Media Lens Message Board: sorry, one more on David

Media Lens Message Board
[ Post a Response | Media Lens Message Board ]

sorry, one more on David

Posted by jeff bowers on October 30, 2009, 11:22 pm

I read the long thread regarding David’s article with interest. It seems to me that an obvious point should be made – that it is good to publish these sorts of articles in the MSM, and more radical (less constrained) comments should be advanced in alternative sources, such as here. One problem with rejecting MSM outright is that it means we are largely preaching to the converted (as pointed out near the end of the thread). We will be in a world where 99% of the world get one world view, and that a rich and dissenting point of view will be found only by a small minority. But there is another thing that might be worth considering. That is, it is hard for many people to be confronted with Chomsky or medialens without some “softer” introduction. I remember watching the movie Manufacturing Concent the first time years ago, before I knew much about Chomsky, and found it somewhat paranoid. I jumped onto the section where he talks about major league sports being used as a distraction to thinking about serious issues as silly, and used it to dismiss most of his ideas (I still think that point is a bit of a stretch). But years later, after reading some books by Linda Maquaig, and some other dissenters you could occasionally find on the MSM I found myself reading some of Chomsky again. I can’t even understand how I was so blinded before. But the point is, that reading the occasional dissent in the media was my path to reading Chomsky (and reading ML religiously). I think a MSM where you don’t find Monbiot, Klein, etc. would be a big step backwards. And so would the absence of medialens. It seems ridiculous to me to be fighting amongst ourselves, and pushing sympathetic voices away.

Responses:

Re: sorry, one more on David - Just John October 31, 2009, 1:51 am

to change the subject a bit - emersberger October 31, 2009, 3:47 am

Re: to change the subject a bit - David Wearing October 31, 2009, 11:23 am

Re: sorry, one more on David - David Wearing October 31, 2009, 11:20 am

Re: sorry, one more on David - David Wearing October 31, 2009, 11:11 am

Re: sorry, one more on David - The Editors October 31, 2009, 5:19 pm

Re: sorry, one more on David - David Wearing October 31, 2009, 6:42 pm

Re: sorry, one more on David - The Editors November 1, 2009, 1:01 pm

Re: sorry, one more on David - David Wearing November 1, 2009, 3:57 pm

Re: sorry, one more on David - The Editors November 1, 2009, 4:48 pm

Re: sorry, one more on David - David Wearing November 1, 2009, 6:54 pm

Yes, Mark Curtis made that point in Web of Deceit, didn't he? - JK October 31, 2009, 7:23 pm

Re: Yes, Mark Curtis made that point in Web of Deceit, didn't he? - David Wearing November 1, 2009, 1:23 am

Re: Yes, Mark Curtis made that point in Web of Deceit, didn't he? - The Editors November 1, 2009, 11:19 am

Re: Yes, Mark Curtis made that point in Web of Deceit, didn't he? - David Wearing November 1, 2009, 12:06 pm

Re: Yes, Mark Curtis made that point in Web of Deceit, didn't he? - dan November 1, 2009, 12:12 pm

thanks, Dan (nm) - David Wearing November 1, 2009, 3:58 pm

Just before we draw the line under this - John Hilley November 1, 2009, 8:26 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - walter November 1, 2009, 10:52 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - noamsampy November 2, 2009, 8:01 am

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - walter November 2, 2009, 11:59 am

Would anyone here want to write for a paper that continually told us that black people are... - JK November 2, 2009, 7:34 am

Re: Would anyone here want to write for a paper that continually told us that black people are... - walter November 2, 2009, 2:09 pm

Re: Would anyone here want to write for a paper that continually told us that black people are... - noamswampy November 2, 2009, 2:35 pm

Re: Would anyone here want to write for a paper that continually told us that black people are... - walter November 2, 2009, 3:38 pm

Re: Would anyone here want to write for a paper that continually told us that black people are... - noamswampy November 3, 2009, 8:13 am

Re: Would anyone here want to write for a paper that ... - walter November 3, 2009, 6:33 pm

Re: Would anyone here want to write for a paper that ... - dereklane November 3, 2009, 8:31 pm

Re: Would anyone here want to write for a paper that ... - walter November 3, 2009, 9:22 pm

Re: Would anyone here want to write for a paper that ... - dereklane November 3, 2009, 11:23 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - David Wearing November 2, 2009, 7:35 am

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - dereklane November 2, 2009, 11:10 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - walter November 3, 2009, 12:57 am

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - David Wearing November 3, 2009, 7:03 am

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - walter November 3, 2009, 10:43 am

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - dereklane November 3, 2009, 8:42 am

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - noamsampy November 3, 2009, 10:34 am

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - walter November 3, 2009, 1:45 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - dereklane November 3, 2009, 2:16 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - dereklane November 3, 2009, 2:23 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - walter November 3, 2009, 2:18 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - dereklane November 3, 2009, 2:33 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - walter November 3, 2009, 9:59 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - dereklane November 3, 2009, 11:19 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - walter November 4, 2009, 2:47 am

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - dereklane November 4, 2009, 9:29 am

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - dereklane November 4, 2009, 9:56 am

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - walter November 4, 2009, 1:08 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - dereklane November 4, 2009, 1:29 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - walter November 4, 2009, 2:19 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - dereklane November 4, 2009, 3:27 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - walter November 4, 2009, 5:44 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - dereklane November 4, 2009, 9:40 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - walter November 5, 2009, 4:01 am

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - dereklane November 5, 2009, 9:46 am

Re - walter November 5, 2009, 5:01 pm

Re - walter November 5, 2009, 5:13 pm

Re: Re - dereklane November 5, 2009, 8:49 pm

Re: Re - walter November 6, 2009, 2:47 am

Re: - walter November 6, 2009, 2:49 am

Re: - walter November 4, 2009, 12:54 pm

Re: - dereklane November 4, 2009, 2:01 pm

Re: - walter November 4, 2009, 7:45 pm

Re: - dereklane November 4, 2009, 10:02 pm

Re: - walter November 5, 2009, 1:51 pm

Re: - dereklane November 5, 2009, 4:16 pm

Re: Just before we draw the line under this - David Wearing November 3, 2009, 6:40 am

Good call David - and well done on the great piece. No 'guilt' necessary NM - MC November 3, 2009, 1:54 pm

Thanks, MC. None felt (nm) - David Wearing November 3, 2009, 2:32 pm

« Back to thread

Post a Response

Your Name:
Your Email:

Subject:

Message:

--Previous Message-- : I read the long thread regarding David’s : article with interest. It seems to me that : an obvious point should be made – that it : is good to publish these sorts of articles : in the MSM, and more radical (less : constrained) comments should be advanced in : alternative sources, such as here. One : problem with rejecting MSM outright is that : it means we are largely preaching to the : converted (as pointed out near the end of : the thread). We will be in a world where : 99% of the world get one world view, and : that a rich and dissenting point of view : will be found only by a small minority. But : there is another thing that might be worth : considering. That is, it is hard for many : people to be confronted with Chomsky or : medialens without some “softer” : introduction. I remember watching the movie : Manufacturing Concent the first time years : ago, before I knew much about Chomsky, and : found it somewhat paranoid. I jumped onto : the section where he talks about major : league sports being used as a distraction to : thinking about serious issues as silly, and : used it to dismiss most of his ideas (I : still think that point is a bit of a : stretch). But years later, after reading : some books by Linda Maquaig, and some other : dissenters you could occasionally find on : the MSM I found myself reading some of : Chomsky again. I can’t even understand how : I was so blinded before. But the point is, : that reading the occasional dissent in the : media was my path to reading Chomsky (and : reading ML religiously). I think a MSM : where you don’t find Monbiot, Klein, etc. : would be a big step backwards. And so would : the absence of medialens. It seems : ridiculous to me to be fighting amongst : ourselves, and pushing sympathetic voices : away. :

Optional Image URL:

Optional Link Title:
Optional Link URL:

Notify me by email of all message replies.

By posting, you confirm that you have read and agreed to be bound by the board's usage terms.