Connect with us


Mainstream Media vs. the Age of Information

Ethan Indigo Smith, Contributor
Waking Times

The information age is changing entirety. It has changed and continues to change so rapidly that many of us, many times, find ourselves playing catch-up, not just with trends of communication but also with shifts in the flow of information itself.

The internet provides access to information and education on everything from politics to physics. Indeed we are presently more capable of being knowledgeable than other group of people to have ever lived. Internet communication devices are almost like having a key to the Akashic Field; we can tap into practically all information anywhere on Earth.

However this ‘mechanical Akashic’ is also layered with the ill-mindedness and untruths that pervade this physical realm today. For this reason, we have to learn to distinguish between knowledge and piles. Our access to knowledge does not necessarily equate to wisdom (knowledge being the possession of information, and wisdom being the inclination to be productive with that information.) So it is up to each of us, not the government or its cohorts, to determine for ourselves what information is real and relevant, and what is ‘fake news’ or propaganda.

Information vs. the Status Quo

The world is on the precipice of change. The information age has the power to challenge the structures of the status quo. It even has the potential to eliminate the influence of money over the election of our leaders, since all candidates can be offered equal communication platforms which enable them all (and their policies) equally, so that those with the best ideas are elected and not the wealthiest corporate-funded noisemaker who can buy support and advertising time on corporate media.

Indeed, there are so many ways that the information age could completely shift the oligarchical collectivism of the power structures of the world in favor of individuals instead of institutions. So, instead of expanding our reach of information – instead of inspiring individuals to dig for truth and research for realness – the institutional powers-that-be are constricting the field of information. This is particularly obvious with recent challenges to net neutrality — a neutrality that 87% of average Americans support, but which institutions are nonetheless seeking to destroy.

This constriction of ideas has expanded to the point that anything esoteric or challenging to the mainstream media narrative is being covertly and overtly belittled, or outright censored, while at the same time, militaristic propaganda is put forth through the mainstream media, who refuse to genuinely analyze or criticize the actions of its government cohort. A clear example is the distinct absence of any pacifists in the mainstream news media even questioning our government’s policy of aggressive intervention, as the U.S. government continues to incite conflict with other nations under the guise of ‘humanitarianism’ and ‘peace’.

Moreover, mainstream media has been found repeatedly obscuring and falsifying ‘news’, while blacking-out important stories completely – clearly demonstrating it is working to corporate and government allegiances and agendas. Just look at the countless global events being reported by the underground news and compare it to the selective, politically-biased fear-fare of the mainstream; there is little journalistic integrity on display in the mainstream media, just the regurgitation of B.S. And lots of it. As a result, public confidence in mainstream news has steadily declined over recent years while “alternative media” has risen in its place, filling the void of real news, views and analyses that go unheard and unexamined in mainstream circles. (For a deeper examination of the ways institutions lie, please read my article A Tangible Math Lesson – Four Types of Institutional Lies.)

And therein lies the impetus for institutions to censor the internet. The role of journalism used to be about holding institutions to transparent accountability. But today, the major institutions of the world — a network of corporate, government, media and religious bodies — are withholding truth and information concerning everything from politics to physics while offering their own biased input, which is often completely bogus subterfuge designed to maintain control and consensus. Events and views reported in the mainstream are filtered, distorted and even blatantly constructed by media corporations that conceal their corporate and political alliances behind the guise of “news” and “journalism”. Why else do you think facts are being labelled as “alternative” or “fake news”, governments are attempting to censor and de-neutralize the internet, and the mainstream media fails to report on major world events while circulating others on endless repeat? (See: Mainstream Media Propaganda – “Extremely Dangerous to Our Democracy”.)

Undoubtedly, such selectivity of the news and information made available to the general population proves an institutional agenda that pivots upon the limitation and suppression of information – and that can only equal bad news for a supposedly free society.

“The mass media serve as a system for communicating messages and symbols to the general populace. It is their function to amuse, entertain, and inform, and to inculcate individuals with the values, beliefs, and codes of behavior that will integrate them into the institutional structures of the larger society. In a world of concentrated wealth and major conflicts of class interest, to fulfill this role requires systematic propaganda.”~Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky

Truth-Seeking: A Revolutionary Act

Corrupted institutions, to one extent or another, enslave individuals to those institutions. Government institutions corrupt law and legality. Religious institutions corrupt spirituality. Corporate institutions corrupt trade. Media institutions corrupt thinking. Financial institutions have corrupted our economy. Today, such institutional corruption is so rampant that it has become the unspoken normalcy, and speaking up to it is quietly viewed as disruption, dissent, and even illness.

Our institutions are designed to limit our access to knowledge and therefore, our thinking, and promote zealotry and elitism as the new political ideal — and as a result, many in our society are unable to comprehend the difference between legal and moral much less why the two have diverged.

So what’s the solution? Open information.

Open information liberates individuals. The reason the words library and liberty have the same etymological root is because of the freeing and empowering nature of information. So, no matter which individual or institution is presenting information, it is the responsibility of us all to interpret, consider and research the truth of everything – from politics to physics.

In our society, some choose to understand while some choose to stand over others. This is done through controlling information initially, and then controlling resources. Once information and resources are controlled, authorizing further actions that solidify the institutional status quo is easy. The institutions of the world are working together to ensure that they remain the holders of power and prosperity, for it is through institutions that individuals gain a foothold to stand over others. As history has shown us, empire serves no-one but itself.

So, to ensure our liberty we must also ensure the integrity of our library. The information age not only invites but requires that we expand our consciousness and our comprehension, not limit it. We do not need to funnel the pool of information into the narrow mainstream, we need to expand our minds and increase the numbers of sources of information. We don’t need corrupted governments or wealthy media corporations telling us what is true or important; the more information we have access to the more easily we can spot the information with bias and information that is untrue.

The First Amendment is designed to prevent the institutional, monothematic takeover of the media, and preserve and inspire our right to consider for ourselves what is truth. It is a fundamental tenet of the U.S.A. (and the free world) that “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” If we limit our sources of information, we limit the potential of our thinking and eventually, we may just have one modality of information, or even just one book to draw information from.

In the age of information, do you want access to an infinite source of information, or just one source of information? The choice is obvious.

“In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” — George Orwell

About the Author

Activist, author and Tai Chi teacher Ethan Indigo Smith was born on a farm in Maine and lived in Manhattan for a number of years before migrating west to Mendocino, California. Guided by a keen sense of integrity and humanity, Ethan’s work is both deeply connected and extremely insightful, blending philosophy, politics, activism, spirituality, meditation and a unique sense of humour.

Ethan’s publications include:

For more information, visit Ethan on Facebook.

This article (Mainstream Media vs. the Age of Information) was originally created and published by Ethan Indigo Smith and is re-posted here with permission. 

Source link



Yes, fear is the power of control

“… The young devil to the old:

– How did you manage to send so many souls to hell?

Old devil:

– Through fear!


– Well done! And what were they afraid of? Wars? Hunger?


– No … Disease!


– They weren’t sick? Weren’t they dying? Wasn’t there a medicine?


-….. got sick. They died. There was a cure …


– I do not understand…


– We accidentally decided that the only thing that needs to be preserved at any cost is LIFE !!!

They stopped hugging … They stopped greeting each other !!! They left all human contact …. They left everything that made a person human!

They were left without money. They lost their jobs.

But they chose to fear for their lives, even if they didn’t have bread to eat.

They believed what they heard, read the newspapers and blindly believed everything they read.

They gave up freedom.

They never left the house again. They never went anywhere. We never visited friends and family again. The whole world has turned into a huge prison with convicts – volunteers.

They accepted everything !!! All this to live another miserable day …

They didn’t live, they died every day!

It was too easy to take their pitiful soul … “

Clive Lewis “Letters from a Senior to a Junior Devil”.

From the book “Balamut’s Letters” (1941)

Continue Reading


Havana Syndrome again? CIA officers are mowed down by a mysterious disease

A CIA officer in Moscow experienced symptoms of the so-called “Havana syndrome” in 2017. This became known to The New York Times with reference to sources in diplomatic circles.

CIA officer Mark Polimepulos, who helped lead covert operations in Russia and Europe, complained about the manifestation of mysterious symptoms. According to the newspaper, in December 2017, he felt severe dizziness, which later developed into a prolonged migraine, forcing him to retire. At that time, Polymerpoulos was 48 years old.

It is noted that such a case was not the only one. Similar symptoms were experienced by the staff of the American ambassadors in Cuba and China in 2016-2018. However, the exact number of cases and the place where this happened is not named. It is alleged that the US diplomats have tried to influence in a similar way around the world.

At the same time, the US State Department was unable to establish an unambiguous reason that caused the “Havana syndrome.” Among other things, it was assumed that the diplomats may have been exposed to an unidentified sound effect.

In 2017, it was reported that, beginning in late 2016, American diplomatic officials and their relatives in Cuba began to complain of symptoms such as hearing loss, nausea, headaches and balance disorder. 

The Associated Press received audio footage of the attack and described the harassing sounds as “the high-pitched sound of crickets combined with fingernails scratching on a board.” Then the American government suggested that Russia or China could be the culprit.

Many victims are still undergoing rehabilitation. Specialists from the University of Pennsylvania performed magnetic resonance imaging and revealed visible changes in the structure of the brain in the diplomatic missions.

Differences were found in 23 men and 17 women who complained of health problems while on diplomatic duties in Havana. Scientists have yet to figure out what causes the unusual symptoms.

Continue Reading


How Russia and the United States nearly started a nuclear war in 1995

The Norwegian meteorological rocket incident remains the only time in history that the Russian president has activated his nuclear briefcase.

On January 25, 1995, Doomsday could have come in the world: the Russian Federation was preparing to launch a nuclear strike on the United States. How did it come about that the states that left the confrontation of the Cold War in the past and had just normalized relations with each other found themselves on the verge of mutual destruction?

The beginning of the war?

The cause of the crisis was an ordinary Norwegian meteorological rocket. Its launch from the small island of Anneia at 7 am local time (10 am Moscow time) towards Spitsbergen caused a stir in Russia. 

Black Brant XII.

Black Brant XII. Legion Media / ZUMA Press

Equipped with scientific equipment to study the aurora borealis, the Black Brant XII was similar in size to the nuclear-powered American Trident D-5 ballistic missile, intended for launch from submarines. In addition, it flew along a trajectory along which, as the Russian Defense Ministry believed, American missiles would fly in the event of a nuclear war. 

In December 1994, Norway informed 28 states, including Russia, about the planned launch, but did not give a specific date, limiting itself to specifying the period: from January 15 to February 10 of the next year. Due to bureaucratic delays, this information did not reach the Russian Missile Warning System, which sounded the alarm.

Decisive minutes

An emergency meeting with the country’s top political and military leadership was convened in the Kremlin. Defense Minister Pavel Grachev, Chief of the General Staff Mikhail Kolesnikov and President of the Russian Federation (as Supreme Commander-in-Chief) Boris Yeltsin had three strategic missile forces control terminals activated – the so-called nuclear suitcases.

Vladimir Sayapin / TASS

The military believed the lone missile could have been fired to create an electromagnetic pulse that knocked out Russian radars and communications systems. Following it, a massive blow could be expected.

For several tense minutes, as leaders watched it flight, it was decided whether Russia would launch a nuclear strike against the United States. 

“Little is known today about what Yeltsin said at the time, given that it could have been some of the most dangerous moments in the entire history of the nuclear era,” The Washington Post journalist, David Hoffman wrote three years after the incident : “They make it clear that the Cold War nuclear readiness system continues to operate, and how catastrophic its consequences could be, despite the fact that the feud between the great powers is already over.”   

The situation was discharged only when it became clear that the rocket had gone towards Spitsbergen (not far from which it fell into the ocean). The nuclear cases have been deactivated. Russian President Boris Yeltsin (center) and Russian Defense Minister Pavel Grachev (right).

Russian President Boris Yeltsin (center) and Russian Defense Minister Pavel Grachev (right). Igor Mikhalev / Sputnik

The incident with bringing Russia’s Strategic Nuclear Forces to combat readiness, soon became the property of the world community. When, four years later, the Norwegians were about to repeat their launch of Black Brant XII and reported this to the Russian Foreign Ministry, the US additionally warned all key Russian military departments about it through their channels. As a result, this time there were no unpleasant surprises. 


Continue Reading