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.

Pastimes : Kosovo -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (7628)	5/10/1999 7:22:00 AM
From: robnhood	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 17770

speaking of OJ. Was that the American Justice you were refering to...? Or maybe the fact that not one white man has been hung in Texas for the murder of a black man in 100 years...

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (7628)	5/10/1999 8:54:00 AM
From: Jacalyn Deaner	Respond to of 17770

Ron - you said:He used CNN coverage to try to manipulate coalition public opinion, thus creating a new "news event". That goes for Clinton too; you also indicated the Chinese regime being manipulative of the public - what did you think of the support offered to clinton after the impeachment and their supportive arguments of the house? The truth is available here too but many act like idiots; you assume the truth is not available in China just because you don't like their actions. You shouldn't do that. This administration assumed that China was their buddy and that clinton could shit all over them and push them around (ie dictate); they know clinton is a liar - his word is crap, plus he is an idiot in foreign policy and has surrounded himself with "yes man" baboons. While clinton was letting the chinese operate some of our strategic positions in the defense department and in the white house, clinton thought they were smiling with him because of his "company" and that they were part of his onterage. The chinese were busy smiling back at the clown and getting everything strategic and materially important that the us had spent decades and billions/trillions developing our technology. First clinton GIVES them the computers and programs necessary to operate any hardare they come across, then ets them freely mve through the white house and defense, energy departments to confiscate all of our military secrets and power. clinton couldn't be a pimple on their rear end when it comes to intelligence or smooze techniques. Sure, China does not need our military nor ties with the US anymore; China doesn't need the US to interfere with its goals and now has the power to dictate world relationships; they put up with clinton only to get what they needed. He is useless to them now - they used him like clinton uses the american public, only they are true to their character - clinton has no character. I see the enemy and it is me - sadly for our democracy it is only too true in his case. The hit on the embassy is further indication that the us military is inept and underqualified as a result of the gutting by the clinton/gore administration. Using 4 - 10 year old maps and grids. No other NATO country could find the error - they have been getting their "intelligence" from the US and up to now had no need to use other sources having thought the US was "up to date". With the depletion of our hardware, we are now in a dangerous, precarious position. The hit on the Chinese embassy was a "blessing" for China to get out from under any misunderstanding left after their visit last month; if clinton did not get the message not to interfere with China FOR ANY REASON - let's hope he will be getting it soon if at all. China is in its infancy in the expansion arena; the coming century is theirs. clinton thought his administration was calling the shots with the chinese - not the case. It doesn't take long for a country to FALL and this administration has gutted every part of this structure and infrastructure - if not poisoned it which is leading to its slow death. Right now the US is operating on the fumes of democracy based on false beliefs and refusal to face facts. Once the fantasy can no longer be substantiated - just like the fall of the Reich - collapse is undeniable. I don't know how people can miss this going on and not see the mirroring of the Roman Empire and its collapse; same type of idiots governing - arrogance abounds, ignorance too. Back to your post - the public demands what their leader promised - sweet nothings and do whatever feels good - there are no consequences. for any behavior...what they don't realize - they are not in his party of the elite and clinton is not omniscient. The vehicles of news and its dissemination in the country have been socialist going fascist since the late 1910's and are experiencing great freedom to print what they need to further their cause. Garbage in garbage out. Nothing significant has been on the Television stations in over 10 years without anything "IMPORTANT" first going through the AOK by the CIA or the white house, etc. Since satellite came into being many views have the opportunity to get other sources of information but without comprehension skills being used for over 15 years, the majority of the masses are just looking at "pictures" not grasping what is said or meant. The masses have to be TOLD what they are looking at and what they are reading. Just wait until the COX report comes out Friday - how big will the demand be and for what? And you think China manipulates the masses!!! Any foreign entity has got to be nuts to trust the US, the truth has no meaning other than what is subjective to the one in command. DANGEROUS. China gets out of jail and collects the 200 and gets the boardwalk. Jacalyn

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (7628)	5/10/1999 12:00:00 PM
From: Machaon	Respond to of 17770

<< Exactly how is that the public develops this "demand" for a certain bit of news?? >> Well..... ratings have something to do with it. Do you think that a TV network will be successful by putting on boring news, or items for which no one is interested? Your question implies that a news station can create demand for a news event by bombarding the public with it, even if the public is not interested or if the event is not news worthy. Good luck. << I don't particularly remember too many folks saying they were demanding day to day coverage of the OJ trial. >> The ratings from the OJ coverage were huge. That's why almost every network competed for coverage. I thought that the OJ coverage did a great service to the public. It showed how our court system worked or didn't work. It showed how "jury nullification" and "jury selection" were used in our courts. << Most of the people I spoke with felt that CNN was shoving it down our throats. >> So? Change the channel. If you are correct about the public not liking CNN then CNN will lose out to the other network news. Who wants to watch a poorly run news service. OTOH, most of the world appreciates the quality and news analysis of CNN and considers CNN their eyes and ears for news. << Did you find people crying out for more OJ coverage?? >> So, in your view, the OJ coverage was a huge business disaster and the rating were very poor because no one wanted to watch it. What is your source for this info, the tooth fairy? << And when News is marketed, it no longer remains news, but becomes part of a marketing plan. >> So, what is your point? Do you really think that the public would continue to be fixated with a news story if it wasn't of interest to them? You seem to think that the planning, preparation and presentation of news is evil. Hmmmm!? Since your biggest beef with CNN is the marketing of news, could you enlighten me on how they do this "marketing"? << Saddam Hussein was a good example of this. He used CNN coverage to try to manipulate coalition public opinion, thus creating a new "news event". >> Dictators have used the news to try and manipulate public opinion long before CNN was created. What is your solution, get rid of free, independent news services so that dictators couldn't be shown on the news? What would you do in place of the CNNs of the world? Would you want Clinton to create a news filtering committee to oversee what the public gets to watch? How would you change CNN? Would you only show boring news? Would you limit the coverage of the war in Yugoslavia to one day? One hour per day? What if we have another OJ type of trial. If you found that the ratings were very high, would you drop the coverage? If you found out that by adding another hour of coverage, your ratings still remained as high, what would you do?