Skip to main content

What us the Transhistoric Relationship Between the Press and the Government in a Society Aspiring Democracy?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

- First Amendment of the United States Constitution



We hold the truth of this amendment to be situational within our nations' history; according to the actions of certain political figureheads in face of opposition of the media, we may find that it is self evident that we do not receive the freedom of press we so proudly endorse. 

Senator McCarthy did not create the fear of communism within the United States, but rather amplified it - his accusations against other member members of government, including the Truman Administration, the United States Military and caused chaos for civilian lives. The issue these actions caused destroyed the reputations of those proven not guilty, but also in several occasions many were convicted without due process. 

"It is high time we stopped thinking politically as Republicans and Democrats about elections and started thinking patriotically as Americans about national security based on individual freedom.” Maine Senator Margaret Chase Smith. 1

Although not the first instance of first amendment rights being hindered by political figures, the impact caused a frenzy of fear to run rampant within our nation. The fear of being crucified without merit allowed Sen. McCarthy to rampage his propaganda without consequence for his actions for several years - until CBS took a stand against his abuse of power with broadcaster Ed Murrow and producer Fred Friendly. 2

We see a form of this transhistoric pattern throughout all of the United States history - the silencing of our freedom of speech and press; even in the government influenced media today, the opinions of those who speak against their actions and agenda are hushed. 

Today, there are several instances of this oppression of freedom of speech and I would like to focus on one. 

The COVID-19 pandemic has struck fear worldwide and especially in our homes, but are there truths being hidden about what are being reported today? 

Dr. Daniel Erickson from Bakersfield, Calif. can attest to this mistreatment. 3 Dr. Erickson's video was removed from YouTube three days after its release and after receiving over 50 million views. In this video, Dr. Erickson reveals the pressure which doctors are receiving from the media to tie COVID-19 as a cause of death to those who are now deceased, even if the doctors do not believe COVID-19 is the case - Dr. Erickson also reveals his frustration for the shut down of the nation as he confronts the analytics from doctors nationwide and the numbers he is recieving from California; stating that media is not following the science. He also shares that our nation is so focused on COVID-19 that those with life threatening issues such as heart diseases or cancer are choosing not to come to the hospitals out of fear, increasing risk in their lives. He continues to challenge the influenced media where their officials originally predicted millions of deaths - whereas the truth is that only 12% of California have tested positive. 4

It was stated to CNN from YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki that "anything that would go against World Health Organization [WHO] recommendations would be a violation of our policy."

FOX News' Tucker Carlson challenges this action taken by YouTube declaring that "Censorship never is about science, it's about power. Big technology companies are using this tragedy to increase their power over the population." 3

Furthermore, we see just as much repression of our freedom of speech with our witness of Dr. Erickson and his analysis based upon science. How far will we allow our government and big corporations to influence our levels of freedom of press and speech? 

After all, the government is upheld and empowered by the governed, right?


_________________________________________________________________________________
1. "The Senator Who Stood Up to Joseph McCarthy When No One Else Would." Lorraine Boissoneault, Smithsonian Magazine. 13 Sept. 2018.
2. "Murrow vs. McCarthy: See It Now." Joseph Wershba, The New York Times. 4 March 1979.
3. "Tucker rips YouTube for pulling 'problematic' coronavirus video: 'Censorship never is about science.'" Yael Halon, FOX News. 29 April 2020. 
4. "Watch controversial press conference held by two Bakersfield doctors that was pulled down by YouTube" Anthony Wright, 23 ABC News. 30 April 2020. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Muzzled Beliefs in a Muzzled Society

  B y David Kleinschuster Q News   2020. A year of chaos, conflict and controversy actively separates our nation, our communities and our families. Stares of death seep from wide pupils and furrowed brows towards once friends to now enemies in the streets and supermarket. What could cause such division and frustration in just under a year? Masks. There are several sides to take in your stance of the virus, but two major belief systems are fueling such controversy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pro-maskers versus anti-maskers. Though there is only a percentage of Americans who truly are anti-maskers – those who refuse to wear one at all times and all circumstances – majority of people who are deemed as ‘anti-maskers’ will wear a mask in stores or in areas which mandate it (else they receive an invitation for removal) and keep their faces free at all times where it is not mandated. On the other side of the spectrum, there are those who wear masks in every aspe...

The Deep State of Affairs

The deep state proves to be more than just a conspiracy - former CIA director John Brennan conducted a ploy to strike fear of Russian involvement in the presidential election of 2016 - there were operatives contacted by Brennan over 17 organizations to plant the farce of Russian coalition. Over the course of the 2016 election, Trump repeatedly praised WikiLeaks when the exposal of Clinton's corruption. Yet, now that Trump has been elected he claims that he "knows nothing about Wikileaks" (RonPaulInstitute) 1 Now, that does sound very contradictory towards his previous campaign statements, yet he does admit that this level of debate is not under his discretion and that Assange's judgement will be left to the attorney general (TheGuardian) 2 . With the current state of affairs with Julian Assange, he is being tried by the United States for the highest threat of national security while being held in London. There has been a hidden history between WikiLeaks and Do...