Bacchus Posted October 27, 2003 Report Posted October 27, 2003 Ever saw "wag the Dog"? it's a movie with DeNiro and Hoffman where 2 marketing/comm pros save the president from scandal by putting together a fake war, thus manipulating the population into forgetting the scandal? I always thought that this comedy was weirdly prescient if somewhat paranoid Well, i was reading an article about our leaders shadows. Those men's jobs are to coordinate the output from the seats of powers (White House, Downing Street, etc). White House current "spin doctor", Karl Rove, is rumored to be the one responsible for the discovered CIA agent, Valerie Plame. Wilson (Plame's husband) was the White House special envoy sent in Nigeria to look into a story of uranium export towrad Irak. Wilson publicly announced that it was "inconsistant", he supposedly was going against his Bosses wish to remain silent. This one out of many such stories.Same story about about Allaster Campbell, Blair personal advisor. he dismissed himself in a hurry after the death of David Kelly. since it is a known facts that TV is the new political arena, those men powers would be vast. Mix it with Internet and an illimited supply of what they call "granular information" on a vast amount of social/ideological group (thus they can "tweak" people at!@#$%^&*ude in almost every circle), they can do pretty much anything they want. Spin Doctors mind tricks what's your thoughts on that? Do you think the ends justify the means? Would you feel betrayed if you knew for a fact that facts have been manipulated? Can something be done about it, or should be? What did it tells us about politics?
Bargeld Posted October 27, 2003 Report Posted October 27, 2003 weirdly prescient if somewhat paranoid
Yupa Posted October 27, 2003 Report Posted October 27, 2003 that was a boring movie dustin hoffman is not a versatile actor...I'm tired of his big nose, funny voice and lame acting
MonteZuma Posted October 27, 2003 Report Posted October 27, 2003 The amount of spin doctoring certainly has increased in recent times. Sometimes it is incredibly blatant and yet the media doesn't bat an eyelid. The quality of reporting by the media seems to be getting worse and worse. News is more about pictures and less about information than it has ever been. I think politicians are capitalising on the media's incompetence. Facts are being manipulated constantly - the fictional "imminent threat of the use of WMDs" by Saddam was a classic example. Yes I feel betrayed. But more than anything I feel let down by the incompetent media and by incompetent opposition parties and politicians. There is nobody around to 'keep the -*BAD WORD*-s honest'. Monte.
madhaha Posted October 27, 2003 Report Posted October 27, 2003 The volume of propaganda has not increased significantly. Merely the emphasis on its use. Of course now we have a better understanding of how to apply it for maximum effect and maximise coverage and yield. If it sounds like I'm talking about a weapon its because I am. Here is the point where people used to throw in the "first casualty of the war is the truth" but we've been desensitized to that.
Aileron Posted October 30, 2003 Report Posted October 30, 2003 Well, I can't argue with the media being incompetent. I think the problem with it is HOW they criticise leaders. Instead of attacking of reasonable fronts, they try to come up with the most ridiculous arguement possible. Take Iraq for example. When they criticised President Bush, they leaned towards that conclusion that he attacked for oil. That is ridiculous, as a matter of fact the only outrage from that statement comes from it being ridiculous. What they SHOULD have done was say that it was to compensate for a weak domestic policy. I support the the action in Iraq, but would seriously have liked to see that issue come up. Also, the fact that they are biased also hurts. Every civilian hurt by coalition forces got covered, whereas they never discussed those killed under Hussein's rule. Because they do this, people simply don't believe them anymore. Overall, the media is weak because they make radical inferences. If they were more reasonable in their judgements, they would be a lot stronger politically.
Bacchus Posted October 30, 2003 Author Report Posted October 30, 2003 mmh...the point being the medias are manipulated, not that they manipulate And wether or not you agree with Bush (who is a space muppet with too many toys imo) is beside the point of this thread. The question i had in mind is more along the lines of what it means for democracy and for our leaders legitimacy to act. Bush is just a puppet, a convenience for the real powers in US. Just as Saddam was, Pol Pot, Pinochet, etc. but that's another story
madhaha Posted October 30, 2003 Report Posted October 30, 2003 Not that simple Bacchus. Things that you might be ineterested in looking up are who owns the media and the backgrounds of various top/high profile journalists such as previous jobs for example. Also look into the same for politicians and you'll see what I mean about things not being that simple.
Bacchus Posted October 30, 2003 Author Report Posted October 30, 2003 i agree mad, but the medias will usually relate stories which are fed to them by sources inside politics. If those sources are harnessed adequatly, if someone has connections and "savoir-faire" enough, those news might be corrupted with a purpose. Like for exemple in the David Kelly case... And i'm not naive, i know it's not that simple, if it were i wouldn't be poting here
madhaha Posted October 30, 2003 Report Posted October 30, 2003 Bacchus: "Some leaks are engineered! Boo! Hiss!" And this is a surprise and deserves an entire topic because...? Expected replies to the topic: "Don't care.""Oh.""Wow, never thought of that!""Down with the government!""Yeah that is a bad thing. And?" Not really much of a discussion.
Aileron Posted October 30, 2003 Report Posted October 30, 2003 It works both ways actually. The media has considerable power to manipulate candidates. They can give one sided coverage enough to hurt political figures.
MonteZuma Posted October 30, 2003 Report Posted October 30, 2003 In Australia the media goes on witch hunts to milk out a story. Facts and truth and bent so much in the media's quest to generate drama and excitement. Meanwhile, they often completely miss the boat on other huge stories because the producers of news and current affairs are so engrossed in engineering an exclusive story. We had a story in the news about a year before Sept 11 2001 and before the Sydney Olympics (2000) about some Al Qaueda linked people in New Zealand who had maps of Australia's only nuclear reactor (Lucas Heights near Sydney) and had turned a room into a 'command centre'. There was a brief story about how maps were found, and other bits and pieces suggesting a terror plot. As soon as the olympics came along all the story was dropped and all we heard about was sport. The media still haven't gone back to explore the link between the Lucas Heights story, 9/11, Al Qaueda, etc. My theory is that the Lucas Height 'scare' was the result of Al Qaueda cells investigating the possibility of attacking the reactor - probably because of Australia's involvement in East Timor (Indonesia has the largest Muslim population of any country). My guess is that eventually even Al Qaueda got sidetracked and all effort was poured into planning the US attacks. Lucas Heights was forgotten. Well yeah...It could be just a crackpot theory....but the point remains...as far as Australia is concerned it was probably one of the most newsworthy events this century - the timing (1yr before S11) was incredible - and it it got dumped because it was easier to just report on sport. My guess is that the investigation was handed over to Australian secret services and it became too hard for reporters to extract information - so they dropped it. Maybe there was no terror plot....but the fact is it was never fully investigated by the press. Anyway...my take is that the media and governments are both easily manipulated....Just like everyone else, they have short attention spans and can only focus on 1 or 2 things at a time. They are easily distracted and easily persuaded. Check it....http://www.turkishdailynews.com/old_editio...8_27_00/for.htmhttp://targetaustralia.multiservers.com/Nuke_003.html Monte.
madhaha Posted October 31, 2003 Report Posted October 31, 2003 It works both ways actually. The media has considerable power to manipulate candidates. They can give one sided coverage enough to hurt political figures. Yes but this is also common knowledge and each paper has its own publicized political slant, usually enforced by an editor. And? Monte: The media report. The police investigate. They get paid to write interest articles, not solve crimes. Just keep your eyes open and read between the lines.
Aileron Posted October 31, 2003 Report Posted October 31, 2003 omg, I am agreeing with madhaha. ~must...get...clean...feel...so...dirty~ I will only go a slight step further. The goal of the media is not to inform the public. Its goal is to sell newspapers or get higher ratings. Don't take that situation too far; if a newspaper company goes too far away from reporting unbiased information, they will lose customers in the long term. Typically, what they do the best is to make out a situation as if it is suspensfull and up in the air. Take for example American elections, or any elections most likely. Every time they keep saying how close it is and how the results could go either way. They are even doing this for 2004, even though the most likely outcome will be the Republicans absolutely slaughtering the Democrats. Why? Because if they reported the news as it really is, less people are going to buy tommorrow's newspaper if the winner has already been decided today.
MonteZuma Posted November 2, 2003 Report Posted November 2, 2003 Monte: The media report. The police investigate. They get paid to write interest articles, not solve crimes. Just keep your eyes open and read between the lines.Investigative reporting.
Bacchus Posted November 3, 2003 Author Report Posted November 3, 2003 Bacchus: "Some leaks are engineered! Boo! Hiss!" And this is a surprise and deserves an entire topic because...? Expected replies to the topic: "Don't care.""Oh.""Wow, never thought of that!""Down with the government!""Yeah that is a bad thing. And?" Not really much of a discussion. heh, i asked for impressions, you don't have any to give..well, don't give one. I really don't care. And could give an actual opinion or write about anything apart from turning a topic into another question like: And this is a surprise and deserves an entire topic because...? es but this is also common knowledge and each paper has its own publicized political slant, usually enforced by an editor. And? those kind of posts are such a hitch. anyway, with your posts number...i would expect you to choose which one you like and avoid others.
Aileron Posted November 3, 2003 Report Posted November 3, 2003 Look, I didn't get "Veteren Member" placed under my name by debating whether or not my posts are new and informative. I just post for the heck of it.
Recommended Posts