There is no questioning that the increasing concentration of the
broadcast media into a few hands is cause for great concern, and
perhaps the reason for the increasing chasm between the evening news
and the facts.

I agree too that a free press has historically been part of the checks
and balances of our democracy, and that the freedom of that press is
in even graver danger than free speech in general. In fact, in that a
culture can be said to constitute the stories we tell to each other,
the whole culture is in danger, maybe; look at our stories. More and
more they are told by people who have little to say but much to sell.

Some would argue that the broadcast media however were never
journalists in the first place. The one hour format is too short to
support thoughtfulness, and television succumbed very early to the
temptation to cater to ratings, which is why a local fire will always
trump any national or international news.

I certainly don't think that people like Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh
are journalists, no, though they do have the right to free speech.
Perhaps they are whores in the sense that they perform for money, but
I suspect that they believe in what they do, actually. Sadly.

I have a feeling that neither you nor I would agree with Ann on which
media in particular were whores, and I am not sure that we would agree
with each other either.

For example, I don't agree either that the news is about reporting the
answers as given. Supposing someone said you were an idiot, I could
report that someone said you were an idiot, sure. Probably without
fear of a libel suit. But is this responsible?

Maybe it is about trying to approach objective truth through some
thought. If person A says Mike D is an idiot but further inquiry
reveals that person B and person C say that he is a coding god and
person D says he's a damn good father, perhaps I should disregard
person A altogether, hmm? It is also about deciding whose facts you
report as correct. In Jschool the government is viewed as some
objective authority, ie if the department of Labor says that
employment is up in the manufacturing sector then this is so.

The Bush administration has brilliantly exploited this flaw by such
tactics are redefining manufacturing employment to include fast food
chains jobs. And this gets reported only in formats that can support a
multi-paragraph story containing multi-syllable words. And perhaps the
truly conservative media are reluctant to criticize a president who
would seem to be on their side, as the progressive media have been
reluctant to talk about the condescension that has been the downfall,
perhaps, of the side they were championing themselves.

It is above all about reasonable discussion, which has never known to
be fostered by using words like whore. And stupid.

Dana




On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:54:18 -0600, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Michael wrote:
> >  "Who cares about truth. Better to sacrifice the truth in order to get 
> > something done."
> 
> Ok, let's test your theory.
> 
> What's the truth about the election?  Rigged or not?
> What's the truth about the the invasion of Iraq?  Did the President
> think there were WMD?
> 
> We don't know the truth about any of these things, yet the press has
> reported on all of them.  What sources should've been asked that
> weren't?  I can't think of one, yet we still don't know the truth.
> 
> Journalism is about asking questions and reporting the answers as
> given, not providing "truth"; that's what religion is for.
> 
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net
http://www.cfhosting.net

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:135813
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to