Thank God Trump Brokered a Ceasefire. That’s the Last Thing Mark Levin Wanted.

How TV News Pushes America Towards War

1. The Main Idea in a Nutshell

   • Two former news anchors argue that major TV news networks use a predictable and profitable playbook to push a pro-war agenda and silence anyone who questions it.

2. The Key Takeaways

   • The War Playbook: News networks like Fox, CNN, and MSNBC use a set strategy to get the public to support wars, using patriotic language, bringing on mostly pro-war guests, and making it seem like war is the only option.
   • Silencing Questions: Journalists and guests who ask tough questions or disagree with the pro-war message are often punished, labeled as unpatriotic, or even lose their jobs.
   • It's About Money: The speakers claim that pushing for war is very profitable for news networks and for the "military industrial complex" (the companies that build weapons).
   • History Repeats Itself: They compare current media coverage to the build-up to the Iraq War in 2002, where they say the media helped sell a war based on false information.
   • Fun Facts & Key Numbers: In the run-up to the Iraq War, one study found that out of 393 guests on nightly newscasts, only 3 were anti-war. Another study found 67% of cable news guests were pro-war, and MSNBC even had a policy of booking two pro-war voices for every one anti-war voice.

3. Important Quotes, Explained

• Quote: "> It's almost like they went to their shelf and they grabbed their book, their manual, they got it off, they dusted it off. Like, what did we do back in 2002?"

  • What it Means: Clayton Morris is saying that when a new conflict starts, the news networks use the exact same strategy they used in the past to convince people to support a war. It's like they're following a pre-written instruction manual.
  • Why it Matters: This suggests the pro-war coverage isn't a coincidence or just "reporting the news." It's a deliberate, repeatable process designed to shape public opinion and make war seem necessary.

• Quote: "> It's crazy to think that country's become so irrational, partly because of training from cable news... That knowing something is considered the same as endorsing it."

  • What it Means: Tucker Carlson is arguing that cable news has trained people to think that if you try to understand an enemy's point of view, it means you agree with them. For example, trying to understand why a terrorist group did something could get you labeled as a supporter of terrorism.
  • Why it Matters: This shows how the media can discourage curiosity and critical thinking. It creates a black-and-white world where you're either "with us" or "against us," and there's no room for understanding complex situations.

4. The Main Arguments (The "Why")

   • In a simple, numbered list, here are the main reasons the speakers give to support their idea:
     1. First, they argue that news networks intentionally create a pro-war atmosphere because it's profitable and serves the interests of powerful groups, like the companies that make money from war.
     2. Next, they provide evidence from their own careers at Fox News and CNN, sharing stories about how they were discouraged from asking tough questions and how others who spoke out against war were punished.
     3. Finally, they point out that this media strategy works by controlling the information people get. This leads to a public that is misinformed and easily manipulated, especially older viewers who might watch cable news all day.

5. Questions to Make You Think

   • Q: Did the speakers ever get explicitly told by their bosses what to say?

   • A: Mostly no. They say no one ever directly told them, "You have to say this." Instead, the control was more subtle. The topics for the day were already chosen for them, the guests were pre-selected, and the questions were often guided. They knew there were unwritten "red lines" you just didn't cross, like seriously questioning foreign policy.

   • Q: What is the "military industrial complex" they keep mentioning?

   • A: The text explains this as the powerful network of military leaders and the large corporations (like Boeing or Northrup Grumman) that make weapons and other military equipment. They argue these companies have a financial interest in the country being at war and have a lot of influence over politicians.

   • Q: Why do they think older people are often more supportive of war?

   • A: They suggest it's because older people are the main audience for cable news. They often leave the TV on all day, absorbing the constant pro-war message without hearing other perspectives. This continuous exposure to one-sided information shapes their worldview.

6. Why This Matters & What's Next

   • Why You Should Care: This conversation is a reminder to always think critically about the news you see, especially on TV. It shows how powerful media can be in shaping opinions on huge issues like war, which affects everyone. It's important to ask questions and look for different sources of information instead of just accepting what one channel tells you.
   • Learn More: For a movie that shows how the media and government can manipulate the public to go to war, check out the film Wag the Dog (1997). It's a dark comedy, but it makes a very similar point about "manufacturing consent" for a fake war to distract from a political scandal.