• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Corporate controlled news, how extensive is it?

RandFan said:
How much fake news do we get? I'm not certain.

I can tell you that I regularly listen to NPR, and Rush Limbaugh on the radio. On the internet I check out BBC, Drudge, and FOX News. I also follow several blogs including The Huffington and Little Green Footballs. I used to read Coulter weekly but I've stopped. I do read Larry Elder and Susan Estrich and from time to time assorted others.

Most importantly I check into the Daily Howler 2 or three times a week.

My conclusions: There's a lot of crap out there. However I don't see any concerted effort to fake a lot of news. I simply see schlock but somehow the news, one way or the other, get's through.

BTW, I get the impression that Bob Somerby, the Editor of the Daily Howler agrees with you to a degree. I'm not as cynical as Bob.

Do you read Daily Howler? You should.

ETA: Though Bob leans a bit to the left I can tell you that he is fair and by and large non-partisan.
Click to expand...
Read a bit of the Howler based on your recommendation. Made excellent points. Pointed out the news media avoidance of a question the same way a politician would have avoided answering. The news media are the culprits here as well as the fake news producers and sellers. I'm in the middle of the book, Attack Poodles, by James Wolcott. The news people go to lunch and dinner with the people they report on. They are of similar stock as well they don't talk too badly about their "good friends."

NPR is certainly worthwhile but it wasn't until I started listening to Democracy Now that I realized even NPR is sanitized on many issues. Doesn't mean it's time to stop listening to them. The News Hour with Jim Leher continues to cover issues with some substance in the reporting. Both programs avoid the short attention span target market. BBC and the CBC, Canadian Broadcast Corp. has news that isn't yet as diluted as the US broadcast corporations.

Rush and O'Reilly have been caught in lie after lie so while I may listen here and there, they are completely untrustworthy sources of news. I see FOX news often since they broadcast when other stations have gone to commercial. (I'm an avid channel surfer when avoiding commercials.) But their relentless focus on 'blame everything on Clinton' was pretty telling of their program content validity. They are also the prime outlet for the "talking points memos" of the Republican Party. Jon Stewart of the Daily Show plays the "talking points memos" 'echo chamber' on his program all the time.

Murdock apparently is doing similar programming in other countries. That is very worrisome.

In looking for a list of Murdoch's holdings, I found this.
Rupert Murdoch has claimed his Fox News channel is not biased in favour of George Bush and that News Corporation, his global media empire, is a "fair and balanced" company.

Speaking at the company's annual general meeting in Adelaide, Mr Murdoch insisted Fox News' reporting was more balanced than that of other US networks.

"It's full of Democrats and Republicans, the others only have Democrats. We don't take any position at all," Mr Murdoch said in response to a question about Fox's impartiality.

"We're not in the least bit biased, we're a fair and balanced company."

Mr Murdoch's comments will astonish critics of the notoriously right-wing television network, which was the subject of the controversial US documentary, Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism.

The film, which accused Fox News of abandoning traditional reporting values and ushering in an era of partisan news coverage, has become a cult classic, topping Amazon.com's list of bestselling DVDs.

It alleges presenters are encouraged to accentuate points that might be helpful to the Bush administration, and includes a claim from one former Fox contributor covering news from Iraq that he was ordered to "keep it positive" and "emphasise all the good we're doing".

But Mr Murdoch admitted News Corp newspapers, which include the New York Post as well as the Times, the Sun and the News of the World, had supported Mr Bush's foreign policy and said they would continue to do so.

"With our newspapers, we have indeed supported Bush's foreign policy and we remain that way," he said.
Click to expand...
The NY Times and the WA Post retain at least some investigative journalism but these references are to the UK papers, The Times (He also owns the UK Sunday Times) and the NY, not the WA Post. I do not know how valid the claims in this article are. Perhaps someone familiar with those newspapers can inform us.

Which reminds me to post a link to Source Watch, a site you can go to and look up who is connected to whom and what side of politics they are associated with. Those infamous "institutes" with names like the Discovery Institute make an effort at times to hide their affiliations.

Source Watch as a page on Murdoch and his holdings that is worth looking at.

Back to your comment. You say you don't know how much news is fake but don't believe it is a concerted effort. First, it has evolved into more and more pervasive trend (4th time now I have said this). It did not come about by a concerted effort. And second, if you don't know how much is fake news, how do you know how pervasive it is?

Many of the people on this forum are out there looking actively to stay informed. But that is not typical. Even many of the science buffs are not news buffs so being a skeptic and/or being educated in no guarantee of staying informed about current events.
 
skeptigirl said:
Read a bit of the Howler based on your recommendation. Made excellent points. Pointed out the news media avoidance of a question the same way a politician would have avoided answering. The news media are the culprits here as well as the fake news producers and sellers. I'm in the middle of the book, Attack Poodles, by James Wolcott. The news people go to lunch and dinner with the people they report on. They are of similar stock as well they don't talk too badly about their "good friends."
Click to expand...
Cool

Rush and O'Reilly have been caught in lie after lie so while I may listen here and there...
Click to expand...
I just can't bear to listen to O'Reilly. I've tried to figure him out and I just can't. He's bizarre. Of course he is the most watched TV pundit so who knows.

Rush is simply the very best at what he does. Sometimes his show is crap and I turn back to NPR. But when he is on the mark I can't stop listening to him. Rush will report things you won't hear anywhere else.

I see FOX news often since they broadcast when other stations have gone to commercial. (I'm an avid channel surfer when avoiding commercials.) But their relentless focus on 'blame everything on Clinton' was pretty telling of their program content validity. They are also the prime outlet for the "talking points memos" of the Republican Party. Jon Stewart of the Daily Show plays the "talking points memos" 'echo chamber' on his program all the time.
Click to expand...
I like the FOX news format. I like a lot of the people on there. I like John Gibson, Shepperd Smith, Steve Duecy, Neil Cavuto and others. I don't get my news from any single source so I don't really worry about the BS. It's just another version of the news.

Back to your comment. You say you don't know how much news is fake but don't believe it is a concerted effort. First, it has evolved into more and more pervasive trend (4th time now I have said this). It did not come about by a concerted effort. And second, if you don't know how much is fake news, how do you know how pervasive it is?
Click to expand...
I'll keep an open mind but I seriously don't see it the way you do. I'm skeptical as to the extent of what you say. Like I said, I get a wide range of opinions and I think the news gets through. But I will check out your links.

Many of the people on this forum are out there looking actively to stay informed. But that is not typical. Even many of the science buffs are not news buffs so being a skeptic and/or being educated in no guarantee of staying informed about current events.
Click to expand...
Welcome to Democracy. I think it works.
 
TriangleMan said:
I can't comment on American news per se but I wonder about the international sources. I know a reporter who works for the English-language Al-Jazzera news channel (going on-air in September), I'll ask him what he thinks about this issue when he is back from vacation.
Click to expand...
Democracy Now is the only place I've heard direct interviews with Al-Jazeera reporters and producers. You don't have to agree with these people, trust them or like what they put on the air. At the same time, I certainly want to know what the rest of the world is listening to.

A memo was leaked to the British press containing information about US plans to bomb Al Jazeera offices in Qatar. It's one thing to want some censorship during wartime. But the main thing Bush wants censored is anything that will turn the American public's sentiment against the war, not military secrets the enemy can use. The rest of the world is seeing the pictures. It's only the US and maybe our allies that aren't seeing them. And to attack the free press outside of Iraq is worrisome as well.

Friday, February 3rd, 2006
Democracy Now! in Doha…"Why Did You Want to Bomb Me Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair?": Al Jazeera Director Demands More Information on Secret Memo

Days after the Daily Mirror cited the memo that allegedly reveals President Bush told Tony Blair in April 2004 of his desire to bomb Al Jazeera, Wadah Khanfar, Managing Director of Al Jazeera, arrived in London to petition for a meeting with Blair to discuss the leaked memo. We speak with Khanfar about his demands for more information about the secret memo. [includes rush transcript] He then published an article in the Guardian newspaper called "Why did you want to Bomb me Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair?" In it he writes, "If it is true that Bush had indeed thought of bombing the Al Jazeera headquarters in Doha, this will undoubtedly constitute a watershed in the relationship between government authorities and the free media."

* Wadah Khanfar, Managing Director of Al Jazeera.

Monday, May 29th, 2006
Ex-British Navy Spokesperson Steve Tatham on "Losing Arab Hearts and Minds: The Coalition, Al Jazeera and Muslim Public Opinion"

Lt. Commander Steve Tatham, former British Navy spokesperson and author of the new book "Losing Arab Hearts and Minds: The Coalition, Al Jazeera and Muslim Public Opinion."

Wednesday, February 22nd, 2006
EXCLUSIVE: Al Jazeera Reporters Give Bloody First Hand Account of April ’04 U.S. Siege of Fallujah

We sat down with them in Doha, Qatar earlier this month. The interview is translated by Al Jazeera interpreter Ali Matar. For our television audience, please be warned some of the images you are about to see are graphic.

* Ahmed Mansur, Al Jazeera Correspondent
* Laith Mushtaq, Al Jazeera Cameraman

Friday, June 9th, 2006
A Mother Under Occupation: Palestinian Journalist Laila El-Haddad on Life in the Occupied Territories

* Laila El-Haddad, a Palestinian journalist and mother who lives in Gaza. She writes for Aljazeera.net and other publications. She maintains her own blog titled "Raising Youssef: A Diary of a Mother Under Occupation"
Click to expand...

Did you know there was an Al Jazeera English Home page?
 
skeptigirl said:
But the people putting out the fakes news and manipulating beliefs are not reacting to public demand. They are actively marketing their message.
Click to expand...
I shall at least do what is in my power, and guard with settled purpose against giving my assent to what is false, and being imposed upon by this deceiver, whatever be his power and artifice. But this undertaking is arduous, and a certain indolence insensibly leads me back to my ordinary course of life; and just as the captive, who, perchance, was enjoying in his dreams an imaginary liberty, when he begins to suspect that it is but a vision, dreads awakening, and conspires with the agreeable illusions that the deception may be prolonged...


René Descartes
Meditations
 
President Bush said:
I shall at least do what is in my power, and guard with settled purpose against giving my assent to what is false, and being imposed upon by this deceiver, whatever be his power and artifice. But this undertaking is arduous, and a certain indolence insensibly leads me back to my ordinary course of life; and just as the captive, who, perchance, was enjoying in his dreams an imaginary liberty, when he begins to suspect that it is but a vision, dreads awakening, and conspires with the agreeable illusions that the deception may be prolonged...


René Descartes
Meditations
Click to expand...
Interesting but not my sentiment.

I have no desire to cast out all opinion and conclusions, only to look behind the curtain and reveal the fake wizard for the deceiver he is.

I live in an evidence based Universe. It has many pillars which support me just fine.



BTW, it's quite funny to post this stuff and see a reply from one calling himself President Bush. I would love to have a real conversation with the man. He may be one of the people most deceived by himself and by his administration. With a mother who claimed, "This is working very well for them" referring to the poor in New Orleans trapped at the Astrodome, one wonders just how warped his own world view really is.
 
Last edited:
I tried to give Democracy Now a chance, I really did. But Amy Goodman is work is very, very slanted by her politics. In many ways, this is a good thing - she questions a lot of things. But her shows don't sound like news to me, they sound like rants. I ended up questioning her ability to track down and publish facts which were contrary to her preconceived antiwar message. I'm no fan of war in general, and have deep reservations about recent activies in that regard, but in the end I am not looking for a reporter to form my opinions, or share their's with me. I want the facts, and let me decide what to think about them. I'm at the point that as soon as I hear her strident, censoring voice I change the channel, because I know I'm about to be lectured to.
 
President Bush said:
Then you might like this.
Click to expand...
??

Can you say "non sequitur". Skeptigirl says that she doesn't share Descartes sentiment and you post a link rehashing the Descartes homunculus. I think you are in the wrong forum. If you want to have a discussion on dualism perhaps you should try the Philosophy and Religion forum. If there is a point to a lengthy discussion of Descarte, could you be a bit less obscure and tell us what the sam hell it is?

"And the London Underground is not a political movement. Those are all mistakes Otto, I looked them up."
--Wanda
 
skeptigirl said:
And what I want is for it to keep working.

Did you see this link in my OP?

Fake TV News: Widespread and Undisclosed
Click to expand...
Oh, I absolutely accept this. Since the news has a certain authority and is accepted in large part as truth by viewers, advertisers and politicians have been trying to exploit the news since day one. I think that you are correct to sound the alarm. I'll grant that you've made an argument that there is a potential problem that we need to address. I'm not certain how significant or widespread, I'm skeptical of some of the claims made but I accept that there is a problem.

Thanks
 
I find that when PR Watch/SourceWatch (same organization), produce information about the PR industry and fake news, they are without peer, but I find their politcal analysis of events less than satisfactory.

I've read Toxic Sludge is Good For You; Trust Us, We're Experts; and Weapons of Mass Deception, and I found the third book less useful than the others.

I'll second roger's opinion of Democracy Now! I listen to it, but find her bias almost as annoying as the corporate bias of "mainstream" news.

Still, there's usually good information to be found, and I listen to the pdcast, so I can always fast-forward it. :)
 
skeptigirl said:
It's dangerous and foolosh to just listen to the news you want to hear.
Click to expand...

I'm curious: since this is your stated position, what media sources do you listen to that provide you with a viewpoint you probably don't agree with? You've given us sources that have a left-leaning perspective, but what sources do you pay attention to that provide a conservative perspective? Is FOX News the extent of it, or do you keep tabs on other sources too?
 
skeptigirl said:
With a mother who claimed, "This is working very well for them" referring to the poor in New Orleans trapped at the Astrodome, one wonders just how warped his own world view really is.
Click to expand...

But the Astrodome isn't IN New Orleans, it's in Houston, Texas. I think you confused it with the Superdome. Barbara Bush was talking about refugees from New Orleans who were staying at the Astrodome, who weren't trapped at all and did have access to food, water, medical care, etc., and NOT the people who were trapped in the Superdome under pretty dire conditions. It may have been an insensitive remark, but it is hardly the disconnect from reality that your confusion led you to believe.
 
RandFan said:
Can you say "non sequitur". Skeptigirl says that she doesn't share Descartes sentiment and you post a link rehashing the Descartes homunculus. I think you are in the wrong forum. If you want to have a discussion on dualism perhaps you should try the Philosophy and Religion forum. If there is a point to a lengthy discussion of Descarte, could you be a bit less obscure and tell us what the sam hell it is?
Click to expand...
A link rehashing the Descartes homunculus? Hardly, RandFan. Unless the little man is in cyberspace...

The issue in the tread I hoped to mirror by posting this link was that of media marketed fake news.

In Meditations, Descartes' absolute doubt calls into question the existence of the world as presented by our senses. Calling into question the existence of the world as presented by our senses. Media marketed fake news. Do you see any (potential) parallels?

... the captive, who, perchance, was enjoying in his dreams an imaginary liberty, when he begins to suspect that it is but a vision, dreads awakening, and conspires with the agreeable illusions that the deception may be prolonged...

René Descartes
Meditations
Click to expand...
It would be difficult to admit that Captain Kangaroo was lying the whole time.

From the link:

... the "false reality" question becomes especially unavoidable in the age of virtual technologies. These technologies constantly narrate their own totalizing dreams of "building worlds" and "providing experience," and produce -- consciously or not -- the corresponding "gnostic" desire to escape the prison of manufactured dreams...

... cyberspace externalizes us, translating the contents of subjectivity into an objective space of technical operations. So on the one hand we have the endless play of virtual identity, in which we lend "reality" to stray fragments of the psyche by externalizing them into a field of technologically sustained symbolic intersubjectivity. On the other hand, we enter a paranoid dystopia, where our every move is tracked, controlled, and manipulated by an increasingly intelligent virtual environment...

... the thoroughly targeted individual whose unique desires and dispositions have been data-mined, tracked, extrapolated, commodified, and, most importantly, fed back to the target in a personalized, even obscenely intimate form. In this process, the statistical generalities that govern demographics are brought down to the scale of the individual without losing their abstract and utterly impersonal instrumentality. The new goal is to anticipate and nudge the precise and singular unfolding of subjectivity in its encounter with information and commodities...
Click to expand...
Hope this helps, RandFan. Let me know if I can answer any other such questions you might have concerning what I've said to somebody else.
 
President Bush said:
In Meditations, Descartes' absolute doubt calls into question the existence of the world as presented by our senses. Calling into question the existence of the world as presented by our senses. Media marketed fake news. Do you see any (potential) parallels?
Click to expand...
Yes, I was wrong.
 
RandFan said:
Yes, I was wrong.
Click to expand...
You will be hereby presented with the Presidential Medal of Freedom. This, the nation's highest civilian honor, will be presented by past Presidential Medal of Freedom recipients, former Central Intelligence Agency director, George J. Tenet, and Michael Brown, former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

We are all very proud of you.
 
President Bush said:
You will be hereby presented with the Presidential Medal of Freedom. This, the nation's highest civilian honor, will be presented by past Presidential Medal of Freedom recipients, former Central Intelligence Agency director, George J. Tenet, and Michael Brown, former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

We are all very proud of you.
Click to expand...
Brown and Tenet? Sometimes you can't win for losing.


"That's some catch, that Catch-22," he observed.
"It's the best there is," Doc Daneeka replied.
--Joseph Heller
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom