Comments on: The news media shutdown Fri, 31 Jul 2015 03:37:49 +0000 hourly 1 By: TheWhiteLine Tue, 08 Oct 2013 18:52:19 +0000 @ptiffany-

Wow – not sure where you got THAT conclusion from – read that post more slowly. Absolutely things need to change – but to what?

Reading YOUR post I sense a high level of vitriol, anger, and dare I say jealousy of that Plutocracy – is it possible that deep down inside YOU want to become THEM? If so – what does that solve? Still the same problem, just a new face on it.

My point was, as long we allow that Plutocracy to define what is “good” or “right” – as long as we as a society buy into “gimme more” as our highest aspiration, then we will NEVER be able to shrug off, ignore, dismantle that Plutocracy. The true revolution begins when all of us peons look upon those in their towers with sympathy and shame – instead of envy and jealousy. We GIVE them their power by accepting the ground rules that THEY have laid out – “This is how our society works, because we said so. Just accept it.”

Well I don’t. And as I said above, I’m not alone – there are more of me everyday. Are you going to be one of them?

By: ptiffany Mon, 07 Oct 2013 19:43:44 +0000 @TheWhiteLine:
So, you’re good with the Plutocracy that rules this country, corrupting our government and decimating jobs – the “jobe creators” (in foreign countries)?

“I was okay when they took away someone from another town. I was okay when they took down a neighbor across town. I was even okay when my neighbor down the street was “disappeared”. Then, “Yikes! OMG! They’re coming for ME!”

Welcome to the class of Pee-Ons, the 99.9%, ruled through the Idiocracy. Too bad there are so few insane asylums left…

By: OUTPOST2012.NET Mon, 07 Oct 2013 16:55:36 +0000 I’ve been happily living with TV sets for four years. I had three of them.
First, I gave up watching news and any political programs. Only NatGeo and similar stuff.
Then, I refused from television entirely.
Sure I download the best.
However, only browsing various news sources can provide a more or less objective picture.
And no ads – thank God!

By: k2d2 Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:08:39 +0000 So… there actually IS some pork in “Pork & Beans” journalism.

By: MikeMongo Mon, 07 Oct 2013 12:22:23 +0000 It’s dissapointing no one seems to have recognized the irony of an article about media bias which is, itself, pointedly biased. The author’s final statement, “Hard-line conservatives are to blame for the current crisis.” clearly articulates his own bias, and clearly undermines/invlaidates his stated intent.

By: HamsterHerder Mon, 07 Oct 2013 09:20:37 +0000 Once again failing to gain traction with it’s own watered-down version of the events of the day, and reflective of its inherently fearful approach to controversy, Rooters decides to appeal to it’s base and throw milquetoast at the TV set.

Well, I suppose even the rancid, opinion-less independents need a place where they come and let their hair down.

By: reality-again Sun, 06 Oct 2013 15:52:22 +0000 The job of the media is to help advertisers sell their stuff. This is what they get paid to do.
The means to achieve this goal is to provide cheap (or low-cost) entertainment to a large number of people.
Practically speaking, there is hardly such a thing as a proper News Industry. The ‘news’ events serve as raw or semi-processed material for various entertainment shows tailored to various audiences.

By: TheWhiteLine Sat, 05 Oct 2013 19:18:10 +0000 A couple of the comments above seem to me to exemplify the premise that is at the heart of many of this society’s problems – “they make lots of money, so they are successful” coupled with “they’re successful, so they must be right/good”.

By this logic, the drug cartels must be some of the best people on earth – they make lots of money, don’t they? They’re successful, so they must be “right”.

Any conversation about the problems of this society/country that DON’T start with a long hard look in the mirror are simply delusional. Too many of us have bought in to selfish greed as the yardstick by which we define our “success” – at the cost of any true moral standard.

For the record, I’m a mid (perhaps even lower) middle class guy who is quite comfortable with where I am. I have what I NEED, and can work toward any realistic WANT that I might have. (Emphasis “realistic”) As such, I cannot be bought, or bribed – by marketing groups, politicians (is there a difference?), or the “successful” media as it now exists. I’m the worst nightmare of all of the above, and those who support them – I can’t be bought off, and I think for myself…

…. and I’m not alone. Be advised.

By: sangell Sat, 05 Oct 2013 05:31:51 +0000 If we use a conservative 12 P/E ratio it would seem that Glenn Beck’s opinions are worth more than a billion dollars and Rush Limbaugh’s close to it.

That’s a frightful number considering that the Washington Post, the friggin Washington Post, could only fetch $250 million as a newspaper. How much are its political opinions worth given that many people read the paper for sports scores, crime news etc.

It would seem that in the market place of ideas the left is bankrupt and thus is forced to use inflammatory rhetoric and pin itself to the bosom of government spending to make itself worth anything.

By: ptiffany Fri, 04 Oct 2013 20:34:15 +0000 Years ago, the media pundits salivated over the prospect of increasing numbers of “channels” for news sources, expecting that would lead to great improvements in the quality of news.

Wow! Looking back now, it seems the only concern of news outlets is to generate profits through massive commitment to controversy and heat generating “coverage”. Jack Shafer recently labeled even CNN as a tabloid based on programming over the past year or so designed to compete for viewership with Faux News. Instead, CNN is circling the drain, and once vaunted reporters have been turned into clowns, often criticising each other on air for their unprofessional speculations and conjectures. And, we thought it was only Faux News that was commited to setting the standard for unfair and unbalanced.

Now the news is often centered around reporters interviewing other reporters – too much work to track down bona fide sources – with contributions from screaming, argumentative (often rude) if not downright stupid political strategists (whatever that is) adding to the polar, sound-bite screaming of personal opinions by “reporters”. What does “reporter” mean? Someone who thinks his or her personal opinions are on a par with those they are interviewing?