Proverbs 14:15 The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going.
Because the media sides with the Devil and profits from telling lies (as they do naturally as they are the children of the father of lies) it behooves a Christian to not believe the stories that the media writes as they are written. Most often key details have been left out and fabrications inserted so that lies of omission and interpolation leave a false impression with the reader.
As I do political and news commentary as a way to augment my page drawing in more hits by filling it with extra content, informing the readers that visit my site, building my skill as a writer, and simply as an exercise of my freedom of press and speech and religion, I must be particularly careful as to what I write about current events of which I have no first hand knowledge of knowing that however small my audience may be what I write is seen by the whole world instantaneously as digital media is immediate and that what I write remains permanently available to everyone in the world as the internet is archived.
And so I try not to write arbitrary comments about daily news as that sort of regular coverage does not allow for planning or careful thought and reflection before publication. Instant internet media platforms are particularly powerful and while the wider audience available to a writer and the low cost of writing on those platforms is an unparalleled power for writers to possess it remains a true saying that with great power comes great responsibility.
If I were to take a news article or tweet irresponsibly written by someone else and repost it I could unwittingly be contributing to an act of slander, libel, or defamation or I could even be dissembling and distributing disinformation that would be aiding the enemies of freedom.
In an attempt to avoid those hazards I seldom comment about an event right after the first reports surface as most of the information turns out to be false and the preliminary articles are written by reporters in haste and tend to center on the emotional rather than the rational side of the subject and so not only do I avoid simply reblogging their information, but since I know I could fall into the same trap I consider which events I truly find worth my time to write about and I give the primary sources and myself time to research and reflect.
Emotions are more subject to change than facts and so an article that is to be viewed by the public at large is not a particularly appropriate place to record initial emotional reactions or immediate thoughts.
That is the great conundrum about blogging (and vlogging, tweeting, etc.).
The regular entries of the kinds of things that used to be privately recorded in personal journals now published for the whole world instantly without editing is a powerful tool for covering live events, but because mankind is an emotional creature and not omniscient our coverage of those events can be hyperbolic, reactionary, panicked, and regrettable.
Our understanding of events and the wider context can be very limited, especially in the present tense.
The damage caused by a hasty article can be particularly devastating on a personal level to the reputations of people or businesses named.
The left likes to use over-reacting mobs whipped into a frenzy by the effect of mass media that pushes a singular narrative that condemns a particular party within the story as the Marxist warfare paradigm of the oppressor/oppressed class struggle is useful for political gain.
We should never participate in crass class warfare as unnecessary division within a nation or household causes its downfall.
Since income flow to people or businesses can be interrupted, reputations irreparably damaged, good names dragged through the mud, jobs lost, lives ruined, or even lost all together we should be responsible enough to ask ourselves if the whole story is being told or if lies have been inserted or certain phrases have left us with false impressions before we cover a story we read from another source ourselves.
The danger should still give us pause when we have been eyewitnesses to events and/or have personal knowledge of them as our own perspective is limited.
How much more when we are simply retelling a story that has already been written by someone else, whose reputation is to be questioned as the source is usually a member of the lying media that serves Satan?
The speed at which we can type and produce content in the information age is astounding and so as responsible writers we must learn to act deliberately and slowly culling our immediate reactions so that our emotions are pacified and our nerves calmed giving ourselves time to absorb the effect of the news we have just read or heard from another source and to give reporters that are closer to the source of the events time to research and correct their articles so they can fill in necessary details and provide a greater context before we offer our own thoughts which are probably based upon limited information that was probably skewed towards a particular political or anti-christian agenda.
We also have to give ourselves time to research the matter fully, checking the gross story and details properly, so that when we sit down to write our thoughts we have all the necessary factual information to offer real insight.
We can not be so sloppy as to just reblog, retweet, rerun, or rewrite, the thoughts of someone else.
We have to establish a factual basis from which to report so that we have a good foundation upon which to build the story and so we can differentiate opinion and personal judgment from historical events and from those things which are unquestionably true so that we do not do an injustice to those affected by what we write or say. That is the essence of responsible journalism.
Responsible journalism has little to do with what kinds of articles you choose to cover as every event is worth covering if you are interested in writing about it or if someone is interested in reading it and you are willing to write it as it fits the general theme of the kinds of stories you are willing to cover not finding them objectionable for whatever reason.
As an independent journalist or blogger the stories you choose to cover is what gives your paper or blog character as it is the best reflection or your personality and style not related to grammar or syntax.
If you write for a major publisher then they choose what stories fill their pages, and you may have to cover stories that seem uninteresting to you simply to get a paycheck, but that paper has its own content style just as your blog would if you were writing independently and so the same principle applies as you contribute to that content under editors and publishers who direct you.
And so while the kinds of articles you cover may have something to do with responsible journalism that is more in the realm of personal interest and customer demand than ethics unless the content is personally objectionable to you in some way.
But the essence of responsible journalism is primarily in the act of writing in an essentially responsible way that reflects your understanding that your words affect people’s lives.
If you work in a way that shows that awareness you will gain a greater reputation as a reliable source of information and as a thoughtful writer while simultaneously not doing unnecessary damage the reputation of others being covered by the story.
I was thinking about this recently since the media has purposely misconstrued and mis-characterized things other people have written, have said, or have done in order to marginalize the influence of those people and deny them a platform to exercise their freedom of speech and/or press.
A responsible blogger or journalist should refuse to go along with the witch-hunting crowd that likes gathers from time-to-time when someone alleges that there are witches to be found in the otherwise non-suspicious or only slightly suspicious crowd.
The media loves repeating lies or exaggerations or misconstruing and mis-characterizing people’s words to draw attention to friends words or their enemies words to sell more type.
And so we should be suspicious of the media and not our fellow citizens so that we can avoid accidentally or purposefully starting or flaming the fires of persecution before real evidence of wrong doing is found to be beyond reasonable doubt.
Even in criminal cases the normal role and purpose of a journalist is not to pressure the authorities to press charges against the alleged or to encourage a crowd to riot, but instead only to record the events so that if action is warranted the historical record accurately reflects the events as they occurred and so that their is a record of the response or lack thereof from the officials and the larger public to the events as they unfolded.
Pressure is only to be applied to officials who are grossly negligent in their duties who may either lazy or corrupt or else against those officials who abuse their power to gain politically, personally, or financially.
And that pressure must come from the people who read what is written and take up the cause and not from the reporter directly in any case.
And since a reporter is far removed from the official investigation in criminal matters or from the events a witness may experience they can not know how things are proceeding and so instantaneous reporting is seldom useful even in that regard except in cases where a crime otherwise exciting or large scale event may be in progress. That is where live media like television broadcasts, internet blogging, periscope, and twitter, comes in handy.
In other words; bringing direct pressure upon authorities to change their behavior is not what a journalist normally does in real time.
And even over a period of time direct influence like that exerted by a journalist upon officials would only be reserved for cases of the unresponsive or corrupt officials obstructing justice.
And yet we regularly see journalists apply political pressure to officials by informing a journal’s readers, who somehow are always part of professional agitation groups, community organizations, direct activists, and political parties, and who always somehow read the very papers and watch the very television stations, and view the very websites that specifically serve as the mouthpieces and organs of those particular groups.
It is almost like the newspapers are owned by those particular political parties and are just fronts using either nondescript names, more or less, to cover up their actual ownership.
In any case that is not journalism. That is collusion. It is the act of a criminal organization that uses the platforms and the journalists as the mouthpieces of a clear extortion scheme enforced by hired muscle and mob-like behavior.
It is one thing to have a biased view, which is forgivable as long as that view does not affect the factual aspects of the coverage and its clear which is which. But it is another thing to blatantly lie in order to help extract money from one party to transfer it to another and many journalists participate that sort of thing all the time.
And so unless we writers want to be a party man, which is among the most loathsome types of creatures, we must remain independent choosing to cover the stories we desire to in the manner in which we desire to, but with the utmost honesty and integrity.
Once we have an agenda of our own our objectivity is called into question, and while it may not be possible to avoid that entirely, once that happens human nature is such that if someone calls attention to our prejudices we may twist the story or fabricate lies, damaging our credibility further in a desperate attempt to save our reputation, and so we have to check our facts carefully before writing a single word because that dark road begins with a simple act of retweeting or reblogging a piece of information without questioning the reliability of that information.
If we cover current events of others as bloggers instead of our own personal lives we must be on guard watching for the creep that occurs through sheer carelessness, if not maliciousness, that we display by spreading rumors or else misconstruing another person’s thoughts or ideas.
Also we must try our best to read people’s thoughts and ideas carefully so that we do not misunderstand them and this can be difficult in the modern age as sarcasm is abused, spelling atrocious, and short and incomplete thoughts which internet platforms like twitter specialize in (to their shame) are probably the most easily misunderstood kinds of statements. But that could be the premise of an article for another day.
And so remember not to believe or reblog everything you read on the internet.
Additional Cross Reference : John 8:39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham.
40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.
41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.
46 Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?
47 He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.
48 Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?
49 Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me.
Next Month on this day we may cover another one of these verses from Proverbs 14 …
Proverbs 14:1 Every wise woman buildeth her house: but the foolish plucketh it down with her hands.
2 He that walketh in his uprightness feareth the LORD: but he that is perverse in his ways despiseth him.
3 In the mouth of the foolish is a rod of pride: but the lips of the wise shall preserve them.
4 Where no oxen are, the crib is clean: but much increase is by the strength of the ox.
5 A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.
6 A scorner seeketh wisdom, and findeth it not: but knowledge is easy unto him that understandeth.
7 Go from the presence of a foolish man, when thou perceivest not in him the lips of knowledge.
8 The wisdom of the prudent is to understand his way: but the folly of fools is deceit.
9 Fools make a mock at sin: but among the righteous there is favour.
10 The heart knoweth his own bitterness; and a stranger doth not intermeddle with his joy.
11 The house of the wicked shall be overthrown: but the tabernacle of the upright shall flourish.
12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
13 Even in laughter the heart is sorrowful; and the end of that mirth is heaviness.
14 The backslider in heart shall be filled with his own ways: and a good man shall be satisfied from himself.
15 The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going.
16 A wise man feareth, and departeth from evil: but the fool rageth, and is confident.
17 He that is soon angry dealeth foolishly: and a man of wicked devices is hated.
18 The simple inherit folly: but the prudent are crowned with knowledge.
19 The evil bow before the good; and the wicked at the gates of the righteous.
20 The poor is hated even of his own neighbour: but the rich hath many friends.
21 He that despiseth his neighbour sinneth: but he that hath mercy on the poor, happy is he.
22 Do they not err that devise evil? but mercy and truth shall be to them that devise good.
23 In all labour there is profit: but the talk of the lips tendeth only to penury.
24 The crown of the wise is their riches: but the foolishness of fools is folly.
25 A true witness delivereth souls: but a deceitful witness speaketh lies.
26 In the fear of the LORD is strong confidence: and his children shall have a place of refuge.
27 The fear of the LORD is a fountain of life, to depart from the snares of death.
28 In the multitude of people is the king’s honour: but in the want of people is the destruction of the prince.
29 He that is slow to wrath is of great understanding: but he that is hasty of spirit exalteth folly.
30 A sound heart is the life of the flesh: but envy the rottenness of the bones.
31 He that oppresseth the poor reproacheth his Maker: but he that honoureth him hath mercy on the poor.
32 The wicked is driven away in his wickedness: but the righteous hath hope in his death.
33 Wisdom resteth in the heart of him that hath understanding: but that which is in the midst of fools is made known.
34 Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.
35 The king’s favour is toward a wise servant: but his wrath is against him that causeth shame.