The foundation of democracy
Trust the mainstream media? Hah. I trust it about as far as I can throw the average news-van. Certain people who will remain nameless (but you can hear them on the radio or see them on TV every day of the week) claim liberal media bias, but I think this contention is getting more or and more ridiculous as time goes on.
The dialog has shifted so far to the right that anything near the center is perceived by some folks as being "leftist." Controlling the tone of the discourse is actually one of the right's greatest victories...allowing it to influence the perceptions of millions of Americans who were never taught critical thinking skills.
Lenin got it right with this one. "A lie told often enough becomes truth." Say it often enough, and loud enough, and shout down anyone who might disagree with you, and people start to believe it. It's worked before, and it's working now.
Information is the foundation of democracy. If our information is suspect, if the voters themselves aren't able to critically examine the assumptions they're handed by the media, democracy falters. Welcome to the age of Orwellian double-speak. I'm certainly not the first one to mention this...it's not the substance of a thing, but the way it's presented...the language used to describe it.
George W's spinmeisters have changed the language America uses to describe these things they want to promote...or oppose. Rather than examining the true nature of something that's proposed, too many people (including the mass media, for the most part) simply define it by its title. Its deliberately misleading title.
"Healthy Forest Initiative?" Puh-leeze. It's amazing that those damned wooded areas survived so long without our stewardship. Thank God for loggers and republicans, lest the great forests die off completely.
This is just one example.
Recently the republicans wanted to change the wording of their now-infamous "nuclear option" regarding a way to eliminate the filibuster in regards to judicial nominations. Analyzing citizen responses to the terminology made them realize that people didn't like the term, so they tried to change the title to "constitutional option."
Too late. Word has it that they wanted to force so-called "liberal media" outlets to change the phrase used to the latter, using the accusation of "media bias" as a stick to force those who would have continued using the former to switch.
Hasn't worked.
Nice try, oh little Gods of spin. Thanks for playing.
The dialog has shifted so far to the right that anything near the center is perceived by some folks as being "leftist." Controlling the tone of the discourse is actually one of the right's greatest victories...allowing it to influence the perceptions of millions of Americans who were never taught critical thinking skills.
Lenin got it right with this one. "A lie told often enough becomes truth." Say it often enough, and loud enough, and shout down anyone who might disagree with you, and people start to believe it. It's worked before, and it's working now.
Information is the foundation of democracy. If our information is suspect, if the voters themselves aren't able to critically examine the assumptions they're handed by the media, democracy falters. Welcome to the age of Orwellian double-speak. I'm certainly not the first one to mention this...it's not the substance of a thing, but the way it's presented...the language used to describe it.
George W's spinmeisters have changed the language America uses to describe these things they want to promote...or oppose. Rather than examining the true nature of something that's proposed, too many people (including the mass media, for the most part) simply define it by its title. Its deliberately misleading title.
"Healthy Forest Initiative?" Puh-leeze. It's amazing that those damned wooded areas survived so long without our stewardship. Thank God for loggers and republicans, lest the great forests die off completely.
This is just one example.
Recently the republicans wanted to change the wording of their now-infamous "nuclear option" regarding a way to eliminate the filibuster in regards to judicial nominations. Analyzing citizen responses to the terminology made them realize that people didn't like the term, so they tried to change the title to "constitutional option."
Too late. Word has it that they wanted to force so-called "liberal media" outlets to change the phrase used to the latter, using the accusation of "media bias" as a stick to force those who would have continued using the former to switch.
Hasn't worked.
Nice try, oh little Gods of spin. Thanks for playing.
posted by Saje Williams at 8:22 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home