Hegemonic
and virulent threat
Undoubtedly one of the world’s most
successful media MODEL in terms of the shear extent of reach and the efficacy
of its “message” communication is the Anglo/American English language MODEL. Its Modus Operandi and proclivities place it at the centre of series of
inter-connected webs, spawning powerful coalitions of the power hungry driven
by an iniquitous alliance between corporate businesses, senior government
officials, politicians, lobbyist, and prominent academics.
This piece contends that the above
described model’s primary objective is to manipulate public thought and nudge its
denizens to act in the local national, regional and international sphere in accordance
with narrowly defined inscrutable self serving objectives.
This model’s tried and tested methods
expresses themselves via a plethora of avenues and has spawned the salacious
and vacuous “red top” the sanctimonious, self assured, naive pompous and overly
intellectual broad sheets mind numbingly repetitive TV news networks and shock
jock radio, rapacious and relentless 24 cable networks, the paternal didactic
and sententious state broadcaster; have all replicated themselves virus-like
across the planet.
The Media’s collective capacity
to channel colossal amounts of finance into the development and employment of
modern cutting edge technology’s fuels it capacity to deliver “the message” in
an effective, efficient and consistent manner determining the dynamics within
which dissemination takes place wielding a power that is existentialist in its
shear capacity to secure control and
domination.
The Messenger in this model becomes
the message-creator not only deciding its nature, form and content but framing
and delivering the “message” with a view to determining how it’s received.
This piece seeks to uncover and
consider the model’s underlying premise and expose it as what in effect amounts
to a confidence trick
In order to understand this
model’s modus operandi and appreciate its efficacy one must de-cloak and
distinguish its formal facade that which it proclaims to be, from its actual daily
operational practices and motivations, to do so one must compare and contrast
the media’s “articulate premise” as described below with s its “inarticulate premise”.
The media’s “articulate
premise” is arguable very familiar to us, it is inculcated into our
consciousness from the cradle to the grave; it asserts that the media’s role in
a democratic society (whatever that means) is predicated on principles of impartiality and
independence in terms of gathering information and reporting, absent of
political bias or hidden allegiance and a driven solely by a commitment
to discover truth and thereby empower its audience. It does so in the lauded
capacity of our guardian of civil and
human rights, and the protector of democratic ideals.
The essence of the “articulate
premise” is predicated on the primacy of
the notion of the “freedom of the press” such freedom unfettered save for
defamation and sedition laws and founded on constitutional principle of freedom
of expression
Few would argue against the
indispensability of such unfettered primacy for this socio-political construct we
call the media in particular given its professed role as a bulwark against
abuse of power in a “free” society.
However, and there is almost
always a pungent “however” lurking somewhere in the wings , the media’s
interpretation of “freedom of the press” in its daily manifestation appears to be at odds with this articulate premise; what is becoming increasingly evident is that the proclaimed
practice does not match or reflect the stated theory; and logic indicate that if the theory does not explain the actuality
then the theory is self-evidently wrong
or misconstrued and in need of further scrutiny.
This piece seeks to engage in
that scrutiny and outline and evaluate some of the key underlying assumptions
that fuel the media’s actual daily operations and its institutional culture and
make-up.
To discover how notions of “freedom of the press” translate in the context of multi-billion
pound/dollar international conglomerates driven by undisclosed agendas intent on the pursuit of money and power is crucial to the appreciating the actual role
played by the media in its daily endeavours.
To move towards this objective
we will analyse and consider how in practice the media operates with a view to
discovering its unstated underlying assumptions and objectives in other words to
analyse and consider the Media’s “inarticulate premise” that which in fact actually
drives the daily activities of
individual news outlets’ .
The “inarticulate premise” in contrast to the “articulate premise”
reveals actual practice rather than self serving theory
The notion of an “inarticulate
premise” emerges within the realms of the law in practice and refers to a technique used by
common law judges to determine cases before them where there is no decided law upon
which to base their determinations and where strict legal analysis is wanting;
in such circumstances judges resort to
the pragmaticism and arrive at their determination deferring to their own
narrow cultural, political and moral prejudices and apply that to the facts and describe its
outcome as “the law” on the matter thereby being considered.
The determination is made on
the basis of the narrow proclivities of an individual judge but is expressed in
the language of the law hiding from view that in fact there is no precise legal
basis to such determination back only by the undisclosed agenda of that particular
judge.
The “Media” it is argued in
this piece employs a similar sleight of hand. To understand how the notion of
the “inarticulate premise” functions in the context of the Media one must appreciate
how media houses manipulate facts to reflect their own particular view of the
world affirming their self serving ideological outlook
The complicity of the political,
legal and financial infra-structure (national and international level) is
required to ensure the seamless operation of this model is obscured from view
and thereby scrutiny masking that the stated
principles of independence and
impartiality of the media are nothing but chimeras stifling protest and an anathema to an open and
transparent society
This piece argues that the
media’s inarticulate premise endeavours towards the creation of an environment
that nourishes, sustains and promotes a particular ideological and political
stance in effect the purveyor of a particular point of view
To understand the modern media one
must first consider that above all else media corporations are businesses
indeed often coalitions of businesses driven in both the narrow and the wider
sense by the maximisation of profit.
Profit in the narrow sense
refers to generating profit for the particular media outlet whereas profit in
the wider sense refers to the development and maintenance of a global
environment conducive to the sustenance of business per se and their own power and
influence. .
This has resulted in a tendency
towards the cynical self serving management of information flows namely propagandism
rather than being in pursuit of and reporting of “news” based on fact-sensitive,
evidenced based politically unbiased, investigative journalism; it seeks to
merely advocate a particular point of view about the matter at hand
Indeed even where individual journalists
seek to honour their professed duty as impartial guardians and report on abuses
of rights improper practices or behaviour contrary to the public interest their
efforts are invariably thwarted by the modern media’s corporate machinery. In
consequence opaqueness and obfuscation prevail usually to protect or promote the
particular media corporation’s own undisclosed agenda. What must be born in
mind however is that the notion of the public interest is overly malleable and nebulous
and thereby subject to abuse needs of course to be considered and a clearer
definition and/or method of determining public interest is to be sought
One recent rather blatant example
that comes to mind is a story that was reported sometime in March –April this
year where a team of Fox News journalist in Miami USA uncovered that Monsanto
were feeding their milking cows with a growth hormones. The problem was that
the very same hormones were finding their way into the human food chain turning
up as toxins in blood test of Miami school children.
Prompted by pressure from some
of its major advertisers Fox’s management buried its own journalist’s story and
sacked the concerned journalist for going public with their findings thereby giving
primacy to the protection of the business interest of the milk manufacturers
with no concern for the adverse public health outcomes for vulnerable American
children
However this piece does not seek
to examine individual instances in which journalist have done the right thing or
the emergence of “social media” to circumvent the “mainstream media”, instead
it endeavours to examine and consider the political, economic, social and cultural
factors that underpin and shape the role of the media in modern society; that
is to unravel the media’s and thereby unravel the Media’s “inarticulate premise”.
To understand the media’s
underlying “inarticulate premise” one must first appreciate that the modern media translate the notion of
the primacy of freedom of the press into the primacy of “coercive persuasion”
this with a view towards engendering particular behaviour form the
recipients of the “message” as a consequence of the dissemination of a particular media
determined point of view. The primary objective appears to be to nudge its audience’s attitudes and behaviours
towards acceptance consciously or unconsciously of a stated point of view, and
to thereby illicit behaviour that conforms to that particular Media outlet’s ideological and cultural outlook.
The purveyed point of view
usually reflects the self interested view of media moguls and/or media executives
who act in coalition with a closed and obscured network of self serving politicians,
senior government officials, lobbyist and fellow corporatist.
In pursuit of its self-defined primary
purpose the Media employs the tried and tested tools and techniques of COERCIVE PERSUASION. Coercive
persuasion functions at the subliminal level,
causing the target to repress, their own independent thoughts, desires or
impulses by removing them the conscious mind and re-locating them into the sub-conscious
mind; one outcome of which is that the individual’s thoughts are now delinked
from the rational scrutiny of their conscious mind; thereby rendering the
target more suggestible and apathetic.
Coercive
Persuasion?
Coercive persuasion has 7 key objectives
as follows:
- Increased mental confusion and thereby increased suggestibility:
this is often achieved by way of hypnosis or other suggestibility increasing techniques which includes repetitive audio, visual, tactile, or verbal stimuli and the employment of fixation exercises
- the adoption of strong
non-physical punishments:
achieved via techniques that fuel humiliation and
instigate loss of privilege and social isolation, causing the target anxiety,
stress, repression and guilt and aimed at creating in the target intense
negative emotional reactions left in no doubt they are on the wrong side of the
argument
- Promotion of social isolation:
similar to 2 above the individual is isolated as
much as possible from sympathetic individuals that is anyone who does not share
the group’s or in our case the media’s approved perception similarly the target
is isolated from alternative sources of information, using rewards, and group
pressure again made to be outsiders ostracised from those on the right side of
the argument
- Attacks
and denude the target’s self
concepts and independent world view:
achieved by way of incessant repetition of the “message”
seeking to cause the target to lose
sight of their distinct "self,"
aimed at disorienting and destabilizing the target and weakening the will to
resist the message
- the intense
and frequent undermining of the target’s confidence in their own judgment:
The target is persuaded the system or in our case
the media’s message is consistently correct and all others sources are
consistently wrong.
- The manipulation
of information and language:
Information is censored with a view to disorienting
the audience and dis-information employed to further confuse the target using a
cocktail of truth and strategically placed untruths using the truths to justify
the lies and obscure the discovery of the falsehood. The objective being the encourage the target
to divide the world into the sanctimonious “us" and the, unworthy
ignorant “them."
- The use of
psychological threat:
Using stereotypes and super myths to fabricate enmity generate
fear and suspicion between groups and communities with a view to control and
domination and quashing alternative views and opinions and ways of living
See Factnet.org
The techniques of coercive
persuasion are the unique domain of the media but is also practiced by
intelligence agencies and cults and any others seeking to coerce for their own advantage
The CIA’s proud boast is that their
techniques of coercive persuasion are at its best more efficient and effective
than physical torture or the use of psychoactive drugs in eliciting conforming
or compliant behaviour.
The CIA blue print on the use of
the techniques of coercive persuasion has been immortalised in its KUBARK MANUAL. The Kubark manual is a training manual detailing precise step by step
techniques of coercive persuasion; techniques which are utilised by CIA and its
cohorts to pacify subjugate and “turn” captured enemy operatives and the wider
society towards compliance with a particular world view as sanctioned by the
CIA.
Many of the manual’s highly
dubious techniques have been used in the Guantanamo concentration camps in Cuba
and in a range of American conflicts across the world from Vietnam to Indonesia,
from Nicaragua to Chile Afghanistan to Iraq
The Kubark manual describes its
coercive techniques as consisting of three key components namely debility,
dependency and dread.
Debility – consist of the weakening and
erosion of the target’s capacity to question orthodoxy, to be effective its
progenitors must conceal or misrepresent information which contradicts that orthodoxy
thereby rendering the audience more amenable to suggestion.
There are various techniques by
which this outcome can be achieved including the use of gross
over-simplifications of a complex situation Putin as a Nazi, Assad as a war
mongering tyrant and the continuous repetition of the compromised message
causing it to be subliminally absorbed by the target
Dependency
–requires the
creation of a near pathological audience reliance on the approval and acceptance
of the Messenger and the legitimacy of the Messenger’s message resulting in a
near oracle like status for the message-creator engendering status of
reliability and trustworthiness often achieved by way of sheer volume and reach
of the outlet i.e. conglomeration
Dread – translates into elicitation of
fear and foreboding, fear of ostracism or isolation, fear of change, fear of
sanction, and fear of annihilation. the enemy within the media determines who
is to be hated, the public enemy, the message demonises those who the media
determines the audience should most both fear and hate
The media’s adaptation of Kubark
style coercive persuasion seeks by way of use of the above described key
components to elicit dislocation, stimulate disorientation, generate fear, and
anxiety in its targeted audience and thereby render such audience more
malleable to psychological repression and thereby acceptance and approval of
the Media’s projected messages
The media employs a range of
tools from its tools kit to achieve the sought outcomes which include as follows:
TOOL
KIT
DEFLECTION –
to bend or turn aside the very question of truth this is a technique which seeks
to control and direct the audience’s focus away from the crux of an issue by shifting
focus to a peripheral issue and “bigging
up” that peripheral issue through use of superlatives and hyperbolic language
or alternatively focusing on a weakness
in any contrary analysis to theirs ignoring any obvious strengths and relevancies.
The outcome is the substantive issues
are obscured and never comprehensively discussed the focus being to extol the
virtues of the media adopted message interpretatioin.
Graphic example of the use of
deflection can be found in relation to
the war against Saddam Hussein which resulted in his ousting and execution in
date the public’s attention was deflected to the existence of Weapons of mass
destruction (WMDs) and the 2011 civil war in Libya which
resulted in the brutal killing of the Colonel in the streets of Libyan city of
Sirte near his place of birth where the international media’s focused its narrative
on vilification of Muammar Gadaffi as a “mad dog blood thirsty dictator” with
what seemed shear abandon and pushed the case for arming the opposition and
bombing Gadaffi’s forces into submission. No thought was given to just who these
“opposition force” were or their agendas or the legitimacy of their case
against Gadaffi or the likelihood of resulting instability following his
removal.
the outcomes of both situations
was increased turmoil, killing destruction of infra-structure, communities on
unprecedented scale
EUPHEMISMS – the substitution of a “soft” or indirect words or expressions for words or
expressions considered to be too accurate, graphic or blunt where such usage
would be considered “off message”.
Used when referring to something unpalatable with a view to
concealing from scrutiny the true nature
of just what is taking place. For example expressions like “collateral damage”
to describe an act of violence resulting in inevitable killing of non-combatants (read
women and children) or the expression “shock
and awe” to describe the horror and barbarity of wanton and all consuming
destruction of men women and children and the obliteration of infra-structure and
social and economic life in Iraq the effective traumatisation of an entire
people, “downsizing” to refer to the social
dislocation pain and anguish that
results from an employer sacking
large numbers of staff
ASSOCIATION – where two or more variables
move in apparent relation to each the media will assert a causal relationship between
those variables for example Black youths and criminality, Muslims and
terrorism, trade unionist and subversion, immigrants and increased benefits cost/fraud;
whereas in fact the variables are in fact moving in the same direction but
independent of each other
INTENSITY – this concerns the prevalence
of the message and seeks to ensure that unproven
and exaggerated claims are given unjustified weight by the enthusiastic use of superlatives
and hyperbole such as “the greatest” , “most harmful” “most invaluable”
“amazing” “unprecedented” resulting in
hype absent any fact driven investigative analytical assessment or evaluation.
REPETITION–involves the continuous
broadcast and re-broadcast of the message; sometimes every few minutes, sometimes
hourly. The message or at least its key words are re-stated again and again one
likely outcome of which is that the message is absorbed into the audience’s sub-conscious
subliminally coercing the target audience and manipulating their perceptions
and thereby their view point , leaving little room for reasoned thought or
consensus building
THE BIG LIE – This involves the deliberate
adoption of complete untruths or fabrications with a view either to supporting
the messenger’s particular point of view on the matter at hand and/or
discrediting the opposing point of view.
One example of this is the so
called “Dodgy Dossier” which appeared to establish that Iraq had the capacity
to attack the UK with WMD and could do so within 45 minutes. This big lie played
a decisive role in the UK government’s decision to enter the American’s war against
Iraq, nudging public opinion to reluctantly accept what was a settling of old scores a Bush and
Blair’s war of conquest
The Media were willing to
accept the dossiers validity without any serious scrutiny and were thereby
complicit in this lie. It was not until after hostilities were well under way
and 100s of thousands were being killed (according to the peer reviewed Lancet
Reports of the period around 600,000 deaths) that the Media appeared to
re-consider its position too little too late
Another more entrenched example
is the media’s complicity in sustaining the status quo in Israel/Palestinian
conflict resulting in extension and regularisation of this extraordinarily
destructive conflict. The big lie here
is that the conflict is one of a battle
between crazed murderous thug like Arab zealots intent on mass murder and
annihilation of righteous peoples of Jewish ethnicity.
FLATERY
– seeks to woo
the individual or group by lauding and praising them, affirming their
integrity, decency and wisdom and affirming that they are on the “right side “
of the argument e.g. benefits cuts proponents,
anti-human rights activist, anti-immigration proponents etc.
THE EXPERT – the Messenger endorses a
person as an “expert” or “specialist” in a particular field and then elicits
from the ascribed expert a narrative that supports the Messenger-makers point
of view.
Another manifestation of the
expert is where a journalist despite not being an ascribed expert adopts the
language of an expert duping the
audience into believing that that journalist’s narrow opinions or heavily
editorialised content are the fact based findings of an expert or at least an
expert opinion.
FEAR – the Messenger seeks to
create the perception that the individual audience member’s way of life or
indeed their mortal life is under threat such threat emanating from an identified
enemy suitably vilified by the Messenger the usual suspects include Blacks,
religious fundamentalist, immigrants, benefit scroungers, trade unionist,
anti-capitalist, anti–fascist and anyone with an alternative point of view or
life style which challenges the maintenance of the status quo.
The Messenger uses this fear to
deflect the substance of the actual concerns at issue blindly almost reflex
like nudge public opinion against these groups and weaken any opportunity for
open and informed debate.
CHARISMA – Media operatives, Presenters
and Journalist seek to develop a relationship with their audience wherein the
presenter/journalist can inspire trust and devotion thereby inspiring the audience’s
confidence and rendering such audience more liable to suspend their disbelief.
A variation on this is where
the Media engage in a campaign to
popularise a person for example to promote a particular politician into ” the
affections of the nation” for example
Boris Johnson portraying him as special, super intelligent, trustworthy indeed simply charming ; diverting attention away
from his consistent blatant misrepresentations of the truth otherwise known as lies his
obvious raw self serving ambition to
wield power and accumulate personal fortune witness the cult of personality that surrounds
Boris Johnson
ANALOGY – an analogy is a comparison
between one thing and another usually for purpose of explanation or
clarification of one or the other thing. The Media employs the creative use of
analogy to massage perception and thereby influence thought and action. Done by
way of use of distorted correlations which appear to substantiate the
Messenger’s message, the creative obfuscation of context to elicit the sought
response. Witness the media use of analogies comparing Putin’s engagement with
the Crimean with Hitler’s voracious appetite for conquest which resulted in the
death of over 50 million people across the world. Obscuring the fact that
Crimea is and always has been an integral part of Russia with huge amounts of
Russian assets and largely inhabited by ethnic Russian. Further that his was a
response to a perceived attack on his country’s territorial integrity by
shadowy western machinations.
ATTACK
THE PLAYER AND NOT THE BALL
– this tool is available to be utilised as part of a propaganda initiative and
seeks to focus attention on the person or persons who are “off message” rather
than attack the “off message” message itself seeking to discredit the person or
persons proffering the particular unwelcome “off message” message. The focus is
shifted to destroying the credibility of the delinquents themselves destroying their
reputation and standing often with falsehoods and innuendos.
One example of a person so
vilified is the USA Nation of Islam’s – Minister Louie Farrakhan despite his
successes in motivating and instilling values of aspiration and self reliance
into the African American psyche playing a pivotal role in equipping them to overcome
their poverty and listlessness and assisting with their transformation into
productive members of their communities he is persona non grata in the UK being
described as an anti Semite, racist and subversive because of his opposition to
Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and the role played by Jewish finance
in the creation and sustenance of European slave trade and slavery.
ASSOCIATION,
CORRELATION & CAUSE
– this requires the deliberate blurring of the meanings of association, correlation
and cause. An association arises where there is a
correlation between two or more variable which vary according to a determinable
pattern for example high crime areas and poverty stricken black neighbourhoods;
the Media will obfuscate this to Black people being somehow genetically disposed
to delinquency, crime and anti social and subversive behaviour. Such blurring
is a sine qua non of institutional racism and social alienation of groups
targeted by the Media.
The employment of these tools and
resultant modus operandi has transmogrified “NEWS” into “PROPAGANDA”. The Oxford dictionary defines Propaganda
as: Information, especially
of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular
political cause or point of view.
The Media presides in its omnipotence
propagating their own self interested message and does so in cohort with the mainstream
political classes in conjunction with armies of think tank analyst, lobbyist
and pollsters; working in a sort of hegemonic alliance towards sustaining “the
message”. No thought for their role as described in their “articulate premise”.
The dissemination and
inculcation of the particular Media Baron’s a unstated point of view with a
view to evince compliance
and ensuring adherence to a particular political, social, economic and cultural
agenda with a view to moulding societal attitudes and eliciting agenda conforming behaviour by the audience
“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless
one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly... it must confine itself
to a few points and repeat them over and over”
This is a quote from former German
Information Minister Joseph Goebbels the
Nazi. It rings as true now as it did then if you keep the message simplistic
and repeat it often enough it will result in changing outlooks and view points
for the target audience.
In recent times Modern technology
and the conglomerisation of the Media has exponentially expanded its capacity
to repeat the message incessantly within a 24 hour global news cycle; run by
global news networks able to unrelentingly repeat grossly simplified and
blatantly self serving representations of extremely complex issues engendering
a mind numbing hypnotic effect in the target who acquiesce in acceptance.
The result of this relentless bombardment
of propagandised images and information is most powerful at the subliminal
level, a heightening of suggestibility and short circuiting of the target
audiences’ capacity for rational thought and reason known as dumbing down.
A more humble and reflective
audience may pause for thought where uncertain as to validity or authenticity
of the “message” and would demand open
discussion and reflection humility is an anathema to this kind of repression
This insipid approach to
“reporting the news” was exposed in the revelations of the machinations of News
Corp one of the world’s behemoth trans-national media corporations part
of media mogul, Rupert Murdock’s media empire. His empire spans media outlets
in Europe, Asia, Australia and the United States of America and includes a 24
hour cable news network Fox News and BSkyB the Wall street Journal, the Times and
Financial times newspapers, 20th
Century Fox media boasting annual revenues in the region of $33 Billion USD.
What emerged from this scandal was
that Rupert Murdock British operations had, over decades, been subverting the
democratic process in the United Kingdom wielding enormous influence over the
setting of the agenda’s of the major British political parties and successive
British Prime Ministers cynically directing their policy agendas.
In return Murdoch offered his endorsement
of political parties and their policies where such policies reflected Murdoch’s
unstated agenda. In effect it was found that Murdoch had for decades used fear and
smear tactics, enticements, blackmail, threats and intimidation to coerce British
prime ministers and leading politicians and civil servants towards serving the
Murdoch agenda.
The democratic process had been
rendered subverted by unaccountable, un-elected super rich individual. This, in
addition to the phone hacking scandal and unlawful invasion of privacy in
search of salacious information has the populous on guard but not yet agitating
loud enough for real change
No more potent a case could be
made for the urgent curtailment of this near unfettered power is essential to
restore the necessary democratic balance this, it seems to me, will require a
judicious level of regulation of the media. It remains to be seen whether the
recent bout of such regulation will achieve the ends sought and assist in regulation
and rationalisation of the Media towards its “articulate premise”.
In recent years two major inquiries
have been held into the operations of the media a judicial enquiry which
resulted in the Hutton Report and the Leveson pubic judicial inquiry the former
of which found BBC journalistic standards to be unsafe and wanting and called its
impartiality into question and the latter dealt with the fallout from News
Corporation corrupt activities which the inquiry found to included
“entrapment,
blackmail, burglaries, theft of mobile phones and making of corrupt payments to
officials in exchange for confidential information. The kind of information
acquired illegally included private communication, physical location of
individuals, bank account records, medical records, phone bills, tax files, and
organisational strategies. Individuals involved in the scandal included
victims, perpetrators, investigators, solicitors, and responsible oversight
officials” Wikipedia
The modern Media conglomerate has
become not only the progenitor of the message but holds near monopoly on the analysis
and the determination of truth. The recent convictions of News International operatives
following the phone hacking trials reinforces the argument for increased
regulation which must be cautiously and intelligently considered.
The guiding overriding objective that should
inform the formulation of regulation should be that of freedom of expression
responsibly exercised and based on fact sensitive investigative unbiased and
impartial pursuit of the truth in the public interest balanced by respect for
the individual’s clearly defined human rights and a fair and balanced
assessment of the public good.
Greater freedom of expression requires
a better informed audience and a better informed audience requires a more open,
transparent and trustworthy Media. The good news is that
a new model of information and news
dissemination has emerged in the guise of the internet and “social media” which
has to some extent democratised information and its access and has the
potential to engender a better informed and more engaged population with a view
to a more cohesive, compassionate and caring society capable and confident enough
to investigate and determine the truth for itself or at least to discover the
questions they should be asking of themselves and their “leadership class”
No comments:
Post a Comment