i am inclined to agree regarding the reliability of information available in the media...but not because i believe in any sort of "deep state" conspiracy paranoia...the media have always been mouthpieces for elite worldviews that present he interests of wealth and power ans the "national interests" and label anyone who takes umbrage with that as a brain-dead slug or a worthless traitor engaging in "class warfare"...one of the points i was trying to get across about last year's circus of a presidential election ( a clown won with his side-show freak running mate ) was that the divisiveness and scurrilous attacks that partisan media mounted against one candidate or another was nothing new...they are and have been commercial entities created to turn a buck so the naturally gravitate to the partisan views of some segment of the population and the advertisers who are trying to reach them...they tailor content to fit a general worldview and use specifics to manipulate that opinion...fox...msnbc...cnn...( and let's not leave out the n y times or that home of yellow journalism the wall street journal...talk about unrestricted class warfare ) all that news is distorted and you can almost always read someone's political views by what outlets they choose to patronize...none of them are trustworthy because they all have a corporate agenda and a need to manipulate your thinking to maximize their profitability..it isn't about objective news..it's about the share holders...so...you could characterize media as stenographers regurgitating the current vogue of agitptop emanating from elite centers that breitbart wants me to believe is a cabalistic "deep state" instead of the "business as usual" system that has been in place since 1789..or you could just turn your back on it...maybe read a few books...and just look around and think about what is going on in your neck of the woods and how it relates, or doesn't, to what the doyens, doges, and pundits have to say...don't let them confuse you.
No comments:
Post a Comment