The MSM and the World of "If"

I’d like to say that no one holds the mainstream media in as much contempt as I do – but I’m afraid that when it comes to wanting to literally strangle the life out of a medium that is as mindless as it is corrupt, I am going to have to take a number – and stand at the end of a very, very long line.

What’s tragic about the current state of the MSM is that its potential for stirring the pot and bringing the average citizen’s blood to the boil-over point is more than obvious; a power that could – as is oft pointed out in action-hero comic book lore – be used for good as easily as for evil.

Unfortunately, we all know how that good versus evil thing turned out.

But one can’t help but wonder where we would be now, had the media riled up the citizenry over important issues, and encouraged the taking up of pikes and pitchforks to be aimed at the truly deserving rather than those who are still dismissed out-of-hand for being determined to hold certain truths as self-evident – not to mention worthy of being defended at all costs.

Where would we now stand as a nation if:

If the MSM had devoted as much time to covering the healthcare crisis facing millions of uninsured Americans as it devoted to creating the circus surrounding the Terry Schiavo case?

If the MSM had asked as many questions about the discrepancies in the “official version” of the events of 9-11 as they asked about the discrepancies in Scott Peterson’s alibi?

If the MSM devoted as much time to exposing the day-in/day-out hate-talk on right-wing radio as they devoted to exposing a few carefully chosen minutes of Reverend Wright’s sermons?

If the MSM had investigated the facts behind “sixteen words” with the same fervor they’ve investigated the disappearance of sixteen-year-old blondes?

If the MSM was as anxious to air footage of caskets being returned from Iraq as they are anxious to obtain footage of Brad and Angelina’s twins?

If the MSM ran videos of the food, water and first-aid station “props” being removed after Bush’s photo-op appearance in the aftermath of Katrina as many times as they ran the videos of his statements that he was doing everything necessary to assist the citizens of NOLA?

If the MSM spent as much time discussing the blatant crimes of this administration as they’ve spent dismissing serious discussion of same as a waste of time or Kabuki theater?

If the MSM gave as much airtime to the people who predicted the disasters inherent in occupying Iraq and were proven right as they give to PNACers who encouraged the occupation only to have been proven wrong?

If the MSM was as quick to point a finger at those who have voted against the needs of our veterans as they are to point a finger at those who don’t wear a flag-pin in their lapel?

If the MSM questioned the veracity of stories emanating from administration insiders with the same fortitude as they question of the veracity of those who have exposed administration insiders’ outright lies?

If the MSM put as much energy into disseminating the facts of what has really happened in Iraq as they’d put into cheerleading its invasion in the first place?

If the MSM was as undeterred in finding out who expunged documents from White House computers as they were in accepting as unimpeachable forged documents that led us to war?

If the MSM was as determined to find out who “outed” Valerie Plame as it is determined to find out what closeted gay or lesbian public figure might be “outed” next?

If the MSM did investigative reports on Diebold and blatant vote fraud instead of "investigating" the questionable vote tallies for a contestant on American Idol?

If the MSM had spent as much time discussing the lack of body armor for our troops in Iraq and the real reasons behind it, as it spends drooling over the latest Hollywood divorce, and speculating on the reasons behind that?

If the MSM had doggedly followed the stories of torture at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo, instead of gnawing on the bones of the insinuated violence in video games, rap lyrics, and action flicks?

If the MSM exercised its First Amendment rights by talking about how all of our rights are being eroded, instead of talking about their right to misinform the public being protected by couching it as merely an expression of their opinion?

If the MSM focused its attention on the mountain of dung created by the lies and deceit of this administration, instead of scraping together enough mud to build a molehill out of a politician’s personal indiscretion?

Yes, one wonders – how many of the dead would still be living, how many of the tortured would have been spared their suffering, how many of the unjustly imprisoned would be free, how many lies would have been exposed, how many criminals would have been brought to justice, how many citizens would have been informed as to the true nature of things and, thus informed, would have demanded that was what wrong be made right?

Yes, one wonders. But the MSM doesn’t wonder at all. It just collects its paycheck and continues to hold itself out as the purveyor of truth and facts, meticulously washing its hands, like a latter-day Pontius Pilate, when the topic of consequences for one's actions, and a sense of responsibility - all too infrequently, it would seem - rears its ugly head.

this has been going on for some time now, and I haven't watched network news in ages. I get my news from various sources, but when I speak of air news, it is usually PBS or NPR that gets it right most of the time. All of the rest of it is essentially little more than trash.

I am old enough to remember when news was really news, when world events were brought into our living rooms, the tinsel and shiny stuff did not exist. News was really news, and it was brought to us by thinking people who tried to be as unbiased and forthright as they could be.

Today...very little exists of journalistic integrity. People don't bother to pick up a newspaper, they rarely, if ever listen to serious radio broadcast, (as if there were a lot of them anyway). Years ago, I looked into some old microfiche of some of the stories from WWII from the NYT's and other sources, and while biased, they tried to get the straight story out as much as possible. Looking at some of the stories during the 30's, the reporting was all verifiable, and while fears were rampant, the news didn't feed the fear, it tried to explain what had happened.

Those days are long gone, most likely never to reappear. Before the "news" became big business, it was a side show before The Honeymooners or the Twilight Zone...something to fill in the gap before Prime Time. Today, news shows fight for ratings, it is all about cash flow.

It has a lot to do w/the blatant lack of journalistic integrity, pundits are not journalists, but it has more to do w/the American publics refusal to see just howe deeply they've aided in this travesty. To quote Pogo, "We have seen the enemy, and it is us."

It's not like CNN did one of its on-line polls one day and asked: (a)Do you want the 'real' news, or (b) would you rather have our infotainment version of the news?" - and the majority of people voted for (a).

I agree that the media wants to dumb-down America - but America never signed-on for being dumbed down.

A large segment of our population still consists of a generation that believed that (a) if it wasn't TRUE, the "news" wouldn't be allowed to report it, and (b) if something WAS true and really happened, it would be all over the news.

With the present state of the MSM, both of these once-accurate truisms are now defunct - but nobody informed the public-at-large about the change in the way "news" is reported - nor have they pointed out the fine line the media walks between what is fact and what is opinion.

It's easy to say that the public is "refusing" to acknowledge the difference between punditry and facts - but when were they offered a choice between the two? And when were they apprised of the fact that there is a difference?

There was a time when facts were facts - and the public wasn't expected to personally investigate the legitimacy of what was being presented as fact before accepting it at face value.

and there are too many folks here who seem to buy into the "we asked for it" argument when the fact is that only a few actually DID ask for it. People need to watch their assumptions, and their sense of moral superiority. Patting ourselves on the back for knowing which way the wind is blowing doesn't do us a lot of good if we're dislocating our arms in the process.

... Indiana Mythsaje.

"Patting ourselves on the back for knowing which way the wind is blowing doesn't do us a lot of good if we're dislocating our arms in the process."

THAT is damned fuckin' brilliant, my friend. Thanks for having my back - and for being back when we most need you!

:hi:

I read some of the threads and just shake my head in despair and disgust. Some of it's the same as it's always been, but more so. I've offered my opinion on the Edwards infidelity thing, for what it's worth, and I'm curious to see what kind of responses it gets. I'm tired of craning my neck to speak to people on high horses. I prefer to remain grounded, hopeful, and keep my eyes on the big picture and the most important details, not run around pissing all over every single brushfire the fuckwits in the corporate media see fit to light.

Big picture? McCain's crazy as a shithouse rat. He's got as much business being President as a rabid weasel has being elected guardian of the chicken coop. THAT, as far as I'm concerned, is the bottom line. Bush is a narcisstic, frat-boy drunkard with the moral compass of a brain damaged vulture flying through the Burmuda Triangle, but McCain is nucking futz.

as it happened.

A few of us raised the alarm, became the voices in the nihgt...but we were barely heard, the complacency of the nation took precedence.

The news has become banal, and the nation accepted it, if for nothing else, so they would not be disturbed by events occurring around them.

Now, people sit around and see what some "celebrity" does to embarrass themselves, as if the world turned on the whim of some overpaid individual that did little more than learn lines from a script, trying to make that a reality. Or the "world of fashion" matters more than the world at large.

Our problem is, we have, by our very complacency, allowed this to happen.

As an aside...I can count on one hand, the # of people I know that have read a book in the last year, I can count on half a hand, the # of people I know that have read the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence. That, to me, is just as frightening as the lack of ability for Americans to discern truth from fiction.

to die...I don't remember a whimper from the public.

:sarcasm: :yourock:

they know that a certain group of us (guessing wildly - 15%) pay close attention on the net, paper, radio and some TV, to what's going on, we then, in turn, filter that news to our friends (wildly guessing 35-45%) who don't focus as much as we do, and then that is how we manage to keep our country in a battle against the knuckle-draggers who are so easy to brainwash and fill with junk like the focus on filler stories like Brad & Angelina's kids & marriage, or horribly sad stories like missing kids - and thus - we must remember - when they start to try and attack the access to the news on the net - we must act HARD and voraciously to quell the attack on our freedom of contact!

McLame, McSame, McWar and MORE at - www.cafepress.com/warisprofitable

this and that. But when the MEDIA was mentioned, folks would SCREAM furiously.
Made me so not alone.

Isn't it ironic:
That the Jesus corpoRAT down the road now wants to join my union.. better money, medical insurance (his wife was laid off)
Christ on a crutch. I now know how to really HATE too.

that folks here would rather bitch about the MSM or simply ignore it rather than try to get some sort of movement going to confront it more or less directly. We all know how fucked up it's become--the only question is whether we're going to stand by and pretend there's nothing we can do about it. That's not strictly true...but it might as well be.

:shrug:

We do not receive news, we receive a carefully crafted script to keep us in our place... uniformed and complacent.

This is a great piece, Nancy. Wouldn't it be refreshing if we could have reporters act as something more than pipelines for propaganda.

Unions anyone?

I've worked for three corps in my career. Poor journalism isn't the result of some conspiracy. It's the result of laziness and people wanting ratings.

I think some have been more pro-McCain and others have been more pro-obama. One thing many people don't realize is that most reporters ARE in fact liberals. I know many of them and only about one in four is a conservative.

We are spoon fed pablum and shiny bright objects because the corporate entities are complicit in either downplaying or distorting news that is highly relevant to the citizens, but could be potentially damaging to advertising revenue. It's not laziness. It is about what the corporate flunky is told to report within constrictive guidelines.

Love how you immediately throw the "conspiracy" label out there... Sounds like you fit right in.

Actually calls you on your bullshit :eyes:

I don't need to "believe what I like" everyday I'm working in it. As I've said, I have been with three corps and I've never once been told to slant a story. I have, however, had an editor tell me my story reads as biased and would I please fix it or follow up better.

And ABC did not scrub McCain from its article, and Monsanto didn't influence whether "the Investigators" would not be able to run their story on rBGH... Crawl off your soapbox and wake the fuck up.

Fox news is obviously bullshit, however laziness is the explanation for the other ones of which you speak. Don't blame me for just telling you how it works. It's not an excuse for it, but it is a reason. If it was as bad as you like to pretend it is there'd be so many reporters coming forward about it. But because it is laziness and money, the two things reporters DO bitch about... they don't cry conspiracy.

during the Cold War. Some adult figure told me, about the countries behind the Iron Curtain: "Their news organizations work for the government and tell people what to think. They don't know about a lot of things we know about." I remember feeling sorry for the citizens of the Iron Curtain countries.

Now it's happened here. And to the rest of the civilized world, WE'RE the ones behind the curtain. Look at the reception Obama received overseas. The world's citizens are hoping so hard that we break free of our self-imposed Night of the Living Dead zombie corpse walking. Weaving, reeling, and stumbling throughout the world, feeding on the resources of others and destroying everything in our path. The world does not like us this way. But, time and time again, the forces of ignorance, hate, and mendacity triumph. And our own human race dies a little with each new media/corporate/political outrage.

Obama should be thirty points ahead by now. But I'm actually scared they're going to do it again. I'm working overtime and sending money where I can. We can't afford to let it happen again. But the zombies are still asleep.

We can fund Obama's and every Congressional campaign to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, but we still don't have the exposure the MSM could provide if it still reported news in the peoples' interest.

The crime is not one of commission as much as omission - half the stories they report would be on the periphery if they were addressing issues of vital interest to the nation and our Democracy. One minute of John McCains' infidelity for every minute of John Edwards' and McCain would've been out of the race - or we'd have heard nothing at all.

Traditional media has let us down, and we have little recourse. The "New Rules" the Republicans instituted allowing corporations to dominate entire market segments ensure that, even if the MSM outlets are hemorrhaging money by the boatload, their corporate parents are still raking it in via no-bid contracts and various other devices. But that was the plan, wasn't it?

One of the very first thing the new Congress has got to do in 2009 is restore the old standards and laws and force the divestiture of the media empires. It's the only way to take back our media.

Thanks again Nance. You have a real talent and flair for cutting through the bullshit in a concise, well stated and sane manner.

is the part of the omnipotent Big Brother Orwell described in "1984."
They control the message and how many voters think. The only thing free about the press is their freedom from responsibility as the Fourth Estate. They are a fifth column.

The media is a corporate entity now. A handful of corporations dominate the main channels of print and broadcast communications that are driven by making profits first and have no obligation to the public other than being there. Their agendas have long prospered with the "laisee-faire" mantra of the repugnican party that has championed the "deregulation" that has allowed their media empires and bottom lines to prosper. Their fiduciary responsibility isn't to the public, it's to their stockholders...and its prime motives are to cater to power to enhance its own power. The "little people"...the sheeple are just "ratings", numbers...the great unwashed that only are seen when called on and otherwise dismissed as a petulant children.

The conflict of interests of many of these corporations compromise how they view the world and their power has allowed them to escape any responsibility or accountability. Most people have only one cable company or satellite provider...the television and radio licenses are dominated by a handful of companies...who used favorable legislation and "deregulation" to drive out competition, stiffle local voices and now force their tastes and agendas to the "sheeple". Don't like it? Try to escape...you can't. They also have vested interests in many newspapers and publications as well. It's they who claim to be "mainstream"...and since they dominate the airwaves, their framing is how this battle is being fought.

Again, the corporate media has no fiduciary duty to be honest or "serve the public"...they used their lobbyists, like Vickie Iseman, to wipe those regulations off the books. The only way to get any accountability is with re-regulation and the re-establishment of laws that did work to make the media truly mainstream...that encouraged local and minority ownership and voices.

Cheers...

How do we effectively confront, expose, indict, & dismantle the hydra of global propaganda (the spine of the beast of Fascism)? Your rants have consistently, articulately aided the critical tasks of confrontation and exposure. I, for one, thank you again.

Once again, you provide food for thought in the most eloquent manner. And you've asked excellent questions. Let's put it this way. . .

For the Georgia/Russia conflict - I've had to go to *Euronews http://www.euronews.net/en/news/world/. I'm also fortunate enough to get this station as a cable subscriber.

*TV5 Monde is updating constantly.

*BBC News has been providing details/updates and background information as well: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7552012.stm

*Cable company also provides news programs from Poland, Italy, and Korea - It's fantastic to actually get some INSIGHT, detail, and HISTORY.

To get my 'crash course' in the history of this - I've had to get outside of the MSM of America.

In the meantime - some yahoo Governor from Louisiani is expounding the virtues of McSame on this week. They are still airing the 'Breaking News' of Edwards on other stations.

While ignoring Putin's 'claim' that Georgians are committing Genocide - while everyone oohs and ahhs over the Beijing Olympics while ignoring their back end participation of the Genocide going on in Darfur.

I consider myself a well-educated person. Not just in Degrees, but in my thirst for knowledge which causes me to read books. . . I prefer History, Cultural Anthropology, etc. etc. I had the pleasure of being at a birthday party last night for a friend and getting the opportunity to meet and speak at length with three men who are recent immigrants to the US:
1. A Croation Christian
2. A Bosnian Muslim
3. An atheist from Serbia

Do you know? They found it sad that most Americans didn't know the different between the three of them, the SIMILIARITIES between the three of them, and that we were more concerned with Edwards infidelities than with what was going on in Eastern Europe this weekend. They were shocked that even with my 'limited knowledge' - I had any at all. They were also shocked (specifically the Croation cutie) that I knew where the Adriatic sea was. This conflict DOES affect us, and it DOES matter.


The world is out of balance, and Americans - simply don't care. They don't care, because our Media force feeds people drivel and snot and the average American eats it up without ever questioning what the back end story is.

And that something is very simple:

Stop Watching!

Seriously, the only way out of this mess is to put them out of business. Purposely, consciously and methodically. And the way to do that is through their advertisers. The advertisers are actually the customers of media outlets, and the watchers are the product. Do we all understand how that works? We are the product, the advertisers are the customer. Media outlets are in the business of delivering a demographic to the advertiser. That's what they get paid for. If there is no more demographic and no more eyeballs being delivered to the advertisements, no more Corporate Media!

I am often amazed at how many people here on Democratic Underground rant, complain, bitch, gripe, whine, grouse and bellyache about the Corporate Media, without REALLY wondering what they can do about it. Day after day after day, people here complain about the bias of one story or one outlet or another. Yet nobody seems willing to hold their advertisers accountable for what they do. We could, with our numbers, intelligence and determination change the face of Corporate Media if we chose to do so. Start by picking ONE advertiser and let them know that THEY will be held accountable for what the "newsrooms" of their media outlets do. And then actually stop buying from them if they don't use their influence to effect some changes, or stop advertising with the culprits.

Pick a company...

but now their mission is to control information. People have not kept up with this shift, and actually still listen expecting straight news, like the good old days.

The corporate media has LIED TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. They have not represented FREE SPEECH, TRUTH or JUSTICE or lived up to the responsibility given to them by us, so they should have this responsibility taken away from them. People have died and countries destroyed.

I think that the 'alternative' media should be declared 'mainstream' since it is living up to the responsibility of the true American Press, so that hereafter we can live in the real world again!!

If the general public didn't jump up and down for coverage of the things you're speaking about then they wouldn't be covered. Yet, people are content to sit back and blame the media for the collective stupidity of the country.. in reality the media is taking the lead from the public.

The public just seems to be in the way -- the occasion, not the recipient.

We likely lost the "lead" when corporations became persons.

Corps want to put ads in the highest rated programs... so the news wants to sell to them a top dollar by getting those ratings... so it panders to what people want to see.

It's as if the attention they pay to the public AT ALL is just window dressing. We can object and boycott all we want -- it doesn't seem to matter at all to their program. :shrug:

an instrument of propaganda. The question is -

HOW TO FIX IT?

Suggestions to "hit them in their ratings" ignores the fact that most of Amerika will not join any effort to boycott either the media themselves or their corporate sponsors. You cannot win a financial war against those with more money.

Writing letters and other whining complaints are totally useless in influencing the corporate elite controlling the message. You cannot win a screaming war with those who do not listen to you.

Even changing laws (everyone's wet dream of returning the fairness doctrine) are not the way to go because (a) things are too far gone to slowly bring balance back to the messages reaching the public) and (b) there is no incentive for those with the power to make that change to make that happen. You cannot win a legislative war with those who make the laws.

The only front in the war against the media left is those individuals who present the propaganda. Until those spewing the garbage to the public are made to understand that it is in their own, personal best interest to act like journalists, they will continue to be willing participants. It only makes sense to attack your enemy where they are weakest, not confront them where they are stronger.

'xactly that...except that we actually can and do influence the media.

...at least I know that we can get MSNBC to pronounce "mee YAN' mar" correctly. (...it's not MY' nuh mar). Contessa Brewer actually did it on the air a few months ago right after I emailed them to hire someone to train their dummy (though beautiful) mike-stands.

And I know that 'important people' do have to waste their very very precious precious time occasionally answering bastards like me when I call them on their bullshit.

...a la Bill Kristol...I received a letter from a NY Times exec who actually answered my threatened medieval attack on their subscriber base. I threatened to muzzle them on Mondays if they gave voice to Kristol & the neocons. I shot them a few zingers and told them to shut down his wingnut virulence or there would be repercussions, and I know that they don't want repercussions...not yet anyway. I think I managed to blunt his rhetoric...or his more rabble-rousing line of shit would have surely hit the fan by now....

So I will keep ranting at them and give them not one more red cent. I am here for the long haul. They, on the other hand, have a very short-term, quarter-to-quarter view. The Times will run out of money within five years anyway - in a typical capitalist mob-inspired bustout program. The powers that be there just don't give a shit for factiness, truthiness, and they actually think that the sheeple will willingly become slaves.

When people call the newsroom "threatening us," or whatever, we act cordial and once we hang up we say, "Another batshit insane listener!" ANd everyone laughs at their expense.

at those who dare disagree with your pro-corporate/GOP message?

I doubt you and your cronies would be as smug if it went beyond empty threats.

I hope it gets to that point. You are a major part of the problem.

They rule by fear. They convinced 70% of Americans we were actually in danger from Iraq(I still can't believe people fell for that crap). As far as i'm concerned they are accessories to murder and have the blood of thousands of innocent people on their hands. Turn the table on them. Hound and harass them wherever they go. Obviously one can't use violence but it's time to quit treating these a-holes like celebrities and put some heat on them. Quit buying their newspapers, magazines etc. Turn off their tv shows. I plan on greeting them warmly in a couple of weeks when they are in my neck of the woods. Hand out "Corporate media LIES" bumper stickers whenever/wherever possible. Of course that would cost some money.

Honestly though i think it's just too late. This country has just way too many intellectual insects in it and you just can't fight stupid. Also most americans don't give a rat's ass as long as they don't have to sacrifice anything.

Where's your damn network? K&R! :kick:

We have become a society "that knows the price of everything and the value of nothing". (with apologies to Oscar Wilde)

The NY Times and traditional media™ is just a tool.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3402300123.html
Modern practitioners of propaganda utilize various schema to classify different types of propaganda activities. One such categorization classifies propaganda as white, gray, or black according to the degree to which the sponsor conceals or acknowledges its involvement. White propaganda is correctly attributed to the sponsor and the source is truthfully identified. (The U.S. government's international broadcast service Voice of America, for example, broadcasts white propaganda.) Gray propaganda, on the other hand, is unattributed to the sponsor and conceals the real source of the propaganda. The objective of gray propaganda is to advance viewpoints that are in the interest of the originator but that would be more acceptable to target audiences than official statements. The reasoning is that avowedly propagandistic materials from a foreign government or identified propaganda agency might convince few, but the same ideas presented by seemingly neutral outlets would be more persuasive. Unattributed publications, such as articles in newspapers written by a disguised source, are staples of gray propaganda. Other tactics involve wide dissemination of ideas put forth by others—by foreign governments, by national and international media outlets, or by private groups, individuals, and institutions. Gray propaganda also includes material assistance provided to groups that put forth views deemed useful to the propagandist.

Like its gray cousin, black propaganda also camouflages the sponsor's participation. But while gray propaganda is unattributed, black propaganda is falsely attributed. Black propaganda is subversive and provocative; it is usually designed to appear to have originated from a hostile source, in order to cause that source embarrassment, to damage its prestige, to undermine its credibility, or to get it to take actions that it might not otherwise. Black propaganda is usually prepared by secret agents or an intelligence service because it would be damaging to the originating government if it were discovered. It routinely employs underground newspapers, forged documents, planted gossip or rumors, jokes, slogans, and visual symbols.

Another categorization distinguishes between "fast" and "slow" propaganda operations, based on the type of media employed and the immediacy of the effect desired. Fast media are designed to exert a short-term impact on public opinion, while the use of slow media cultivates public opinion over the long haul. Fast media typically include radio, newspapers, speeches, television, moving pictures, and, since the 1990s, e-mail and the Internet. These forms of communication are able to exert an almost instantaneous effect on select audiences. Books, cultural exhibitions, and educational exchanges and activities, on the other hand, are slow media that seek to inculcate ideas and attitudes over time.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3402300123.html

for to do so shows NO contempt.

What do you think the elite corporate media want to be called? Mainstream, of course. Calling someone by their preferred name shows no contempt at all.

Are they mainstream?

No.

Continuing to give the title "mainstream" to those media whores is but another example of how the right always knows how to frame issues, institutions, and people, better than the left.

We still have so many people that want to honor those whores by calling them mainstream. Some because it's such a cute abbreviation: M$M.

Do you hear the right-wing call the media mainstream?

No. It's either the "liberal media" or the "left wing media."

The only people who call the media whores "mainstream" are the whores themselves and those on the left who refuse to get on message.

And the message is becoming more vital not only for the reasons given above.

There is a real change in peoples attitudes towards corporations. The price of oil hasn't hurt this change. The loss of good jobs to off-shoring hasn't hurt either. I've never sensed this feeling before to this extent in my life. There is a real and growing anti-corporate feeling in the air.


They are what the are: the elite corporate media


(No offense meant to sex workers intended.)

As usual, it's out of the park!

You have the best memory for this sort of thing of anyone I know...

K&R

:patriot:

Where you said "If the MSM was as anxious to air footage of caskets being returned from Iraq as they are anxious to obtain footage of Brad and Angelina’s twins?" I used to say that if the MSM covered the military funerals as much as the Anna Nicole Smith Funeral we all would wake up.
Thanks for your fantastic work and please keep it up for a little less then 90 days.

I keep wondering how much sooner public opinion would have turned against this war, and how much stronger the opposition would be today, if the media had covered military funerals on an ongoing basis.

heres my take in all of this, majority of Americans do believe that decisions about
which path M$M should take is made here in these shores, you'll be surprised to find
that that is not the case, many years ago in England I was fortunate to be amongs the
creme de la creme of news media corp who makes decision as to which way the wind blows.

Just a tid bit of an insight to those who are not aware, this was during the time the
British public was in disgust of Camilla Parker Bowles (anyone remember her) Prince
Charles's fling that became his wife, it was amazing to see how these folks operates
first hand and that was where I learned of Hillary being the chosen one, also it was
just after Ted Turner was forced out of CNN board rooms, the man that built his own
news network was forced out by operatives in the board room, all these things relate to
each other and putting the pieces together can be daunting but knowing what to look for
makes it easier, then targeting the group should be the ulterior goal, if this group
can be reached things WILL change overnight.

They dictate the pace and thinking of how owners of MSM passes their narratives, its
all about plotting and scheming and they have to be beaten at their own game.