Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MSI who wrote (235072)	3/7/2002 5:58:53 PM
From: MSI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

"The site that set out to bring the media to their knees - but found they were already there" mediawhoresonline.com Welcome to Media Whores Online. Media Whores Online takes an unbiased, in-depth look at the astonishingly vast myriad of whores who call themselves "journalists." MWO casts a garish spotlight on the relentless screaming heads of television, the babbling paranoids of squawk radio, and the crayon scribblings of lazy print media "columnists." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Nation's progressive perspective The woman who runs the nation But when it comes to the media, vanden Heuvel argues, we still live with a "kind of suffocating consensus," brought about, in part, by the corporate ownership of the news media which is set to increase as recent court decisions presage even more consolidation. "We live at a time when the line between entertainment and news has been forever blurred," she says. "There is woefully little attention paid to public policy and too much to celebrities and petty scandals. The need is acute for independent perspectives, constructive ideas and radical rethinking of the assumptions underlying mainstream politics." That, she adds, is why there is more of a role for The Nation today. "As the mainstream media grow more homogenized and timid, The Nation is the only weekly magazine in America that reports and interprets the news and culture from a progressive perspective." Let's see.. Supporting efforts by egomaniacal blowhard Ralph Nader to put an unqualified chimp in the White House, along with supporting right-wing efforts to impeach and remove a legitimately elected president simply because he was effective in stopping the "Reagan Revolution" in its tracks - are what pass for a "progressive perspective" nowadays? Wow! Who knew Faux News had a "progressive perspective"? "There are a number of persuasive reasons to cast a vote for Ralph Nader in the fall, and a number of unpersuasive reasons, too. But the principal argument in favor is this: On the 22nd of May last, Nader said without equivocation that if he had been a Congressman he would have voted to impeach Clinton and that if he had been a Senator he would have voted to convict him." - Christopher Hitchens, The Nation (06/24/2000) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Excellent MediaNews letter from Charles Pierce.. Excerpt: If you're keeping score at home, the president of the United States, who once mocked a condemned woman to a reporter, used the deaths of 3000 people in New York and Christ alone knows how many in Afghanistan as a cheap punchline in the tawdry business of political fundraising. He also got a laugh out of the notion that their deaths gave him the opportunity to ram through domestic policies that had been soundly rejected by over half-a-million people in the election that he very nearly won. Take heart, survivors. Your departed loved ones now have been enlisted in the noble political purpose of electing Liddy Dole to the Senate. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: MSI who wrote (235072)	3/7/2002 6:13:31 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

There is no reason to "control content". The editorial direction of the paper is satisfactory to the intent of the subsidy.......

To: MSI who wrote (235072)	3/7/2002 10:55:16 PM
From: Selectric II	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

If you're right: 1. GE dictates the news content of NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, numerous local television stations, untold radio stations, print publications, and other media outlets; 2. Disney dictates the news content of ABC, numerous local television stations, etc. etc. as above. 3. Viacom dictates the news content of CBS, MTV(?), numerous local television stations, etc., etc., also as above. 4. The Washington Post also owns, and therefore dictates the news content of numerous magazines, local television stations, etc., etc., also as above. Presumably, none of the above owners would tolerate or publish anything critical of them or their interests. True?