Re: I don't see this as a valuable debate, got shrill and personal and left rational debate behind, Archived Message
Posted by John Monro on March 2, 2023, 3:41 am, in reply to "When smug "journalists" get it back in the face and then some"
I'm not sure why this was posted, I am not as impressed as the presenter. I thought the debate was of a poor standard and not particularly enlightening. Neither side seemed to have their arguments well rehearsed or particularly relevant. I didn't know any of them or who or what they represented. I felt that the argument about "fact checkers' really missed the point of how the MSM work. They can be totally scrupulous about making sure every fact that they print is correct, though they often don't as the Ukraine was has proven again and again, or hedged with caveats if difficult to prove. But, the problem isn't the facts, it's the absence of other inconvenient facts that counts. A paper can publish a thousand checked facts, but by omitting the other pertinent but contrary thousand other facts, is still lying. The other way that facts are presented is by relaying information from other people, "a whitehouse spokesperson" for instance, or quoting a so called "authoritative" source but merely just another unverifiable utterance of a non-disinterested party Whereas inconvenient probers of the truth such as Seymour Hersh or John Pilger are successful pushed aside and sent to Coventry. The global warming debate over this century gave the topic a different twist, in the effort to do exactly what I have above suggested they do, give the alternative view point and facts, they gave the alternative view, but omitted to review or counter the unscientific and "alternative facts" of the deniers, without informing the reader or viewer these views were outliers and fraudulent. . There are a lot of ways to manipulate public perceptions, the MSM media employ them all the time, but I am pretty sure they are doing so much more than they used to and are getting cleverer at disguising this distorted discourse. Again the Ukraine war is a frightening example of the MSM in a corporatist monopoly of disinformation and bias, but worse than this, an ugly inhuman bellicosity with death and destruction as their sales pitch. The point was made about public financing of the news in Canada, as if this was the hugest problem, yet the financing by vast corporative capital and sinister players such as Rupert Murdoch wasn't mentioned at all and is no less lethal to truth. The overriding matter is that the MSM now have an agreed agenda and they all push it. and to hell with moral or ethical human concerns. This agenda is killing our societies and the very planet we depend on. That's where the lies are, that's where the propaganda is, that's the nature of Western propaganda, and I suppose that's why an increasing number of people are not trusting the media. No, not a good debate, iMHO
|
Message Thread:
- When smug "journalists" get it back in the face and then some - Adamki March 1, 2023, 9:22 pm
- Re: When smug "journalists" get it back in the face and then some - Ken Waldron March 1, 2023, 10:17 pm
- Re: I don't see this as a valuable debate, got shrill and personal and left rational debate behind, - John Monro March 2, 2023, 3:41 am
- Re: When smug "journalists" get it back in the face and then some - Sinister Burt March 2, 2023, 8:43 am
- Re: When smug "journalists" get it back in the face and then some - Sinister Burt March 2, 2023, 1:10 pm
- Que? - Tomski March 2, 2023, 5:19 pm
- Re: Que? - sinister burt March 2, 2023, 8:10 pm
- Re: Que? - Tomski March 2, 2023, 8:57 pm
- Re: Que? - sinister burt March 2, 2023, 9:54 pm
- Re: Que? - sinister burt March 2, 2023, 10:06 pm
- Re: Que? - Tomski March 3, 2023, 2:19 pm
- Re: Que? - sinister burt March 3, 2023, 11:07 pm
- Re: When smug "journalists" get it back in the face and then some - scrabb March 2, 2023, 5:43 pm
- Re: When smug "journalists" get it back in the face and then some - Shyaku March 2, 2023, 10:37 am
- Taibbi seemed honest - Keith-264 March 2, 2023, 6:39 pm
|
|