in the news
Scot and Lacy Peterson
Kobe Bryant
Princess Di
Michael Jackson
Jon Bennet Ramsey
Britney Spears Marriage
These Stories are on the news all the time. Does anybody else but me not give a shit about them. Granted, some stories like the Laci Peterson case might be sad, but the story won't effect the vast majority of people. Its just sensationalized crap.
You will never be famous.
It goes to show the majority of americans are morons. I don't watch the news, because the second they started caring about ratings, was the same second it became a "program" and not the news. I'll read the newspaper, but I don't watch local news.
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms." Albert Einstein
hey gonzo, have you ever read any noam chomsky?
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by DrGonzoHST [/i]
[B]It goes to show the majority of americans are morons. I don't watch the news, because the second they started caring about ratings, was the same second it became a "program" and not the news. I'll read the newspaper, but I don't watch local news. [/B][/QUOTE]
most newspapers i've seen are just as biased as television programs. to the owners, it's all still $$. newspapers care about ratings just as much, their ads sell for more money depnding on how many people "read" said newspaper.
and just think, "majority of americans" means most americans, and i see that you're an american....
i hear so many people on this site saying "majority of so-and-so are morons" and yet no one is willing to admit that they are in fact a part of that majority. not many people fall into the minority category on such subjects, if they did, it wouldn't be a minority now would it?
By reading a newspaper I have more control of what I let enter my brain. TV News is focused on tricking me into watching longer than I actually want. And then I listen and watch some bullshit that is fucking ridiculous like the 'orange alert' nonsense. By reading a newspaper I have more control. And that's really what it is all about - CONTROL. I know I can change the channel but then I wont get the news I want to hear. Newspaper don't force me to read about Scott Peterson or Michael Jackson. Tv News indirectly does.
I may be a moron but I am not contributing to the sensationalism in TV news, magazines like People, or tabloid's like the National Enquirer. By not buying their product I am telling them that it is not ok for those to be the lead stories. And I don't have a subsciption to a newspaper SO I check the newstand to see if the headlines are something I care about like 'Iraq War Rages On', and wont buy the 'Kobe trial moved back' headlined paper.
And yes I read a little of Chomsky, and I have this great lecture of his on DVD that was at harvard law. It's called Distorted Morality - it's mostly about the war on terrorism.
PS Trypdwyre
The post was about sensationalism and not bias.
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms." Albert Einstein
The only news I can handle is The Daily Show. And of course I stick around for Tough Crowd, although sometimes that show sucks. Bill Maher is great also, but I never catch him anymore, then there's a talk radio guy called Lionel...
Come to think of it, NPR is ok by me.
I can't stand celebrity gossip stuff. It totally drives me nuts that the only reason it's still around is cause people eat it up. That "celebrity uncensored" show should be boycotted to discourage those lowlifes from being able to make a buck off that stuff. But who am I to tell other people what to do? I just try to be discriminating in what I percieve as truth. I used to like Time magazine, I think because my dad always had it, but lately they've seemed more and more speculative and sensational, and the last issue I read made me sad when they talked about the year in review, and one of the stories was about the finding of Hussein, but most of the story went on about how someone heard someone else say that "...Saddam spit on his captor,...a soldier promptly slugged the old tyrant..." Then they end the article by quoting an "official military spokesperson"whose comment was: "I think this is an urban legend" Then why devote any page space to it?
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by DrGonzoHST [/i]
[B]By reading a newspaper I have more control of what I let enter my brain. TV News is focused on tricking me into watching longer than I actually want. And then I listen and watch some bullshit that is fucking ridiculous like the 'orange alert' nonsense. By reading a newspaper I have more control. And that's really what it is all about - CONTROL. I know I can change the channel but then I wont get the news I want to hear. Newspaper don't force me to read about Scott Peterson or Michael Jackson. Tv News indirectly does.
I may be a moron but I am not contributing to the sensationalism in TV news, magazines like People, or tabloid's like the National Enquirer. By not buying their product I am telling them that it is not ok for those to be the lead stories. And I don't have a subsciption to a newspaper SO I check the newstand to see if the headlines are something I care about like 'Iraq War Rages On', and wont buy the 'Kobe trial moved back' headlined paper.
And yes I read a little of Chomsky, and I have this great lecture of his on DVD that was at harvard law. It's called Distorted Morality - it's mostly about the war on terrorism.
PS Trypdwyre
The post was about sensationalism and not bias. [/B][/QUOTE]
you're telling me that you can't control what you filter out through television, but you can through print? sorry if it seems rude of me to say this, but what the fuck are you talkin' about willis? if you feel more comfortable with newpapers, fine, but to say that you can filter content of one, and not the other, that's beyond ridiculous.
yes, i know this is about sensationalism, sensationalism is what i'm also talking about. newspapers report on the same crap you can find on any 6:00 news program. same content, different media.
it's good that you pick and choose which paper/magazine you buy, but at the same time, you have to realize you can do the same with the news, most news programs are pretty blunt abotu what they'll be talking about for the next 30-60 minutes. if you don't like what they have to say, you just press a button and it all disappears. like i said before, same content, different media.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Prensa Taladradora [/i]
[B]The only news I can handle is The Daily Show. And of course I stick around for Tough Crowd, although sometimes that show sucks. Bill Maher is great also, but I never catch him anymore, then there's a talk radio guy called Lionel...
Come to think of it, NPR is ok by me.
I can't stand celebrity gossip stuff. It totally drives me nuts that the only reason it's still around is cause people eat it up. That "celebrity uncensored" show should be boycotted to discourage those lowlifes from being able to make a buck off that stuff. But who am I to tell other people what to do? I just try to be discriminating in what I percieve as truth. I used to like Time magazine, I think because my dad always had it, but lately they've seemed more and more speculative and sensational, and the last issue I read made me sad when they talked about the year in review, and one of the stories was about the finding of Hussein, but most of the story went on about how someone heard someone else say that "...Saddam spit on his captor,...a soldier promptly slugged the old tyrant..." Then they end the article by quoting an "official military spokesperson"whose comment was: "I think this is an urban legend" Then why devote any page space to it? [/B][/QUOTE]
yes, it is true that entertainment does seem to be infiltrating what used to be good journalistic new sources. america has always pandered some of the best and most subtle propaganda to their public, is it bad that the propaganda they now distribute and promote is blatant propaganda rather than well hidden, more subtle and less easy to identify?
i say good on them for making a buck off of it, that's a pretty damned good livelihood, if you can get involved in it. that's not saying that i'll read/watch/listen to it though, i exercize my right to turn my head, just as you are prensa.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by DrGonzoHST [/i]
[B]...And yes I read a little of Chomsky, and I have this great lecture of his on DVD that was at harvard law. It's called Distorted Morality - it's mostly about the war on terrorism. [/B][/QUOTE]
i figured as much. i urge you to search out opposing view points and form your own opinion based on either extremes.
I guess you missed the point trypdwyre. The newspaper is open for me to pick and choose what stories I want to read. When I watch the news I can't pick and choose what stories I deem important they do that for me. That crap that I don't want to read, I dont have to. And I can still enjoy the rest of the newspaper. To filter the news I have to change the channel and miss the news I do care about.
I think your version of 'filter' is a little different then mine.
And Moe
I listen to right wing radio. That kinda balances it out. I don't know who the equivalent of Chomsky is on the right but I would be sort of willing. But it is asking a lot from someone to waste time on reading material that doesn't appeal at all to them. I don't ask Fox News watchers to listen to NPR and read The Nation.
Plus I don't read Chomsky a lot. I've read Manufacturing Consent and a interview book called 9-11.
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms." Albert Einstein
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by DrGonzoHST [/i]
[B]I guess you missed the point trypdwyre. The newspaper is open for me to pick and choose what stories I want to read. When I watch the news I can't pick and choose what stories I deem important they do that for me. That crap that I don't want to read, I dont have to. And I can still enjoy the rest of the newspaper. To filter the news I have to change the channel and miss the news I do care about.
I think your version of 'filter' is a little different then mine.
And Moe
I listen to right wing radio. That kinda balances it out. I don't know who the equivalent of Chomsky is on the right but I would be sort of willing. But it is asking a lot from someone to waste time on reading material that doesn't appeal at all to them. I don't ask Fox News watchers to listen to NPR and read The Nation.
Plus I don't read Chomsky a lot. I've read Manufacturing Consent and a interview book called 9-11. [/B][/QUOTE]
my definition of "filter" is to strain out what one doesn't want, and allow what one does want to pass through. so yes, i filter plenty of television shows, mostly the news. it's just a different sort of filtering method you have to use.
remember, take everything with a grain of salt.
But by watching TV news you help their ratings and thus help them make money.
I would rather not have them make money off me.
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms." Albert Einstein
by purchasing the newspaper you're still helping them, no matter if you buy it all the time or not, and you help them make money still.
really, you can't read any news without increasing their money one way or the other. newspapers are just as bad as television news programs.
see, they are making money off of you.
Of Course they are. So I choose the best way to still recieve news and cut down on the amount of money that helps to support sensationalism.
How do you filter your news?
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms." Albert Einstein
wait a second, you realize everytime you purchase a paper, they count you as a seperate individual, thus driving up ad costs, but if you subcribe they only get the money of your subscription, and can only count you as one individual?
how do i filter my news? change the channel, flip the page, i choose what i do want to see, what i don't want to see, i'm sorry but i'm not getting what you're asking of me. most of the news i read online, i choose what i want to read, and what source i want to read it from. the news i watch on tv, i choose what source i prefer to watch, and if they aren't saying anthing i want to watch or listen to, i change the channel, same with the newspaper.
let me also add that i don't just believe everything i read/see/hear. if i think it sounds truthful, i'll look it up, research it on my own, it's what i do for a living, work in a library. research to me is second nature by now. anyway, i choose what i believe after i read/see/hear it and do some research on my own.
I don't understand? Seperate individual? One individual?
Isn't that all I am.
The question was just to stop the one sided nature of the conversation. It's nice when both teams get to play defense.
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms." Albert Einstein
by seperat individual i meant that their stats go up by 1 [b]each and every time[/b] you go out and purchase a newspaper. incidentally their stats only go up 1 annually when you subscribe to the newspaper.
and you're right, both sides playing defense is convenient, at least for the person who was on defense to begin with.
Fair not convenient. They dont play winners out in the NBA.
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms." Albert Einstein
I don't like my newspaper enough to waste money on them.
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms." Albert Einstein
you should have said so in the first place rather than trying to act like you had some political agenda motivating you from purchasing a subscription.
not that i blame you, it just adds up to too much trash for me, and all i every really do is the crossword...
Crosswords - I feel like the biggest idiot in the world when I look at The Nation crossword. I don't think I can get one word. Ever.
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms." Albert Einstein
no worries, to each his own, crosswords don't appeal to some people, for me, it's something to do when i'm on the crapper.
anyway, there's no way to avoid feeding the media's every growing wallet, unless you purchase a cave, a cave without an address, phone jack, or cable access, surround your cave with tinfoil in an attempt to block out the radio waves and eat only the bugs you find in your cave.
but that might just be crazy.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by trypdwyre [/i]
[B]let me also add that i don't just believe everything i read/see/hear. if i think it sounds truthful, i'll look it up, research it on my own, it's what i do for a living, work in a library. research to me is second nature by now. anyway, i choose what i believe after i read/see/hear it and do some research on my own. [/B][/QUOTE]
this is the most important thing right here, and what i was trying to get at by suggesting gonzo reads other stuff. just because noam chomsky, or michael moore, or president bush, or george tenant says it's true doesn't mean it really is. it might be some sick, twisted version of the truth, but there's always another way to look at things.
p.s. i like to read "mother jones" after "the economist"
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by trypdwyre [/i]
[B]anyway, there's no way to avoid feeding the media's every growing wallet, unless you purchase a cave, a cave without an address, phone jack, or cable access, surround your cave with tinfoil in an attempt to block out the radio waves and eat only the bugs you find in your cave.
but that might just be crazy. [/B][/QUOTE]
Step forward through the back door of the room.
Remember to breathe... where does it lead?
To your CAVE.
Step forward into your cave.
That's right, you're going deeper into your cave.
You're going to find: your power animal.
If your power animal is a bug, eat it.
That's right, crunch the hard shell in your teeth and taste the salty inside oozing out.
Swallow your power bug and imagine it as a white ball of healing light, moving slowly through your body, blocking out all information that is not absolute truth.
Now it's time for the one on ones...
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Prensa Taladradora [/i]
[B]Step forward through the back door of the room.
Remember to breathe... where does it lead?
To your CAVE.
Step forward into your cave.
That's right, you're going deeper into your cave.
You're going to find: your power animal.
If your power animal is a bug, eat it.
That's right, crunch the hard shell in your teeth and taste the salty inside oozing out.
Swallow your power bug and imagine it as a white ball of healing light, moving slowly through your body, blocking out all information that is not absolute truth.
Now it's time for the one on ones... [/B][/QUOTE]
your a dumbass. Taking excerpts from Fight Club and changing the words to be more relevant to your topic is tired and cliche, not clever or funny. its been don a thousand times before.
You will never be famous.
it [I]was[/I] pretty lame
so here i go...
i'm haLf the way to home...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >
commenting on it was any better?
for every faux fight club comment on here, there have been at least 10 people commenting on the faux fight club comments.
which is worse?
I really hate how the news will barely cover stories that are extremely important. Case in point: the Iran Earthquake.
[url]http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/fromthefield/107358010757.htm[/url]
This is a tragedy. They say 50,000 people may be dead, but I have yet to see anything on the 24 hour news channels about it. I have only read about it in the paper.
You will never be famous.
definately, i actually read about that in a spanish newspaper that we got here at the library. none of our papers, or news channels ran that story at all.
news is just a PR battle it seems.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by angusbeef123 [/i]
[B]Scot and Lacy Peterson
Kobe Bryant
Princess Di
Michael Jackson
Jon Bennet Ramsey
Britney Spears Marriage
These Stories are on the news all the time. Does anybody else but me not give a shit about them. Granted, some stories like the Laci Peterson case might be sad, but the story won't effect the vast majority of people. Its just sensationalized crap. [/B][/QUOTE]
and yet the media generally chooses stories like these to play to the public, to give the public what they want, the sensationalized crap that the majority of their viewers are asking for.