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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jon Tara who wrote (11185)	4/2/2004 1:19:07 PM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu	Respond to of 110194

John, depending who think is duped. If you speak of CNBC or CNNfn for example they make money from advertising mostly from WS and Money Center Banks and as such those networks will promote the version of those that enable them to make a living - e.g. WS and Money Center Banks. It is part of the system - the PPI and Employment report are classic examples. Even that Reuter released the data ahead of time neither CNBC nor CNNfn reported it more so lately they delay the dissemination of economic news and insert an advertising instead

To: Jon Tara who wrote (11185)	4/2/2004 1:35:41 PM
From: glenn_a	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 110194

Jon Tara. ((Do you think the media is part of the conspiracy too, or are they just easily duped?)) Yes. John Stauber of PR Watch has opined that Eisenhower misnamed the MIC (Military-Industrial Complex), should have been named the MMIC - Media-Military-Industrial complex. The problem to my mind is the power of large corporate advertisers who have enormomous leverage on media content. I know up here in Canada, I am enormously thankful for non-corporate media Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). The scope of dialogue for the "manufacturing of consent" is much broader than that allowed by corporate-owned media IMO. Though the Globe & Mail is pretty good - provides pretty balanced coverage to my mind from both the right and the left of the spectrum. Though its coverage of the coup in Haiti was brutal. No doubt censorship happens had the highest level of editorial boardrooms, and furthermore that national security "interests" are well represented there. Nonetheless, elite consensus is not uniform, and fissures and cracks do emerge. National security interests are also well represented in academia. If you ever get a chance to view the CFR membership list, its extraordinary to see the confluence of power amongst diverse American institutions. Regards, Glenn