Well Nick, if you keep saying ignoring responsibility, what am I supposed to think?
I don't know what you're supposed to do... but my comments were in reply to that column you posted, not anything you wrote. And it was a very general observation. It's your choice about whether the generalization means anything for you.
No, it's not. That's moral vanity again. The hungry
don't care why you feed them, they care about getting
fed. That's what hunger does to someone. Worrying
about the motives that cause people to do something
like feeding the hungry is the luxury of someone who
does not need to be fed.
What does worry have to do with responsibility? I associate worry with guilt, not responsibility, with how the past might have been different, rather than what I can do to make the future better.
My problem with the media is that it focuses on who
is right and who is wrong, who is winning and who is losing.
These are very important things in wartime.
In politics? Do you think it is important for the media to polarize war issues along party lines, which is what I see them doing. They're not focused on the issues and choosing the best among a bunch of lousy options, they're focused, as usual, on left v. right and who is winning that war, as if the country would be better off if one of them did win.
Why not? What is the purpose of a free press in liberal democracy if it's not to discuss right and wrong, if it's not to figure out who is winning wars and who is losing them?
To make the best decisions, to create a better future, to overcome the past, and so forth. Who wins is one part of that; to focus on it is the *definition* of cynicism, in my opinion.
I think it's naive to believe that big media doesn't
ultimately align itself with corporate power, rather than any
political agenda.
I think that's Marxist reductionism. There are many
things more important in this world than economics as
long as you're comfortable - which reporters
overwhelmingly are. I always want to ask people who
say that, for God's sake, have you ever _met_ someone
who works for the New York Times? Maureen Dowd, for
reasons that entirely pass understanding, has the most
valuable printed real estate in the world. If
corporate power can't get rid of her, what the hell is
it good for?
Have I *met* them? I've *been* them! Did you forget that I was a reporter for years? For UPI, ABC, CBS, Rolling Stone, various business publications. I've even been directly lied to in the West Wing briefing room (a badge of honor, I tend to imagine)! I know them better then almost everyone -- I've *been* them! As for their comfort, I would hazard that few go into journalism because they are well-adjusted comfortable folks. They are far more often troubled missionary types who want to make the world a better place (and fail, repeatedly)... and many become burn-outs who forget their idealism in order to make it in a profit-driven business that weeds out those whose work doesn't contribute to the delivery of eyeballs to advertisers.
You conflated power with economics, which wasn't what I meant.
Nick
-- Nick Arnett Director, Business Intelligence Services LiveWorld Inc. Phone/fax: (408) 551-0427 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
