My Name Is Ben Swann and I left Fox 19 to Bring Truth To Media, Ask Me Anything

Mr Swann,

I'm glad you are on to the false Left/Right paradigm also.

When you go higher than Establishment Democrat and Establishment Republican you come to the same kind of people funding both sides. When you strip away the facade everything makes more sense. In short the status Left/Right paradigm is not a sufficient political theory to explain current day Washington and what has been allowed to go on. It took Clinton/Gingrich to repeal Glass-Stegal. It took 9-11/Bush/Obama to totally destroy the 4th Amendment. These are not things to brushed aside lightly. They are deliberate calculated actions for a purpose.

"Wedge issues" are there to keep the People at a constant 50/50 split to essentually hide the corruption and criminality that BOTH sides are doing together. This makes it politically impossible to do the things that the vast majority of the People want like balancing the budget, not going to war, and so on. This also makes it easy to "swing the pendulum" every 4 or 8 years and keep the People believing that the excesses of both sides are being "kept in check" (hahahaha, so funny). If 60% of the People lean Dem on one issue this will always be canceled out by another 60% of the People that lean Repub on another issue and so in the end neither issue is resolved.

"Wedge issues" are seemingly parceled out to the parties when often the position is inconsistant with the supposed ideology of that party. Independant thinking people can list an issue and make a case for almost any official party position being in the wrong ideological camp. Politicians keep flipping sides on issues and to the masses we just brush it off as typical political "hypocrisy."

The battle in this country is not really Dem vs Repub, it's the Political Class vs the People.

Lance from Texas.

BenSwann
Journalism is more than just creating and reading headlines.
We are building solutions to these problems. Learn more at benswann.com...

Ask Me Anything!

************************************************************************************************************************************************

Mr. Swann, thank you very much for coming forward and allowing to unveil many answers to questions (as you can see) many of us have.

I've also looked at your website: BenSwann and I think it is very well organized and easy for readers to find what they are looking for. So good luck with your launch.

MY QUESTION: (sorry if it has already been asked and answered)

I applaud your effort in "Truth in Media" !!! Since you hold 'high standards' (rightfully so) in Journalism, after 14 years in 'broadcast media', can you tell we ATS'ers (1) news item that stands out in your career that has been 'false' and reported so by MSM and the public has been totally deceived? (in otherwords, you know of a story that has been reported, that remains today, that is a lie, and remains so)

Thank you very much. Congratulations on your new endeavor and good luck!!

The GUT

tetra50
And if it isn't a total farce, journalism in general, then why would we NOT expect that these folks investigating the facts and stories would not be more or less informed, as we think ourselves on this website to be, as this is what they do, live and breathe to earn their keep, so to speak. Why wouldn't they know the dots and be able to connect them, if it isn't a total farce......
And I don't mean to be harsh....

It appears that John Swinton actually said this during a speech to his peers. Regardless, it holds true, true, true:

There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it.

There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.

The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press?

We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.
(Source: Labor's Untold Story, by Richard O. Boyer and Herbert M. Morais, published by United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, NY, 1955/1979.)

Viva the Free Press!! Can it, yet, overcome the darkness?

I don't know, can it, Gut????
That's the real question, here, is it not?

Not meaning, again to be harsh , as Mr. Swann said, but I will take you to task on this every day of the week, no matter I may be seen as a Biatch, such as it is. LOL

But, I really like what you have quoted here, as it takes to task directly, what I am trying to say here. if you earn your living informing, HOW COULD YOU NOT SEE THOSE DOTS AND CONNECT THEM.

So if you're being quiet for the sake of job security and/or physical health and well/being (and I can quite likely understand that, completely, but then, it should be admitted to and this is what I'm pushing for, at the very least), then that's one thing. But are you really telling me, that most who are reporting to the populus the pertinent facts of the day really, really DON'T SEE THOSE DOTS, much less connect them?

Coming from a place of journalism, family wise, I've hung out with a lot of you, pardon my vernacular. Many of the present day journalists see us common folk as simply lacking in sense, idiots waiting to be told what the spin of the current "truth," is.....

Sorry, Mr. Swann, I've been in a room amongst a bunch of journalists working for USA Today and the Washington Post, etc., and heard their interpretation of what they think of those of us who don't work in journalism, but read or watch what they "deign" to provide to us....
Tetra50
Lucy

I don't know if this is your cup of tea, or not... Can't hurt to ask...

Here in the Northwest, specifically Southeastern Washington, an environmental catastrophe, sixty years in the making, is being to a large degree stonewalled. The Hanford Nuclear site.

Would this be the sort of story you'd be interested in?

tetra50
So if you're being quiet for the sake of job security and/or physical health and well/being (and I can quite likely understand that, completely, but then, it should be admitted to and this is what I'm pushing for, at the very least), then that's one thing. But are you really telling me, that most who are reporting to the populus the pertinent facts of the day really, really DON'T SEE THOSE DOTS, much less connect them?

I, personally, could only conclude that the "journalists" have been dumbed-down and enraptured with the cult of personality and all the party-favors that involves...or they were knowing and complicit sell-outs for those very same "party-favors."

At the very least: Slowly seduced to shut-up and tow the party line or else. I love, and have compassion for, some of them...that's the ONLY reason I didn't name names.

Never confuse a "Personality" with a "Journalist." Today: personalities are hired...journalists have to do what Ben Swann did and buck the system. Word.

Mr. Swann,

Thank you for offering the Q and A. It's fascinating read.

I would like to know how you feel about political correctness in the news/media. Did you ever encounter any really bizarre PC overkill or ridiculous PC "rules" that baffled/surprised you?

reply to post by tetra50


I can feel you there tetra [lucy], in so much as they actually think people 'need' to be told what to think, feel, know and/or understand in and about the world around us... and yet most of them don't really even have a friggin clue themselves. (?)

me?

nothing could be further from the truth.

i think people would do very well, all on their own, if the media simply laid it all out there without the bs/spin, what have you... and let the people decide for themselves what the 'truths' of the news were. (?)

reply to post by The GUT


There, I think you hit on it. Cult of personality. They all want to be the next Walter Cronkite, or John Chancellor...

Forgetting, assuming they ever knew, that they made their bones covering a war the likes of which I hope to never see.

I know mods are watching this thread, so would one of you please send Mr. Swann a request to please quote the question he is responding to? It is making it hard to follow just what he is talking about on some of his answers unless we take extra steps to backtrack to the question.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


just click where you see " reply to " post by (whatever screenname) is there at the top of the post. hope i expalined that well enough.

12m8keall2c

i think people would do very well, all on their own, if the media simply laid it all out there without the bs/spin, what have you... and let the people decide for themselves what the 'truths' of the news were. (?)

And that's how they spin it.

The Real Truth is subjective.

And what's really scary is I think they believe their subjective truth.

reply to post by papelstaques


A great place to start is by contacting [email protected]. Tell him that you would like to be part of the "Street Team". this is a great place where we are beginning to pull together those who are interested in being a part of TIM

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


Springer has said a 2-3 times that

THE LEADERSHIP DOES *NOT WANT* the quotes used as it clutters up the guest's responses as well as the process.

They want the guest's answers clean and limited to their answers and simply that.

I'm inclined to agree though I think the other thread with the answers posted with the questions is an important thing to do.

Alternatively, perhaps it would be workable to have the AMA threads be 2 columns. The left column with the answers posted below the related question ONLY . . . or if they still want to keep the questions out of the guest's posts, to have the right column display the question beside the guest's answer . . .

with otherwise, the right column containing the questions and commentary from members.

reply to post by BO XIAN


There are several workable options, but if we keep our questions simple, then it really should not "clutter" up the thread with a short quote.

I find it extra work to ask someone to create a question/answer thread. Just quote the question in example:

Mr. Swann, have you ever been ....."

and then Swan can answer.

Just easier to follow for me.

reply to post by The GUT


Yep that quote hit the nail right on the head there good sir.
Pretty much what I've always assumed.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


I certainly understand.

I don't think it's very workable to expect the . . . herd of cats . . . on ATS to all keep their questions 1-3 lines only. It's Not going to happen. Just not.

And trying to make it happen would degrade the tone and atmosphere, spirit of ATS. So, just not going to happen.

Which leaves us back at the starting point. Sigh.

Welcome Mr. Swann!

I would like to ask you if you have read Mark Levin's book the Liberty Amendments and if you have do you have any opinion on whether or not thats a direct enough aproach to restore the constitutionality of the govt on all levels and branches?

Thank you in advance for your time

reply to post by 12m8keall2c

I can feel you there tetra [lucy], in so much as they actually think people 'need' to be told what to think, feel, know and/or understand in and about the world around us... and yet most of them don't really even have a friggin clue themselves. (?)

Yup. That's my personal experience, anyway. And I've been amongst those in the publications wreaking control and havoc by their reputations today.

So that's why I'm asking Mr. Swann, what I am: as to, how can anyone working in this field not really be more informed, and expected to be that, as they are informing the rest of us, and so, not know the dots nor connect them on their own????

Sorry. Wasn't going to pin it to the wall like that, but thought about it, and if you have that overwhelming, important responsibility to speak for the rest of us, and inform the same, how could you possibly claim ignorance in this?

reply to post by tracehd1


Dear Ben,

Thank you for taking the time go give us the opportunity for us inquisitive to ask you open questions.


My question is, What is your reason/s for coming out and finally talking to the public straight, if this is really the case? Why now and why didn't you do it along time ago when you first got in the business?

If it was conditioning of sorts that they groom people into, then by the time they realize they are already too deep and can't just leave or get out, can you explain the process?

Thank you very much. T H

tetra50

So that's why I'm asking Mr. Swann, what I am: as to, how can anyone working in this field not really be more informed, and expected to be that, as they are informing the rest of us, and so, not know the dots nor connect them on their own????

My non-educated, layman 'answer' to that would have to simply be that, apparently, they have the attitude of 'paper on the wall' qualifies them and no further 'training', 'research' is needed. (?)

a rather arrogant sense of mind, in my opinion, but just take a gander at the likes of ....                 and I think you'll see what I mean.

they're no longer 'journalists' in search fo the truth, they're reporters looking to make a name for themselves. (?)

yet I haven't taken the time to ask a question of our appreciated & prestigious Guest...

Mr. Swann,
In your opinion, would you consider Reagan's veto concerning the fairness doctrine to be similar to the NFL's introduction of free agency, in that it somewhat 'killed the sport'?

one being 'investigative journalism' and the other 'the love for the game'- football.

... essentially making both little more than 'all about the money' (?)