ADVENT: History
ADVENT and the Media I
"First they came for the tabloids, and I cheered, because I was not a gullible idiot."
- Anonymous comment
I will preface this by saying that this is my own opinion, and it should not be treated any other way, in accordance with ADVENT policy, of course. That is the state of the press under the ADVENT administration, and it is a danger I have not seen in decades. What is concerning isn't that it is based out of a simple wish to suppress dissent, I truly feel like ADVENT is taking these steps because they feel they have to.
The news has strived to keep the public informed, and to bring the truth to light. Sometimes we have succeeded, other times we have failed. Yet at no point did we feel we didn't have an impact. The times change, but the news doesn't, and there are always stories to be told. The threat of censorship is one we have known for decades, but none were brave enough to actually try and take our voices out of fear of being either exposed or rejected by the public.
Yet I fear that is changing under ADVENT.
ADVENT does not care about fairness, independence, or freedom of speech. At least not in a way that we traditionally understand is the American way. The power the people had is gone under ADVENT; those who begin asking questions are taken, silenced, and those who dare to publish the stories critical of the administration are shut down.
The problem stems from perception, and their means of fixing it is all the more insidious, because contrary to popular belief, the threat ADVENT poses to the media is not one of blunt threats, but by the delegitimization of our own hand. They wish to turn the facts against us; they turn reputable journalists into mere opinions dispensers; they dilute the shock of a story by forcing us to state in big, bold letters that this is 'speculation'.
"Good!" some of you may say. "The news should tell the truth." And so they should, but that is why their actions are so dangerous. Since the beginning newspapers have relied on sources, anonymous or otherwise. The problems begin to arise when ADVENT officially states that anonymous sources are simply not acceptable. They want names; proof, as they say, for anything else is baseless speculation.
And their point is valid, but it is also a means of silencing the whistleblowers who want to expose crimes and issues within ADVENT. The moment a story goes up against ADVENT with a named source, it may be successful, but the cost is both the one who was courageous enough to speak in the first place, and no one else coming forward, for fear of being punished.
They have nowhere to go, and the story dies in the darkness.
And then what is left? Should we simply accept that this is the way things are going to be now? That is what ADVENT wants; they want us to only report on what they are doing that is positive, not the secrets they are trying to cover up. They want all of us to fall into a routine of complacency; they want us to focus on the aliens, believing that to be an acceptable cover for all their actions.
The day ADVENT shut down the first newspaper was the day democracy began to die. And I fear that this time it is too late to stop them from accomplishing their goal of delegitimizing the media. We can only trust that there are enough people who are able to read between the lines, past the 'opinion' label and understand what they are unknowingly giving away without a fight is not just transparency, but accountability.
- Opinion piece published in the New York Times by Journalist Brendan Khan
Memo distributed to CNN employees
Due to ADVENT regulations, there are some additional standards we must impose on both our broadcasting and written articles and segments. We have received an official order from the ADVENT Peacekeepers giving us approximately one week to bring our content up to their standards. This must be enforced. ADVENT has been clear that failure to abide by these standards will result in the prosecution of our station and arrest of offending members. If you fail to follow these guidelines you will be immediately terminated and turned over to the Peacekeepers.
Here are the rules ADVENT has stated that can be equally applied to anchors and writers:
1. ALWAYS DISPLAY SOURCES: Include as many details of the source as you can, including full names, job, age, and if possible, reason for contribution. Always be sure to archive proof of correspondence be that via internet archive, phone logs, or recorded conversation (Note that if you record a conversation, you are legally obligated to inform the receiver that they are being recorded). Be prepared to turn over all evidence to inquiries from ADVENT officials.
2. ANONYMOUS SOURCES ARE NO LONGER ACCEPTED AS LEGITIMATE: While ADVENT does not explicitly forbid the usage of anonymous sources, they are not considered reliable unless their anonymity is removed. If an anonymous source is used you must explicitly state that the information in question is not able to be completely verified.
3. ANYTHING THAT COULD COMPROMISE GLOBAL SECURITY MUST BE TURNED OVER TO ADVENT IMMEDIATELY: This includes but is not limited to: classified documents, weapon or technology schematics, unpublished legislation, travel plans or logs of government officials, or alien messages. Failure to turn these over, as well as exact details of how they were acquired, will result in immediate prosecution and investigation of this organization.
4. ALL INCOMING NEWS THAT IS UNABLE TO BE PROPERLY SOURCED/VERIFIED MUST HAVE A DISCLAIMER ATTACHED: For anchors this will be both stated in the broadcast itself, and displayed in clear text about the headline in question. This cannot be removed until the segment or story is completed. For writers, this must be a disclaimer before the start of the article stating the story as 'unsubstantiated' or 'opinion'. Either is acceptable and can be written as normal.
5. OPINION PIECES HAVE BEEN SLIGHTLY CHANGED: Certain anchors will have additional disclaimers on-screen which will either be 'commentary' or 'opinion' displayed in clear text on the top of the screen. They must also explicitly state that the following segment is opinion, and should not be treated as verifiable fact. For writers, standards have not changed overmuch. Simply include a disclaimer before the article.
6. DO NOT INSINUATE ILLEGAL ACTIVITY WITHOUT VERIFIABLE PROOF: The insinuation of any individual as a criminal or suspicious without evidence, circumstantial or otherwise (circumstantial evidence must be explicitly stated as such) is illegal and will result in the arrest of offending members. This applies to both government and civilians.
7. IN THE EVENT OF THE DISCOVERY OF ILLEGAL ACTIVITY, YOU MUST IMMEDIATELY TURN OVER ALL INFORMATION TO THE PEACEKEEPERS: Withholding information on criminal activity is in and of itself a crime, and will be prosecuted accordingly. Do not run a story on criminal activity without first turning over all information related to the situation, and only after the Peacekeepers have given their explicit approval.
8. ALL VIDEO FOOTAGE OR STILL IMAGES OF THE FOLLOWING CANNOT BE SHOWN WITHOUT EXPLICIT APPROVAL FROM ADVENT: Peacekeeper operations, military operations, civil unrest, alien attacks, or terrorism. Note that this does not prohibit coverage of such topics, but the supplemental addition of those mediums. In addition, approval is only needed once before it can be used freely in future broadcasts/articles.
9. PRESS ACCESS TO ADVENT MILITARY/PEACEKEEPER OPERATIONS IS RESTRICTED WITHOUT EXPLICIT AUTHORIZATION: You cannot investigate battlefields, warzones, or crime scenes without approval. Attempting to subvert or bypass these will result in arrest. We will not pay for your legal fees either.
10. ALL PERSONNEL MUST COMPLY WITH ADVENT PERSONNEL: If ADVENT requests assistance or information in any capacity, we are legally obligated to provide it to them. Please direct them to ranking personnel to ensure full and timely cooperation. However, if ADVENT personnel do not have appropriate warrants/paperwork do not comply and immediately contact Peacekeepers for clarification. You have the legal authority to refuse compliance if ADVENT does not have proper authorization.
If you have any further questions, please refer them to your immediate manager or HR.
There were certain days with the Peacekeepers where I really felt good about my job. Whatever they say publicly, the truth is that we really don't like acting against civilians because a few idiots spoil it for the rest of them. But we have our jobs to do and we do them, not much I can really do except say it sucks for them.
However, the times where we nail the bad guys are some of the best in the world because there usually isn't any ambiguity about the guilt of these people. That legwork is done by ADVENT Intelligence and the Special Operations Division; we're the ones who go take the criminals down and drag them to a car kicking and screaming. Nothing feels better than clocking a rapist who was resisting arrest with a stun baton. Might have given him some brain damage, I really don't care. Not like anyone actually cares what happens to scum like him.
One of the highlights of my career was definitely when ADVENT was first starting up and they were aggressively checking pretty much any media publication in existence. The big ones were scrambling to adapt, as were the newspapers. But for some ungodly reason, the tabloids of all things kept doing their thing and posting their crap like normal.
I'd always found the tabloids amusing, you know those magazines you see in checkout lines in grocery stores? That's them, and often with the most fake-sounding headlines in existence. I'd always considered them entertainment, but there are actually people that believe the stuff inside them. Well, they ignored the memo ADVENT sent, and while I think ADVENT is permitted to give at least one second chance, they didn't want to and I don't blame them.
So that's how I found myself on an operation to shut down the National Enquirer, and it was one of the best feelings ever. The Officer said we had free reign to do whatever we wanted to inside, so after arresting everyone inside (Who all were protesting loudly), we gathered up all the printed copies and burned them, and since we don't like to waste perfectly good equipment, salvaged the rest.
But it was the funniest thing, because I also was along for the ride when we arrested their editor-in-chief, and his excuse for being a lying scumbag was, and this is real, the 'freedom of the press'. Good riddance. Needless to say we were all laughing at that, and the last I saw was him being driven away towards a hopefully uncomfortable cell.
No wonder America had problems if that guy was able to publish blatant lies like that and get away with it. Good on ADVENT for stopping him.
- Excerpt from "Keeping the Peace", a collection of short stories from various Peacekeepers detailing various operations and events.
"My job is probably not as exciting as you're thinking, but if it will help dispel some myths about the job me and other ADVENT Intelligence Observers do, then I'm happy to answer your questions. So yes, I'm the guy that's scouring the internet looking for people who like to cause trouble."
"So, what do I do specifically? That depends on the day in all honesty. Our job is randomized each day both so we don't get too complacent, and so if anyone is smart enough to figure out we're there, it isn't the same person as last time. Each day we'll get a short list of instructions. Sometimes it will be monitoring several known sites for designated times; sometimes it will be watching a few videos that have been flagged for review; or sometimes it will be specific investigations into profiles and personalities."
"So let's say I was given the job of monitoring YouTube for a period, which with a site that big, you'd have more than just me, but I digress. First there are several ways of going about proper monitoring, the easiest is using simple keywords that will generally bring up relevant videos. But those generally have limited reach. The most obvious places to check first are news aggregators and political channels, and if I am to watch a video, I do have to do a full report so I have to choose my targets wisely and be selective about what I will watch."
"In the case that I do find a violator, contrary to popular belief, we do not show up at their house and drag them away in the middle of the night. At least with first-time offenders. Oftentimes people are ignorant of the regulations on speech and media distribution, and thus we simply provide them with the guidelines, and most of the time they comply. Our goal is not to suppress free speech entirely, but encourage logical and rational discord. One of the worst things is an uneducated society, and this is a necessary step to reach that goal."
"Now, if this is a repeat offender, that is when we will begin gathering evidence of violations, and once we have enough, we will make the necessary arrests. As shocking as it may be to some people, having several million Twitter followers does not make you immune to the law, nor does having millions of dollars."
"In the case of a site like YouTube, we have come across surprise instances of blatant criminal activity. The so-called 'prank' channels are the worst, and there were quite a few people we arrested after that was brought to our attention. In very rare cases we come across child abuse or domestic assault, which does happen, even on Youtube, though you have to be a special kind of idiot to post that in the first place."
"We generally leave entertainment and gaming channels alone, since those rarely introduce outside politics, but there have been cases where we've had to investigate statements made by certain personalities that were decidedly uninformed. What is important for everyone to understand is that there are real people on this task. AI is not at a stage where this can be done with an algorithm, as it would likely lead to false charges and an inability to distinguish context. Don't worry, we can tell the difference between a joke and a threat."
"The same philosophy extends to other sites. Google is useful for bringing the most blatant offenders to our attention, and the methodology is mostly the same. We observe, record, and pass judgement. We do have priority 'target zones' as it were, but the internet is a massive digital landscape, and we have to take every advantage we can if we hope to bring some order to it."
"The Dark Web? Yes, of course we monitor there as well, although specific details I'm afraid I can't reveal. That is an ongoing operation and a completely different topic from the main internet, where the majority of people are concentrated."
"If there is one thing I hope people get out of this, it is that we don't target anyone unjustly. You say "ADVENT can go fuck itself" as a joke and I'll laugh and likely move on. We don't care about you. We care about terrorist organizers, criminals, child porn sites, havens for racist and fanatical groups, things like that. Things that can hurt our citizens."
"And if you are still with me, do realize that words do have power. This is largely to the ones who think their subscriber counts, followers, or money makes you able to say whatever you want. Many people are easily swayed, and the wrong words can give the wrong impression. There is no more freedom from consequences anymore, and the more people that realize that, the better."
- ADVENT Intelligence Observer [Redacted] to Journalist Jessica Wong in a sanctioned interview