COPENHAGEN — If 120 to 150 celebrities were gathered at a hotel for a private three-day meeting, there would be no end to the media coverage, analysis, pictures, manufactured scandals, and ridiculous hype. Supposed “journalists” would have a field day. Just this weekend, about that many top globalists, whose decisions collectively affect the lives of virtually every person on the planet, gathered for the Bilderberg summit in the Danish capital. Establishment media outfits such as CNN, BBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, Fox, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Associated Press, and others, however, were nowhere to be found.
The deafening lack of press coverage surrounding what many analysts say is perhaps one of the most important meetings of the year was not due to a lack of information about Bilderberg. This magazine and numerous reporters for alternative media outlets in the United States and Europe were there covering the summit. The Danish press was there, too, as were a handful of reporters for major European newspapers. A few government-funded media outlets from Russia, China, Iran, and other nations also reported on the summit. In the increasingly discredited and wildly mischaracterized American “mainstream” media, though, scarcely a word appeared about Bilderberg.
Incredibly, in attendance at the secrecy-obsessed gathering of globalists were numerous high-powered media executives and supposed “journalists” — from editors and publishers of major publications to influential columnists and corporate media magnates. All of them were mingling with over 100 figures representing the upper echelons of banking, politics, the Internet, business, war, government, foreign policy, the EU, NATO, military, spying, royalty, the Chinese Communist Party, and more. Naïve readers and viewers, though — for reasons that remain unclear, one in five Americans still trust the establishment media to keep them informed — were none the wiser.
Journalists, of course, are supposed to seek truth and do their best to share it with the public — at least that is how members of the profession like to view themselves. Among the “media” bosses in attendance at this year’s Bilderberg summit, however, traditional journalistic ethics and motivations were apparently in short supply. As of Monday, the day after the Bilderberg summit’s conclusion, it did not seem like any of the establishment media bigwigs in attendance, or their “news” outlets, had reported anything about the gathering.
Media attendees at the 2014 summit included the Economist magazine's editor-in-chief John Micklethwait, chief economics commentator Martin Wolf with The Financial Times, political editor-in-chief Tove Lifvendahl for one of Sweden’s top newspapers, senior columnist Cengiz Çandar with Al Monitor and Radika, Austrian newspaper Der Standard publisher Oscar Bronner, editor-in-chief Monica Maggioni with Italy’s Rainews24 and RAI TV, French paper Le Monde executive editor Natalie Nougayrède, and more. Their audiences may never learn what was discussed or even that the summit took place.
In fairness to the press, though, at least compared to just a few years ago, there was quite a bit of Bilderberg coverage. As usual, the alternative media was there in force, dominating the narrative. Infowars had a team of veteran reporters on the ground and filed regular video updates and articles offering insight and news about the meetings. The American Free Press also had a reporter in Copenhagen to cover the summit, taking over from the late Jim Tucker, who for decades followed the annual gatherings closely. Many smaller alternative outlets were also present. CNBC ran a brief piece on Bilderberg prior to the summit, too, as did the taxpayer-funded National Public Radio and Al Jazeera America. None of the major U.S. “news” networks said a word, however.
The only U.S. market where the establishment press offered a decent amount of Bilderberg coverage was Atlanta. The mayor of the Southern city, Kasim Reed, was among the lesser-known attendees at the summit, sparking a wide range of speculation as to whether he was being groomed for higher office. Both Bill Clinton and Obama attended a Bilderberg summit before becoming president, as have more than a few leading European politicians and globalists prior to their meteoric rises to power. Still, outside of Atlanta, American newspapers were suspiciously silent on the globalist confab.
In the foreign media, at least two major British newspapers, The Guardian and the Independent, provided some coverage of Bilderberg’s 2014 summit, as well. As in previous years, Charlie Skelton of The Guardian offered some of the most high-profile insights into the meetings — much of it written in a humoristic style. Numerous major outlets in other European countries — Hungary, Portugal, Denmark, the Czech Republic, Italy, and more — provided at least minor reports. Still, for the vast majority of Europeans, the gathering of high-level globalists in Copenhagen was not in their newspaper, much less on the front page — where it undoubtedly would have been if 125 actors or singers had converged on the hotel instead of politicians and CEOs whose actions will profoundly affect the world.
One reporter for a leading newspaper in a small European nation, who like other uninvited journalists remained in a pen for protesters across the street from the meetings, spoke with The New American off the record about the media scene. “Probably almost nobody in my country knows about these meetings, because the guys who own the two big private TV channels are inside, and the public channel never talks about it,” he said. “My reports will be the first time the major media talks about Bilderberg. We’ll see what happens.” Due to the infamous lack of transparency, though, he was unsure exactly what to write about.
Outside of the West, there was a fair amount of coverage as well. A Communist Chinese newspaper mentioned the summit, and the Kremlin-funded RT network probably had more Bilderberg news than any other media outlet in the world. Much of its coverage, though, centered on summit attendees' alleged agenda to maintain a Western-dominated “unipolar” world order — a dubious theory, to put it mildly. Iran’s state-controlled Press TV promoted a similar narrative, claiming, for instance, that “the nations resisting the Bilderbergers' world takeover attempt, led by Iran, Russia and China, are gaining ground.”
Of course, numerous senior Bilderberg and pro-“New World Order” bigwigs — Henry Kissinger, George Soros, David Rockefeller, and more — have all touted the ruthless Communist Chinese dictatorship as a leading player in what they call the “New World Order.” Looking back at history and examining the key role of globalist operatives at the Council on Foreign Relations and similar outfits in bringing the mass-murdering regime in Beijing to power also casts serious doubts on the narrative.
Like Bilderberg regulars, top EU and Russian officials regularly promote “integration” between the ruling classes in Moscow and Brussels. Innumerable links between the former communist regimes in the East and the ruling class in the West could also be cited. All of the BRICS regimes (those ruling Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa), meanwhile, have been fervent supporters of the openly touted Western globalist goals of empowering the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund, and the Fund’s proto-global currency known as Special Drawing Rights. Recently, the IMF, via Ukraine, funneled billions of bailout dollars to Russia’s Putin.
IMF boss Christine Lagarde was among the 2014 Bilderberg attendees. As The New American reported based on the official list of attendees released ahead of the 2014 gathering, a leading member of the Communist Party of China’s Central Committee was also in attendance at this year’s summit. So, the Kremlin-pushed narrative of Bilderberg bigwigs trying to hold back the BRICS due to their alleged opposition to the “New World Order” strains the limits of credulity. Beijing recently called for a global currency and a United Nations-dominated "New World Order" by name, echoing the public pronouncements of countless Western globalists.
Much of the theorizing surrounding the Bilderberg’s alleged efforts and agenda to “contain” the mostly socialist and communist BRICS regimes was attributed to alleged leaks. The supposed agenda was reportedly obtained from unidentified summit insiders by journalist Daniel Estulin, who regularly covers Bilderberg and is often cited as an expert on the summit. It was not possible to independently verify or disprove the claims.
The New American reached out to Bilderberg via its official media e-mail address requesting comment and on-camera interviews. “As ever, in order to encourage the highest level of openness and dialogue among the participants during the conference, the Bilderberg meeting is closed to reporting journalists,” the self-described “Bilderberg media team” responded in an e-mail. “While we would have liked to help you with your request, we regret to inform you that we cannot provide any interviews this week.”
Despite the surge in Bilderberg coverage seen in recent years, critics and media analysts continued to lambaste the establishment press for failing to cover this year’s summit. There is no serious argument to be made that it is not newsworthy, yet most “journalists” remain asleep at the wheel. Last year’s summit in the United Kingdom appears to have set the record in terms of Bilderberg coverage. Much of it, though, was focused on demonizing protesters rather than figuring out what taxpayer-funded public “servants” were doing behind closed doors with Big Business, Big Oil, leaders of bailed out mega-banks, and other would-be world rulers.
Of course, if the “mainstream” media would put one thousandth of the effort it expends covering useless celebrity gossip into uncovering what the world’s top politicians, CEOs, and bureaucrats are doing behind closed doors, Bilderberg’s obsessive secrecy (bordering on paranoia) would be quickly shattered. Their agenda would suffer, too. However, even as the establishment’s self-styled “news” operations suffer from plunging revenues and shattered credibility, the prospect of serious reporting emerging any time soon remains slim. Until then, the alternative media will have to continue doing the job that the propagandists in the pseudo-mainstream press refuse to touch: Real journalism.