The Blue Pill.

[BIAD]

...Those first sentences/paragraphs form how the reader will digest the message.
This shows how the MSM can control the narrative. This is why I never watch MSM, none of it!!

Do yourself a favor and go to independent sources for your news.

And on the back of Mystic's wise-words, I offer this!!

You may have heard the story about an experiment involving five monkeys and the water-spraying bananas.

Five monkeys are in a large cage. High up at the top of the cage, well beyond the reach of the monkeys,
is a bunch of bananas. Underneath the bananas is a ladder.

The monkeys immediately spot the bananas and one begins to climb the ladder.
As he does, however, a stream of cold water hits the monkey and then proceeds to spray each of the other
monkeys. The monkey on the ladder scrambles off. And all five sit for a time on the floor, wet, cold, and bewildered.

The temptation is too great, and another monkey begins to climb the ladder and they're all dowsed in water again.
When a third monkey tries to climb the ladder, the other monkeys, wanting to avoid the cold spray, pull him off the
ladder and beat him.

Now one monkey is removed and a new monkey is introduced to the cage.
Spotting the bananas, he naively begins to climb the ladder. The other monkeys pull him off and beat him.
The swapping-out continues until all new monkeys are in the cage and all of them know that it's bad to go for the
bananas.
They just don't know why.

Welcome to where Journalism is today.

Below is an excerpt from the website 'ethicaljournalismnetwork.org' and shows the current situation regarding
the lack of trust in the general mainstream media. The monkeys are scratching their heads and wondering why
nobody wants the bananas, the answer is fairly simple and resides in the same metaphor.
They've forgotten what they were supposed to do.
...............................................

FAKE NEWS
Facebook and Matters of Fact in the Post-Truth Era

'In 2016 media learned the hard way that journalism is in danger of being overwhelmed by rogue politics and a
communications revolution that accelerates the spread of lies, misinformation and dubious claims.

According to many observers two major stories –Brexit and the election of Donald Trump –signal a moment of
peril for the press, and media around the world are deeply alarmed.

The free circulation of malicious lies, the ineffectiveness of fact-checking, the resilience of populist propaganda,
racism and sexism and the emergence of the so-called post-truth era appear to challenge a fundamental cornerstone
of ethical journalism –that facts matter for democracy and that people want to be well-informed when called upon to
make potentially life-changing decisions.

In the last months of 2016 media executives and leading journalists, policy-makers and media academics have been
scratching their heads to explain what has gone wrong...'

SOURCE:
...............................................

'...In the last months of 2016 media executives and leading journalists, policy-makers and media academics have been
scratching their heads to explain what has gone wrong...'

Do you see it...?!
Media executives, leading Journalists, policy-makers and media academics... Who the f*ck do you think you are?!!

You're scribblers finding what really happened, you're the person who tells it like it is, not what a blue-haired, black
lesbian in a wheelchair wants you to say.
You're the person who has the access that the public hasn't, you're supposed to be -what they called 'trusted'

Journalism was about reporting information relevant to an action deemed interesting to the general public.
'This happened' and 'Those in powerful positions announced this' are actual examples of reporting what we call 'news',
but looking through today's eyes, they don't seem hold anyone's attention for long.

Man-bites-dog stories don't sell well and your side being the 'baddie' in a war doesn't improve sales and doesn't tempt
advertisers, but the world sometimes rolls like that.

There's isn't a 'wow' story every day and the simple logistics of asking a Reporter to possibly die for his employment
to get a good story in a conflict is obviously not something beneficial to the Journalist and the company he/she works
for. Labour for pay works best for both parties when it's done over a long time.

These are the realities of life. Sometimes a building isn't hit by an aeroplane and sometimes a politician isn't screwing
a porn star. Sometimes, there is just a cat stuck up a tree and the day is quiet. It's the cold water of reality, but it doesn't
sell newspapers or tempt a person to change TV channels.

However, if we view the man who bit the dog or the 'baddie' in a war from a different angle, then sales might improve
due to 'sugaring' the article with a social-opinion-based slant that a reader or viewer may approve of. Maybe the cat
stuck up the tree belongs to the porn star and surely a little background on what the cat-owner is currently doing would
add a little saccharine to what everyone would agree is a mundane story?

Right there is where true Journalism dies and the Influencing-Media is born.

I'm not judging, it's just that when a faux moral outrage is displayed regarding the lack of trust in the mainstream media
because the reader/viewer realised the trick, one would believe the Journalists would accept the game is up and just go
back to reporting straight-forward, no-nonsense and unbiased news.
But there's no original monkey to tell them how to.

Instead, they blame everyone around them who isn't considered part of their gang for 'Fake News'... and I'll resist the
easy jibe of asking where they learned it from. What did you expect...?! You pulled everyone from the ladder when
they aspired to get the bananas!!

The opinion-based, class-relevant, influencers that write everyday for television, internet and newspaper companies
are in the situation where they truly believe that not striving to obtain the bananas is the correct thing to do.
It's unimaginable to even contemplate the idea of not enlightening the uniformed and helping them to see the world that
the MSM believe is the correct one.

Ruses like discussing newspaper headlines between 'Influencers' during a television broadcast are supposed to imply
to the viewer that since it isn't spoken towards the camera, the points of view must be viable and believed by the
person speaking. Ergo, it's possibly a opinion of value.

This -along with certain optics and emotional background tones are the norm in the business of impacting the public's
consciousness into realising that a Journalist's perception is a vital part of anyone's ability to socially interact with those
around them.
Are they the public's custodians of truth...? or is it just show-business and entertaining? Which sells better and pays the
wine-bar bill and the mortgage? Film at eleven.

When Cronkite emotionally took off his thick-framed spectacles during his announcement that John Kennedy had died
in the Bethesda Naval Hospital in 1963, it may have been then that a presenter of the news became an actor for the
ratings.

Brexit and Trump shocked the media world because it was if an entirely different troope of monkeys were outside of the
cage and hadn't accepted the banana-starved inmates' decisions. My advice is to endure the cold water and get back
to reporting real news, even if it clashes with your own world-view.

Or don't.
You can continue to offer your click-bait, anti-working-class, indulgent, over-bearing diversity half-truths and maybe the
vulnerable will eat it up. But stop whining, not everyone is in the cage with you and when they close the News-desk,
at least you won't look puzzled at the bunch of fruit that's been hanging there for a very long time.