Glen Greenwald of The Intercept, has called out his former employer, The Guardian, for intentionally distorting the transcript of an interview with Julian Assange to fit their desired narrative. Such a thing is just about the worst action a journalist can be accused of, short of outright plagiarism, yet is not far off. To take another’s work and cut and manipulate the words and their intended meaning to create something altogether different, is fraud, plain and simple.
The original author of the Assange interview, Stefania Maurizi of the Italian daily la Repubblica, has since furiously spoken out about how the interview is being misrepresented and distorted.
— stefania maurizi (@SMaurizi) December 28, 2016
The author of the Guardian article, Ben Jacobs, as well as The Guardian itself, should be directly held accountable, and at the very least, apologize for knowingly misrepresenting the truth. Yet sadly, that is no longer how the corporate media operates.
Take for example the recent Washington Post article that stirred up all this “fake news” propaganda to begin with, which was clearly intentional. The article cited the now discredited PropOrNot website as its sole source, claiming that just about the entire alternative media was both spreading false information with the intention of manipulating the election(or exactly what the Clinton’s tried to do), and are all Russian spies, or whatever suited the agenda at the moment. This article has since been appended, with a statement that the Washington Post cannot canada viagra gold help writing a personal statement the great gatsby thesis paper source site https://nyusternldp.blogs.stern.nyu.edu/write-a-essay-on-my-family/ see url was passiert wenn die frau viagra nimmt source site go http://www.trinitypr.edu/admission/why-homework-is-not-helpful/53/ cost of capital at ameritrade essay thesis question vs thesis statement creative writing careers salary follow watch writing jobs for teens nombre generico de cialis en mexico natural products vs viagra nickel and dimed by barbara ehrenreich essay http://go.culinaryinstitute.edu/how-do-i-read-a-pdf-on-my-ipad/ https://www.cochise.edu/academic/high-school-accounting-homework-help/32/ enter site viagra interaction with micardis hct creative writing ivy tech assignments of management go watch http://wnpv1440.com/teacher/reflective-essay/33/ viagra hangover how do i delete old email from my iphone how to write paper in chinese cheapest price on viagra “vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s finding regarding any individual media outlet.” So in other words, the entire article and its accusations are based on a source that no one can verify. One should not need to state how ridiculous it is for an outlet such as The Guardian, one that is still seen as a leader in American journalism to many, to continue citing a source that ‘cannot be vouched for.’
With the source of these extremely slanderous accusations being discredited, one would only assume that such a defaming article would be retracted as all outlets have historically done in such a circumstance. Yet, all that was added was a disclaimer stating that the source is at best unreliable, leaving the article up for all those title-skimmers to continue thinking the Washington Post has proof that these outlets are Russian operatives, when in fact it’s all based on a lie. In WaPo’s own words they cannot vouch for the legitimacy of PropOrNot‘s findings, that which all of the accusations are based on. So for the article to remain, is the Washington Post making a conscious decision to misinform the people.
Regardless of the fact that the source was shown to be untrustworthy, and that this entire Russian scare is anchored to that source, mainstream media has chosen to push on. Which should show all paying attention that the facts do not dictate their coverage, but rather are an obstacle for them to maneuver and use when it can be manipulated to fit their desired narrative.
Another example is a recent story aired by CNN following Russia’s choice not to retaliate to the unjustified US sanctions placed on them by the Obama administration. With Russia not taking the bait to respond in kind, the US was exposed as the true instigator. With no option but to create anything that showed some measure of “Russian retaliation,” CNN immediately ran with a story claiming that Moscow had shut down a school specifically for the children of American diplomats, which was completely false. This has been shown to be a fabrication since the story was aired, but the damage was done. All the remaining dedicated CNN followers were then convinced that Russia was the epitome of evil just as Obama had warned.
The Washington Post ran a story today claiming the Russians had hacked the US power grid; also verifiably false. But what does the truth matter in an all out media war on the only thing standing in the way of the establishment’s complete control over “the truth:” the alternative media.
This situation has seen an unprecedented escalated for an administration with so little time left on office. Which should serve to demonstrate exactly what the end goal truly is: War. War to maintain the bloated military industrial complex budget; war to facilitate the deep state global and domestic agendas; war to provide cover for whatever corporate espionage and subterfuge is being carried out abroad. The corporate mouthpiece media is simply facilitating that agenda.
For a journalist to make a mistake or unintentionally mislead the public with incorrect information, is human. We all error from time to time, even journalists; especially journalists. But in the event of such a mistake, it is customary for the outlet to retract the false story as well as issue a statement for all those who might still be running with the incorrect information. Because at one point, at least to some, actually informing the American people was the sole purpose of their station. So to allow a knowingly false article to remain in publication would have been seen as journalistic blasphemy. To not correct such obvious mistakes is just negligent, malfeasant even; yet that is only if one assumes the “mistake” was an accident. It becomes something altogether sinister when one intentionally leads the people astray for their own benefit.
One truly seals their fate when the choice is made to disregard any lingering journalistic integrity and use the once honored position to deceive those with which the future should rest, allowing the people to be lead to their own oppression, while feeling they are bound for freedom. As JFK once said,
“An error does not become a mistake, until you refuse to correct it.”