Corporate Media Reveals Itself As Dysfunctional After Trump-Putin Meeting
We might need some independent media news outlets to take over after this one.
Something very important happened at that meeting that is being basically ignored by our media, when it should be on the front page of every respectable news outlet, since it is such a big deal, something that might’ve saved us from WWIII.
The Associated Press reports: (https://apnews.com/eaa310ccb6e04e0580759d4ce36e778b)
The United States and Russia struck an agreement Friday on a cease-fire in southwest Syria, crowning President Donald Trump’s first meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. It is the first U.S.-Russian effort under Trump’s presidency to stem Syria’s six-year civil war. The cease-fire goes into effect Sunday at noon Damascus time, according to U.S. officials and the Jordanian government, which is also involved in the deal.
Bravo, Donald Trump, you actually did something good in your life.
The AP continues:
Syrian government forces and its allies will stay on one side of an agreed demarcation line, and rebel fighters will stick to the other side. The goal is also to enable aid to reach this area of Syria, [Mohammed] Momani (a Jordanian government spokesperson) told state media. U.S. officials said the U.S., Russia and Jordan had only agreed on that demarcation line last week, clearing the way for a cease-fire to be worked out.
This sounds absolutely fantastic. A cease-fire in Syria? Less unneeded death and destruction of civilians and towns? That’s a dream, and now it’s a dream come true.
But what did the corporate media think about this meeting? What did they put in their headlines?
Even the Huffington Post has sunk to the Washington-Post-level of propaganda for the Democratic Party establishment.
Remember when Obama had to remind Romney that Russia is not our enemy?
Or when Putin was on vacation with the Bushes?
But even with all of this in mind, this is what the Huffington Post had to say about the meeting: (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-meeting_us_595eabe0e4b0d5b458e95705?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009)
Tillerson said two discussed Russian interference in the U.S. election, and that Putin denied any involvement while asking the U.S. for evidence that hacking had taken place. Russian state media reports Putin and Trump also discussed Syria, Ukraine, counterterrorism and cybersecurity, according to CNN’s Jim Acosta.
Right, Trump and Putin just discussed Syria, instead of making a landmark agreement that should’ve been the headline and the topic of this article.
The meeting comes amid investigations into whether Trump’s campaign team actively colluded with Russian officials to sway the outcome of the 2016 presidential race. (Trump and his team deny any such collusion.) U.S. intelligence agencies have already determined that Russia did interfere in the election, and that Putin was directly involved in those efforts.
What does collusion mean again? How exactly could Trump have “colluded” with Russia to hack into DNC servers? What specifically could that have entailed? And when was the last time we could trust our intelligence agencies? I heard that they like to break our constitutional rights and lie us into pointless wars for oil.
Also, when was the last time journalism was supposed to speak truth to power instead of serving it? The government needs to be criticized when it has “already determined” something without any evidence, or when it’s done that many, many times before.
Three conclusions can be drawn from this. One, the corporate media reports on the wrong things and puts out the wrong headlines. Two, the corporate media reports false things and puts out false headlines. And three, the corporate media does this to serve the powerful, the elites, and those in government who are tied to the petro-dollar and the system of corruption and corporate ownership of government.
And when journalism is about reporting on the right things, reporting on them accurately, and doing so to speak truth to power, this makes the corporate media utterly dysfunctional at doing its job: being journalists.