-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 11/13/2016 06:58 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

...

On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

...

How we just love the Lame Stream Media!

New York Times promises to “report America and the world honestly” after Trump’s election win http://theduran.com/new-york-times-promises-report-america- and-the-world-honestly-after-trumps-election-win/

Will they report on any of this? Will they tell the real truth... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8TE_QMa3fw

This is the reality of what our nation has become. We aren't the leaders of the free world, we're its destroyers. We are the villains, not Russia, not China, but America.

I doubt it.

Individuals can be honest, in a context where a mutual trust relationship based on common material interests enables them to be honest. The weaker this bond of trust motivated by practical self interest is, the less honesty is rewarded, and the more it is actively punished when the information presented is unfavorable to the interests of individual respondents. Of course, there will be exceptions to any rule: Some idealists habitually tell the truth as they see it with little regard for the consequences; some neurotics will only tell the truth when they can't think of a better lie. Organizations and institutions can not be honest, at least not for long, because the persons who receive the most material compensation through their participation in the organization or institution have a personal interest in maintaining their dominant positions, inevitably at the expense of other participants in the enterprise. Growing the power and influence of particular departments and the organization as a whole, at the expense of other departments and organizations, increases the personal compensation of members of those departments and organizations. So, both internal and external conflicts of interest erode or negate trust relationships and the value of honesty within and between formally organized enterprises. Honesty's cousin, factual accuracy, is degraded or eliminated within hierarchal organizations. Hagbard's Law states that "communication is only possible between equals." When information is reported up a chain of command, it is altered at every step by the reporters' efforts to curry favor and/or avoid punishment. A recent de facto revolt by 50 intelligence analysts at CENTCOM, complaining that their work product was being altered in transit to comply with the political agendas, indicates that this mechanism is at work even in organizations whose sole function is "accurately reporting information." Mechanisms for transparency, accountability to third parties, and flattening chains of command can to some extent mitigate the inherent problems degrading honesty and information in organizations, but the same mechanisms these strategies seek to correct are also present in the mitigation processes themselves: * Transparency requires reporting, and reporting requirements always prompt the reporters to twist or discard information as necessary to advance their interests, curry favor and/or avoid punishment. * Third party monitors have their own agendas and organizational drivers; as a classic example, the Internal Affairs activities of police departments normally work to shield corrupt officers and activities from accountability, except when taking sides in factional power struggles affecting the whole organization. * Organizations with horizontal command structures develop informal cliques working off the record when and as necessary to influence the organization's decision making and operational processes for their own advantage. This is done "for the good of the organization" as defined by its ability to reward them for their participation. Pontius Pilate famously asked, "What is truth?" That was not so much a question as a ironic statement: In the Imperial Governor's house, truth is whatever he says, because he has said it. This provides us with a working definition of what it means to speak "with authority." The New York Times and its organizational sponsors manufacture truth by speaking with authority. A long running propaganda meme calls the NYT a "newspaper of record." What they publish is true because they have published it, on behalf of State and Corporate powers with the authority to enforce their collective will by any means necessary to assure their continued dominance. When the Times formally commits to "report America to the world honestly," that only reaffirms their mission of publishing effective propaganda in the interest of the American ruling class and their various State and Corporate administrative organizations. Some conflicts among the ruling class will be reflected in that reporting, and some factual information will make it through the many layers of filters. "Flat fact" will occasionally be published as loss-leader material to maintain an illusion of impartiality, and some accurate information will be exposed because the same mechanisms that degrade competency within any organization degrade the quality of the NYT's propaganda efforts. But as a source of politically relevant general information, the New York Times can best be approached as a hostile witness, if not a downright vicious one: If you want to know what your rulers want you to believe in and care about, subscribe the New York Times. :o) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYK1lvAAoJEECU6c5XzmuqpmsIALlqn86d9cvDQOQmgBWtkT2j Rf/EFRnZvjLx7MxxO9Od0+lqr8+vmwcExMQmmeMk/iCL62kVk/WH2q5mTLzvceE9 RZMpT/jE2FWU39HDbQhvpXseES5iGQ+bLDEwLpqzetpxqdt5OjBZ6JPbuPQ7Sxja rQl1CjJEbbjbWP7F5kwsnxKHkyMvveYY91ZKd0WPAqyG/9fY2ZL2dueZhVyMfyXw RHFrArhzfGPoufvMEf7h7nxf57igcnbQu/0WK+8nyjyP4y12S3ZqUZXk85O31gaH Ic1V830reoG76LUygGvoHPU9OEAq673paO4ocVAAfgTa3axS7+Qnl4sMinXbMbk= =US39 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----