Well, I find it interesting that, although it inspired many very thoughtful comments, my question about the media inspired no direct answers. It seems the entire premise of my question was rejected en masse.
But I still think it is a valid question. What is more harmful? Let me ask it another way. What’s more harmful to progressive governance? Right wing press or mainstream press?
(I’m assuming “press” = print).
Short answer is neither. The public in most cases seems to do a good job of distinguishing between clearly biased articles, and (mostly) objective reporting. I don’t know what the numbers are, but I suspect the Washington Post has a vastly larger audience than the Washington Times, and far more credibility.
All of which is irrelevant to “progressive governance”. News is generated in the political realm, and the progressive movement is a lousy “generator”. That’s not the fault of “The Media”, that’s a “personal” problem.
Mainstream press, without a doubt.
It is the mainstream press which, by its lending the aura of credibility to the most non-credible of right wing talking points, which has led to the current tsunami of misinformation and acceptance of outright lies as fact.
They, as much as anyone on the planet, bear responsibility for the current situation. It wasn’t the right wing press which put the illegitimate invasion of Iraq over the top, it was the mainstream press. It wasn’t the right wing press which lent the most credence and validity to Scooter Libby’s pardon. It was the mainstream press. It wasn’t the right wing press which finally convinced the American people that Saddam was a co-conspirator on 9-11. It was the mainstream press.
It will take a lifetime for the mainstream press to begin to make amends for what they have done to this country. And the pitiful thing is that they have not learned a damn thing. Who is it, today, that will likely be the ultimate catalyst that legitimizes a war with Iran in the minds of the American people. It will be the mainstream press.
They are the ones who try and foster the illusion that they are the vanguards at the gate for the American people. They are the ultimate hypocrites.
It’s true; Judith Miller, Thomas Friedman, Tim Russert, and all the rest of their cohort, weren’t FOX employees. And they can’t begin to make up for what they’ve done. Though I could argue at the same time that wall-to-wall Lindsay Lohan is hurting our country like nobody’s business. Their unseriousness is as dangerous as their outright lies.
Still, taking a fight to FOX, for those individuals or outlets with the capacity to have that matter, will have positive repercussions on the corporate media, imo. Again, I think we’re all better off because people decided that Imus’ low-key, persistent bigotry just wasn’t going to fly anymore.
Agreed.
The “Mainstream Press” = and especially TV – changed dramatically. TV News used to operate with a “firewall” between News and Entertainment. Since the 80’s, TV news became totally free-enterprise with no “Public Duty” to report things accurately or educate the public anymore. All profit, ratings and vanity – all the time. How could a responsible news organization compete with the porn that we call news nowadays? The movie “Network” is a prime example of what was happening around that time. News was always a money loser before deregulation and it was supposed to be that way. It was the network or station’s DUTY to keep our brains from turning to jelly – or they could lose their license. Media consolidation made it worse by putting all media into the hands of a handful of global mega-corporations.
And print is fading away with the advent of the internet. Thankfully the internet is creating new ways to find what you want, until that is eaten up and controlled by the mega-corps as well.
There is no more “mainstream media.” Just soul-less self-interested corporate media. And they own the brains of far too many naive Americans.
Mainstream press due to the influence of sponsors, advertisers, and corporate and or vanity owners.
The bottom line has corrupted the media much in the same way it has corrupted the electoral process.
FOX has been a real problem. It’s right wing without being openly right wing. Funny, how simply labeling something “Fair and Balanced” confused so many people for so long. So yeah, I’d have to give them an edge.
But the damage done by corporate news is more insidious because they still have some credibility among the other 75%.
Twenty years ago, most newspapers were independently owned. Now most are owned by chains, and they put corporate interests first.
TV stations are now part of media empires. (The local Fox “news” station constantly pushes their own reality shows like “American Idol” as news stories.)
Corporate interests, more often than not, favor the right wing. There are very few owners are in it out of a sense of mission anymore. It’s all about the bottom line.
Ultimately, I don’t see much of a difference.
The convolutions of the English language prevent me from being able to give you a valid answer. In fact if I gave you a valid answer you might think me a troll and or delusional conspiracy nutcase.
I really do like to think of myself as “progressive” as I think the sum total of my soul leans toward a service to others type of meme yet “progessive” websites have banned me for life considering my “arguments” offensive. Hence my tendency to consider “movements” as mere marketing efforts directed by the all powerful and secretive “Illuminati”.
I did last a mere 48 hours with the “conservative” hannity.com and since then learned that when proposing rational thought to the largest possible audience the only venue was the “left”.
The real answers lie in psychology, B.F.Skinner, Maslow, K Street, Madison Avenue. The problem is I’m an engineer and I know at least something about all of this stuff. The tradesman, the farmer, the “food service” worker doesn’t. I said “I didn’t mean it in the Machivellian way” to a tradesman and he said “What?”.
So in answer to your question. Jay Severin, Boston’s own right wing pundit, the next generation’s Bill ORielly. Yes, most dangerous.
All of us share the view that G.W. and company lost whatever credibility they had with us a very long time ago. We watch MSNBC, listen or watch PBS (for example) and feel as though we are getting more accurate information from those sources than we could find elsewhere. We read articles on liberal blog sites and are convinced that we are getting the straight scoop. Are we?
It seems to me at times that what I find myself agreeing with are articles that point out inaccuracies in BushCo. press conferences or Faux News stories or the ramblings of right wing radio pundits. In other words, what is often believable to me is simply a contradictory reaction to what is obviously false. We react to the MSM. We don’t own newspapers, radio stations, television networks and the like; corporations do. They create the talking points with our predictable reactions in mind.
What I’m trying to say is that, on some days at least, I don’t even trust my reactions to their noise. I feel controlled and directed towards what I am to think and feel about current events. That in turn creates fear or at least anxiety. Perhaps that is the whole point.
for media that would jibe with my thinking aout what was actually happening. Maybe a case of group think, but it helped to say = “yes, that is IT” when an article would appear about corruption and influence peddling. I even like ole Howie Kurtz because as bad as he is, he did have SOME references that sounded as if theymight be true. I’ve given up on so-called news. I am even tired of those who keep dragging in references to them – who cares who is in rehab today or yesterday was sprung from an LA jail? If it ain’t any of the guys we need to keep a close eye on – i.e. the characters running the wh, then forgetaboutit!
Folks in New York take an attitude toward the New York Times much like folks in other communities take Rush Limbaugh. They both are corporate media.
As for the press, the one that tells the most and most subtle lies is the worst. Local papers that carry the AP and columnists like Friedman, Novak, Kristol and the like can be more damaging than the WaPo, NYT, Washington Times, or Wall Street Journal.
By far the most dangerous of all is the business press that tells coporate executives and main street businessmen what they want to hear instead of the truth. As a consequence these same businessmen make decisions, based on illusion, that impact the lives of ordinary worker bees. The American automakers, for example; have wasted 30 years trying to avoid moving to renewable fuels. They have resisted fuel economy, and as a result foreign automakers have taken their markets and resulted in massive layoffs. And here they are again with the business press goading them, pressuring Congress not to increase the automobile fuel efficiency standards.
Coulter wouldn’t matter were it not for the fact that Maureen Dowd is doing a cleaned up version of the same thing.
There’s little doubt in my mind-mainstream press. Many many people who wouldn’t be caught dead watching Faux News or listening to Limbaugh faithfully watch CNN or other ‘legit’ news sources or read the ‘legit’ newspapers and truly believe they are getting the real news…when they are only getting a sightly kinder, gentler Fake news viewpoint. It’s not just Fox news that’s talking about John Edwards haircut over and over or the print news talking about Hilary’s cleavage for gods sake….it’s not just Fox news that lied the country into believing Sadamn was behind 9/11 and are now leading viewers down the garden path all over again concerning Iran.
No as much as I hate Fox news, coulter,limbaugh etc…my real disgust is for what has happened to all the other news stations(national and local) and the print media making the country a nation of fools…a dangerously uninformed nation of fools who don’t even know how truly uniformed they really are.