For the Record

Dean Wright on Ethics, Innovation and Values

After the warm glow, telling the cold, hard truths

January 30, 2009

dean-150Dean Wright is Global Editor, Ethics, Innovation and News Standards. Any opinions are his own.

The president was inaugurated in front of adoring crowds and positive reviews in the media. As the unpopular incumbent sat on the platform with him, the new Democratic chief executive took office as the nation faced a crippling economic crisis. The incoming president was a charismatic figure who had run a brilliant campaign and had handled the press with aplomb. The media were ready to give him a break.

That was 1933, and in Franklin Roosevelt’s case, the media gave him a break.

For Barack Obama, the honeymoon was shorter.

Less than 36 hours after Obama took the oath of office, the White House denied news photographers access to the new president’s do-over swearing in, instead releasing official White House photos of the event. Reuters, The Associated Press and Agence France-Presse protested and refused to distribute the official photos (which nevertheless showed up on the websites of a number of large U.S. newspapers).

This is an important issue for news organisations, the public and for an administration that has promised a new era of transparency in doing the people’s business. How are people to know, for example, that the official photos haven’t been staged?

All U.S. administrations seek to manage the flow of information and the White House and the news media have a complex, interdependent relationship. Each needs the other. But it’s important that media organisations remember who’s most important.

For Howard Goller, Reuters editor for political and general news for the U.S. and Canada, it’s clear who’s most important.

“A news organisation’s first obligation is to its clients,” he says. “Our correspondents have a front-row seat at the White House, we ask questions at news conferences and briefings, and we travel with the president wherever he goes. Our photographers work just as hard for our customers. We became concerned when on taking office, the new administration prevented Reuters and other news organisations from taking our own photos. We’ve had several conversations with the new administration since those first days and we expect a more open relationship going forward.”

Most administrations get a bit of a honeymoon. Gallup polls show that every incoming, newly-elected president back to Dwight Eisenhower enjoyed majority approval ratings. Even the lowest-rated incoming presidents, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, had job approval ratings of 51 percent and disapproval ratings of only 13 percent and 6 percent, respectively.

Obama’s approval rating, 68 percent, was exceeded only by that of John F. Kennedy, who had a 72 percent rating. Even a plurality of Republicans—43 percent—give Obama positive marks.

The media have also generally been positive—or at least, not very negative– about new presidents during their administrations’ first 100 days, one of those round numbers we seem to like so much.

The Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism compared the coverage of the two most recent first-term elected presidents, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. In measuring the tone of coverage by network television, newspapers and a major weekly news magazine, the study found that only 28 percent of the coverage of both presidents’ first two months was “negative.”

No president has been more successful at managing the media than Roosevelt. So carefully did the administration control the president’s image that only a few pictures were published in newspapers of the president—disabled by polio– using his wheelchair. Indeed, in a scene in the movie “Yankee Doodle Dandy (1942),” James Cagney was able with a straight face to portray Roosevelt in a song and dance number, as the “president” wittily told reporters what was on and what was off the record.

Betty Houchin Winfield, a journalism professor at the University of Missouri, argues in “FDR and the News Media” that “FDR’s consummate news management skills served as a major key to his political artistry and leadership legacy” and that “a strong president such as Roosevelt can indeed influence the journalists’ newsgathering, the reporters’ reactions, and the final news stories.”

As Douglas McCollam notes in the current issue of the Columbia Journalism Review, many believe much of the media are already in the tank for Obama.

A Pew Research Center poll during the heat of the campaign in September 2008 found that 36 percent of those questioned believed news organisations were biased in favor of Obama, while only 14 percent said the media were biased in favor of Republican John McCain. Forty percent detected no bias. A Rasmussen poll last summer was even more stark, with 49 percent saying they believed most reporters would “try to help the Democrat with their coverage.” Just 14 percent believed reporters would try to help McCain win and only 24 percent believed that “most reporters will try to offer unbiased coverage.”

Those are depressing numbers for a journalist to read—and the only way to respond is to aggressively cover the issues that matter to your audience.

For Reuters News, that’s a global audience and a financial audience.

Goller says that in response to the change in administrations, “We have made some big changes, especially in the way we work together to cover the big economic stories in the face of the financial crisis as well as the politics of climate change and health care….We’ve put more people on both the White House and the Congressional beats in part because the president…has promised change and both he and the Democratic-led Congress have made a priority of addressing the crisis, no small matter for our core financial clients.”

So how do we balance the need to be close to the newsmakers at the White House with the danger of being in a bubble where news can be managed?

Goller puts it well: “For Reuters, the key is to keep our eye on the issues, and that means to be aware of the impact a president’s words and actions or non-actions have on business, the economy, other countries and Americans as a people. We ask the tough questions in the briefings—and in the stories we write. If we don’t get the answers, our stories say so. This is our job.”

As in coverage of the Middle East, there are partisans who will never, ever be convinced that journalists can report objectively. As in the coverage of the recent Gaza fighting, all we can ask our audience to do is judge us on the journalism we produce—and tell us when we’re wrong.

It’s especially important now, as coverage of the new administration moves out of the warm, feel-good glow of the inauguration. As we saw Wednesday, the stimulus bill passed the House without a single Republican vote, a reminder of the deep divisions that remain and a sign that the story of the Obama administration is just beginning. It will be up to the hard-nosed, experienced journalists in Washington to push beyond the soft, easy, feel-good stories and tell the hard and complete truth.

Comments

One problem I have seen more and more with the media is they are afraid to call out the facts. Example, Steve Holland writes and article about how Obama did not do enough to include the Republicans, then writes a paragraph about payroll tax cutes and sites some were concerned they wouldnt stimulate the economy fast enough..who said that?? Implies Democrates didnt like that as a Republican suggestion…the truth is the reverse. Its fine to quote politicians, but then reporters need to take the next step and state the facts about bills and issues. All to often they act like political adds for politicians and do not follow up with their own reading of data, bills, legislation, which is readily available, but apparently, too burdomson for reporters to get muddled down with reading. If your going to be a Washington reporter, you better do your homework. Most reporters don’t seem to be much better informed than the population in general and they really should be.

Posted by jay verrier | Report as abusive
 

If you guys want to portray yourselves as reporting the “facts” – then let’s start with the facts of this stimulus bill that’s wandering through the House and Senate. How about actually reading the bill and reporting to the people what the money is actually being spent on – a vast majority of which is pet projects and which will do little to “create jobs” as the White House wants us to believe. The media in Washington and in general has the same “pack” mentaility as the majority of voters have. Once a story breaks – they all read the same. I’m wondering if you guys have been told if you want access to the White House, then you’ll report things in a way that they like and not necessarily the facts.

Posted by John | Report as abusive
 

I haven’t seen the major news outlets (AP, Reuters, networks, etc) disclose the daily phone conferences that the White House has with former Democratic operatives James Carville, Paul Begala, and George Stephanopolis, all whom are regular commentators on TV news shows. Stephanopolis is the most egregious since he has a regular news program on ABC.
These are highly partisan individuals who we are supposed to trust with reporting and commentary on the Obama administration? Hardly. Let’s find out more about this conflict of interest.
JimP

Posted by j paulus | Report as abusive
 

Are you really making a comment on ‘transparency’ just due to the white house not letting the media in to the second swearing in of Obama?

Is there really nothing more important to talk about? Im angered that made that much of a hubbub about the first go around that the man felt that he had to do it again and waste more time appeasing and delaying his work as president.

Do people feel empowered when they point out the mistakes of others (be they mistakes or not) when they themselves don’t have to be in the line of fire, or have as heavy of responsibilities?

Come on now.

Posted by Sol | Report as abusive
 

No one is bringing about wasteful projects in the bill. As tax payers we want to know where the money is being spent. Only two criteria, is the money going to produce jobs NOW, is the money going to reach us the people soon, so we can spend. The news media should have someone go through the bill with a fine comb and let us know ALL the wasteful spending. BUT the media is left leaning and they do not want to call a wasteful spending if it is a cause they bekeive strongly. There will be a time and money for that. But right now let us not waste our tax money and our children’s future on programs that does not impact immediate job creation.We are all in together.

Posted by Lawrence Richards | Report as abusive
 

AP, AFP and Reuters shot themselves in the foot by refusing to publish handout photos of Obama’s first day in the Oval Office. As you say, a news organization’s first obligation is to its clients. Well, clients spoke loud and clear and 99% ran the official White House photographs on their front pages the next day – brushing aside any self-serving, hair-splitting arguments about “staged” photos, journalistic “tradition” or the White House private vs. public areas (why, by the way, would pictures taken by wire photographers briefly allowed inside the Oval Office be any less staged than those snapped by the official White House photographer?). In the end, the public saw the photos the world over, as the Obama administration intended. The news agencies showed they were out of touch and gave an opening to younger challengers like Getty and EPA. They lost an opportunity to differentiate from each other. They also signaled a worrying willingness to waste precious reporting resources by demanding to be allowed to cover staged photo ops in triplicate, instead of looking for fresh material further afield.

Posted by Ahmed Azhar | Report as abusive
 

One of the previous posts makes good point. Reuters should do more to explicate the stimulus package. What exactly is in it and who put it in there? Journalists should help their readers get around the obfuscation of politicians (and legislation) and show us the facts. Reuters could do a better job here, all the news outlets could. If someone starts and it isn’t you guys, I’ll be the first out the door.

Posted by Winchester73 | Report as abusive
 

It is clear how biased the media is in favor of liberal government. As for Obama, had a Republican quit going to church and stated he would choose a new church after the election, refused to provide a valid birth certificate, and refused to provide the names of donors prior to the election, the press would have taken him apart. The negative press pitted against anyone Republican has been clear for so long, it is a given. And yes, the press are all, for the most part, viewed as the papparazi. We shall see if you print this comment.

Posted by Beth | Report as abusive
 

We just want to know the truth. If our politicians are doing their jobs above and beyond their call we have a right to know and it is the obligation for the news to let us know. Then on the other hand if our politicians are wasting our tax dollars, endangering our freedom or setting up Ponzi schemes to bilk the treasury our news media need to let us know. It shouldn’t matter what party the Politician represents.

Posted by Craig Coal | Report as abusive
 

Read the comments for this article. If you want to increase readers, then print the truth!!! This bill is pure spending PORK! all ham. You know it, I know it and we all know it. So list the elements, show where it fails the common sense approach to economic issues. Readers will again start to see Reuters as a source of honest, accurate information, and not a sounding board for your corporate and misguised allegiance that you have now become.

Posted by Den | Report as abusive
 

Change must start at the top of the White House. News agencies photographers should be allowed to take their OWN pictures not trust White House official pix. Government photographers usually don’t see good angles for pictures such as experienced agencies photographers.
So, I suggest the White House press corps should ask fledging press officers to allow properly credentialed photographers to do their job. Just that.

Posted by Richard | Report as abusive
 

Please read Lawrence Pintak’s excellent analysis of how the US media didn’t tell its audience the “cold, hard truths” about Israel’s recent attacks on the Gaza strip:

http://www.arabmediasociety.com/?article =698

Is there anything Reuters can do to help rectify this imbalance in the US media’s coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

Posted by Benjamin Geer | Report as abusive
 

You people should watch FOX to see “fair and balanced news” or Rush Limbaugh tell conservatives everything you need of the “truth”. That’s why you people never complain about their reporting. It’s too burdensome to verify news on own. All the info is out there, but most seem to only want their own POView!

Posted by Obie | Report as abusive
 

Mr. Wright,
As you know(and probably your audience as well), the vast majority of journalists, while in schools of journalism, express a preference for liberalism, and “saving the world”. It is unlikely that they will have changed their views when faced with the “Messiah” who seduced them with the mantra of “change”. As we move forward, your news organization will be increasingly challenged, because the change you expected will not be forthcoming. Obama is a classic Chicago poll- who will revert to form on all of his promises. He must be laughing his head off at the gullibility of the press!
Frank

Posted by Frank Kotomski | Report as abusive
 

With a readership like this, I don’t think the US needs any enemies, its quite clear that we shall bring down the house all by ourselves!

FWIW, the argument presented above makes a lot of sense, and I am sympathetic, but for Americans of any stripe the mainstream press just doesn’t have a ton of credibility at this point-in-time (though for various reasons, just read the comments above mine!).

It’s been several decades since any of the national US news organizations regularly practiced in-depth journalism of the kind that warrants the type of indignity professed above.

A case-in-point is the woefully inaccurate and cartoonish coverage of the financial crisis, a calamity that has been underway since at least 2006, yet received virtually no media attention until 2008, and which virtually none of the major news organizations cover with any degree of accuracy or insight to this day.

So long as I have to turn to blogs like Calculated Risk and Naked Capitalism and Setzer’s Follow the Money to understand what is really happening to our economy, I’ll continue to regard the national media with a jaundiced eye. Extricate yourselves from corporate interests and marketing departments first, then lets talk.

Posted by BeerdedOne | Report as abusive
 

Watch Beck, Hannity and Huckabee on Fox and you will get the ugly details of the Stimulus disaster.

All the democrats can talk about is Americans losing their jobs but their not reporting on the number of Green Cards still being issued.

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/resour ces/video/commercials/elevator-commercia l.html?jid=83591&lid=9&rid=928&tid=60728 9

Posted by kerijay | Report as abusive
 

Reuters and AP and every other major news outlet is so in the tank for Obama that they can not let him fail. They will report a side of the story that makes him look good no matter the truth. When the economy worsens or we get attacked they will make it Bush’s fault. That is it, just keep blaming Bush. Everyone hates Bush, right. But Obama, he is the savior and he can not fail. The media will make sure of it. A real nuetral press in this country is dead.

Posted by Bill | Report as abusive
 

I lost all faith in the mainstream media when they went along with Bush and his gang of liars during the run-up to the Iraq war. The media didn’t seek out the truth then and they are not seeking it out now. Take the recent Israeli attacks on Gaza for instance. There are so many things we should know that the media is not telling us because they aren’t doing the work to find out the facts. I totally disagree that journalists are “liberal”, just the opposite in fact, because they just go along with whatever party line they are fed.

Posted by Helen Highwater | Report as abusive
 

And how about these guys who conveniently remember to pay back taxes afer Obama nominates them. If I ever get audited (and I doubt I will because I am honest) I want to claim the same privilege and grace that they received.

The honorable thing would be to step down, like they do in Europe. But no the only change we will see from Obama is that he changed his mind on enforcing ethics.

Posted by Steve | Report as abusive
 

I find that presidents are magicians when it comes to distracting the press. The press must be so mesmerized by the association with the president and his staff they lose all curiosity. For instance in the “90’s the press was so worn out chasing “bimbos” they missed the big story that was right in front of them. The relaxation of the accounting and auditing standards that led up to the current financial crisis.
I read comments about failing companies paying billions of dollars in bonuses to top executives and former presidential advisors, from both parties. I see no curiosity about how and why a failing company can pay or even justify the bonus payments.
The press that has the constitutional freedom and responsibility to protect our freedom can report scandalous payments that are reimbursed by the taxpayer but has no curiosity about how this can happen?
Instead the press is concerned about who took the pictures of the second inauguration this just sounds like more distraction to redirect the attention of the press and the nation away from the information we should know.
How did we come to have a press without curiosity?

Posted by Craig Coal | Report as abusive
 

I am almost 40. I seriously debated being a journalist in college, I thought the profession noble. Now, journalist and their coporate news media bosses are no better than politicians. I have totally lost faith in our news media – what a joke they are. So sad they have rolled over and played Oprah…where has real journalism gone?

Posted by Anita Clark | Report as abusive
 

Americans have forgotten some basic ideas. We see ourselves as ‘reliant’ and ‘dependent’. Somehow we have forgotten that ‘we’ are not reliant on anyone…politicians, bankers, journalists and ‘that crew’ should fear us…not the other way around. They serve us.

‘We’ have been held captive and domesticated for so long, that we no longer feel empowered and fail to recognize even basic truths, like who is really in power, the people. I feel un-empowered and held hostage by my ‘credit rating’…but I am not owned by banks (I PAY them to help me with money, but do I need them?).

If I decide to stop paying my mortgage, I will not suffer the ultimate loss, the bank will. I may loose points on ‘my credit’, but the bank is going to loose far more than that.

Really, what do I care if the bank is propped up another day? I wasn’t the one who set up this fatally flawed system and milked it for all it was worth. They got in bed with the politicians and decided that we, the people, could be harnessed to ‘bail them out’ whenever they felt necessary (this is blatantly obvious because although we are bailing them out, NOTHING IS CHANGING ON A BASIC LEVEL).

If more people understood and acted on the basic position of power that they now held in their hand, this silent moment, under reported and unnoticed, there would be an upswing in maybe not the money flow, but in the real ability of American to effect positive change, for themselves.

The problem is that when the establishment sees your power, they will concede and change, but not enough to effect a positive outcome for you, just enough to pacify people into believing again (HELLO THE BAILOUT!! wake up! they hold 99% of wealth they can afford to pacify you A LOT before their income or holdings are in jeopardy, THINK about 1% of your income, would you notice it?).

You have to decide as a people whether or not you are willing to play for keeps or on your knees. Either way, it is going to be a long protracted financially painful process, but in one scenario ‘We the people’ come out on top, the others are just ‘more of the same’.

More than any other issue on the table right now, is the governments and big business (journalist this is you too) unwillingness to ‘change’ or to have the ‘peoples’ power realized. Subterfuge, smoke and mirrors are all you will see, shadow stories that keep you ignorant and facilitate a lack of understanding for the ‘real’ issues on the table.

How many of you KNOW what is really at stake? We have the facilities to self govern now…but will we use them? Do we buy into the continued propaganda that Americans are witless, pathetic and incapable of self interest (government and big business MUST hold your hand before you, pathetic as you are, can make a decision) or do we decide that we have our own self interest at heart?

Banks began this slide when they made so many foolish and terrible decisions that they realized they no longer trusted each other…then there was the frantic scramble to find someone to ‘pay’ for their mistake.

Do you honestly think you could do worse? Could anyone exercise a worse group of choices? Are you willing to be this perpetual servant/ATM machine for them? What have they REALLY done for you lately?

One of the funniest things about this whole scenario is the fact that the bankers, big business and politicians continue to be SO out of touch with reality that they don’t even understand the finger is pointing at them…they think it is OK to keep taking bonuses, buying private jets and basically building a huge bonfire out of our, ‘the peoples’ future.

Posted by Kiki | Report as abusive
 

GE/NBC, Time Warner/WB/TBS, Disney/ABC, Viacom/CBS/UPN, News Corporation/FOX/NY Post/London Times and Reuters (Thompson Corporation merger..17.2 Billion)….nawwwwwwwww, news isn’t about news…it’s about money. Want news? Dont look to the ‘big guys’..especially when they use an OpEd to pat themselves on the back telling you how important YOU are, as a ‘client’…client, translation…pocketbook *rolls eyes*

Posted by Lynn | Report as abusive
 

One other point, historically. FDR was president during a very different time in our country. Back when there was such a thing as decorum…respect. Kennedy also enjoyed this sense of decorum and respect. Historically, if Kennedy and Clinton were to exchange time periods for their presidencies, there would be no talk of Monica Lewinsky, no cigar, no blue dress… while Kennedy..one of the most beloved presidents, would probably have been the one facing impeachment.

Posted by Lynn | Report as abusive
 

the cold hard truth is americans are lazy and incompetent. a bail out is like going to your kids teacher and complaining about little johnnys bad grades. not only complaining but demanding that little johnnys f should be made into an a. why? because their are lazy and incompetent

Posted by JORDEN | Report as abusive
 

good morning,

Frankly, it is high time for Mr. Obama to walk the walk having talked the talk, and journalists must do their best to prompt him to do so.

One example: Mr. Obama has taken personal responsibility or “blame” several times already for missteps. It is wearing thin with me, a small financial contributor to Mr. Obama’s campaign and a vote in his favor. I would much prefer slight public gloating for appointing law abiding (i.e. taxpaying) citizens to his cabinet, for not appointing a lobbyist to be the controller of the Pentagon, for guiding the stimulus bill through Congress instead of deferring to Ms. Pelosi’s partisan leadership, and for appointing a person with both ethics and credentials in the intelligence field to run the CIA. Please hold Mr. Obama to an objective standard of performance: Do what you said you would!

take care

 

The news media is already managing the economic and political news…has been for years, but most evidently now.

Posted by E.H. Murphy | Report as abusive
 

I have to congratulate Reuters for coverage of events. I once thought AP was reliable…until the Obama campaign and it seemed that many of their reporters were obsessed with giving good press to Obama. Their reporting was unreliable and one-sided. Pair that with two of the most respected news outlets in the country…NYTimes and WashPost who were in awe of Barack Obama and made no apologies for it. Their “news” was always biased. That goes doubly for CNN, NBC, ABC and CBS. There was no way to get the real story from these sources during the campaign.

I like Reuters professional, fact-based reporting and sincerely hope you don’t fall into the same trap as the others….you are our last hope.

Posted by Lezah2 | Report as abusive
 

DO YOU REALLY THINK YOU AND EVERY OTHER NEWS PERSON / BUSINESS IS NOT CONTROLLING THE NEWS??? ARE YOU SERIOUS! IN TODAYS “INSTANT NEWS IN YOUR FACE” THE OVERALL BIAS IS TOWARDS “SHOCK & AW” AND I CAN’T STAND IT. REAL NEWS REPORTING HAS PASSED AWAY YEARS AGO.

Posted by DENNIS | Report as abusive
 

It might be easier to show that the press was unbiased if the scientific facts behind the issues of global warming were more rigorously chased down, instead of accepting the prevailing view in the style of a Bernie Madoff sycophant.

 

HONEYMOON? Why worry NOW? You let the past eight years go by without any remorse!

Posted by Ray Jozwiak | Report as abusive
 

really – did you hold the Bush administrations feet to the fire? no you did not nor did any other media establishment. shame on you and your hyprocacy!!!!

Posted by heather | Report as abusive
 

Reading the news used to be an education. Now it’s just brainwashing.

Posted by Jeff | Report as abusive
 

The Borgen Project has some good info on the cost of addressing global poverty.

$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
$550 billion: U.S. Defense budget

 

I am at such a loss of words because of the worry and concern I have for our beautiful nation. We have let politicians stay in office (need term limits for all politicians) for so long and gain so much power that if younger politicians were voted in, with every intent to try to turn this thing around, they would have their heads mashed in by the Pelosi’s, Reids, Kennedys, Franks, Shumers, and all the other socialist. The only way to stop this is to let our representatives know that if they vote in line with these type people, they will be voted OUT, and then vote them OUT. I’m afraid that it is to late, and that our country will never be the same for “the people”. I’m not some big church go’er, but I pray to GOD that he awakens us before we let these people destroy our country before our children have a chance to enjoy it.

 

What you sow is what you reap.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.
Therefore is this a reaction to some past action?

All pleasure leads to pain
To avoid pain. Avoid pleasure – Hindu Philosophy

You will have to pay for your deeds – Islam

A man who lives by the sword will die by the Sword. – JXT

Posted by Starwin | Report as abusive
 

It has been a long time since I have read such a load of self-serving drivel. I will think about taking words such as yours seriously when they are offered freely from persons who reap no benefit from their being believed. Until then, history — particularly your history and that of others in your so-called profession — demands a different interpretation, and warrants my total disbelief. Please prove me wrong.

Posted by EPLogos | Report as abusive
 

Corporate Media manipulates public thinking & opinion.
Corporates manipulate politicians & beaurocrats, and thus the democracy.
Corporate finance self generates feeding on public wealth.
Common public are maintained in stupified ecstatic hypnosis through the mass entertainments sponsored by corporates.
Its 1% of elites controlling the rest of 99%.
It applies not only to USA, but to the entire world.
Freedom of expression is finely filtered out by the corporate media.
Its a well planned out strategy getting smoothly executed, without waking up the public awareness.

 

Hello Max of May 18th at 0808 GMT

Although we here in our group of Disabled American Veterans (with MBA’s) might not have phrased it exactly as you did, sir…in essence, you are right on target.

The self-censored “get-along-and-go-along” corporate media sector works in concert with the unregulated corporate financial sector, the price-fixing corporate energy sector, and the revolving door corporate public sector…all to manipulate, control and overtax the majority Middle & Working Class…while constantly distracting independent Middle & Working Class voters with the blissfully ignorant left wing agenda and the dangerously ignorant right wing agenda.

OKJackGroup
oklahomajack.com

Posted by OKJackGroup | Report as abusive
 

Speaking of telling the “complete truth”, I’m afraid that Caren Bohan’s Sotomayer article today commits the same sin that Obama complained about this morning, i.e. omitting context. Sotomayer’s remark about a Latina perhaps having valuable insights compared to a white male was in a discussion of CASES INVOLVING RACIAL DISCRIMINATION, but that fact was once again omitted in Reuters’ story.

Posted by DeanOR | Report as abusive
 

Here’s some Cold Hard Truth…

Amid distractions, planned and incidental, the “sheeple” are oblivious as forces of world domination have again been dealt a winning hand and we continue to get the “Royal Flush”. Do not dismiss this as conspiracy for we are long past that phase. There are many players in this high stakes struggle for power and money, most have been in this “game” a long time. Use whatever moniker you prefer: Roman Clubbers, Build A Burgers, Illumined Nazis, Skull and Boneheads, Rockin Fellers, Rotten Childs.. reagrdless of the titles it’s merely fingers of the same “iron” fisted globalist hand. Huxley said it clearly:

“It seems to me that the nature of the ultimate revolution with which we are now faced is precisely this: That we are in process of developing a whole series of techniques which will enable the controlling oligarchy who have always existed and presumably will always exist to get people to love their servitude.”
(Huxley 1962 speech at Berkeley) TRANSCRIPT HERE:
http://tribes.tribe.net/infobunker/threa d/2cdea7ff-9397-49bd-9aa7-0950a9add86a
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~
“Bad laws are the worst form of tyranny”
-Edmund Burke-

 

Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
  •