Part 1

Pulitzer-Prize winning Journalist Alex S. Jones – not to be confused with that other Alex Jones – warns readers in his seminal book, ‘Losing the News,’ of the dangers which news organizations face in regards to accountability and public trust. He worries that the core values of journalism are under serious threat and that we must be vigilant in upholding the highest journalistic standards. Jones advocates for the importance of ‘News Literacy.’

He argues that students “must be able to determine bias or the agenda of the writer.” True enough, but sadly Jones falls into the same trap as other ‘respectable’ journalists in his attempt to demonstrate the importance of filtering information and the ability to determine fact from fiction. He succeeds only in making himself look like an idiot.

A quote from page 50 is instructive:

“Oliver Stone’s JFK was a version of the assassination of President John Kennedy that strongly suggests a conspiracy among the army, C.I.A., Vice President Lyndon Johnson and others followed by a cover-up abetted by Chief Justice Earl Warren – all with no evidence to support the charges…” (Emphasis added).

This excerpt reveals a classic example of Confirmation Bias: the unconscious act of referencing only those perspectives which support one’s pre-existing views. ‘Confirmation Bias’ is the tendency everyone has to interpret all evidence as a confirmation of their own beliefs.

In so doing, Jones laughably contradicts his own argument.

This kind of media bias represents an insidious trend among investigative journalists: self-censorship. A truly progressive, un-biased reporter should take the time to investigate highly controversial subjects himself rather than simply parroting the sanitized, mainstream version of events demanded by his peers.

The declarative statement that Stone has “no evidence to support the charges” of a conspiracy to kill JFK is blatantly and provably false. It’s unclear if Jones is purposely trying to mislead his audience or whether he is simply ignorant of the fact that there are reams and reams of official government documents released through the Freedom of Information Act which contradict the now totally discredited version of events put forth by the Warren Commission. This view is shared by a wide range of scholars and researchers – not to mention the US House Select Committee on Assassinations at their 1976 hearings.

I may not be some hifalutin reporter for the New York Times, but it only takes about three seconds of research to determine that there is indeed plenty of compelling evidence to support a conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination  – and in pretty much the manner in which Oliver Stone portrays it in JFK.

This seriously damages Jones’ credibility as a reliable source.

The instant anyone utters those horrible words “conspiracy Theory,” people automatically assume you’re some kind of lunatic. Confirmation Bias is a knee-jerk reaction, which no amount of evidence can change. Jones’ misleading representation of the facts is a perfect example of this phenomenon.

He’s not alone, however: many supposedly intelligent people rush to make judgments based on their emotions, even though they sincerely believe they are thinking critically. Few investigative journalists actually do the research on any of those “wacky” conspiracy theories for themselves, however. At least, not if they want to keep their jobs…

What’s worse, Jones then goes on to praise the accuracy of a completely fictional Hollywood movie, Steven Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan as an example of historical accuracy. When Jones declares that the first twenty minutes of this totally fictional account of D-Day was “the most frightening 20 minutes I’ve ever experienced in a movie,” it is quite illuminating. He admits that a make-believe Hollywood version of World War II was so realistic he advised his combat veteran father not to see the film because it came “too close to the truth.”

Well, there you have it. Confirmation Bias in all its glory: Jones considers the fictional movie Saving Private Ryan to be an example of “truthful entertainment” while pointing out that the “vast majority of historians” consider JFK to be “rubbish.”

Of course, he fails to mention any of these historians by name…

And excuse me but I happen to believe that the public execution of an American President and the subsequent decades-long cover-up by an illegitimate government is far more terrifying than some lousy piece of Hollywood pabulum. Sorry.