Helter Stelter: America’s most dangerous propagandist returns to CNN



Propaganda comes in two forms. The first manipulates the public into accepting a particular political viewpoint or persuades them to do something that benefits the ruling class. A prime example is John Legend’s Pfizer ads, which ran in 2023 and 2024, encouraging people to stay "up to date" on their COVID mRNA boosters.

The second type involves what CNN’s returning propagandist Brian Stelter routinely does — acting as an authority to vilify and demean critics of the ruling class narrative. In line with the COVID hysteria analogy, Stelter frequently targeted critics like Alex Berenson in 2021.

What is truth, and what is disinformation? That’s for the high priests like Brian Stelter to decide.

This second type of propaganda is often more dangerous than the first. It’s the kind preferred by the so-called champions of the “free press,” and Stelter excels at it. For years, Stelter has told his audience and the American people that anyone with views opposing the regime spreads mal-, mis-, and disinformation. In his esteemed opinion, the punishment for this is cancellation from public life.

After a brief period of introspection following the Discovery merger, CNN’s staff shrugged off the constraints of Chris Licht’s oppressive leadership and are once again free to embrace their bias and partisanship. Is it any wonder they’ve brought back their chief propagandist, Stelter? After all, there’s an election to win.

How did Stelter rise to become America’s most dangerous propagandist? It all started with a newsletter and a blog.

Making of a narrative guardian

Stelter grew up a media nerd. He had a strong interest in nightly news and its anchors. He turned this interest into TV Newser, a blog he started from his University of Maryland dorm room as a teenager. The blog quickly became a must-read after Stelter began breaking media stories ahead of more experienced journalists. He sold the blog but continued writing it for years.

After graduating, Stelter began working for the New York Times covering the media. His big break came in 2013 when he took over CNN’s long-running media criticism show, “Reliable Sources.”

As the 2016 election unfolded and its aftermath played out, Stelter became the most vocal cheerleader for administrative state and media narratives, wielding the power and prestige of his role as a media referee. From the debunked Russian collusion story to COVID extremism and even Hunter Biden’s laptop, no one defended the party line and attacked critics as consistently as Stelter. No one.

His unwavering commitment to protecting the establishment at all costs may give the impression that he’s comically unaware. But he isn’t. As Shakespeare said, “All the world is a stage,” and Stelter clearly knows and relishes his role on it.

Stelter’s main role is to keep mainstream media in line, ensuring that they stick to the approved narrative. He is a master at this, consistently playing the concern troll against anyone presenting alternatives to the accepted truth, even relying on figures whose credibility with the public is in ruins.

Enter Dan Rather, the disgraced former host of CBS Evening News. After Trump’s victory in the 2016 election, Stelter frequently brought Rather onto his show to discuss “truth.” In 2018, Stelter even had Rather explain how journalists needed to provide “truth” to counter “Trump’s fantasyland.” That’s right — Stelter invited the man fired from CBS for fabricating National Guard documents to speak on the importance of “truth.”

Truth doesn’t matter to Stelter. Scoring points on the opposition does.

Stelter has never hesitated to defend a regime narrative, no matter how false. When Hillary Clinton’s campaign used the Democratic Party to pay a law firm that hired an opposition research team to create a fake dossier written by a former MI-6 spy alleging “Russian collusion,” Stelter became one of its biggest defenders.

In 2020, when the media and deep state pushed the narrative that the violent riots across America’s cities were “mostly peaceful protests,” Stelter did what he does best — discredit those showing the truth. He portrayed them as extremists trying to deceive the public, like when he attacked Sean Hannity for using days-old footage to make his point.

When the media and Big Tech colluded to protect Joe Biden from allegations contained in his son’s laptop weeks before the 2020 election, Stelter and his protégé Oliver Darcy quickly came to his defense. Stelter tweeted, “'Over the past 24 hours, the Hunter Biden narrative pushed by President Trump and his allies in right-wing media has started to unravel,’ @oliverdarcy writes in the latest edition of @ReliableSources.”

Yes, the media did their job protecting the Biden family by “unraveling” the “narrative,” but they didn’t unravel the truth that the laptop and its contents were real. Stelter did what he was born to do: influence the outcome of the election for his side.

The devil in disinformation

Fast-forward to 2022. After the Discovery-Warner Brothers merger, and under pressure from libertarian board member and former Trump donor John Malone, CNN fired Stelter. This left a vacuum for the type of activist “journalism” that had become synonymous with Stelter. Left-wing activists, like Dan Froomkin at Press Watch, lamented the decision. Froomkin cried, “By firing Brian Stelter, CNN is capitulating to disinformation rather than fighting it.”

That key word appears again — disinformation. Like a talisman, it summons the supplicants of the progressive order to the holy fight. But what is truth, and what is disinformation? That’s for the high priests like Brian Stelter to decide.

After spending a little over 100 weeks in the wilderness, the prophet returned to CNN, finding a sea of shifting anti-speech norms that his past activism had laid the groundwork for.

Now in 2024, governments have ramped up their crackdowns on free speech. The U.K.’s new Labour government is emptying prisons to jail social media offenders, while Brazil has shut down access to X, formerly Twitter. Anti-speech totalitarianism that would make Big Brother proud is on the rise.

The fervor to suppress speech isn’t confined to other so-called “liberal democracies.” It’s surging here in the American republic. Just this week, former U.S. senator and perennial failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton called for jailing those who spread “disinformation,” First Amendment be damned.

Meanwhile, California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) signed legislation making it a crime to “knowingly distribute an ad or other election communications that contain materially deceptive content — including deepfakes.” This isn’t just about regulating or banning deepfakes, which may seem reasonable to most. But what exactly is the “materially deceptive content” Newsom refers to? Differences in how government should be run? Who gets to decide?

Brian Stelter’s unwavering dedication to protecting those who seek to amass power by limiting Americans' access to speech has brought us to this pretty pass. He has profited greatly from his role as the gatekeeper of “truth.” His actions have paved the way for ever-increasing restrictions on speech throughout the so-called free world.

So in a few years, as you stand at the gate of the gulag for posting one too many memes, remember who sent you there. Then, if they’ll let you, raise a glass of potato vodka and salute his name.

CNN's 'Reliable Sources' suffers lowest ratings of the year — and it gets even worse for host Brian Stelter



The post-President Trump world has left many media outlets hurting for clicks and viewers, but possibly the hardest-hit network could be CNN. "Reliable Sources" suffered its lowest ratings of the year, and yet somehow the news gets even worse for host Brian Stelter.

"Reliable Sources" averaged only 810,000 total viewers for the May 2 episode, which was the smallest audience the show had so far this year, according to Fox News. It gets even worse for the struggling Sunday morning cable TV news show because in the highly coveted demographic of adults ages 25-54, "Reliable Sources" was able to garner an abysmal 163,000 viewers. The news opinion program had viewership below 1 million for five consecutive weeks.

To add insult to injury, "Reliable Sources" had better ratings without regular host Stelter, who has often been labeled as a "hall monitor" by his critics. The previous week's episode with fill-in host John Avalon notched 907,000 viewers, nearly 100,000 more than when Stetler returned from vacation. Avalon also did better with the advertiser-friendly 25-54 demo, averaging 182,000 viewers.

"Reliable Sources" claims to examine "the media world – telling the story behind the story – how the news gets made," but often spends large portions of the show criticizing Fox News, especially with Donald Trump not available as a viable target since he is out of the White House.

Turn on @CNN – it's @ReliableSources time – @JohnAvlon is in the chair while I'm somewhere out here. Guests:… https://t.co/GwklZXZIc1

— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) 1619362847.0

CNN's "New Day" program is also struggling mightily, despite having a brand-new host. "New Day," which has a new co-host in Brianna Keilar who replaced Alisyn Camerota, had its worst ratings of the year last week. "New Day" is averaging fewer than 500,000 viewers with Keilar at the helm, down 37% compared to the first quarter with co-hosts Camerota and John Berman, according to Nielsen Media Research. "Fox & Friends," the direct competition for "New Day," reeled in an average of 1.2 million viewers from April 26 through May 2.

Overall, Fox News was the clearcut ratings winner with an average of 2.3 million primetime viewers, surpassing MSNBC with an average of 1.6 million. "Tucker Carlson Tonight" averaged 2.9 million viewers, making it the most-watched cable news program of the week.

A new Rasmussen Reports survey found that CNN is likely to continue to struggle in the ratings department. A survey of 1,000 likely voters between May 3-4 were asked if they continue to watch the big three cable networks.

Fox News was the winner with 41% of viewers saying they continue to watch the conservative news channel. But viewers are less likely to watch left-wing cable networks CNN and MSNBC. A mere 25% of respondents said they "generally watch" CNN, and only 21% said they tune into MSNBC.

"It may be that the biggest loser in last year's election wasn't a political candidate, but CNN, which has seen its ratings drop precipitously since former President Donald Trump left office in January," Rasmussen Reports stated. "Those numbers are a sharp reversal from four years ago, when Trump's presidency proved a ratings gold mine for CNN. In a June 2017 survey, 47% of regular cable news viewers said they generally watched CNN, compared to 33% for Fox News and 16% for MSNBC."

During President Joe Biden's first 100 days in office, ratings have plummeted for CNN and MSNBC.

"On average, 1.3 million household viewers were watching MSNBC in the last week of January, shortly after Biden took office," The Hill reported. "For the week ending April 25, that number was 868,000. At CNN, those figures went from 1.2 million to 749,000."

Democratic congresswoman calls for 'truth commission' to root out 'extremist ideology' so Americans can have 'common narrative'



Earlier this month, the New York Times published a story saying "experts" suggested that President Joe Biden's administration should set up a "truth commission" and appoint a "reality czar" to battle "disinformation and domestic extremism."

Now a Democratic congresswoman also is touting a "truth commission."

Freshman U.S. Rep. Sara Jacobs on Sunday told CNN's Brian Stelter on his "Reliable Sources" program that we need a "truth commission" to put down "extremist ideology" so Americans can all have a "common narrative" about what is true and what isn't.

What are the details?

Before her "truth commission" declaration, Jacobs defined an "extremist" as one who's "unable to take in competing ideas and reflect the truth."

Not that such a condition isn't an issue with the left, but whatever — Stelter seemed to enthusiastically agree with her take.

Image source: Twitter video screenshot via @ReliableSources

Jacobs added that extremists believe their "sense of identity" is being threatened and lack "critical thinking skills" — and have this oh-so-problematic access to "common social networks" with those who share their views.

Stelter seemed to love what he was hearing. After all, a few weeks back he said he wanted the influence of "liar" Fox News reduced — and yet claimed his wish somehow wasn't "censorship."

So he took Jacobs words farther, invoking problems such as the "impact of cellphones and this constant connectivity, social networks and far-right television networks" — all of which are "fueling a fire" of extremism.

Jacobs replied by saying "we know the violence on [Jan. 6] was predicated on the idea of the 'big lie' — the fact that this election was stolen despite the fact that Donald Trump's own Department of Homeland Security says it was not. You need to be able to perpetuate that kind of lie in order to get the kinds of reactions that you did. I think we need to look at far-right media — which I know, Brian, you have been such a leader on calling out — and also the role of social media and the whole ecosystem of social media where the kinds of information and the kinds of posts that get the biggest reactions are the ones that are prioritized by their algorithms."

Soon Stelter added that for the United States "it's about a 'whitelash,' about a white Christian America reaction, backlash, to a changing country personified by Trump. But ... none of this is going away now, even though the [second impeachment] trial is over and even though one phase of Trumpism is over. You also said in an interview with the 19th News website this week that the country needs a truth commission. What exactly would a truth commission be?"

Jacobs explains what her 'truth commission' would look like

"Because we haven't really done the reckoning with the racial injustice and white supremacy of our past that we need to do," Jacobs replied. "And so ... a truth commission — a lot of people will think of South Africa --- we've used them in countries around the world. And basically ... it's communities all the way up to the national level having conversations about both the gory and the glory of our history and what happened — both throughout the history of our country and leading up to and on January 6 — so that we can come to a common narrative, moving forward, of what we want our country to be."

“We define an extremist ideology as one that is unable to reflect the truth. I think that’s exactly what we’re seei… https://t.co/iCA15rtKWX
— Reliable Sources (@Reliable Sources)1613321371.0