The media

[Guest avid]

Alot of the posts on this forum refer to the "liberal media" or the "right wing media" or the "mainstream media" or the whatever..........

I think this is dangerous.

I think this is corporate manipulation.

I think it plays into the hands of the power brokers and divides us in ways that they expolit.

Case in point.   "Global warming"

there is all this debate about global warming.  It's a hoax, it's a natural phenomena, it's destroying the planet etc.

We all argue about global warming and either point to the "liberal media" as being hysterical, or the "right wing media" as being pawns for the money men.

The fact as I see it is that ALL the the mainstream media are "pawns"  Any corporate owned entity is profit motivated.  Whether they like to come from the left or the right their agenda is the same.  Get ratings, and subscribers.

They fool us by framing the debate, and then we fight among ourselves taking one of the two sides they offer us and seeing nothing else.

On both the recent "global warming" threads both the staunchest conservatives and leftiest of democrats agreed that humans are contanimating their own living environment by pouring millions of tons of toxic material into the air, water, and land.  We all agreed that this is bad.

But are we getting together as members of the human race to demand our leaders find economically viable solutions to our energy and other essential needs without poisoning the planet?

Nope,  we arguing over global warming.  We are fighting each other on the terms defined for us by the monied interests and presented to us through the corporate media outlets they own or control.

"We the people"  is one of the most bold and revolutionary concepts in the history of humanity.

We have more in common than "They" want you to believe.

[BASS fisherman]

I'm glad I am not the only one who sees the bigger picture avid.  Great post!

[Crabcakes]

The man with the shadowy face hath spoken!

   

[Hookem]

Avid,

To quote a faux news guy.....

"You reasonable bas tard."  

8-) 8-) 8-)

[Guest the_muddy_man]

WHO IS THAT BEHIND THE CURTAIN IS THAT THE WIZARD WHY NO IT'S

AVID

[Grey Wolf]

Well said Avid !!!!!!!!

[nboucher]

Avid, great point. As someone who has spent his career as a member of the mediahold the spitballsI'll make two points:

1. Reporters/writers have jobs to do, and some are better than others. Some are lazy and some are not. All make mistakes. The problem, of course, is that their mistakes can cause a lot of damage because their jobs are so public. How many of us would like hundreds or thousands or hundreds of thousands of people judge our job performance very single day? Teachers are in similar situations, though their audience is smaller. Politicians have public jobs, but they also have staffs to spin and protect them. Reporters can be their own worse enemies when they can't admit to mistakes or are not honest enough with themselves to control their own biases. I have filed stories that I just didn't have enough time to be 100 percent sure about and that probably shouldn't have run, but I hope they've been few and far between.

2. It's no secret that over the last ten years just about all forms of media have been consolidated until relatively few corporations now own most of it. This has exaggerated the "pack mentality" where everyone is covering the same stuff and fewer reporters are encouraged to take an original approach or to dig beyond the conventional wisdom. Bloggers have been trying to fill some of this void, but the quality there is wildly uneven. Bottom line (pun intended): more than ever, media outlets follow the money. My favorite example of this is morning TV shows. Half of their content is focused on promoting products (movies, other TV programs, books) put out by other arms of the same corporation. So you have a "news" show covering the lastest Survivor winner, etc. I don't mind right wing or left wing as much as I mind no wing: let people duke out the facts and opinions, but save us from all this marketing and empty content.

Just my .02.

[senile1]

Thanks for your post, Avid.  In all of these threads where we, as a group debate the pros and cons of different issues, I have always tried to make the point to everyone that our favorite media outlets are biased and aren't giving the full truth either.  Your post is exactly correct.  They frame the debate for us, and if we read or hear an opinion that fits our pre-determined view we agree with it and run with it in our arguments and debates, often, without considering that we should read or listen to information that doesn't fit our pre-determined view.  In any debate, the best way to remain open to the best ideas is to always keep in mind that you and your ideas could very well be wrong.  Debate your points, but understand that the best solution or ideas aren't usually proposed by the media.  The media tends to push us to the extremes on issues.  Confrontation sells.  Listen, and be open to the best courses of action whether these ideas come from you or those you oppose.  Don't be fooled into useless arguments by the media.  

[Marty]

Unlike nboucher, I am not a member of the media, so I have no inside information, just speculation. I believe the tilt of the media in general is overstated. Yes, the media have to make a profit, just like all corporate entities, but making a profit and putting out a good product are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and I truly believe that there are media outlets that are providing a good product.

Perhaps the media are framing the debate on global warming, just to cite this one example, perhaps not. But let's not forget that they are reporting mostly what the scientists are concluding. And there are thousands of scientists and hundreds of scientific organizations spending millions of hours on this. Do some media outlets present one side of the argument more than the other? Probably, but there are also those which present both in reasonable balance.

There are more sources of news today than at any time in history. Broadcast networks, cable networks, radio, satellite, magazines and the Internet. By reading a variety of sources and making sure we read both the conservative and liberal viewpoints, I think most of us can get a pretty good idea of the extent of a problem.

Again, just using global warming as one example, in the final analysis, the debate is being framed by the scientists studying it, even though the media may play a sizable role.

[Alpster]

We have more in common than "They" want you to believe.

The only thing I can add to what Avid has warned, is that this is the first WHOLE generation that has gotten ALL of it's information from the broadcast media. How many hours are today's kids spending in the library, as opposed to the internet or in front of a television. Just an observation.

Ronnie

[Catt]

A house divided amongst it's self can not stand

The powers the be want black against white against Hispanic against Oriental  

They want rich against poor against middle class and so on

This is how they stay in control

[fourbizz]

A house divided amongst it's self can not stand

Unless of course, it has Glulam beams with post to beam connectors

Just a little carpenter jargon for the rest of ya!

[cart7t]

It takes work these days to get real news.  Too much of it is presented in a slanted way one way or another. My best advice is too not rely soley on one source but use multiple sources, both video or print.