In a jury decision that is unprecedented in U.S. tort law, the American Broadcasting Company was recently assessed a 5.5 million dollar judgment on behalf of Food Lion, a 1,100-store supermarket chain based in North Carolina. The suit against ABC was considered of vital importance in that it was the first such award in which the litigation did not address the accuracy of content, but, the methods used to gather information. Food Lion did not dispute ABC's claims that it was marketing spoiled and rotten food as fresh. Its suit was based on the fact that ABC producers gained access to Food Lion stores posing as employees who were hired using false resumes and lies on their employment applications.
It is of interest that the North Carolina jury ignored the First Amendment defense taken by ABC's lawyers and addressed the substance of dishonesty by their journalists. This has brought a howl of protest from every corner of the news media establishment. The president of ABC News, Roone Arledge, in an interview with the Washington Post, defended the use of covert cameras, claiming, "We only do this if it's a very important story and there's no other way to get it. These people were doing terrible things and we documented it by our cameras....It's not a thing we do lightly."
It seems to be the venue of modern journalism to forcibly, even odiously, press claims of their accuracy and integrity upon the public. There are few professions in this day that have succeeded in making themselves more respected and revered by the citizenry than the "investigative reporter" while at the same time having also succeeded in arousing public resentment toward them that contradicts that perceived image. Simultaneously, we both revere and loathe the "press" for its wonderful and apparently altruistic attempts to present truth and accuracy while engendering a level of disgust for their methods.
Modern journalism's hue-and-cry is "credibility". At the same time, they want us to accept them as the only agency of modern civilization that can righteously employ the doctrine of "the end justifies the means". This "doctrine" apparently includes the hypocrisy of using lies as a vehicle to obtain truth--which could be likened to committing adultery to obtain chastity. The doctrine, here mentioned, is also quoted from the Protocols. "Therefore we must not stop at bribery, deceit and treachery when they should serve towards the attainment of our end." If a news organization is willing to engage in the manufacturing of a mountain of falsehoods to secure a molehill of truth, what would they do to gather information about a really important story?
Framing the truth with lies! Who do they think they are? - the government? Isn't it a given that only politicians and government officials are allowed unrestricted lies to gain a noble end?
The government refuses private citizens the privilege of wiretapping the phones of others or even recording conversations off their own telephones, for that matter. Yet, the news media is permitted to surreptitiously videotape their subjects with apparent impunity. Such recording is far more invasive of one's privacy than merely taping a phone conversation.
How is it that the media has obtained such power? Simply speaking, they are the sweethearts of the New World Order. No politician dares get too abusive in any assault upon the media or they will find themselves out of a job come next election time. To gain control of all the power of a society, all one must do is to secure domination of only two critical areas: money and information flow. Realistically, if one selectively controls information, it will not be long before they control the money also.
In this nation we have a strange paradox. Polls claim that the majority of citizens do not trust the news media, but, at the same time, will effectively act upon, as fact, whatever the media feeds them.
"...because they received not the love of the truth...God shall send them strong delusion that they should believe a lie."
Disclaimer: APFN is not responsible for the accuracy of
material on 'The Winds'
and does not necessarily endorse the views expressed within their web pages.
This site is in the public domain.