Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bingo
There are too many jouralists working for credible agencies looking to make a name for themselves to leave this topic alone if it was as cut and dried as the conspiracy theorists make it out to be. All of these guys choose to leave it? How many people are we talking 10,000? 20,000? more?
|
I don't think that's how it works Bingo. Mainstream press is made to tow a certain line. Huge pressure from corporations (who own the news) and government to parrot the official news and not stir up trouble. Reporters who ask too many questions and raise too many issues get blackballed. If you wanna make a name for yourself you report the story they want.
As an example we can look no further than a segment in the The Corporation where a couple news journalists in the US discover that posilac (a drug made by Monsanto to increase milk production in cows) turns out to be dangerous. Their story was first quashed because Monsanto is a huge advertiser on the owner company of the affiliate they were working for and then brought back with any controversial claims removed. Neither Canada nor Britain allowed the drug past our food and drug administration agencies.
Both "Why We Fight" and "Manufacturing Consent" a couple documentaries I've watched recently touch on the issue of freedom of the press and biased reporting in the US Gov't favour.
I'm not saying I support these conspiracy theories. What I am saying is that saying, "Well some reporters would have uncovered it if it actually happened" is not necessarily true.