Over the past week, NBC’s Megyn Kelly has taken a lot of heat over her controversial interview with Alex Jones. You may be familiar with Alex Jones’ work at Info Wars, as he’s gained an extensive following after years of work in alternative news and “conspiracy theories.” To be clear, I genuinely believe that Alex Jones has helped the movement, and I recognize the key role he played in my own life and my personal “waking up” process.
However, he is also notorious for reacting and communicating in extreme ways. Though this is clearly indicative of the passion he has for his work, which is very inspiring at times, this type of reaction did not necessarily serve him in his interview with Megyn Kelly (though I’m not sure if you could even call it an interview, as it was clearly a hit piece against Jones as well as a form of political propaganda). We get into more details about this specifically in our latest docu-series episode at the end of this article.
If you haven’t watched the interview, you can check it out here:
When I first watched the interview, I remember thinking, this cannot be the full story. This was another clear example of mainstream media (MSM) not providing the full picture, and simply publishing a “political fluff” piece rather than real, honest news. To be frank, I wasn’t sure if it was even deserving of an article at first, because it lacked substance and was clearly over-edited.
It seemed like Jones’ responses to Megyn in the interview weren’t actually his responses, but rather misplaced sentences meant to paint Jones in an unflattering light and simply put words in his mouth. However, did Alex really expect MSM to accurately portray who he is? Most of what MSM spews is altered, falsified, or dramatized, so it’s unsurprising that his interview was no different from the regular narrative we see on MSM news networks.
So, What Lessons Can We Take From Jones’ Interview?
In my opinion, one of the things we can learn from this interview is the importance of neutrality. In this particular interview, you have two very different people who represent very different things reflecting a similar state of consciousness. Both parties use extreme emotions and statements, both promote fear and anger, and neither of them are truly independent or neutral.
Megyn Kelly, who clearly had her own agenda, is not doing her journalistic duty by putting out a piece like this. Instead of choosing more relevant stories, she only focused on the Sandy Hook shootings. Not that this particular event doesn’t deserve media attention, but this occurred in 2012, and ultimately Jones has a lot more information out there that deserves to be discussed.
Why weren’t topics like the elite, occult rituals, Hillary Clinton’s corruption, or Jones’ work at the Bohemian Grove brought up? These are all stories that are far more shocking and controversial than a shooting that occurred five years ago, and that’s only four of many topics that Jones reports on that deserve to be discussed in the mainstream
Instead, Kelly only focused on one story, and involved one parent’s tragic loss. In addition, for viewers that weren’t well versed on Sandy Hook and the controversy surrounding it, they probably had no idea what was going on because she didn’t provide enough background information on the subject. Instead, she created an “I’m right, you’re wrong” dialogue with Jones, which serves absolutely no one. The entire interview lacked substance and evidence, with both offering mere conjecture and attacks on one another’s character.
Kelly also focused significantly on Jones’ ties to President Donald Trump, making it seem like this was a political propaganda piece. Kelly painted Jones in a negative light, just like MSM paints Trump in a negative light. Instead of allowing Jones to explain these relations, she only allowed him to get a few words in. Plus, by painting an inaccurate picture of Jones and then tying him to Trump, she has now associated Trump with “fake news,” which is ironic given that NBC is the real pusher of “fake news” here.
On the other hand, you have Alex Jones, who responded to the piece by referring to Megyn Kelly as a modern day “Medusa.” Don’t get me wrong, Jones clearly has reason to believe that Kelly had bad intentions, since she lied to him about the context of the interview, which he was able to prove by recording their phone calls.
However, his response was full of anger, which does not help his credibility or public image. One of the most important aspects of journalism, and communication in general, is responding instead of reacting. Kevin Trudeau put it beautifully when he compared the difference between responding and reacting in regards to modern medicine: When we respond to medication, our bodies are working with it, but when we react to something, this means we’re experiencing some sort of negative effects.
The same can be said in any other scenario. When we respond to something or someone, we are taking a neutral stance and acting as the observer, whereas when we react, we are most often responding emotionally and with a particular viewpoint. It’s crucial when it comes to independent reporting and even everyday life that we respond instead of react.
When we’re mad, we often lose track of our thoughts, overcrowd our minds, and say things we don’t mean. Our passions can be mistaken for biases, and we can lose credibility for it. I’m not suggesting that you don’t develop passions or express them, but rather that you simply try your best to remain neutral and not let your passions turn into anger! At the end of the day, this will only upset you.
Either way, this interview represents an opportunity for both Megyn Kelly and Alex Jones to grow and learn from their actions. Kelly has had an extensive career in MSM, and perhaps the negative backlash she’s receiving from this interview will act as a catalyst for her own change and encourage her to focus more on seeking the truth than raising her ratings and succumbing to the elite’s agenda.
This interview also shows us that the rise of conscious media is incredibly important. The ways of the past where we bash one side or the other with extreme emotion or drama does not serve to bring out the truth and only puts more of this drama into the public. Whereas if we can look at information from a neutral place, without emotion or bias to persuade viewers, we can transcend a form of media that is not serving us to advance consciously.
As for Alex Jones, perhaps this interview will show him that he could benefit from remaining more neutral and not letting his anger get the best of him. After all, he probably wouldn’t have attracted this type of interview into his life if he didn’t need to learn something from it. Though this extreme reactions have clearly served him in the past, and many others, as he has inspired so many of us to “wake up,” alternative media is currently under attack with all of these allegations of “fake news,” and expressing anger probably won’t help progress the movement any further.
We already see so much fear and anger expressed in MSM, as they manufacture so many stories about false villains; let’s keep this type of mindset out of independent journalism!