What will replace the “media?”

A study in over reaction? Sure, unless you like be lied to. 75

All kinds of things are showing up in the light of day. Stinky old secrets that were paying good wages only a few months ago seem to be shamelessly, well, exposing themselves in public places. These media giants, once the envy of the world, have become trailer trash so obnoxious that not even their truth masters can get the lip stick back on them.

Staggering about with vague credentialism from the the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the “Big Five” media corporations have, probably, terminally “soiled” themselves. The news manipulation so brazenly crafted by these opportunistic corporations is now growing more damagingly obvious every day. The dark creatures who had guided and protected these deceit peddlers have, judiciously, withdrawn from the new light. Like comatose patients awaking after a long sleep, even the most credulous viewers are growing suspicious of a massive public deception. Suspicious, and a little embarrassed.

By “credulous” we mean “automatic.” Automatic viewers are those who spend no time with alternate sources of news and are unaware of the tide of voices warning the public about what’s gone on. For years these stalwart media fans could be counted on to fill the roster of the millions of users these media conglomerates exploited so profitably. Regardless of the clear disconnection between even the reporting offered to viewers on one day and contradictory reporting on the same story a few days later, these automatic viewers had been artfully coaxed into, well, habits.

That habit was to park the car, pour a drink and relax with the news, then discuss it as if it were fact the next day at the water cooler. The factual nature of what had been reported as fact was reinforced by others in the conversation who had seen an almost remarkably similar story on another network. In the absence of any reporting done outside the editorial control of these media monsters, things meshed. Stories supported each other. There might have been an occasional debate about what appeared to be the substance of these stories, but never a debate about the credibility of them.

After all, every newsworthy network always agreed on all the newsworthy facts.

Precisely what media monsters do we mean?

Easy. CNN (AOL Time Warner), NBC (General Electric), Fox (News Corp.), CBS (Viacom) and ABC (Walt Disney). Of course there are many more, but these are the specific corporations presently enjoying the great masses of viewers, followers, acceptors, addicts, subjects, you know, believers. This handful of companies represents only the mountain tops. For example, CBS owns 37 television broadcasters, 47 radio broadcasters and more than 20 publishing houses. Between all of these organizations we see a dismal presence in every major media market in the country.

Major media market? Of course. That’s where they were convinced the treasure rested.

The treasure? Narcotized addicts, lockstep volunteers for their toxic hypnosis. Why, the zombies could vote, send their sons to any war made necessary, and, most important, elect without question.

So what’s the crime? Think about it. Some years ago we received First Amendment reporting that Sadam Hussein had poison gas, bacteriological weapons and delivery systems. Think about it. You received that reporting, didn’t you? Try to remember.

It was, of course, false. We could care about its source, but for right now, let’s consider whether or not broadcasting known falsehoods is consistent with First Amendment protected Freedom of Speech. By the way, that broadcast propagates itself through airwaves owned by the recipients of the lies.

That would be us. We’ve been gang raped.

Keep thinking. Was there a retraction? Was there a correction? Was there more later? Any in depth reporting as to the exact story of how this got broadcast to us? Who benefitted? Why it was done? Keep thinking. Try to remember.

What about 911? Keep thinking. Who knows if there was a conspiracy -- probably no one in my acquaintance knows. Who is interested in whether or not there was a conspiracy? Just about everyone I know. Try to remember. What news organization spent so much as a second on this story after its fabrication had delivered the public opinion to start the war? Was there a retraction? A clarification? An explanation? Were there any questions asked and answered? Try to remember. Did we get our First Amendment Free Speech’s money worth from the free press broadcasting over our air waves? Try to remember.

Was there some innocent reason we’ve never seen coffins returning from Iraq? Was it just an oversight? Perhaps, never -- never once -- newsworthy? Try to remember. Try to understand. Never newsworthy?

Is it a coincidence that every neo-con knuckle dragger on Fox came up with the identical talking points day after day? Maybe it was simply a sign of very thoughtful selection of newsworthy topics. Maybe some blogger left his group address enabled. Try to understand.

Was Reverend Wright so newsworthy that his ranting somehow deserved millions or billions of dollars worth of free press news treatment? Did so many Americans worry whether or not Obama was a Muslim that the question had to be resurrected day after day? Did a same or similar calamity befall all the candidates equally? Try to remember. Was there a retraction? A correction? An explanation? Think about it.

Let’s pause for a moment. All these companies has every right to maintain and promote an editorial policy and make editorial comments, all well protected by the free press clause in the First Amendment. Because they are profiting from their control of our air waves, it might not be out of line for us to require them to identify these editorial comments of theirs in a way which would prevent them from being promoted as news or fact. That would be something like “public interest.”

Further, can we countenance outright incompetence in this news reporting process? Sure. Everyone can make a mistake. But what else might we expect? A correction? Try to remember. Were there corrections? Even more important, would corrections have had anything to do with “public interest?” Does accuracy have any place in the First Amendment’s protection of a free press? Even when the lie is covered with American blood and treasure? You know, accuracy? Fact?

The worst transgression of all, and exactly the one which should push all these parasites out of business and into the dustbin of neo-con failures is the 5% lie, the innuendo, the uncorrected minor mistake. Now we will see that what these giants have been reporting to us, every word and utterance of it, has been carefully toxified by their ownership to produce just the “automatic” reception they wanted. The reception they needed. To keep their vampire scheme well oiled.

This contamination is not manifest in flaming, outrageous lies. It is carefully presented with omissions. Ever hear a story about why Al Quaeda wanted to hurt us? Wait. The “they hate our freedom” thing is no more than odorous rubbish. Not newsworthy? Doesn’t exist? Try to remember.

How about stories explaining why the Palestinians are attacking Israel? Try to remember. Are they just crazy or is there actually some kind of reason? We wouldn’t know. Why would anyone want that one sided war to happen? Is it First Amendment Free Speech? Is it “fair and balanced?” Is the reporting we get complete? Try to remember. Maybe there just isn’t any reason that’s newsworthy? Try to remember. Take a moment. Do you really understand anything about what’s happening in Gaza? Does anything in the story we got make sense?

This posting gives examples which are present in our immediate thoughts. There are thousands more. Just when our democracy was in the most threatened moment in its history, our view went blank. The pablum oozing from our television screens was an insidious, yeah, you got it, conspiracy. Everything we received from our First Amendment Free Press, everything being broadcast over the public airwaves in the “public interest,” had been tilted just enough.

Now they've already started in on our new President.

As an informed public, we have no idea what is going on. Somebody thought that was a good preparation for selling us all sorts of stupid, destructive half truth. They delivered their media torpedo of deception and lies. We bought it. When the main players began the looting, the manipulation, the fear mongering and the lies, they assumed that we were entirely prepared to do our part.

Our part? To believe.

Pissed? Try to remember. They are counting on you to not be able to remember. They tell you that your memory fades in a few days. In fact, they tell you that over and over -- sort of like “they hate our freedom” and “cut and run” and “appeasers” and “stay the course.”

God. What were we thinking?

Anyone else in favor of dumping this “free press” of ours before it destroys us? Oh my. What could replace it?

How about a free press?

An educated electorate needs to know what’s happening in the world. You know. What’s really happening. Both sides. Bad news. Questions. Answers.

Yeah, that stuff.

For an interesting self-test concerning media objectivity (you own view...), try:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=121

and an interesting, short visit to Al Gore's book:
http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/biblio?inkey=2-9781594201226-2

The "Art" of "Knowing" about Iraq

Can We Penetrate the Nature of the Iraqi Government?
Can We Do It Even Under A Media Blackout?

It’s high time to start with our version of the W.W.II German disclaimers, only we will need to smooth out some ruffled feathers with our national behavior in Iraq rather than declaring a lack of knowledge about “death camps.” Of course, we can only know what we have been told about the invasions and the subsequent occupation. How could we be held responsible for events about which we were never informed?

Frankly, if we place all that we have been told in one column on the right, then add a column on the left noting our inescapable other conclusions about the same topics, we would be facing a “loose brick” in our wall of presumptive innocence. Although the administration, with the help of its trained monkeys on AM radio, has carefully crafted a position for us about the whole affair, a position which provides a wonderful foundation for our “complete innocence,” those among us who can still claim to “know nothing more” is a dwindling population.

Our “innocence” has grown a little frayed, a little “road weary.” We can no longer wear our white wedding dress quite so effortlessly. The nagging alternative to this blissful blind faith grows into a more and more inevitable observation every time we add one of our famous “but’s” to the argument. “Well, they said this and this and this, BUT, what about that and that and that?” The innocent image the administration has offered to us tasted pretty good at first, but the bitter contradictions just seemed to keep on coming after those first few delicious, vengeful bites.

So, we admit it. We can no longer assume that we have ever known what was actually happening in Iraq.

As for self-deprecation, during the formal invasion I proposed loudly that we would never be able to just steal the oil. Such a blatant crime would collect too much international baggage even for someone as implacable as Dick Cheney. Instead, I suggested, American “looters” would nibble away slowly, imperceptibly, at the Iraqi fortune with truly awful oil field service contracts, bad distribution agreements and the like, all benefitting respectable corporations such as Brown and Root and Halliburton.

I was wrong. After spending five continuous years reporting on Iraq, from Iraq, NBC’s Chief Foreign Correspondent, Richard Engel, estimates that around 500.000 barrels of Iraqi oil are pilfered every day. At $125 per barrel, that amounts to roughly $62,500,000 worth daily or about $24 billion per year.

Jumping right beyond this unaccounted-for-oil, let’s return to the question of what we know about what’s happening in Iraq. What do we know about our partners in democracy, the people running the Iraqi Government? Again, we have the “official” version of who these folks are. The administration would like to depict them as amateur but enthusiastic “founding fathers,” making possible all the wonderful things that Iraq will become if we just “stay the course.” Veritable copies of Thomas Jefferson or, perhaps, Ben Franklin, honest, hardworking nation builders eminently deserving of our respect and support.

Never mind the five year long argument about reconciling the country, never mind the idea that millions of Iraqi’s are possibly less than pleased with monthly death rates of 1,000, 2,000 or worse, depending on the moment. These same stalwart democrats continue to give their all to this mission of theirs, year after year without any progress, lucky breaks or inspired results.

Don’t be too critical. The model of democracy offered up as an example for them to follow was none other than a United States government reeling from every sort of corruption, lack of oversight and ridiculous ideology. What did we expect?

As for the missing oil, pause for a moment and consider the material reality of stealing half a million barrels of oil every day. Sure, these clever Iraqis have developed some very sophisticated tricks. Under filling and over reporting oil tanker loads in Basra. Undetected diversion lines from the main oil pipelines (undetected?). Outright criminal corruption done in the broad glare of the Iraqi daylight.

Yet, we are led to think that the noble Iraqi government leaders, in their daily struggle in Baghdad to form a new democratic nation, somehow remain aloof from such a dirty business. They learned from their American sponsors that a position in government is akin to a natural resource, a birth into a privileged nobility or a generous trust fund, suddenly discovered.

Now, years later, we have managed to create a class of politicians cast in the exact mold of the Republican Party that has run our own country, full of subterfuge, excuses, convenient confusion and graft, not to mention outrageous hubris. We taught our Mexican neighbors how to hold crooked elections. We taught our Iraqi partners how to perfect corruption.

Thank you, President Bush. Perhaps you and the Secretary of State can retire to a refurbished Chevron oil tanker, the Condalezza Rice, docked at some friendly port in the Persian Gulf once you have finally finished with us.

All Rightee! President Time!

Making Tough Decisions: Electing a President in a Media Blackout
or is it, Electing a President in an Electorate Blackout?

Here it is again. November. The wife is poundin’ on me -- “You get out there and vote! If you don’t have one of them ‘I Voted’ stickers, you better not plan on gettin’ your favorite meatloaf for the rest of the year!” She don’t care if it’s colder than a brass bra out here. Oh no. “You get out there and vote!” Women are like that. My mom always told me to vote, too.

So, here we are at Cataclysm Junior High. There’s the ‘Vote Here’ sign. All these people, jeez, there’s no parking. I guess there’s nothin’ to do but go on in there and get it over with.

This is just like last time. Every four years it’s the same. I’m walkin' in to vote and I have no idea who I’m supposed to vote for. At least all the names are listed on the ballots. That makes it easier to remember who is running.

At least, this year, I did my homework. I watched the news a couple of times so I’d, like, know, the questions. The wife says you have to do that to be an educated voter. One thing I do know for sure, and that is whoever gets picked is gonna’ be the guy who runs the country until the next time, you know, the next election. I say guy, but, darn, that woman is running this time. If I vote for the woman, the wife will probably like it.

Still, I promised her that I’d vote my own mind. So, I guess it’s time to boil all these facts down so I know what I’m doin’. Mom always said to pay attention to the church goin’ while you size up each pick. McCain’s preacher thinks that the Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon. That don’t mean much to me, ‘cause I ain’t Catholic. O’Bama’s preacher is a black man who doesn’t act like he’s white, but O’Bama dumped him anyway, whatever that means. Hillary’s little prayer bunch is full of fire-breathin’ neo-cons. She says she ain’t no neo-con, but she never said that the rest of ‘em weren’t.

So, that helps.

And, there’s the screw-ups. McCain said he didn’t know much about the economy but he wanted the war to go on for a hundred years. That’s weird all right, but I don’t rally know anything about the economy, either. O’Bama said that bitter people cling to religion and guns, but I ain’t bitter and I don’t even own a gun. The wife hates guns, but she don’t think he’s no Moslem. Hillary said she got shot at somewhere, but the movie didn’t show it. Sometimes I think I got shot at, but I don’t remember any of the details very well, either.

Stuff like that really does help narrow down the decision.

Yup, I’m registered, thanks to the wife, and now I’m walking up to the little curtain thing. Mom told me to never tell a pollster that I was undecided ‘cause they’d call me on the phone everyday after that. I tried to watch all them numbers the news kept comin’ up with. I’m under fifty, but I’m over twenty-five. I’m pretty sure I’m mostly white, whatever that means. The wife and I go to church every Easter, Christmas, Thanksgiving and them other two days. I earn less than $250,000 and more than $45,000, right? And, I am the proud father of two kids of “mixed sex” like 39% of the rest of the country.

All that stuff says I’m supposed to vote for somebody, but I can’t remember which one. Still, it’s a clue.

I guess I’m just going to do it like last time. So long as everyone thinks I thought about it, I’ll be all right. Plus, I learned something from last time. I ain’t tellin’ nobody who I voted for until I can figure out if it makes me look stupid. If it does make me look stupid, I’ll just lie and say I voted for someone else.

All right, last time I used the alphabet idea. Since “B” came before “K,” I voted for the guy who’s in there now. To keep things democratic, this time I’m going to pick the last guy. Than means that “O” comes after “M,” even though it’s just barely. Huh. I wonder if I should count the “O” part or the “B” part. That would change everything.

Here goes. It’s gonna be “O.” That leaves all these other people to vote for. At least no one’s has ever heard of any of ‘em. For them, I can just use the old “flip the coin” approach. Anyway, no one ever asks whether or not you voted for them, or, you know, which one.

Now, I take this paper back over to the old lady and she gives me my “I Voted” sticker, then it’s home for meatloaf and sex. What a country!