“If we can’t discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems,” Obama said during a press conference alongside German leader Angela Merkel.
Part of the problem, according to Obama, is that the internet has lowered the barrier of entry to mass audiences to the point where internet hoaxsters have the same reach as traditional media outlets like CNN.
“If everything seems to be the same and no distinctions are made, then we won’t know what to protect,” Obama said. “We won’t know what to fight for.”
Of course, what the president is saying and what he and establishment attackers of alternative media really mean are totally different things.
We’ve covered this several times since the establishment news media began flipping out over its inability to convince Americans that Hillary Clinton was the inevitable future President of the United States.
In case you missed them, a couple of recent posts:
Think about the tenor of the presidential election as portrayed by the national mainstream news media. If all your information came from mainstream outlets, it wasn’t an election about issues— it was an election about whether we’d have the first female president or be led by an alleged misogynistic racist.
The only problem was this: The media never really managed to find any firm evidence to back its character assassination of Trump in a meaningful way. Meanwhile, no thanks to the national news media, Clinton’s career of corruption came into plain view because of the work of transparency groups.
And that’s where alternative media came in, reporting and analyzing what the mainstream wouldn’t.
The liberal political establishment is losing control, and it is terrified. Think about the story the propaganda news networks fed American voters after Clinton’s campaign emails were leaked.
Some refused to report on the content of the emails because federal officials said the leaks were perpetuated by Russian hackers looking to sway election results. Of course, besides a vague national security statement, the political establishment conveniently failed to provide any real proof to back the claim.
Americans didn’t really buy it. And even for many who do think Russians leaked the emails, the content of the correspondence remained extremely disturbing.
With the Russian boogeyman no longer a viable option, the establishment is trying to suggest that all of the alternative media reports about Clinton’s corruption were simply false. In other words, the establishment realizes it can no longer write history via corporate media propaganda… so it’s working feverishly to re-write the account provided by alternative media observers.
Discrediting alternative media is a longtime goal of the anti-free speech leftist establishment.
Back in 2013, Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and other leading Democrats pushed legislative efforts to define journalism for legal purposes.
“A journalist gathers information for a media outlet that disseminates the information through a broadly defined ‘medium’ — including newspaper, nonfiction book, wire service, magazine, news website, television, radio or motion picture — for public use. This broad definition covers every form of legitimate journalism,” Durbin said at the time.
Of course, I’m sure you can guess who gets to decide what constitutes “legitimate” journalism in this kind of scenario.
To support his effort, you have to believe you are too stupid to decide what is and isn’t reliable information and that the government and its mass media allies never lie to you.
Of course, if you managed to catch anything revealed from recent leaks analyzed by alternative media outlets it’s a little tough to do so.