I'm not kidding. The White House called them dead-enders and insurgents almost from the moment troops invaded the country. It was clearly a propaganda ploy, and it worked. It made viewers think the situation in Iraq was settled when it wasn't.
Bernard Goldberg provided anecodtal evidence that dovetailed with the predominant view of the majority of reporters. However, how a reporter thinks and what gets on the air is entirely different. The prevailing viewpoint expressed on all network news is one of conservative thinking, differing only in degree. All prop up White House talking points even when doing so is absurd. All pick on the White House occasionally, but predominantly they support whatever Bush is selling. That's conservative.
:) Since my original post wasn't a troll, anyone thinking it was a troll must have taken offense at what I said. From that I gathered they must not have liked criticism of Fox News, and thus I said what I said and unleashed far more controversy than I feel like this morning.
I admit what I said was done in an inflammatory manner, yet I think I can back up my words. But if the moderator modded me a troll not because of what I said, but how I said it, then I apologize to him or her. If they were focusing on my wording, I can see how they might have thought I was trolling. I wasn't, but I won't condemn someone without talking to them first.
Is Ted Turner in control of Time Warner? Nope. He's out of power.
Your point about ratings is a valid one, however. Nevertheless, at the moment the American populace seems to be in sleep mode overall, and every scandal of the Bush White House seems to slip right off them. If I am interested in ratings, I can see the writing on the wall. I would be pushing a pro-Bush slant on the news too. It's what is selling in America today, at least on television where the object of the game is to lull people into a trance while not upseting them.
Now the book market is different. There you can have lots of niches that do well, and anti-Bush books are a definite niche that is profitable. But the subject of this thread, set by someone else, was Fox News, and we both agree that it is right-wing.
Actually, no I don't. I am talking about people who take sides instead of thinking for themselves. If all you do is read liberal blogs, you are in the same boat as someone who just watches Fox news. Both sides are corrupt, however the topic of this thread was set by someone else and happened to be Fox. So I made my comment and got attacked for it. Typical of taking-sides behavior, and that is what I am condemning.
Not really. If I consistently sided with left-wing folks, even when they contradicted themselves, then I would be using the same thinking techniques that I despise. But there's nothing wrong with calling partisan actions when they occur. Do you really think a left-wing thinking person modded my comment about Fox a troll? Nope, me either. Thus no hypocrisy on my part for what you pointed out was different from what I was saying.
I see lack of independent thought on all sides of the political spectrum. I particularly dislike even the concept of political parties, with taking sides instead of thinking for yourself. However, I didn't pick the topic of this thread, I merely commented on what someone else said about Fox, and I got attacked for it.
"So by your logic anyone who agrees with something the White House says is just a sheeple without independent thought, but anyone who disagrees is a bastion of intellectual radiance?"
Not at all, in fact just the opposite of what I was saying. That's the way to misread something.
I agree with the White House at times. I disagree at other times. What I was talking about is how some people fall into lockstep with whatever the White House says, even when what they say contradicts what they used to say. That is lack of independent thought.
"How many conservative analysts on CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC?"
All, more or less. Look at how all of those channels let the White House get away with things that had Clinton done it the Republicans would have howled about endlessly. All those channels follow White House talking points. The White House calls Iraqis fighting American troops "insurgents"? Then so do CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC. All of those channels are owned by conservative corporate entities.
What makes Fox news so unique is the nakedness with which it uses its propaganda techniques. Those other channels use them too, but they are more subtle. With Fox it's as plain as can be.
Some right-wing type who can't think for his or herself modded my comment as Troll, but I wasn't trolling, I am serious about what I said, and the evidence is plain to see on any Fox News report. Just look for the propaganda techniques, the slanted, emotionally-laden leading words, and the way they march in lockstep with whatever the White House talking points of the day are. Then look at how they treat anyone who thinks differently than they do. That is the definition of being against freedom of thought.
Now if you happen to agree with their viewpoint, and you magically happen to change your mind to whatever the White House is pushing that day even if it contradicts past talking points, well then you are an amazing coincidence housed in an independent-thinking brain. Or possibly the alternative is true: You too have been influenced by the Fox propaganda techniques.
Re:G5 laptop holdup? AMD's been doing it already!
on
Apple Updates PowerBooks
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
"Now, admittedly, my laptop is big, bulky and basically the antithesis of what I would imagine a Powerbook laptop would look like"
"terrify industry executives, who remember only too well what Napster and other file-sharing programs did to the music industry"
Ugh. I hate it when industry propaganda gets reprinted by reporters without comment or common sense. OK, let's talk about this sentence. What exactly did happen to the music industry? During the rise of P2P, their business improved. Then a recession hit, and their business slowed. They then attacked their customers, which is bad for business too. Then iTunes and the like came out, and the recession eased, and business went up.
So what exactly went wrong for the music industry?! They certainly moaned about losing business, but check out those bottom lines and you'll see they are still in business and raking in the billions, thank you very much. Bah! Bad, John Markoff! Repeating industry propaganda is not good for a reporter to be taken seriously.
"Microsoft's IPTV technology will allow a home to receive 3 standard TV signals, 1 HD channel, and high-speed Internet access all at the same time."
While simultaneously allowing Microsoft to spy on your TV viewing habits, not to mention which shows you tape. Oh sorry, I thought I was reading the WMV license terms. But you get the idea. Let Microsoft in your living room and you never know what you are agreeing to.
Oh well, just a little baseless paranoia for a Friday night.
"But it looks like the film is not a complete bastardization of Adams' work."
Since Adams wrote the script from his own books, that's not too surprising. The acting, who knows? But unless they wanted to deliberately destroy the approved script, it would stand to reason that it would have the usual Adams touch. A touch that has worked in print and on radio, so here's hoping it works in film.
REVENGE OF THE LUCAS
Cash! The production house is crumbling
under attacks by the ruthless
Sith Lord, and Slashdot fanboys.
There are whiners on both sides.
Ennui is everywhere.
In a stunning move, the
fiendish droid leader, General
Lucas, has swept into the
Hollywood capital and kidnapped
famous movie critics, and leaders of
the big studios.
As the exhasperated Slashdot army
attempts to flee the onslaught
of PR pushed by bought-for flaks
two Jedi Knights lead a
desperate mission to rescue the
captive franchise...
That's a very well thought out scenario. I agree that the key is the distribution, as well as publicity. But that is coming, and it amazes me that you and I can see it coming but they cannot.
I completely agree with you. I may be off in my timing, but I don't think in my prediction. This pattern has played out many times in the past, and it eventually leads to the death of irrelevant organizations.
Dinosaurs pushed the mammals around right up until they dropped dead. I'm talking irrelevance in the long run. The RIAA won't even exist in a decade or so.
"A9 is like Google and Claria combined, with webbugs, click tracking and paid inserts all tied to your Amazon cookie which is tied to your credit card"
What Amazon cookie? You mean you allow them to set a cookie on your machine? I don't.
Your post is hilarious because you clearly do not know Speakeasy. What you described is how they operate, and I mean 100% accurate. So you wound up whining about a problem that doesn't exist.
"Is there some kind of "Slashbot: A Guide to Slashdot Alternate Reality" I can buy to understand your little world?"
Sure, it's called the court system of the United States. That's where Judge Jackson found Microsoft to be an illegal monopoly. This got appealed, and in the appeal process Judge Jackson's remedies got thrown out, but the Findings of Facts that proved Microsoft was an illegal monopoly was upheld in the appeal. Thus two courts reviewed the matter, and they both found Microsoft guilty of illegal monopoly practices. That's why I say they are a "convicted monopolist," and only those living in alternate reality universes think otherwise.
Of course the ends don't justify the means in this case, yet nevertheless this is a good thing the Gates Foundation is doing. It's not an All or Nothing proposition. Gates can be a convicted monopolist who does awful things in the business world while simultaneously spending his money on humanitarian things. Doesn't justify his business crimes. Hey, look at Andrew Carnegie. Similar to Gates in the business world, but he spent his money on lots of good things such as libraries.
If a gangster throws a block party for his neighbors, it doesn't justify all the people he killed in his work. It's still a nice party, and he's still a gangster.
Slashdot Mirror
Bernard Goldberg provided anecodtal evidence that dovetailed with the predominant view of the majority of reporters. However, how a reporter thinks and what gets on the air is entirely different. The prevailing viewpoint expressed on all network news is one of conservative thinking, differing only in degree. All prop up White House talking points even when doing so is absurd. All pick on the White House occasionally, but predominantly they support whatever Bush is selling. That's conservative.
I admit what I said was done in an inflammatory manner, yet I think I can back up my words. But if the moderator modded me a troll not because of what I said, but how I said it, then I apologize to him or her. If they were focusing on my wording, I can see how they might have thought I was trolling. I wasn't, but I won't condemn someone without talking to them first.
Your point about ratings is a valid one, however. Nevertheless, at the moment the American populace seems to be in sleep mode overall, and every scandal of the Bush White House seems to slip right off them. If I am interested in ratings, I can see the writing on the wall. I would be pushing a pro-Bush slant on the news too. It's what is selling in America today, at least on television where the object of the game is to lull people into a trance while not upseting them.
Now the book market is different. There you can have lots of niches that do well, and anti-Bush books are a definite niche that is profitable. But the subject of this thread, set by someone else, was Fox News, and we both agree that it is right-wing.
Actually, no I don't. I am talking about people who take sides instead of thinking for themselves. If all you do is read liberal blogs, you are in the same boat as someone who just watches Fox news. Both sides are corrupt, however the topic of this thread was set by someone else and happened to be Fox. So I made my comment and got attacked for it. Typical of taking-sides behavior, and that is what I am condemning.
I see lack of independent thought on all sides of the political spectrum. I particularly dislike even the concept of political parties, with taking sides instead of thinking for yourself. However, I didn't pick the topic of this thread, I merely commented on what someone else said about Fox, and I got attacked for it.
Not at all, in fact just the opposite of what I was saying. That's the way to misread something.
I agree with the White House at times. I disagree at other times. What I was talking about is how some people fall into lockstep with whatever the White House says, even when what they say contradicts what they used to say. That is lack of independent thought.
Sorry, missed this sentence the first time. I think you need to re-read the definition of ad hominem. I'm stunned that you would think that.
All, more or less. Look at how all of those channels let the White House get away with things that had Clinton done it the Republicans would have howled about endlessly. All those channels follow White House talking points. The White House calls Iraqis fighting American troops "insurgents"? Then so do CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC. All of those channels are owned by conservative corporate entities.
What makes Fox news so unique is the nakedness with which it uses its propaganda techniques. Those other channels use them too, but they are more subtle. With Fox it's as plain as can be.
Now if you happen to agree with their viewpoint, and you magically happen to change your mind to whatever the White House is pushing that day even if it contradicts past talking points, well then you are an amazing coincidence housed in an independent-thinking brain. Or possibly the alternative is true: You too have been influenced by the Fox propaganda techniques.
And there's your answer, frankly.
I noticed that too and thought it was very funny. The network that is against freedom of thought talking about freedom of expression in software.
Ugh. I hate it when industry propaganda gets reprinted by reporters without comment or common sense. OK, let's talk about this sentence. What exactly did happen to the music industry? During the rise of P2P, their business improved. Then a recession hit, and their business slowed. They then attacked their customers, which is bad for business too. Then iTunes and the like came out, and the recession eased, and business went up.
So what exactly went wrong for the music industry?! They certainly moaned about losing business, but check out those bottom lines and you'll see they are still in business and raking in the billions, thank you very much. Bah! Bad, John Markoff! Repeating industry propaganda is not good for a reporter to be taken seriously.
While simultaneously allowing Microsoft to spy on your TV viewing habits, not to mention which shows you tape. Oh sorry, I thought I was reading the WMV license terms. But you get the idea. Let Microsoft in your living room and you never know what you are agreeing to.
Oh well, just a little baseless paranoia for a Friday night.
Since Adams wrote the script from his own books, that's not too surprising. The acting, who knows? But unless they wanted to deliberately destroy the approved script, it would stand to reason that it would have the usual Adams touch. A touch that has worked in print and on radio, so here's hoping it works in film.
Cash! The production house is crumbling
under attacks by the ruthless
Sith Lord, and Slashdot fanboys.
There are whiners on both sides.
Ennui is everywhere.
In a stunning move, the
fiendish droid leader, General
Lucas, has swept into the
Hollywood capital and kidnapped
famous movie critics, and leaders of
the big studios.
As the exhasperated Slashdot army
attempts to flee the onslaught
of PR pushed by bought-for flaks
two Jedi Knights lead a
desperate mission to rescue the
captive franchise...
That's a very well thought out scenario. I agree that the key is the distribution, as well as publicity. But that is coming, and it amazes me that you and I can see it coming but they cannot.
I completely agree with you. I may be off in my timing, but I don't think in my prediction. This pattern has played out many times in the past, and it eventually leads to the death of irrelevant organizations.
Dinosaurs pushed the mammals around right up until they dropped dead. I'm talking irrelevance in the long run. The RIAA won't even exist in a decade or so.
..you know the rest. Evidently the MPAA has decided to copy the RIAA 12-Step Plan to Irrelevance completely.
What Amazon cookie? You mean you allow them to set a cookie on your machine? I don't.
LOL. That's one way to react when you've made a mistake.
Your post is hilarious because you clearly do not know Speakeasy. What you described is how they operate, and I mean 100% accurate. So you wound up whining about a problem that doesn't exist.
Didn't you read what I wrote? The punishment part was the part that got tossed, but the conviction remained intact.
Sure, it's called the court system of the United States. That's where Judge Jackson found Microsoft to be an illegal monopoly. This got appealed, and in the appeal process Judge Jackson's remedies got thrown out, but the Findings of Facts that proved Microsoft was an illegal monopoly was upheld in the appeal. Thus two courts reviewed the matter, and they both found Microsoft guilty of illegal monopoly practices. That's why I say they are a "convicted monopolist," and only those living in alternate reality universes think otherwise.
If a gangster throws a block party for his neighbors, it doesn't justify all the people he killed in his work. It's still a nice party, and he's still a gangster.