Weapons of Mass Deception (WMD) & When News Lies  

rd_sweetpea 48F
54 posts
7/16/2006 5:26 pm

Last Read:
9/12/2006 2:21 pm

Weapons of Mass Deception (WMD) & When News Lies

I went to see a GREAT movie today at the Miramar theatre, downtown Milwaukee, called Weapons of Mass Deception by Danny Schechter, the news dissector. I also bought his book "When News Lies (Media Complicity and the Iraq War)" I recommend the movie & book to everyone!!

Is it possible...

That the media shows a slanted view of what is really going on?

That news stations broadcast information supporting our governments decisions in order to receive money from the FCC?

That journalists working for large news stations are not independent thinkers and often repeat what is said by key political figures?

That independent journalists are often targeted (in danger) when covering sensitive issues?

That many Americans believe what they see on the news and believe it to be the truth?

That there is no freedom of speech - the government and large corporations vying for large government contracts control everything that is reported on large national news stations?

That many civilians and people active in the US armed forces have senslessly lost their lives due to the decisions made by our government?

That the war in Iraq is not about freedom - it is really about oil?


I could go on & on about this subject. It is one I feel strongly about. Since watching this movie I have decided I will be watching a lot more Public Television. The news reported on PBS is far less biased than the news on Fox, CBS, or NBC.

So I ask you...do you believe everything you see on TV? Or are you a free thinker who seeks out truth?


irishtongue71 51M

7/17/2006 7:53 am

This is where you and I seriously part company. But I won't hold it against you

IT


SpiceVarixBeast 59M
898 posts
7/18/2006 8:04 pm

A topic that gets me in trouble....

That the media shows a slanted view of what is really going on?Of course it's slanted...today's media is not impartial. They are going to report what sells...not what the issues are.

That news stations broadcast information supporting our governments decisions in order to receive money from the FCC?

Don't believe that at all. FCC doesn't have the teeth it used to.

That journalists working for large news stations are not independent thinkers and often repeat what is said by key political figures?
Only on Fox news. The rest are generally free to voice their own opinons, unless it rubs the network CEO's really wrong.

That independent journalists are often targeted (in danger) when covering sensitive issues?
Never have seen evidence supporting this theory.

That many Americans believe what they see on the news and believe it to be the truth?

Only on Fox news and talk radio. Rest of us are far more skeptical.

That there is no freedom of speech - the government and large corporations vying for large government contracts control everything that is reported on large national news stations?

Not in the manner you describe. Gov contracts seem to be given on the basis of who you know and how much you've given them. There are plenty of outlets for information..too many to control them all.

That many civilians and people active in the US armed forces have senslessly lost their lives due to the decisions made by our government?

This statement would be true regardless of the times we live in. More magnified today, but how many decisions the govt. makes have sense?

That the war in Iraq is not about freedom - it is really about oil?

Depends on who you talk to. Cheap oil? Check the gas prices today? It's about control and money. Who has it and who keeps it.

Interesting post for a blog. If you ever want to see the movie again, let me know. Sounds interesting. Surprised I haven't seen it myself. I did watch an interesting edition of "Frontline" that addressed some of those issues. If you're up for it, I'd love to discuss this in greater detail sometime (and any other thoughts you may have on other issues of the day).

I'll be a regular visitor!


literoticat 51F

8/4/2006 8:44 am

you would also enjoy manufacturing consent, a documentary and
outfoxed, also a docu. on the media.


turq6969 69M
553 posts
9/10/2006 8:56 am

This may get me into trouble too ...

That the media shows a slanted view of what is really going on?
The news industry journalist are sensationalists when it comes to reporting the news. The journalists don't report the positive aspects of their story unless that in and of itself is the entire story. Tradgedies, war, political events, etc. usually are reported with the negative aspects of the story. People respond to the negative aspects of noteworthy news rather than the positive slant of news. Who wants to hear that all is well and good? The majority of people that tune their television sets into the local news and network news do so each day so that they can hear all the bad things that the journalists report. Positiveness doesn't usually sell to the listening and reading public. Negativeness does.

That news stations broadcast information supporting our governments decisions in order to receive money from the FCC?
The FCC doesn't pay news stations money for their broadcasts. The news stations however DO pay the FCC for licensing of the station. The FCC may find a news station in violation of its rules and will levy a fine against a station if the violation is not corrected. Even if corrected, the station may have to pay a fine.

That journalists working for large news stations are not independent thinkers and often repeat what is said by key political figures?
Most journalists REPORT was a politician SAYS or has SAID. Their opinions are not conveyed during normal news reporting. However, their opinion may be queried by other journalists who are asking questions. By large stations are you referring to the primary network news? Occasionally, the lead newscaster will illicit their opinions, or question other journalist if the network has a live feed. Normally the lead journalist is reporting what other journalist's have investigated , then their investigated work is scrutinized by editor's who may alter the submitted content, then the altered version is sent to copy, then on to the lead network journalist.

That independent journalists are often targeted (in danger) when covering sensitive issues?
Targeted by whom? If a given journalists reports on a story and it is later found out that the journalist fabricated the story for the sensationalism, having no factual information, yes! I agree. He will be targeted by the public, and his fellow journalists. If an independent journalist can articulate the facts, then he may be targeted by the offending person that is being reported on if they have good connections. Rare.

That many Americans believe what they see on the news and believe it to be the truth?
Many Americans are gullible and believe everything that they see on telecasts or read in print.

That there is no freedom of speech - the government and large corporations vying for large government contracts control everything that is reported on large national news stations?
Journalists report on what they can conger up from governmental and large corporations sources. If the journalist suspects that a no good situation is occuring and have no validation to their suspicions, they may report on their suspicion. The journalist has to convince his news editor that it is newsworthy to the public.

That many civilians and people active in the US armed forces have senslessly lost their lives due to the decisions made by our government?
Am I to assume that your slant with this statement is about harm's way situations like Iraq and Afghanistan? This must be your opinion of someone elses opinion. Someone has convinced you that this is something that you should be opinionated about. I have family that has served in harm's way or is currently serving in harm's way. The military today is a volunteer organization. A young man or woman enlisting in the military knows that they may be called upon to subject themselves to harm's way situations. Civilians that enter hostile environments such as Iraq or Afghanistan have full knowledge that they will be subjected to a not so pleasant environment. They are paid higher amounts of money for subjecting themselves to these situations. The civilians have a choice to go or not, whereas the military does not. They go where their Command-in Chief designates.

That the war in Iraq is not about freedom - it is really about oil?
Is it really about oil? You have no opinion on this statement? There are many facets of the war in Iraq, some which have come to light that have been proven untrue from the reasons given forth by our top government officials. Freedom from Sadam Hussein's torture and senseless killings? Many Iraqis would counter your assumptions. Oil will always be an issue as long as people depend on it.

I could go on & on about this subject. It is one I feel strongly about. Since watching this movie I have decided I will be watching a lot more Public Television. The news reported on PBS is far less biased than the news on Fox, CBS, or NBC.
You have expressed many subjects, rather topics, although I think your primary focus intended is the reporting of the news by the news media whether it is factual or not, influence by government bodies or freely reported without outside influence, and whether the listeners, viewers, and readers fully believe what has been reported to them.

Regarding your last question, So I ask you...do you believe everything you see on TV? Or are you a free thinker who seeks out truth?
Hardly do I believe everything that I see on the television. Most of it is fictional. What you meant to ask is do I believe all the news that is reported on television is the whole truth and nothing but the truth? No, not everything.

Nice blog!

Peace and Love,
Turq {=}

Peace and Love,
Turq


Become a member to create a blog