quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X how about for news unrelated to science or technology?

LOL, how cute and naive.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby LOL, how cute and naive.

It was a rather serious question. My brother has had a subscription to it for about 12 years now and having had borrowed more copies than he would have liked, I've learned a considerable amount from it in that time. I can also say that I've read enough of it to know that it doesn't exactly cover too many facets in regards to our world's political or economic scene.

So I guess that means you're not going to answer my question?

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X What points has Olberman made that you don't agree with, Q? I mean, I'm sure there have been quite a few but I'd be interested in hearing you debate them rather than just broadly cast them aside as though they were meaningless. He seems to bring up quite a large number of important issues if you ask me. Many more than Lou Dobbs, IMO.

his leftist views are shallow and contrived. as with just about all the viewpoints on MSNBC. i listen to many leftists that can carry themselves much better than he can intellectually.

it seems he gets a lot of his talking points from the interwebs.

in that same regard, he never invites opposing viewpoints on his program.

he douches.

for the record i'm impartial to O'Rielly. i find him to be too arrogant for my viewing tastes although i agree with him infinitely more than Olberdouche. that and i work nights so i can't be bothered around that time for either.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X Can you expound upon that or are double worded ad hominem's the furthest you can elaborate? I mean, it's rather obvious that the man is not an idiot. I'd almost be willing to bet that his IQ is in the 120-140 range which would technically make him almost a genius Edit: say what you will but Lou Dobbs is definitely not an idiot. They don't accept idiots into Harvard.

Hmm, idiot may have been the wrong word. Bad journalist is perhaps far more appropriate. He has an agenda (on his one issue), and he completely disregards and attacks the opinions of anyone who disagrees with him. The conservative right is always looking for a liberal to paint with the same brush as O'Reilly (by ways of justifying O'Reilly ironically), but they should really look no further than Dobbs. I find him reactionary, and close-minded. So I've stopped watching him.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Hmm, idiot may have been the wrong word. Bad journalist is perhaps far more appropriate. He has an agenda (on his one issue), and he completely disregards and attacks the opinions of anyone who disagrees with him. The conservative right is always looking for a liberal to paint with the same brush as O'Reilly (by ways of justifying O'Reilly ironically), but they should really look no further than Dobbs. I find him reactionary, and close-minded. So I've stopped watching him.

I'd say that the bad journalists are the ones who report upon nothing but which they are told to report, the ones who are fed and in turn disseminate propagandized information directly from the White House, the Pentagon, from corporate interests, etc. (which is basically all that O'Reilly does.)

IMO, Lou Dobbs is one of the few journalists who even seems to give a sh*t about the plight of the average, middle class American worker.

BTW - he's a lifelong Republican (he only recently become an independent) but he's been painted as a liberal by those who don't agree with him simply because the issues that he raises are considered to be fringe issues. I believe that they're fringe issues only because few others have the courage (or well placed job security) to talk about them - but that doesn't lessen their importance.

If American corporations didn't seek lowest costs they would fail to survive in the global market which means much less jobs

___________________

soulful/latin/deep house + jazz

The problem with the media...

The 5 filters of the Propaganda Model explain it best...

1. The first filter, ownership, notes that most major media outlets are owned by large corporations.
2. The second, funding, notes that the outlets derive the majority of their funding from advertising, not readers. Thus, since they are profit-oriented businesses selling a product — readers and audiences — to other businesses (advertisers), the model would expect them to publish news which would reflect the desires and values of those businesses.
3. In addition, the news media are dependent on government institutions and major businesses with strong biases as sources (the third filter) for much of their information.
4. Flak, the fourth filter, refers to the various pressure groups which go after the media for supposed bias and so on when they go out of line.
5. Norms, the fifth filter, refer to the common conceptions shared by those in the profession of journalism. (Note: in the original text, published in 1988, the fifth filter was "anticommunism". However, with the fall of the Soviet Union, it has been broadened to allow for shifts in public opinion).

___________________