Propaganda - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-27-2003, 01:30 PM   #46
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 01:53 AM
Quote:
Well you shouldn't have believed your eyes because you are wrong. I saw the same line at the bottom of the screen and it was a quote by a Coalition Military official which was clearly stated. I admit it is an inflamitory statement, but it was given after the latest airing from Al Jazeera of two dead soldiers that were being kicked around in the street. This was a quote, not a "tag line" just put out there by Fox.
But it was placed at the bottom of the screen without any explanation. Regardless if it was a quote or not, the use of it was irresponsible. You can quote the Bible to make people believe some things that are not of God when used out of context.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 01:35 PM   #47
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,181
Local Time: 07:53 AM
It was placed at the bottom of the screen while talking with the military official who made the statement. I agree, not the best quote to just sit out there, but my point being it was the quote of the guy that they were discussing, not a Fox news statement.

Hey, I commend you for at least watching a little Foxnews now and then. I spread my watching and reading over a wide range from conservative to liberal to see all points of view. Most anti-war people here trash Foxnews but have never even seen it.
__________________

__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 01:41 PM   #48
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 01:53 AM
Quote:
It was placed at the bottom of the screen while talking with the military official who made the statement. I agree, not the best quote to just sit out there, but my point being it was the quote of the guy that they were discussing, not a Fox news statement.
Ok trust me. It was placed their without and quotes or source. It was there while they were airing the press conference they had yesterday afternoon with the pentatgon. I was out to lunch with many friends and my friends are all Bush supporters and are for this war and even they had to pick their jaws from off the floor at the sight of this.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 02:29 PM   #49
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Kristie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: back home again in Indiana
Posts: 6,386
Local Time: 02:53 AM
I saw Fox News for the first time last weekend... it was a joke. They'll interview 20 peace protestors, ask them why they're protesting, 13 will give an intelligent answer, 5 will give a half-assed answer, and two will say "um..." or "I don't know." Which will be the two they broadcast.
__________________
Kristie is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 03:14 PM   #50
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 02:53 AM
This is from a biased source, but the references sighted are repuable

"It turns out that most of the pro-war rallies have been organized by and sponsored by Clear Channel Entertainment, under the name of "Rally for America(tm)," in a faux-grassroots campaign known as "astroturfing." Writes The Chicago Tribune, "The sponsorship of large rallies by Clear Channel stations is unique among major media companies, which have confined their activities in the war debate to reporting and occasionally commenting on the news." "I think this is pretty extraordinary," said former Federal Communications Commissioner Glen Robinson, who teaches law at the University of Virginia. "I can't say that this violates any of a broadcaster's obligations, but it sounds like borderline manufacturing of the news." In today's New York Times, Paul Krugman has an op-ed piece (free registration required) criticizing CCE for their amazing gall. Clear Channel's intent is clear: supporting the administration can only help reduce government threats against CCE expansion. It helps, of course, that Secretary of State Colin Powell's son, Michael Powell, is the head of the FCC."

www.clearchannelsucks.org
__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 03:46 PM   #51
ONE
love, blood, life
 
MrBrau1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Verplexed in Vermont
Posts: 10,436
Local Time: 02:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Kristie
there's a LOT of US citizens that think their news (whichever one they may watch/read) is 100% accurate and not slanted in any way.
Makes me sad.
There are also lots of US citizens that think their news (whichever one they may watch/read) is 100% inaccurate and slanted in every way.
__________________
"If you needed my autograph, I'd give it to you." Bob Dylan
MrBrau1 is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 04:28 PM   #52
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,181
Local Time: 07:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Kristie
I saw Fox News for the first time last weekend... it was a joke. They'll interview 20 peace protestors, ask them why they're protesting, 13 will give an intelligent answer, 5 will give a half-assed answer, and two will say "um..." or "I don't know." Which will be the two they broadcast.

If they only broadcast those 2 answers, how do you know that they interviewed other people that gave intelligent answers?

When I watched interviews with protestors on Fox, they didn't edit it at all, they went live and the reporter was in the crowd interviewing several people in a row, most gave some sort of reasoning, but none of them that I heard sounded very intelligent. Mostly filled with "war is wrong", "peace is the only answer", "this is just killing for oil", etc...

I don't take those as intelligent, informed answers. They are soundbites.
__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 04:32 PM   #53
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Kristie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: back home again in Indiana
Posts: 6,386
Local Time: 02:53 AM
I was creating a hypothetical situation.
The moral of that story is, I know many very intelligent peace protestors, I know there are thousands more out there... but their story deliberately portrays all of them as morons.
__________________
Kristie is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 04:55 PM   #54
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,181
Local Time: 07:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Kristie
I was creating a hypothetical situation.
The moral of that story is, I know many very intelligent peace protestors, I know there are thousands more out there... but their story deliberately portrays all of them as morons.
gotcha. I know what you mean. that's why I was pleasantly surprised when I watched and they were actually just having a women roaming through the crowd interviewing. That way you knew it wasn't a pick and chose thing. I know that the pick and chose thing does happen.
__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 08:35 PM   #55
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
kobayashi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: the ether
Posts: 5,142
Local Time: 03:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Kristie
I was creating a hypothetical situation.
The moral of that story is, I know many very intelligent peace protestors, I know there are thousands more out there... but their story deliberately portrays all of them as morons.
well as many 'intelligents' that are out there, the numbers are stacked against them. mostly because it is easy to be 'anti-war'/'anti-establishment'. youth gravitate toward liberalism and idealism (not saying youth are the idiots, but they do make up the majority of passengers in these protests from my experience).

if it wasnt for these passengers however, they're wouldnt be as much interest and thus there is likely to be no news coverage at all.
__________________
im the candyman. and the candyman is back.
kobayashi is offline  
Old 03-28-2003, 05:30 AM   #56
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Saracene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia, some time after tea
Posts: 6,325
Local Time: 07:53 AM
What surprised me after I've read through some posts on various net forums is that apparently some people think that if they listen to the news outside of US they'll get an unflinching, unskewed look at the war. Because IMO there's no such thing as unbiased reporting. It doesn't depend on whether the country participates in the war or not, because it's far from being an only reason for bias when it comes to the way countries view each other.
__________________
Saracene is offline  
Old 03-28-2003, 07:07 AM   #57
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,543
Local Time: 08:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Scarletwine
This is from a biased source, but the references sighted are repuable

[...] In today's New York Times, Paul Krugman has an op-ed piece (free registration required) criticizing CCE for their amazing gall. Clear Channel's intent is clear: supporting the administration can only help reduce government threats against CCE expansion. It helps, of course, that Secretary of State Colin Powell's son, Michael Powell, is the head of the FCC."

www.clearchannelsucks.org
For those interested in the NYT editorial, here it is (copy-paste from the Velvet Rope forum):

Quote:
Channels of Influence
By Paul Krugman - NY Times - 25 March 2003

By and large, recent pro-war rallies haven't drawn nearly as many people as antiwar rallies, but they have certainly been vehement. One of the most striking took place after Natalie Maines, lead singer for the Dixie Chicks, criticized President Bush: a crowd gathered in Louisiana to watch a 33,000-pound tractor smash a collection of Dixie Chicks CD's, tapes and other paraphernalia. To those familiar with 20th-century European history it seemed eerily reminiscent of. . . . But as Sinclair Lewis said, it can't happen here.

Who has been organizing those pro-war rallies? The answer, it turns out, is that they are being promoted by key players in the radio industry - with close links to the Bush administration.

The CD-smashing rally was organized by KRMD, part of Cumulus Media, a radio chain that has banned the Dixie Chicks from its playlists. Most of the pro-war demonstrations around the country have, however, been organized by stations owned by Clear Channel Communications, a behemoth based in San Antonio that controls more than 1,200 stations and increasingly dominates the airwaves.

The company claims that the demonstrations, which go under the name Rally for America, reflect the initiative of individual stations. But this is unlikely: according to Eric Boehlert, who has written revelatory articles about Clear Channel in Salon, the company is notorious and widely hated for its iron-fisted centralized control.

Until now, complaints about Clear Channel have focused on its business practices. Critics say it uses its power to squeeze recording companies and artists and contributes to the growing blandness of broadcast music. But now the company appears to be using its clout to help one side in a political dispute that deeply divides the nation.

Why would a media company insert itself into politics this way? It could, of course, simply be a matter of personal conviction on the part of management. But there are also good reasons for Clear Channel - which became a giant only in the last few years, after the Telecommunications Act of 1996 removed many restrictions on media ownership - to curry favor with the ruling party.

On one side, Clear Channel is feeling some heat: it is being sued over allegations that it threatens to curtail the airplay of artists who don't tour with its concert division, and there are even some politicians who want to roll back the deregulation that made the company's growth possible. On the other side, the Federal Communications Commission is considering further deregulation that would allow Clear Channel to expand even further, particularly into television.

Or perhaps the quid pro quo is more narrowly focused. Experienced Bushologists let out a collective "Aha!" when Clear Channel was revealed to be behind the pro-war rallies, because the company's top management has a history with George W. Bush. The vice chairman of Clear Channel is Tom Hicks, whose name may be familiar to readers of this column.

When Mr. Bush was governor of Texas, Mr. Hicks was chairman of the University of Texas Investment Management Company, called Utimco, and Clear Channel's chairman, Lowry Mays, was on its board. Under Mr. Hicks, Utimco placed much of the university's endowment under the management of companies with strong Republican Party or Bush family ties. In 1998 Mr. Hicks purchased the Texas Rangers in a deal that made Mr. Bush a multimillionaire.

There's something happening here. What it is ain't exactly clear, but a good guess is that we're now seeing the next stage in the evolution of a new American oligarchy. As Jonathan Chait has written in The New Republic, in the Bush administration "government and business have melded into one big `us.' " On almost every aspect of domestic policy, business interests rule: "Scores of midlevel appointees . . . now oversee industries for which they once worked."

We should have realized that this is a two-way street: if politicians are busy doing favors for businesses that support them, why shouldn't we expect businesses to reciprocate by doing favors for those politicians - by, for example, organizing "grass roots" rallies on their behalf?

What makes it all possible, of course, is the absence of effective watchdogs. In the Clinton years the merest hint of impropriety quickly blew up into a huge scandal; these days, the scandalmongers are more likely to go after journalists who raise questions. Anyway, don't you know there's a war on?
C ya!

Marty
__________________
Popmartijn is offline  
Old 03-28-2003, 09:16 AM   #58
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 11:53 PM
All rallies supporting the Administration and the Coalition troops are not Dixie Chicks cd burnings. Sure, Clear Channel may have organized such events, but to suggest that all "pro-war" rallies are corporate creations is a cheap way to diminish the message of those rallies.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 03-28-2003, 09:24 AM   #59
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,543
Local Time: 08:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
All rallies supporting the Administration and the Coalition troops are not Dixie Chicks cd burnings. Sure, Clear Channel may have organized such events, but to suggest that all "pro-war" rallies are corporate creations is a cheap way to diminish the message of those rallies.
The editorial did not suggest that all pro-war rallies were organised by Clear Channel, nor that all involved CD burnings. And the message of such a rally is clear. The point here is the motives behind organising a rally. It appears that it's not done because of the message, but because of getting favourable treatment later by pleasing the current administration now. Or at least, at the rallies organised by Clear Channel (and in venues owned by Clear Channel where performers are asked not to give political speeches or the concert might be cut short).

C ya!

Marty
__________________
Popmartijn is offline  
Old 03-28-2003, 08:59 PM   #60
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 11:53 PM
Quote:
Secret Videotape Shows Lions Eating Christians In Iraq
Thursday March 20, 2003



By VINCENZO SARDI & BARRY DUTTER

WASHINGTON -- U.N. weapons inspectors searching for nuclear weapons have uncovered something they never expected to find: A hidden rock quarry, dubbed "The Arena of Death," where helpless Christian prisoners are fed to hungry lions!

One of the quick-thinking inspectors had his video camera with him when this horrifying spectacle was taking place, and captured the gruesome scene on tape. The inspectors could only stand by helplessly as three men were torn limb from limb by the voracious beasts.

"It was the most frightening thing I've ever seen," says one inspector.

"They must not have fed those lions for weeks beforehand, because they ripped into those Christians like they were wounded antelopes."

The inspectors were too late to save the three men in the lion pits, but they did find one other prisoner in a cell adjacent to the arena -- an American woman, Alice Semple, 32. Semple traveled to Iraq with seven companions as part of a Christian missionary group.

"We came to Iraq on a mission of peace," she told Weekly World News reporters. "We wanted to help the underpriveleged people in Iraq. But Saddam accused us of being spies and threw us into cages."

The prisoners were taken in groups of two or three at a time to the arena and fed to the lions.

"My friends never had a chance," Semple sobs.

"They were totally defenseless, armed with nothing but their faith in Jesus. I could hear their screams from inside my cell."

Semple was freed from Saddam's prison at the insistence of the incensed U.N. inspectors.

"Saddam was reluctant to let her go," one inspector says, "because he feared it would give the U.S. one more reason to invade.

"He finally relented, convinced that no one would believe her story anyway."

But Saddam was unaware of the secret videotape taken by inspectors.

Semple has since been flown back to an undisclosed hospital in the U.S., where she is undergoing treatment to help her cope with the trauma of what she saw.

"They told me I was to be the next victim of the lions," she said. "And they said after I was gone, they'd go out and kidnap more helpless Americans."

A Vatican spokesman says Pope John Paul II is outraged.

"The Pope feels that this time, Saddam Hussein has gone too far," the spokesman says. "He believes some sort of action must be taken."

A U.S. Defense Department official agrees, saying, "This incident shows why we must take Saddam out now. He is a dangerous, sadistic maniac."

For years, Iraqi defectors have told lurid tales about Saddam's private arena, a stadium-size "athletic facility" located just outside Baghdad.

The twisted megalomaniac reportedly fancies himself a latter-day Roman emperor. In addition to his beloved lions, Saddam also also uses tigers, bears, and other exotic imported animals to dispatch political prisoners.

According to the U.N. inspectors who witnessed the carnage from a hidden alcove, Saddam and his generals sat in a booth, munching on cotton candy, and enjoying the 'show.'

The inspectors note that Iraqi officials had tried to steer them clear of the arena. "We came upon it purely by chance," one inspector said.

Iraqi officials deny any knowledge of Saddam's lions
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com