The Mainstream Media
Forging a New Global Consciousness
by Berit Kjos - 2002
See Rockefeller & Global Media Censors
The Revolutionary Steps to Global Tyranny | Media-made "Foes"
"…we will build a culture of peace based on non-violence, tolerance, dialogue, mutual understanding, and justice. We call upon the institutions of our civil society, the United Nations System, governments, governmental and non-governmental organizations, corporations, and the mass media, to strengthen their commitments to peace and to listen to the cries of the victims….” UNESCO's Declaration on the role of religion in the Promotion of a Culture of Peace. 
"Let’s just make sure that social change and transformation are going in the right direction…. The media must act as part of the education process that counters individualism.” Dr. Ismail Serageldin, Vice President of the World Bank. 
"Nonformal educators should encourage lifelong learning about sustainability.... Media strategists and sustainable development experts should develop an integrated approach for raising public awareness of and support for sustainable goals... " Public Linkage, Dialogue, and Education Task Force Report, The President's Council on Sustainable Development.
Matthew Shepard. What does that name mean to the American people? Hatred, torture, homophobia, sexism, political advocacy...?
Few Americans could miss the shocking details of this young homosexual's horrible death in 1998. According to a newspaper data base, the media published the story 3007 times -- 45 times in the New York Times alone. It stirred a national scandal and made Matthew a martyr for the cause of gay rights, hate-crimes legislation and anti-Christian sentiment. Ignoring his mother's plea not to politicize her son's death, reporters from coast to coast seemed to revel in a sensational story tailor-made for its liberal political campaign.
Did you read about Jesse Dirkhising's torture and murder at the hands of two homosexual lovers eleven months later? Probably not. The thirteen-year-old boy was drugged, strapped down, sodomized, tortured and killed by two adults living in an apartment which "reeked of excrement and was littered with drug paraphernalia and residue." Driven by sadistic passions, the men sealed the boy's mouth with duct tape and tormented him until he died. 
Like Matthew's murder, it was a horrible crime -- almost unfit to print. But that's not why most newspapers across the country refused to tell the story. The real reason? It wasn't politically correct. As journalist Andrew Sullivan wrote in the wake of Jesse's torturous murder, "the media only coughed up 46 stories." (Robert McCain, Washington Times, 03-23-01). This gross imbalance shows the driving priorities of the powerful social advocates who control the mainstream media.
Reporter Robert McCain began calling various networks to find an answer. When asked if the disparity in news coverage might suggest a political preference, a CBS spokeswoman answered, "Absolutely not." She added, "We only have twenty-two minutes on CBS Evening News. We can't cover every story that happens in the country every day."
Andrew Sullivan, a homosexual British journalist based in Washington, was more honest. "The answer is politics," he wrote in the liberal New Republic. "The Shepard case was hyped for political reasons: to build support for inclusion of homosexuals in a federal hate-crimes law. The Dirkhising case was ignored for political reasons: squeamishness about reporting a story that could feed anti-gay prejudice, and the lack of any pending interest-group legislation to hang a story on." 
That's it. A new politically correct criteria for good and bad news determines whether a shocking story wins the headlines, is squeezed into the back pages or misses the mark altogether. The real issues are: Does the story...
Further the global agenda?
Match the values of media leaders?
Bring financial rewards?
Help silence the opposition?
The masses, lulled to complacency by thrills and trivia, may never know the truths about the shadowy and manipulative media agenda. Its participation in the transformation of America has helped sever America's public consciousness from God's absolute truth. And with each incremental step onward, it leads us closer to decadence and docile consent to a new world order.
The global agenda.
The goal is total transformation -- social, spiritual, economic and political. It's all summed up in the words "sustainable development." The envisioned 21st century community must share common values, embrace a global spirituality, trade individualism for group thinking, and consider the "greater whole" more important than self -- in short, embrace a global, pantheistic worldview.
America, like most nations, has implemented UNESCO's education system and the concept of "lifelong learning." Not only will our government manage and monitor "learners" during the years of formal education. With help from the media, it plans to guide human resources through a lifetime of nonformal "learning." All the elements will fit together in one massive global management system under the umbrella of the United Nations.
Describing the power of UNESCO alone to coordinate education with environment and social policies, its former Director-General, Federico Mayor, touted his authority "to profit from the contribution of the media to education, while at the same time ensuring through education that critical judgment is brought to bear on them and their socio-cultural impact is analyzed...." 
This is double-speak -- a nice way of saying that UNESCO would make sure -- using the media -- that the masses learn to "analyze" the world and its people from the "socio-cultural" perspective of the new global paradigm.
Whether through the media or schools, "education must inform… but it must also form, it must provide them with a sense of meaning to guide their actions . . . . and provide a basis for the analysis of concepts that will prevent… chauvinist and irrational explanations from being accepted. Our Creative Diversity, UNESCO, 1995.
The news media would be a major distributor of the politically correct information, interpretations, mental images and suggestions needed to shift the public consciousness from the old Biblical foundations to a new global and "sustainable" ethic. See Paradigm Shift: Total transformation
To clarify the importance of universal values, the 1996 UN Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II) in Istanbul held a day-long "Dialogue on Solidarity." “I have gathered leaders with tremendous wisdom and prestige,” began Dr. Wally N’Dow, Secretary-General of the UN conference. “They are bringing the spiritual dimension, the only ingredient that can bind societies together.” To add credibility, he had chosen Robert MacNeil (of MacNeil-Lehrer)— “one of the spiritual lights of the media industry today”—to moderate the dialogue.
“How would you define solidarity?” I asked MacNeil during a break.
“In our culture, it was probably exemplified most often by the union movement,” he answered. ”Industrial unions often used the phrase solidarity—‘solidarity forever.’ And in the socialist movement, of course, solidarity was a very strong word—the solidarity of the workers against the employers, their oppressors, capitalists, running dogs of capitalism, whatever it was. So solidarity means people of like interests, needs, and responsibilities, coming together to pursue their common goals.”
Around the world, organized community and grassroots groups are doing just that. Following UN guidelines (treaties, declarations, policy statements, etc.), they redefine community and management according to the global pattern. With the media as willing partners, they persuade the masses to give their consent to socialist visions, community managers and political advocates.
On my flight home from Istanbul, I read two books made available to reporters at the conference. First, I scanned Sustainable America, the official report from the President's Council on Sustainable Development, one of over 150 similar national councils marching to the tune of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development. In a section called "Community-driven strategic planning," it suggested that "Building stronger links… can revitalize grassroots democracy….” 
That made sense. Government partnerships with nongovernmental organizations (NGO) were already bypassing laws and establishing the shadow government of rules and regulations demanded by grassroots advocates under UN guidance. Our Creative Diversity, UNESCO's Report of the World Commission on Culture and Development pointed to this process in 1995:
"...innovative partnerships should be encouraged between international agencies, governments, the media industry and civil society. Such co-operation should be launched everywhere...."
With that in mind, I pondered the topics and instructions in former President Clinton's Sustainable America. They seemed strangely similar to some familiar Communist revolutionary strategies such as media control and organized rebellion among the people least likely to support status quo:
Preferred participants: "All levels of government should ensure substantial opportunity for public participation in all phases of planning and decision making... Special states should be taken to ensure that historically under-represented groups are involved.”
Involve the media: "Coalitions should be as broad as possible, including industry and business, schools, newspapers, television and radio stations, community groups, environmental organization, labor and local government."
Use surveys and meetings to gather, dialogue and guide opinions: "Community-based coalitions can create educational media campaigns... disseminate high-quality information on community issues, and promote public discussions that identify solutions to problems." [page 90]
Sustainable America left little doubt that our former president was determined to implement the UN agenda for sustainable development (the 3 E's: Environment, Economy and social Equity) using the media to mold American minds.
Next, I browsed through Local Agenda 21, a UN manual for community collaboration and change.  It gave the same instructions:
Preferred participants: “The proper selection of participants for the Stakeholder Group and its Working Groups is perhaps the most critical step in establishing a partnership planning process. The composition of the participants will determine…consensus for action…. Include… representatives of groups who are traditionally underrepresented... [including] special groups of people (women, youth and indigenous people)…
Involve the media: "[including] ...the media, environmentalists….
Consider “the inclusion of individuals with credibility….” [No wonder the UN leaders chose the respected Robert McNeil to moderate the "dialogue" on solidarity.]
Use surveys and meetings to gather, dialogue and guide opinions: Use "neighborhood surveys, community meetings, and public forums to directly engage the resident population in identifying and analyzing issues...." 
The previous year, I had read another government book written to transform our nation: the U.S. Education Department's Community Action Toolkit. Compare its instructions with those above. While the media is not mentioned in the first or last points, it would be involved in needed publicity:
Preferred participants: "Describe allies and opponents, identify change agents, develop action steps...." "Concentrate on gaining the involvement of the 15 percent of people typically open to new ideas-and ask them to help involve the other 75 percent.... Try not to spend too much time responding to the... unwelcome actions of the 10 percent who may actively oppose your change efforts..."
Involve the media: "Find information that lends credence to your argument and creates a sense of urgency." "One of the best ways to influence public opinion is to influence the news and information that people rely upon in making decisions."
Use surveys and meetings to gather, dialogue and guide opinions: "Two vision-building tools are discussed--holding community meetings and conducting surveys."
The striking similarity between the three plans suggest an alarming cooperation between the UN and US leaders. All three were peppered with these buzzwords: partnerships, consensus, lifelong learning, baselines or benchmarks, monitoring, assessment, data gathering, systemic change, system thinking, social development, etc. All stressed the need to measure, assess, and monitor progress. And all called for a cooperative media.
All were designed to bypass traditional government and govern people through a form of "citizens" or "grassroots participation" which the Encyclopedia Britannica refers to as "totalitarian democracy." Communist leaders called it "People's Government." In the US, this system is already bypassing both state and national representative governments. As in Lenin's Soviets, neither UN forums nor the US community meetings on education will acknowledge dissenting voices. Resisters are silenced by trained facilitators who only record voices that echo the "right" ideology.
The public usually doesn't know this, because the media doesn't expose things best accomplished in secret. It remains strangely silent about these revolutionary plans for transforming our nation.
In 1990, few knew that UNESCO, UNICEF and the World Bank held a "World Conference on Education for All" (WCEFA) in Thailand to complete their plans for the new global education system. Nor were we told that the six education goals announced by former President Bush in 1991 were the same goals touted at the Thailand conference.
The media blackout continued during the 1991 U.S. Conference on Education for All (USCEFA) in 1991, where Barbara Bush served as Honorary Chairwoman. Titled "Learning for All: Bridging Domestic and International Education," it would help coordinate and win grassroots support for the planned merger of the UN and the U.S. education systems. The partners and participants from around the world included UNESCO, UNICEF, World Bank, domestic, government and non-government groups, education associations as well as "individual education, business, media and health leaders."
Its "action document for shaping education reform initiatives in the US and other countries" would reflect "both domestic and international research and practice." A cooperative media -- led by media moguls who share the global vision -- would distribute the selected information, shocking stories and plausible "scientific facts" certain to persuade the unsuspecting masses who might never know they were being manipulated.
Social Values of Media Leaders
The Star Wars epics put America in touch with "the force." Their thrilling cosmic power struggle mesmerized millions, inspiring dreams of connecting with the same power system. Few bothered to examine the source of that "force."
The appealing images and visions of contemporary movies bombard our children, making them doubt God and seek "better" ways to power-living. Many young people create an imaginary world that seems more real and exciting than true reality. Quick to believe that nothing is impossible for man, viewers grasp for illusive dreams of space conquests, time travel, promiscuity without consequences, and connection with higher beings.
In The Empire Strikes Back, Yoda employs the "good side" of the force to raise Luke Skywalker's spaceship out of the swamp, showing his spellbound audience that man can accomplish anything he wants through faith in the "god of forces" (Daniel 11:38, KJV).
The visions and values shaped by the entertainment media are not accountable to truth and reality. They are accepted, not on the basis of reason but because they excite the emotions, challenge the imagination, entice human nature, and manipulate the minds of masses.
The news media deals with facts, but its editors can play with the context: using, introducing and adjusting the "facts" according to their own values. Those values were exposed in three studies by the research team of Lichter and Rothman. The column "News" represents views of the media elite who influence major newspaper, magazine, and television news reporting. "TV" represents those who write, select, and control television entertainment. "Movie" represents Hollywood's successful moviemakers.
"These studies confirm the fact that the vast majority of leaders of both the national news media and the entertainment media are overtly hostile to the Christian faith," warned Donald Wildmon in The Home Invaders. "...To the humanist mind and mentality, all influence of Christian faith must be removed from society." Although Pastor Wildmon's observations were written in 1987, they give us a glimpse into an industry that, if anything, has grown more liberal and hostile to contrary persuasions.
Attitude on Social Issues
Woman has right to decide on abortion…
Strongly agree homosexuality is wrong…
Strongly agree homosexuals should not teach in public schools…
Strongly agree adultery is wrong…
Government should redistribute income…
Government should reduce income gap…
Government should guarantee jobs…
Structure of society causes alienation…
Institutions need overhaul…
Seldom or never attend worship…
Attitude Toward TV Entertainment
TV should promote social reform…
Strongly agree that TV is too critical of traditional values…
While political advocacy and personal persuasions drive much of the media, the industry is not immune to the forces of a market economy. Years ago, that meant sensitivity to the reader's values and conscience. Lewd pictures and profane words were out.
Today, that tender conscience is ridiculed, not respected, by a news and entertainment industry hostile to traditional values. Biblical values are seen as a hindrance to an industry more than willing to sell all the sensual ads and profane messages the public craves.
In a world that has turned its back on God and His Word, marketing must appeal to the felt needs and wants of human nature. And media providers know well that people fed a little sex, perversion and violence soon want more shocking stories and sensual thrills. Like drugs, a momentary high can lead to unquenchable lust. And feeding human lust has become a billion dollar business.
That doesn't mean the media will be free to follow its own lust for power. To the contrary. Our global managers intend to reign in the media and hold it accountable to its revolutionary agenda.
UNESCO, in its 1995 report Our Creative Diversity asked a provocative question -- a sobering reminder that under the envisioned global management system no one would be free to oppose the socialist vision. As under communism, every person must support its vision of totalitarian power, socialist equality and redistribution of all the world's resources: natural capital, manufactured capital, human capital and social capital.
"How can the largest possible number of people be offered a ride on the "information superhighway'?" Internationally, the task of balancing the efficiency of market forces with considerations of equity is at least as urgent as it is nationally." 
Silence the opposition
Some years ago, the tragic Oklahoma bombing provided the excuse media leaders needed to blend a vast and varied mix of "malcontents" into the singular group labeled the Radical Right. Day after day, the media's accusing pens pointed to suspected foes of American oneness --those enemies to social solidarity whose "enraged rhetoric" had created a national "climate of hate and paranoia." They ranged from "rabid" radio hosts and armed "extremists" to Pat Robertson and concerned parents. "Their coalition," said Time, "included well known-elements of far-right thought: tax protesters, Christian homeschoolers, conspiracy theorists... and self-reliant types who resent a Federal Government that seems to favor grizzly bears and wolves over humans..." All were implicated, for all had questioned the government's growing control over local schools, private property, and personal lives.
Emotional appeals work. It's easier to shout, "Stop spreading hate!" than to encourage rational debate. It's more effective to discredit discerning citizens by linking them to violent anarchists than to give factual answers to legitimate questions. It's quicker to invalidate unwanted information by tying it to wild speculations than to provide honest responses--especially when the truth would expose plans best kept hidden. History has shown that nothing crushes well-informed resistance faster than well-planned disinformation and false accusations. Nothing unifies a nation faster than a common enemy.
Hitler knew those lessons well. He had watched the Bolshevik Revolution. His book, Mein Kampf, explains the winning strategies to any future revolutionary. Notice his insight into group psychology:
The art of truly great popular leaders in all ages has consisted chiefly in not distracting the attention of the people, but concentrating always on a single adversary.... It is part of a great leader's genius to make even widely separated adversaries appear as if they belonged to one category, because... the recognition of various enemies all too easily marks the beginning of doubt of one's own rightness.
Hitler focused his fury on an influential, well educated ethnic group whose religious beliefs opposed his own. "It was a stroke of genius on the part of Hitler to find this common denominator in the Jew," explains the Encyclopaedia Britannica. "This enabled him to discover the Jew behind all his changing adversaries... in short, behind everybody and everything that at a given moment opposed his wishes or aroused his wrath."
Today the key words are "hate" and "intolerance." But even those words must be defined in the context of the new social agenda. The negative labels must be attached only to the opposition -- those who don't accept contemporary values or promiscuous behavior. Those who rage at dissenters are not included. No matter how venomous their obvious hatred, they are not among the "intolerant."
Long before the Oklahoma bombing, media "change agents" had found their common enemy in the medley of "malcontents" they called the Radical Right. Like Hitler's Jews, this diverse mix represented politically incorrect religious values. The Oklahoma explosion added new intensity and plausible justification to the growing hostility. And the media fed the fury with sensational quotes such as this statement by Lew Finch, the superintendent of schools in Cedar Rapids, Iowa:
"There is a dedicated, very well organized, very well financed movement in America that is very anti-public schools, very anti-government, very anti-tax. The ultimate example of that sentiment is the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City."
To sell their radical agenda to the public, politicians, reporters and educators have become masters at manipulating information. "We have actually been given a course in how not to tell the truth," said North Carolina school superintendent Dr. Jim Causby in his speech at the 1994 Annual Model Schools Conference in Atlanta. "How many of you are administrators? You've had that course in public relations where you learn to put the best spin on things."
Does Causby's admission sound familiar? "Spin control" became a daily task for Clinton's White House staff and political news-makers. New policies, plans, decisions... everything demands the right kind of marketing. Many of those "spins" are used to mold public attitudes toward "radicals" who oppose White House policies.
We shouldn't be surprised. The Bible tells us that "the whole world is under the control of the evil one," and he has always despised God and His people. Today, as our culture shifts to the global paradigm, political and educational "change agents" are turning biblical values upside down. From the new paradigm perspective, God's people look like inflexible radicals who oppose tolerance, unity and "academic freedom." It makes sense to hush their voices and purge beliefs that block "progress" toward the 21st Century global village.
Remember that throughout history, Satan has used government leaders to persecute Christians and Jews. In fact, persecution is a normal part of Christian life. "If they persecuted Me," said Jesus, "they will also persecute you... because they do not know the One who sent Me." (John 15:20-21)
Hitler tolerated what he called "positive Christianity," but genuine Christianity was incompatible with Nazi loyalties--something the Nazis realized sooner than most Christians.Today, only a compromised, cross-less "Christianity" willing to blend and conform to other spiritual paths is acceptable to America's media leaders. Those who choose to follow the narrow path of obedience, surrender and intimacy with Jesus will surely be viewed as the most repugnant of the "Radical Right." But to those who know the joy of His presence and live in the light of eternity, that won't even matter. They have counted the cost and won the Prize they sought. And no one can take it from them.
1. Declaration on the role of religion in the Promotion of a Culture of Peace, UNESCO.
2. Ismail Serageldin, Vice President of the World Bank. Personal tape transcription.
3. Public Linkage, Dialogue, and Education Task Force Report (The President's Council on Sustainable Development, 1997?], page 22.
4.Toby Harnden, Liberal media 'ignores' rape-killing of boy, 13, Washington, The Electronic Telegraph, 30 March 2001. Harden ends with this paragraph referring to an article by Andrew Sullivan: "He noted that the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights organisation that "raised oodles of cash exploiting the horror of Shepard's murder," had made no comment about the Dirkhising case. Sullivan hinted that hushing it up might help to confirm anti-homosexuals' suspicions that this murder actually is typical of gays." <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/et?ac=000118613908976&rtmo=kC3kZeqp&atmo=rrrrrrrq&pg=/et/01/3/30/wrape30.html>
5. Eugene Narrett, Ph.D., [This link is now obsolete:] "Media Blackout Pushes Homosexual Agenda," 31 March 2001.
6.While this descriptions may seem offensive, God didn't hesitate to show the horrors of promiscuous and cruel sex in the Old Testament. Since children in public elementary schools across America face sex and AIDS classes taught by homosexuals who promote and describe their sexual practices. The world is sinful, and we can no longer afford to think otherwise.
7.Federico Mayor, "Worldwide Action in Education," Education and Human Development, 1993, UNESCO website.
8. Our Creative Diversity, UNESCO, 1995, page 169.
9. Sustainable America (The President's Council on Sustainable Development, 1996), page 89. It also stated:
"Citizens depend on the quality and timeliness of information to alert them to hazards and to make informed decisions. As sustainable development focuses attention on new environmental, social, or economic concerns, government must perform this critical management function more effectively to ensure the quality and timely availability of new kinds of information.
"The federal government is already participating in collaborative efforts with the public, the private sector, and intergovernmental organizations to improve information management. These efforts should be expanded to include priority setting for data collection and analysis, identification of the most useful formats for dissemination, and additional mechanisms." (p. 59)
The report calls for "international cooperation" and broad governmental networks to coordinate "comprehensive regional inventories and assessments of environmental, economic, and social indicators of progress." The public would be warned about "risk assessment" and taught "accurate information built on basic scientific research needed for sound decisionmaking." (p.61)
The truthfulness of this "accurate information" would depend on political expedience. As Stanford environmentalist Stephen Schneider said, "We'd like to see the world a better place to get some broad-based support, to capture the public's imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts we might have." (See Brave New Schools, chapter 5)
10. Our Creative Diversity, UNESCO, 1995, page 126.
11. The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide: An introduction to Sustainable Development (Toronto: International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, 1996), p. 20-21, 22, 45. This "planning framework for sustainable development at the local level" was prepared by The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) in partnership with the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) and the International Development Research Centre of Canada. Remember, UNEP also prepared the GBA which supposedly proves the environmental "crisis."
The ICLEI Planning Guide suggests that Stakeholders select two kinds of people to serve their agenda: (1) ordinary people who don't have "a stake" in the old system and would expect to gain power by establishing a new political system, and (2) media, business, political, church, and education leaders who must be wooed and persuaded to promote the transformation within their sphere of influence. The following ICLEI list includes both:
A. Community Residents: women, youth, indigenous people, community leaders, teachers
B. Community-Based Organizations: churches, formal women's groups, traditional social groups, special interest groups
C. Independent Sector: Non-governmental organizations (NGO). academia, media
D. Private/Entrepreneurial Sector: environmental service agencies, small business/cooperatives, banks
E. Local Government and Associations: elected officials, management staff, regional associations
F. National/Regional Government : planning commission, utilities, service agencies, financial agencies.7
12. Community Action Toolkit (National Education Goals Panel, 1994), cog-5, goym-6, 7, 12, 18, 28, cog-8.
13. The Delphi Technique for producing a semblance of consensus pervades community forums on education. Chapter 3, Brave New Schools (Harvest House Publishers) describes the process.
14. Donald E. Wildmon, The Home Invaders (Wheaton, Illinois: Victor Books, 1987), 19.
15. Ibid., 22.
16. Our Creative Diversity, UNESCO, 1995, page 125.
17 Philip Weiss, "Outcasts Digging in for the Apocalypse," Time (May 1, 1995); 48. The last words of the quote ("on government land") were deleted since Time failed to mention the reason for concern: the government land borders on farms where wolves attack domestic animals, yet laws protecting wolves prohibit farmers from protecting their livestock.
18. Encylopaedia Britannica, Vol. 16, (Chicago: William Benton, 1968), 93-94.
20. Anne Carothers-Kay, "School chief fighting the radical right," Des Moines Register, May 4, 1995.
21. Cynthia Weatherly, "The 2nd Annual Model School Conference," The Christian Conscience (January 1995); 36.
22. 1 John 5:19
23. Encyclopaedia Britannica, 16-95.
24. Matthew 5:10-12; Philippians 3:7-10; Psalm 27.
Home | Persecution | Articles| Charts | Preparing for Victory