Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Reelya]

Saying Arabs and climate scientists are evil but Israel and oil companies can't be criticized while having your show funded by wealthy jewish business leaders and big oil would seem to speak for itself.

The guy even speaks adverts himself for his sponsors, he's a fraud.

Note: he's on video attacking the "Media Matters" watchdog site which criticizes Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck etc, but no similar critique of any right-wing "watchdog" site like aim.org which label you "biased media" for not agreeing with them that Obama is a Marxist.

[scriver]

To be clear, I was calling them "antisemitic", since Arabs are Semites. Just wanted to make sure you didn't misunderstand me.

[Duuvian]

I don't have anything against the Jewish people. That said it sounds like wealthy individuals of Jewish descent are using this guy to manipulate people to their own goals. That said they are welcome to try I suppose until the government as a whole pulls it's head out it's ass and passes a law that supports journalistic integrity that it can enforce without undermining free speech. Though that makes me think of Yahoo news stories and the way it always seems to give a counter argument against whatever point the article might have made so they don't get sued or damage the companies reputation with a segment of the population.

Maybe journalists shouldn't be paid to spew forth a political ideology but instead to be journalists.

[Descan]

Saying wealthy Jewish businessmen are "donating" to a journalist through money to get him to support them and Israel is, to me, no more weird/racist than saying wealthy French businessmen are "donating" to a journalist through money to get him to support them and France. Just that Jews and Israel are kind of sensitive subjects in that regard.

It's when you get into "Jews are in every level of business and Zionists control Washington! The NWO is coming!" that you get into... weirdness.

[kaijyuu]

And if what the French businessmen were supporting heavily pushed a French agenda?


Honestly it doesn't sound that unreasonable to me. It's not some "Jewish conspiracy," but a bunch of rich dudes with reason to have a political agenda supporting someone who supports that agenda.

[Descan]

That was my point, Kaijyuu. ;P

[Alexhans]

until the government as a whole pulls it's head out it's ass and passes a law that supports journalistic integrity that it can enforce without undermining free speech.

Why on earth would the government destroy its most effective venue of propaganda?

Mass Media is there to create a false sense of legitimacy on whatever it is anonymous government officials in the know want to spread.

Ad it's a perfect system because if you challenge the government, then there's no more exclusives for you, buddy.

[mainiac]

Why on earth would the government destroy its most effective venue of propaganda?

Because "the government" is made up of a bunch of people elected in something resembling a popular election?  There isn't a man behind the curtain, they do it all in plain sight.  Elected officials seldom lie because they can so often tell the truth without anyone giving a shit.  And "the government" will go on just fine whether the elected officials are doing bad shit or not.  You could make every journalist have the morals of a saint and the character of a buddha and that wouldn't upset "the government" effort at all.  "The government" did just fine when Nixon was impeached and did just fine when Obama escalated the drone strikes.  "The government" doesn't need propaganda, only something with an agenda needs an ideology.

[SalmonGod]

Why on earth would the government destroy its most effective venue of propaganda?

Because "the government" is made up of a bunch of people elected in something resembling a popular election?  There isn't a man behind the curtain, they do it all in plain sight.  Elected officials seldom lie because they can so often tell the truth without anyone giving a shit.  And "the government" will go on just fine whether the elected officials are doing bad shit or not.  You could make every journalist have the morals of a saint and the character of a buddha and that wouldn't upset "the government" effort at all.  "The government" did just fine when Nixon was impeached and did just fine when Obama escalated the drone strikes.  "The government" doesn't need propaganda, only something with an agenda needs an ideology.

Are you really trying to say that there isn't a PR machine in action?  I would contest you on that one.

Otherwise, you're right.  They don't lie.  They obfuscate.  For example:  defining any military-age male in a strike zone as a "combatant", even if nothing is known about them.  The media is complicit when they wholeheartedly adopt such language in their reporting without disclaimer as to the nature of their words, and that language has vast effect on public opinion.

[mainiac]

No that would be an example of a lie.  Hence "seldom" not never.  You need to keep in mind that for everything you read about in the papers that the government does there like 100 things you don't read about.  When they get caught on the lies the media think that's somehow more newsworthy then all the important stuff they've been telling the truth about that's bad.

[Alexhans]

I can't really write (one hand right now ) but I really don't know how either of your posts responds or questions what SG or me said with consistency.

My point still stands.  The government, a body of humans with quite a deal of power, has no incentive to change the way the media works these days.  They already share some sort of symbiosis.

meh, too much effort to write few words.  I'll move back to reading again.

[Moghjubar]

In the meantime, Obama has been attacking Romney's tenure at Bain over, and over, and over.

Romney wants Obama to apologize.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/romney-calls-obama-apologize-bain-attacks/story?id=16775732

Obama's response:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

 

edit: more: http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/07/obama-wont-apologize-for-staff-on-bain-128788.html

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Wait, seriously?

[Darvi]

Obama's response:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

 

So Barack remained silent?

[Sirus]

Obama's response:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

 

So Barack remained silent?

I can see it