing our flesh from our bones.
When, in the past, people would come to me for help to expose someone or something that’s done them wrong – it might be their local council, their MP, a business, a rogue boss – now, they publish defamatory one-sided stories about those same people on their social media pages, mainly without regard to foundation or fact, investigation or balance.
Their posts are also generally confusing, misspelt, arrogant and ill-conceived. Hey, but they are the new media luvvies – wot duz speling ahve two du wiv anyfing! Am telink tha f”kin truf u tw*t!
This is not freedom of speech on social media - only the destruction of language, of law and, more importantly, the real freedom to speak your mind out about the shameful, hurtful and downright illegal.
This all raised its ugly head again as the bendy, gummy, hair-sprayed, wild eyed ‘sex god’ Russell Brand was laid before the public eye by mainstream media for being a potentially very naughty boy.
Or as Bob Geldoff once called him – a complete c*nt!
Mainstream media is the crack in society where the light gets in, without it there would be a black, deafeningly silent, abyss.
No longer would people like me, working journalists, dare to go where the police and the authorities can’t be bothered going. Society would be a closed book where the liars, cheats, narcissists and bullies scurry, like bugs thriving in the darkness and silence.
Social media bleats that Russell Brand is the victim of mainstream media and pompously quote ‘all are presumed innocent until proven guilty’.
But they don’t see the fundamental flaw…
Yes, there Is, quite rightly, a presumption of innocence by law and its due process… judges of any kind have to judge after hearing evidence. There must lie the presumption of innocence.
But there is no presumption of innocence in investigations - far from it! Ask any police officer or journalist.
An investigation only begins when there is a suspicion of guilt and wrong-doing.
That’s how we find out the truth, the evidence.
Or lack of it.
#branded #chuckconnors #russellbrand #sex #geldoff #geldof #msm #journalists #journalis
m
"Mainstream media is the crack in society where the light gets in, without it there would be a black, deafeningly silent, abyss."
There is such a silent abyss on nearly every scandal! The mainstream media is obsessed with celebrity, even to the point of putting "news" of allegations of celebrity crime before the ordinary folk. According to the victims commissioner, "Only 5% of rapes that were given an outcome by the police in the year ending December 2021". (Source: https://victimscommissioner.org.uk/news/the-distressing-truth-is-that-if-you-are-raped-in-britain-today-your-chances-of-seeing-justice-are-slim/#:~:text=Only%205%25%20of%20rapes%20that,you%20will%20get%20to%20trial. )
At some point, someone will say "praise the Lord for celebrity criminals, it's the only way the mainstream media can be assed to report crime and hold the legal system's failures to account!"
But even that will be a farce, when you look at how the media revered Sir Jimmy Saville's libel lawyers so much he was never exposed during his lifetime. According to "due process of the law", Saville is "innocent until proved proved guilty while being given the chance to defend himself", and since that is no longer possible, he is "in the eyes of the law" innocent. All because the newspapers were either in awe of him for being a celebrity, or afraid of his lawyers. Literally the same happened with Hitler in the 1930s, when the vast majority of the media backed peace at any price, applauding Chamberlain's three trips to get Hitler's "peace pledge" autograph in 1938, even after the Mein Kampf and Nuremberg Laws had exposed him as a malicious war mongering racist. You can't say the mainstream media is innocent or well-meaning! It would pander to the devil incarnate to boost readers/viewers!
Take another example. Around 2008, when the CO2 climate scare mongering began, based on Arrhenius's greenhouse deception, a couple of climate researchers at NASA resigned in protest because there's a massive flaw in the theory, being covered up to this day.
If you plot CO2 rise and temperature rise over say the past century, there's a general correlation, but there's a huge problem. The amount of CO2 (now 416 parts per million of air) is only 4% of what is needed to account for the rise in temperature if CO2 is purely responsible!
So where's the 96% of the temperature rise coming from? It turned out that all of the IPCC's "alternative models" of climate change attributed that 96% to water vapour, H2O. If you boil your kettle, you get steam, and steam (water vapour) is a good wide-band absorber of infra-red. The problem is, that can't be true. The NASA scientist (I quote him in papers on vixra, over a decade ago) grasped that if there was such "positive feedback" from water vapour, we wouldn't be here because the earth's oceans would have ensured a runaway greenhouse effect, making Earth another Venus.
The reality, of course, is that as soon as the atmosphere is saturated, clouds condense, increasing the albedo. So a hotter earth will simply have more cloud cover, reflecting away more solar radiation and offsetting the effect of extra CO2.
What's shocking here is what the mainstream media did with this. They ignored the whole thing unless they have a vested interest in promoting mainstream propaganda, and if they were critical, they tried to avoid looking at the mechanism and instead tried to built a case by quoting "experts". James Delingpole at the Daily Telegraph wrote a huge number of posts attacking climate research, but ignored the facts, preferring to leak the emails about peer review bias from the University of East Anglia, or former New Scientist editor Nigel Calder's graph correlating temperature rise to cosmic ray solar activity measurements.
(This relates to the cloud formation: cosmic radiation hitting the clean upper atmosphere causes ionization of air, triggering the condensation of saturated air into cloud droplets just as occurs in the Wilson cloud chamber of physics, so instead of having water vapour absorbing the sun's infra-red, you get a cirrus cloud that reflects most sunlight back into space, cooling the earth. But this mechanism was never front page headlines, submerged by endless nonsense.)
So, the media is a really bad thing. If you go into it, journalism began with people simply keeping journals like diaries or letters, that could be passed around to distribute written news. Then the printing presses corrupted it, and the hunt was on for celebrity "news". The most exciting headlines sold the most, so boring stuff was gradually censored out. But the problem is, the devil is in the detail, and the detail is boring.