I blame the media.

[Lyle]

I blame the media for much of the mess we are in now. Just how many times during the last 5 years has the media simply failed to perform its most rudimentary purpose: ask the right questions. The answers almost are secondary. Ask the questions!

In a *free* society (eyeroll), the media's essential function is to serve as a watchdog. Not a lap-dog. In recent times, the media has simply fallen down the job. It has neglected its purpose. It has betrayed the public trust.

The media should have raised hell over the FIRST stolen election. Should have asked the right questions about 9/11. Etc. I feel the most important failure of the media - the one instance that could have changed the direction and events of the last 5 years - concerns the media's virtual blind eye to reporting on the PNAC. It has never even been mentioned. To the best of my knowledge, no main stream media outlet has ever reported on the fact that the whole of the Iraq agenda was laid out in detail nearly a decade ago...by the very same people who are implimenting this plan now. No journalist has pointed out that the whole PNAC agenda could not have advanced to the current status without 9/11. In fact, a 9/11 type event was even suggested in PNAC documents. Taken in aggregate, the actions of this administration look drastically different when framed against the stated goals of the PNAC. The PNAC is the biggest story. It is the thread that tied it all together: the elections, 9/11, oil, Iraq, taxes, everything. Isn't this news?!

The media have reduced themselves - from journalists to propaganda spouting mouthpieces. The true blame is theirs.....

[Skittles]

1. if the media had done its job no way would bush have been installed

if he had been identified as the incompetent, lying cowardly SOB he is......damn, it will always piss me off to think about it

[pretzel4gore]

2. and the persecuting of Clinton....

i go bak to the 90's....it was endless, the 'Clinton's a crook' etc, 27/7/365....they set us up!

[Lyle]

3. I agree.

Clinton did lie - and I don't think that was proper bevavior for a president. However, if lying about a blow job generated THAT much media coverage - lying about 9/11, a war, oil, spying, etc. should generate VOLUMES more media attention. Hey - I'd give the guy a BJ myself if it would get him out of office. :-)

[pansypoo53219]

11. the problem

was the supreme court allowing the paula jones case to go to trial during his administration DURING the new age of 24/7 teevee 'news'.
what were they thinking?

[sasha031]

4. all part of fascism

corporations and state become one, Jenning has said that news pieces were being made in the board room, like we didn't already know. I had hope at one time that they couldn't possibly be that corrupt to endorse such an insane adm., I was wrong. The bottom line is that they had business on the table and the more likely ones that would help it pass were the repukes and to hell with everyone else.

welcome :hi:

[JHB]

6. It goes further than that...

The anti-Clinton campaign would have never sailed if the news organizations hadn't been softened up by over a decade of Reagan-Bush media tactics (shmooze the owners & editors, and suggest that their fine upstanding organization is being used to advance a partisan agenda by ideological "investigative" reporters (or that the reporters have been suckered in by an elaborate propaganda apparatus), give access to those who talk the Reagan talk, cut off those who don't, and let the owners & editors make the "right" decisions that follow from these).

[SteppingRazor]

5. Bull. The blame is Bush's...

Has the media been laughably credulous? Absolutely.

But blaming the media for the situation we are in doesn't make any sense. It's like leaving food out in the kitchen and then blaming the cockroaches when they come out to eat.

The media has made some serious errors in the last few years, especially broadcast media, but certainly all areas shoulder some blame. There's all sorts of reasons for that -- profit becoming more important than professionalism. A skewed view of "objectivity" that results in allowing for two versions of the truth.

But none of this is really the media's fault. Certainly, the media's problems have helped things along, but there is no way I'll blame it all on them, because that takes the burden off the shoudlers it belongs on -- Bush's. I won't scapegoat the media and give that lying thug a pass. No way.

(Full disclosure: I'm a member of the media :hi: )

[bpilgrim]

7. they are a large part of the problem in america today.

M$M consolidation and the death of the fairness act has turned them into mostly mouthpieces for the elite and it has caused incredible harm to our nation.

without the M$M * would've remained an obscure loser.

thank GORE he 'invented' the INTERNETs :->


peace

[Lyle]

8. I see your point...however...

...I'm not implying that we should give george a pass. Rather, I think we should give him impeachment and a prison cell. I simply feel much of this mess could have been nipped in the bud early on - if the media had performed their function.

It is similar to mis-behaved children. Do you fault the child for acting poorly? Yes, certainly. But the parent has a responsibility to keep that behavior in check. And at some point, the responsibility for poor parenting is owned by the parents.

[SteppingRazor]

10. Granted. And as I said...

I don't give the media a complete pass here. I think the problems of the modern media have resulted in Bush essentially getting away with murder. I think the only point we really differ on is how much blame to assign where. I give the lion's share to Bush. Your parent/child analogy is a good one, except for the fact that Bush is a grown man and is wholly accountable for his own actions -- or at least, he ought to be in any decent society. Yes, it's the responsibility of the media to make sure that those in power are always held accountable. But even before that, it is the responsibility of those in power to use that power responsibly. The fact that the media didn't do its job is only relevant because Bush, in the first place, didn't do his.

[bpilgrim]

14. the fact that the M$M didn't do their jobs allows bush not to do his

that is the major problem and we will be saddled with even worse than * unless this problem is resolved, however considering where we are today as a society i don't see it ever being resolved since in today's world the corporations demand their right to 'free-speech'.

our free press was constituted for this very reason, to minimize corruption, NOT to encourage and coddle it.

peace

[pretzel4gore]

20. overgeneralized condemnations are used....

saying 'the media' and forgetting that there are vast swaths of media which never get attention outside their limit of range is a problem, yes, and lumping the whole into one actually aids the bad guys (sorta a 'shootem all, let god sortem out' idea) who can then hide behind the not guilty, but bush is a result of a mass media which criminally disregarded the facts starting many years ago, and one day this mess will have to be sorted out...in the meanwhile, offsetting the lying liars is job one (and quick panaceas maybe only effective way to do it)..i often refer to the media as 'pigmedia' knowing full well kieth oberman, michael moore, lewis lapham, the nation, bill moyers, AAR, thom hartman, bill press, radioleft, pacifica, elements of the nytimes/washpost/pbs/and the networks all are not 'pigs' and are fighting using what's available to them....nevertheless, the 'effective' mass media is a pigmedia- bush's continuation is proof of that

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

12. I have to disagree w/you and agree with the premise of thread

What passes for media today is frequently little more than propaganda.

The am radio talk stations are almost totally right wing propaganda.

The media is generating distractions - like the "War on Christmas." In many cases, it is also deliberately withholding news, repeating lies without checking the facts and/or slanting coverage. Look at Judith Miller at the NYT. Look at the entire Fox "News" Channel.

[malaise]

9. And where was the Democratic party

on those issues?

[sasha031]

13. And where was the Democratic party

That sounds like a right wing talking point if I ever heard one.

A good place to start is Media Matters http://mediamatters.org/ then tell me how fair the media is to the more progressive side.
I longer bother to watch tveee, unless it's the daily show. I am so thankful to DU for the beginning of self education.

[malaise]

19. Right wing..Me???

I hold no brief for the media, indeed since they're owned by the corporations, I don't expect them to challenge the establishment but I did expect the Democratic party to raise many of these issues. It seems to me that the mainstream democratic party remained silent on many of these issues. John Conyers is easily the most visible democrat on most serious issues.

[Greyhound]

15. They abrogated their duty long ago. When the suits in NYC

spiked the tobacco suit so they could make the deal that netted them (personally) millions, it was apparent that M$M was no longer interested in news. Cronkite & Co. warned us about this in the 70's.

[LibDemAlways]

16. The corporate whores are all shills for the

Bush Crime Family. They helped install the chimp and they keep him propped up by underreporting or failing to report a shitload of criminal activity, casting what they do report in the most favorable light possible - as in, the domestic spying was necessary to 'protect' us, and creating as many distractions as possible. Why else is Laci Peterson a household name and PNAC isn't?

The anthrax attack just after 9/11 was a reminder and warning to the Dems in Congress and to the corporate whores - step out of line at your peril. We have the power to kill you and we're not afraid to use it.

[MindPilot]

17. Here's an LTTE I wrote a while ago.

I sent it to most of the major media outlets, didn't get a single response.


I blame the media. Yes, you. Newspapers, TV networks, cable news services, you are all answerable for the death and destruction that has once again visited our shores.

Way back in 1999 anybody with two brain cells and a modem knew George Bush’s resume was iffy. You knew it too, but you praised his statesmanship and intellect.

You knew the 2000 election was rigged, but you didn’t report it.

You knew there were serious questions surrounding 9/11, but you didn’t ask them.

You knew that the reasons to invade Iraq were lies, but you simply retold them.

You knew the 2004 election was rigged, but you didn’t report it.

While Bush and his cronies bullied, stole, and lied, you sheltered them with your own lies of omission.

You have abdicated your responsibility to speak truth to power and because of that America’s reputation lies in ruins, a major city is destroyed and tens of thousands of your countrymen are dead.

Being a mouthpiece for the Republican Party probably paid you very well. Was it worth it?


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4665566&mesg_id=4665566

[Harry S Truman]

18. You are so right

I've worked in the MSM for 25 years, and all I see anymore is a vapid desire to appeal to 20-somethings and "younger readers." We'll bend over backward to put in brainless information and be sure stories are no more than 12 inches long. Sort of like a bad TV news broadcast in print.
It's a joke.

[Berry Cool]

21. I simply cannot agree.

It's true that the ownership of the media by huge corporate conglomerates has made a mess of things and has made it all the harder to get a message out that does anything but reinforce the status quo. But there are people in the media who still try to do it--despite all the odds against them. They didn't ALL stand by silently and allow all the things that have happened in the past few years to happen. Some have tried to speak out, and still do.

And I have to agree also that when it comes down to it, those who commit the wrongdoing in the first place need to be held primarily responsible for their actions. It is not the media's job to make those in power behave, but to report on them when they misbehave so as to serve as a check on them should they be tempted to do so. To assume that they can't be held responsible for their misbehavior--that all people with power will inevitably misbehave and take advantage of their power, and that therefore the media who fail to adequately report on that misbehavior are responsible for it...that's ridiculous.