BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: John Hardly
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 11:46 AM

all but those who have experienced first hand, or proven something empirically, get filtered truth. Yup, even newscasters.

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: Jeri
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 01:24 PM

I don't think objectivity from humans is possible, but the attempt to be fair is. That seems to be what's lacking: no one seems to notice that fairness is often missing, it's not important. What's important is finding an opinionated asshole one can use as an example. People who think it's alright to be close-minded, prejudiced, and cruel with invective aimed at 'the other side' are not going to want their newscasters being fair. They need role models who demonstrate how to properly behave like an opinionated asshole and who endorse that sort of image.

Maybe that talk show mentality was with us before talk shows, but it sure seems to me that talk shows were where the new gladiatorial games first started gaining popularity. It took a while before 'news' shows bought into the games, but it was inevitable. Insidious too. I think things have changed quite a bit. Others don't notice anything different. Ah well - perhaps Cronkite, Huntley, Brinkley, Reasoner, etc, were just as publically biased as news people of today and I was just too young to notice.

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: John Hardly
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 02:23 PM

I don't want them to attempt to be fair -- the concept of fairness is as biased as the content.

I want everyone OUTED.

I want to know where everyone stands and I don't want anyone to be able to put for the pretext of fairness, objectivity or any other euphemism for couching their biases in a way that empowers them.

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: Deckman
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 03:04 PM

Rick, let me preface my comments by saying that I have NOT read every posting to this thread yet. I'm in the middle of some serious designs and bids and I won't have time until midnight. However, the title caught my attention, and I did read your posting.

I have had a lifteime strong aversion to TV. That doesn't mean that I don't watch it, I just choose my programs extremly carefully. The reason I do this is because years ago, I learned one fundemental: The PRIMARY purpose of TV is to sell toothpaste (or cars, or dog food). Given that basic assumption, how can anyone believe anything they see on TV, including your favorite persons mentioned.

The day that Maher sits down in my living room and lays an idea on me, where I can add my two cents worth in a meaningful discussion is the day I will perhaps listen to him. As it is now, his primary job is to sell toothpaste! CHEERS, Bob

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: John Hardly
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 03:07 PM

Oh, and this...

"Maybe that talk show mentality was with us before talk shows, but it sure seems to me that talk shows were where the new gladiatorial games first started gaining popularity"

You may be right but from my perspective it started with the fact that the left had a wonderful, powerful, built-in one-two-three punch that the right seemed to have no answer for.

Punch number one -- the national newscast possessed the mantle of objectivity while embracing a left-leaning stand.

Punch number two -- the left totally dominated academia, and in such a manner that trained a generation that there was only one dogma -- the left. And it became highly unlikely that the right could themselves appear "scholarly" in their positions as all "studies" pouring out of academia proved what academia already believed to be true -- the unassailable "rightness" of the left (see thread about scholarship).

Punch number three -- and to my mind perhaps simultaneously the least appreciated but the most effective -- the left has a total stranglehold on the entertainment industry. I think this wore on the psyche of the right more than either of the other two punches because, though the left's presentation from this front was the least logical, it was the most visceral. It told the right that they were STUPID, moronic sheepfucking rednecks who sit on their asses in their easy chairs when they weren't molesting their children. Not to mention the right dressed unhip, and had no sense of humor. Neither were we loving.

Well, I wish we could have risen above it in an homorable manner, but when push came to shove, the bloody battered right rose from the matt in the form of talk radio -- and it combined it's own one-two-three punch in one rabid, desparate......but very hurt attempt to be significant again.

It's first punch was finally not giving a damn about whether being humorous would compromise credibility. The left always got away with this because their humor wing was handled by the entertainment punch while the news media carried the credibility water.

Their second punch was in finding an alternative to accepted new media to gain credibility. This came in the form of the internet in which the standard news sources were daily scooped and their point of view was being unmasked by a news source that second by second could show an interested readership what news was being spiked, as well as a glaringly opposite perspective on events -- and they were covered more completely. Now the left has caught up and that "source" has become a burden for both sides as each and every kookburger conspiracy theory gained unassailible sources for every plot now threating to take over the (world/government/mudcat/you-name-it).

The third punch is in a self-collapsing academia. From elementary all the way up, the religion of how education is to be done and what is to be believed is crumbling -- whether talking about how incredibly well homeschoolers have done (despite all dire predictions otherwise) or how market forces drove simple, pragmatic education techniques back into schools out of necessity (like phonetic reading) or how technical schools are supplanting colleges in practical job training, and helping drastically change the face of the college campus such that women now significantly outnumber men.

Unfortunately, it is the first -- the unholy marriage of entertainment with news that has had the greatest ill effect on civil discourse.

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: GUEST,pdq
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 03:09 PM

This is an example of bias/agenda promotion/spin right here on Mudcat:

"How bizarre can the music business be when a 12-year-old girl is prosecuted for internet downloading children's songs ".

Fact is that her mother(42) has 1000+ songs on her computer, mostly Madonna, Aerosmith, etc. Not Childern's songs and probably not downloaded by the daughter. They were set up for desktop file-sharing.

Call it spin or call it lying, most people are tired of non-truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 03:40 PM

Here are some links (and some spelling corrections)

Bill Maher
Robert Fisk
Christopher Hitchens (not an "official" site, apparently)
Michael Moore
Ralph Nader
JesseVentura
Cathy Jones (Is this the right one? I'm not familiar with her.)
Mary Walsh (ditto)
Rick Mercer (I'm beginning to see a pattern here.)
Greg Thomey (Aha!)
Jerry Brown
Mario Cuomo (It was hard to find a good site about him.)
Jon Stewart
Molly Ivins
Ellen Goodman
Bill Moyers
Margaret Thatcher
Paul Harvey (only audio is available, apparently)
Howard Dean
Roger Bennett (Couldn't find any references to his writings. Help!)
Walter Cronkite
Peter Gzowski
Linda Ellerbee
Christiane Amanpour
Greg Palast
Lewis Lapham
Gore Vidal
Camille Paglia
Andrew Sullivan
Peggy Noonan

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: GUEST,pdq
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 04:37 PM

Only two conservatives, one 83 years old and the other retired. Nice balance. Paglia and Noonan are mixed-message types, and therefore may be honest.

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 06:08 PM

Well as I've pointed out again and again, I've left out dozens (mentioned here) from MY list, simply 'cuz they never break ranks LOUDLY and publicly from their idealogical position. Doesn't sound like objectivity to me.

Rick

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: GUEST,pdq
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 06:27 PM

Does anyone really want objectivity ? Most people seem to want advocates who shout their side's story louder and longer than the other side's spokemen. Hannity and Limbaugh are spokesmen for their particular view points and tell people that from the start. What many must object to is the "objective" journalist like Rather or Moyers spinning everything for his/her side. As John Hardly said, much more elequently than I can, we just want people who cannot be objective in reporting the news to go home. Having them become more clever and discrete in disguising their spin is hardly an improvement.

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: GUEST,An observer...
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 07:53 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 08:56 PM

Well, seems that what folks want to hear has little to do with volume but more in something that makes 'em feel good. Ahhhh, not to be confuzerated with the truth, now. So when George Dubya gets up and says things like "No child left behind" everyone feels good. Hey, they got to dig real deep in the A section of their newpapers to find that Bush won't authorize the money to impliment the educational reforem legislation that he signed into law. Bottom line: public eductation is now being held accountable with standardized tests but the money to bring public education up to speed isn't being spent! But don't we all feel good knowin' that "no child is being left behind'? Meanwhile, behind the "no child left behind" scenes, Bush and his buddies are not only no funding the "no child left behind" but they are now stealin' money from public eduaction with school vouchers????

So a lot of kids are being left behind in the *new and improved* "no child left behind* program. Actually, more kids are being left behind now than before the "no child left behind" program... But who cares. We still got NASCAR, Budweieser and Country Music, don't we???...

BObert

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: GUEST,pdq
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 09:10 PM

You forgot apple pie and motherhood.

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 09:21 PM

Dubya can't eat apple pie 'cause it's got too high an alcohol content.... But now, pretzels (wink, wink) are another story.

Ahhhh, just seemed to fir in with the "truth" or lack-there-of of this thread.....

The boy was smashed out of his gord, passed out and fell onto something but we get the "pretzel" lie...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 09:37 PM

"Unfortunately, it is the first -- the unholy marriage of entertainment with news that has had the greatest ill effect on civil discourse."

Two words: Rupert Murdoch. This Faux News scion is the antithesis of "left" and the epicenter of the unholy marriage you mention. and you think this is a result of those big bad lefties knocking over your bloodied, holier-than-thou conservatives, poor, poor victims that they are? And now they've risen, phoenix- like, against the forces of Rather and Jennings to be championed by this " fair and balanced" marriage of news, entertainment, and sets left over from the football pre-game shows? what a load of horseshit your post contains. the left hasn't held the presidency or signifigant power in the politics of america since LBJ. bill clinton was no "liberal" he was a moderate republican who had to run as a democrat because there's no such thing left in the republican party since they've moved to the right of mussolini. as such, "conservative" ( i hate the theft of that word by the reactionaries who now claim it) values have held sway in america since at least 1980 but the crybaby right still want to claim victimhood and milk it for all it's worth like an unrepentant welfare queen.

"the concept of fairness is as biased as the content."

you don't believe in the concept of fairness? i'm guessing you've not had a lasting relationship or raised kids, because one doesn't generally do well in such things without a concept of and commitment to fairness. i don't see why it can't be applied to civil discourse.

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: John Hardly
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 10:06 PM

No. It's much more simple than that.

I don't want the same people who decided what was "unbiased" deciding what is "fair".


....and I like my horseshit. It makes sense to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: GUEST,pdq
Date: 14 Sep 03 - 10:16 PM

Scary part, John, is that ANON guest actually believes his horseshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Publicly speaking the truth. Rare.
From: GUEST,Casual Observer
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 05:19 PM

I like my truth with a little humor: Dave Barry and P.J. O'Rourke.