|
|
#1
07-01-2007, 10:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Why does the US media behave as if it was state-controlled?
The latest conversion of all Iraqi insurgents into "Al Queada" by the American military PR machine is not surprising. Power is desperate to make people percieve this war as one against those who attacked the WTC on 9-11.
Our media is happy to play along, despite a long track record of lying and misleading during this Iraq debacle. This general statement was made by all major US press outlets last week: [ QUOTE ] US helicopters have killed 17 gunmen with suspected al-Qaeda links in Iraq's Diyala province north of Baghdad, the US military says. [/ QUOTE ] On complaints from the villagers, the BBC actually investigated and found: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6239896.stm [ QUOTE ] But villagers in largely-Shia al-Khalis say that those who died had nothing to do with al-Qaeda. They say they were local village guards trying to protect the township from exactly the kind of attack by insurgents the US military says it foiled. They say that of 16 guards, 11 were killed and five others injured - two of them seriously - when US helicopters fired rockets at them and then strafed them with heavy machinegun fire. Minutes before the attack, they had been co-operating with an Iraqi police unit raiding a suspected insurgent hideout, the villagers said. [/ QUOTE ] Why is the BBC the only outlet investigating our military's statements after all the BS? 
|
|
#2
07-01-2007, 11:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why does the US media behave as if it was state-controlled?
People in power do things to ensure their own selfish ends are met. That is true in governement and outside governement. The problem is that the government is a monopoly in the united states. When GE does it there are dozens of other competing forces they have to take into consideration. There is no downside to government doing it.
What forces of power influence the media here? Do you think you have any influence over it?
|
|
#3
07-01-2007, 12:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why does the US media behave as if it was state-controlled?
The force that influences the media are the GE's Lockheeds and other military contractors.
Imagine Tim Russert coming out in favor of decreased military spending. His boss depends on the Iraq war to maintain his opulent lifestyle.
|
|
#4
07-01-2007, 12:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why does the US media behave as if it was state-controlled?
[ QUOTE ]
The force that influences the media are the Haliburtons--KBR's GE's Lockheeds and other military contractors. Imagine Tim Russert coming out in favor of decreased military spending. His boss depends on the Iraq war to maintain his opulent lifestyle. [/ QUOTE ] FYP
|
|
#5
07-01-2007, 01:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why does the US media behave as if it was state-controlled?
I think it is about access to information.
Story ideas are the currency of journalism. Many, many stories come out of the government, especially the most exciting ones involving bang bang. If an outlet starts getting too critical, they get cut off. The major media are now completely profit driven, with honest journalists like CBS's Edward R. Murrow defeated decades ago by the bean counters. These towering money machines cannot afford to have an obnoxious reporter disrupt production of the commodity. Imagine how much viewership CNN gets by having a shot of a reporter posed in a bunker with bombs and explosions in the background. All those thrilling shots of smart bombs taking out bridges? Pure gold. They cannot lose access to that stuff. It's been awhile in developing, but the corrosive of the need for access has steadily worn away independent journalism. To prosper in corporate media, the reporters have to adopt the values of their bosses, so they become the most effective, hands-on gatekeepers of information. A reporter who is not a member of the club simply will not develop sources, her clip file will be skinny and crappy. Great book on this: Manufacturing Consent by Herman & Chomsky. This is how even a once good newspaper like the New York Times could regurgitate all those shallow lies that got us into the war, and all the obsequious WMD stories by Judith Miller. Major media now toadies to the point that even the 40th anniversary of Israel's attack on the USS Liberty is ignored, despite an original Navy investigator announcing that he had obeyed an order to conclude the attack was a mistake. When not even red, white, and blue stories are run because they contradict the party line, you know you are living in an Orwell novel. Thankfully, they have not yet controlled the web, but China does, and it could happen here.
|
|
#7
07-01-2007, 03:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why does the US media behave as if it was state-controlled?
[ QUOTE ]
Imagine Tim Russert coming out in favor of decreased military spending. His boss depends on the Iraq war to maintain his opulent lifestyle. [/ QUOTE ] Um, isn't Tim Russert supposed to be an objective journalist? Aren't they supposed to cover the news, not be advocates for certain policies? So you want Tim Russert to go on his program on Sunday morning and say, "I support decreasing the military budget." This is why the media bias debate is impossible to have with some liberals. For those who don't know, Tim Russert was a Democratic operative for years (like Stephanapolous and others in the MSM). The media is full of former Democratic partisans, and people like Canis still think it is too conservative. When the media give enormous promotion and exposure to Al Gore's upcoming save the world concerts, come back and tell me about the conservative media. Imagine a former Republican Vice-President holding an event to promote his pet cause. Would the major media celebrate it like this? www.newsbusters.org go there if you want to see what real bias looks like After thinking about it, Canis, you do have a point. We do have a problem with multi-millionaires sponsoring news broadcasts for their financial benefit: http://newsbusters.org/node/13776
|
|
#8
07-01-2007, 03:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why does the US media behave as if it was state-controlled?
I think it's foolish to assume the media either leans towards the Republicans or the Democrats; they are both incredibly powerful they both share the power of the media. The bias in the media (in my mind) is that it only talks about the viewpoints of those parties and NEVER anything else.
|
|
#10
07-02-2007, 01:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why does the US media behave as if it was state-controlled?
[ QUOTE ]
I think it's foolish to assume the media either leans towards the Republicans or the Democrats; they are both incredibly powerful they both share the power of the media. The bias in the media (in my mind) is that it only talks about the viewpoints of those parties and NEVER anything else [/ QUOTE ] It is not foolish to assume that. The MM are dominated by left of center people. There is a distinct bias. However, your second point is correct. There is a distinct establishment bias. To use a football analogy, the media only cover people within the 20 yard lines. Anybody outside that on either side does not receive coverage.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
