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 : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (5751)	2/10/1998 12:22:00 PM
From: Father Terrence	Respond to of 20981

Just think what the Internet would've done to the Kennedy Administration! FT

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (5751)	2/10/1998 1:07:00 PM
From: loafer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

Good point bap. The media has always been used as a tool of statecraft, the costs and infrastructure required to disseminate 'news' have always been beyond the reach of the average citizen (Look at Goebbels(sp) as an example of this in the extreme). As a result the lens of media coverage (what stories are reported, how much coverage they get and for how long) has always been controlled by a very small group of people compared to society at large. Hollywood is another example of this type of concentrated power to manipulate perception (For example, how many movies have you seen where business is portrayed in a favorable light? Not many I would wager. Business is mostly portrayed as avarice gone amuck, raping the environment etc.). Even in a supposedly free society it is relatively easy to set a tone and agenda politically by controlling or subverting the press to special interests. This essentially results in a brainwashing of the populace. After all if all you are exposed to is one point of view with respect to a story or issue it's very likely that it will become your point of view as well. It takes effort to dig behind the stories, and most people don't have the time or energy to do so. They are worried about paying bills and putting food on the table. In the two recent presidential elections for example, the press themselves admitted that about 90% voted for slick. Do you think this may have colored their coverage of the issues? You bet it did. It still is. Another great example is the current 'debate' on global warming, perhaps one of the more sinister current efforts to get the feds involved with every aspect of your life. I suspect cow flatulence contributes more to emissions than other sources. I personally would rather see the resources currently being marshalled to prevent global warming allocated to some sort of asteroid deflection strategy. After all if we're hit by a rock from space, we're not going to give sh*t about global warming. Just ask the dinosaurs. But that effort doesn't give the state the excuse to get into every aspect of your life, so it doesn't suit the interests of the globalists. The internet is breaking down these barriers to entry very quickly, as the current situation illustrates. Individuals will be both producers and consumers of news. I hope it happens fast enough to stop and maybe reverse the slide into socialism that we have been on for far to long.