Based Underground is now a conservative news aggregator AND curated newsletter.
(American Thinker)—It has been eleven years since investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson first revealed that Barack Obama’s government was illegally spying on her. Although she has pursued the matter doggedly in court, no high-ranking Obama administration officials have ever been held accountable. The incident remains remarkable not only because it laid bare another instance in which Obama’s administration engaged in unlawful, unconstitutional, and unethical conduct (remember when Attorney General Eric Holder got caught arming international drug cartels in Operation Fast and Furious for reasons that only he could justify?), but also because the silence from the American press corps was deafening.
There was some platitudinal outrage, to be sure, but if the pre-eminent news organs in the United States had truly wanted to defend free speech from government tyranny, they would have robustly condemned Obama for presiding over an administration at war with the First and Fourth Amendments. They would still be running stories to this day reminding Americans that nobody of consequence from the Obama government has been punished. And they would never stop pointing out that neither Obama nor his lieutenants have ever apologized for their impeachable offenses or naked betrayal of their constitutional oaths. Judged from their tepid response, it would appear that most corporate news reporters tacitly approved of Obama’s government conducting espionage operations against the press — at least so long as the “right kind” of reporters were the ones being targeted.
To the great consternation of the Obama regime and its praetorian press supporters, Sharyl Attkisson has always been an “old school” reporter — which is to say, she follows important news stories wherever they may take her and regardless of how her investigations may affect the political fortunes of those fêted by The New York Times or CNN. With neither fear nor favor, she strives to reveal truth — not her truth or the preferred truth of those who pay her, but the truth. Because she sticks to that journalistic creed, she is a thorn in the side to those with power.
In another time or place that regarded journalistic independence as a requisite safeguard for preserving both free speech and a free press, Attkisson would be admired as an exemplar of her profession. And to those who appreciate her work, she is. But for far too many national reporters who would gladly sacrifice truth for the promise of future prestige, her story is best ignored. Why? Because she is a corporeal reminder that American journalism is fake.
Contrary to the banal assurances that come out of the mouths of intellectual flyweights such as Jim Acosta, reporters regularly do pick sides, omit important facts, and manipulate the coverage of breaking news. Almost all practicing journalists these days are creatures of the left. Fabian socialists, Marxist ideologues, or Democrat partisans — however else they might self-identify, they all view themselves as romantic figures destined to influence history. Who, What, When, Where, and Why are for the schlubs. They are here to engineer narratives, and they take their jobs quite seriously.
“Narrative engineer” is such a perfect sobriquet for today’s reporters. It appeals to their special brand of vanity. Most would love to be known for their literary talents but lack the skill to tell good stories. Most wish others would see them as having the kind of brainpower associated with engineers, but alas, they struggle with basic geometry. Thinking of themselves as master builders of human events allows journalists to carve out a privileged caste for themselves that lies somewhere between that of the academic and the priest. And if anyone honored them as “professors” or bowed deferentially in their presence, members of the journalistic clergy would certainly not object.
This kind of pomposity offends “old school” reporters. In fact, one of the easiest ways to discern whether a journalist is more interested in discovering the truth or engineering a narrative is to look at that person’s bio. “Narrative engineers” love to highlight their journalism degrees, fellowships, exotic assignments, and the list of important corporations that have paid them to say what those corporations need them to say. “Old school” reporters don’t care about telling you where they went to college — or if they even attended one. Rather than refer you to their updated C.V.s, they’d rather let their work product do the talking. They’re not fond of flaunting awards or illustrious former employers because both tend to reflect the mission statements of powerful corporations or wealthy patrons — the exact kinds of groups and people “old school” journos inherently distrust.
Good muckrakers are suspicious of power — in all its forms. If a self-described expert says that something is true, the muckraker says, “Prove it.” If an agent of the government says that something is true, the muckraker says, “Prove it.” If another journalist says that something is true, the muckraker still says, “Prove it.” Neither titles, nor positions of authority, nor membership in the journalistic clergy connotes absolute truth.
In fact, all of those things are red flags to any good reporter. If something is so complicated that its comprehension requires expertise, then it is imperative that dissenting experts be consulted as intellectual counterweights for discovering hidden bias. If a government minister asserts something as true, a reporter must assume that it is false. What good is a Fourth Estate if it does not maintain a position that is in constant tension with — if not diametrically opposed to — all those holding the reins of political power? And when a journalist reports something as truth, the first thought from other journalists must always be: let’s see your sources. Only by knowing who is saying what and why that person is saying it can anyone judge a statement’s veracity. A journalist who accepts another journalist’s recitation of events without first scrutinizing the sources for that information is no journalist at all!
If you take to heart the last paragraph, then you will agree that journalism as a truth-seeking profession is dead — or, if not dead, at least flat on its back and gripping its chest like a fat man after one too many sausages. It is rare these days to find reporters who value research and legwork over prepackaged sound bites from the White House. It is far easier to be fed information than to track down and discover the truth. Reporters would rather consult their on-demand contact list of “who’s who” government celebrities than look for unknown and powerless insiders with important stories to tell.
In many ways, journalism has become the apex manifestation of credentialism — or the celebration of prestigious credentials. In the old days, an editor did not care where a young reporter went to school or whether he played tennis with some Cabinet secretary’s daughter. What mattered was what stories the cub was right then pursuing. The job was to be such a pain to those with power that City Hall put you on a watch list. Newspapers weren’t looking for golfing buddies or acquaintances from the country club; reporting was the vocation of choice for blue-collar Americans who enjoyed sticking it to the man! Somewhere along the line as colleges began teaching students what to think instead of how to think and mega-corporations scooped up newspapers for pennies on the dollar, hard-nosed journalists were replaced with brown-nosing sycophants.
What are “narrative engineers,” after all? During the Cold War, we called them “Soviet propagandists.” In the world of espionage, they are known as “disinformation specialists.” In every time and place, they are skilled liars who distort reality and peddle falsehoods. They are regime protectors and agents of the State.
None of those vile synonyms for modern journalism describes Sharyl Attkisson, though. She’s a truth-teller who doesn’t curtsy to the powerful. That’s why Barack Obama treated her like a domestic enemy.
Most Accurate Pollster From 2020 Drops Final Numbers
by JD Rucker
Atlas Intel, which was hands down the most accurate public poll during the 2020 election, just dropped its final poll of the season. It points to landslide victory for Donald Trump. If Kamala Harris is able to win Minnesota and Virginia, two blue states that are in jeopardy of being…
A Kamala Harris Victory Means Green New Deal Lawfare
by Daily Signal
Expect Kamala Harris’ Justice Department to wage Green New Deal lawfare if she is elected president on Nov. 5. As with every last issue pertaining to this election, Harris has not said much about the substance of her climate policy. But a review of her record suggests she’d be amenable…
The Moral and Spiritual Issues That Demand Our Votes
by Harbingers Daily
As a pastor and a preacher, I want to urge all Christians this election season: Get out and vote. I believe it is our duty as citizens of our state and country, but I also believe it’s especially important given the issues represented in this election. Many of these are…
No Matter the Final Vote, This Election’s Biggest Loser May Be the Legacy News Media
by Just The News
In the sultry days of summer 2020 as Donald Trump contemplated a second term, his aides engaged in a quiet conversation with members of the emerging digital media about an audacious idea. The goal was to bypass the traditional news media who monopolized the White House Correspondents Association press room…
Democrats Unveil Dark, Diabolical Plans to Prevent Trump From Retaking White House – Even if He Wins!
by WND
With results from the 2024 presidential election now imminent, Democrats have been vocal in their plans to subvert the will of the American people and prevent former President Donald Trump from retaking the White House if he pulls out a win over his Democratic rival Vice President Kamala Harris. In…
Trump Doesn’t Rule Out Banning Certain Vaccines if He Wins Election
by The Epoch Times
Former President Donald Trump in a new interview did not rule out banning some vaccines if he wins the upcoming election. “Well, I’m going to talk to him and talk to other people, and I’ll make a decision,” Trump told NBC over the weekend when asked if banning vaccines would…
Trump, Republicans Pin Hopes on Record Early Voting in North Carolina
by Jeff Louderback, The Epoch Times
(The Epoch Times)—In his final North Carolina rally of the 2024 campaign, former President Donald Trump predicted he would win the state where he prevailed in 2016 and 2020. “North Carolina’s reliable for me,” Trump said at Dorton Arena in Raleigh, the first of four stops on Election Day Eve….
If Godly People Don’t Vote, Godless People Will: The Christian Case for Voting
by The Blaze
Do Christians have a spiritual responsibility to vote? Allie Beth Stuckey of “Relatable” and the senior pastor of Lakepointe Church, Josh Howerton, believe the answer to that question is a resounding “yes.” “I’ll gently venture out on a limb,” Howerton tells Stuckey. “I think Christians have a spiritual responsibility to…
Here’s Proof the FBI Protected Biden in 2020, and Why Congress is More Important Than the White House
by PJ Media
You won’t find it reported on the A-section pages of the New York Times or the Washington Post even though it is quite likely the most significant report produced by any investigative committee in Congress since the Church Committee in 1976. For those who need a refresher, the investigative committee…
The Media Made Sure This Election Was Never Going to Be Free or Fair
by The Federalist
The corrupt news media lied to voters on behalf of Democrats over and over ensuring an unfair election. How can we ever return to normal? It’s truly awe-inspiring to watch the news media berate Republicans, down to the very end, over the “free and fair” election we’re most certainly not…
“It’s Not Going to Be Close”: Mark Halperin Says One Key Voter Group Will Decide the Election
by Harold Hutchison, Daily Caller News Foundation
(DCNF)—Journalist Mark Halperin said on Monday that the turnout of women would decide the presidential election between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris. Trump leads Harris by 0.1% in a head-to-head matchup, according to the RealClearPolling average of polls from Oct. 11 to Nov. 3, with Trump’s…
It Was the Night Before the Election, and Everyone Was Freaking Out
by Michael Snyder
(End of the American Dream)—I have never seen so much doubt, worry, anxiety, fear and panic as we approach a presidential election. All over the country, people are freaking out right now. Democrats are freaking out because the early voting numbers are so dramatically different from 2020. Republicans are freaking…