This looks like a fairly standard alternative media rant, but consider the source. From Bill O’Reilly at billoreilly.com:
Tag Archives: fake news
On the 70th anniversary of Orwell’s death: The danger of third parties “curating” and “fact checking” our info, by Sharyl Attkisson
There are all sorts of official, semi-official, and private busybodies who want to protect us from “fake news.” We’re all just too stupid to sort through it on our own. From Sharyl Attkisson at sharylattkisson.com:
It is a dangerous practice: Government, corporations, universities, news outlets and “experts” curating our information so that we cannot access, see or believe that which they determine we should not access, see or believe.
If anyone had suggested to Orwell, or the American founders, that we would invite this sort of manipulation and control of our information, they wouldn’t have believed it.
The idea was first introduced on the national stage by President Obama in October of 2016 right before the presidential election. He insisted that somebody needed to step in and “curate” our information in the “Wild, Wild West” internet environment.
Nobody had been clamoring for any such thing.
So the challenge for those who came up with this bright idea– in my opinion in an effort to control news and information– was to convince the public to accept something very un-American: their information being shaped and censored by others.
This feat was accomplished in concert with the anti-fake news effort, started in September 2016 through a nonprofit called First Draft. (First Draft was funded by Google, owned by Alphabet, run by Eric Schmidt, a major Hillary Clinton funder and supporter.) The anti-fake news effort was also an effort by special interests to step in and control news and internet information.
The truth in America is in extremis, barely kept alive on life support from primarily from the alternative media. From Bill Sardi at lewrockwell.com:
How do Americans discern truth from fiction in this era of fake news?
By now, any American who doesn’t have their head in the sand should have lost any faith they ever had in the news media as the 4th estate of government, the de facto examiner and investigator of government.
- 69% say the federal government withholds important information from the public
- 61% say the news media ignores important stories
- 58% of adults are not confident people can hold civil conversations with those who have different views
- 57% are not confident people will cast informed votes in elections
More troubling, a Northeastern University survey reveals 45% of students are not confident that they could readily distinguish between real and fake news.
The strong minds that read SLL have nothing to worry about, but Google is trying to brainwash the weak-minded. From Joseph Mercola at lewrockwell.com:
In this interview, Google whistleblower Zach Vorhies, who worked as a senior software engineer at Google and YouTube for over eight years, shares his inside knowledge of this global monopoly, revealing why Google is not a reliable source of information anymore.
Google’s monopoly over search is matched by a continued reassurance that it is an unbiased search platform. Google is actively suppressing and censoring information, proving it is anything but unbiased.
While some of the information revealed is related to politics, you can read about my views about the two-party U.S. federal government here.
The point of sharing this information is that Google is manipulating search results to reflect its views, and to influence our social behavior while denying this is happening.
This article will dispel any lingering doubts you may have had about mainstream journalists being in bed with governments and intelligence agencies. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.org:
In a recent interview with USA Watchdog — https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/10/13/if-impeach-gate-fails-elites-will-crash-economy-to-get-rid-of-trump/ — I described Western journalists as prostitutes who whore for a living.
One of them who did so—Udo Ulfkotte—describes what it is like. For the naive and insouciant Western people who need to hear the truth from the horse’s mouth, here is a translation of one of Udo Ulfkotte’s lectures on the subject.
Kopp in Germany published Ulfkotte’s book, Gekaufte Journalisten (Bought Journalism) several years ago. It was a best seller. An English language edition was authorized, but its publication was blocked by intelligence services. You can get an idea of the book from the lecture.
If the link doesn’t work for you, here is the transcript:
In 2014, the German journalist and writer Udo Ulfkotte published a book that created a big stir, describing how the journalistic profession is thoroughly corrupt and infiltrated by intelligence services.
The biggest whoppers, the most egregious “fake news.” comes from governments, so when the powerful Pentagon takes an interest in combatting “fake news,” it’s a sure thing that the Defense Department isn’t after the truth. From Matt Taibbi at rollingstone.com:
If there’s a worse idea than the Pentagon becoming Editor-in-Chief of America, I can’t remember it. But we’re getting there:
From Bloomberg over Labor Day weekend:
Fake news and social media posts are such a threat to U.S. security that the Defense Department is launching a project to repel “large-scale, automated disinformation attacks,” as the top Republican in Congress blocks efforts to protect the integrity of elections.
One of the Pentagon’s most secretive agencies, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), is developing “custom software that can unearth fakes hidden among more than 500,000 stories, photos, video and audio clips.”
Once upon a time, when progressives still reflexively distrusted the military, DARPA was a liberal punchline, known for helping invent the Internet but also for developing lunatic privacy-invading projects like LifeLog, a program to “gather in a single place just about everything an individual says, sees, or does.”
DARPA now is developing a semantic analysis program called “SemaFor” and an image analysis program called “MediFor,” ostensibly designed to prevent the use of fake images or text. The idea would be to develop these technologies to help private Internet providers sift through content.
It’s the latest in a string of stories about new methods of control over information flow that should, but for some reason do not, horrify every working journalist.
From the Senate dragging Internet providers to the Hill to demand strategies against the sowing of “discord,” to tales of hundreds of Facebook sites zapped for “coordinated inauthentic behavior” following advice by government-connected groups like the Atlantic Council, it’s been clear the future of the information landscape is going to involve elaborate new forms of algorithmic regulation.
Stories about the need for such technologies are always couched as responses to the “fake news” problem. Unfortunately, “fake news” is a poorly-defined, amorphous concept that the public has been trained to fear without really understanding.