Does Anyone Here Honestly Believe That Every Big News Story...

[arwalden]

... is some sort of "cover" or "diversion" to take our attention away from some other potentially embarrassing news story or revelation about this administration?

Please... raise your hand if you do. Step up and have the balls to admit it. I'd like to know who you are and if possible, could you please explain why it is that you believe such a thing. On what evidence or authority can do you base your belief?

[cyr330]

1. That depends

I certainly don't believe that every big story is some kind of conspiracy to divert attention away from the really ugly news, but think of examples like the Swift Boat Veterans. . . That was a deliberate lie that exploded into breathless headlines with no basis in truth whatsoever. It completely managed to pull the wool over the public's eyes and helped to place the squatter back in the WH.

I realize that this is not the kind of big news you're talking about, but the Repigs DO have the ability to "create" news in some respects. They control Congress, thus they can pull all kinds of legislative levers to make news.

[TwilightZone]

2. Does anyone here have to use the phrase

"have the balls" to apply to everything?

Some of our fellow DUers don't happen to have balls.

To answer your question, it's pretty obvious that some people do believe that everything in the media is a diversion from whatever topic they believe should be getting the most press.

[mopaul]

5. 'balls' is a state of mind

[TwilightZone]

7. That may certainly be true, but...

that doesn't change the fact that it's an excruciatingly overused phrase.

[bloom]

8. It's also a sexist use of language...

and thought - by implication.

[mopaul]

3. i believe that every story is exploited for all it's warworth

like with 9/11, it was explioted brilliantly and still is to this day.

[Sarojin]

4. imo, it's not that they are "cover"

so much as the bizarre emphasis on stories with much less impact on the current state of affairs, and often times politically biased coverage, serve to distract media attention, and therefore public awareness, from stories damaging to the GOP and the administration.

For example, I saw yet another story about Sandy Berger removing documents from the archives yesterday. We all know that none of the documents were originals, blah blah.

When was the last time you saw a story about Rove, or downing street memo, or the stolen election?

And what about Dan Rather. Clearly the memos were fed to him to create a diversion from the real story, which was true and stood without the documents.

I think all the stories are hyped and exaggerated for ratings, and there is proof that Rove invents stories (or plants bugs in his own office) to damage or smear opponents and distract public attention.

Isn't the Iraq war a huge diversion for Empire building and raiding of the coffers?

[Dr Fate]

11. Or sharks, or missing white kids, or celebrity trials & gossip.

I think you explain it correctly.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

6. LOL, seems like that sometimes

It's one of those things that annoys me about DU: any big story that comes out, you can count on someone to post that it's a deliberate attempt to divert our attention from <insert Bush Administration failure here>.

But this is a big community, and you're just going to get that. It doesn't so much annoy me anymore, I just find it part of our quirky charm. :)

[applegrove]

9. News is just reporting the bare facts these days.

[Dr Fate]

10. Like the Roberts nomination during Rovegate?

Nahh- couldn't be.

But seriously- I think is does happen sometimes. Like the Roberts announcement.

[berni_mccoy]

12. Stop IT! You are distracting us from more potentially embarrassing news

about the administration!

[arwalden]

13. Oops.... Sorry.

:rofl: