Posted on 12/05/2005 1:30:00 AM PST by GiovannaNicoletta
Excellent topic.
And I'm sick of these traitors!
"Journalism" was swirling down the toilet long before Woodward and Bernstein. They merely put a shine on that turd, and that shine really didn't last very long. Today, journalism's long ride through the sewer pipes and out to sea is nearly complete thanks to the new media.
Hallelujah for Free Republic, talk radio, and the rest of the "new" news media!
May the dinosaur press finally, please, just keel over and die.
(Think I'll go bump a few "newspaper layoff" threads. Har!)
The emergence of the Internet and the era of instant communications between everyone will remove this bottleneck and free us from the likes of Woodward, Bernstein, Rather, Couric, Mapes, Dowd etc., etc. Now all that remains to be dealt with is the information overload that many will have difficulty with. MTCFWIW
"Media bias just might turn the future of Iraq into a disaster that will reverberate for decades. Last week, The Washington Post interviewed Sunni-insurgent sympathizers. They said they "loved" media-creation Cindy Sheehan and took heart from reports of the anti-war movement in Washington."
And the left is still offended when we call them unpatriotic or anti-American.
"Actions have consequences. Today's journalists refuse to accept that the rule applies to them. The wages of irresponsible journalism are death — for others. Expose a crucial clandestine operation, shatter a policy or wreck a struggling state, and you get a Pulitzer Prize. The motto of journalists today is "Nothing's ever our fault."
The republic suffers. "
Good for Ralph Peters..Bravo!
The bottlenecks are recent. Major cities had five or six daily papers and even small towns had two. It's only in the last 30 years that papers began to close up and media companies consolidate...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1534018/posts
Martz concerned about growing disconnect between military, media
US Army FORSCOM News Service ^ | December 2, 2005 | Kevin Larson,
Senior military leadership’s suggesting that reporters aid the enemy by reporting only negative news affects the relationship between the media and the military, Martz said. It puzzles him to think that the media is being thought of in this way, especially considering their role in what Martz called “the information war”.
“I was sadly disappointed by the accusation that I and my fellow other reporters are traitors,” he said, considering 19 reporters died covering the war this year. He also pointed to insurgents in Iraq driving car bombs and a truck bomb into the Palestine Hotel on Monday, a hotel known to house reporters.
“Why would we aid and abet an enemy that would kill us without hesitation,” Martz asked."
Peters may need to have a talk with Martz.
[Berlin_Freeper] They are frauds and abusers and We The People are their victims.
This has been going on since the founding of the Republic. During the debate over the Constitution, the drawing of which was the business lobby's first counterrevolution against the American Revolution, the establishment of the People's liberty, and the abolition of the King, business interests that control the press have used that control shamelessly.
During the debates over ratification of the Constitution, the Federalists used the press the same way the MSM uses its power now:
Or IOW, the same old same-old, but long before it ever happened where you could smell it, and the neo-Federalist teachers' cabal has long, oh but long, kept the stink of that old fraud out of American classrooms.
They say that every great thing contains the seeds of its own destruction from the very beginning. Ours were lawyer-lobbyists and journalists.
That's when/because Congress, fearing the press power, passed a special exemption to the Sherman Antitrust Act allowing pooling arrangements between competing dailies.
That was a money-saving thing -- allowing papers to use the same printing facilities. Newspapers are expensive to produce. National news magazines and local television ate into their audience and advertising.
But now you have ABC owned by Disney. NBC owned by GE. CNN owned by Time/Warner. Fox owned by News Corp.
What is even more amazing to me is the fact that virtually all popular entertainment -- and by extension, pop culture-- is manufactured by five (or six) companies.
The big difference was at the time, the press was FOR rights and freedoms for the public, instead of now, where the press is AGAINST rights and freedoms for the public and are in support of tyrants and terrorists.
oh yeah, and CBS owned by Viacom.
I concur that this is objectively bad for the republic and the People.
I noticed a "Christmas special" on ABC the other night. I suspected, and didn't have to wait long to be proved right, that it was a Disney show, virtually a private-label, hour-long product placement for Mouse on their own captive network. I've also noticed name actors on ABC shows being given throwaway lines about going to Disneyworld, or mentioning Disney in some way.
You probably won't be seeing any Fox shows critical of China, either.
But again, the bottleneck has been removed. People want to know, one way or the other.
In 1789, Alexander Hamilton and the Federalists were dumping all over the idea of a Bill of Rights. I think Federalist No. 84 and 85 are the numbers (also 81, maybe?) in which Hamilton rolls out the big guns to hammer the Antifederalists' demands for a Bill of Rights.
Alexander Hamilton argued that enumerating our rights in a BoR would allow Government to despise other rights not enumerated (gotcha, Al; guys, whip out a Ninth Amendment, would you, please?). The Federalists tried as hard as they could, to produce a strong government that would be a strong tool -- in their hands. It was the Antifederalists who, even in losing America's epochal political struggle at the outset of the Republic, produced the pearl utterly beyond price in the Bill of Rights, and stuffed it down Hamilton's gagging throat.
We owe the Federalists our gratitude for our federal Constitution. We owe the Antifederalists the earth, the moon, and the stars.
Why would Fox toady for the Chicom Politburo? I thought that was Slick's speciality.
You might enjoy this essay...
http://www.cfr.org/publication/7260/its_much_more_fun_in_the_mud.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.