Deep State? What about elite television news anchors?

Deep State? What about elite television news anchors?

The elite news anchor is the eunuch: “trusted everywhere”

by Jon Rappoport

April 13, 2018

It’s not only the content of news that is embraced, it’s the style, the manner of presentation—and in the long run, the presentation is far more corrosive, far more deadly than the content.

The imitations of life called anchors are the arbiters of style. How they speak, how they look, how they themselves experience emotion—all this is planted deep in the brains of the viewers.

Most of America can’t imagine the evening news could look and sound any other way.

That’s how solid the long-term brainwashing is.

The elite anchors, from John Daly in the early days of television, all the way to Brian Williams (until he was exposed) and Scott Pelley, have set the tone. They define the genre.

The elite anchor is not a person filled with passion or curiosity. Therefore, the audience doesn’t have to be passionate or filled with curiosity, either.

The anchor is not a demanding voice on the air; therefore, the audience doesn’t have to be demanding.

The anchor isn’t hell-bent on uncovering the truth. For this he substitutes a false dignity. Therefore, the audience can surrender its need to wrestle with the truth and replace that with a false dignity of its own.

The anchor takes propriety to an extreme: it’s unmannerly to look below the surface of things. Therefore, the audience adopts those manners.

The anchor inserts an actor’s style into what should instead be a relentless reporter’s forward motion. Therefore, members of the audience can become actors shaping “news” about their own lives through Facebook.

The anchor taps into, and mimics, that part of the audience’s psyche that wants smooth delivery of superficial cause and effect.

From their perch, the elite television anchors can deign to allow a trickle of sympathy here, a slice of compassion there.

But they let the audience know that objectivity is their central mission. “We have to get the story right. You can rely on us for that.”

This is the great propaganda arch of national network news. “These facts are what’s really happening and we’re giving them to you.” The networks spend untold billions to convey that false assurance.

The elite anchor must pretend to believe the narrow parameters and boundaries of a story are all there is. There is no deeper meaning. There is no abyss waiting to swallow whole a major story and reveal it as a hoax. No. Never.

With this conviction in tow, the anchor can fiddle and diddle with details.

The network anchor is the wizard of Is. He keeps explaining what is. “Here’s something that is, and then over here we have something else that is, and now, just in, a new thing that is.” He lays down miles of “is-concrete” to pave over deeper, uncomfortable, unimaginable truth.

The anchor is quite satisfied to obtain all his information from “reputable sources.” This mainly means government and corporate spokespeople. Not a problem.

Every other source, for the anchor, is murky and unreliable. He doesn’t have to worry his pretty little head about whether his sources are, indeed, trustworthy. He calculates it this way: if government and corporations are releasing information, it means there is news to report.

What the FBI director has to say is news whether it’s true or false, because the director said it. So why not blur over the mile-wide distinction between “he spoke the truth” and “he spoke”?

On air, the anchor is neutral, a castratus, a eunuch.

This is a time-honored ancient tradition. The eunuch, by his diminished condition, has the trust of the ruler. He guards the emperor’s inner sanctum. He acts as a buffer between his master and the people. He applies the royal seal to official documents.

Essentially, the anchor is saying, “See, I’m ascetic in the service of truth. Why would I hamstring myself this way unless my mission is sincere objectivity?”

All expressed shades of emotion occur and are managed within that persona of the dependable court eunuch. The anchor who can move the closest to the line of being human without actually arriving there is the champion. In recent times, it was Brian Williams—until his “conflations” and “misremembrances” surfaced.

The vibrating string between eunuch and human is the frequency that makes an anchor “great.” Think Cronkite, Chet Huntley, Edward R Murrow. Huntley was just a touch too masculine, so they teamed him up with David Brinkley, a medium-boiled egg. Brinkley supplied twinkles of comic relief.

The cable news networks don’t really have anyone who qualifies as an elite anchor. Wolf Blitzer of CNN made his bones during the first Iraq war only because his name fit the bombing action so well. Brit Hume of FOX has more anchor authority than anyone now working in network television, but he’s semi-retired, content to play the role of contributor, because he knows the news is a scam on wheels.

There are other reasons for “voice-neutrality” of the anchor. Neutrality conveys a sense of science. “We did the experiment in the lab and this is how it turned out.”

Neutrality implies: this is a democracy; an anchor is no more important than the next person (and yet he is—another contradiction, swallowed).

Neutrality implies: we, the news division, don’t have to make money (a lie); we’re not like the cop shows; we’re on a higher plane; we’re performing a public service; we’re like a responsible charity.

The anchor poses the age-old question about the people. Do the people really want to suck in superficial cause and effect and surface detail, or do they want deeper truth? Do the people want comfortable gigantic lies, or do they want to look behind the curtain?

The anchor, of course, goes for surface only.

The anchor is so accustomed to lying and so accustomed to pretending the lies are true that he wouldn’t know how to shift gears.

At the end of the Roman Empire, when the whole structure was coming apart, a brilliant and devious decision was made. The Empire would proceed according to a completely different plan. Instead of continuing to stretch its resources to the breaking point with military conquests, it would attack the mind.

It would establish the Roman Church and write new spiritual law. These laws and an overriding cosmology would be dispensed, in land after land, by official “eunuchs.” Men who, distanced from the usual human appetites, would automatically gain the trust of the people.

These priests would “deliver the news.” They would be the elite anchors, who would translate God’s orders and revelations to the public.

By edict, no one would be able to communicate with God, except through these “trusted ones.” Therefore, in a sense, the priest was actually higher on the ladder of power than God Himself.

In fact, it would fall to the Church to reinterpret all of history, writing it as a series of symbolic clues that revealed and confirmed Church doctrine (story line).

Today, people are believers because the popular stories are delivered by contemporary castrati, every night on the evening news.

If these castrati say a virus is threatening the world; and if they are backed up by neutral castrati bishops, the medical scientists; and if those medical scientists are supported by public health bureaucrats, the cardinals; and if the cardinals are given a wink and a nod by the President, the Pope—the Program is working.

And the news is spread to the people…

But the true viruses are the anchors. They spread the illnesses.

Through their style. The style of the eunuch.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

40 comments on “Deep State? What about elite television news anchors?

  1. While one can blame others for our condition of servitude; in the end it is our choice to accept or reject them. Our willingness to believe the news is the most important part of the equation.

  2. Natural Woman says:

    Brillian analysis–thanks, Jon!

  3. Natural Woman says:

    Brilliant

  4. Roy says:

    I foresee a greater threat from the syndicated news coming down the pike. I envision the news networks scouting the internet and social media sources for a topics with a high ratio of internet traffic. The news networks will then build their news broadcasts around these elevated topics to foster a authoritarian stance for reinforcing their view and/or discrediting further debate toward alternative views.

    There is some study that states if a certain percentage threshold is reached on a particular public opinion, then the possibility for that change could become inevitable. Hold the opposing opinions down below this threshold, then the possibility for change is squashed.

    If the syndicated new can disseminate enough counter information to dissuade the public view, then they have control of the public view and the direction public change.

    This makes me very uncomfortable as it should everyone who has a “question before conform” attitude. It’s the difference between our sentinals telling us “The British are coming, take arms…” versus “The British are coming, lay down your arm, because we told them to come.”

    • maidinamerica says:

      I believe they are already reinforcing their view and discrediting further debate. How l-o-o-n-n-g-g have we heard “Russian collusion, p-p-gate, stormy-gate, IMPEACH! and only conspiracy theorists would believe in pizza-gate and vaccine-induced autism,” We, who are informed know the REAL stories, while the media moguls are scrambling to keep the masses in their somnolent, apathetic trance, and that no one would dare to cross their authoritarian, monopolistic line.

      “I do not take a single newspaper, nor read one a month, and I feel myself infinitely the happier for it.
      “Educate and inform the whole mass of the people…They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.”
      “Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.”
      Thomas Jefferson
      “If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”
      George Washington

  5. Greg C. says:

    An apt comparison, Jon. I was indoctrinated into Catholicism from my youth, and now marvel at how well it worked to keep me from thinking my own thoughts. The Mass has many of the qualities of the evening news – the mesmerizing musical interludes, the calming backgrounds, the blandly intoned words. Sitting still and receiving conclusions from on high. The news anchor doesn’t quite go so far as to bless the viewers at the end, but the way he seriously intones, “Have a good evening” has the same feel. The news even has secular saints who are remembered on their anniversaries. Great insight.

  6. truth1 says:

    Jon, I liked this topic. The anchor, a good choice of name as an anchor tied us, drags us down into the sea to drown; ultimately, he gives us what we want. but then again, most are disenchanted with national news. Some because they don’t want to hear bad stuff and other cause they hate lies or avoidance.

    I do note that local news has taken on a different attitude of more friendly, warm kidding typical social behavior which I have mixed feelings about. Some of it seems Juvenile to me. Some news deserve more dignity and deeper analysis that all news avoids.

    As for the Cathoilic church, while it might seem “religious,” The truth was that if you dare to publicly disagree with something, you risked your life to do so. This was also the case with the Eastern Orthodox churches, who also had the government be their “enforcement,” should any disagree. Many were either imprisoned or tortured and/or killed for questioning either church, be it east or west.

    I think the real big change was that mercantilism was recognized as the primary sustenance of any empire. So when Rome fell, some of the wiser chose a swamp and its harbor and sea as the new capitol of the former Rome, now calling it Venice. It became a mercantile empire of both merchant marines, shipbuilders, and naval marines, too. the empire would rules by sea, rather than by land and armies. Ships could carry troops better than marching them over land. And once the Chinese made their geographical knowledge available to Venice, Florence and Genoa, the race was on to colonize the Americas. White the air force has a strategical role now, the primary mean of power is still economics and shipping by sea.

    then we added TV and Movies to brainwash the fools with bread and circuses.

    I night note that Carthage was a rival empire of commercial power with Rome, but Rome, ever the capable strategist, found a way to nulify the best abilities of Carthage war ships and amplify the best Roman skill of hand to hand combat, on the open seas by simply dropping a plank on to the ships of Carthage and begin the hand to hand struggle. But the 2 empires were both fairly equal commercial empire and the war between the 2 spanned 200 years. That was a long drawn out war of attrition, favoring Rome. Rome would further evolve into Venice, who has never been conquered changes its ID so that none are even aware that it still operates and better than ever before, with Europe having been its home since the Americas were discovered.

    The Catholic church became irrelevant with the printing press and Protestantism. Now Protestantism has become the new “Orthodox,” fully controlled by the state even as the eastern and western churches were.

  7. joel says:

    Hey man!
    Being a eunich is all the rage. Baphomet has a wanger, but no cojones and a pair of nice boobies, this is our new world order

  8. Lavender Dreams says:

    I always feel less alone after reading one of Jon’s brilliant posts. The truth just feels good. Much appreciation!

  9. Reblogged this on amnesiaclinic and commented:
    The parallels with the fall of the Roman Empire are stunning.

  10. stiegem says:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-kA3UtBj4M It’s an older song; I’m an older person. The lyrics are right on. We all want to know what’s going on. Who can we trust for the “truth”? Ourselves alone. How’s your life going on amidst all of this…?

  11. stiegem says:

    Lyrics
    Mother, mother
    There’s too many of you crying
    Brother, brother, brother
    There’s far too many of you dying
    You know we’ve got to find a way
    To bring some lovin’ here today, eheh
    Father, father
    We don’t need to escalate
    You see, war is not the answer
    For only love can conquer hate
    You know we’ve got to find a way
    To bring some lovin’ here today, oh oh oh
    Picket lines and picket signs
    Don’t punish me with brutality
    Talk to me, so you can see
    Oh, what’s going on
    What’s going on
    Yeah, what’s going on
    Ah, what’s going on
    In the mean time
    Right on, baby
    Right on brother
    Right on babe
    Mother, mother, everybody thinks we’re wrong
    Oh, but who are they to judge us
    Simply ’cause our hair is long
    Oh, you know we’ve got to find a way
    To bring some understanding here today
    Oh oh oh
    Picket lines and picket signs
    Don’t punish me with brutality
    C’mon talk to me
    So you can see
    What’s going on
    Yeah, what’s going on
    Tell me what’s going on
    I’ll tell you what’s going on, ooh ooo ooo ooo
    Right on baby
    Right on baby

    • truth1 says:

      Marvin Gaye’s plea for sanity and reason and reasonableness. You know the 60s had more of that sentiment than at any other time that I am aware of. It was our peak of hope from the young that we might stop all this stupid war crap, that had no good reason, whatsoever, for existing. Viet Nam was madness. but that spirit is dead and gone, now. What a crying shame. what happened,boomers?Why did you give out and give up? Was it that big house and affluence? The sucker’s bet? Survival. How did you lose the vision and hope? I want to know.

  12. From Quebec says:

    The so-called Elites always find a way to fool you and to laugh at your stupidity..
    Why do you think that they called the man on television giving the news an Anchor?

    Think about it. An anchor is a heavy hooked object that is dropped from a boat into the water at the end of a chain in order to make the boat stay in one place.

    YES, to STAY IN ONE PLACE. So why would they rock the boat? They are in a safe space, stuck to the bottom.

  13. Larry says:

    Approximately 30 seconds into a network news broadcast – whether televised or radio – I have the distinct sensation of being lifted into an adult-sized high chair (one of the old-fashioned affairs with pretty flowers painted on the back) and as the tray clicks into place someone hands me a large wooden spoon, whereupon I begin to pound the hell out of the tray, drool coagulating on my bib as my eyes dart vacuously about the room.

    The more inane, vacuous, insipid and meaningless the story, the harder I bang away on my tray!

    Please someone….tell me I’m not the only one! 😂😂😂

  14. Reblogged this on John Barleycorn and commented:
    We should all avoid tv and go back to reading.

    • NellieAldrich Rockfell says:

      You understand it well, throw away the tv.

        • JB says:

          Haven’t watched TV news for 40+ years. Not even the weather report (sorry Paul Simon). Almost never listened to radio news at an early age. Blasted through Netflix membership twice in about a year’s time as there was hardly anything listed worth watching.

          Now reading–still carry that on after nearly 60 years, but even so, it is getting harder to find anything worth reading. Most of the good authors are dead, and the local library carries nothing but female porn and kiddie books. Not even the library network has much worth reading. Lately I’ve had to lean on a professor-friend’s good graces to tap into the university library to find something intelligent.

  15. henry says:

    Do the anchors knowingly lie to the public or do they lie to them self, then report the lies as truth? They could justify their partial truths (lies) by reasoning that part of the truth is better than no truth.

    • maidinamerica says:

      We know from Sheryl Attkisson, a reporter who broke free from CBS, under President David Rhodes, (coincidently brother of Ben Rhodes, Obummer’s deputy national security advisor), that so many of her stories with hours of detailed work and interviews were shut down sometimes moments before show time or going to print. If you read her book, “Stonewalled”, you will see how non-transparent and subversive the previous administration was and that the public wasn’t about to hear the truth about how America was being dismantled: thank you very much CBS…Being the good and conscientious reporter that she was, the government thought they needed to teach her a lesson and invaded all of her computer files and spied on her. She, I believe is still involved in suit filed against the US govt. Even since 2010, we know through Wikileaks about “Obama’s War on Leaks” and it is stated, “Brennan is behind the witch hunts of investigative journalists learning information from inside the beltway sources.” Many journalists’ phone records were legally obtained, also.
      It’s unfathomable to me why a journalist, who I believe initially would have had the intrinsic desire to sniff out a good story, could be at all satisfied towing these false narratives for a pay-check. But I have never seen such a deceived populace in and out of the newsroom before either. I would guess there is a lot of coercion and bribes going on in the good ‘ol eunuch’s club.
      One more thing; we know singly that ANYTHING related to our health being destroyed by every element bombarding us is absolutely verboten, BIG pHARMa owns the news room$.

      • bob klinck says:

        There are some very nice paycheques on offer. Plus the society of “movers and shakers”, “the great and good”. For someone not certain that his intrinsic purpose as a human lies elsewhere, the temptation would be strong.

        What I find amusing is the fact that these hundreds of thousands of agents of disinformation (THE news) are considered in official statistics to be proper additions to the ranks of the “employed”. It’s a good demonstration of the inanity of the modern (Fabian Socialist) concept of “work”.

    • JB says:

      “A successful shaman ropes himself first.” –Ernst Kretschmer psychiatrist 1888-1964; restated in To Sail Beyond the Sunset by Heinlein

  16. Sunshine2 says:

    I’m following the International Journalism Festival in Italy today. I’m not actually there, I’m just following it online. I want to see what ideas are being pushed.

    One astute journalist commented something to the effect of feeling disoriented when just today fully realizing that big, non-news businesses are not only funding and controlling the conferences, innovation, distribution models, and search engines, but also want and expect the independent, unpaid journalists to adapt to their models.

    • Sunshine2 says:

      Continuation. So far the presentations have been pushing a lot of info about trust and how to get it, but not a lot about truth and how to report it.

  17. t sunn-stott says:

    It seems a good offense best thrives when dismantling an opponent’s defense.

    Thus, today’s anchors are like plain-clothes cheerleaders who, ironically, keep us pawns in a grand game while seamlessly convincing us that we aren’t and could never be in the midst of one.

    They masterfully bait and beat us all the time, and ensure that the proverbial ball is always in their court. Those eunuchs are so cunning.

    Unfortunately, that today they appear so hackneyed and enervated (yet essential and successful) attests to the fact that collectively, these subliminal seducers have been doing their job very, very well.

    Nevertheless, it seems the snake-oil salesmen are losing their grip — for despite their antics, we are awakening…and consciously dreaming and realizing a better world. Thank goodness.

    Game over; and so must it be.

    Peace, perspicacity, and power to all.

  18. trishwriter says:

    I usually take your brilliant writing for granted, Jon, but sometimes, as with this piece, the insight into something we’ve been taught to buy into is so fascinating, so original, that I simply must say thank you for sharing your incredible thoughts with us. As with most people I know, I was taught from a very early age that watching the television was important, educational, necessary. Watching the news made us really smart. We weren’t always told that directly, but it was certainly implied. To see such fabulous deconstruction of newscast and anchor myths is a blessing indeed. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

    • redneckdavinci says:

      I always find it funny when someone actually gets mad with me after I tell them I don’t watch TV. Slaves are so funny.

  19. Mike says:

    Some people’s kids; Isaiah 39:7

  20. Alexis Keiser says:

    I find your reference to eunuchs interesting. In the Biblical story of the death of Jezebel it was the eunuchs who threw her down.

    • Jackie2015 says:

      Jezebel was all dressed up and ready to go.

    • Mike says:

      It is “elite’s” kids who go on to become tv’s talking heads i.e., modern day eunuchs. You know, the Ivy League See Eye A recruits.

      “Some people’s kids”.
      – Mrs. Getzinger, Third Grade Teacher

      (Wee little bastards referred to her as Gutslinger behind her back).

  21. Jon

    I agree. Here you are spot on. There are “conventions” and then there are “refiners of conventions”.

    Give me one Facebook “crusader” that doesn’t follow these embedded instructions….

    Headline – “Mrs Smith went butt naked to her supermarket.”

    Response:

    “But she’s fat and ugly”, “wasn’t it cold?”, “that’s offensive”

    And more….

    Headline – “Mrs Smith was arrested for indecent exposure”.

    Response:

    “Serves her right”, “what about the children? (did they see her?)”, “rude woman”, “disgraceful”

    That is the PROBLEM.

    Best
    OT

  22. JB says:

    “THE times of drastic change are times of passion. We can never be fit and ready for that which is wholly new. We have to adjust ourselves, and every radical adjustment is a crisis in self-esteem: we undergo a test; we have to prove ourselves. A population subjected to drastic change is thus a population of misfits, and misfits live and breathe in an atmosphere of passion.”

    “All social disturbances and upheavals have their roots in crises of individual self-esteem, and the
    great endeavor in which the masses most readily unite is basically a search for pride.” The Passionate Mind, Eric Hoffer

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s