Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's much deeper than that. The root of the problem is that people are stupid enough to eat whatever crap is fed to them by the corporate media. That won't change, they'll just find someone else to follow blindly.
I'll be happy if we can just ban pharmaceutical advertising. There is no reason for folks to "ask their doctor" about any drug. If the doctor treating you thinks it's warranted, they will bring it up. We don't need people who feel a little unhappy running to their doctors and asking for anti-depressants, and that's what we have now.
I think THAT alone is responsible for our government problems. Because those drugs keep people tame.
Somehow, in the last few decades, people have decided that if they're depressed, they either need to get more depressed or take a pill.
NO, your other option is to open a can of whoop-ass on what is depressing you, and take care of it. Nobody does that anymore, and yet people wonder why. People wonder WHY our government and big corporations have gotten away with so much.
Social engineering, which comes from corporations owning the news, and pharmaceuticals. Call me crazy, but that's my theory.
It's much deeper than that. The root of the problem is that people are stupid enough to eat whatever crap is fed to them by the corporate media. That won't change, they'll just find someone else to follow blindly.
I think you're right, but here's how I look at it--if there were more free and independent unbiased media sources, they might be more likely to eat that vs. "crap." I know older people who are sure that everything they hear on cable news has to be absolutely true because they think it's against the law to say something that's not. We're in a sad state, but better, more unbiased information would at least feed people real news vs. a political and/or corporate agenda.
I think you're right, but here's how I look at it--if there were more free and independent unbiased media sources, they might be more likely to eat that vs. "crap."
I doubt it. Crap is much easier to eat. It doesn't require any effort or thought. That's how we wound up where we are now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547
We're in a sad state, but better, more unbiased information would at least feed people real news vs. a political and/or corporate agenda.
Well, we eat it up when it's put in front of us. It's a consequence of having a free press, because the quality of a free press will be directly determined by the people. Which is why I'm not bothered by these corporations, I'm bothered by the larger issue of whatever it is about our society that spawns this garbage.
The only alternative is some type of government intervention which is not the direction to go in. Just another entity (a monopolistic one at that) telling us what to think.
I doubt it. Crap is much easier to eat. It doesn't require any effort or thought. That's how we wound up where we are now.
Stupid people are nothing new, but not all people are stupid.
Well, we eat it up when it's put in front of us. It's a consequence of having a free press, because the quality of a free press will be directly determined by the people. Which is why I'm not bothered by these corporations, I'm bothered by the larger issue of whatever it is about our society that spawns this garbage.
The only alternative is some type of government intervention which is not the direction to go in. Just another entity (a monopolistic one at that) telling us what to think.
Here's where we disagree--we don't have a free press if it's controlled by just a few companies--that's a monopoly. Monopolies can completely control the information they put out. A free press means that it's not controlled by other entities or groups--their job is just to put the news out there without a spin. Editorials and pundits are one thing, but it's a dangerous thing when all the facts are filtered through an agenda.
Here's a question for those in doubt about corporations controlling the media.
Did you ever stop to wonder WHY, that in many cases, there is a STARK contrast between what you read and hear in the major media, and the blogosphere?
In fact, when the major media outlets DO talk about what the bloggers are talking about, it's usually to offer a weak, opposing view. Ever notice that?
Nothing is absolute of course, but this trend is far too common for there not to be an agenda.
There are plenty of independent media outlets out there. The National Review and The Nation are both self-supporting and are acclaimed by the Right and Left respectively. How about Pacifica Radio?
The Washington Post is still family-owned as is The New York Times. The Wall Street Jouranal is owned by Fox but it was always conservative leaning.
The Internet brings you any media outlet you want. News from North Korea, Iran, Al Qaeda, the Nazis? Its all there at the click of a mouse. The point is you have more options than ever.
There are plenty of independent media outlets out there. The National Review and The Nation are both self-supporting and are acclaimed by the Right and Left respectively. How about Pacifica Radio?
The Washington Post is still family-owned as is The New York Times. The Wall Street Jouranal is owned by Fox but it was always conservative leaning.
The Internet brings you any media outlet you want. News from North Korea, Iran, Al Qaeda, the Nazis? Its all there at the click of a mouse. The point is you have more options than ever.
You can find anything anywhere......... that's not the problem. Folks will not spend their lives hunting for the truth and trying to discern what is and isn't.
The problem is, major media. The stuff that everybody sees. Because after all, we're a democracy. We vote for politicians. I'll say that again a different way. Our politicians are put in office by a consensus of opinion.
The Internet brings you any media outlet you want. News from North Korea, Iran, Al Qaeda, the Nazis? Its all there at the click of a mouse. The point is you have more options than ever.
Agreed.
I happen to work for a large national media group (Tribune Company).
It isn't the media that is at the core of the problem, it is a mass audience who only wants to read and hear what they believe to be true anyway.
They don't want to hear that they are wrong, they don't want to diligently see both sides, they want news that agrees with their set opinions. CNN and FOX are perfect examples of news sources that knew their audience and gave them what they wanted to hear.
It's not so much THEM....it is US....we are a lazy society.
Last edited by GloryB; 10-20-2011 at 09:53 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know older people who are sure that everything they hear on cable news has to be absolutely true because they think it's against the law to say something that's not. We're in a sad state, but better, more unbiased information would at least feed people real news vs. a political and/or corporate agenda.
