academic freedom agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games Governance & control vs anarchy health and health concerns Intelligent Design Lessons of History Media Medicine UD Newswatch highlights

A media bias takedown by the Frontline Doctors

Spread the love

If you needed a case study on loaded language driven slanted reporting, here is a case study that deserves to be headlined:

yay, it works . . .

For context, see the de-spin chart:

Remember, this has been with lives on the line. END

7 Replies to “A media bias takedown by the Frontline Doctors

  1. 1
    kairosfocus says:

    A media bias takedown by the Frontline Doctors — now think about the way ID, any number of other movements and individuals have been covered by the media.

    There’s a lot of ‘splainin’ to do!

  2. 2
    News says:

    kairosfocus at 1, the reality is that legacy media don’t have to care about misrepresentations as long as they are misrepresenting on behalf of an establishment. It’s likely true that many thousands died unnecessarily but, you see, those people don’t matter. They would need to make themselves matter and many are not prepared for that yet. They would first have to get past legacy media, Trust the Science!, and many other approved “supports” for their lives that are simply manipulations, oblivious to their interests.

  3. 3
    kairosfocus says:

    News, yes. We have become corrupt, cynical, manipulative, damaged in conscience/integrity. It shows in many dimensions and now in a clear march of folly that is costing lives, livelihoods and much more. We could focus attention on the particular personality and her perversity, expressed here in utterly cynical smears that start with denigrating courageous dissenting doctors speaking up for rights, the right and truth from a very traditional spot, the USSC steps. She then goes on to attack their courageous stance to offer an effective remedy that has been willfully sidelined and falsely labelled as a toxic, useless horse dewormer. We could highlight that she has nil qualifications in medicine or evaluating relevant evidence — BA public policy, DPhil politics — so is just a mouthpiece for an agenda, here radical progressivism. This invites the analysis, confession by projection to the despised other rooted in cognitive dissonance. The result of such combined with data on personality is itself devastating, but in reality that only takes us to why such a figure would be willing to go along with such agitprop. The real issue is institutional: disintegration of integrity of news such that without being directly state controlled it routinely and without judicial accountability, pushes an ideological narrative that is or should be known to pivot on distortion, falsehood and even outright big lie and turnabout projection tactics, with here cynical disregard to lives needlessly lost. Tort reform is only part of the cure. Another part is to recognise that institutional capture by the abortion agenda has led to bloodguilt driven corrosion of integrity, so of credibility, now compounded by entanglement in all sorts of radical agendas including cultural marxism. Therefore, thirdly we need to red flag the media acting like this and seek out those who have integrity, to reform our own understanding of current events and issues, across the board. Then, we need a completely different approach to the public, issues, policy, education and issues, politics, carrying civilisation forward. KF

  4. 4
    kairosfocus says:

    PS: It also speaks to officialdom, government, politics and law. Going forward we need to reform the basis for civilisation, restoring sanity. That takes me right back to the root issue of built in, self evident Ciceronian first duties, which were so spectacularly violated:

    We may readily identify at least seven branch- on- which- we- all- sit (so, inescapable, pervasive), first principle . . .

    first duties of reason:

    “Inescapable,” as they are so antecedent to reasoning that even the objector implicitly appeals to their legitimate authority; inescapable, so first truths of reason, i.e. they are self-evidently true and binding. Namely, Ciceronian first duties,

    1st – to truth,
    2nd – to right reason,
    3rd – to prudence [including warrant],
    4th – to sound conscience,
    5th – to neighbour; so also,
    6th – to fairness and
    7th – to justice
    [ . . .]
    xth – etc

    Likewise, we observe again, that objectors to such duties cannot but appeal to them to give their objections rhetorical traction (i.e. s/he must imply or acknowledge what we are, morally governed, duty-bound creatures to gain any persuasive effect). While also those who try to prove such cannot but appeal to the said principles too. So, these principles are a branch on which we all must sit, including objectors and those who imagine they are to be proved and try. That is, these are manifestly first principles of rational, responsible, honest, conscience guided liberty and so too a built-in framework of law; yes, core natural law of human nature. Reason, inescapably, is morally governed.

    Of course, there is a linked but not equivalent pattern: bounded, error-prone rationality often tied to ill will and stubbornness or even closed mindedness; that’s why the study of right reason has a sub-study on fallacies and errors. That we sometimes seek to evade duties or may make inadvertent errors does not overthrow such first duties of reason, which instead help us to detect and correct errors, as well as to expose our follies.

    Perhaps, a negative form will help to clarify, for cause we find to be at best hopelessly error-riddled, those who are habitually untruthful, fallacious and/or irrational, imprudent, fail to soundly warrant claims, show a benumbed or dead conscience [i.e. sociopathy and/or highly machiavellian tendencies], dehumanise and abuse others, are unfair and unjust. At worst, such are utterly dangerous, destructive,or even ruthlessly, demonically lawless.

    Such built-in . . . thus, universal . . . law, then, is not invented by parliaments, kings or courts, nor can these principles and duties be abolished by such; they are recognised, often implicitly as an indelible part of our evident nature. Hence, “natural law,” coeval with our humanity, famously phrased in terms of “self-evident . . . rights . . . endowed by our Creator” in the US Declaration of Independence, 1776. (Cf. Cicero in De Legibus, c. 50 BC.) Indeed, it is on this framework that we can set out to soundly understand and duly balance rights, freedoms and duties; which is justice, the pivot of law. The legitimate main task of government, then, is to uphold and defend the civil peace of justice through sound community order reflecting the built in, intelligible law of our nature.

    Where, as my right implies your duty a true right is a binding moral claim to be respected in life, liberty, honestly aquired property, innocent reputation etc. To so justly claim a right, one must therefore demonstrably be in the right.

    Likewise, Aristotle long since anticipated Pilate’s cynical “what is truth?”: truth says of what is, that it is; and of what is not, that it is not. [Metaphysics, 1011b, C4 BC.] Simple in concept, but hard to establish on the ground; hence — in key part — the duties to right reason, prudence, fairness etc.

    Thus, too, we may compose sound civil law informed by that built-in law of our responsibly, rationally free morally governed nature; from such, we may identify what is unsound or false thus to be reformed or replaced even though enacted under the colour and solemn ceremonies of law.

    The first duties, also, are a framework for understanding and articulating the corpus of built-in law of our morally governed nature, antecedent to civil laws and manifest our roots in the Supreme Law-giver, the inherently good, utterly wise and just creator-God, the necessary (so, eternal), maximally great being at the root of reality.

  5. 5
    kairosfocus says:

    PPS, expanding just one of them, right reason:


    How is logic necessary?

    When someone in [Epictetus’] audience said, Convince me that logic is necessary, he answered: Do you wish me to demonstrate this to you?—Yes.—Well, then, must I use a demonstrative argument?—And when the questioner had agreed to that, Epictetus asked him. How, then, will you know if I impose upon you?—As the man had no answer to give, Epictetus said: Do you see how you yourself admit that all this instruction is necessary, if, without it, you cannot so much as know whether it is necessary or not? [Notice, inescapable, thus self evidently true and antecedent to the inferential reasoning that provides deductive proofs and frameworks, including axiomatic systems and propositional calculus etc. We here see the first principles of right reason in action. Cf J. C. Wright]

  6. 6
  7. 7
    jerry says:

    The media in the Western world is controlled by one person, Larry Fink. His investment organization, BlackRock has 15-25% of nearly every large organization. He has placed people into management positions in these media organizations.

    Vanguard and BlackRock are the top two owners of Time Warner, Comcast, Disney and News Corp, four of the six media companies that control more than 90% of the U.S. media landscape.

    BlackRock and Vanguard form a secret monopoly that own just about everything else you can think of too. In all, they have ownership in 1,600 American firms, which in 2015 had combined revenues of $9.1 trillion. When you add in the third-largest global owner, State Street, their combined ownership encompasses nearly 90% of all S&P 500 firms.

    Vanguard is the largest shareholder of BlackRock. Vanguard itself, on the other hand, has a unique structure that makes its ownership more difficult to discern, but many of the oldest, richest families in the world can be linked to Vanguard funds.

    They own Big Pharma too.

Leave a Reply