Is Mainstream Media Guilty Of Professional Malpractice By Ignoring Metals Manipulation?



 


(The Doc)   If “theories” about gold & silver manipulation are proven to be true, the players who conceivably might have been involved include everyone from the president of the United States, chairman of the Federal Reserve, secretary of the Treasury, CEOs of major banks, leaders of international central banks, intelligence agency stalwarts, regulatory agency directors, heads of state of other powerful nations, etc.
By way of comparison, it’s a story that could make Watergate look like a case of fixing parking tickets.
Watergate involved one paranoid, insecure president. The intentional manipulation of precious metals could involve multiple officials at the highest levels of power (in America and around the globe) … with consequences that would impact the economy of the world and the financial health of all the planet’s citizens.
The resignation of Richard Nixon didn’t really affect markets, nor the proverbial price of eggs in China. What I’m describing would, could, and probably already has.
2013 Silver Maples As Low As $2.09 Over Spot at SDBullion!
Silver Maple
By BILL RICE, JR.
Today, I continue with my list of possible events that could serve to end the manipulation of precious metals …3. A mainstream media outlet or credible investigative journalist(s) could expose the manipulation.

In an ideal world, “The Fourth Estate” would serve as the watchdog of regulators, powerful government officials and/or powerful bullion banks.
Alas, when it comes to reporting on individuals or organizations who may be involved in manipulating precious metal prices, the press has failed to perform this vital civic function; nor does it appear likely any prominent press member is likely to take on this task in the near future.
Which to many Americans (myself included) is nothing short of bizarre. You could also add depressing, exasperating, befuddling, disappointing … just plain and inexplicably sad.
Readers be warned. This ended up being quite the lengthy essay. However, given my keen interest in the topic and what I view as the importance of the topic (which amounts to a charge of press malpractice), I’m going to risk losing readers and use as much space as required to say my piece.
As you will (I hope) read, I go into some detail discussing theories which might explain press actions (or in this instance inaction) on this topic. To me, when it comes to the “precious metals manipulation’ story, the press has actually served as a key accomplice in making said manipulation possible.
I also present a number of examples where the press’s coverage of economic issues – and issues that impact precious metals – has been hard to comprehend.
I’ve got to start somewhere, so I guess I’ll start with a fact that has long puzzled me. Which is …
…. If any press organization, or any fearless investigative journalist(s) did uncover and report that powerful officials were in fact manipulating the prices of precious metals, such an expose would clearly qualify as the story of a lifetime. The stuff film rights, book rights and Pulitzers are made of.
Not only would fame and fortune beckon for this person, the journalist who uncovered such a monumental story would almost certainly go down in the history books. Such could be the economic, social and political consequences of a story that would implode the financial status quo in America and the world.
Heady stuff one would think. Quite the carrot or incentive to get out of the pressroom cubicle, shake things up, fire off some hard questions to those in the know, do some initial research, and once other questions emerge, do a little more research.

To date, however, no mainstream reporter has taken even a modest-size nibble when it comes to this potentially gigantic and explosive topic.
If “theories” about manipulation are proven to be true, the players who conceivably might have been involved include everyone from the president of the United States, chairman of the Federal Reserve, secretary of the Treasury, CEOs of major banks, leaders of international central banks, intelligence agency stalwarts, regulatory agency directors, heads of state of other powerful nations, etc.
By way of comparison, it’s a story that could make Watergate look like a case of fixing parking tickets.
This is a bold statement, but one I stand by. Watergate involved one paranoid, insecure president. The intentional manipulation of precious metals could involve multiple officials at the highest levels of power (in America and around the globe) … with consequences that would impact the economy of the world and the financial health of all the planet’s citizens.
The resignation of Richard Nixon didn’t really affect markets, nor the proverbial price of eggs in China. What I’m describing would, could, and probably already has.
One would think the incentive to break a story so stunning in scope would motivate at least one ambitious or idealistic reporter, newspaper, TV magazine show or non-fiction author.
But, as mentioned, it hasn’t. The question I attempt to address today is why this hasn’t happened. Here are a couple of possible explanations.
Pack Journalism …
“Pack journalism” exists … and the “pack” has seemingly deemed inquiries into PM manipulation off-limits or beneath the dignity of the profession and thus unworthy of any journalistic exertion.
The “enterprising reporter” can be enterprising in many areas, but apparently not this area.
This theory is closely related to a companion theory having to do with “conventional wisdom,” which I believe is almost always wrong, but for some reason is almost always protected.
Conventional wisdom states that theories of gold and silver price manipulation are promulgated almost entirely by “kooks” and are the stuff of the “tin foil hat” crowd.
Obvious examples of this same attitude could also be seen in the coverage of Ron Paul’s last two presidential campaigns. Paul was either dismissed as a “kook,” or a right-wing “extremist” by the icons of the mainstream media.
Gold and silver supporters largely receive the same treatment Paul experienced, and are held in the same regard by those who purchase ink by the barrel and reach audiences of millions.
A major component of Paul’s political campaigns dealt with the Fed (as in it should be audited), and a possible return to a gold standard (including a call to audit the country’s alleged gold holdings).
Both the mainstream media and the conservative media (including the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin) either barely mentioned Paul’s campaign (and its impressive, energetic grass roots’ following) or they ridiculed and attacked him once it looked like his campaign was gaining too much momentum.
(Kind of like precious metal prices are nipped in the bud as soon as they start to rise too high or too fast).
The “pack” simply rolled their eyes at the “Ron Paul Revolution” just like they roll their eyes at any suggestion that precious metals might be manipulated.
Indeed, the fact that so many of those who believe precious metals are being manipulated also happen to be Paul admirers probably makes it even easier to dismiss those of us who are lobbying for a real investigation into the forces that might be controlling precious metals prices.
“Pack journalism” also seems to work as a cliquish club where everyone who is a member is subjected to either direct or indirect pressure to “toe the party line.”
Other examples of approved or sanctioned “party-line” views include the not-to-be debated “fact” that the the activities of man are causing “climate change”or that government should always do more to combat the Crisis of the Week.
The story-line that precious metal investors are flaky conspiracy theorists is just one of many tenants accepted as gospel by the gate-keepers in the mainstream media “pack.”
Above all else, the pack sticks together. Strangely, for a “truth-seeking” profession, diversity of opinion in the newsroom seems to be neither highly valued nor tolerated.
And the “pack” often follows the leaders of the pack.
The consensus of pack members seems to be that the consensus view should always be accepted. If The New York Times or Wall Street Journal hasn’t done a serious investigative piece on precious metals manipulation – well, neither should we, believe members of the pack.
In conservative media, if Rush Limbaugh or Charles Krauthammer or The National Review haven’t made an issue of gold manipulation (and they haven’t), maybe other “conservative” media should follow their example (lest they be expelled from the club).
For whatever reason, the pack has seemingly decreed that precious metals manipulation is a subject unworthy of serious examination.
To continue the high school clique or club analogy, it simply isn’t “cool” to give credence to the nerds or outcasts in the uncool “tin foil” club.
No indications they’ve
even broached the subject
Of course, it’s possible my theory doesn’t hold up. Perhaps big-time mainstream media organizations – remembering that they are supposed to be “watch dogs” and “skeptics” – have, in fact, launched major investigations into this topic, investigations that produced no evidence.
However, if this is the case, I haven’t read the story or seen the segment on “Sixty Minutes.” That is, any indication that a big-time press organization has at least looked into the matter and found no “smoking guns” has not been reported.
Instead, what I’ve read are constant dispatches from groups like GATA and individuals like Ted Butler disclosing they have indeed forwarded their research to media members, appropriate regulatory officials and board members of the “too big to fail and jail” banks.
These individuals (and others) have made clear the responses their outreach efforts have generated. To date these calls for inquiry have been filed in a giant and growing “ignore” folder.
Nor have I ever heard a reporter or prominent columnist pose any direct or pointed questions to those who may be involved in any manipulation activities.
I consider myself to be a voracious consumer of the news, and I’ve seldom if ever heard a reporter pose even the tamest of questions to anyone who might have knowledge of manipulation.
I also haven’t heard any follow-up queries. This lack of follow-through is important as any answer that might be forthcoming from, say, JPM or the Fed chairman is going to assuredly be dismissed in an eye-rolling manner. And any quote that might begrudgingly have been offered has invariably consisted of zilch substance.
“What a ridiculous question” might be the gist of any answer (if one is even forthcoming).
“I know. Sorry I asked, sir. You still like me don’t you?” seems to be the attitude of our country’s bulldog reporters upon receiving the requisite dismissal of said question.
Actually, “no comment” is about the only answer that comes from the bullion banks suspected of being key agents in any price suppression scheme. However, in our age of “transparency,” this turns out to be an ingenious “answer.” So far it’s worked every time.
CNBC is on the air at least 12 hours a day, five days a week, 12 months a year. If I’ve heard 30 minutes of commentary or questions dealing with the possibility of precious metals manipulation in these thousands of hours of “financial news coverage,” I’d be stunned. The same goes for Fox’s business channel.
What you do read or hear on a regular basis is dismissive comments about the (paraphrasing here) “nut cases who believe in manipulation.”
Tellingly, what you don’t hear from these guests is any indication these people have actually and seriously looked into the possibility themselves. Or asked any probing questions to any of the likely suspects.
That is, the allegations of those who believe manipulation is a reality are discounted out of hand by members of the “pack media” as not worthy of examination.
The effects of media group think ….
The above paragraphs simply suggest that a “pack” mind-frame exists among key players in financial media. The reasons this pack mentality holds such sway might be best be explained by psychologists or sociologists.
But when it comes to what is transpiring in the precious metal markets what is the effect of this “group think?”
The effect is that stories that might change the way people think about precious metal markets and pricing simply do not get published. The “gate keepers” who determine what stories are covered (and just as importantly are not covered) do not allow this.
On the other side of the same (silver) coin, the gate-keepers do decide what stories are covered, as well as the manner they are covered. To some of us, these stories are either false, suspect or incomplete, lacking context and the column inches which would allow for the presentation of differing points of view.
It is the stories that are published that influence public opinion and/or all-important investment “sentiment.” So we receive a steady diet of stories and headlines that re-enforce negative sentiment.
“Taper prospects send gold into 5th week of decline.”
“Gold falls on employment prospects.”
“Such and Such Bank predicts falling gold prices.” Etc. Etc.
In recent months, taper prospect stories have been a particular thorn in the side of those who are pulling for their gold and silver investments to finally appreciate.
The possibility – reported as the “likelihood” – that the Fed would finally reduce the rate of its “stimulus” has time and again served as “cover” for any number of beat-downs of precious metal prices.
Strangely, such reports haven’t kept the stock market from soaring to record highs, but they have served as the accepted explanation of why gold and silver have continued to move south since the fourth quarter of 2012.
Other sound bite-sized “reasons” for gold’s dreary performance are offered from time to time as needed. What is not presented is any discussion that powerful entities might be using trades in the paper future markets to suppress or contain precious metal prices.
Of course sentiment is terrible
Given the cumulative effect of such stories, is it any great surprise that “sentiment” for precious metals is at record lows?
It’s probably not an overstatement to state that manipulation – even if being conducted by the most powerful entities – could not be sustained without the assistance of a mainstream media that:
A) Ignores credible accusations of manipulation.
B) Ignores (does not report on) alterative theories of why precious metals prices routinely drop in recurring cliff-diving chart patterns.
C) Does report as gospel bogus (and common-sense defying) reasons for price declines.
D) Seems to take every opportunity to disparage precious metals and those who choose to invest in them.
So, to some of us anyway, the press has been negligent in living up to its charge of fairly presenting all sides of a story. It has also shown a bias against those who hold differing views, effectively keeping these views from large segments of the population.
Be it intentional or not, the “gate keepers” in the press – working in pack mode – have largely created the negative sentiment that helps make manipulation efforts successful. They are also the group that could most easily expose and halt manipulation activities. If they were so inclined, which clearly they are not.
Theory 2 …
The majority of members of the mainstream media also have a “liberal agenda” and as such have a rooting interest in the current leader of this agenda, President Obama.
Here I’m taking as a matter of faith – actually, I believe “fact” – that reporters, editors and producers are more liberal than most of the people who read or watch their stories.
I used the word “fact” above because numerous opinion surveys have proven that those in the mainstream media, by overwhelming margins, vote for and donate to liberal politicians.
It’s possible then that the media has opted to ignore the possibility of PM manipulation because of concerns a genuine investigation might cause a scandal that could harm the president, their ideological hero and a man they pulled so hard for during the past two elections.
Such a scandal might, in turn, make it far less likely that the liberal policies they cherish will be enacted into law.
If manipulation is indeed occurring, it is almost certainly being perpetrated by either Obama appointees, allies and/or key fund-raising sources.
To impugn or indict one or more of these individuals is to risk calamitous embarrassment to the entire liberal establishment. Maybe the mainstream media recognizes this and simply “doesn’t want to go there” given that they too are among Obama’s biggest allies and cheerleaders.
(Of course, price manipulation almost certainly pre-dates the Obama administration. However, this column deals with the likelihood that the press will expose manipulation this month – or two years from now – when President Obama will still be in office.)
Also, those of us who argue that precious metals are being manipulated are probably viewed as a potential threat to the “status quo.” And the “status quo” is Big Government (a ravenous entity forever seeking to grow into Even Bigger Government.)
One could argue that it is gold and silver manipulation that make liberal programs and massive government expenditures possible in the first place. One could also argue that, truth be told, most Republicans like Big Government and certainly are not attempting to radically alter the status quo.
Or said differently, the alternative view that precious metals are a safer and wiser investment than stockpiling U.S. dollars (or U.S. Treasuries) is likely perceived as a serious threat to the continued growth of the federal government.
Be it welfare programs, the military or the military industrial complex, the powers that be in Washington (Republican and Democrat) simply want more.
“More” requires more fiat paper money creation, a spigot that is even more likely to pump at full force when gold and silver are being consistently impugned.
Generally speaking, members of the MSM working press, columnists, editors, producers and probably the crony capitalists who own many media operations love big government solutions.
By logic, this probably means they fear any economic movement that might threaten their love of “progressive” and “compassionate” government.
If free markets were to prevail (if manipulation was exposed), it’s entirely possible that the Fed and Treasury could not continue their scheme to print the volumes of money needed to fund Big Government.
You can bet that liberals – be they in the government or the media – do not want to see this happen. Better to take a pass on any investigation that might bring about a result so distasteful and threatening to their agenda.
Sunshine Mint Rounds(3)Transparency for school boards, but not the Fed
I for one do not discount the possibility that the Fourth Estate has effectively seen its traditional “watchdog” role co-opted by its desire to help advance a liberal agenda pushed by their “allies” in government.
To me, the “watchdog” function of the press has been largely abandoned.
The same press corps that screams bloody murder when a local school board goes into “executive session” during a supposedly “open” meeting has been as quiet as a mouse when it comes to the “transparency” of the U.S. Federal Reserve, arguably the most powerful entity in the world.
Raise your hand if you’ve ever read any editorial penned by a major newspaper backing Ron Paul’s “Audit the Fed” bill?
Similarly, have you seen any major newspaper that’s written an editorial arguing for an independent audit of America’s gold supply? For that matter, on the conservative side, has Rush Limbaugh spent even two minutes talking into his golden microphone about these two subjects?
For the liberal media, these potential political issues are being championed (conveniently enough) only by the “tin foil” crowd. Or if the big papers’ editorial boards do write on these topics it’s to defend the secret status quo.

Really, when you think about it, their message is:
“More non-transparency!”
“Secrecy among the powerful is liberty and freedom-protecting and is necessary and good for our democracy.”
It’s as if George Orwell’s Big Brother was writing the lead editorials of the leading papers in the country.
I picked these examples – the actions of the Fed and the lack of any press demand for an accounting of gold inventories – out of thin air to make a point. But both of these (ignored) stories also touch on the precious metals story as well.
If a reporter did ever start to seriously dig into the the Fed or its gold holdings, he might start to connect some dots, which would be risky.
Personally I think this explains why we don’t see more instances of “common sense” reporting on a wide variety of economic topics.
Today, the mainstream media almost takes as an article of faith the following “facts:”
A) Inflation is definitely not a concern and, in fact, might be too low for our own good.
B) Unemployment is steadily coming down and is – just like the government tells us – below 8 percent.
C) The economy is turning around or will soon turn around.
Despite the press’s trumpeting of these “facts,” many Americans still believe all of the above are bogus and that the opposite is, in fact, almost certainly reality.
Price inflation is soaring (if The New York Times or Time magazine doesn’t believe this perhaps editors could ask the lady who writes the checks for office supplies if prices are going up. Or perhaps they could interview their own spouses about the family grocery bill).
Some of us believe unemployment is double or triple what the Labor Department (and press) tells us. The economy has improved so much that the equivalent of four U.S. states have gone on food stamps in recent years.
You think any MSM reporter might do a Page 1-spread on the persuasive and detailed work of John Williams at www.shadowstats.com? I doubt it.
Sure, some of these stories (bogus inflation numbers, bogus unemployment numbers, silence on audit the Fed, etc) might embarrass President Obama and Democrat … so we have this to consider.
It should also be noted that these story lines (accepted as gospel by millions) serve an important propaganda purpose in the battle to suppress precious metals prices.
Think about it. If price inflation is reported as rapidly rising, perhaps even close to getting “out of control,” what would be the likely impact on the price of precious metals (famous as a hedge against inflation)?
If The New York Times and Washington Post demanded that America’s gold supply be independently audited, what would happen if such an audit revealed that much of the gold we thought our nation owned had in fact been sold, swapped and/or leased?
Both scenarios, fairly reported and publicized, could result in a run on whatever physical gold still exists. And, oh yeah, price manipulation would be confirmed.
The popularity of gold would soar, while the trust in government would plummet. The press’s own popularity would also fall even lower as some of us would invariably ask, “why did it take you so long to do your job?”
Not only is it unlikely the big press operations won’t commit resources to investigate possible manipulation of metals, they also don’t seem to want to challenge all kinds of other dubious government statistics.
Perhaps because it would be impossible to conduct such an investigation without mentioning the elephant in the room – gold and silver.
Like the meek regulators the press should monitor but doesn’t, the MSM has opted to “look the other way” on charges of manipulation, as well as other economic reporting that might embarrass their liberal or “status-quo” allies in Washington.
In addition to this, the “reporting” the press does do on the economy (simply publishing government press releases without question) probably goes a long way to making the manipulation possible and effective in the first place.
If the sheriff, police chief, prosecutors and the working press covering the crime beat are all on his team, a Mafia don and the lieutenants doing his bidding probably sleep like babies.
Maybe the press will humor us …
I recognize that I’ve made some pretty bold accusations here. However, I am far from the only person who has gone on the record with suspicions that untoward things are happening in the metals arena.
One would think that at least one paper might editorialize on some of these topics if for no other reason than to call the bluff of people like myself; or to shut up those of us who are suspicious of their government and also not big fans of the press.
In other words, humor us if nothing else. I’m sure the wording might be different, but it would be refreshing to read an editorial like this:
“Whereas we here at Mainstream Media Times are 100 percent confident any audit of the Fed or U.S. gold depositories will produce no shocking revelations, we nonetheless hereby call on our government to perform such audits to once and for all prove how ridiculous these conspiracy gold people are.”
Similarly, one might think that the editors of The New York Times and Wall Street Journal might at least sign-off on a profile story about one or more individuals who are leading the manipulation crusade.

To me, the underdog who fights for what he believes in (after years of being ignored or ridiculed) always makes for an interesting and compelling human interest story. In the past, such people have even been considered worthy of “profiles in courage” type awards.
We’re talking here about articulate, serious people like Ted Butler, and groups like GATA that clearly are not fringe kooks. People who the press might dismiss, but who nonetheless have hundreds of thousands of followers and admirers.
Alas, their work and arguments have yet to be worthy of prominent mention by the mainstream media “gate keepers.” This in itself is revealing and reinforces the notion that the mainstream media is not interested in giving equal or fair treatment to a view they simply do not share and do not want to risk publicizing further.
When it comes to the mainstream media’s treatment of the “manipulation theory,” I also don’t think it’s an overstatement to say that many in the financial and economic press literally despise gold (and those who acquire it).

It’s not difficult to find examples of columnists who, for example, rejoiced in the dramatic price decreases that occurred this past April. I almost cancelled my USA Today subscription after reading one such gloating columnist on the paper’s Money pages in April.
These are people who don’t just report price routs, they seemingly take glee in the news, never failing to make fun of those who invest in a piece of metal that, to them, has no valid function.
Is it even possible that a fair-minded and thorough investigation into possible price manipulation could emerge from such a journalistic fraternity?
If such a press corps were ever part of a jury pool, a lawyer would immediately strike them from consideration for proven bias, if not for their virulent dislike of the defendant.
Other possible reasons …
To be fair, there could be other possible reasons the big mainstream media organizations have yet to launch a major investigation into possible PM manipulation.
Such an investigation, done correctly, would likely take weeks if not months or years and involve a team of reporters. In other words, we’re talking about a significant commitment of time and money.

Due to staff down-sizing (more signs of a recovering economy?), many media organizations simply do not have the staffers to devote to such an effort.
This said, an issue this big could be broken down into dozens of smaller stories and follow-up stories. Almost every day, some evidence of manipulation occurs (if you are looking for it or consider it a legitimate area of inquiry).

Woodward and Bernstein didn’t write one Watergate story. They wrote many stories over the course of years. And this was just two reporters, not 20. So far, however, no such reporters have written the first (significant) story on precious metals manipulation.
It would also help the press if one or more credible “whistle blowers” came forward.
Some of us believe a few may have already emerged. Granted, though, no one from the Fed, Treasury Department or JP Morgan has gone to the press (that we know of) yet. I’ll consider the plausibility of this scenario in more depth in a subsequent treatment of this topic.
For now, I’ll simply say it’s not terribly likely that a whistle blower would “confess” and share all … for the same reasons that Gordon Liddy or President Nixon’s confidants were none too eager to volunteer information.

It can take copious, time-consuming work on the part of journalists to identify a potential whistle blower and convince him or her to go on the record.
Is a crack journalist at The Washington Post at this moment looking for such a whistle blower? Or writing initial stories that might make it more likely that a whistle blower would come forward in the future? Somehow I doubt it.

In the interest of being fair and balanced, one would think that somewhere in America one prominent news organization would at least assign a reporter or two to the topic of possible manipulation.
If nothing else, they would have a scoop – a guaranteed “exclusive.” If any paper cares about increasing readership, they would also be guaranteed a massive number of page views from those of us who have almost become convinced we’ll never live to see such reporting.
A news organization could start with baby steps and need not consider the task overly daunting. It certainly wouldn’t be hard to come up with a at least a few “expert” sources. Nor would it be difficult to identify past suspicious or puzzling activity in the gold and silver trading exchanges.
An editor might look at a price chart that shows, say, a “cliff-diving” plunge of 6 to 10 percent which occurred at 3 in the morning on no economic news whatsoever and say, “Hey, what’s up with this? …. Jones, do some interviews.”

But even this hasn’t happened.
If such an investigation DID take place and some reporters did prove that manipulation has been occurring on a regular basis for years, at some point other members of the press would belatedly jump on the story.
It would be embarrassing to the press to have to acknowledge that the nut case tin-foil crowd was right all along, but there have been other cases where the press ate crow and belatedly did its job.

Or maybe a serious and fair-minded treatment of the topic would reveal that manipulation is indeed a fantasy and I’m among the crowd who will have to acknowledge I was completely wrong.
A fair and thorough investigation might show that the free market has been working like it should all this time. That JP Morgan is acting in good faith and has not “cornered” the precious metals market. And that all evidence shows that the Fed doesn’t even pay attention to the price of precious metals, much less try to suppress them.
Such an investigation would ask hard questions – and demand convincing answers – of those who are suspected of being involved in the manipulation. Documents and other evidence proving these individuals played no role in all the price smash-downs that cause a skeptic like myself to suspect foul play would also be presented.
I’ll be the first to admit I’m wrong when I see such a compelling story or series of stories (stories replete with documentation of the leg work that went into it, citing names of people who were interviewed and questions that were asked and answered).

But I’m not holding my breath. My guess is that the mainstream media – like the regulatory agencies – has no interest in travelling down a road that might prove embarrassing to themselves, and also harpoon a Big Government agenda so central to their ideological convictions and identity.
… Even if such a story might be the most important of a journalist’s career and, long-term, could help save a nation that is drowning in debt and is being ravaged by corruption at the highest levels of power.

This is about more than the price of a commodity
Silver and gold are often viewed only as investment options, which they are – the ultimate contrarian investment in a world that has come to worship green paper backed only by the promises of politicians.

But, for many of us, the manipulation issue involves core national values like trust, freedom and liberty. We believe that gold and silver – treated as “real money”- could save the country from its debt nightmares, not kill it.
But this won’t happen if people in our own government and a few giant banks and maybe the Fed can set prices wherever they want to suit their secret purposes.
As far as I can tell, the press, acting in pack fashion, has completely bought into the narrative that those of us hollering about “manipulation” are tin-foil kooks and conspiracy buffs.
Apparently the code of the press does not allow for equal consideration of any accusations brought by members of this group .. regardless of how well-documented and plausible our charges and “hunches” may seem.

Of course, a conspiracy doesn’t have to involved thousands of people. A few actors – with strong motivations and aligned interests – could pull one off. Especially when manipulators know the one group who might uncover the conspiracy is, for all intents and purposes, on their side.

Once upon a time dogged, skeptical and fearless reporters incapable of being bullied would salivate over the prospects of uncovering such a story.
Not now, though. Today, the story remains that there is no story. “Nothing to see here, move along” seems to be the mantra that applies.
As far as many of us can tell the prevailing and dominant attitude of leaders in the press seems to be that “well, we haven’t really looked into this in any great detail, but we know enough to know that we don’t need to look into this in any great detail.”

Like I said at the beginning of this piece: Strange, bizarre, sad.
If ever written, such a story might be the most important of a journalist’s career and a news organization’s existence.

buff sale(1)It would ensure fame and fortune to the reporters who finally uncovered the “real story” of what’s been going on. Similarly, it would reflect immense credit on the news organization which displayed the courage to take on the most powerful of the powerful.
In the big picture, such a story – finally told – might end up saving a once great nation that is drowning in debt and is being ravaged by corruption at the highest levels of power.
Now that, folks, is a good story. An important story. In fact, a story the journalistic profession – our “free press” – was created to cover.
If a press corps entrusted to inform the public of activities that affect all of us doesn’t do its job and seek the truth about those who can control our lives and futures then who will?
For those of us who have come to believe a grave injustice is being allowed to continue unchallenged, our current state of affairs is both scary and sad on so many levels.

Article first read on Silver Doctors