-Caveat Lector-
When you get to these upper-level individuals which you have termed
"Marxist" I do not think they bother to vote. They already know the
outcome. Any gesture along those lines is for appearance only. Either way,
they win.
Amelia
----- Original Message -----
From: Ric Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 1999 11:45 AM
Subject: Re: [CTRL] Fw: SNET: [piml] Clinton and 1922: Is History Repeating
Itself?
> -Caveat Lector-
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Amelia Edgeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > From: Ric Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > From: Amelia Edgeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > > Note the part about 89% of journalists voting for Clinton.
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >
> > > >> The New Australian
> > > >> Remember: 89 per cent of Washington journalists voted for Clinton
> > > >> and everything he stands for, including the destruction of our
> > > >> military. What America needs is a moral revival and the media is
> > > >> a good place to start.
> > >
> > > Questions that come to mind: Where did that 89% statistic come from?
> > > What percentage of EDITORS [gatekeepers], not REPORTERS [newsserfs]
> > > "voted for Clinton and everything he stands for"? Are "Clinton" and
> > > "everything he stands for" identical? Could some have voted for Bill
> > > [I didn't] not because they liked "everything he stands for" but
> > > because they somehow perceived some difference between the nearly-
> > > identical platforms of Clinton-Bush [92] and Clinton-Dole [96]??
>
> > That statistic may have come from the survey taken by MSNBC News. I
> > remember the survey but not the exact percentage. That seems about
> > right.
>
> Sure, I remember that 'survey' too, but the other questions remain
> unanswered. That survey, and the NewOzzy piece, misconstrue power
> relationships in media. Line-workers don't make policy, managers
> do. I have a simple little quiz re: "Liberal" media:
>
> Q: How do you become a journalist in the US?
> A: An editor hires you.
> Q: How do you become an editor in the US?
> A: Senior management hires you.
> Q: How do you become senior management in the US?
> A: The owner(s) hire you.
> Q: How many media corporations in the US are owned by Marxists?
> A: (the answer is left as an exercise for the student)
> Q: Who controls biases of US media - journalists, editors, or owners?
> A: (the answer is left as an exercise for the student)
> Q: What is the religion of for-profit corporations?
> A: Money.
> Q: What is the driving force behind media corporations?
> A: Money.
> Q: What will corporations do to make more money?
> A: Anything they can get away with.
>
> The logic is simple: If a perceived bias, if polarization of the
> populace, will sell advertising space in any media, that medium
> WILL present polarizing, biases productions. If ad space can be
> sold in productions about talking equines, alien invaders, cabals,
> soft-core porn, conspiracies, vampire slayers, Elvis, or anything
> else, such productions WILL be presented, with much fanfare.
>
> Keep in mind that, for commercial media, their actual product is
> the audience, not the production. They sell their audience to their
> advertisers. When we consume TV, radio, periodicals, WE are the
> product. The content of the media is but a lure. Every pundit and
> politico before the public eye is a performer, a dancing bear, a
> talking parrot who squawks to grab our attention for the next sales
> pitch, the next chance to sell US to the advertisers. When a media
> outlet spouts an ideological line, it's because they have enough
> of an audience to generate dividends for the shareholders.
>
> So in presidential campaigns, the finalists have indistinguishable
> political platforms, and the only way to induce candidates/parties
> [advertisers] to plow MASSIVE amounts of cash into media biz, is to
> produce presentations magnifying the minute distinctions between
> Tweedledee and Tweedledum, to garner sufficient audiences [we, the
> product] for the show. Never let truth stand in the way of a good
> story [that's showiz]. Misconstrue every possible detail. Omit
> every embarrassing contrary detail. 89% OF JOURNALISTS VOTED FOR
> MARXIST CLINTON!! But how many editors/owners did, and who controls
> what journalists write, and is corporate-whore Dixiecrat Clinton any
> more Marxist than was Reagan? Hey, don't answer that, the readers/
> viewers will get bored and switch channels and ad revenues will
> drop and the shareholders will be pissed and I'll be pounding the
> streets looking for another cushy job. Keep the juices flowing.
>
> Never underestimate the power of greed.
>
> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
> ==========
> CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting
propagandic
> screeds are not allowed. Substance-not soapboxing! These are sordid
matters
> and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and
outright
> frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor
effects
> spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
> gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to
readers;
> be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
> nazi's need not apply.
>
> Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
> ========================================================================
> Archives Available at:
> http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
>
> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
> ========================================================================
> To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
> SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
> SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Om
>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
