Platt and y'all:
David B wrote:
> When we talk about the media, we're talking about corporate news
> organizations with an increasing emphasis on "corporate" and a decreasing
> emphasis on "news". And the so-called journalists who work for these
> mainstream organizations are celebrities rather than genuine investigators
> for the simple reason that star-power translates into high ratings, which
> means more money and investigation costs money. (The weekly news magazine
I
> subscribe to, THE NATION, is non-corporate and authentically liberal, but
> less than .005% of the population reads it.)Further, corporate news
> organizations can hardly afford to anger or upset the advertisers. Also,
> the time constraints inherent in commercial radio and TV don't allow for
> the expression of complex ideas and consequently there is only room to say
> what is immediately recognizable. They can only say what you already know.
> In short, mainstream news is about celebrity and money. Its about fame and
> fortune, not information.
Platt responded...
If what you say is true it would seem the news ought to have a
conservative, corporate-oriented bias instead of the liberal bias
generally acknowledged to be the case.
DMB answers with...
Exactly. The difference between what is "generally acknowledged" and the
actual state of affairs is much like the differnce between social patterns
and intellectual patterns. I am saying that corporate media presents a
corporate view. Pirsig challenges "common sense" assumptions throughout the
book, as all crtical thinkers ought to. I've come to have little respect for
unexamined assumptions. And it seems that if we want to understand what kind
of bias might really exist, we have to examine the nature of the beast. I've
only tried to make a case that profit and fame are among the most powerful
factors in determining the nature of mainstream media.
Then Platt gave me lots of tedious homework to do....
I would be interested to know your source for the alleged "reactionary
forces" and also the following assertions:
DMB...
I provided an example, Bill Kristol, but that wasn't good enough.
So Platt asked...
Like when and where?
DMB...
Don't you think I'd have to be a obsessive maniac to have times and dates?
Give us a break, eh?
Platt asks for still more documentation...
The Geneva convention demands due process? News to me. Please
cite the laws the U.S. is violating.
DMB...
Yes, I'm sure its news to you. I'm not surprized. But as they say, you can
look it up.
Platt persists in trying to wear me out...
Please cite where Pirsig said this and give the actual quote, avoiding if
you can his qualifying adjective "ultra." Also in the interests of "fair and
balanced" you might quote what Pirsig says about the relationship
between intellectual level values and left-wing political views.
DMB...
I didn't use the word, "ultra". As far as the connection between levels and
ideologies, I've been trying to get that political compass discussion going
for a while, but apparently people are tired of it. I'd love it. It would be
very fruitful because it would essentially be a series of real life
examples. It would show us exactly how this battle between the third and
fourth levels works in the real world. And I'd love to supply the quotes in
such a discussion. I'd go to the effort just for you if I thought it would
help, but you've already proven that you are completely impervious to such
quotes. As you prove yet again by mistaking Pirsig's criticism of SOM, and
its inability to spell out what is right and true, for your own
anti-intellecual, reactionary views...
Platt quoted....
"What passed for morality within this crowd was a kind of vague,
amorphous soup of sentiments known as "human rights." You were
also supposed to be "reasonable." What these terms really meant was
never spelled out in any way that Phaedrus had ever heard. You were
just supposed to cheer for them."
As usual, Platt conveniently forgets...
"According to the MOQ these human rights have not just a sentimental basis,
but a rational, metaphysical basis." P307
Platt ends with...
I admire you David for admitting to be one of the crowd. Many liberals
are reluctant to say so.
DMB ends with...
That's right. All intellectual ideologies have been systematically demonized
by the right. So much that people are afraid to use the word "liberal". This
demonization began even before McCarthyism and continues to this day. I
actually heard Rush Limbaugh going after moderate Republicans last week. Now
Republicans are too far to the left!? Watch out! You're next.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:52 BST