Ford Focus Forum banner

1 - 20 of 67 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
615 Posts
Intentional return of self to Stone Age. Wtf?


C'mon asteroid!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,090 Posts
Many Buddhist statues, relics, and temples were destroyed by Muslim groups in Pakistan and throughout the region not long ago... nothing but their own narrow beliefs will do for some idiots.

We don't have to wait for an asteroid, a few nukes will level all karma.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
615 Posts
Too much blowback from nukes, an asteroid is an "act of god".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
235 Posts
BBC rarely wrong? Heh. Classy. Somehow on 911 they reported building 7s collapse what, 20-30 min before it did? They're just as wrong as any 'media outlet'. Their business is fear and hate mongering. It sells unfortunately.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,766 Posts
The mass media reports what the government and corporations pay them to report. The truth, about any matter, is entirely irrelevant. It's why I haven't watched any mass news station in several years. Even weather reporting has gotten out of control. They're often dramatizing storms to be way worse than they actually are to boost their viewers/listeners.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,090 Posts
... They're often dramatizing storms to be way worse than they actually are to boost their viewers/listeners.

(Had to repost that... great one!)

A few days ago Chicago's WGN was broadcasting a Cub's game and there was a rain delay, so they switched to weather coverage of the T-storms and potential tornadoes that were moving across the top third of Illinois. This was not a problem as long as the game was paused, but they started to spin out of control and way over sensationalized a thunderstorm... to the point where they stayed with the coverage (talking to people who where taking cell phone pictures of lightning and other lame stuff) even after the game restarted.

The producer must have been an idiot (or enamored with the weatherman), because it was a full inning later that they finally resumed coverage of the game, but then it was split-screen with the game as a smaller overlay on the radar image and the weatherman and the cell phone pix. They caught a bunch of crap for their out-of-proportion concern (amounting to doomsday like coverage of "apocalyptic weather" events), and their choice of promoting fear, rather than serving the interests of those who were tuned in to watch the game. It seemed like they were trying to accumulate their minimum number of hours of "public service announcements" all at once... a simple scroll and small radar image in the corner of the screen almost always works well enough, no one needs the hair-raising claptrap that the news and weather have turned into, just to sell commercial time to the people they have successfully scared.

That said, I watch the BBC when I'm in front of the TV at the right time, and listen to a small variety of radio news (non-mainstream and NPR). I find the BBC does less sensationalizing than American networks, and usually enlightens me about events without putting a lot of SPIN on them.
 

·
****ney-4-Life!
Joined
·
3,685 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
BBC rarely wrong? Heh. Classy. Somehow on 911 they reported building 7s collapse what, 20-30 min before it did? They're just as wrong as any 'media outlet'. Their business is fear and hate mongering. It sells unfortunately.

What part of 'rarely' are you struggling with....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,912 Posts
I've never met a sane person who brought up WTC 7 in casual conversation, so...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,912 Posts
You're wrong. Don't dismiss them as a rag-tag army. Accept that we've a fight on our hands. Is it at all possible to beat a diety?
He's saying the mass media don't care about facts.

I'm not even sure what you think he was saying, the full sentence was "The truth, about any matter, is entirely irrelevant" and both surrounding sentences were about the media.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
615 Posts
He's saying the mass media don't care about facts.

I'm not even sure what you think he was saying, the full sentence was "The truth, about any matter, is entirely irrelevant" and both surrounding sentences were about the media.
Mass media is profit driven, product that the audience consumes the most allowing for increases in advertising revenue tends to jump to the fore as far as the "news" cycle is concerned. It's all just pandering to the audience now. I don't think corporations with shareholders have any drive one way or the other as far as truth and facts are concerned. Most of the corporate news channels are only trying to inflame or fulfill a demographic position.

Public broadcasters tend to be less concerned with shareholders, hence their slight advantage towards reporting stories. They are hamstrung by political interference by the government of the day if funding is through taxpayers(CBC, BBC etc).

Donation funding is likely the only actual source of unbiased viewpoint, but they are hampered by limited production money and competing for time and reporter quality with corporate news product.

It's always best to eat a cheeseburger from multiple joints before forming an opinion on cheeseburgers in general. I watch as many different sources as I can, and try to form my opinions by consensus.

The news has changed mightily since I was a kid, it's dissemination is mostly not in the public interest anymore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,090 Posts
...
The news has changed mightily since I was a kid, it's dissemination is mostly not in the public interest anymore.
Not to suggest that the rest of your post wasn't worth commenting on, I just agree too much to have anything to add. But this...

The news used to be about keeping the public informed, so they could prepare for coming potentialities that could impact their well-being, either for better or for worse. Now anything that might generally help to improve peoples lot, is either jealously guarded, if it will alert corporate rivals, or released with fanfare and hyperbole, if it will sell stocks or advance the portfolio position of a cabal of wealthy insider's, or silenced, if it will disrupt the dominant paradigm (like graphene capacitors will disrupt big oil profits, unless they were to get on board and start producing them themselves).

Sadly for us, somewhere along the line a bunch of influential conservatives determined that the news coverage produced in America needed to be more "managed" (mostly due to a combination of Cold War paranoia and fallout from Vietnam War coverage), and that the common man's right-to-know must be subordinated to "national security", which really means "protecting political and economic advantage for a few"... most, if not all, political tyrannies hide behind a waving flag and/or enflamed fears of the destruction of an undefined thing called "our way of life". Anything or anyone exposing the hypocrisy inherent in this "management" is compromised by either being labeled a "crank" or a "political hack". Anything or anybody exposing the specific lies or the obfuscation of truth that advantages "the few" and penalizes "the many", is labeled as a "criminal" and/or "dispatched" through total character assassination or actual assassination (depending on how dangerous they are to the maintenance of a dominant paradigm, balanced by how known and loved they are)... American "news" will spin the tale however "the few" (read: "oligarchs and friends/close minions") demand it be spun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
615 Posts
Not to suggest that the rest of your post wasn't worth commenting on, I just agree too much to have anything to add. But this...

The news used to be about keeping the public informed, so they could prepare for coming potentialities that could impact their well-being, either for better or for worse. Now anything that might generally help to improve peoples lot, is either jealously guarded, if it will alert corporate rivals, or released with fanfare and hyperbole, if it will sell stocks or advance the portfolio position of a cabal of wealthy insider's, or silenced, if it will disrupt the dominant paradigm (like graphene capacitors will disrupt big oil profits, unless they were to get on board and start producing them themselves).

Sadly for us, somewhere along the line a bunch of influential conservatives determined that the news coverage produced in America needed to be more "managed" (mostly due to a combination of Cold War paranoia and fallout from Vietnam War coverage), and that the common man's right-to-know must be subordinated to "national security", which really means "protecting political and economic advantage for a few"... most, if not all, political tyrannies hide behind a waving flag and/or enflamed fears of the destruction of an undefined thing called "our way of life". Anything or anyone exposing the hypocrisy inherent in this "management" is compromised by either being labeled a "crank" or a "political hack". Anything or anybody exposing the specific lies or the obfuscation of truth that advantages "the few" and penalizes "the many", is labeled as a "criminal" and/or "dispatched" through total character assassination or actual assassination (depending on how dangerous they are to the maintenance of a dominant paradigm, balanced by how known and loved they are)... American "news" will spin the tale however "the few" (read: "oligarchs and friends/close minions") demand it be spun.
Trickle down information is as effective as trickle down economics. :)

I actually don't think people in news corporations are indifferent to the truth, I just think that the economics of production of news consumption is where the current system has massive shortfalls. Left or right of centre news is spun to appeal to a targeted demographic for financial gain. The news used to be indifferent to politics, now it's mostly editorial opinions about a set of facts. Which in a competitive market, seems like an inevitable result. Different agencies all reporting the same stories must differentiate themselves from every other organization, resulting in spin, as well as hyper focus on singular stories to keep from being trumped. It's really no different than when the first burger joint added bacon to a cheese burger, to stay competitive, they all had to use bacon or lose business...


Yes, I want a damn bacon cheese burger...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,090 Posts
Trickle down information is as effective as trickle down economics. :)

I actually don't think people in news corporations are indifferent to the truth, I just think that the economics of production of news consumption is where the current system has massive shortfalls. Left or right of centre news is spun to appeal to a targeted demographic for financial gain. The news used to be indifferent to politics, now it's mostly editorial opinions about a set of facts. Which in a competitive market, seems like an inevitable result. Different agencies all reporting the same stories must differentiate themselves from every other organization, resulting in spin, as well as hyper focus on singular stories to keep from being trumped. It's really no different than when the first burger joint added bacon to a cheese burger, to stay competitive, they all had to use bacon or lose business...

Yes, I want a damn bacon cheese burger...
I agree that there is a large component of "Hansel and Gretel" in news focus... where one can readily see how the mass media could lose its way in a "forest" of competition... only, in this case, I fear the kids won't out-smart the witch, but will be eaten instead. I'm not sure what can be done to better serve the country and the rest of the world (and save those poor kids), except to get rid of commercial television... something that will never happen as long as Capitalism remains intact.

However, the point I was railing on about above is a bit different... in that the news media itself is more of a cross between a couple other naïve-youth characters. From one perspective, the news media is like Little Red Riding Hood, with The Wolf as a combination of giant corporations (like Monsanto) and our military and secret police agencies, none of which want even the slightest, teeny bit of a version of the TRUTH to escape to the light of day... I fear for Little Red, because, despite the fact that there are a number of Woodsman out there, they are all quickly dispatched by the Wolf. From a different perspective, the news media is Snow White, with the vain Wicked Witch played by a combination of owners of media outlets (like Rupert Murdock w/lackeys), who care more about their ideological/political agenda than they ever do about REALITY, and the Entertainment Industry (especially its moguls), which cares only for more air-time to promote itself, and not so much for anything that's the slightest bit ENLIGHTENING... I fear for Snow, because, although there are many more than "seven dwarfs" trying to help guide the poor girl, they are dwarfs compared to the owners and moguls.

That leaves all of us to figuratively either be eaten by the predators, or snowed under by the fakes, or actually find our own way to the truth that fits reality.
 
1 - 20 of 67 Posts
Top