Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Al Gore’s Rolling Stone Article – How The Corporate Media Turns The Left Against Democrats

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
TomCADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 10:09 PM
Original message
Al Gore’s Rolling Stone Article – How The Corporate Media Turns The Left Against Democrats
Edited on Wed Jun-22-11 10:21 PM by TomCADem
I am sure you have heard about Al Gore’s recent article in Rolling Stone. The corporate media coverage of Gore’s article perfectly illustrates how the left is being manipulated by the corporate media into blaming Democrats and giving Republicans a free pass. The articles have the following headlines:

“Al Gore slams Obama on climate change.”
“Gore Blasts Obama for Not Fighting Climate Change.”
“Gore: Obama Has 'Failed to Stand Up' on Global Warming.”
“Gore: On global warming, Obama has changed little.”
“Gore Faults Obama on Global Warming.”
“Gore faults Obama on global warming.”
“Gore: Obama has 'failed'”

Wow! That must be some can of whoop ass the Al Gore opened on President Obama! This then leads Politico to follow-up with this story, “Gore voices left's climate grumbling,” which describes the now familiar narrative that the left feels abandoned and uninspired about supporting President Obama in 2012.

So, most DUers are probably now thinking that Al Gore must have written a treatise on the failures of President Obama. Indeed, President Obama must be the single greatest impediment to confronting climate change. You have to wonder whether the title of Al Gore’s Rolling Stone article is “Barrack Hussien Obama: Climate Change Anti-Christ?” I guess we should all stay at home on election night in 2012, right?
Well, you would be surprised to find out that the actual title of Al Gore’s Rolling Stone article is: “Climate of Denial: Can science and the truth withstand the merchants of poison?

What? Where is President Obama in the title to Al Gore’s article? If you then proceed to actually read Gore's article, rather than the propaganda masquarading as journalism that pollutes the media, you will find some critiques of President Obama, but you will also find that a large portion of the article reviews the facts behind climate change, which most of the stories discussing Gore’s article ignore. In addition, you will also find the following passages, which are are ignored in the above referenced articles:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/climate-of-denial-20110622?page=1


To sell their false narrative, the Polluters and Ideologues have found it essential to undermine the public's respect for Science and Reason by attacking the integrity of the climate scientists. That is why the scientists are regularly accused of falsifying evidence and exaggerating its implications in a greedy effort to win more research grants, or secretly pursuing a hidden political agenda to expand the power of government. Such slanderous insults are deeply ironic: extremist ideologues — many financed or employed by carbon polluters — accusing scientists of being greedy extremist ideologues.
***
Unlike access to the "public square" of early America, access to television requires large amounts of money. Thomas Paine could walk out of his front door in Philadelphia and find a dozen competing, low-cost print shops within blocks of his home. Today, if he traveled to the nearest TV station, or to the headquarters of nearby Comcast — the dominant television provider in America — and tried to deliver his new ideas to the American people, he would be laughed off the premises. The public square that used to be a commons has been refeudalized, and the gatekeepers charge large rents for the privilege of communicating to the American people over the only medium that really affects their thinking. "Citizens" are now referred to more commonly as "consumers" or "the audience."
***
In the new ecology of political discourse, special-interest contributors of the large sums of money now required for the privilege of addressing voters on a wholesale basis are not squeamish about asking for the quo they expect in return for their quid. Politicians who don't acquiesce don't get the money they need to be elected and re-elected. And the impact is doubled when special interests make clear — usually bluntly — that the money they are withholding will go instead to opponents who are more than happy to pledge the desired quo. Politicians have been racing to the bottom for some time, and are presently tunneling to new depths. It is now commonplace for congressmen and senators first elected decades ago — as I was — to comment in private that the whole process has become unbelievably crass, degrading and horribly destructive to the core values of American democracy.
Largely as a result, the concerns of the wealthiest individuals and corporations routinely trump the concerns of average Americans and small businesses. There are a ridiculously large number of examples: eliminating the inheritance tax paid by the wealthiest one percent of families is considered a much higher priority than addressing the suffering of the millions of long-term unemployed; Wall Street's interest in legalizing gambling in trillions of dollars of "derivatives" was considered way more important than protecting the integrity of the financial system and the interests of middle-income home buyers. It's a long list.


What? Did anyone else see this sharp critique of the news media in any of the news media articles covering Al Gore’s story? I didn’t. Oh, and what does Al Gore think of President Obama? I guess the corporate media must have missed the following prominent passages:


First of all, anyone who honestly examines the incredible challenges confronting President Obama when he took office has to feel enormous empathy for him: the Great Recession, with the high unemployment and the enormous public and private indebtedness it produced; two seemingly interminable wars; an intractable political opposition whose true leaders — entertainers masquerading as pundits — openly declared that their objective was to ensure that the new president failed; a badly broken Senate that is almost completely paralyzed by the threat of filibuster and is controlled lock, stock and barrel by the oil and coal industries; a contingent of nominal supporters in Congress who are indentured servants of the same special interests that control most of the Republican Party; and a ferocious, well-financed and dishonest campaign poised to vilify anyone who dares offer leadership for the reduction of global-warming pollution.

In spite of these obstacles, President Obama included significant climate-friendly initiatives in the economic stimulus package he presented to Congress during his first month in office. With the skillful leadership of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and committee chairmen Henry Waxman and Ed Markey, he helped secure passage of a cap-and-trade measure in the House a few months later. He implemented historic improvements in fuel-efficiency standards for automobiles, and instructed the Environmental Protection Agency to move forward on the regulation of global-warming pollution under the Clean Air Act. He appointed many excellent men and women to key positions, and they, in turn, have made hundreds of changes in environmental and energy policy that have helped move the country forward slightly on the climate issue. During his first six months, he clearly articulated the link between environmental security, economic security and national security — making the case that a national commitment to renewable energy could simultaneously reduce unemployment, dependence on foreign oil and vulnerability to the disruption of oil markets dominated by the Persian Gulf reserves. And more recently, as the issue of long-term debt has forced discussion of new revenue, he proposed the elimination of unnecessary and expensive subsidies for oil and gas.


It would seem that the corporate news media read an entirely different article than the one Gore actually wrote. Or, they were simply reading the script that their corporate masters told them to publish: Blame Democrats and Give Republicans a Free Pass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
RandomThoughts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 10:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. They may be on a different Internet shard,
Edited on Wed Jun-22-11 10:16 PM by RandomThoughts
and literally be reading different articles.

Although if that is true, It would not help posting it here would it. :)





Remember when Kerry had never heard of building 7, or when Bachmann had never heard of the quote they said she said. And many other things.

How about the Asian CEO that did not know the salaries of CEOs in the USA, compared to his.

How about the posts in this forum that are not true.



How about the fact that I am due beer and travel money and that has not arrived.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 10:14 PM
Response to Original message
2. TLDR / eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomCADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Even Though Gore's Article Is Eight Pages, You Should Read It. Don't Rely On The Corporate Media!
I understand the excuse that Al Gore's actual article is too long to read. I only included a few excerpts, but his article is very comprehensive and insightful. Also, reading his article perfectly illustrates how the corporate media manipulates the public into Blaming Democrats and Giving Republicans a Free Pass by creating a false rift between President Obama and Al Gore. This is not an article about the left being unhappy with President Obama. Al Gore's article is a sharp critique of the corporate news media, and his expresses great empathy and admiration for the accomplishments of President Obama.

Nonetheless, regardless of media outlet, the false narrative of Al Gore bashing President Obama is repeated and recited. Sadly, rather than read what Al Gore actually wrote, many liberals read and rely on the corporate media and post such articles on DU, thus feeding into the false narrative perpetrated by the corporate media, which Al Gore is truly attacking.

So, it may be a long read, but I encourage folks to actually read what Al Gore actually said about the "Merchants of Poison," and he was not talking about President Obama.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/climate-of-denial-20110622?page=1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. K&R
Can you say: Obfuscate?

How about M$M? The media is not, in any way shape or form, our friends.
If ever I do another protest, it will be on the sidewalk in front of their offices from 11 to 2, holding a sign informing the public that the people who work in the offices behind me are a bunch of liars.

Biggest hold back is finding someone who would bail me out for the 'crime' of exercising free speech.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #4
41. Al Gore's 2007 book
The Assault on Reason was largly ignored by M$Greedia while they followed Sarah Palin around like animals on leashes.
"A visionary analysis of how the politics of fear, secrecy, cronyiam and blind faith has combined with the degradation of the public sphere to create an environment dangerously hostile to reason."

The corporate media hate Al Gore - he's bad for their corporations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ozymanithrax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Sometimes it takes more than a 30 second sound bite to explain things.
I mean, really, Too Long, didn't read?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlabamaLibrul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
3. People who are part of the left, I trust, form opinions based on info from somewhere other than
F'in Politico.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dana_b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #3
24. we do actually read the articles
and look at the actions of our elected leaders - unlike a lot of the media and the right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 11:26 PM
Response to Original message
7. ouch, and what is on the front page of DU?
Once again, the M$M rings its bell and we salivate like Pavlov dogs.

Is it dinner time again? Oh boy, it's bullsh*t, my favorite!!! Wag, wag, wag, munch, munch, munch.

Unfortunately, the lie is once again halfway around the world, as the truth struggles to get its boots on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. sickening, isn't it? can't even wait 2 hours to find out the truth
but no, if it makes obama look bad, hammer him good and put it up on the front page.

how fucking sickening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #9
21. Lather, Rinse, Repeat...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 02:12 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
2banon Donating Member (794 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 12:27 AM
Response to Original message
8. good job! k/r'd
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoeyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 01:52 AM
Response to Original message
10. Everyone knows how the corporations turn the left against Democrats.
They buy them off so they end up being Free Trade pushing wankers like Gore was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #10
44. Exactly..
... it's their actions, not the ridiculous pile of shit that passes for an objective news media in this country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Denzil_DC Donating Member (268 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 04:46 AM
Response to Original message
12. K&R n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tsuki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 05:47 AM
Response to Original message
13. I think Jon Stewart nailed it. They look for the sensational because
they are EFFN Lazy. What do they do all day long?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gtar100 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #13
34. Blaming their malfeasance on laziness is letting off the hook too.
The corporate media creates the sensationalism around a story. Imagine if they did to Vitter what they did to Weiner. Or, better, if they highlighted global climate change by running a story over and over with all the visuals and emphasis that it deserves.

I think they are more deliberate in their story selection. They are outright ignoring important stories or at best speaking very quietly about them while shouting out inconsequential or less damaging stories. They create the sensationalism through their presentation. The issue really comes down to what they *choose* to present to the public through their media channels and how they present it.

Laziness is the more palatable label they are willing to cop to. From my perspective they are working tirelessly to obfuscate the really important stories and accentuate the marginally interesting and non-threatening stories. They are unwilling to have progressive Democrats on their media shows in the same numbers as they put troglodyte Republicans on their airwaves. Laziness? No, they went out of their way to make sure Republicans continue to have the dominant voice on our airwaves, despite Democratic majorities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 06:02 AM
Response to Original message
14. The Democrats turn the left against Democrats...
The M$M didn't kill the public option and force us to buy overpriced insurance from private entities that increase profits by denying medical care to us.

The Democrats did that all on their lonesome.

There's a whole slew of issues we could go through on this but the conversations have all been repeated to the point of utter numbness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. you don't think the M$M helped at all
The M$M has not pushed the narrative that "socialized medicine doesn't work"?
The M$M has not buried the simple facts that we pay far more per capita on health care than places like Europe, Japan, Canada, Australia, where they live just as long as we do or longer (on average)?
The M$M didn't promote the tea party as this huge and important grass roots movement that hated Obama care?
The M$M didn't go after Michael Moore's "Sicko"? (lead, of course, by that guy that Obama nominated to be Surgeon General)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #15
23. This is not the case of a failing memory
Something is afoot here.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. Yes, that is it for me.
POLICY has made me unhappy with the Dems, and nothing else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #18
26. sometimes the gnashing over policy has been over-blown
For example, the budget cuts at the time of the budget deal. Oh, from the wailing here it was the end of the world that Obama agreed to $70 billion in budget cuts instead of shutting down the government.

It depends on how you get your information. People get upset about policy and the administration, often because they read an article with the theme "I am mad as hell at the Obama administration because of this policy". It is quite possible though that the article where you get the information is an unfair attack, but it is easy to get swept up in what seems like a plausible argument when nobody is giving the other side of the story, or more background information.

Since the victory of Obama, DU has been deluged with article after article after rant about "this betrayal" or "that betrayal" and often it seems like hype. http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/131
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #14
22. You don't recall the "Death Panels", that the media was playing up during that time?
Thats interesting.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xphile Donating Member (565 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #22
37. Do you remember the Democrats effectively calling that out as a lie?
Oh right because it didn't happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #14
29. +1 nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #14
40. Not sure why you think that example is applicable, given that the left overwhelmingly supports the
affordable care act.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #40
50. It's a band-aid on a sucking chest wound..
Of course it's better than nothing at all but it's certainly not going to rein in costs and everyone knows that is the real problem.

A man sentenced to death is usually glad to get a reprieve to a life sentence.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
16. K&R! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MilesColtrane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
17. Big K&R
Nice post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
19. The false narrative driven by the corporate media on this essay only serves to prove the validity
of Gore's primary points re: the dysfunctional effect of the corporate media on reasonable or logical debate in this modern version of the American Public Square.

Thanks for the thread, TomCADem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #19
27. Yeah, if only Gore had been in a position to do something about it
when Clinton was dismantling the last vestiges of protection against media monopolization in the 90s.

As usual, another Dem "leader" who is one week late and a thousand dollars short. Ironic, for a DLC founder like Mr. Gore to have such limited historical memory, given his push to neutralize the left out of the Dem party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. A few points for you to take in to consideration.
Edited on Thu Jun-23-11 02:03 PM by Uncle Joe
1. The primary dysfunctionality of television, radio and to a lesser degree print are their top down, one way method of information delivery and dissemination along with the high cost to advertise.

2. Television has always been a monopoly at one time having only one network, that being NBC.

3. The elimination of the Fairness Doctrine; did far more damage than the 96 Telecommunications Act, this is what turned some semblance of logical debate in to blatant propaganda.

4. When the 96 Act was passed, it was a trade-off increasing the scope and size of the Internet; allowing it into more schools and rural areas, at the time the Republicans controlled both houses of Congress.

5. Common sense and logic should tell you, the true answer to the dysfunctional top down, one way corporate media method is the continued growth and development of the instantaneous, mass, two way method of communication, information delivery and dissemination as embodied by the Internet.

6. Nothing has enhanced the American Peoples' freedom of speech power more than the Internet since the First Amendment was adopted over 200 year ago.

7. Al Gore has been the preeminent political champion for opening the Internet to the people, to my knowledge, he's the only political leader with a Webbie Award.

8. The corporate media trashed Gore, ie: "Al Gore claimed to have invented the Internet" etc. etc. for the better part of two years prior to the selection of 2000 precisely because he was the preeminent champion of the Internet. They; owners and upper management if no one else, saw the growing influence of the democracy empowering Internet as threatening their one way, top down business model, stranglehold on information delivery and dissemination and the resulting erosion of their wealth, power and influence, ie; ability to brain wash the people.

In short the corporate media played Zeus to Gore's Prometheus, and they're still doing it today, that's why the AP and other corporate media outlets couldn't muster enough integrity to address the primary focus of his critique in this essay.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 12:13 PM
Response to Original message
20. Yes, it is the media's fault that Obama supports "clean coal"
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beartracks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
25. K & R n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
30. k&r...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 06:56 PM
Response to Original message
31. K&R...nt


Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hay rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 08:37 PM
Response to Original message
32. Just like Al predicted.
From the article:

"Even writing an article like this one carries risks; opponents of the president will excerpt the criticism and strip it of context."

Great article- worth the read. K&R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
certainot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
33. it is the left that gives the republicans a free ride by ignoring their most important weapon
talk radio swiftboated gore and sold the election theft and is the main culprit here too but the left has no fucking clue.

it is the most important component in selling global warming denial but is completely ignored by the collective left, which has NO organized in your face response to the coordinated repetition blasting from 1000 radio stations every day. without limbaugh's week long pounding of 'email gate' there wouldn't even have been an 'email gate'.

the gore article just comes out and the local RW blowhard has three hours of climate denial with two industry reps on the largest station in the state, the one that does the state university sports broadcasting, thereby getting their endorsement for limbaugh and hannity and more global warming denial.

the talk radio monopoly leads the global warming denial, making the absurd acceptable for the rest of the media through sheer volume and repetition, and the only reason they can do that is the talk radio blowhards get a free speech free ride- there is no readable record of what they emphasize and the collective left ignores it, while it eats our lunch every day, dominates messaging and decides what is and what isn't acceptable in US media.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluesbreaker Donating Member (205 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
35. I hate to agree with the corporate media . . .
But their characterization of Gore's take on Obama's environmental policies is accurate. He's done very little good and a lot of harm on the environmental front, from coddling oil companies to promoting nuclear power and ignoring the impacts of Fukushima to the ocean and the atmosphere (in the Pacific Northwest, Hawaii and elsewhere in the U.S.).

Richard Nixon was a better environmental president than Obama. Nixon created the EPA, Obama's EPA bends over backward to avoid penalizing corporate polluters. Gore was way too easy on the president, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
36. Marking for later read
thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
38. Corporate owned and friendly DINOcraps do far more damage than the corporate media they helped
create, play to, use for cover for their wrong doing, and support.

That includes should have been President Gore, who was a tireless worker for moneyed interests and facilitated much of what he opposes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
39. "...opponents of the president will excerpt the criticism and strip it of context."
Edited on Sat Jun-25-11 06:45 PM by underpants
PAge 6

Yep they did. Thanks for pointing this out Tom.

We don't like in a world of reality. It really all is a fake wrestling match (while our cars are getting looted in the parking lot)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #39
46. It's as if suddenly we're all excited to believe corporate media.
2008 elected no new media ownership. The same folks I wouldn't trust if they told me water was wet in 2006, suddenly they're going to play fair now?

Good reads up there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #46
48. Robb...you....
No it is amazing the number of years I have been on DU and know not to believe a bit of what headlines say let alone the nonsense in the stories you just can't be that relentless. They are - my god it is amazing how the general public can have an event or a story that they watched twisted around RIGHT AFTER THEY SAW IT and shaped into something else.... something else completely different.

Just this week McCain basically blamed Reagan for Afghanistan being the launching point for 9/11 and it turned into a "rebuke" (Morning Joe) of WV Senator Manchin speaking the obvious truth. The Joe crowd lead off to Manchin by asking him when John Denver released "Country Roads" - seriously.

People like you and I are attuned to how much we are lied to and a moment of not doubting every single thing we read on "the news" lets in an illness that the rest of the country (and it is remarkably stark in our country) has succumbed to years ago.

Lies are like water -they go were they can. Only a watertight seal stops them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoodleyAppendage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 07:30 PM
Response to Original message
42. The media blames Democrats because the Democrats LET THEM DO IT.
It would be a different situation if Democrats were unified in their media roll-outs and stuck to their rhetorical guns, like the Republicans do with robotic consistency. If you don't stand up for your beliefs, then don't expect the media to do it for you.

J
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Eagle 718 Donating Member (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #42
43. It's hard for the Dems to sell their message when the media mostly features Republicans.
That's not to say the Dems couldn't do a better job messaging but when Republicans consistantly outnumber them on the Sunday shows and the cable channels while parroting GOP talking points that makes the job twice as hard for the Dems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoodleyAppendage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. True, which is why we need to be doubly better in our messaging. n/t
J
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Eagle 718 Donating Member (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #45
47. Agreed nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-25-11 09:34 PM
Response to Original message
49. & I Thought It Because Dems Won't Prosecute Torture & Bank Fraud, & Rip Apart Public Education
Edited on Sat Jun-25-11 09:35 PM by NashVegas
thanks for informing me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddiemom Donating Member (70 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
51. corporate media
So Right. Many say the media got scared after being accused of being "left wing " constantly and set off to prove they were not. This was all a smokescreen from the Right, who freaked when any of their policies were questioned. Combined with a media lock by ultra conservative foreign interests (we all speak English, Mr. Murdock, but you're still a foreign interest) the scenario has gotten ludicrous. Certainly there are some liberally slanted networks, but research and backup give them credit. Fox viewers are not only often misinformed, but hilarious in their talking points, Watch any unbiased "crowd interview." They have their talking points down pat, but are at a total loss to explain them. ( Because Sean Hannity said so). Unbiased coverage, however,is increasingly hard to find.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theFrankFactor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
52. I Like the Way Al Fought in the 2000 election & His Running Mate Was Awesome!
Edited on Sun Jun-26-11 04:59 PM by theFrankFactor
What a guy! Everyone knows Democrats are victims!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 02:30 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC