These are snippets of a small part of my upcoming report on the Media. Forgive me if some of the statements seem out of context. I am not providing the whole section because it is too long.
According to this report from the United Nations in 1952 titled, News Agencies, Their Structure and Operation, AFP (formerly Havas), AP, and Reuters are the primary “World News” sources.
On page 15 of this document it says most of the National News agencies from all over the world became part of the Reuters Trust. This ensured that all news came from one source. It says:
it is true to say that in 1952 world news is disseminated mainly by six agencies: the US agencies (AP, INS and UP); the British agency, Reuters; the French agency, AFP (formerly Havas); the Russian agency, TASS.
The geographical spheres of activity covered by the four world agencies which came into being between 1835 and 1851 were fairly circumscribed and were determined in the main by political, economic or ethnic affinities. The four agencies’ limited resources inevitably restricted their expansion. It was natural that they should co-operate and “ally” themselves by contracts for the exchange of services, so as to be able to cover the news in the greatest possible number of countries.
The history of the “treaties of alliance” signed by the agencies in Europe and the United States may be divided into four different periods: the alliances take shape from the beginnings to 1870; the reign of the “grand alliances”, from 1870 to the first world war; the alliances disintegrate, from the first world war te 1934; the present time.
So there were contracts that gave this “alliance” of World News sources effectively one news voice from before 1870.
As of now, their joint Trusted News Initiative (TNI) ensures all reporting voices and all fact check voices are one voice world wide. No dissension happens within the framework of the MSM.
The TNI apparently started with the BBC getting together with all its MSM buddies to “stop the spread of disinformation:”
The TNI is an industry collaboration of major news and global tech organisations working together to stop the spread of disinformation where it poses risk of real-world harm.
In the month leading to polling day, partners will alert each other to disinformation which poses an immediate threat to life or to the integrity of the election so that content can be reviewed promptly by platforms, whilst publishers ensure they don’t unwittingly republish dangerous falsehoods.
The above paragraph, and the start of the TNI was for the UK election in 2019.
This new expansion to the US follows the TNI’s success in tackling disinformation during the UK 2019 General Election, the Taiwan 2020 General Election
To be clear that this was not the first or only such partnership:
The Trusted News Initiative (TNI) was set up last year to protect audiences and users from disinformation, particularly around moments of jeopardy, such as elections. The TNI complements existing programmes partners have in place.
Its members are, well, everyone (Megamedia):
The partners currently within the TNI are: AFP; BBC, CBC/Radio-Canada, European Broadcasting Union (EBU),Facebook, Financial Times, First Draft, Google/YouTube, The Hindu, Microsoft, Reuters, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Twitter, The Wall Street Journal.
And just in case you thought the big American boys were left out:
The TNI is also expanding its global network. New organisations joining the TNI for the US Election include The Associated Press and The Washington Post.
Just in time for the U.S. election.
Right before the vaccines were deployed they also made sure to include a censorship and fact check of potential disinformation about them:
With the introduction of several possible new Covid-19 vaccines, there has been a rise of ‘anti-vaccine’ disinformation spreading online to millions of people…
TNI partners will alert each other to disinformation which poses an immediate threat to life so content can be reviewed promptly by platforms, whilst publishers ensure they don’t unwittingly republish dangerous falsehoods.
One voice is good right? It makes sure that no “harmful misinformation” occurs. The fact that the CEO of Reuters which leads the TNI is also on the Board of Directors for Pfizer might be a conflict of interest when it comes to fact checking vaccine information, but I’m sure nothing untoward is happening there.
[Talking about his families banking empire] We covered Europe. We covered the European Union that we have today. From that grew a business which was successfully built upon an understanding between the five brothers. The five brothers used to talk to each other through writing. That was one side. They were also the first client of a man called Mr. Reuter. Mr. Reuter made his name by flying pigeons around the world, and if you couldn’t send messages, you used a pigeon. And that’s why we were the first client of the great house of Reuter. Which as you know became the most important messaging company in the world today. And from that it grew, over a period of time.
There is also this plaque in front of Royal Exchange London which is a commemoration to Edmond L'de Rothschild. It says:
The supply of information to the world’s traders in securities, commodities and currencies was then, as is now the mainspring of Reuters activities & the guarantee of the founder’s aims of accuracy, rapidity and reliability. News services based on those principles now go to news papers, radio & television networks & governments throughout the world. Reuters has faithfully continued the work begun here to attest this & to honour Paluullius Reuter. The memorial was set here by Reuters to Mark the 125th anniversary of Reuters foundation & inaugurated by Edmond L’de Rothschild td 13-10-76
You have to understand that AP especially is part of a system. "Ownership" is irrelevant. It is similar to the Federal Reserve. Ownership does not matter.
The only thing that matters is who CONTROLS it.
The Federal Reserve banks are "owned" by member banks. But they have no power -- and that is the point. The power is what matters, not the ownership.
In the Federal Reserve, the ONLY power position is the president of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, because that is who controls the manipulation of the money supply -- which is the ONLY reason that the FR exists (to make profits off manipulating the money supply).
The position of president has the power, but WHO CONTROLS THE PRESIDENT of the NY FR? THAT is the important question.
At this point, you get into PRIVATE CONTRACTS, such as voting trusts and other types of contracts that are NOT available to the public.
THOSE people who have those agreements are the ones who REALLY control the Federal Reserve.
The Associated Press is similar.
Its REAL function is to MANIPULATE the "news" that is broadcast to millions of people.
It is officially a non-profit organization, "owned" you could say by its members. Those members are thousands of "news" outlets.
So, some jackass at the New York Times creates a fictional story out of nothing, citing "anonymous sources" that don't really exist. This article is published in their paper, but their readership is minimal.
So ... they send the article to the Associated Press. At the AP, another jackass decides that this article should be sent out to all members. And those thousands of members then publish the "AP article" which then goes out to millions of people via newspapers, radio, TV, internet, etc.
Who actually CONTROLS which articles go out to the members is the KEY. THEY are the ones with the power.
Even more to the point is WHO CONTROLS THEM? Once again, we get back to private contracts, which are not available to the general public.
This is how the cabal keeps power behind the scenes, making it look like it is all open to the public, when in fact it is not.
Reuters is owned by Thomson Reuters. But who CONTROLS (not owns) Thomson Reuters? That is the key. And the answer is: YOU are not allowed to know THAT.
Your question is a third-grader's question that has a PhD-level answer.
The people who control things in secret are not stupid enough to make it obvious to the public.
These are snippets of a small part of my upcoming report on the Media. Forgive me if some of the statements seem out of context. I am not providing the whole section because it is too long.
According to this report from the United Nations in 1952 titled, News Agencies, Their Structure and Operation, AFP (formerly Havas), AP, and Reuters are the primary “World News” sources.
On page 15 of this document it says most of the National News agencies from all over the world became part of the Reuters Trust. This ensured that all news came from one source. It says:
So there were contracts that gave this “alliance” of World News sources effectively one news voice from before 1870.
As of now, their joint Trusted News Initiative (TNI) ensures all reporting voices and all fact check voices are one voice world wide. No dissension happens within the framework of the MSM.
The TNI apparently started with the BBC getting together with all its MSM buddies to “stop the spread of disinformation:”
The above paragraph, and the start of the TNI was for the UK election in 2019.
This new expansion to the US follows the TNI’s success in tackling disinformation during the UK 2019 General Election, the Taiwan 2020 General Election
To be clear that this was not the first or only such partnership:
The Trusted News Initiative (TNI) was set up last year to protect audiences and users from disinformation, particularly around moments of jeopardy, such as elections. The TNI complements existing programmes partners have in place.
Its members are, well, everyone (Megamedia):
And just in case you thought the big American boys were left out:
Just in time for the U.S. election.
Right before the vaccines were deployed they also made sure to include a censorship and fact check of potential disinformation about them:
One voice is good right? It makes sure that no “harmful misinformation” occurs. The fact that the CEO of Reuters which leads the TNI is also on the Board of Directors for Pfizer might be a conflict of interest when it comes to fact checking vaccine information, but I’m sure nothing untoward is happening there.
In 2011 Sir Evelyn de Rothschild gave a talk at Peking University at which he said (@7:20):
There is also this plaque in front of Royal Exchange London which is a commemoration to Edmond L'de Rothschild. It says:
Dammmmnnnn! Nice work bro! Looking forward to your report.
talks like this on a Q board, won't get banned, meanwhile I get banned for making statements that require >65IQ... stay classy, GAW.
You want censorship for talking about Jews?
Sounds like a good little tyrant wannabe.
no ive heard it for years, we've all realized that actually enforcing laws is the answer to everything.
Depends on what laws are passed.
AP= Accuracy Problem.
The Reuters/AP "big news" operation is probably run by CIA (and other intel aggregates) and then pencil pushed out via Council on Foreign Relations.
You have to understand that AP especially is part of a system. "Ownership" is irrelevant. It is similar to the Federal Reserve. Ownership does not matter.
The only thing that matters is who CONTROLS it.
The Federal Reserve banks are "owned" by member banks. But they have no power -- and that is the point. The power is what matters, not the ownership.
In the Federal Reserve, the ONLY power position is the president of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, because that is who controls the manipulation of the money supply -- which is the ONLY reason that the FR exists (to make profits off manipulating the money supply).
The position of president has the power, but WHO CONTROLS THE PRESIDENT of the NY FR? THAT is the important question.
At this point, you get into PRIVATE CONTRACTS, such as voting trusts and other types of contracts that are NOT available to the public.
THOSE people who have those agreements are the ones who REALLY control the Federal Reserve.
The Associated Press is similar.
Its REAL function is to MANIPULATE the "news" that is broadcast to millions of people.
It is officially a non-profit organization, "owned" you could say by its members. Those members are thousands of "news" outlets.
So, some jackass at the New York Times creates a fictional story out of nothing, citing "anonymous sources" that don't really exist. This article is published in their paper, but their readership is minimal.
So ... they send the article to the Associated Press. At the AP, another jackass decides that this article should be sent out to all members. And those thousands of members then publish the "AP article" which then goes out to millions of people via newspapers, radio, TV, internet, etc.
Who actually CONTROLS which articles go out to the members is the KEY. THEY are the ones with the power.
Even more to the point is WHO CONTROLS THEM? Once again, we get back to private contracts, which are not available to the general public.
This is how the cabal keeps power behind the scenes, making it look like it is all open to the public, when in fact it is not.
Reuters is owned by Thomson Reuters. But who CONTROLS (not owns) Thomson Reuters? That is the key. And the answer is: YOU are not allowed to know THAT.
Your question is a third-grader's question that has a PhD-level answer.
The people who control things in secret are not stupid enough to make it obvious to the public.
The Rothschilds
Is it Pfizer or Mike Lindell? I can't remember.