Showing posts with label Mainstream Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mainstream Media. Show all posts

Friday, May 15, 2009

How to Watch

I like to watch
I like how the TV
Is always watching me
Beam me into space
Upload my ID
I like how the Internet
Is always watching me
Put me in a jacket
Warm in your magazine
Fire me from your gun
I’m content
With other people’s content
It’s how I watch TV
-----------------------------
Credits: Poetry, Collage, and sense of worldly sleep by Jay Larsen
Cathode Ray Tube by Ferdinand Braun
Delivery of an apparently innocent thermos flask to an old friend in Helsinki by Harry Palmer, aka Michael Caine in the Billion Dollar Brain

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Monkey in the Box



There is a whole world out there
A place where things mostly go right
Or at least they go all right
Just these past few days
I have seen children fed and cared for
Lonely people comforted
And felt a lover’s embrace

All right, so everything is not perfect
Life can be disappointing and cruel
But that mostly comes from giving in
To our private monkey minds
But the monkey in that box
Keep screeching about fear and hate
Using bold declarative statements
Broadcasting worst case scenarios
In primetime and during our downtime

Don’t let the monkey in the box
The self-declared minister of silly walks
Cast a veil of darkness over your eyes
To block your view of the world
It’s your world, your life
Take your monkey for a walk
Let the box squawk
While you see that life is all right
All right?


---------------------


Credits: Collage and Poetry by Monkey Boy

Thursday, August 07, 2008

Crude Arguments


Yes inflating your tires properly will reduce your gas consumption.
No, that is not the entirety of Obama's energy plan.

Yes, if oil companies drill new wells off the coast of America there will be more oil eventually.
No, that is not the entirety of McCain's energy plan.


But this is the part the Main Stream Media is not covering:
Just because the wells are on or near America, does not make that American oil.

The oil will belong to the oil corporations, Exxon, Mobile, etc..

The MSM and the Republicans act like all that oil will be American oil, that it will cut down American dependence on foreign oil.

But they are not talking about nationalizing the oil companies (that would be political suicide for a Republican).

All the oil taken out of the ground or the sea bed by the oil companies goes on the global oil market. Exxon can and will sell that oil to the Chinese or the Indians or the Russians. The new oil will only effect America as much as it effects the global oil market (which won't be much of an impact).


So properly inflating American tires will make a difference for American energy consumption.

Drilling new wells offshore will add a tiny amount of oil to the global oil market.

So which candidate has American interests in mind?

And which candidate has oil company interests in mind?

And who do the MSM corporations have in mind?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

Tuesday, August 05, 2008

Swimming Against the News Stream



Don’t think for a minute that the Main Stream Media (MSM) doesn’t have a particular story that they want to tell (make that SELL), a particular narrative that makes you react in ways consistent with their interests.

For all the good it does me, I try to swim against that stream when things in the MSM story don’t match up over time. So here are some of my recent MSM Things in the Stream that make me go hmmmm? (or more correctly WTF?)

Anthrax Guy:
The Feds just paid off their old public suspect in the Anthrax case (to the tune of 5+ million dollars). Part of the settlement is that they guy can’t talk about the investigation and the FBI doesn’t have to go to court, where records are still public. Then said Feds announce that their shiny new suspect just killed himself and now they might close the case without presenting evidence to a grand jury, where records become public eventually. We are supposed to believe that recently and conveniently dead scientist guy was behind all those mailings of anthrax to Democratic politicians and we are supposed to ignore the fact that said scientist was a registered Democrat.
Can we prove the recently deceased was set up? No. But will the FBI have to prove he was guilty? No. Hmmmmmm…

Military Tribunals:
Finally the Pentagon is beginning to hold trials for all those guys locked up in GITMO. That’s good news, right? If they are guilty, they get punished. If they are innocent, they will be let go. No. The Pentagon says that despite the outcome of these tribunals the status of these men as “enemy combatants” will not be changed. In other words, if Osama Bin Laden’s driver is found “guilty” his time served so far (5 years + so far) will not be applied to his sentence. And if he is found “innocent” that will not change is “enemy combatant” status and he will continue to be held indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay Cuba by American military personnel.
So, these prisoners might get executed because of the out come of these tribunals, but no body will be released.
Justice, you ask? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm…

The Tight Presidential Race:
The MSM insists night after night that the Presidential Race is too close to call. Yet Obama’s voter registration drives in all 50 states are ignored. Surveys only call cranky old people who don’t have caller id on their phones. And nation-wide surveys don’t count in the Presidential Race, Electoral College delegates are what count (that and the Supreme Court). According to most of the Electoral College counts done by non-MSM organizations (including right-wing groups) Obama is leading by any where from 68 to 137 Electoral Votes.
Obama McCain Margin
Real Clear Politics 322 216 Obama +106
Electoral-Vote.com 316 209 Obama +107
FiveThirtyEight.com 303 235 Obama + 68
Pollster.com 284 147 Obama +137
AVERAGE 306 202 Obama +104
Last time I checked, +104 Electoral Votes makes you President of the United States.
That is not a very close race. So why is the MSM telling and retelling this close race story? Do they expect enough Election Day shenanigans, enough voter purging, enough electronic machine hacking, enough denial of service to make this a “close race” at the last minute? Close enough that the Supreme Court can call the winner again? Do they need to prime the pump so that the expected “official” results seem reasonable and expected on November 5th? Hmmmmmm….

Experience vs. Celebrity:
People are just fascinated by Obama. But he is just a celebrity. He doesn’t have any real experience. Only John McCain has real experience.
Well if McCain is so damned experienced, how come his campaign commercials are so ham-fisted? Why has McCain’s campaign been the one on the rails so many times, running out of money, turning over staff, changing strategy? He has campaigned before. He has been an elected official for 28 years. Why can’t he bring all that experience to bear on the campaign? What, didn’t getting shot down in a plane give him the experience he needs to run an effective campaign? Maybe hiring all the sleazebags that ran Bush’s 2000 campaign will help?
Meanwhile, Obama has run one of the most efficient and effective campaigns of my life time. His staff has been stable. His message has been consistent. His ability to excite the voters and to raise money has been incredible. But we are supposed to believe that he has no experience and that his success is just due to celebrity. We are supposed to believe that a Constitutional Lawyer with experience in local, state and federal government is an untested neophyte with no ability to lead or organize people.
Hmmmmmmmmm….

The Housing Crisis:
The “housing crisis” has undermined our economy. All those people borrowing money they couldn’t pay back for homes they couldn’t afford are dragging down the system.
There is no “housing crisis”. There is a mortgage investment problem fueled by Wall Street and enabled by the Banking Industry. The Wall Street wizards told Congress and the people that we were too stupid to understand how their financial instruments work, so we shouldn’t even try to regulate there profit taking activities. They skimmed off all the profits of the “housing bubble” as their demand for more and more mortgage activity drove up the price of housing for all of us. And now that their scheme has fallen apart and they are losing money, they want government welfare for their Wall Street firms and mortgage banks to cover their losses. They weren’t willing to share their profits, but they are willing to let us cover their losses. Is that “free market capitalism”? No. That is “oligarchical socialism” (where the rich few get government handouts paid for by the taxes paid by the many poor citizens).
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm…

The Rants of Bloggers:
Has this new medium changed the way people get their news and information? Does the ranting of some obscure blogger make any real difference? Can bloggers, who post what ever crap they want for free, compete with the corporate budgets of the MSM? Hmmmmmmmmmm….

-----------------

Credits:

All words spun off the top of my head.

Research done: 0, zero, nada, none.

References: none, zip.

Don't believe anything I say. Go check your own facts.

But don't believe CNN either without double checking.

Friday, April 18, 2008

Cardboard Sedition

Found this great video obout the Freeway Blogger. Watch it.


Freeway Blogger Video Link

Now that's what I call freedom of speech.

When GE or IBM put up billboards it is respected and protected commercial activity.

But when a genuine Citizen exercises his freedom of speech, he has to worry about being caught and punished.

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

John Edwards: spell that H-I-L-L-A-R-Y

Has anyone else noticed how the mainstream media fauns over Hillary Clinton?

Right Wing and Left Wing pundits all agree, Hillary is the Democratic Candidate of choice.

But whose choice? They aren't leaving that up to the citizens. They are proclaiming Hillary the only good choice in the Democratic field. Even when they talk about other candidates, oh yeah there are other candidates, they still subtly and not-so-subtly remind us that Hillary is who we should be looking at.

The New York Times did a focus piece on John Edwards and filled half the accompanying photo with HILLARY.


Why would the mainstream media want Hillary as the Democratic candidate?

That is an easy one. The mainstream media is all Corporate Media. And the Corporate majority shareholders want Hillary. She is a proven corporate agent, while some of the other Democratic candidates are not clearly in corporate pockets. Edwards made his law career suing big corporations and Obama is new and as yet unpurchased. So if a Democrat is going to win, it needs to be Hillary with her clear corporate allegiances.


On the Republican side? The corporate world is not too worried. Ron Paul doesn't have a chance, and all the other candidates are known corporate players. So any Republican but Paul is a corporate win.


Hillary vs. Any Republican is a Corporate wet dream. Too bad the American voter has been so sidelined by the process. The Parties prepick our top two choices for us and we just get to rubber stamp one or the other. That is not a real choice.

Monday, July 09, 2007

A Post Worth Reposting

I have reposted an article on Common Deams by Paul Bucheit, a professor at Chicago City Colleges and the founder of fightingpoverty.org. You should also check out the 75 References at the end of his article, citing sources for all of his claims. How many newspaper articles have you read lately that cite even 2 or 3 sources? Paul's article packs a powerful punch. I wish our newspapers and TV News were as compelling.

---------

Published on Monday, July 9, 2007 by CommonDreams.org
Mainstream Media Where Are You?
by Paul Buchheit

A group of teachers in Chicago recently started an initiative to inform college and high school students about critical global issues. The initiative deals with young people who have a wide range of academic skills, who are generally hard-working and eager to find a suitable career, and whose savvy about modern culture makes up for their lack of life experience. But they know almost nothing about their country’s relationship with the world. They know there’s a war going on, they’ve heard about genocide in Africa, they suspect that Iran is a threat to the United States. But ask them to provide some details and they return a blank stare.

It is understandable that today’s youth, with so many entertainment options and electronic distractions, and with the pursuit of good times high on their list of priorities, can’t be sufficiently aware of world issues. But they do read newspaper headlines and occasionally watch the news. They simply don’t get enough information from these sources. If they hear at all about controversial issues, the information is oversimplified, incomplete, and often one-sided.

They need to know that the U.S. is responsible for almost half of the world’s total military expenditures, that nearly half of the arms sales to developing countries (in 2005) came from the United States, and that 20 of the top 25 recipients of U.S. arms sales in the developing world were declared undemocratic or human rights abusers by the U.S. State Department’s own Human Rights Report.

They need to know that the U.S. attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments from the end of WW2 to the turn of the century, many of them populist and democratic movements that were battling oppressive regimes.

They need to know that the U.S. went to war with Iraq in 2003 because of erroneous claims that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction and had ties to Al Qaeda.
They need to know that studies by 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, including the CIA, the FBI, the State Dept., and all four branches of the armed forces, revealed that the occupation of Iraq has contributed to an increase in the overall terrorist threat. And that studies by the University of Chicago, the Hoover Digest, the Cato Institute, Iraq Body Count, and the 2005 Human Security Report support these findings.

They need to know that the U.S. opposed United Nations votes on the right to food, the rights of women, the rights of children, and the right to freedom of people forcibly deprived of that right. That the U.S. opposed the banning of landmines. That the UN has accused the U.S. of repeatedly violating the World Convention against Torture, and that the UN voted the U.S. off the U.N. Human Rights Commission in 2001. And that at the end of 2006, 80% of the UN’s unpaid dues were owed by the United States.

They need to know that only eight corporations — Time Warner, Disney, Murdoch’s News Corporation, Viacom (formerly CBS), General Electric, Yahoo, Google, and MSN — now control most of the U.S. media, and that some of them have close connections to companies making weaponry for the U.S. military.

They need to know that while 3,000 Americans died in the horrible terrorist attack on September 11, 2001, every DAY of the year 30,000 children die of hunger and preventable diseases around the world. That the United Nations Human Development Report 2005 concluded that “The gap between the average citizen in the richest and in the poorest countries is wide and getting wider.” That the World Bank’s World Development Report 2006 stated that inequality in the U.S. is the worst in the developed world. That corporate income has risen much faster than workers’ wages, while the corporate tax rate has dropped dramatically over the past 50 years.

They need to know that U.S. foreign aid, based on percentage of income, is one of the lowest in the developed world. That most of our aid goes to relatively wealthy Israel and another ally, Egypt. That 70% of U.S. aid is ‘tied,’ which means that the recipient must use it to purchase U.S. goods and services. That even our impressive level of private aid is mostly confined to donations within the U.S., and in the form of remittances (money sent back to the home countries of people working in the United States).

They need to know that “free trade” is often skewed in favor of wealthy countries. That we give more economic aid to our own multinational companies than foreign aid to poor countries. That U.S. tariffs on countries like Viet Nam and Bangladesh are 10 times higher than on European Union countries. That according to Christian Aid, trade liberalization in the past 20 years has cost sub-Saharan Africa more than $272 billion, a staggering sum that could have erased all its debts while paying for vaccination and school for every child. That the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the New Economics Foundation, and the United Nations Report on the World Social Situation 2005 all reported that free trade has not helped the world’s poor.

Is it unpatriotic to criticize the behavior of one’s own country? It depends on the meaning of patriotism. Socrates angered people by challenging them in public and exposing their ignorance. But he felt he was acting as a patriot by encouraging thoughtfulness over blind acceptance and celebration of government policies. In words attributed to him, “The unexamined life is not worth living.” Like Socrates, Henry David Thoreau believed that citizens should tolerate nothing less from their government than the highest standards of behavior. He said, “Those who, while they disapprove of the character and measures of a government, yield to it their allegiance and support are undoubtedly its most conscientious supporters, and so frequently the most serious obstacles to reform.” Martin Luther King talked about moving “beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism to the high grounds of a firm dissent based upon the mandates of conscience.”

But how do we know what’s true and what isn’t? Opinions derived from any one source may be inaccurate, or biased, or simply wrong. Our students in the Global Initiative are taught to research the issues, to seek multiple sources if there is any question about the truth. It can be hard work. Their job would be a lot easier if the newspapers and TV news shows would take on the big issues and make a realistic effort to provide balanced coverage.

Paul Buchheit is a professor with the Chicago City Colleges, co-founder of Global Initiative Chicago, and the founder of fightingpoverty.org. He has contributed to commondreams, counterpunch, and countercurrents.Email: pbuchheit@ccc.edu