Global Tuidang Center



How the Specter of Communism Is Ruling Our World: Chapter Thirteen



Hijacking the Media

The specter of communism did not disappear with the disintegration of the Communist Party in Eastern Europe

Table of Contents


1. Mass Indoctrination in Communist Countries

2. Communist Infiltration of Western Media

3. Left-Wing Bias Among Media Professionals

4. The Media Takeover by Liberalism and Progressivism

5. The Film Industry: Vanguard Against Tradition

6. Television: Corruption in Every Household

7. The Media: A Key Battleground in a Total War

Conclusion: Bringing Back Responsibility in the Media



The influence of the media in modern society is enormous and growing daily. It permeates communities of all sizes, from the local to the global. Mass media has evolved from newspapers and magazines to radio, film, and television. With the rise of social media and user-generated content, the internet has greatly amplified the speed and reach of audiovisual communication.

People rely on the media for the latest news and analysis. In an ocean of information, the media influences which information people see and how they interpret it. The media is in a position to influence people’s first impressions on a particular topic, and thus carries considerable powers of psychological priming. 

For social elites, particularly politicians, the media determines the focus of public opinion and serves as a rallying beacon for the public. Topics that the media covers become matters of grave social concern. Issues that go unreported are ignored and forgotten. 

Thomas Jefferson, father of the Declaration of Independence and third president of the United States, once summed up the vital duties that the press assumes in society: “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.” [1]

As the voice of society, media can be the safeguard of morality or an instrument of evil. Its duty is to report the truth of the world’s major events in a fair, accurate, and timely manner. It must support justice and condemn wrongdoing, while promoting goodness. Its mission goes beyond the private interests of any one individual, company, or political party. 

In Western news circles, the media is the guardian of the truth and of the society’s core values. It enjoys the lofty status of “the fourth estate.”Journalists are respected for their expertise and sacrifices. 

Joseph Pulitzer, a newspaper publisher and founder of the Pulitzer Prize, said: “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 mold the future of the Republic will be in the hands of the journalists of future generations.” [2]

However, in the midst of mankind’s moral decline, it’s difficult for the media to protect its virtue and perform its duties under the pressure of power and the temptation of money. In communist countries, the media is controlled by the state. These regime mouthpieces brainwash the masses and act as accomplices to communist policies of terror and killing. 

In Western society, the media has been heavily infiltrated by communist thought, becoming one of communism’s main agents of anti-traditional, anti-moral, and demonic trends. It propagates lies and hatred, adding fuel to the flames of moral degeneration. Many media entities have abandoned their duties of reporting the truth and guarding society’s moral conscience. It is imperative for us to awaken to the state that the media is in today, and to bring responsibility back to this field. 

1. Mass Indoctrination in Communist Countries

From the very beginning, communists have viewed the media as a brainwashing tool. In their 1847 writing “The Communist League,” Marx and Engels asked members to have “revolutionary energy and zeal in propaganda.” [3] Marx and Engels often used terms like “party battlefield,” “party mouthpiece,” “political center,” or “tool for public opinion” in their articles to express the media’s desired character and functions.

Lenin used media as a tool to promote, incite, and organize the Russian revolution. He founded the official communist newspapers Iskra and Pravda to promote revolutionary propaganda and activism. Soon after the Soviet Communist Party seized power, it used the media for domestic political indoctrination. Abroad, it ran propaganda to improve its image and export revolution. 

The Chinese Communist Party also regards the media as a tool of public opinion for the dictatorship and a mouthpiece of the Party and the government. The CCP is highly conscious of the fact that “the guns and the pens are what it relies on for seizing and consolidating power.” [4] As early as the Yan’an period, Mao Zedong’s secretary Hu Qiaomu put forward the principle of “Party nature first,” saying that the Party newspaper “has to carry through the Party’s viewpoints and understandings in all articles, every essay, every news report, and every newsletter. …” [5]

Upon establishing its dictatorship, the CCP imposed strict control over the media, including television, radio, newspapers, magazines, and later the internet. It uses them as tools to indoctrinate the Chinese with communist ideology, to suppress dissidents, intimidate the public, and conceal or distort the truth. Media workers are experts in self-censorship, constantly aware that a single error can result in a miserable outcome. Censorship not only permeates the official news channels, but personal blogs and online communities are also monitored and controlled by a vast system of internet police. 

There is a contemporary Chinese phrase that vividly describes the role of the media under the CCP’s rule: “I am the Party’s dog, sitting by the Party’s door. I’ll bite whomever the Party tells me to bite and however many times I am told.” This is no exaggeration. Every communist political movement starts with public opinion: The media spreads lies to incite hatred, which cascades into violence and killing. The media plays a crucial role in this deadly mechanism. 

During the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, the CCP claimed that the students were violent thugs and so used the army to suppress the “riot.” Following the massacre, it claimed that the army didn’t shoot anyone and that there were no casualties at Tiananmen Square. [6] In 2001, early on in the persecution of Falun Gong, the regime staged the so-called Tiananmen self-immolation incident to frame the spiritual practice and kindle hatred against Falun Gong across China and around the world. [7] 

Leading cadres in committees at all levels of the CCP place great importance on propaganda work and field considerable personnel for this task. By the end of 2010, China had more than 1.3 million staff working in the national propaganda apparatus, including about 56,000 in propaganda departments at the provincial and county levels, 1.2 million in the local propaganda units, and 52,000 people in the central propaganda work units. [8] This figure does not include a large number of staff who are responsible for monitoring and manipulating online opinion, such as internet police, moderators, Party-controlled commentators, and others employed in various forms of public relations duty. 

Countries ruled by communist parties, without exception, use great amounts of resources to manipulate the media. Years of operation have honed the communist state media into an efficient mouthpiece for their totalitarian masters, using any and all means to deceive and poison the people.

2. Communist Infiltration of Western Media

The last century was witness to the great confrontation between the free world and the communist camp. All the while, communism has been infiltrating free societies. To this end, infiltrating and subverting the media in Western countries has become one of its chief methods. In light of the extraordinary influence of American media throughout the world, this chapter focuses on the United States to discuss the communist specter’s grasp on the media. 

After the Soviet regime seized power in Russia, it attempted to establish its control over public discourse in the West, dispatching its agents to infiltrate the Western media and enticing local communist sympathizers. It used these people to great effect in eulogizing the Soviet Union and concealing the brutality of communist rule. Soviet propaganda efforts swayed large numbers of Westerners, even influencing government policy to favor the Soviet Union. 

It has come to light that the Soviet KGB used its agents in the United States to work directly with prestigious American media organizations. Among them are Whittaker Chambers and John Scott, employed as editors of the New York Times; Richard Lauterbach and Stephen Laird of  Time magazine, and others. They used their positions to mingle with politicians, celebrities, and heads of state. Aside from gathering a wide range of intelligence, they also influenced high-level decisions concerning matters of politics, economics, diplomacy, war, and more. [9]

New York Times Moscow correspondent Walter Duranty covered the Soviet Union extensively and won the 1932 Pulitzer Prize for 13 serialized reports in that country. American former communist Jay Lovestone and prominent journalist Joseph Alsop, however, believe that Duranty acted as a spy for the Soviet secret police. [10]

During the 1932–1933 famine that ravaged the Ukraine and other regions of the Soviet Union, Duranty denied that the famine even existed, let alone that millions of people were starving to death. He claimed that “any report that the Soviet Union has famine today is exaggerated or malicious propaganda.” [11]

Describing the consequences of Duranty’s false reporting, Robert Conquest, a famous British historian and authoritative scholar on the history of the Soviet Union, wrote in his classic book The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-famine: “As the most famous journalist in the world’s most famous newspaper at the time, Duranty’s denial of the Great Famine was regarded as truth. He not only deceived readers of the New York Times, but because of the prestige of the newspaper, he also influenced countless people’s views on Stalin and the Soviet regime. His influence undoubtedly affected newly elected President Roosevelt on his recognition of the Soviet communist regime.” [12]

Hollywood, home of the American film industry, was also infiltrated by communist and leftist ideas and even hosted a Communist Party branch. After Willi Munzenberg, German communist and member of the Third International, entered the United States, he began to implement Lenin’s concepts of film development and production, using film as a tool for propaganda. He attracted Americans to travel to the Soviet Union to study film and helped trainees enter the film industry. It was he who set up the Communist Party branch organization in Hollywood. 

Step by step, the Soviet Union’s influence began to sink in. Many filmmakers of the era idolized the Soviets, and these sentiments only grew during World War II, when the United States and Soviet Union were briefly allied against Nazi Germany. A famous playwright claimed that the German invasion of the Soviet Union was “an attack on our motherland.” [13] In the 1943 film “Mission to Moscow”, it was publicly declared that “there is no fundamental difference between the Soviet Union and the traditional United States.” [14]

In addition to the Soviet Union, the Chinese communist regime has also greatly benefited from leftist media and journalists in the free world. Prominent among them are left-wing American journalists Edgar Snow, Agnes Smedley, and Anna Louise Strong.

Edgar Snow’s Red Star Over China painted a glowing picture of Mao Zedong and other senior Chinese Communist Party leaders while hiding their crimes and the evil nature of communism from Western readers. Mao said: “Snow is the first person to clear the road for the friendly relations needed to establish a united front.” [15] 

Agnes Smedley wrote many articles and books flattering the CCP and its leadership. There is strong evidence from the Soviet archives suggesting that she was a Comintern agent who had worked to foster armed revolution in India and collect intelligence for the Soviets. [16] Anna Louise Strong was also an admirer of the Chinese communist movement. The CCP has acknowledged these three Americans by issuing postal stamps in honor of their “meritorious service.”

3. Left-Wing Bias Among Media Professionals

Most Americans are skeptical about the accuracy of media news reporting. Surveys have shown that 47 percent of people feel that the media is liberal-leaning. In comparison, only 17 percent thought that there was a conservative bias. [17] A question then arises: With the news industry being such a competitive field, how could such a uniform bias exist? 

Though reporters and editors have their own individual political and social views, this does not have to be reflected in their reporting. As subjectivity and neutrality are keystone principles of journalism ethics, news reports should not be colored by personal opinion. By normal market principles, if there is bias, it should be offset by the emergence of new, more neutral competitors. 

The reality is more complicated. American political scientist Tim Groseclose’s 2012 book Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind uses rigorous scientific methods to analyze the political leanings of major American media. His findings revealed that the political leanings of American media on average trend exceedingly toward liberalism and progressivism—far left of the typical voting citizen. The “mainstream” media are even further left of this average. [18]

The book explains that the majority of media professionals are liberals, which objectively speaking, puts pressure on traditionalists in the field. The small number of conservatives working in liberal media companies are seen as “mildly evil or subhuman,” according to Groseclose. Even if they aren’t squeezed out of employment, they dare not air their political views publicly, much less promote conservative viewpoints in print or on television. [19] 

Left-wing bias discourages students with conservative viewpoints from picking journalism as their major, or getting a job in the media after graduation. The community of media professionals excludes views that do not align with its liberal bias, thus forming political echo chambers. Individuals in this community see themselves as the compassionate and intelligent elite at the forefront of societal development, while looking down on ordinary citizens as stubborn commoners.

But the mainstream media does not necessarily represent the opinions of the social mainstream. Gallup’s 2016 poll verified this. According to the poll, 36 percent of American citizens are conservatives, while liberals number just over 25 percent. [20] That is to say, if media accurately reflected the views of a majority of citizens, then the media as a whole wouldn’t be left-leaning. 

The leftist bent of media is evidently not the result of popular will. Rather, it comes from the behind-the-scenes pushing of a political agenda intended to shift the entire demographic to the political left. This is also explained in the above poll—citizens on the whole are changing their views to become more liberal and progressive. The gap between conservatives and liberals in 1996 was 22 percent; in 2014 it was 14 percent; and in 2016 it was 11 percent. The proportion of conservatives has remained stable, but many in the middle have been converted to the Left. The mainstream media has an undeniable role in this demographic transformation, which in turn sustains the media’s ideological bias. 

There are also some issues when looking at media professionals’ partisan affiliations. In the United States, Democrats are associated with the Left while Republicans tend to lean right. According to a 2014 survey by The Washington Post, 28.1 percent of media personnel in the United States were Democrats compared to just 7.1 percent reporting themselves to be Republicans. [21]

The majority of people working in major newspapers and TV stations are leftists, be they the owners of these organizations or the reporters and commentators. Their bias is obvious. In the 2016 U.S. presidential election campaign, 57 of the nation’s one hundred biggest newspapers—making a combined circulation of 13 million—openly endorsed the Democratic candidate. Just two of the top hundred, with a circulation of 300,000 papers between them, supported the Republican candidate. [22]  

Why does the media lean so far to the left? In the 1960s, the country was heavily influenced by communist ideology, with radical left-wing social movements taking the United States by storm. The radical students of that period later entered the media, the academic community, upper-class society, government agencies, and the arts scene, thus establishing control over public discourse. 

The majority of university professors are leftists, as discussed in Chapter 12. Departments of journalism and literature, filled with left-wing ideology, have brought generations of graduates under its influence. Media workers are not paid high salaries, instead relying on their idealistic sense of purpose to persevere in the field. This idealism has become the tool for transforming the media into a left-wing base of operations. 

Along with news media, the film industry is also under siege. Hollywood has become a bastion of left-wing propaganda. Using sophisticated production and narrative techniques, left-leaning producers promote leftist ideologies that have reached the entire world. The main theme of Hollywood films usually appears to be slandering capitalism and emphasizing class conflict, while praising immoral behavior or anti-American sentiment.

Author Ben Shapiro interviewed many movie stars and producers in Hollywood and wrote a book titled Primetime Propaganda: The True Hollywood Story of How the Left Took Over Your TVAccording to Shapiro, a famous producer said that in this profession, liberalism is 100 percent dominant, and that anyone who denies this is either kidding or not telling the truth. When asked whether having a different political standpoint could hinder a person’s pursuit of the movie industry, he answered, “Absolutely.”

A famous producer blatantly admitted that Hollywood has been selling liberal political views through the programs. “Right now there’s only one perspective. And it’s a very progressive perspective.”[23] The producer of a television series about criminal police admitted that he intentionally shows more whites as the criminals because he didn’t “want to contribute to negative stereotypes.” [24] 

Shapiro argues that nepotism in Hollywood is ideological rather than familial: Friends hire friends with the same ideological views. The openness with which the Hollywood crowd admits its anti-conservative discrimination inside the industry is shocking. Those who talk about tolerance and diversity have no tolerance when it comes to respecting diversity of ideology. [25]

4. The Media Takeover by Liberalism and Progressivism

Walter Williams, the founder of journalism education and of the world’s first journalism school at the University of Missouri, created the Journalist’s Creed in 1914. It defined journalism as an independent profession that respects God and honors mankind. Journalists should be unmoved by pride of opinion or greed of power. They must pay attention to detail and exercise self-control, patience, fearlessness, and constant respect for their readers. [26] After the 1960s, however, progressivism became prevalent. Advocacy replaced objectivity. Liberalism and progressivism replaced impartiality. 

In The Media Elite, author Samuel Robert Lichter wrote that reporters tend to add their own opinions and educational background to their reports on controversial issues. The majority of the people in the newsroom are liberals, which has shifted news reporting in favor of liberal politics. [27] 

In his research on the evolution of two hundred years of American journalism, Jim A. Kuypers concluded that today’s mainstream media are liberal and progressive both in their structure and in their reporting. He quoted a liberal editor of a major newspaper as saying: “Too often, we wear liberalism on our sleeves. We do not tolerate other lifestyles and viewpoints. We are not hesitant to say that if you want to work here, you must be the same as us, and you must be liberal and progressive.” [28]  

In another work, Kuypers found that the mainstream media leans very much toward liberalism in the reporting of the issues, such as race, benefits reform, environmental protection, gun control, and the like. [29]

The leftist media established its dominance in the ecology of American politics, proliferating its ideological agenda in covering the news. In a commentary piece published by The Wall Street Journal in 2001, former CBS reporter Bernard Goldberg wrote, “The mainstream news anchors were so biased that they ‘don’t even know what liberal bias is.’” [30]

Most people in the high-trust societies of the West have few doubts about the veracity of news created and broadcast by the mainstream media. Many take it for granted that reports are written objectively and comprehensively and that what is cited is serious expert analysis based on information from reliable sources. The leftist media makes use of its consumers’ trust to inculcate them with its ideological worldview. 

While fake news runs rampant today, this is a rather unusual phenomenon. The free societies of the West have traditionally emphasized the need for a truthful, objective, and fair media. Thus, the left-wing media does not generally spread fake news to deceive the public outright. Its methods are more subtle and elaborate, as described below.

Selective Coverage. Every day, tens of thousands of newsworthy events occur around the world. But which events receive attention or quietly fade from public attention are almost completely determined by what the media chooses to cover.  

Contemporary media wields great power. Due to considerable left-wing influence among many media organizations and personnel, many progressive ideas, such as so-called social justice and equality and feminism have become mainstream, while the crimes of communism have been whitewashed. Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich once said, “The academic left and its news media and Hollywood acolytes refuse to confront the horrifying record of Marxism’s endless inhumanity.” [31]

Selective coverage can be divided into three categories. First, events are selected only or primarily for their utility in helping readers accept the ideological stand of the Left. Second, instead of reporting comprehensively on the event’s context, they report only the aspects that support the leftist point of view. Lastly, the media tends to give greater voice to those who lean left or whose statements agree with the Left, while other organizations and individuals are sidelined. 

In A Measure of Media Bias, Tim Groseclose wrote, “For every sin of commission, … we believe that there are hundreds, and maybe thousands, of sins of omission—cases where a journalist chose facts or stories that only one side of the political spectrum is likely to mention.” [32]

Agenda-Setting. In the 1960s, media researchers came up with the influential theory that the media’s function is to determine which topics are suitable for discussion. Bernard Cohn articulated this well: The press “may not be successful much of the time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in telling its readers what to think about.” [33] That is to say, the press can determine the importance of events by the number of reports and follow-up reports that an event receives, while equally or more important issues can be dealt with more summarily or not at all. 

The issue of transgender rights, though it concerns only a very small portion of the population, has become a focal point of discussion and is an example of media successfully setting the agenda. In addition, global warming becoming an important issue in public discourse is the result of a long-term conspiracy between the media and other political forces.

Framing. There are many issues that are too big to ignore. The media uses the method of framing to set the narrative. The sex liberation movement and the state welfare of the 1960s resulted in the disintegration of the family, worsened poverty, and increased crime. However, leftists use the media and Hollywood to depict an image of the strong and independent single mother, hiding the real social issues behind this phenomenon. Some criticize “white supremacy” and attribute the poor financial and social status of minorities to systemic discrimination. The prevalence of such narratives is largely the result of collusion between the media and certain political forces. 

The method of framing is seen mainly in the phenomenon of stories preceding facts. In objective reporting, the writer summarizes the facts into a story. But reporters and editors often hold prejudiced opinions on an issue, and when creating reports, massage the facts to fit the story that validates their own biases. 

Using Political Correctness to Enforce Self-Censorship. Political correctness permeates the media. Whether written in the style guide or left implicit, many media outlets have policies of political correctness that affect what may or may not be reported and how it is reported. Because of legislation on “hate crimes” in some European countries, many local media outlets dare not report on crimes committed by immigrants, even though such crimes have become a severe social issue and are threatening the domestic security in these countries. American media organizations also self-censor when it comes to reporting crimes, often omitting the perpetrators’ immigration status. 

Labeling Conservative Sources to Neutralize Their Influence. In order to create the impression of balanced reporting, the liberal media has no choice but to report on the opinions of conservatives or conservative think tanks. But the media typically uses labels like “conservative,” “right-wing,” or “religious right-wing” when quoting these sources, subtly implying that their opinions are prejudiced or not trustworthy for the simple fact that they are conservatives. When quoting from liberals or liberal think tanks, the media usually uses neutral titles such as “scholar” or “expert,” suggesting that these opinions are impartial, objective, rational, and trustworthy.

Creating a Lexicon of Political Correctness. The Western media, along with leftist political groups and academia, has created a vast system of politically correct language. It has been applied so frequently by the media that the language has become deeply rooted in the public consciousness, influencing the public on a subliminal level. 

Once the media validates a left-wing opinion, it manifests in all aspects of society. An October 2008 report by The New York Timestitled “Liberal Views Dominate Footlights” begins with the sentence, “During this election season theatergoers in New York can see a dozen or so overtly political plays, about Iraq, Washington corruption, feminism or immigration; what they won’t see are any with a conservative perspective.” [34]

The media’s political colors are also reflected in its coverage of the democratic process. Liberal candidates are reported positively, while candidates who espouse traditional views receive more criticism. Such reports and “expert” analysis have great influence over the voting population. Groseclose discovered that 93 percent of reporters in Washington, D.C., voted for Democrats; only 7 percent voted for Republicans. According to Groseclose’s calculation, media bias aids Democratic candidates by about 8 to 10 percentage points in a typical election. For instance, if that media bias didn’t exist, John McCain would have defeated Barack Obama 56 percent to 42 percent, instead of losing 53 to 46. [35]

5. The Film Industry: Vanguard Against Tradition

Hollywood has tremendous influence around the world. Although American movies make up less than 10 percent of the films produced globally, Hollywood movies receive 70 percent of global cinema screenings. There is no denying that Hollywood movies dominate the international movie industry. [36] As an international symbol of American culture, Hollywood has served to broadcast and amplify American values worldwide—but it has become an instrument for exposing all of humanity to distorted, anti-traditional values.

Today it’s hard for most Americans to imagine that families in 1930s and 1940s had no need to worry about the negative influence of movies on children. But the film industry at the time followed strict moral regulations. 

In 1934, with strong backing from churches, the film industry introduced the Code to Govern the Making of Talking, Synchronized and Silent Motion Pictures, also known as the Hays Code. Its first principle was that no picture should be produced that would lower the moral standards of those who see it. The audience should never be made to sympathize with crime, wrongdoing, evil, or sin. The Hays Code principle on sex was to uphold the sanctity of the family and marriage: Motion pictures should not infer that low forms of sexual relationships are acceptable norms. Adultery, while sometimes necessary as plot material, must not be justified, depicted attractively, or treated in an explicit manner. 

Since the 1950s, however, sexual liberation has caused cultural and moral shock. The rise of television in the American household fostered enormous market pressure and rivalry among film producers. Hollywood increasingly ignored the Hays Code and failed to enforce self-discipline. For example, Lolita (1962), adapted from the novel of the same title, depicted the adulterous relationship between a man and his underage stepdaughter. 

Lolita won an Academy Award and a Golden Globe, and though the film received both negative and positive reviews at that time, today Lolita holds a 93 percent approval rating among its 41 reviews on the American film and television review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes. This reflects the sea change in social morality that has occurred in recent times.

The counterculture movements at the end of the 1960s marked the collapse of traditional morality and order in Hollywood productions. Several iconic films depicting themes of rebellion reflect an evil and growing hold on the American film industry. 

As stated repeatedly throughout this book, a key tactic of communism is to cast criminal behavior in a noble or righteous light. Bonnie and Clyde is a 1967 crime film based on the real story of the eponymous Great Depression-era robbers. During the Great Depression, many families became homeless after their houses were foreclosed by banks. The protagonists in the film express righteous anger at this phenomenon, and are depicted as fighting social injustice when they commit bank robbery and murder. 

The film, which features some of Hollywood’s first depictions of graphic violence, suggests an underlying narrative of Robin Hood-style justice for these crimes. The criminal couple were depicted by a handsome man and a beautiful woman, portraying them with an inherent sense of justice. The police, meanwhile, were cast as incompetent stooges rather than protectors of law and order. At the finale, the deaths of Bonnie and Clyde when they fell victim to a police scheme had a profound impact on adolescent audiences. The two were beatified as martyrs, as though they had sacrificed themselves for the sake of some great cause. 

The themes of crime and violence depicted in the film shocked the mainstream of American society, but found great resonance among rebellious students. The actor and actress who starred as Bonnie and Clyde appeared on the cover of Time magazine. The youth started to copy their style of clothing, speech, and contempt for tradition and custom. They even sought to emulate the couples’ manner of demise. [37] One radical leader of a student organization wrote an article comparing Bonnie and Clyde to supposed heroes like Cuban guerrilla leader Che Guevara and Nguyễn Văn Trỗi, a Vietcong terrorist. [38]One radical student organization claimed, “We are not potential Bonnie and Clydes, we are Bonnie and Clydes.” [39]

Aside from beautifying crime, Bonnie and Clyde featured an unprecedented level of violence and sexuality, However, the film still received critical acclaim, being nominated 10 times at the Oscar nominations and winning twice. Hollywood had deviated from its traditional principles. 

The Graduate, released at the end of 1967, reflected the inner anxiety and conflicts of college students in the period. The film depicts a lonely college graduate at the crossroads of life. The traditional values of his father’s generation are presented as dull and hypocritical. Instead of entering mainstream American society, he accepts the advances of an older married woman and also falls in love with her daughter, who discovers the affair. At the wedding ceremony of the daughter and another young man, the protagonist arrives at the church, and he and the young woman elope. The Graduate featured a jumble of adolescent rebellion, uncontrolled libido, incest, and other themes reflecting the confused, anti-traditional milieu of rebellious youth. The film was phenomenally successful, generating high box-office sales immediately and over the following years. With seven Oscar nominations and one win, The Graduate gained recognition throughout Hollywood. 

Films like Bonnie and Clyde and The Graduate kickstarted the New Hollywood era. At the end of 1968, the Hays Code was replaced with the modern film-rating system. That is, films with all kinds of content could be screened as long as they were labeled with a rating. This loosened the moral self-discipline of the entertainment industry considerably and blurred the standards of right and wrong. In this way, entertainers and media staff separated morality from their creations, giving free rein to evil content. 

Degenerate entertainment hooked audiences with cheap, exciting, and readily available stimulation. Meanwhile, producers gave in to their greed as they reeled in prodigious commercial profits. 

Film is a special medium with the power to create compelling atmospheres and realistic personalities, and to bring audiences to the viewpoint of the director. Successful movies can so immerse their audiences in the cinematic world that hardly anything can call them back to reality. They play an enormous role in shaping the feelings and worldview of their audiences, and in the hands of evildoers, in leading people to break with tradition. 

A well-known film producer once said, “Documentaries convert the already converted. Fictional films convert the unconverted.” [40]  In other words, documentaries strengthen the values that viewers already hold, while fictional films use fascinating stories to prime their unwitting audiences with a new set of values. The producer and male lead of Bonnie and Clyde is a supporter of socialism. His 1981 historical drama Reds won him Oscar and Golden Globe awards. At the height of the Cold War, Reds changed the stereotype of a radical communist into an easy-going and friendly person [41]. 

In another of his Oscar-nominated movies, Bulworth, he depicted a socialist presidential candidate. Through his portrayal, audiences were given the suggestion that class, not race, is the central issue of American politics. [42] This movie was such a success that many urged him to run for president of the United States.

Many movies had an immediate impact. As Bonnie and Clyde came to the end during its debut, insults were shouted at the police from the back rows. [43] After the introduction of the rating system, the first R-rated movie, Easy Rider, became an instant hit and contributed to the popularity of drug abuse. The film follows the adventures of two long-haired, cocaine-dealing hippy motorcyclists as they indulge in rock music, hallucinatory drugs, hippy communes, and brothels. Real drugs were used during the film’s production. Their lifestyle of antisocial indulgence free from conventional values became the dream of numerous youth, and turned drugs into a symbol of the counterculture. The director admitted: “The cocaine problem in the United States is really because of me. There was no cocaine before Easy Rider on the street. After Easy Rider, it was everywhere.” [44]

Since the introduction of the movie-rating system, Hollywood began to mass produce movies that cast a positive glow on degenerate behaviors such as sexual promiscuity, violence, illicit drugs, and organized crime. A research study showed that R-rated movies took up to 58 percent of the Hollywood movies produced between 1968 and 2005 [45].

American scholar Victor B. Cline did an analysis of 37 movies that were shown in Salt Lake City in the 1970s. He found that 58 percent of the films presented dishonesty in a heroic light or as justified by the hero because of the circumstances, and that 38 percent of the films presented criminal activity as something that pays off or as a successful and an exciting pastime with no negative consequences. In 59 percent of the films, the heroes killed one or more people. Seventy-two percent of the heroines were presented as sexually promiscuous to some degree. In fact, only one film suggested normal sexual relations between a man and a woman legally married to each other. In only 22 percent of the films were any of the principal figures seen engaged in what might be termed healthy and reasonably satisfying marriages. [46]

A common argument against criticism of violence and sexuality in films is that such things exist in real life and that films only reflect the nature of reality, rather than having any negative impact. But from the figures above, this is demonstrably false. Moreover, numerous movies produced by Hollywood leftists naturally reflect their values and in turn have changed the values of society. According to film critic and former Hollywood screenwriter Michael Medved, the liberal-minded social revolutionaries in Hollywood are molding the values of society by assaulting the legitimacy of the family, promoting sexual perversion, and glorifying ugliness. [47] 

Others argue that the profusion of morally degenerate content in the film industry is merely driven by market forces. But whatever the means, diabolical goals are being achieved to frightening effect. The speed and power with which the film industry has been used to take down public morality are astounding. Some movies lionize beasts or monsters; those that depict man transforming into beasts or even bestiality are approved of and praised by the Hollywood mainstream. This is the real-life reflection of how the devil has brought the world under its rule—mankind has come to embrace monsters.

These anti-tradition movies probe into and reflect on social issues with superficial intricacy, but they are actually excuses to create a complex and vivid environment in which to immerse the audience. A studiously crafted atmosphere allows the audience to think of moral standards as being circumstantial. Ugly deeds that conventional society disapproves of can always in some way be rationalized, given sympathetic treatment, or even made to appear positive. The ultimate message, implanted in the brains of the audience, is that there isn’t a clear divide between right and wrong or good and evil, that traditions are boring and suppressive, and that morality is relative.

6. Television: Corruption in Every Household

Television has become a ubiquitous part of everyday life. Frequent television viewing changes people’s worldviews without their noticing it. Research conducted by the Media Research Center has demonstrated this point. For instance, the more people watch television, the less committed they are to traditional virtues such as honesty, reliability, and fairness, and the more lenient their attitudes toward issues related to sexual morality such as sex outside of marriage, abortion and homosexuality—are likely to be. [48]

Although the percentages of two sets of people—light and heavy TV-viewers who say they believe in God—are almost the same (85 to 88 percent), the more one watches television, the more difficult it is for the person to value religious principles. For example, when asked in a questionnaire to choose between “People should always live by God’s teachings and principles under all circumstances” or “People should combine their personal set of morals and values with God’s moral codes,” those who watch more television tend to choose the latter.

From these figures, it can be generally concluded that television predisposes people to moral relativism. 

Television has been an integral part of daily life since the 1950s. Not only do TV series and movies achieve a similar effect in molding people’s values, but talk shows, situation comedies (sitcoms), and even documentaries also quietly inculcate their audiences with all sorts of distorted ideas through continual repetition every day.

Take talk shows for example. Television studios are especially keen to invite guests whose opinions or behavior contradict traditional values or whose lives are fraught with conflict, or to invite “experts” to discuss some controversial issues of morality. The guests are encouraged to “bravely” disclose the “deep” or “complex” problems in their personal lives. The host, experts or the audience at the scene give different “options” as solutions to the problems. To ensure the popularity of the program, usually no moral judgment is made. In this way, many programs become a venue for displaying corrupt and distorted behaviors and perspectives. People have gradually come to agree that the values they used to uphold do not apply under some special circumstances, which in fact negates the existence of universal principles.

Many primetime television programs are filled with despicable and distasteful content that is hard to watch. Some program hosts, including female hosts, take pride in swearing. Quite a number of programs indoctrinate people with vulgar tastes and anti-culture or anti-tradition content via entertainment, while the audience is in a state of relaxation. As time passes, people do not feel alarmed at all and even come to recognize and appreciate this material, thus eroding their moral thinking. 

Sitcoms are used to normalize deviated values and behaviors that are actually rarely seen in people’s daily lives by airing them repeatedly on television.

Ben Shapiro made an example of a scene from the episode called “The One With the Birth,” which appeared in the popular U.S. sitcom series Friends. Ross’s lesbian ex-wife, Carol, is having his baby. Ross is understandably concerned that his child will be growing up in a lesbian family. While Ross is feeling perturbed, Phoebe says to him: “When I was growing up, you know my dad left, and my mother died, and my stepfather went to jail, so I barely had enough pieces of parents to make one whole one. And here’s this little baby who has like three whole parents who care about it so much that they’re fighting over who gets to love it the most. And it’s not even born yet. It’s just, it’s just the luckiest baby in the whole world.” 

Ross immediately feels relieved and reassured by her perspective. As Shapiro writes, the episode portrays “pregnant lesbians and three-parent households as not only normal, but admirable.” [49]

Modern medicine has discovered that human brains consist of five different types of brainwaves. Two among them are brainwaves found in the waking state of consciousness: alpha (α) waves and beta (β) waves. When people are busy working, their dominant brain waves are β waves. They exhibit an enhanced ability to analyze and tend to use logical thinking. A person having a debate would exhibit predominantly β brainwaves. In other words, people in the state where β waves are dominant are more alert and less gullible. However, when people are relaxed and α waves dominate, their emotions take the lead, and their analytical ability weakens. When people watch television, they are not prepared for serious thinking, but are instead relaxed and impressionable. Under such circumstances, people tend to be subliminally persuaded by the themes and views represented in the television program.

Research shows that close to two-thirds of media programming, including children’s programs, contain scenes of violence. Misleading sexual content is also all over TV programs and movies. Following sex education classes in schools, young people list the media as the second-most important source for learning about sexual activity. 

A copious amount of research shows clearly that violent content in the media desensitizes young people to violence and increases their chance of committing violent acts later in life. The media has had a very bad influence on youth, increasing the tendency for violence, underage sexual activity, and teen pregnancy. Girls who often see programs containing depictions of sexual activity are twice as likely to be pregnant within three years compared to girls who rarely watch such programs. Media programs also increase the risk of sexual assault and engagement in dangerous behavior. [50]

A deluge of pornographic and sexual content directly attacks social values and tradition. As one scholar pointed out: “The media are so compelling and so filled with sex, it’s hard for any kid, even a critic to resist. … I think of the media as our true sex educators.” [51] Due to media influence, sex outside of marriage, adultery, and other behaviors have been taken for granted as parts of a normal lifestyle—as long as all parties are willing, there is nothing to it.

In the book Primetime Propaganda, Shapiro summarized nearly a hundred influential American TV series. He found that as time progressed, these programs run the range of accepting liberalism, promoting atheism and belittling faith, promoting sex and violence, promoting feminism, accepting homosexuality and transsexuals, rejecting morality, rejecting the traditional relationships between husband and wife or parent and child, strongly promoting leftist viewpoints, and establishing ruthless antiheroes devoid of sympathy as the protagonists. Their evolution is a process of continuous decay in moral values. This type of anti-traditional lifestyle has had major influence over the mindset of the general public, in particular young people. [52]

Many so-called music television shows unreservedly promote softcore porn and even perverse sexual behavior among young audiences. [53] Since the film-rating system was implemented, many pornographic films can be sold as long as they are labeled with an “X” rating. As technology developed, these indecent programs went from underground to general consumption, and could easily be obtained at movie-rental stores, through paid TV channels, and in hotels.

Television programs begin polluting people at very young ages. Cartoons feature ugly characters or large amounts of violence. Other children’s programs are loaded with hidden themes of progressivism and liberalism, such as teaching homosexuality under the name of “cultural diversity.” They use phrases like “There’s only one person in this whole world like you” to foster unearned self-esteem and the concept of accepting all people regardless of their immoral behaviors. [54]

Certainly, few Hollywood producers had any sort of formal agenda to instill their audiences with corrupt ideologies. But when the program producers themselves agree with the concepts of progressivism and liberalism, then these corrupt ideologies will inevitably end up in the programs. The real plan is diabolical, and media workers who stray too far from the divine become the evil’s pawns.

7. The Media: A Key Battleground in a Total War

The communist philosophy of struggle spares no means and respects no moral bottom line in order to achieve its political objectives. In the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, candidate Donald Trump opposed “political correctness” and declared his advocacy of measures to shift America from the far-left to the right: a return to traditional values, rule of law, tax cuts to revitalize the economy, a renewal of people’s reverence and humility before God, and so on. His outspokenness threw liberals into a panic. Armed with the mainstream media, they lashed out with an all-out assault against Trump. 

During the presidential campaign, the left-wing media used various methods to willfully demonize and denigrate Trump while ostracizing his supporters, who were described as racists, sexists, anti-immigrant xenophobes, and uneducated whites. That is, the media tried to influence the results of the election by manipulating public opinion. Apart from a small number of media outlets, almost 95 percent of the media repeatedly predicted that Trump would definitely lose. Against all expectations, Trump defeated his rival and was elected 45th president of the United States. 

Under normal circumstances, no matter how fierce the campaign trail may be, the different parties and groups should return to normal operation after the election is over. More importantly, the media should uphold the principle of fairness, put national interests first, and maintain the principle of media neutrality. However, after the 2016 presidential election in the United States, we have seen that the media has continued its campaign-trail frenzy even at the risk of its public image. 

Most media outlets deliberately ignored the achievements of the Trump administration, such as the stock market soaring to record levels, American diplomatic achievements, and the near-total eradication of the ISIS. With the unemployment rate hitting an eighteen-year low in the United States, the American economy is enjoying a revival. Furthermore, the media is doing everything possible to hamstring the Trump administration by making groundless accusations. For example, the media stirred up a conspiracy theory of collusion between Trump and Russia, but a special investigation has not found any evidence to support this. A Congressional report has stated unambiguously that there was no collusion between Trump and Russia. [55]

In order to attack Trump, the media also generated a lot of fake news. In December 2017, a TV news giant had to suspend two senior journalists for four weeks without pay and redact their work because they had fabricated fake reports that Trump had ordered Michael Flynn to make contact with Russia. [56] Finally, the two reporters were forced to leave the TV station. This particular team had previously made outstanding accomplishments, winning four Peabody Awards and 17 Emmy Awards, but fake news brought them shame and disgrace. 

When President Trump condemned the infamous MS-13 gang, especially those members who had entered the United States as illegal immigrants, he said, “They’re not people. These are animals, and we have to be very, very tough.” However, the major media in America immediately took it out of context, claiming that Trump said that illegal immigrants were animals.

In June 2018, a photo of a crying Honduran girl was widely circulated in the media and on the internet. This little girl and her mother were stopped by border patrol when trying to sneak into the United States. The media claimed that the girl was forcibly separated from her mother and used this opportunity to criticize Trump’s border policies and zero-tolerance stance toward illegal immigration. Later, Timemagazine combined the photo of the little girl with a photo of Trump on the magazine cover, adding the caption “Welcome to America” to ridicule Trump. However, the girl’s father later told the media that border officials had not separated her from her mother. [57]

According to studies conducted by the Media Research Center, Trump was the main focus of the evening news broadcast by the three main U.S. media networks over the last two years, taking up one-third of the total airtime used by the evening news. In 2017, 90 percent of coverage given to Trump was negative, while positive coverage was only 10 percent. In 2018, negative coverage reached 91 percent. The report concluded: “Without question, no President has ever been on the receiving end of such hostile coverage, for such a sustained period of time, as has Trump. …” [58] 

However, the American public is becoming more aware of fake news. From a poll conducted by Monmouth University in April 2018, the percentage of Americans who felt that “the major media outlets were reporting fake news” increased from 63 percent in the past year to 77 percent. [59] In 2016, a Gallup poll found that America’s trust in the media had sunk to a new low, with only 32 percent of people having a great deal or a fair amount of trust in the media, down 8 percentage points from the previous year. [60] Unsurprisingly, the owner of a large media company lamented that “fake news is the cancer of our times.” [61]

Judging from the results of the U.S. election, half of Americans support Trump, but the attitude taken by the media is literally one-sided. Under these abnormal circumstances, Trump is attacked and demonized because he strongly advocates the restoration of tradition, and his ideals cannot coexist with the anti-traditional ideology of the Left. If the media’s attacks on Trump are able to cause the public to lose their confidence in him, this would achieve their underlying objective—to prevent society from returning to tradition.

More worrying, however, is that many media outlets have become catalysts for magnifying radical rhetoric, provoking animosity and hatred, and polarizing the population, thereby further widening the cracks in society. Basic ethics have been thrown out, and consequences are ignored to the point that destroying oneself so as to bring about the demise of an opponent has become acceptable. The country has been pushed to a state of extreme chaos and danger. 

Conclusion: Bringing Back Responsibility in the Media

If we say that the specter of communism had only partially infiltrated and controlled various areas in the world over the past century, by today the specter is already ruling our world—all aspects of the human world have already been subject to corruption. The immense influence of the media over humanity has been used effectively to brainwash, deceive, and corrupt human morality, causing people to unconsciously deviate from tradition. 

In Western countries, many liberal media establishments have become tools for concealing the truth and deceiving people. Many have forsaken basic professional ethics and instead resort to all sorts of unscrupulous attacks, abuse, and slander, regardless of the impact to their reputation or to society.

The specter has been successful because it has exploited human failings: the pursuit of fame and gain, ignorance, laziness, selfishness, misapplied sympathy, competitiveness, and the like. Some journalists self-righteously rebel against traditional values under a facade of knowing the truth. Some conform to the already morally debased “public demand” in order to get views. Some conform to the lowered standards for the sake of their careers. Some fabricate fake news out of jealousy and hostility. Some believe fake news because of their ignorance and laziness. Some exploit the kindness and sympathy of others in advocating social justice and thus tilt the entire society toward the left, resorting to unscrupulous tactics to achieve their political and economic goals. 

The mission of the media is a lofty one. It is meant to be the lifeline by which people obtain their information about public events, and it is also an important force in maintaining the healthy development of society. Objectivity and impartiality are the basic ethical requirements of the media and are key to the trust people place in it. But in the media today, chaos reigns, severely affecting the confidence people have in it. Reclaiming the mission of the media and re-establishing the glory of the news profession is the noble responsibility of people employed in this field. 

Restoring the media’s mission means that the media needs to pursue truth. The media’s coverage of the truth must be comprehensive and come from a place of sincerity. When reporting social phenomena, many media outlets present partial realities that are often misleading and can do more harm than outright lies.

Part of the media’s mission is to promote compassion. The compassion of the media is neither an abuse of sympathy, nor political correctness. Its goal must be the long-term well-being of mankind. The way out for mankind is not to obtain short-term economic benefit, not to fall for a fabricated communist utopia, but to follow the traditional path set forth by the divine, to raise moral standards, and to return to one’s original place, the true and wonderful origin of life itself. 

The media is good if it can help society value and uphold morality, as good and evil are both present in human society. It is the responsibility of the media to spread truth, extoll virtue, and to expose and restrain evil. 

In returning to its mission, the media must pay more attention to the major events that affect the future of mankind. The last century was witness to a great confrontation between the free world and the communist camp. While it appeared to be an ideological confrontation, it was in fact a life-and-death struggle between righteousness and evil, for communism is ruining the morals that hold together the civilizations of mankind. Yet following the collapse of the communist regimes in Eastern Europe, its ghost lingers on, undefeated. 

In China, a country of ancient culture, the Communist Party has since 1999 persecuted the spiritual practice of Falun Gong, which upholds the universal principles of truthfulness, compassion, and tolerance. This persecution has affected millions of people across the expanse of the world’s most populous country; it has lasted nearly two decades and is being perpetrated to a degree of brutality that is hard to match. It is the largest persecution of faith in contemporary history. 

The persecution of Falun Gong is a persecution against the core values of human civilization and a monstrous assault on the freedom of belief. However, its coverage by the Western media has been disproportionately weak when placed beside the magnitude and severity of the actual events taking place. Most of the mainstream media outlets have been influenced by the Chinese Communist Party’s political clout, and have exercised self-censorship or remained silent on this matter of grave concern. Some have even been complicit in helping the CCP spread its deceit. 

At the same time, a trend has emerged that opposes communism and advocates a return to tradition. In China, more than 300 million people have withdrawn from the CCP and its affiliated organizations in the “Tuidang” (Quit the Party) movement. Yet such a major phenomenon, which holds great significance for the future of China and the world, is rarely mentioned in the Western media.

Today, as the world undergoes great changes, truth and traditional values are more important than ever. The world needs media that can distinguish between right and wrong, conduct good deeds, and maintain public morality. Transcending the interests of individuals, companies, and political parties to present the real world before the people is the duty of every media professional. 

Today, when facing the moral decline in the media profession, it is imperative that readers and audiences make a conscious distinction between right and wrong, and scrutinize rationally the information produced by the media. People must judge issues in line with the moral tradition, regard social phenomena through the lens of universal values, and in doing so, push the media to fulfill its historic mission. This is also the key for mankind to stave off the influence of the communist specter and find the path to a better future.

Read Chapter Fourteen here.


[1] Thomas Jefferson, The Works, vol. 5 (Correspondence 1786–1789), quoted in Online Library of Liberty, accessed on October 2, 2018,

[2] Joseph Pulitzer, “Why Schools of Journalism?” The New Republic, October 9, 1930, 283. 

[3] “Rules of the Communist League,” The Communist League, Marx/Engels Internet Archive, accessed October 4, 2018,

[4] Lin Biao, “Speech at the Enlarged Meeting of the Politburo,” Collection of Documents From China’s Cultural Revolution (May 18, 1966). [In Chinese]

[5] Hu Qiaomu, “Newspapers Are Textbooks,” The Collected Works of Hu Qiaomu, Vol. III, (Beijing, People’s Daily Publishing House, 1994), p. 303. [In Chinese]

[6] Han Mei, “UK Declassifies Files Saying 10,000 Were Killed at Tiananmen; Bodies Stored Underground in Heaps,” Sound of Hope Radio, December 20, 2017, [In Chinese]

[7] “Self-Immolation Hoax on Tiananmen Square,”,

[8] “General Overview: Intensify the Fostering of a Mechanism for Innovation, Construct a High-Grade Propaganda Cultural Team,” Xinhua News Network, September 28, 2011, [In Chinese]

[9] Matthew Vadum, “Journalistic Treachery,” Canada Free Press, July 1, 2015,

[10] Marco Carynnyk, “The New York Times and the Great Famine,” The Ukrainian Weekly No. 37, Vol. LI (September 11, 1983), accessed October 5, 2018,

[11] Robert Conquest, The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-famine (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986), 319.

[12] Quoted in Arnold Beichman, “Pulitzer-Winning Lies,” The Weekly Standard, June 12, 2003,   

[13] Ronald Radosh, Red Star over Hollywood: The Film Colony’s Long Romance with the Left (San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2005), 80.

[14] Ibid., 105.

[15] Edgar Snow, Random Notes on Red China, Translation by Xi Boquan, (Nanjing: Jiangsu People’s Publishing House, 1991), p. 1.

[16] Ruth Price, The Lives of Agnes Smedley (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 5–9.

[17] Lymari Morales, “Majority in U.S. Continues to Distrust the Media, Perceive Bias,” Gallup, September 22, 2011,

[18] Tim Groseclose, Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2011).

[19] Ibid., “The Second-Order Problem of an Unbalanced Newsroom,” Chapter 10. 

[20] Lydia Saad, “U.S. Conservatives Outnumber Liberals by Narrowing Margin,” Gallup, January 3, 2017,

[21] Chris Cillizza, “Just 7 Percent of Journalists Are Republicans. That’s Far Fewer than Even a Decade Ago,” The Washington Post, May 6, 2014,

[22] “2016 General Election Editorial Endorsements by Major Newspapers,” The American Presidency Project,

[23] Ben Shapiro, “The Clique: How Television Stays Liberal,” Primetime Propaganda: The True Hollywood Story of How the Left Took Over Your TV (New York: Broadside Books, 2012).

[24] Ibid., “Making the Right Cry: How Television Drama Glorifies Liberalism.”

[25] Ibid., “The Clique: How Television Stays Liberal” 

[26] Quoted in Jim A. Kuypers, Partisan Journalism: A History of Media Bias in the United States (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2014), 8.

[27] S. Robert Lichter, et. al., The Media Elite (Castle Rock, Colo.: Adler Publishing Co., 1986).

[28] Kuypers, Partisan Journalism, 2.

[29] Jim A. Kuypers, Press Bias and Politics: How the Media Frame Controversial Issues (Santa Barbara, Calif.: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2002).

[30] Quoted in Kuypers, Partisan Journalism, 4.

[31] Newt Gingrich, “China’s Embrace of Marxism Is Bad News for Its People,” Fox News, June 2, 2018,

[32] Tim Groseclose and Jeff Milyo, “A Measure of Media Bias,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 120, No. 4 (November, 2005), 1205.

[33] Quoted in Maxwell E. McCombs and Donald L. Shaw, “The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media,” The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 2 (Summer, 1972), 177.

[34] Patricia Cohen, “Liberal Views Dominate Footlights,” New York Times, October 14, 2008,

[35] Groseclose, Preface, Left Turn.

[36] Jonathan Derek Silver, Hollywood’s Dominance of the Movie Industry: How Did It Arise and How Has It Been Maintained?, doctoral dissertation, the Queensland University of Technology (2007), Section 1.4,

[37] John Belton, American Cinema / American Culture, 2nd Edition (McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, 2005), Chapter 14.

[38] Todd Gitlin, The Whole World Is Watching: Mass Media in the Making and Unmaking of the New Left (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003), 199.

[39] Steven J. Ross, Hollywood Left and Right: How Movie Stars Shaped American Politics (Oxford University Press, 2011), 322.

[40] Ibid., 338.

[41] Ibid., 338–39.

[42] Ibid., 352.

[43] Gitlin, The Whole World Is Watching, 199.

[44] Peter Biskind, Easy Riders, Raging Bulls: How the Sex-Drugs-and-Rock ‘N’ Roll Generation Saved Hollywood (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1999), 74.

[45] Ashley Haygood, The Climb of Controversial Film Content, master’s thesis in Communication at Liberty University, May 2007, accessed October 5, 2018,

[46] Victor B. Cline, “How the Mass Media Effects Our Values and Behavior,” Issues in Religion and Psychotherapy, Vol 1, No. 1. (October 1, 1975),

[47] Michael Medved, Hollywood vs. America (New York: Harper Perennial, 1993), 3.

[48] “The Media Assault on American Values,” Media Research Center, accessed October 2, 2018,

[49] Shapiro, “Prologue: How Conservatives Lost the Television War,” Primetime Propaganda.

[50] “The Impact of Media Use and Screen Time on Children, Adolescents, and Families,” American College of Pediatricians, November 2016,

[51] Congressional Record, Volume 141, Number 146 (September 19, 1995),

[52] Shapiro, Primetime Propaganda.

[53] Libby Copeland, “MTV’s Provocative ‘Undressed’: Is It Rotten to the (Soft) Core?,” Los Angeles Times, February 12, 2001,

[54] Shapiro, “Robbing the Cradle: How Television Liberals Recruit Kids,” Primetime Propaganda.

[55] Erin Kelly, “Speaker Paul Ryan: ‘No Evidence of Collusion’ between Trump Campaign and Russians,” USA Today, June 7, 2018,

[56] Julia Manchester, “Trump: ABC Should Have Fired ‘Fraudster’ Brian Ross,” The Hill, December 8, 2017,

[57] Samantha Schmidt and Kristine Phillips, “The Crying Honduran Girl on the Cover of Time Was Not Separated from Her Mother,” Washington Post, June 22, 2018,

[58] Rich Noyes, “TV vs. Trump in 2018: Lots of Russia, and 91% Negative Coverage (Again!),” NewsBusters, March 6, 2018,

[59] “‘Fake News’ Threat to Media; Editorial Decisions, Outside Actors at Fault,” Monmouth University Polling Institute, April 2, 2018,

[60] Art Swift, “Americans’ Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low, Politics,” Gallup, September 14, 2016,  

[61] Polina Marinova, “New L.A. Times Owner Tells Readers: ‘Fake News Is the Cancer of Our Times,’” Fortune, June 18, 2018, http://fortune/2018/06/18/los-angeles-times-owner/

Help end Communism world wide. Sign the End CCP Petition at