If your considering copy and pasting your latest drive by spam here because you cant find any other place.
DONT!
Oprano has a ZERO tolerance policy for spam. Yours WILL be deleted. If you are looking for more exposure for your product please contact advertising@oprano.com for more information.
Legacy Archived Main BoardBusiness chat and general industry chat. All participation is welcome. Dont post your fucking spam here.
JR, I don't have an opinion on whether PBS is more or less credible than CBS, NBC, ABC, or FOX. I am aware of the way PBS is funded, and why large corporations sponsor shows on PBS. Your stomach and kidney ailments appear to have affected your mentation, as you took my post as an attack on commercial news and a defense of public broadcasting, which it certainly wasn't.
You attacked the credibility of the show by pointing out that it was sandwiched in between Sesame Street and MasterPiece Theatre. I'm still trying to find out why that makes it less credible than a show that follows Cops and leads into The Simpsons, or a show that follows Wheel of Fortune and precedes [insert sitcom here]. Please, if you can pick yourself off the floor long enough to type, I'm just dying to know.
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
JR: it isn't about what you PERSONALLY do, it is what americans on average do - and they get their news in a half hour around dinenr each day and then watch dateline NBC or 20/20 and think they are informed. That is where the average american finds out what is going on in the world.
Yes, CNN covered the story of the protests... and gave as much coverage to the responses from Condi Rice and GW etc... balanced coverage from an american point of view, I guess.
It isn't about "our news is better than your news", and if that is what you think, you miss the point. The point has to do with the control of the news media by the politicians - not direct ownership or direct ordering, but by controlling the news cycle, they control what the american public in general sees, hears, and understands. They spin stories to create public opinion - and the media are often the willing lapdogs attempting to fill up time in newsmagazines and "debate" programs that don't debate anything.
America is one of the two major parties in the event - your news is not likely to be 100% unbiased, now is it? (and if you think it is, just wait for the next "soldier away from home" or "suffering back home" fluff piece created mostly to tug at your heartstrings and create sympathy.
Have some fun - watch the news tonight (say NBC Nightly News, example) and check to see how things are presented - try to keep a non-emotional view of things, and look at how much of the news is "fact", how much is "s'posin'" , how much is "sympathy" and how much is "fluff". You will find that mostly you aren't getting news, you are getting OPINION and SPIN. Try to watch the news discounting that stuff, and you will find the real stories hiding underneither.
How do you think the media keeps finding sympathy plays to put into the news? You think they just turn up?
JR, you are better than this... stop the fluff, get to the guts dude! :-)
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
I have access to the same variety of news sources as you and yet I see that coverage is remarkably the same everywhere. Who. what. when. where. why. That's it. That's the news.
The anti-establishment conspiracy websites you read that tell you how to think and present opinions as fact shouldn't be considered news sources.
An article titled "The Real Reason George Bush is Going to War" is not a news piece. It's an opinion editorial and that is all. No one can read minds in the real world. "ESP for Dummies" is just that.
Last edited by Colin at Feb 17 2003, 07:40 PM
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Colin, too often, US TV news runs exactly that type of story: "the real reason" or "the truth behind" or "war exposed"... the CNN tagline for all of this current thing is "SHOWDOWN IRAQ"... and most of the time anything in that framework is opinion, interviews of past military people, spinning politicos, etc. Not news, but views.
Looks like Blair is taking it on the chin... this will be his last mandate unless things change dramatically.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Feb 17 2003, 05:35 PM You attacked the credibility of the show by pointing out that it was sandwiched in between Sesame Street and MasterPiece Theatre. I'm still trying to find out why that makes it less credible
Let me try. JR is not saying that PBS is less credible. He's saying it's no more credible ... in a very humorous way.
I hope I'm correct. Do I get a cookie, JR?
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Originally posted by Colin@Feb 17 2003, 07:37 PM An article titled "The Real Reason George Bush is Going to War" is not a news piece. It's an opinion editorial and that is all. No one can read minds in the real world. "ESP for Dummies" is just that.
Just want to add:
the problem is too many people don't know the difference between news and views, and the politicos use that to spin public opinion... every time public opinion slips, more "stuff" comes out, not fact, but possibles, data, "new sat pics"... whatever it takes to keep pumping things back up.
Colin Powell had a whole bunch of things he could have distributed to the UN weeks earlier - but the timing was important in the cycle of news and public opinion - created to get the public onside and put pressure on the inspectors to make a bad report so that the US can go to war.
That leads to the "why we should go to war" opinion pieces that crowd the evening news up, and give the general population the mistaken impression that these possible things are facts. Back it up with a heartstring puller of a personality fluff piece on a soldier stuck away from his or her family, and you have a "spin"... none of it is news, all of it is just creating positive feelings towards engaging war.
It's just tough to watch, knowing that too many people aren't able to see the difference between fact and spin.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Alex, your brain must be froze. You haven't said anything new all day. A day in the life of Alex.
"The news cycle" blah blah blah
"Americans are stupid" blah blah blah.
"Americans are brainwashed" blah blah blah.
"Blah blah blah news spin"
You said "all of it is just creating positive feelings towards engaging war". Yeah, right. Interviews with Democrat after Democrat on the Hill that say we need more time for inspections is creating positive feelings for war? (Yes, opinions are roughly split by party. big surprise.) Showing millions of people on TV protesting is creating positive feelings toward war? Polls are shown which show split opinion on the war.
Let me guess. You think Americans that favor a war watch CNN and Fox and think that because they don't have the same information as you. If they read your "alternative news sources" they would suddenly be convinced that your position is correct and they are wrong.
Have you nothing good to say about my fellow Americans?
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 17 2003, 07:48 PM Colin Powell had a whole bunch of things he could have distributed to the UN weeks earlier - but the timing was important in the cycle of news and public opinion - created to get the public onside and put pressure on the inspectors to make a bad report so that the US can go to war.
I agree. Everyone tries to time their efforts for the best effect.
I wonder why the protestors didn't wait another month before they protested. Why do you think they chose the timing they did, Alex? It was meant for maximum effect. The wisest of people have the best timing.
Nothing new here.
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 17 2003, 07:48 PM It's just tough to watch, knowing that too many people aren't able to see the difference between fact and spin.
I never knew you were such an elitist. Alex is wise. Americans are stupid. Sad.
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Colin, you live in a country that is required to put "caution, filling may be hot" on a mcdonalds "hot apple pie"...
'nuff said.
yes, the media is presenting all these different views, but at the end of the day the whitehouse controls the news cycle for the major 6pm newscasts, and it plays them like a fiddle... unless something is really out of whack, the first news story ALWAYS goes to Washington, and usual for the President's view. Using the media to create positive feelings is a fact of life.
Without that "pearl harbour moment" (thread is about this, after all), the court of public opinion is being blitzed hard from all sides.
I don't think your media is trying to lie - but I think they are working with the information as provided and are being played by the whitehouse for all it's worth... and it's sometimes very tough to watch.
that's all.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by Colin+Feb 17 2003, 08:10 PM-->
QUOTE (Colin @ Feb 17 2003, 08:10 PM)
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 17 2003, 08:39 PM Colin, you live in a country that is required to put "caution, filling may be hot" on a mcdonalds "hot apple pie"...
'nuff said.
How to Win Friends and Influence People?
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Nope... facts are facts. Spin them how you like...
The best propaganda is done in a way that the people being targetted don't realize it's anything but the complete truth.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 17 2003, 02:44 PM JR: it isn't about what you PERSONALLY do, it is what americans on average do - and they get their news in a half hour around dinenr each day and then watch dateline NBC or 20/20 and think they are informed. That is where the average american finds out what is going on in the world.
Yes, CNN covered the story of the protests... and gave as much coverage to the responses from Condi Rice and GW etc... balanced coverage from an american point of view, I guess.
It isn't about "our news is better than your news", and if that is what you think, you miss the point. The point has to do with the control of the news media by the politicians - not direct ownership or direct ordering, but by controlling the news cycle, they control what the american public in general sees, hears, and understands. They spin stories to create public opinion - and the media are often the willing lapdogs attempting to fill up time in newsmagazines and "debate" programs that don't debate anything.
Alex, thanks for you good bit of information about "how the average american finds out about the world"
i think most average americans would disagree. if fact, i am not sure where your "average american" statistics are from that tell you what they do exactly to "tell themselves they are informed"
BBC is in every home that has cable TV as far as i know (i have never had cable in the US that did not have BBC). Same with CNN. Same with all other local and national news programs.
i am still not 100% sure why you feel the "average Canadian" or the "average Briton" or the "average Eskimo" is MORE informed, does more to inform themselves or why they for some strage reason has a better perspective on life, the universe and everything. I dont know why you feel there is this massive conspiracy on the part of the Government of the United States to "control the news cycle" - and thus the opinions, beliefs and minds of US citizens.
of course i guess its all easy to say when you cannot do better than making vague and unsubstantiated remarks about "the average american"
you continue to talk about the "government controlling the news cycle" - i really dont understand that. i dont understand what information you think is shown on CNN that is not shown on BBC for example, or visa-versa. i was not aware that the government controls what people see. Was the US government controlling what people saw when CNN and BBC and other journalists were reporting on Desert Storm in Iraq directly from the Al Rashid Hotel in Bagdad (which was hit with a cruise missile)? What the government controlling what people saw in Kosovo when they were busy blowing up bus loads of civilians? exactly where does your government conspiracy (presumably a Republican conspiracy) begin and end?
You just said again that the US Government controls what the "american public in general sees, hears, and understands". thats where Colin is saying that you start to sound like the typical 14 year old gallery submitter from Helsinki on GFY.
You are saying the same thing over and over but in different ways.
1) american news cannot be trusted or believed
2) american people cannot be trusted to have an opinion because if they do, it was the direct result of being brainwashed by the government
3) foreign news sources are more credible than that news which can be seen in the US
4) the opinions of Americans are less credible than those of non-Americans.
JR, no, and I don't really want to go 10 more rounds...
News: Go look at the viewership numbers... about a 30 share watches the nightly news each day. Datelilne, 20/20 and similar shows are very popular.
prop·a·gan·da ( P ) n. The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause.
You are a victim of propaganda... you don't understand the word, it appears... it doesn't mean LIES...
Thus, the rest of your two posts are not important, because you misunderstood me.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 17 2003, 11:03 PM
You are a victim of propaganda... you don't understand the word, it appears... it doesn't mean LIES...
Thus, the rest of your two posts are not important, because you misunderstood me.
Alex
ok... we are making progress.
so far we understand and agree that Dateline and 20/20 "and similar programs" may be popular. so is Teletubbies and Wheel of Fortune.
What does that have to do with Americans not being able to make a competent decision regarding world politics?
you say i am "a victem of propoganda" and then use your word a day dictionary to impress us, but fail to explain why and how government controls me (assuming i am the "average American") the media, my opinions and beliefs.
you conclude by saying the rest of what i said is not important because i did not understand you. i never claimed to understand you. i am telling you again and again that i am trying to understand you. you keep repeating the same things, you cant back it up with facts (other than supposed ratings of 20/20 which has no relevant connection to anything)
you can say anything you want and that does not change the fact that you have repeatedly said, implied, inferred, suggested or stated that:
1) Americans are brain washed.
2) Americans opinions are not relevant or credible.
3) American news is less credible than foreign news
4) the US government controls the news, peoples opinions and beleifs of the citizens of the USA
then you back it up only by posting a websters definition of propoganda and posting alleged ratings for 20/20 and proclaim "Case Closed!". how convienent.
you have made a lot of pretty strong statements about how fucked up and ignorant Americans are - but still have yet to back them up with some concrete facts or a solid, credible explanation... or show why and how the situation is different in Canada or any other Western Country.
Dont be deterred by the impending flood of jokes about Canada and Candian politics... make your case.
Alex, I'm shocked. You have shown your true colors. You are an Uber-elitist. You are smarter than everyone. You dismiss the opinions of everyone but yourself. You are wise. We are stupid. You have a general disdain for humanity. I'm dismayed. You remind me of those on other boards who claim everyone in America is brainwashed and that we are all sheep. Everything is a conspiracy. Our government controls us. "All follow shepherd Bush!"
Yes, spin is put on everything by everyone. Even your choice of words, Alex, is intended as spin -- to influence people with a certain viewpoint. What you completely fail to understand is that most people understand that every article and every reporter has a point of view that shows in their articles and stories . Most people understand commercials slant the truth to sell more product.
Do you really think you are educating anyone on this board as to the definition of spin? Oprano is FULL of spin masters.
Your "whitehouse controls the news" theory from "The Book of Communist Tricks 101" is laughable. Comrade Alex, I call you a communist because you think you like one. Everyone is out to get you. People in positions of power control you but you have figured it out and are exempt. You're the only smart one. Matrix was a movie, man. Not reality.
It does not stand up to scrutiny at all. The problem with such mass psychology 101 theories is that in countries with free press and free markets - there are many of them today - each individual acts on their own accord. Some of us like to say there is a liberal bias in the media. Some today say there is a conservative bias. In truth, it is an average effect only. Some stations are more slanted one way than others and some reporters are more biased than others. One NY Times writer always write pro-liberal stories, for example. She always uses the polls and news that reflect her viewpoints. What Republican is going to write a news story about how great the welfare system is? The same is true of writers for the Times of London, the Jersusalem Post, the Toronto Star, and the Moscow Times. In the end, there are contrasting points of view side by side in any media in the US. The same is true everywhere where there is free press. This is not a top-down referendum from the white house but rather just the individual bias that we all use.
A great example. There are polls that show mixed results on the same subject matter depending on how the questions are asked. You did not go and find the poll that shows the opposite of what you wanted to demonstrate. You showed only the supporting poll. I will assume that you are aware of the fact that there is a wide-range of mixed opinions and polls re: the soon-to-be Iraqi conflict. Maybe you only seek out stories and media that agree with your point of view.
You really think a die-hard Democratoc reporter is going to write a pro-whitehouse speech under a situation in which public opinion is so evenly split?
Your mistake is simple. Any news story you disagree with is propaganda. Any news story you agree with is news. You think you are reading balanced news coverage whereas in reality you are reading only those stories that agree with your position. Self enforced propaganda.
Last edited by Colin at Feb 18 2003, 06:45 AM
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 17 2003, 03:31 PM Colin, do yourself a favor - watch some BBC news, some CBC news, and whatever other international news sources you can find - pick up english language editions of a foreign newspaper - find out what other people think, how the news is reported differently, and you will see a different world.
Living in Canada means I can watch news from at least four different countries (US, Canada, UK, and France) and the stories don't all play the same... it is interesting and it is an eye opener.
Alex
Alex, sigh. You really think you are the only Opranite that reads a variety of news sources? More elitism. I still disagree with your assessment. Mainstream news is pretty much the same everywhere. Some slant. Some rant. Reuters here. Reuters there. Reuters is really everywhere.
The alternative newspapers you read that were written by some guy from his basement in France that claim "America, the Fourth Reich?" certainly ARE "different". I know you read those, Alex. You've posted links to them here before. We remember!
Do you think "The Economist" is controlled by the white house when a Republican is president but suddenly switches to a non-state newspaper when a Democrat is elected? Do you think a NY Times writer that has voted Republican for 28 straight years is going to write pro-white house pieces when Bill Clinton is in the office?
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
tee-hee, nice to see you all tie yourselves in knots.
Colin, notice I talk about "the average american" not "the average opranaut" for an important reason - most of the people here are better informed than most of their fellow country-men-women.
Your government doesn't control your media in that it doesn't WRITE the stories - but it provides a good deal of the material used to build the stories. You all pride yourselves on "balance" such as the democratic reply to the republic president's "state of the union" address - yet nothing in that speech is discussed more than 15 seconds after it is done, because the whitehouse controls the news cycle, has the press on speed dial, has a spokesmen, news confercences, releases, and the authority of being "right" every time they speak, because it is the whitehouse.
The whitehouse doesn't write the news, but they sure do lay down a strong trail of breadcrumbs to lead the media to the required result. The media is independant, but with only a certain collection of facts to work from, the results can for the most part be planned and guided.
If you can't see it, well, then your a victim of it.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 18 2003, 11:39 AM You all pride yourselves on "balance" such as the democratic reply to the republic president's "state of the union" address
What next? Are you going to say "you people"?
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Originally posted by Colin@Feb 18 2003, 07:11 AM Do you think "The Economist" is controlled by the white house when a Republican is president but suddenly switches to a non-state newspaper when a Democrat is elected? Do you think a NY Times writer that has voted Republican for 28 straight years is going to write pro-white house pieces when Bill Clinton is in the office?
I didn't say anything was "state run"... nice to see you using the "black/white" debating tactic of taking the othersides opinion and taking it to the extreme to try to make it silly. I have stated before, and will state again, in case your not reading it all: the US government doesn't RUN the media - but they spoon feed it, poke it, prod it, and make it do the tricks they need it to do. They don't write the stories... but they provide the material, the leads, the tips... breadcrumbs.
The rest of this is such ignorant bullshit that it surprised me it comes from you, Colin. Party politics governs access.
Let's go to the extreme, shall we? When Bush is in office, do you think that Rush Limbaugh often complains about government policy? Nope... cheerleader to the max... rah rah... he gets access, he gets interviews, he gets guests, he gets the inside scoop from the whitehouse, and is certainly one of the recipients of "unnamed whitehouse sources" when it comes to things that make the opposition look bad. With republicans in power, and a conservative feel to the US at the moment, well, he is big man on campus - and an important part of the process of putting pro-bush views out there for people to hear, and understand.
When the tide changes (and it always does), Rush sinks back to being a strident voice of dissent that isn't anywhere near as powerful....
BECAUSE mainstream media isn't on his side at that point. He won't have the inside scoops, he won't have the powerful guests, and he won't be on the side of the majority of voters, and his message won't match that of the spun media, and as a result, his message (right or wrong) won't be as heard or as agreed to - he will be a victim of spun media.
Can I repeat myself one more time? Your government doesn't CONTROL the media in a communist manner, but it spoon feeds it in such as way that the end result is mostly what they want.
BTW, calling someone a communist or an Elitist is just way of say "I don't have a good reply, so I will sink down to name calling and belittling..." - and it really takes away from the experience of trading points of view.
My last on this thread... enough, nothing more to learn here. :-(
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 18 2003, 11:39 AM The whitehouse doesn't write the news, but they sure do lay down a strong trail of breadcrumbs to lead the media to the required result. The media is independant, but with only a certain collection of facts to work from, the results can for the most part be planned and guided.
By the same extension of your faulty conspiratorial logic, Chirac and Putin control the US media because the US media covers their statements - statements which are opposed to the US administration's views. Do you REALLY expect the White House to not to respond to statements by foreign leaders that are opposed to their viewpoints, statements that are being expressed freely through the US media?
Colin Powell gives a press conference. You read what he said in the news.
Chirac gives a press conference. You read what he said it in the news.
Putin gives a press conference. You read what he said it in the news.
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 18 2003, 12:00 PM I didn't say anything was "state run"... nice to see you using the "black/white" debating tactic of taking the othersides opinion and taking it to the extreme to try to make it silly.
Its called humor. You might want to try it sometime, Comrade. Humor by hyperbole, those dangerous daggers demonize devils. Nothing more. Nothing less.
You hardly need ME to make your position seem silly, Alex.
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
well, i would say that its safe to say that this pleasant conversation about who is the "one true master race according to Alex" has totally derailed.
to close this thread, i would like to quote for Alex the words of someone much wiser than both of us.
"its one thing to believe that you are smarter than everyone else... its quite another thing entirely, to believe that everyone else is dumber.
it is the difference between optism and arrogance"
Oh man.. I know you guys love our country, and I love ot to death to, but can you stop for a second and look at this objectively?
Just take a look at facts like in surveys 50% of americans believe that some or all of the hijackers were Iraquis!! DAMN NEAR A MAJORITY has no clue as to who was involved in the 9-11 hijackings! Only 17% said for sure that no Iraqis were among the hijackers the other 33% refused or had "no opinion" on the issue. If that doesn't give you room for pause nothing will. The amount of ignorance that requires is ASTOUNDING! Just how stupid and inattentive to news can people in the US be to get a result like this? http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/4911975.htm And 2/3 of the people who responded in that survey felt they were well informed and had a good grasp of the issues.
Read that article and the ignorance will scare the living daylights out of you!!
Originally posted by Colin@Feb 18 2003, 02:17 PM TheEnforcer,
Didn't your mom ever teach you to not to jump in on the losing side after that battle is already over?
ROFLMAO!! With all due respect Colin, if that doesn't scare the living daylights out of you on the level of attention we as Americans pay attention to the news, I don't know what will.
That's about as bad a picture you could paint as to the level of depth we pursue to our knowledge of even the most horrific event that has befallen this country.
Originally posted by TheEnforcer@Feb 18 2003, 02:26 PM ROFLMAO!! With all due respect Colin, if that doesn't scare the living daylights out of you on the level of attention we as Americans pay attention to the news, I don't know what will.
That's about as bad a picture you could paint as to the level of depth we pursue to our knowledge of even the most horrific event that has befallen this country.
Alex doesn't just claim that news in the US is biased. He claims that it is MORE biased than everywhere else in the world. Alex doesn't just claim that Americans have a lack of knowledge regarding current events but that they have less knowledge than people elsewhere in the world.
Everything is comparative.
He hasn't demonstrated that and neither have you. If you say "People are stupid" there must be some comparative meter stick you have in mind. Most people mean "They are more stupid than I" when they say something like that. I don't know what YOU mean. Please enlighten us. I am really surprised. Who are Americans more stupid than?
I used to think it was liberals who were compassionate and thought of all people as being equal. Now I see liberal after liberal calling "the people" dumb and incapable of thought. "Sheep". A change in the weather? The times they are a changing. Hopefully PD will take the other side so my fears don't run away from me.
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Colin, I am not going to participate in this discussion any further. But can you please refrain from attributing things to me that I did not say? I never said that the US media is "MORE biased than everywhere else in the world". I hate it when you have to make shit up to think that you won. Old conservative trick, did you learn it listening to Rush on the radio? Or maybe from reading the Rush website (bullshit half truths 24 hours per day)?
The level of discussion drop when people are forced to lie ti make others look bad, Colin, I honestly thought better of you. I guess I learned something today
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 18 2003, 03:18 PM Colin, I am not going to participate in this discussion any further. But can you please refrain from attributing things to me that I did not say? I never said that the US media is "MORE biased than everywhere else in the world".
You don't need me to position you. You do it yourself when you insult "average Americans" and say the White House controls the US news media.
You say the "news media is controlled by the politicians". You also say "party politics governs access". Yet you are faced with the contradiction of there being two political parties in the US with nearly equal sized constituents, with somewhat equal representation in the press, and having to explain via "hocus pocus you're not in focus" mechanisms how CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, The New York Times, and the Washington Post all deliver "White House propaganda" that is digested and read by non-thoughtful Americans that believe whatever they are told depite that fact that opinion regarding these current events is very split.
You can't wave your hands and dismiss the fact that you said 'Colin, you live in a country that is required to put "caution, filling may be hot" on a mcdonalds "hot apple pie"... ' You have many negative things to say about the US. I'd say you are obsessed with it.
Last edited by Colin at Feb 18 2003, 04:18 PM
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Colin, sorry, but you obviously are having an understanding problem. Nothing I can post here can fix it. You don't seem able to even read what is posted without misunderstanding simple statements, and taking statements on one issue and applying it to another.
You post a poll, I post a poll, I discuss yours, you call me "obsessed" and don't even both to comment on anything. Every time any fact comes up you don't like, you just dismiss it with name calling and extremism.
You quote things to your advantage, in order to change meaning. Yes, I said the "news media is controlled by politicians", but I said it like this:
"The point has to do with the control of the news media by the politicians - not direct ownership or direct ordering, but by controlling the news cycle, they control what the american public in general sees, hears, and understands"
You make it sound like the politicians write the stories and use the newscaster as puppets, shoving their politican hands up their asses to make them puppet the party line. Wrong. I said that by controlling the news cycle, they color and control what stories are important and which ones gets buried.
However, I know you won't actually read what I just posted, rather you will pick a few words out, string them together, and laugh at the results, rather than actually considering the concepts presented. It's pointless, it's useless... your a victim and you don't know it... which makes you the best victim possible.
You may now mentally masturbate for your own benefit.
Alex
Last edited by RawAlex at Feb 18 2003, 05:22 PM
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
While I was posting, Colin, you once again proved that you aren't reading what I post, rather you make it up and try to pin the entire "liberal / commie conspiracy" on me.
Your stunning in your gall - and stunning in how silly you make yourself look.
I shake my head in disbelief.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 18 2003, 05:04 PM While I was posting, Colin, you once again proved that you aren't reading what I post, rather you make it up and try to pin the entire "liberal / commie conspiracy" on me.
It's not at all clear what you ARE trying to say, Alex.
For two days you have been saying nothing but "White House". Waves hands. "Media". Waving more hands. "Control".
"You're the victim of Propaganda. If you don't believe you are the victim of propaganda, you are the victim of propaganda".
Some sort of lefty communist witch hunt. Bedevil or be deviled. No examples. No illustrations. No explanations. Just a frozen tundra of statements with no roads leading to the real world.
One man's news is the next man's propaganda. Put that in your pipe and light up, my friend but don't inhale.
Last edited by Colin at Feb 18 2003, 06:08 PM
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Amazon.com
With a slew of simultaneous scandals to his credit and numerous ongoing investigations pending, President Clinton has been bombarded by the media in a fashion not seen since the last days of the Nixon administration. Despite this unwanted attention, Clinton has managed to maintain lofty approval ratings and successfully deflect even the most ardent attacks. How does he do it? This question is answered in full in Spin Cycle: Inside the Clinton Propaganda Machine, an engrossing, backroom look at how news is created and packaged in the White House and the methods used to distribute it to the public. In painting a detailed picture of the hand-to-hand combat known as a press conference, Kurtz shows how the use of controlled leaks, meticulously worded briefs, and the outright avoidance of certain questions allows the White House to control the scope and content of the stories that make it to the front page and the nightly network news. As Kurtz makes clear, the president and First Lady are convinced that the media are out to get them, while the journalists covering the White House are constantly frustrated at the stonewalling and the lack of cooperation they encounter while trying to do their jobs. In the middle is White House press secretary Mike McCurry, a master at defusing volatile situations and walking the fine line with the press. Though less paranoid and cynical of the media than Clinton, he often finds himself on both ends of personal attacks and vendettas that veer far outside the arena of objective reporting. The anecdotes and carefully buried information Kurtz has uncovered give Spin Cycle a brisk pace, along with ample invaluable information that cuts to the core of this age of media overkill. The author of Hot Air and Media Circus and a longtime media reporter for the Washington Post, Kurtz is uniquely qualified to report on the status of news dissemination in the United States. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
I know EXACTLY what Alex is referring too. It's all in the story telling though. Everyone is acting in their best interest and we'd be insane to think that Clinton or Bush or Reagan or Carter would not make statements in their best interest. That's all though. If you want to use worlds like "spin cycle", "propaganda", and "stonewalling" you're painting a certain picture and making a leap of faith. "meticulously worded briefs"? Those damned scammers! What is the author trying to convince me of?
Everyone is acting in their best interests; Chirac, Blair, Bush, Putin, Democrats, Republicans and it is all on the news here. The BBC is not covering the secret european meetings and CNN ignoring them. If you want to read what the white house is saying, you can read it on the BBC website also. Are they part of the white house news cycle too?
Alex may try and skirt around it now but he said "As soon as you leave the US and start looking at other news sources you start to see that there are at least 2 sides to every story". Well, in the US we have a two party system that keeps that in check very well. World events are political events and in America opinions are often split down party lines. Some make fun of the "tabloid-like news shows" of FOX, CNN, MSNBC but we can turn on the television at any time of the day and watch interviews with congressman, former presidents, and leaders of other countries. Much of them have opinions that differ from the white house position. Our television news shows create airwaves of dissent.
Alex's contention is that we don't receive balanced converage in America because we have a lack of information resources, our media is controlled by the white house, and in his exact words "The point has to do with the control of the news media by the politicians".
I argue that we DO receive balanced coverage precisely because of the two party system. People participate in that system, the politicians do, and do does the media.
There is no major issue regarding the US/Iraq situation that is NOT being covered by FOX, CNN, etc. I've heard the BBC covers news differently and in my experience it doesn't. It's the same old song and dance. Yes, the format and style is different - in the same way that FOX and CNN are drastically different from each other but the news is the same.
Alex is one of those people that turns on one of those news talk shows with one liberal and one conservative and gets so upset at what the conservative says that he thinks the show is anti-liberal biased - despite the fact that there are two hosts - one on each side.
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Originally posted by JR@Feb 19 2003, 07:22 AM Alex wont reply now.
He is busy negotiating his surrender to France.
It's an awful catch-22, just like the one Alex thinks Bush is in. Alex painted himself into a corner by twice saying he won't post anymore but then he is not showing backbone by NOT posting.
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
02-17-2003
Linear Mode
