Photo by Jametlene Reskp on Unsplash
Clear thinking does not come out of a muddled mind. Clear thinking only arises when the brain gets adequate rest. Tuning into the 24-hour news cycle, scrolling through post after post after post on your digital devices, combined with not stepping out into the natural world for a walk, not “stopping to smell the roses” as the old saying goes, will leave one with an exhausted psyche.
With all the horror stories emanating from the news, and all the pundits informing viewers (or readers) on how to interpret these stories, it’s easy to find oneself feeling hopeless and helpless.
And that’s just how the oligarchs who own the news/entertainment corporations want you to feel. Oh, they’ll throw you little snippets of hope every now and then, but there are strings attached to those snippets (a bias to the story that either praises/blames the GOP or Democrats, i.e. FOX vs CNN) leading you right back into the corrupted, status quo political system.
Bombarding the public constantly with the latest “breaking news,” interpreted by puppets of the corporatist mainstream media, is a method of mind control. If one doesn’t step away from all the noise, it’s all too easy to be led into believing that the corporate media’s interpretation of events actually emanated from your own thinking.
It’s not that the reporters, journalists, and news anchors are always intentionally lying to the public, it’s more that they know which side their bread is buttered on. To sustain a long career with a major network or legacy newspaper, one has to be aware of what can and cannot be openly stated; toe the line or find oneself out of a well-paying job.
With all the horror stories emanating from the news, and all the pundits informing viewers (or readers) on how to interpret these stories, it’s easy to find oneself feeling hopeless and helpless.
And that’s just how the oligarchs who own the news/entertainment corporations want you to feel. Oh, they’ll throw you little snippets of hope every now and then, but there are strings attached to those snippets (a bias to the story that either praises/blames the GOP or Democrats, i.e. FOX vs CNN) leading you right back into the corrupted, status quo political system.
Bombarding the public constantly with the latest “breaking news,” interpreted by puppets of the corporatist mainstream media, is a method of mind control. If one doesn’t step away from all the noise, it’s all too easy to be led into believing that the corporate media’s interpretation of events actually emanated from your own thinking.
It’s not that the reporters, journalists, and news anchors are always intentionally lying to the public, it’s more that they know which side their bread is buttered on. To sustain a long career with a major network or legacy newspaper, one has to be aware of what can and cannot be openly stated; toe the line or find oneself out of a well-paying job.
And it’s worth keeping in mind that this type of propaganda doesn’t have to necessarily convince the audience to completely accept the point of view being put forth. Rather, it can still be effective if it merely disorients and confuses the audience, because that renders readers without the kind of clarity required to take political action. (link)
I don’t watch NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, NEWS NATION or any other corporately-owned news media, and I don’t read legacy newspapers like the New York Times or the Washington Post. In my conversations with people who do turn to the mainstream media for information on world events, I am often struck by how they repeat what they learn from these entities as fact, and are unfamiliar with the history behind the stories. And, if we don’t know the history, we tend to place faith in the “expert opinions” provided by the 5-minute analysis of a politician, a lawyer, or an army general.
Most people don’t want to read a book, or watch an hour-long video that may provide a more in-depth analysis and some background to world events, but yet they feel they are informed because an expert told them what to think.
And if you try to discuss alternative views with these folks, they are quick to label you a conspiracy theorist. And, even when the “conspiracy theory” is proven to be correct, the mainstream media (MSM) believers will never know because the MSM generally never admit that they made a mistake; sometimes newspapers will provide one sentence on the last paragraph of page 21 to note that an “alternative” story had “some” facts correct.
When I am asked who I turn to for news and analysis, I answer that I tend to follow those reporters who are able to admit when they have made mistakes (and offer corrections as soon as possible), those who have lost well-paying careers rather than promote propaganda (Chris Hedges and Patrick Lawrence come to mind), those who are tireless researchers (Max Blumenthal, Aaron Maté, and Matthew Kennard are some examples), and investigative journalists who have lived among the populations that they write about.
Most the people that I follow are writing on Substack, because they have been fired from legacy newspapers, or demonetized on YouTube or other social media sites, or have lost their shows (along with the archives of their shows) on sites like RT, because the US government closed access to such sites. Telling the truth gets one blacklisted.
I am not implying that I know the truth. I just believe that I have a better chance at getting to the truth by listening to independent journalists who can explain how they arrived at their conclusions, and who refer readers and watchers to read books and listen to analysis that goes beyond the usual 5 to 10 minutes of “expert” opinion.
I also follow FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting) and listen to their weekly radio show Counterspin. FAIR clearly points out media bias:
Most people don’t want to read a book, or watch an hour-long video that may provide a more in-depth analysis and some background to world events, but yet they feel they are informed because an expert told them what to think.
And if you try to discuss alternative views with these folks, they are quick to label you a conspiracy theorist. And, even when the “conspiracy theory” is proven to be correct, the mainstream media (MSM) believers will never know because the MSM generally never admit that they made a mistake; sometimes newspapers will provide one sentence on the last paragraph of page 21 to note that an “alternative” story had “some” facts correct.
When I am asked who I turn to for news and analysis, I answer that I tend to follow those reporters who are able to admit when they have made mistakes (and offer corrections as soon as possible), those who have lost well-paying careers rather than promote propaganda (Chris Hedges and Patrick Lawrence come to mind), those who are tireless researchers (Max Blumenthal, Aaron Maté, and Matthew Kennard are some examples), and investigative journalists who have lived among the populations that they write about.
Most the people that I follow are writing on Substack, because they have been fired from legacy newspapers, or demonetized on YouTube or other social media sites, or have lost their shows (along with the archives of their shows) on sites like RT, because the US government closed access to such sites. Telling the truth gets one blacklisted.
I am not implying that I know the truth. I just believe that I have a better chance at getting to the truth by listening to independent journalists who can explain how they arrived at their conclusions, and who refer readers and watchers to read books and listen to analysis that goes beyond the usual 5 to 10 minutes of “expert” opinion.
I also follow FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting) and listen to their weekly radio show Counterspin. FAIR clearly points out media bias:
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, US-based media platforms have made an extraordinary effort to cut Western audiences off from news from a Russian perspective. When social critic Noam Chomsky pointed out how unprecedented this was, Newsweek‘s “factchecker” (7/26/22) declared his criticism “clearly untrue”—a determination that did more to confirm the ideological strictures of US media than to debunk them. https://fair.org/home/factchecking-the-factchecker-on-chomsky-russia-and-media-access/
I like to check out FAIR and to watch Useful Idiots Monday Mourning (spelling intentional) to hear their opinions on bias and to then decide for myself what to believe. And, yes, I watch shows on the conservative outlet Rumble, as they offer more variety of opinions without censorship than does YouTube.
I do not doubt that in the current climate of increasing censorship that the places I turn to for news will become more and more difficult to access. I am a proponent of buying books in print (or lend from the library before possible book bans), that can’t be altered. E-books are not always reliable, especially since February 26, 2025:
I do not doubt that in the current climate of increasing censorship that the places I turn to for news will become more and more difficult to access. I am a proponent of buying books in print (or lend from the library before possible book bans), that can’t be altered. E-books are not always reliable, especially since February 26, 2025:
Amazon has updated the wording when purchasing Kindle e-books in the U.S. to clarify that users are buying a license rather than owning the book. The new text states, “By placing your order, you’re purchasing a license to the content and agree to the Kindle Store Terms of Use.” This change aligns with California’s new law (AB 2426), which mandates companies to disclose that digital purchases are only licenses. The update applies only to U.S. customers, while international users still see the previous wording. . .The broader issue of e-book ownership has gained attention, especially after Amazon announced it would eliminate USB File Transfer for Kindle books on February 26th. This move, along with continuous updates preventing backups and jailbreaks, makes it increasingly difficult for users to maintain independent access to their purchased e-books. (link)
Readers may find my views reactionary. That’s fine. Different life experiences lead to different ways of interpreting the world around us. I simply want to share some of the alternative media sites that I have found to be reliable. I’ve never been comfortable with blindly believing things just because an expert insisted that their take was the only correct take. I want to understand how they came to their conclusions.
Keep reading Aunty Jean on Aunty's Substack.