Skip to main content

Chrysler blinks!

By Matthew Hayward

Why are ‘USA Today’ and other news outlets losing readers and viewers? Could it have anything to do with the fact that they all read the same script? Yesterday I heard the catchphrase Chrysler blinks, but only after… on two radio stations and three TV news programs. I am confident if a person wanted to, they could comb over yesterday's and today’s news and find identical words in many more places than I annoyingly stumbled across.

But who is feeding them all the same stories? How does it work? Is there a story that gets broken, and the rest of the news agencies just copy it without changing a word? This is likely part of what is going on, but what is the point of having different news outlets if they are reporting the same things with the same words?

Some differences are notable with TV news like MSNBC and FOX. These so-called news outlets should not be included as they do not report the news but rather spin the news. Yes, both of them use propaganda sound bites and lack journalist integrity, just like the papers. They don’t repeat what everyone else is saying; they spin it into a Democrat Verse Republican issue and actively instigate division. 

So back to the ‘USA Today.’ Today’s front page features an article on ‘alternative medicine.’ Just finishing a class at The Evergreen State College on health and nutrition where we read books and did research on the health care system and ‘alternative medicine,’ this caught my attention. I was excited at first glance,  ‘this is great the ‘USA Today’ is going to slam the pharmaceutical industrial complex and show people how natural practices, exercise, and foods are healthier and better ways of treatment than many of the VERY harmful FDA-approved drugs that are getting large companies very rich.’ 

To my dismay, I read on. “Book hammers an industry that has been gaining traction with millions of Americans.” The article goes on to talk about the risks and potential side effects of alternative medicine. It also goes so far as to bring money and special interest into the fold. 

Are you kidding me? Do they really think they can get away with trying to claim that a 34 billion-dollar-a-year business can compete with the lobbying of a multi-trillion-dollar industry that controls the FDA? And you want to talk about side effects. Something like 100,000 people a year die from taking prescription drugs. However you slice it, around 1000,000 people die preventable deaths yearly in the hands of the mainstream medical system.

Disclaimer: I believe in modern medicine and encourage anyone with a life-threatening illness or injury to seek professional ‘mainstream’ medical help. That said, I encourage you to do everything possible to try and keep from getting sick, all of which are natural actions, diet, etc. I also encourage you all to question medicine and consider alternatives, especially when there is either a long history of horrible side effects (there usually is) or if the drug is so new there is not enough history to know what it might do to you (Do not trust the often skewed test results that have been proven to be misleading and wrong).

Trust but verify; whatever comes from the government is not something to trust. Whatever comes from the media is definitely not something you can trust. Life is short and full of gambles, educate yourself and gamble wisely.
 

July 25th, 2013. More on USA Today and its front page attacks on alternative medicine.
I love how they start with, "For a man heading to prison for selling dangerous weight-loss pills..." There is mention of one person dying from a workout. Dietary supplement, then it is later said that the person purposely overdosed. Again how can an argument about safety be brought up when the FDA approves drugs that kill tens of thousands of people yearly? This is all about money and big businesses that use the courts, papers, public opinion, and Congress to enhance their monopolies.
More on media propaganda:


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Grassroots Revolt Against GOP Elitism

By Matthew Hayward In the complex arena of political strategy, even those who occupy the highest echelons of power can falter, demonstrating a profound disconnect between their strategic intentions and operational execution. The recent failure to secure the endorsement for their preferred candidate, Dave Reichert, is not merely a setback; it is a revealing exposé of the grave strategic missteps at the heart of the Republican party's establishment in Washington State. These seasoned campaigners, these stewards of conservative strategy, have evidently underestimated the critical importance of grassroots engagement. While I acknowledge the logic behind promoting an established politician strategically positioned geographically and perceived as moderate in our swing state—a strategy driven by considerations of electability, which admittedly has its merits—the incessant focus on this argument and complete lack of any meaningful engagement and education has alienated the grassroots yet a...

Could Today Be the Cheapest Price for Bitcoin Ever Again? Here’s Why

By: Matthew Hayward Current price  Nov 10, 2024 76.72K 80.43K Is Now the Time to Buy Bitcoin? Bitcoin has come a long way since its early days as a niche digital asset. Today, as we enter another phase in its established four-year cycle , Bitcoin may be at a historic high, but it could soon become the new baseline price. This cycle, which has repeatedly shown Bitcoin’s resilience and long-term growth potential, suggests that the current price might be the lowest we’ll see again. While recent political shifts, including Donald Trump’s landslide election victory, have added new momentum and support for Bitcoin, the timing within the cycle itself makes this an ideal moment to consider buying. A Political Shift: From Anti-Crypto to Pro-Crypto For years, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have faced an uphill battle against a U.S. government determined to restrict and control their growth. This opposition was largely led by Gary Gensler, who waged an outright war against crypto from hi...

When the Census Goes Beyond the Constitution

 By Matthew Hayward The Census: From Counting People to Collecting Control The Constitution established the census as a straightforward tool for representation—nothing more, nothing less. Article I, Section 2 mandates an enumeration every ten years to determine how many representatives each state is allotted. That’s it. Simple. Effective. Proportional representation was the goal, and the census was designed to achieve it. So how did we end up here—with government agents asking about the number of bathrooms in our homes, our ethnic identities, and everything in between? This is the creeping hand of central planning at work. What began as a tool to empower individual representation has been twisted into a mechanism to empower bureaucrats, planners, and those who believe they know better than free individuals how to run their own lives. Central Planning: The False Promise of Data The justification for prying into the most intimate details of our lives is always the same: “We need the ...