One of the biggest things we have learnt this year is the meaning of press freedom.    Both the Brexit vote and the US election vote, the media were heavily involved in the process of informing the public.   What became clear very quickly, however, in both cases is that the press was less interested in informing the public about the facts, but rather influence and manipulate the key issues for a particular desired outcome.

I believe that the press have done this freely – they are still a free press.  Having the story is the most important aspect for a press organisation, and in order to get that story they need to have a door into it and the doors are often controlled by someone one.  It is not hard to believe that the favour becomes a two way street – ‘I give you access to this story, and you let me feed you that story, and now you are in the ‘in’ crowd, mess up and report something we don’t like you will be out in the cold.’    The choice made is a free choice.

And so another group of the community falls victim to the profit line.  For a while, in the previous decade, it looked like the press, corrupted now for several decades already, were enjoying discovering their new found role in influencing public opinion as major events hit the news stand with 9/11 and the Iraq war.  They flexed their muscles and seemed to relish the effects, but did not take the cue from the public who realised they were being manipulated, that the public can’t be fooled for long.   Rather than admit the insidious role they were now playing, the press decided to self delude and believe in what they were actually writing about.  We saw this spectacularly in the US where the reporters could not hide their shock and upset in the results of the election a week ago.

The election results have been an enormous wake up call to the press, and yet we are not seeing a huge amount of change from them.  The BBC came under fire, from other press organisations it must be said, however you wouldn’t know it the way it was reported, for inviting Le Penn for an interview.  The BBC who openly stated approx 15 years ago were openly stating that they were not interested in facts or impartial reporting on global warming, they would only report biased information in order to promote and progress the man made global warming agenda.    Will they, or will they not, now treat this interview without bias?  I have not seen it yet, but it would be nice if the old, and once much trusted institution became a beacon of light for the rest of its industry.

In the mean time we have to suffer with watching them as the increasingly polarise opinions and whip up discontent in support of the globalist agenda from which they feed.