tagged w/ Big Media
‘Disney World’ of democracy - Big money and big media have coupled to create - Big Money, Big Media, Big TroubleBig Money, Big Media, Big Trouble
Big money and big media have coupled to create a ‘Disney World’ of democracy in which TV shows, televised debates, even news coverage is being dumbed down, resulting in a public less informed than it should be, says Marty Kaplan, director of USC’s Norman Lear Center and an entertainment industry veteran. Bill Moyers talks with Kaplan about how taking news out of the journalism box and placing it in the entertainment box is hurting democracy and allowing special interest groups to manipulate the system.
http://billmoyers.com/segment/marty-kaplan-on-big-moneys-effect-on-big-media/Big Money, Big Media, Big Trouble Big money and big media have coupled to create a... more
Get what you want, when you want it. That's the phrase that has dominated the entertainment industry over the past decade. New technologies have given us access to countless channels for music, television and film — and we can sample them whenever we find it convenient. But as the options multiply, are we losing our sense of a common culture?
Take "The Outing," the Seinfeld episode in which a reporter thought Jerry and George were lovers. Even if you didn't see it — not that there's anything wrong with that — you heard about it: at work, at school, in the checkout line at the grocery store. And suddenly the show about nothing, says Stanford University communications professor Clifford Nass, meant something even to people who didn't watch it.
"That's really what marks cultural touchstones," says Nass. "Things that people are aware of; that they can share; that they can make reference to — that they don't actually have to consume themselves."
More than 40 percent of American households saw the final episode of Seinfeld in the spring of 1998, according to the Nielsen ratings company. Fast-forward about 11 years: American Idol may be the most popular program on television today, but only about 16 percent of American households saw this year's finale.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=121986877Get what you want, when you want it. That's the phrase that has dominated the... more
MSNBC counts down the top 10 worst news stories from Campaign 2008 -- highlighting how overly commercial "junk news" can trivialize our democracy.
Can you think of any news stories that are not on this list that should be?MSNBC counts down the top 10 worst news stories from Campaign 2008 -- highlighting how... more
3. this brings me to the 'firewall;' the vanguard of the western Propaganda system. this is much less powerful, (and necessary), in the US than in Western Europe or the British Crown, but it is the very thing that keeps most intelligent people, particularly in academia, engaged in the two-party democratic process and away from revolutionary, or truly democratic, forces. by this I am referring to the BBC, NPR, PBS, CBC, certain portions of the NYT, WP, the Globe, and other such surces. These publicly funded semi-governmental news sources with very long leashes. they can do and say essentially whatever they want, provided they follow one rule: "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain." by this i mean, these media sources, which, to be fair, are still very constrained by the distorted political discourse in these country which make the truth seem like a wacko liberal conspiracy theory, are allowed free range so long as they don't actually make the assertion that the media is part of a controlled system intended to manipulate public opinion. and since only a very small percentage of the population actually consumes this stuff, it has little significant impact.
So there it is. now I'm sure you are wondering 'how does this all work, how can journalists be controlled, how could this 'secret' be kept,' and of course i wouldn't say any of this stuff unless i knew the answer, or at least had a plausible answer that makes more sense, given the facts, than any alternative. but that's a very long discussion, and much less fun for me to write. if you express interest in this stuff, and hopefully are committed to spreading the word or doing something about it (pending a satisfactory explanation for how it all works), i'll devote more time to it.
I've realized recently that posting crap to people on facebook has little to no impact, and that i need to just devote the time and explain stuff to people, and so i'm happy to explain any of this to anyone who, of course, has a good heart, is intelligent, is not weak, and is passionate. and so know that i am doing this not be an intellectual and assert my opinion (which actually is a force that plays a major role in mechanics of the media), which is something i totally detest. i know that you probably get a great deal of joy from reading NYT, watching MSNBC, following the races, and all of that good stuff; but just always be aware of what they are trying to do; and that they are damn good at doing it (I watch all that stuff too, and it was very useful for me to do this during my 'trying on hats' period where I was sort of comparing the above world-view with the righteous-journalist myth).
3. this brings me to the 'firewall;' the vanguard of the western Propaganda... more
The opposing force, of course, is 'the truth.' positive propaganda from Germany and the USSR in the mid 20th century did not work (Positive meaning trying to instill and convince people of things, rather than merely hiding the truth from them). it didn't work because people knew it was propaganda, and ignored it (do you believe everything Sean Hannity tells you?...). and so it is an absolutely necessary prerequisite for any functioning of the American Propaganda System, that the people do are not aware that they are being manipulated. that's why this whole myth of the righteous journalist whose just out there trying to find the truth needs to be constantly reiterated to the public.
The result is a layering effect in the media. you have Fox News and talk radio, a relatively new phenomenon, with no intent of bringing 'moderates' or 'liberals' into the 'conservative' world view, but rather in keeping the 'conservatives' 'conservative,' radicalizing them, pumping them with overt lies and distortion, inciting hatred against 'the other,' and making them very, very afraid. the next layer is everything ranging from USA Today (which is about as informative as a placemat from Denny's), to CNN, to (parts of) NYT, MSNBC, and the Washington Post. this is the meat and potatoes of the media. this reaches the vast majority of the 'thinking' public and, to varying degrees, uses the previously discussed strategies to control and alter public opinion......
2. you then have, in continuance of this discussion on the 'layering' of the media, Distraction, the subsidiary effect. The power of this was first discovered by the Italian Fascists, and later implemented by the US in Japan during post-war occupation. Italy did not make the same mistake as Germany and the USSR with positive propaganda. instead they just set up a government agency to decide what films would and wouldn't get made. They had lots of romantic films, matador movies, fluff comedies, historical peices with some covert propaganda; think 300, a few 'action' type movies ( some of the same basic genres we have today, though we don't have many matador movies anymore).
so when you wonder why most of the movies we have, and even main-stream music for that matter, are total crap, you have to recognize the powerful social transformative potential of films and music and the incentives for those who wish to resist such changes. next time you hear about Britney spears, Paris Hilton, and the like (other than in McCain TV ads), and someone tries to tell you that 'that's what the people want' just ask yourself 'what came first, the ox or the mule,' and think from a perspective where you weigh the incentives of the powerful people who, with extreme attention to detail, design this stuff.
The opposing force, of course, is 'the truth.' positive propaganda from... more
from a college professor smarter than all of us...
I just want to get through to some people who seem like they might be capable of comprehending the degree to which 'the political reality' , as we know and learn it, is a total facade (e.x. people who might have 'Noam Chomsky' somewhere on their FB profile). that it has been developed, and is continuously developed, to distract passionate and decent people, capable of critical thinking, from understanding what is actually happening and trying to do something about it. (its the media!)
I can back all of this up if you'd like, and so rather than send links that i don't think anybody ever really watches unless i sit them down and watch it with them, I'll just explain how the media operates. there's really 1. two major forces, 2. one subsidiary force, 3. and a firewall.
1. the two primary forces; the pendulum of the American (and UK/Western European) propaganda system are 1. intentional regulation and manipulation of public opinion through a. distortion b. concision (i.e. controlling, restraining debate into such a format that full intellectual discourse is impossible [I don't know if you saw it, but the FOXNEWS interview of Ron Paul last January, where they asked him for 'one word responses' to things like Iraq, Main Stream Media, etc. is an extreme example]) c. asserting the opposite (e.x. the 'liberal media' myth, which is just an assertion of the exact opposite of what decades of academic research has demonstrated; demonstrating the power of the media)
d. promoting incomplete/distorted argumentative paradigms, whereby alternative perspectives, and the broader political reality, are mitigated (think of crossfire. or, in a much larger sense, the concept of 'liberal' and 'conservative' that have emerged not from academic discourse but from the media echo-chamber. liberal actually means someone who supports total free-market Smithsonian 'government', while conservative is a minimalist sort of protestant/environmentalist world-view where the growth of capitalism and economic expansion is seen as subordinate to some larger, natural/spiritual/clandestine process. the media has redefined these terms as conservative meaning blindly religious people who kowtow to authority and tradition, are incapable or afraid of critical thinking, and, as Steven Colbert lampoons, 'think with their gut'; (George Orwell would, no doubt, be proud) . liberal has been redefined anti-American, anti-religious, moral relativist, weak, effeminate, incompetent, loud/orderless, and [somehow] 'elitist.' this was developed through the fascistic paradigm from Italy, Germany, Spain, and the South American Cone, and brought to the US; whereby one side is seen as nationalistic strong, and typical (white, christian, 'archetypal physical form,' heterosexual, strong, subordinate, etc.), the other side seen as the quintessential 'other' (weak, anti-state/country, effeminate, gayish, minority, anti-religious, open-minded). children are taught to fear this side so most become 'conservative' (between 35 and 50% of Americans consider themselves 'conservative'), while the smart people eventually come to their senses and support this marginally better group, but are restrained by the brainwashed folks on the other side and their own fear of going too far (i'll get to that part later). this was really developed for the US in the 70''s and beyond, as it was necessary to redefine the political spectrum so that the anti-war movement, this powerful revolutionary force, would be behind a political party rather than against Johnson and the democrats and without a clear (and controllable) alternative; they obviously weren't going for Goldwater the heartless, Wallace the racist, or Nixon the 'Nixon')
from a college professor smarter than all of us... I just want to get through to... more
* FAIRNESS, AMBIGUITY & LONG TERM EFFECTS NOT ADDRESSED *
One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous - Carl Sagan
To the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate:
26/09/09 As economists, we want to express to Congress our great concern for the plan proposed by Treasury Secretary Paulson to deal with the financial crisis. We are well aware of the difficulty of the current financial situation and we agree with the need for bold action to ensure that the financial system continues to function. We see three fatal pitfalls in the currently proposed plan:
1) Its fairness. The plan is a subsidy to investors at taxpayers’ expense. Investors who took risks to earn profits must also bear the losses. Not every business failure carries systemic risk. The government can ensure a well-functioning financial industry, able to make new loans to creditworthy borrowers, without bailing out particular investors and institutions whose choices proved unwise.
2) Its ambiguity. Neither the mission of the new agency nor its oversight are clear. If taxpayers are to buy illiquid and opaque assets from troubled sellers, the terms, occasions, and methods of such purchases must be crystal clear ahead of time and carefully monitored afterwards.
3) Its long-term effects. If the plan is enacted, its effects will be with us for a generation. For all their recent troubles, America's dynamic and innovative private capital markets have brought the nation unparalleled prosperity. Fundamentally weakening those markets in order to calm short-run disruptions is desperately short-sighted.
For these reasons we ask Congress not to rush, to hold appropriate hearings, and to carefully consider the right course of action, and to wisely determine the future of the financial industry and the U.S. economy for years to come.
Signed (updated at 9/25/2008 8:30AM CT)
Acemoglu Daron (Massachussets Institute of Technology)
Adler Michael (Columbia University)
Admati Anat R. (Stanford University)
Alexis Marcus (Northwestern University)
Alvarez Fernando (University of Chicago)
Andersen Torben (Northwestern University)
Baliga Sandeep (Northwestern University)
Banerjee Abhijit V. (Massachussets Institute of Technology)
Barankay Iwan (University of Pennsylvania)
Barry Brian (University of Chicago)
Bartkus James R. (Xavier University of Louisiana)
Becker Charles M. (Duke University)
Becker Robert A. (Indiana University)
Beim David (Columbia University)
Berk Jonathan (Stanford University)
Bisin Alberto (New York University)
Bittlingmayer George (University of Kansas)
Boldrin Michele (Washington University)
Brooks Taggert J. (University of Wisconsin)
Brynjolfsson Erik (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Buera Francisco J. (UCLA)
* FAIRNESS, AMBIGUITY & LONG TERM EFFECTS NOT ADDRESSED * One of the saddest... more
A FEW THOUGHTS ABOUT THE 1000 POUNDS GORILLA, BEAR OR GODZILLA STOMPING THROUGH CONGRESS, SENATE & DEMOCRACY... EVERYONE IGNORES IT SO ELEQUANTLY !
With All Eyes on the Bailout, House Passes Trillion-Dollar Defense Bill
IT'S EMPIRE BUILDING, NOT DEFENSE SPENDING ! http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/100524/
The legislation came together in a remarkably secret process that concentrated decision-making power in the hands of a few lawmakers.
In keeping with the tradition of recent years, Bush held a gun to his own head and threatened to pull the trigger if his demands weren't met. According to the AP ;To earn President Bush's signature rather than a veto, House and Senate negotiators dropped several provisions he opposed. They include a ban on private interrogators in U.S. military detention facilities and what would have amounted to congressional veto power over a security pact with Iraq.
THE WAR ECONOMY
Congress and the administration are embroiled in contentious talks over on the details of a $700 billion infusion into the financial system, intended to restore liquidity and maintain the flow of credit. But the talks stalled yesterday. "It was an implosion that spilled out from behind closed doors into public view in a way rarely seen in Washington," the New York Times observed. Tonight, Sens. Barack Obama (D-IL) and John McCain (R-AZ) are scheduled to debate foreign policy matters in Oxford, MS. While the subject matter seems disconnected from the situation in financial markets, prescient economists predicted this fall-out from the Iraq war long ago. In 2002, Gerd Hausler, director of international capital markets at the IMF, said that "a serious conflict with Iraq would not be a very healthy development; for the financial markets. Robert Shapiro, undersecretary of commerce in the Clinton administration stated, If the [Iraq] conflict wears on or, worse, spreads, the economic consequences become very serious." The debt was $5.7 trillion when Bush took office; it will be $10.3 trillion by the time he leaves. While Congress hesitates to appropriate $700 billion for the financial crisis, the administration still is pouring $12 billion a month into Iraq, also raising the question of how the Iraq war funds could be spent better at home.
IRAQ RECESSION?: A significant reason for the current $9.6 trillion federal debt has been the Iraq war, which the U.S. largely financed through borrowing. This week, President Bush said that the crisis began after "a massive amount of money flowed into the United States from investors abroad because our country is an attractive and secure place to do business," which led to easy credit and to the housing bust. But the problem isn't simply one of excessive foreign investment because of businesses. "It's that the U.S. had to borrow money from foreign nations at an alarming rate, after it dug itself into debt paying for the Iraq War while cutting taxes," The Wonk Room observed. Thus, the United States had to turn to investment from abroad for financing. This, as well as lax regulation and oversight of Wall Street contributed to the credit troubles. Currently, 45 percent of Treasury securities are owned by foreign nations, with the most owned by China and Japan. Other nations owned less than 20 percent of these securities as recently as 1994. Bush left out of his assessment the fact that much of the foreign investment went to finance a war and his tax cuts.A FEW THOUGHTS ABOUT THE 1000 POUNDS GORILLA, BEAR OR GODZILLA STOMPING THROUGH... more
THE GREATEST THEFT IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANKIND
Could it be that it is far easier to abuse a nation of village idiots than well educated & informed citizens ?
Journalism is not a profession or a trade. It is a cheap catch-all for fuckoffs and misfits - a false doorway to the backside of life, a filthy piss-ridden little hole nailed off by the building inspector, but just deep enough for a wino to curl up from the sidewalk and masturbate like a chimp in a zoo-cage." ~ Hunter Thompson, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
“If you are afraid to speak out, you are not in America any more” - unknown
OH BY THE WAY...
Section 8 of the proposed legislation says it all:
"Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."
"All Hail Caesar!" The days of the republic are over.
THE GREATEST THEFT IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANKIND... more
“They call it the 'American Dream' because you have to be asleep to believe it.” - George Carlin
And what best way to keep the people docile than to keep them in the dark. We are back IN Plato’s cave.
Worst of all, since Edward Bernays it has become an art to manipulate the will of the people. The obvious and tragic failure of the fourth estate has more to do with framing a narrative that serves the ruling class than with informing us or telling the truth.
So the notion of how the ones involved, including the present executive branch, are merely incompetent nincompoops, is but a philosophical banana peel. It is an orchestrated and well planed operation to bypass the will of WE THE PEOPLE and turn us into WE THE SHEEPLE !
"A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press will produce in time a people as base as itself "- Joseph Pulitzer
Just a quick reminder of what THEY are fighting for…
The 5% richest among us owns 83% of Wall Street stocks. Even worst, 53% of these stock are in only 1% of these happy few's hands.
The salary of the middle class american has shrunk by 4% while the Bush/Cheney admin took over, while the poorest has been slashed by 20%. (a fifth of the population). Meanwhile, Fortune 500 CEOs enjoyed a 51% increase.
In the 70’s the difference between a CEO and his employee’s paycheck was 60 to 1, it is now 350 to 1 !
"This is an impressive crowd : the Haves and the Have-Mores" - Presidential candidate G.W. Bush / Waldorf Astoria, at a $800 / plate dinner in Octobre 2000
When Reagan took over in 1980, one percent of the population owned 33% of the wealth. In 2006 it was 50%. Now, a hundred fifty million Americans own less than 3%. The predatory mortgage bank industry made sure to make it even worst.
"Washington has become Versailles. We are ruled, entertained and informed by courtiers. The popular media are courtiers. The Democrats, like the Republicans, are courtiers. Our pundits and experts are courtiers. We are captivated by the hollow stagecraft of political theater as we are ruthlessly stripped of power. It is smoke and mirrors, tricks and con games. We are being had." - Chris Hedges
So there ya go, continue to absorb the journalistic pabulum to your own risk, but remember, THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE INDEED !
"We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light." – Plato
Sample this site for size...http://freedocumentaries.org/index.php
Top 25 Censored Stories for 2009
#1. Over One Million Iraqi Deaths Caused by US Occupation
# 2 Security and Prosperity Partnership: Militarized NAFTA
# 3 InfraGard: The FBI Deputizes Business
# 4 ILEA: Is the US Restarting Dirty Wars in Latin America?
# 5 Seizing War Protesters’ Assets
“They call it the 'American Dream' because you have to be asleep to... more
Pretty much every mainstream media source fails to mention the fact that Russia are present in a peacekeeping capacity (much the same as the US in Iraq/Afghanistan et al.) following the invasion (BY Georgia) or South Ossetia. The majority of casualties have been caused by the Georgian military bombing civilian areas.
The situation in Georgia has been triggered by an increase in Western grooming of the former Soviet satellite state. US and Isreali military personal are known to be in the country, for "training purposes", though this source claims that Israel has stated it has at least 1,000 troops already fighting there. Expect this information to get zero coverage on your news boxes.
More links as I find them...Pretty much every mainstream media source fails to mention the fact that Russia are... more
So I was Stumble!ing (yes it's a verb to me) and I came across this video on youtube.com named Fuck Corporate Media. OK I'm down with hearing some arguing. After watching the video I found it amusing how it's not just the corporate media (in this story) that is leaving out events and details of this protest. Everyone is going to have their own side of the story. This protest started off as a Presidential Visit but skewered into topics like Media Bashing, Gay Bashing, Violence, Anarchy, Police Brutality and etc...
Those old ladies had it right. If you stop the video at 15:41 you will notice the sign one of them is holding. It states, "Pres Bush - Give Us Back Our Civil Rights"
This all seems to be a retaliation of the protesters who were called Uncontrollably Violent Anarchist.
Please comment! I really want to hear other opinions. I'm ALL about changing the face of Mass Media but in this case it seems like a game of "Spy Vs Spy"So I was Stumble!ing (yes it's a verb to me) and I came across this video on... more
Dan Rather addresses the National Conference for Media Reform in Minneapolis, on June 7, 2008.
He talks about freedom of the press, big media, and news coverage.Dan Rather addresses the National Conference for Media Reform in Minneapolis, on June... more
Hard-hitting journalism is nearing extinction on television, and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) just threw another shovel-full of dirt on its grave when it recently ruled that Rupert Murdoch's TMZ and Pat Robertson's 700 Club meet the test for "a bona fide newscast."
Media companies get their broadcast licenses for free. In return, the FCC says that if a TV show is not a bona fide newscast, and it airs a story about a political candidate, "it must afford equal opportunities to other such candidates for that office."
This is supposed to keep ideologues like Pat Robertson and Rupert Murdoch in check. But instead the FCC let them off the hook by adding TMZ and 700 Club to the list of bona fide newscasts; even though Congress defined bona fide as newscasts as those that hold "genuine news value" and are not intended to boost or aid any particular political candidate.
We need a lot less 'cheap junk news' and a lot more real news. Junk is not good for you. Keep the government out of the news as much as possible.Hard-hitting journalism is nearing extinction on television, and the Federal... more
In his 1983 treatise, The Media Monopoly, Ben Bagdikian warned that 50 multinationals, “all interlocked in common financial interest with other massive industries and with a few dominant international banks,” controlled the majority of the leading outlets. In the latest edition, published in 2006, those 50 had consolidated into five.
That’s why lobbying expenditures from the media and telecommunications industry exceed those from defense, energy and agribusiness.In his 1983 treatise, The Media Monopoly, Ben Bagdikian warned that 50 multinationals,... more