Free Press

[RobBob]

This is becoming a debate about what shade of green is green. I still maintain that what matt was originally talking about is the fact that the normally-liberal press is unquestioning & apparently supportive of a Republican president as he prepares for war with Iraq.

 

And that would be weird, except for the huge amount of interest and influence that AIPAC and Israel have on our nation's politics and press. And this war will do a tremendous favor to Israel's security.

 

We have sold our objectivity over the Israel-Palestine problem (and its importance in solving the Muslim problems with the US) so far down the river, it has become irretrievable.

[allthumbs]

Matt, check out these dudes press . Also Fox News.

[Toast]

I think we're all missing the point. The state run free press concept is all about lack of diversity, a lack of divergent viewpoints, a lack of choice about what to listen to, evaluate and form intelligent, informed opinions about. Whether the mainstream press is left or right, it's all spewing out essentially the same, not-so-objective, brain candy.

 

Somebody hit right on it earlier... media is consolidating as a result of changes in FCC regulation being steered by Dubya's appointee, Michael Powell. These changes are near-stealth. They get little press as there is no sex, money or scandal associated with their headlines. However, the changes they will lead to will likely be an undermining of the fundamental building blocks of and informed democracy (brain candy = mind rot.)

 

Now that's worth fighting for.

[mattp]

Patty Murray calling Saddam a humanitarian? What the fuck?

I have to do some work now, but let me take a shot at this one. A certain former president called Nelson Mandela a "Terrorist" right up until the very day that he received the nobel peace prize. He was not criticized for this. Not at all.

 

I agree with what Patty Murray said - she did not say that Saddam was a humanitarian. She said that he, and I believe she actually talked more about Bin Laden in this context, had helped build infrastructure and helped people to feed theirselves and that in so doing they had built some good will. These are true facts that our government wants to ignore in portraying these poeople as the agents of evil and portraying ourselves as the great white saviors.

 

Gotta go, but I'll talk w/ ya later.

Edited January 8, 2003 by mattp

[gregm]

built infrastructure and helped people to feed theirselves. These are true facts that our government wants to ignore in portraying these poeople as the agents of evil and portraying ourselves as the great white saviors.

 

let's not forget all the wonderful things the nazis did for germany before the war started - major public works projects and economic revival. i remember my dad talking about how the nazis modernized a lot of the farming systems and public health facilities in the rural part of germany he was from. the nazis were shakers and movers - they got stuff done. and they had an agenda, just like saddam.

[iain]

I found the press' constant ridicule of the Railiens' religion pretty funny. there's some flamebait for ya'lls.

[allthumbs]

That's cause the friggin press had a slow week going and nothing better to report on. At least that's what they said to cover their ass. Jean Ennerson blows

[Greg_W]

let's not forget all the wonderful things the nazis did for germany before the war started

 

Yeah, Hitler commissioned the Volkswagen. Without a humanitarian like Adolf, what would all you dirty hippies drive?

[j_b]

Also Fox News.

 

"As for Gore's assertion that the Washington Times and Fox News hew to the marching orders of the White House's Mayberry Machiavellis (in the memorable phrasing of the very former Bush adviser John Dilulio) – where is the debatable point in that? Tony Blankley, the Washington Times' opinion editor, has made much of his ties to Republican activists on the Hill, even used them as sources in editorials. And need we remind anyone that John "Let Me Call Florida" Ellis, the head of Fox's election coverage in 2000, is Dubya's cousin?

 

 

Even more troubling, if equally apparent, than the White House calling the shots at Fox, is Fox calling the shots at the White House, a matter raised almost tangentially in the Bob Woodward play-by-play, "Bush at War." Woodward reports that in the days after 9/11, Fox chairman Roger Ailes – who had worked as a media adviser for the president's father – wrote Bush a note on how to proceed. "The American public would tolerate waiting and would be patient, but only as long as they were convinced that Bush was using the harshest measures possible," Woodward writes, describing Ailes' memo. "Support would dissipate if the public did not see Bush acting harshly." "

 

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=14789

[allthumbs]

whatdoya call a volkswagon full of blonds? Farfromthinkin

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

Quoth Greg Dub:

"Here's another example: Trent Lott's statement at Strom Thurmond's birthday party. Why didn't anyone come out to give some balance to the attacks that were made on Lott for what he said?"

 

Dr. Flash Amazing recalls hearing a few small murmurs about it perhaps being a misunderstanding, but really, "liberal media" or not, no one's going to come out and say something that could get them branded as a racist or a racist sympathizer. It didn't take but a minute to see what a shitstorm Lott landed himself in, and no politician or media outlet wants to get themselves in that kind of pickle. Even the prez distanced himself from Lott, and if Bush is in on the "liberal media" conspiracy, DFA is moving to Canada.

 

Y'all are right, though, about the media being in it mostly for the dollar. It's a business, and they need to sell sell sell. Really, the idea of a liberal media OR a conservative media is pretty flawed. What would make the most sense is a spinelessly centrist media, not wanting to report with too much of an obvious slant to one side or the other, and consequently not digging too deep into one issue or another, unless it involves murder or sex. Lean too far in one direction, and you alienate half your PAYING audience. How else do you suppose that conservatives find so much "liberal" slant to squawk about and liberals find so much "conservative" slant to squawk about? Fuckers are walking the tightrope down the middle, trying to preserve the almightly bottom line.

Edited January 8, 2003 by Dr_Flash_Amazing

[j_b]

whatever Saddam may be, let's not forget we supported him until it suddenly was not in our interest anymore. We have supported equally worse in the past and will continue to support equally worse in the future. So please, spare us the hypocrisy.

[mattp]

Maybe you are right DFA.

 

Does anybody have an example of how an issue has been consistently portrayed - in news stories and in headlines - with a "liberal slant" in major newspapers or on national TV?

[allthumbs]

DFA, I think that's what Fox tries to do.

[iain]

quiz: which is a cult leader?

 

the media portrays one as a spiritual icon, the other as a laughable kook.

[allthumbs]

All I can think of is the liberal slant channel 4,5, & 7 give to the gun issue. They're all very anti-gun.

[RobBob]

Can anyone disagree with this statement?:

 

From a strategy standpoint, George Bush Sr.'s failure to press on to Baghdad and remove Saddam represents one of the US's biggest military mistakes in the 20th century.

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

It hardly matters, Iain; everybody knows the Pope is a 33-and-a-third-degree Freemason occult satanist who was part of the UN conspiracy to cover up the pyramids on Mars and wants us all to get mark of the Beast microchips implanted in our right hands so we can move to a cashless society and the Gray Men can take over as soon as George W. Bush/Antichrist declares a state of emergency. It's all there in Revelations; haven't you been decoding your Bible?

[iain]

no but I've climbed revelations, does that count?

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

http://freemasonwatch.freepress-freespeech.com/

[johnny_destiny]

All this turmoil in the world today is a plot by the ALIENS to distract us while they take over human kind for their plot to run a sex industry for intergalactic travlers. Hollywood and the world governments have been in on this for a long time as most are ALIEN. The ALIEN CONSPIRACY has been going on all during WWI and then really took off during WWII since the entire world was looking in the wrong direction. Look at Henry Kissinger he is ALIEN. Rumored to have a libido of a 16 year old. He even states that power is the ultimate aphrodisiac. He was not allowed to enter into the Bush Cabinet because all the worlds eyes would be focused too closely on a real ALIEN.

The ALIENS are grooming us for the take over which will take place so smoothly that resistance will be futile. Human kind will be slaves for eternity.

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

Your Irreverence borders on Heresy. You probably want to Barbecue the Pope, don't you? Maybe you should take a walk in the Shoes of the Fisherman before going on a rampage like Scarface. You think you're a Boy Prophet, but you're Dreamin', dude. You need to lay off the Aggro Monkey routine and Kill the Hate, before you set off a violent Chain Reaction.

[j_b]

Fuckers are walking the tightrope down the middle, trying to preserve the almightly bottom line.

 

since when, regurgitating the party line without checking other widely available sources, amounts to walking the tightrope down the middle?

[iain]

thanks DFA, I'm now deaf from that website blasting my headphones.

 

So from observation, which is a more believable story, and why is one considered a silly little cult by the news?

 

Christianity: guy is born from a virgin, dies, comes back to life, becomes all-powerful individual watching over us.

 

Raelianism: aliens are the source of humanity.

 

Disclaimer: I'm bored. I am making no claims about my own beliefs.

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

Do you honestly think the mainstream press could get away with veering too far to one side or the other and not suffer a major hit to the pocketbook? They need to stay as mushy as possible to keep their viewers/readers/listeners.