Марк Дайс - The True Story of Fake News - How Mainstream Media Manipulates Millions

This kind of slanted coverage is certainly nothing new. A famous study of liberal bias in the American media was conducted in 1986 and found that most journalists working for the major national news outlets were Democrats with liberal views on issues like gay rights, abortion, affirmative action, and welfare programs. 325The study, later published in a book called The Media Elite , gathered its data by conducting surveys of journalists at the Big Three broadcast news networks (ABC, CBS, NBC), along with print outlets including The New York Times , The Washington Post , The Wall Street Journal , Time, and Newsweek.

It concluded that because liberals dominated most news organizations, their coverage reflected their political attitudes both consciously and unconsciously; even if they didn’t think they were being biased because they unconsciously believed that their views were ‘correct,’ so in their minds they didn’t see their coverage as biased at all.

A decade later in 1997, another major study of journalists was conducted by the American Society of Newspaper Editors and that found that 61% of reporters leaned Democrat, but only 15% leaned Republican. 32624% of those surveyed appeared to be independent. 327

In 2002 a professor at Dartmouth College published his research on media bias in his book Press Bias and Politics: How the Media Frame Controversial Issues, which also showed that most mainstream media in America present liberal views in a more favorable light. 328

Another study in 2005 by researchers at UCLA found a “strong liberal bias” at most mainstream media outlets with the exception of Fox News and The Washington Times . 329A 2007 study at Harvard University also confirmed a liberal bias in television news. 330They noted that as soon as the 2008 presidential campaign kicked off that, “Democrat Barack Obama, the junior Senator from Illinois, enjoyed by far the most positive treatment of the major candidates during the first five months of the year,” and that, “the press overall has been more positive about Democratic candidates and more negative about Republicans.” They calculated that in the first five months of the year just 12% of the coverage of John McCain, the Republican frontrunner, was positive.

In 2008 a study looked into political donations made by employees at NBC, ABC, and CBS and found that over one million dollars was given to the Democrat Party from 1,160 different people at those networks. 331It also found that the Republican Party only received $142,863 from just 193 employees. 332If you do the math, the Democrat Party got seven times as much money from people who worked at the Big Three networks, and six times as many employees donated to the Democrats vs. the Republicans.

After the study was published, NBC News surprisingly admitted, “Whether you sample your news feed from ABC or CBS (or, yes, even NBC and MSNBC), whether you prefer Fox News Channel or National Public Radio, The Wall Street Journal or The New Yorker , some of the journalists feeding you are also feeding cash to politicians, parties or political action committees.” 333

A 2016 poll of the White House Press Corps revealed that of the 72 members, there were zero registered Republicans. 334In 2017 the same poll found that there were only three. 335

After Hillary’s campaign manager John Podesta got his emails hacked and they were published by Wikileaks, some of them showed various journalists actually coordinating with Hillary’s campaign. New York Times writer and CNBC anchor John Harwood gave Hillary Clinton “veto” power over what not to include in an interview with her. 336Politico’s Glenn Thrush even called himself a “hack” and let John Podesta review parts of his story before it was published. “No worries. Because I have become a hack I will send you the whole section that pertains to you. Please don’t share or tell anyone I did this,” he said. 337

Another reporter for The New York Times named Mark Leibovich also emailed the campaign parts of his interview with Hillary and asked if it was okay if he included them in his article. 338In one of the emails the Clinton campaign named New York Times writer Maggie Haberman as someone who they said had “teed up stories” for them in the past and “never disappointed” them. 339

Hacked emails from the DNC showed that CNN’s Donna Brazil gave Hillary Clinton debate questions in advance. 340She initially denied doing such thing, but later apologized, saying, “sending those emails was a mistake I will forever regret.” 341

The Wikileaks email dump also showed that Marjorie Pritchard of The Boston Globe coordinated with the Clinton campaign to determine when to publish an article for the maximum amount of positive exposure. “It would be good to get it in on Tuesday, when she is in New Hampshire,” Pritchard wrote. “That would give her a big presence on Tuesday with the piece and on Wednesday with the news story. Please let me know.” 342

Another of the leaked emails from the DNC showed then-DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz emailed NBC’s Chuck Todd telling him that the negative coverage of Hillary Clinton “must stop” and asked to schedule a phone call to discuss the matter with him. He replied, agreeing to schedule a call. 343

The Clinton campaign didn’t deny any of these emails were real, instead they just tried to deflect from the controversy by claiming ‘the Russians’ had hacked them in order to help Donald Trump.

When talking about Hillary Clinton, CNN’s Chris Cuomo admitted on air that, “We could not help her any more than we have… she’s got just a free ride so far with the media, we’re the biggest ones promoting her campaign,” 344and Wolf Blitzer was seen for a brief moment dancing and drinking wine at the Democratic National Convention of 2016 after Hillary gave her big speech and was formally nominated as the Democrat Party’s candidate. 345

So we know that the overwhelming number of news networks and their employees are liberal, but why? One theory is that the media industry was started by privileged elitists due to the high costs associated with the equipment needed to manufacture and distribute media. Television studios, cameras, editing bays, satellite uplinks, and broadcasting antennas have traditionally been very expensive. Not to mention the costs of printing presses and the infrastructure needed to deliver hundreds of thousands of newspapers per day.

Political commentator Noam Chomsky points out, “those who occupy managerial positions in the media, or gain status within them as commentators, belong to the same privileged elites, and might be expected to share the perceptions, aspirations, and attitudes of their associates, reflecting their own class interests as well. Journalists entering the system are unlikely to make their way unless they conform to these ideological pressures, generally by internalizing the values; it is not easy to say one thing and believe another, and those who fail to conform will tend to be weeded out by familiar mechanisms.” 346

Every time people talk about the mainstream media conglomerates secretly collaborating with each other, visions of smoke filled rooms and shadowy figures wearing expensive suits sitting around a table come to mind. While this may be an exaggerated expectation of a behind the scenes look at the issue, it isn’t all that far from the truth.

Every July since 1983 a small group of media moguls, tech titans, investors, politicians, and intelligence agency insiders, all gather in the small town of Sun Valley, Idaho for a week of meetings to develop a consensus regarding policies for mainstream media, social media, and emerging communications technology. It is basically like the Bilderberg Group meeting for media, and since tech companies like Facebook, Twitter, Apple, and Google have become major players in the media industry, they all come together each year in Sun Valley trying to make sure no emerging platforms can threaten their power.