Dear Minnesota Journalists,
As Phillip C. Parrish, a retired U.S. Navy Lieutenant Commander with 21 years of service in naval intelligence, specializing in counter-terrorism and foreign policy, and now a candidate for Governor of Minnesota in 2026, I write to you with a deep sense of duty and firsthand insight into the world of information warfare. My military career exposed me to the tactics of propaganda, disinformation, and narrative manipulation used by adversaries to influence public opinion and undermine democracies. Drawing from this experience in the intelligence community, I’ve seen how subtle influences can shape perceptions, often without those involved fully realizing it. Today, as a veteran, educator, and whistleblower who has fought for transparency in our state, I urge you—our frontline defenders of truth—to reclaim your independence and scrutinize the forces at play in your profession.
In an era where trust in media is at a crossroads, pause and reflect on who is truly directing your editorial choices—whether it’s regarding what constitutes genuine public interest versus alleged popular interest driven by sensationalism or external agendas. Scrutinize the polling pools that often underpin these decisions: Who funds them? How are samples selected, and do they truly represent Minnesotans, or are they skewed to amplify certain narratives? History shows that manipulated polls can sway coverage and public opinion, as seen in election misinformation cases in our state.
Furthermore, ask yourselves why so many in our profession continue to align with owners and producers who have a proven track record of being wrong and spreading or amplifying false information. From the rapid spread of conspiracy theories following tragic events like the 2025 Minnesota lawmaker murders—where misinformation flooded social media and was echoed in broader coverage—to outdated or debunked health claims that legacy outlets have occasionally failed to correct swiftly, these lapses erode credibility. Why perpetuate ties to entities that prioritize clicks over accuracy, or that have historically cooperated with intelligence influences, potentially at the expense of journalistic integrity?
I invite you to think critically about plausible behaviors and methods from past CIA operations, such as Operation Mockingbird, which involved recruiting journalists, planting stories, and shaping narratives to manipulate public opinion during the Cold War. While direct CIA involvement today is speculative and constrained by law, some media personalities may have adopted similar tactics—such as selective framing, anonymous sourcing to push agendas, or fear-mongering—to advance their careers, gain influence, or align with powerful interests. My time in naval intelligence taught me to recognize these patterns not as conspiracy, but as real risks to informed discourse. Recognizing them isn’t about paranoia; it’s about safeguarding the Fourth Estate and protecting Minnesotans from division.
To aid in this vigilance, here is a list of warning signs to look for in your coworkers and colleagues that may indicate adoption of propaganda-like methods:
1. Frequent Use of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD): Colleagues who consistently employ scare tactics to drive narratives, exaggerating threats without balanced evidence, mirroring classic propaganda tools.
2. Name-Calling and Ad Hominem Attacks: Resorting to personal insults or labels against sources or subjects instead of engaging with facts, a tactic to discredit opposition without substance.
3. Reluctance to Accept Contradictory Evidence: Dismissing logical counterarguments or new information that challenges a preferred storyline, often a sign of entrenched bias or manipulated intent.
4. Over-Reliance on Anonymous or Unverifiable Sources: Pushing stories based on “insider” tips without transparency, reminiscent of planted intelligence leaks.
5. Amplification of Divisive Narratives: Prioritizing content that polarizes audiences, such as unchecked conspiracy claims, which can spread rapidly and align with disinformation strategies.
6. Sudden Shifts in Coverage Aligned with External Pressures: Abrupt changes in editorial focus that coincide with political or corporate interests, potentially indicating undue influence.
By questioning these elements and fostering a culture of accountability, you can reclaim journalism’s role as a pillar of our Constitutional Republic. Minnesotans deserve reporting that’s independent, accurate, and unafraid to challenge power—including within our own ranks. As your future Governor, I commit to supporting ethical journalism that serves the people, not hidden agendas. Let’s work together for a transparent Minnesota.
Sincerely,
Phillip C. Parrish
LCDR, USN (Ret.)
Candidate for Governor of Minnesota 2026
###