PRG Media Notice - December 11, 2015

Return to Index

December 14, 2015 Archived PRG Updates HERE

"Our Republic and its press will rise or fall together. An able, disinterested, public-spirited press, with trained intelligence to know the right and courage to do it, can preserve that public virtue without which popular government is a sham and a mockery. A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press will produce in time a people as base as itself. The power to mould the future of the Republic will be in the hands of the journalists of future generations." Joseph Pulitzer

Washington Post Article - 12/14/15 (print)

COMMENTARY

This is the first Washington Post article dealing with Paradigm Research Group's advocacy work since the Citizen Hearing on Disclosure in April/May 2013 and the sale of the newspaper to Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. Given the importance of the Post as the nation's "political paper of record," the article requires some commentary.

It should be noted at the outset it is a Style Section piece with a focus more on a person than on the issue. It is generally accurate. If it has a fault, it is in portraying PRG's executive director as a lone wolf crusader. The Disclosure advocacy movement is global, housed in cyberspace and thousands are involved.

It is quite possible the material from nearly three hours of interviews and a great deal of transmitted information and links will appear in a later article.

Moving from top to bottom:

Reporters almost never write the headlines for their stories. That said, "UFO truthers" is ridicule language. PRG has no interest whatsoever in "UFOs." It is addressing a political embargo on the reality of an extraterrestrial presence. The term "truther" was pushed forward by the government to counter public dissatisfaction with the investigatory response to the events of Sept. 11, 2001. Anyone who challenged the product of that tardy investigation was labeled a "truther." Here the term has been shifted to other duty.

Also, reporters do not select the graphics used for their stories. The alien abduction lead graphic is vaguely appropriate though novel. That said, the placement in the print edition was impressive. The only way it could have been better would to have been in 3-D. Full disclosure: the photo in the print article is from 1997, front page Business Section (look much better now). It only took 18 years to make it from Business to Style.

The Citizen Hearing on Disclosure was not a "fake" congressional hearing; it was a mock congressional hearing. There is a difference.

The term "believer" is ridicule language. It is not a matter of "belief," it is a matter of being convinced by overwhelming evidence.

Clarification: not "least funded advocacy group in history;" rather "least funded advocacy movement addressing a major issue in history."

The reportage of a personal nature was largely correct. (Minor point: the inheritance was from an aunt.)

Ms. Kean has criticized Paradigm Research Group's efforts for many years. PRG would happily match its advocacy accomplishments against Ms. Kean's at any time.

The most important reportage here addresses the Rockefeller Initiative. Those two paragraphs make the article worth the time and effort put into it. For an extensive review of the Rockefeller Initiative, - all of which was provided to the reporter - see the information and links HERE.

While this article is useful, the Washington Post still has a long way to go before it repairs its historical failure to challenge the government imposed truth embargo on the extraterrestrial presence. It is hoped this failure is based upon an elitist stubborn resistance to a paradigm shift and not the result of a collusion with the national security structures going back to the 1950's.

Whatever the case, history will not be kind. One wonders if the Post's owner, Jeff Bezos, presently the fourth richest man in the world, is aware of and supports this failure. Maybe someone should let him know.

In the meantime, please share your views - positive and negative - in the comment section at the bottom of the article. That is very important feedback to which the editors do pay attention.