kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Right so you admit you don't really consume media, yet feel you are able to comment on all the media in the US?
Your favourite Neo-con moments
- Thread starter Brainaddict
- Start date
kyser_soze said:
It all depends on the parameters you want to put in place mate. You talk about 50,000 publications. If you mean do i trawl several thousand different media in order to be able to have opinions about what's in them, then no, i don't 'consume' media. Who the fuck does? How many hundred or thousand do you require me to read in order to be able to make statements that you will accept?
Often in your replies to me you put in place impossible criteria for me to allow to continue holding my views and ideas about things.
I don't admit anything. I have my well-read and well-formed opinions of what constitutes the american media as a distinct body. I have already referred to honorable exceptions, so you should know that i'm not talking about 'all the media'.
You tell me how i'm wrong when i say that american media, as an entity, fucked up over bush and his clan. You show me how they came out against these illegal filthy wars that the neo-cons engaged in. You tell me how they stopped those appalling domestic bills that put so much power in the state's hands.
But mate, you lose sight of what i'm saying sometimes because you're too wrapped up in what you think i've said in the past, and the kind of political person you think i am.
You really would do yourself a favour by getting rid of this idea that i'm one of those people that make generalisations based on very little input. I might inadvertently give that impression sometimes, but hey, such is the limitation of written communication which is so snail-like in pace. Such differences in understanding can be solved in seconds in the oral variety, but that ain't part of this forum.
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
I can't say that because I don't view media as 'an entity' - it's one element of society, not some homogenous lumpy thing (altho many journalists are
)
Do I agree with you...to some degree yes, the US press has somewhat prostrated itself before the neo-con agenda, but then the neos played the information game far harder and more brutally than anyone else - if you were editor of the NYT and were placed in a situation where ALL your journalists would be barred from any kind of access, official or otherwise, to the White House, what would you do?
I would also point out that while the press were muzzled, publishing and film were rampant in their criticisms of the regime (radio has been tied up by the right for the last 2 decades) and this is what I mean when I say your argument only has limited scope.
)Do I agree with you...to some degree yes, the US press has somewhat prostrated itself before the neo-con agenda, but then the neos played the information game far harder and more brutally than anyone else - if you were editor of the NYT and were placed in a situation where ALL your journalists would be barred from any kind of access, official or otherwise, to the White House, what would you do?
I would also point out that while the press were muzzled, publishing and film were rampant in their criticisms of the regime (radio has been tied up by the right for the last 2 decades) and this is what I mean when I say your argument only has limited scope.
I can't say that because I don't view media as 'an entity' - it's one element of society, not some homogenous lumpy thing (altho many journalists are
Do I agree with you...to some degree yes, the US press has somewhat prostrated itself before the neo-con agenda, but then the neos played the information game far harder and more brutally than anyone else - if you were editor of the NYT and were placed in a situation where ALL your journalists would be barred from any kind of access, official or otherwise, to the White House, what would you do?
I would also point out that while the press were muzzled, publishing and film were rampant in their criticisms of the regime (radio has been tied up by the right for the last 2 decades) and this is what I mean when I say your argument only has limited scope.
I will be careful in the future to talk about the 'press' not media per se. Point taken about some of the other media.
"if you were editor of the NYT and were placed in a situation where ALL your journalists would be barred from any kind of access, official or otherwise, to the White House, what would you do?"
Inform the readers of this new development on the front page, and leave all the pages that would have had political news as bits of blank white paper. Perhaps put in a few mug shots of some of my journos with dog muzzles over their mouths...
coccinelle
Active Member
Anyway, to come back onto topic, I remember Wolfowitz saying just before Iraq was invaded: "This is not about Israel, this is not about oil...". From a neocon, who use projection and denial as rhetorical devices, that's about as close to the delicious truth as you will get...
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
