Micha Kat about the ‘tsunami’ that destroyed journalism and what the media look like now.
A generation ago journalism was a simple, one-dimensional concept. Of course, there were many types and variations of journalism and big differences in focus and quality but all these were connected and sustained by the same pillars: independence, objectivity and impartiality. This was not only the case with the big names of ‘quality journalism’ like The New York Times, The Times of London or Le Monde in France, but also with the local newspapers and all kinds and types of magazines (scientific, thematic). Today this media landscape has changed dramatically. You can say that an earthquake or a tsunami has uprooted the cosy world of ‘the newsroom’ and ‘Fleet Street’ to its utter destruction. After this monumental event, the media had to ‘reinvent’ themselves and build new structures with new playbooks and agendas. This ‘monumental event’ was not a point in time like an earthquake or tsunami but a process that played out over a decade, from say 1990 till 2000. The appearance of the internet in journalism played the role of catalyst. Now that we have had to deal with the new media landscape for 25 years, its contours have become clearly visible and we can describe what we see. Never before has someone done this, mainly because all media involved want to ‘play ostrich’ and do and act as if nothing has changed, the ‘newsroom’ still operates as it has always and the three pillars are still in place. Nothing however is further from the truth. This is the new post-earthquake media landscape:
Just like a witness in a criminal trial is called ‘a charge’ when he attacks the suspect and tries to help the prosecutor to prove the case (witness for the prosecution), media ‘a charge’ are those media that ‘attack’ the powers that be in their basic role and function as ‘controllers’ of the power structure on behalf of the people and/or victims of power abuse. The ‘powers that be’ are governments, big companies and other big and powerful organisations. These media are in essence a continuation of the old, pre-earthquake situation. The classic example is Watergate with The Washington Post, but in modern times we can point to all the media and reporters on the internet that exposed the scams with Covid and the vaccinations. A good example too is the reporting of the New York Post around the laptop of Hunter Biden and the countless disclosures of Julian Assange’s WikiLeaks. At the time of writing, the news show Redacted plays an important role on YouTube and this platform, Arktos, on Telegram. A good example of an individual ‘digital soldier’ that operates ‘a charge’ is Taylor Hudak (i.e. with The Last American Vagabond). Today most of these media are brought together on the social media platform X. This category of media contained in the old situation nearly 100% of all publications (although, of course, their level of engagement differed), but now they are a small minority.
Nearly all the media that were ‘a charge’ before the ‘earthquake’ have now become ‘a decharge’ — just like we call a witness in a criminal trial that is called by the defence to neutralize — or at least weaken — the accusations against the suspect (witness for the defence). A case in point is The Washington Post that nearly 50 years after Watergate has been defending the Biden regime against all accusations and disclosures of the ‘media a charge’ — saying for instance that the laptop of Hunter Biden was ‘Russian disinformation’. These media have been attacking and demonizing all people and media that went against the Covid narrative of the governments and against the ‘clear and undisputed’ victory of Biden in the 2020 elections, all supporters of Donald Trump and Trump himself, each and everyone that dared to ask questions about the ‘green agendas’ and climate change or gave attention to child abuse and/or paedophilia within the centres of power. These media are now mostly called ‘legacy media’ or ‘mainstream media’ and comprise all the big names of yonder years. These media in the extreme and polarized political landscape of today aren’t just content with defending the powers that be, but also oftentimes play an active role in building up fake criminal cases against the ‘enemies’ of these powers and thus don’t refrain from engaging in criminal acts themselves. A case in point are all the media (especially CNN and MSNBC) that created and concocted the ‘Russia hoax’ against Donald Trump. These media in the Netherlands have for more than ten years played a disgusting game against my person, not only by publishing hundreds of accusatory and demonizing pieces, but also by filing fake criminal complaints with the police that resulted in an extradition from Northern Ireland to the Netherlands and imprisonment for 30 months (I have now been free for nine months).
These are the most dangerous media: they act as if they are ‘controlling the powers that be’ on behalf of the people and the victims of power abuse, while in reality they act in line with the power structures and sometimes even are managed by them. In the last case we are dealing with ‘controlled opposition’. A motive for a publication to choose this path can be commercial, because there is a big market for anti-government sentiments, but at the same time these publications shy away from real-life consequences of an anti-government approach like legal troubles or attacks by the ‘media a decharge’. The result of course is an unsatisfactory and unconvincing mess. In the Netherlands we see exactly this with De Andere Krant (‘The Other Newspaper’) and internet initiatives like Cafe Weltschmertz and BLCKBX. In these cases this mess is a consequence of self-censorship, caused by fear and cowardice. Examples of the other category, outright controlled opposition — that is, the government creating its own ‘controlling’ media — is of course hard to discover because we’re talking about secret, deep-state intelligence operations like Operation Mockingbird from the CIA starting in the early fifties of the last century. What we can say is that many media ‘a charge’ are accused of being controlled opposition, like for instance Infowars from Alex Jones in the USA. In these cases, these accusations themselves may well be another method by the powers that be to attack and discredit these media while they in reality have no merit.
I wrote the above analysis in a ‘neutral way’, that is to say without taking into account one specific party or faction being in the position of power. According to this neutral analysis, the ‘media a charge’ would attack the Trump government in the same way as they did with the Biden one and the ‘media a decharge’ would defend it just like they did with Biden. But this is not the case. The legacy media are ‘owned’ by the Democrats and the connected deep state and they will continue to defend and protect them — that is to say, until the real, ‘deeper powers’ that control them are destroyed. In other words: as long as the legacy media continue to attack Trump — and thus by playing their ‘a decharge’ role to protect the real power — you can, or you must, conclude that he is not really in power, or not in full power. What we do already see, however, and what will continue and gain traction is that the legacy media adapt to the new situation by implementing some changes. For instance, the talk show The View from ABC has announced to invite more ‘pro-Trump’ guests and wants now even to bring the big boss himself on the show — such after 10 years of demonizing and lambasting him. Comparable initiatives are launched by The Washington Post and NBC’s Morning Joe. But here the incentive is self-preservation. No real change will take place in political orientation. You can say though that the legacy media ‘a decharge’ (defending and protecting the real power, still the Dems and the deep state) will become more ‘pseudo a charge’ by seemingly attacking these deep state powers like Bill Gates and George Soros and giving more of an appearance to be pro-Trump. In the EU, meanwhile, Trump’s victory will only lead to more fear and paranoia by the leftist deep-state powers and thus to more aggression and crackdown on ‘a charge media’ — exactly what we see playing out big time in the UK, Germany and the Netherlands.
The real mission of Trump 47 and MAGA, as we all know, is, however, not to be in power partly or partially, but completely and totally. That means automatically that the deep state powers that still control the legacy media — team Soros, Gates, Obama, Clinton, Bilderberg, the FED, big business — also have to be neutralized. If that happens — and the odds look really favourable — the legacy media will be ‘free’ again and the three pillars of yonder will be restored, reinforced even.
