In this blog I will demonstrate how the term ‘conspiracy theory’ has been misused by the media. In particular, I will focus on the so-called ‘alternative media’ and the many ways they marginalize and isolate reasonable suspicions about the political economy which have the potential to de-legitimize the prevailing social order.

The archetypical example of this cohesive, targeted strategy evolved from the need for the plutocrats to quell public doubts about the findings of the Warren Commission and the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963.

Many valid questions regarding high crimes potentially committed by the state have been suppressed and marginalized simply by applying the term ‘conspiracy theory’ to them since that time. Up through the end of the Cold War, anti-communism was used effectively as a way to subdue any meaningful debate regarding state crimes against democracy committed by the US government. America’s rulers have committed all manner of global atrocities in the pursuit of empire, and they have subverted democracy at home through social engineering and mass manipulation of our culture.

The pursuit of enormous wealth and global domination has given the plutocrats virtually limitless resources with which to dominate society. By setting the agenda and suppressing conflicting voices, the corporate-run media can easily control normative debate. As professor Lance DeHaven-Smith points out in Conspiracy Theory in America, The pejorative term ‘conspiracy theory’ originated with a secret CIA memo which was covertly circulated among influential politicians and media elites in response to critics of the Warren Commission following the report’s release in 1964. The purpose was to take the focus away from the many valid questions raised by the report by placing it back onto the accuser and labeling them a ‘conspiracy nut.’ This is a perfect example of how effective propaganda works.

I assumed it would be difficult to find scholarly articles on the subject of conspiracy theories. In fact, the opposite is true. There is an over-abundance of academic literature available on this topic, although most of it was resoundingly negative. I expected most of the research would attempt to discredit the idea of conspiracies in general. Several sources – Sunstein and Vermeule, for instance – characterized conspiracy beliefs as false, harmful, or even dangerous to democratic societies. There was plenty of literature which strongly reinforced  certain aspects of rational conspiracy beliefs in the public’s mind.

Dr. DeHaven-Smith, Professor of Public Administration and Policy at Florida State University, argues that conspiracy theories – far from being merely the stuff of outlier fantasy – have played a major role in the formation of U.S. history. He insists the Founding Fathers developed a kind of proto-conspiracy theory as a means to justify the Revolutionary War. The Declaration of Independence cites the past abuses of King George as “proof he was plotting to subject the colonies to ‘an absolute tyranny.'”

Modern-day liberal democracies can reduce their vulnerability to state political criminality by identifying vulnerabilities proactively and instituting policies for detecting and preventing State Crimes against Democracy, or SCADs.

Mainstream journalism – including so-called ‘alternative media’ – tends to overlook the possibility of major political criminality in America. There are many reasons for this, mostly by design. DeHaven-Smith advocates a policy to detect SCADs using social and political theory to understand when, why, how, and by whom such crimes are likely to be committed. Indeed, DeHaven-Smith demonstrates that in the aftermath of the JFK assassination the phrase “conspiracy theory” first entered the American vocabulary: a phenomenon associated with the government’s efforts to discredit skeptics of the highly controversial Warren Commission findings. DeHaven-Smith ultimately suggests that journalists should apply the same forensic protocols to elite crimes as they do to ordinary criminal misconduct. SCADs are actions or inactions by government insiders, intended to manipulate democratic processes and undermine popular sovereignty. SCADs in high office are often difficult to detect and successfully prosecute because they are usually complex and highly compartmentalized. Investigations are compromised by conflicts of interests involving media ownership and journalistic integrity.

Furthermore, normative narratives enforced by current journalistic standards discourage speculation about serious corruption in high office. This, despite the fact that mainstream media is more than willing to investigate minor political scandals concerning sexual or financial misconduct: the more trivial, salacious or sensational, the better. The Tuskegee Syphilis study, Gulf of Tonkin, MKULTRA mind-control experiments, Watergate and Iran–Contra are a few well-known, fully acknowledged examples of SCADs involving top government officials.

Edward Snowden’s recent revelations regarding the NSA’s gross misconduct are also accepted at face-value. Clearly, some conspiracies are acceptable, while others are not. Successful journalists have learned to internalize this highly flawed narrative or they soon find themselves out of a job.

The irony is that alternative media sources such as Salon, AlterNet and Huffington Post embrace some conspiracies as gospel truth while at the same time they “tow the corporate line” and ignore other probable SCADs, including the political assassinations of the 1960s, government involvement in 9-11, the global drug trade, or the UFO phenomenon. Indeed, these supposedly progressive media outlets employ the same rhetorical techniques that mainstream publications use to discredit “false” conspiracy beliefs, along with public figures who dare espouse them. Sadly, this faction includes respected liberal icons such as Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman, who are vehemently opposed to any accusations that their (clearly conspiratorial) work endorses such irrational thinking.

My analysis will focus on an article published November 20, 2013 on AlterNet, ordinarily one of the best online sources for ‘alternative news.’ It was written on behalf of another ostensibly progressive organization, the Southern Poverty Law Center. The article concerned actor/comedian Richard Belzer, author of two books on the JFK assassination. He is an outspoken critic of the Warren Commission. The headline gives the game away: ‘Law and Order’ Star’s Dangerous Dalliance with Some of the Most Paranoid Conspiracy Theories in America.’ Author Marilyn Elias suggests that a belief in conspiracy theories is actually dangerous to civil society. This is essentially a hit-piece; classic yellow journalism representing the officially-sanctioned narrative so prevalent in many of the studies I found.

I was unable to locate any scholarly texts specifically related to the focus of my analysis – that is, how the alternative press handles the subject of conspiracies – so this research contributes to the literature by broadening the scope of analysis to determine how news representations of ‘conspiracy nuts’ in the alternative press are consistent with the mainstream media’s policy of marginalizing and ostracizing these voices from public discourse. In the course of my research, I examined several sources which were highly critical of conspiracy theories. One negative study supports the idea that ‘conspiracism’ constitutes a circular belief system, drawing its logic from the knowledge that “authorities and officials engage in massive deception of the public to achieve their malevolent goals.”

Connectivity with this dominant idea lends credence to virtually any individual conspiracy theory – to the point where mutually contradictory theories fail to show a negative correlation in belief. Sunstein & Vermeule go even further. They argue that “false” conspiracy theories represent a serious threat to the government: “They [conspiracy theories] do not merely undermine democratic debate; in extreme cases, they create or fuel violence. If government can dispel such theories, it should do so.”

These two scholars seem to have conducted their study on behalf of the US government. They make little if any distinction in regards to what constitutes a “true” conspiracy theory and a “false” one. The paper chillingly outlines the “causes and cures” for conspiracy thinking and recommends that radical steps be taken to quell such beliefs, including the use of “cognitive infiltration.” All of this would be accomplished under the cover of fighting “extremism.”

The conspiracy theory meme is routinely used to marginalize and quarantine reasonable suspicions which have the potential to delegitimize the prevailing social order. ‘Conspiracy theorist’ is a weaponized term used to discredit citizens who harbor reasonable doubts about the dominant narrative promoted by the corporate media.

I have chosen to scrutinize an online article published November 20, 2013 on AlterNet.org: a website ostensibly devoted to providing an ‘alternative’ to mainstream media.

The article is essentially a ‘hit piece’ on Richard Belzer; a well-known actor, comedian and social critic in the vein of the late Bill Hicks and George Carlin. Belzer is the co-author of several ‘conspiracy’ books, including  Hit List: An In-Depth Investigation into the Mysterious Deaths of Witnesses to the JFK Assassination with David Wayne (2013), Dead Wrong: Straight Facts on the Country’s Most Controversial Cover-Ups (2012), Dead Wrong 2: Diana, Princess of Wales with Wayne (2013) UFOs, JFK, and Elvis: Conspiracies You Don’t Have to Be Crazy to Believe, also with David Wayne (2000), and even a novel: I Am Not a Cop!: A Novel (2009) by Richard Belzer and Michael Black.

Belzer was born in Connecticut, served a stint in the US Army as a young man, and he now lives most of the year in France with his third wife, a former Playboy model. But Belzer is best known to TV viewers for his portrayal of conspiracy-obsessed detective John Munch: a familiar, good-guy cop character to millions of Americans. He has enjoyed a 20-year career as detective Munch on the NBC series “Law and Order: Special Victims Unit,” but he has also had the unique distinction of portraying the same role on eleven different television series. Belzer’s character is the archetypical hard-nosed detective: an acerbic, slightly paranoid cynic who often proves to be disturbingly correct. AlterNet is “an award-winning news magazine and online community that creates original journalism and amplifies the best of hundreds of other independent media sources.”

AlterNet’s aim is to “inspire action and advocacy on the environment, human rights and civil liberties, social justice, media, health care issues, and more.” AlterNet prides itself on meeting the public’s demand for independent news. According to their website, http://www.alternet.org, AlterNet “provides free online content to millions of readers, serving as a reliable filter, keeping our vast audience well-informed and engaged, helping them to navigate a culture of information overload and providing an alternative to the commercial media onslaught. Our aim is to stimulate, inform, and instigate.” “Law and Order’ Star’s Dangerous Dalliance…” was written by Marilyn Elias on behalf of another ostensibly left-leaning, progressive organization: the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

Elias implies in her article that a belief in conspiracy theories is downright dangerous to civil society. The conspiracy-theory label does something else, however; it targets the audience, not the speaker. It inculcates in people who are undecided about conspiracies – or who have never considered such matters – a propensity to dismiss conspiracy claims out of hand. In this way, conspiracy statements that are actually quite compelling go unheard. The `conspiracy theory’ meme is routinely used to marginalize individuals like Richard Belzer, a well-known, trusted personality who is both articulate and highly literate – who dare to express perfectly reasonable suspicions about the government which have the potential to de-legitimize the prevailing social order. A single paragraph from Elias’ article perfectly illustrates the not-so-subtle journalistic propaganda techniques at work.

While she acknowledges Belzer’s contributions as an entertainer, she writes: In recent years, though, Belzer, 69, has gone far beyond anywhere even the fictional Munch would, into a never-never land of florid political conspiracy theories that are doubtful at best, and frequently without the slightest basis in fact. Starting with a fascination with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy that is shared by millions of Americans, Belzer has now reached the point where he describes the United States as a “fascist state” run by “sociopaths,” regularly makes conspiracist claims about a vast array of alleged plots, and even heartily endorses Alex Jones, arguably the loudest and most unhinged conspiracy theorist in America. ‘

Conspiracy theory’ has become a weaponized term. In its current form, it was created and deployed with the express intention of preempting suspicion of what the Founding Founders referred to as ‘high crimes.’

Dr. Lance DeHaven-Smith introduced the concept of State Crimes against Democracy (SCAD) to supplant the term “conspiracy theory.” Supplant is a more operative word than ‘replace’ because a SCAD is not meant to be another name for conspiracy theory; it is a new definition for a specific type of wrongdoing about which the conspiracy-theory label discourages us from speaking. The term “conspiracy theory” is applied pejoratively to allegations of official wrongdoing that have not been substantiated by public officials themselves.

In contrast to conspiracy theories, which speculate about suspicious events in isolation, the SCAD model delineates a general category of criminality and calls for crimes that fit this category to be examined comparatively. Using this approach, an analysis of post-World War II SCADs (and suspected SCADs) highlights a number of similarities in targets, timing, and high-level policy consequences, particularly where presidential power and foreign policy intersect. SCADs differ from other forms of political corruption in that they involve political, military and economic elites at the very highest levels of the social and political order.

At the very least, Elias agrees that Richard Belzer is not alone in his concerns regarding the JFK assassination. There is no denying that this view is shared by millions of people all over the world.

And I would challenge Marilyn Elias to provide any untainted evidence to refute the perfectly reasonable assumptions of Mr. Belzer that the United States is becoming a ‘fascist state’ run by ‘sociopaths.’ Clearly the empirical evidence is limited, considering our current political state.

One of the reasons why the conspiracy-theory label is effective rhetorically is because it targets the audience, not the speaker. It indoctrinates people who are undecided about the reality of conspiracies, or who never even considered such matters – towards a propensity to dismiss them out of hand. In this way, conspiracy allegations which are actually quite compelling go unheard.

Marilyn Elias’ article is a prime example of state-sponsored propaganda.

Frustratingly, I was not able to locate any scholarly texts which dealt specifically with the difference between the way the alternative press handles the subject of high-level conspiracies as opposed to mainstream media; so hopefully this research will contribute to the published literature by broadening the scope of analysis and will demonstrate how news representations of ‘conspiracy nuts’ in the alternative press are consistent with the Mainstream media (MSM)’s policy of marginalizing and ostracizing these voices from public discourse. The available evidence leads me to conclude that there is no real difference. My research was focused on identifying areas in which future researchers can look for evidence of collaboration between mainstream media and the propaganda aims of the ruling establishment. “Law and Order’ Star’s Dangerous Dalliance…” is classic yellow journalism masquerading as objective reporting.

Elias’ work represents the officially-approved dominant narrative so prevalent in many of the conspiracy-debunking studies I found. The term conspiracy theory is traditionally associated with paranoia and harebrained speculation.  I found several examples of this tactic in Elias’ AlterNet piece. As a label, the phrase does a poor job of characterizing speculations about political intrigue, yet it remains popular because it functions normatively to protect political elites from public suspicions about their motives and tactics. This is exactly the sort of misrepresentation and deception I expected to find in the MSM, but certainly not on such as supposedly progressive forum as AlterNet. Another derogatory article by Tom Jacobs featured on the same website was titled: “One Surprising Reason People May Believe Bizarre Conspiracy Theories.” In this piece, the author insinuates that people who see “dark conspiracies everywhere” are offering some interesting information – about themselves. Using utterly Orwellian logic, the article highlights a study conducted at the University of Kent in the UK which purports to show that “people who have more lax personal morality may endorse conspiracy theories to a greater extent because they are, on average, more willing to participate in the conspiracies themselves. New research suggests belief in such theories may reveal a Machiavellian mindset.”

The researchers allegedly found that “personal willingness to engage in the conspiracies predicted endorsement of conspiracy theories. So did a propensity to manipulate others for personal gain.” In other words: people who believe in conspiracies are more likely to engage in conspiratorial activities themselves. This is nothing more than the dissemination of rank pseudo-science with a clearly driven political agenda posing as an “academic study – not uncommon for alternative sites that want to remain “respectable” and keep the dollars flowing. Other so-called ‘alternative’ sites such as the Huffington Post and the Daily Kos currently prohibit any posts which challenge the official version of 9/11. This is a disturbing trend.