Is the media lazy or conspiratorial?

[linazelle]

Poll question: Is the media lazy or conspiratorial?

I listened to Morning Sedition this AM and the hosts went back and forth about the media not covering the awful truths about BushCo because they are (a) lazy or (b) purposefully hiding information.

The debate seems to be growing because Randi Rhodes talked about it later and so did Jeanine Garafolo.

Here's why I don't think the media is lazy.

The RNC drew hundreds of thousands of people to New York City and they marched all over Manhattan. There was little or no coverage and the few hecklers who made it inside the hall were only filmed being accosted and taken out in handcuffs--a very strong message. Even the laziest media organization would have been hard pressed not to film the unprecedented throngs at the RNC--yet, they managed to do just that for the most part.

They also managed to avoid widespread coverage last year of the million people who converged on the mall in Washington DC. And last October, while Bush was visiting the Royal Family with 700 bodyguards and more than 700,000 protesters marched in the streets all we saw or heard was that Micheal Jackson was being brought up on charges. Anybody recall seeing the streets lined with people the way Michael Moore filmed it on any media broadcast?

There's no way the media is lazy. They are obvious accomplices in the effort to downplay dissent to keep their man in office.

If we do nothing else in the next four years, I hope it will be to establish some standards for reporting--some requirement for truth; the whole truth and nothing but. That would mean covering Bush's trips WITH a depiction of the true environment he travels in. It would mean letting fallen soldiers' caskets be televised and it would mean that lies like the tripe thrown out by Denny Hastert alleging that George Soros makes money off illegal drugs would not be aired or at least vetted and challenged.

I can dream can't I?

[autorank]

1. You can punish them in multiple ways for their mendacity!

1) Stop buying newspapers period (except those that are fair). The no-buy list would include The Washington Post and the NY Times at the very top (they know better). Don't subscribe, don't buy at a news stand.
2) No more Network anything...news, entertainment (your favorite sports team excepted).
3) Write your paper and the networks and let them know exactly why you're not reading/viewing them.
4) Support web sites that tell the truth; support publications that tell the truth; support Gore's cable network.

CNN is effectively finished. Their ratings cannot support the costs. It's a subsidiary so you'll never see the real numbers, count on it, but they're through...because anyone with a brain that watched stopped.

The Luntz canning is proof that somebody is listening.

[linazelle]

4. Good suggestions...the newspaper thing has taken care of itself

It was predicted years ago newspaper readership would dwindle and it has...even with the color pictures and 8th grade writing. I never watched CNN and stopped reading newspapers beyond my horoscope after they effectively ignored Bush's illegal misappropriation of funds for the Iraq war. Unfortunately, I know way too many people who don't think CNN is slanted right and some who don't think Fox is biased (go figure).

[Media_Lies_Daily]

2. The U. S. mainstream media is OWNED by major conservative...

...corporations who control the purse strings. If you're a reporter and you buck the system, you'll never work in your field again.

[TahitiNut]

3. Exactly. They're an extension of Corporate Marketing/PR ...

... without scruples, morals, or loyalty to anything but the God Of Profit!

The media foot soldiers (fresh out of Journalism School) may be predominantly liberal (focused on freedom of speech and freedom of the press, of course), but they'll get a graduate course in realpolitik from their first managing editor: Rock the boat and DIE.

[autorank]

6. Right!

And if you're a commentator who disagrees with the toady hosts, you get banished. I remember the last time I saw the telegenic Col. David Hackworth was when he called CNBC weasel, L Kudlow, a 'chicken hawk.' He was off the air from that point until I stopped watching these morons several months ago. It's a perfect closed, self reinforcing system.

[Festivito]

5. Money, not fairness is the new media goal.

Since the Reagan administration threw out the media fairness rule, the media have adjusted to a goal of immediate profit. No conspiracy needed.

Keeping the field even increases the need for sound-bite ads. Expensive ads.

Add media ownership also making immediate profit from upper-income tax cuts and higher unemployment hiring/firing power, and we have owners who promote right-wing stooges while ignoring or firing left-wing thinkers with diminished power to even present an issue, story, or editorial. The promoted self-delude themselves as talented souls who need to pass their knowledge to others along with the morals they are above having to follow.

Unfortunately this continues until resources so diminish that we have to deal with each other.

Then we want fairness again.

[geek tragedy]

7. They are stupid, shallow, self-important, cowardly twats.

Naturally, they have an affinity for W.

[rman]

10. the media's affinity for W is only "natural" because

the media are owned by big corporations.

It is not coincindence that the media's self interest, self-importancy, shallowness and cowardess does in fact serve the interests of their owners.

[Downtown Hound]

8. They are lazy

But they know what they're doing most of the time. They were very much aware of how they cheered the Iraq War on, and they are very much aware of how they are soft on Bush.

[KelleyKramer]

9. Lots of whores are lazy

Actually, you could accuse almost all corporate whores of being lazy.

Whether you are a good or effective media whore determines how much money they give you.

Being lazy or lame, or just Dennis Miller, doesn’t mean you are not a whore.

If you don’t shill or whore for Bush then you will never make it, your career is over.

Is it conspiratorial? ... Yes, it’s a conspiracy of money.

[linazelle]

11. Well...any more thoughts on this?

[getoffmytrain]

12. 500 years from now...

500 years from now when we are all worm casserole, scholars will look back upon this era with laughter. It's so blatantly obvious that our media is self-interested and money driven. In fact, it is SO blatant, that the irony lies in the fact that sometimes the most obvious or visible is the hardest to recognize. One word: Revenue.

[LuCifer]

13. THE MEDIA SUCKS!

ABC, CBS and NBC refusing to air ads for Mike Moore's movie on DVD, WABC in NYC getting rid of radio legend Lynn Samuels due to "budget cuts" even though they are owned by DISNEY who's profits WERE UP. Funny how the budget cuts keep coming down on the LEFT side of things, no? Crap Channel dumping Howard Stern from the 6 stations they owned that had him, but they keep RUSHitler Lardass proving that if you say BUTT you're bad but if you do illegal drugs you're ok! Huh? SOME LIBERAL MEDIA.

I want the licenses of Disney, General Electric, and Viacom
REVOKED for failing to completely serve the public interest. F. THIS! THERE IS NO LIBERAL MEDIA! I am sick and tired of the korporate mediuh for being cheerleaders for Pussy-in-Chief Bush and his Iraq War for oil.

Lu Cifer
http://www.LU13.TK
AIM = MrLuCiferPhD