The Wall Street Journal and The Fed, Part II
(Campaign For Liberty) -- by Daniel O'Connor --
Last week, I posted an article about the US Federal Reserve Bank and The Wall Street Journal. The article drew attention to the cozy relationship that exists between this widely read publication and this most secretive arm of the US government. The main point of the article was that WSJ, in its weekly coverage of Fed Reserve activity, uses similar calculations and economic analysis as the Fed itself and therefore acts as a proxy of the bank and those closely aligned with the bank. Coincidently, the same day that this article was posted (March 7), another article in WSJ was littered with the exact same figures and views as Federal Reserve employees. But what mostly drew my attention to this particular article is that not only does the writer overtly legitimize The Fed but directly to the right side of the article was a huge advertisement for none other than GoldmanSachs.
My March 7 article also points out that The Wall Street Journal receives a lot of money for advertisements from institutions throughout this country that earn large profits due to their close relationships with The Fed and our government.
As compared with my initial critique of three back-to-back WSJ segments and their calculation methods, I shall now draw all attention to just this one article by Jon Hilsenrath and his use of Federal Reserve-type euphemisms. This is an extremely important aspect of The Fed’s agenda because its use of euphemisms are just as deceptive as their methodologies and warrant much more attention than given.
The First obvious euphemism appears in the title "Fed Unlikely to Remove its Economic Stimulus Just Yet." As someone who reads WSJ every day, I see the words "Economic Stimulus" constantly plastered across different articles. These words are misleading and were concocted by government employees who manipulated this choice of words for their own benefit. After 3 years of "stimulus", what has been stimulated? Although the Fed prefers to embellish on how well the economy is doing and how things will soon improve; this sort of rhetoric is merely standard lip-service that Fed employees have been feeding the public for decades. If Bernanke came out in public tomorrow and stated "We expect a drastic dip in the economy over the next few quarters" the market would be very liable to take a hard dive. Therefore, Bernanke’s role as Chairman and spokesperson for the Fed is a very political role indeed -- implying that its façade of being "scientific" or "independent from political influence" is absurd...MORE...LINK
Comment by "Chris Moore" on The Pale Male Paradox: How White Men Achieve Most and Are Vilified Worst, by Tobias Langdon - And it’s natural that whiteness would be most vilified precisely because it’s most valuable in maintaining the modern world and western hegemony. One rea...
1 day ago