Turns out he also has a blog. And one post (December 30, 2014) is a transcript of a presentation he made to PCG's writers evaluating media outlets on April 4, 2013. It is entitled "Evaluating and Selecting News Sources, Especially in the Internet Age."
Let's take a look at what Jacques has to say about assessing media outlets.
In evaluating news sources, the “follow the money rule” is always helpful. Where do the funds to produce the news for that source come from? Knowing that can tell you a lot about the perspective which underlies the news stories. Will a media outlet owned by Disney (such as ABC) do an objective story about the Disney company or its products? Maybe, but it’s unlikely. ABC generally avoids all real criticism of Disney and its products because Disney funds them.So if one follows the money what will be the result of such an inquiry according to Jacques?
The very choice of what to focus on in news stories, and which stories to stay quiet about, reveals the bias of the producer. … Think about the American Mainstream media’s coverage of the “Fast and Furious” story. The Solyndra story. The Benghazi embarrassment. The U.S.’s mainstream liberal media very often will systematically suppress news stories that could injure the ruling administration. The reason why goes back to their funding.The choice of topics also reveals that Jacques happens to lean to the right in regards to politics. It is alleged that these media outlets suppressed by the mainstream media. The possibility that his understanding of these topics may be wrong is not addressed.
Jacques mentions conspiracy theorists.
The main reason I mention this is because among our readers, we have some conspiracy theorists. A mind that is on the far right can be every bit as delusional as one on the far left. (I once encountered a source saying the moon now orbiting earth is not the original moon, but a replacement moon that NASA built after they accidentally blew up the original moon). It’s a lot of wasted effort, a lot of embarrassing deception, and it can get really sad, once a person delves into these extremes of paranoia.Jacques mentions one website they sometimes use.
A poll by Public Policy Polling found that 28% of American voters believe that a secretive power elite with a globalist agenda is conspiring to eventually rule the world through an authoritarian world government. 6% think Osama bin Laden is still alive. 21% believe a UFO crashed at Roswell in 1947. 7% of voters think the moon landing was fake.
So, we just have to remember that a fair number of people gravitate to bizarre theories, and when we quote from or link to a certain website, it will be viewed by some readers as an endorsement by our publication of that website. By our actions, we are communicating to some readers that we trust this source and think that they report the news in a relatively honest way.
But for some stories, a multitude of sources will not be available… That brings me to….
German-Foreign-Policy,com is an incredibly useful site. It’s so mysterious—enshrouded in a cloak of secrecy. It is inherently leftist and critical of Germany’s rise… Its mission is to alert the world to the “hegemonial tactics and strategies of the united Germany.”
It really fulfills this mission.
It’s interesting that some of the sites we use are so left-leaning, yet they have a mission similar to the Trumpet…. I take solace in knowing that the Trumpet doesn’t have loyalty to any given side. We know that we are an apolitical or a metapolitical publication. But there’s something also potentially dangerous about groping for whatever meets what we are looking for.We are an apolitical publication, Jacques says. Does the rest of this post align with this claim?
Jacques discusses ZeroHedge. He seems suspicious of its economic views and condemns it by saying they an anti-Israel bias.
ZeroHedge has a range of economic, market, banking, and political news and opinions. It often publishes very good charts and graphs. It publishes items from multiple sources concerning US, UK, Europe, China, and other areas. Some pieces are too technical for general use, but many of them are very clear and valuable.Jacques also discusses WorldNetDaily.
We must approach it with caution, though, because of its robust enthusiasm for the Austrian school of economic thought, and for its anti-Israel bias.
World Net Daily
WND: Liberals call it “Conspiracy theorist central,” and usually that’s a fair assessment. We should not use this site in normal circumstances.
World Net Daily sometimes gets mired in verbosity concerning marginal topics that cannot be ‘proven’ to the satisfaction of mainstream readers. (Example: Mr. Obama’s birth records).
Nevertheless, it can be a good starting point, but I don’t think it is wise for us to link to WND or to quote from them because of the conspiratorial nature of the analysis.One wonders why PCG's writers do not share their concerns about WorldNetDaily with their readers. They have never criticized WorldNetDaily on their recruitment website, thetrumpet.com, either before or after this presentation.
Despite Jacques' warning to avoid quoting this media outlet PCG's writers still cited WorldNetDaily articles in November 2013 and January 2014. These articles were published after Jacques' presentation on April 4, 2013.
So far this year, nine generals and flag officers have been terminated by the Obama administration. World Net Daily calls this an “extraordinary number.” The site reports that over the past five years, close to 200 high-ranking officers have been fired—some under very suspicious circumstances. (Robert Morley, Is President Obama Purging the Military of Dissenters?, November 6, 2013.)
Since then, President Obama has terminated close to 200 high-ranking military officers. This year alone, nine generals and flag officers have been fired or have been pressured to resign. World Net Daily calls this purge of top military brass an “extraordinary number.” This amounts to a major eradication of the leadership of the U.S. military. (Worldwatch, January 2014.)For more information about PCG's reliance on WorldNetDaily see PCG's Reliance on WorldNetDaily.
Jacques mentions The Daily Telegraph and states that Gerald Flurry views it as one of his favorite publications.
The Telegraph is among the finest sources you’ll find for hard news and views from and about the UK, Europe, Middle East and the world. They, like every site, have their own philosophy and editorial viewpoints.Jacques mentions Fox News. He warns that citing them will turn off a lot of people. To lessen this effect he encourages PCG's writers to cite it with another source.
But it is a solid and valuable source. Our editor in chief [Gerald Flurry] has singled the Telegraph out as one of his favorite publications to learn news from.
Fox News is less “conservative” than it is “republican.” There is a great stigma associated with it among many people. Many who consider themselves moderate or liberal get instantly bristled by it. Beware of the way people recoil away when if we cite it. We should almost always try to balance it out with another source. If we quote it alone, people will assume an ideological slant.In other words PCG's leaders are afraid to be too closely linked with Fox News knowing that many will ignore their recruitment writings if they detect that PCG likes Fox News. PCG's writers are trying to not turn away readers who may happen to not like Fox News. Hence this proposal to use that media outlet sparingly or cite them with another source.
Jacques also seemed to be afraid that Fox News is filled with Catholics.
Also, Fox News is made up of about 2/3 Catholic correspondents and producers, although those are American Catholics, (which are sort of disowned by the hardline European ilk of Roman Catholics). But, if we “follow the money,” we still have to be aware of the overarching, pro-Vatican slant.PCG teaches that the Roman Catholic Church is the Whore of Revelation 17 and is fated to help create a European superstate that will soon destroy the United States.
Jacques mentions the New York Times. He says it is filled with "leftist bilge" and some of their articles are "prone to liberal distortion".
Once you filter out the leftist bilge, and just look at the journalistic quality, the NYT is an exceptional news source. The have a whole cast of Pulitzer prize-winning journalists, and the writing is just phenomenal.One moment he says "the Trumpet doesn’t have loyalty to any given side" and is an "apolitical" publication. Next he condemns the New York Times' "leftist bilge" and "liberal distortion". He does this because he leans far to the right. And so does PCG's 1% in general. This is why it is so important to point out that PCG is right wing. They seem to think just because they do not vote and sometimes quote left wing sources that they are somehow neutral. They are not. They are right wing. Far to the right.
If a NYT article is on a subject prone to liberal distortion, such as National Health Care, Gun Control, Abortion, Homosexual “Marriage, then it is generally not a good source to use.
But, if it’s about something like the Syrian crises, where bipartisanship doesn’t really factor in, it’s great. The NYT is a lot like NPR. (National Public Radio)… It has a blatant Leftist agenda, but really clear and sound analysis when it comes to subjects that are not prone to political distortion.
It is particularly fascinating that he should talk like this in a lecture delivered to PCG's writers. It indicates that they actually do not notice how right wing they are.
I do not condemn PCG for being right wing. But it is important to note that they are right wing. Especially since sometimes they talk as though they were neutral, even calling themselves an apolitical publication as seen above, despite the many right wing positions they tend to take.
This is a fascinating presentation as it gives a small glimpse into how those at the center of PCG's recruitment publications assess media outlets.