|
Maybe the media has decided that it is time to rebuild its image after being used as a WMD by Bush and Cheney. Like all those commies in the Diplomatic Corps who won't go to Iraq and be blown up. The Canadian Media is even worse n2sooners!! That could have some truth tabsey. Actually it's been business as usual for longer than Bush OR Clinton have been in office. No use trying to minimize or re-define the substance of the clip. It is of a level far more deeply ingrained than just reactions one way or the other, to events of the last 5 years. And even if it was a case of "rebuilding it's image" after what you see as "being used" etc,......they are not supposed to be there to take one side or another. They are there to report what HAPPENS. I see many of similar mindset referring to the media as either being good, honest,balanced OR "tools", "used by", biased, unfair,.......all based on whether you like what a politician said or the gov't. did, or what happened in... If the paper (or ?) is reporting something you don't like that happened or was said, the paper didn't say it.To explain my words, this means that it was not the media source which said or did the thing that you don't like, they are reporting what someone ELSE said or did. THEY didn't say or do it ! If they report Cheney saying something about the nuclear threat of Iran, "you" might rail against the media that reported it as working for Cheney. When discussing the topic, that mis-conception would have to be ironed out first before proceeding, which keeps any discussion of whatever was said in the story on a level of gamesmanship and deception. Makes it hard. Maybe the media has decided that it is time to rebuild its image after being used as a WMD by Bush and Cheney.Being used by Bush and Cheney, or following lock step with all the prominent democrats who were saying the exact same thing from Bill Clinton and his wife to Teddy Kennedy to John Kerry? They are following lock step with the democrats now, they have been for decades, I don't see any reason to believe they weren't doing the exact same thing before the war. Also keep in mind that for all their often touted ethical journalistic integrity, the media conglomerates are private companies, thus, for profit. That goes for Fox, CNN, NY Times, etc...That's just a factor though, since there's clearly agenda bias in many "non-profit" orgs, like NPR, or many other online sources. Oh...and I'm not trying to demonize corporate profit as so often occurs. Just to see it as they are, and not on some pedestal. Hah! I didn't need a Harvard study to reveal this "truth" about biased media. Their motto: whatever gets a buck in the coffers, whether truth or not. CNN = 'Corrupt News Network' and almost the same for Fox. Holy newsprint Batman, where can we find the truth? Well, at least the news isn't state run. Oh wait... Its easy to criticize the media, and they deserve it some of the time, but who's "Truth" are they supposed to report? No matter what they report SOMEONE is going to take issue. I think we as thinking, voting citizens need to take it upon ourselves and educate ourselves. We should never rely on a sole media forum for our news. Good idea...but how do you choose your media of education? I'm convinced that we all have a preconceived *world-view*. We have a life-created set of ideas that determines how we understand our lives and our world. So we, then, seek out what validates, confirms, educates us in that view. Sometimes we don't even know how to intellectually define it...until we hear someone express our disjointed ideals in a uniform presentation. Ta-Da! Traditionally the conservative agenda has mirrored my values...which has been in stark contrast to most everything I've read in the world's media. Now I understand why I've disliked and been *bothered* by the news presentations I usually hear! :~) |
View the Top Clips from November 3, 2007
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
|
|
|
