From: Ant McWatt (antmcwatt@hotmail.co.uk)
Date: Fri Jan 28 2005 - 15:47:17 GMT
Mark Heyman stated January 18th :
Platt’s example of Goldberg’s books is unconvincing. These books
offer nothing to corroborate the author’s opinions: no notes, no
internal memos, no references, nothing even approximating legitimate
research. There is no way to verify that his opinions are anything
more than a vague web of anecdotes, hearsay, and unsupported
generalizations stemming from some personal ax-grinding.
Platt Holden replied January 18th:
I guess this puts Zen and Lila out of bounds as nowhere do I find in them
notes, internal memos, references, or anything even approximating
legitimate research.
Ant McWatt noted January 28th:
You find lots of texts cited in ZMM and LILA. I think I’ve checked out each
and every one and none of them are fictional.
Moreover, you have the “Guidebook to ZMM” (by two philosophy lecturers
packed full of reviews, notes, correspondence and overviews), my PhD thesis
and Dan Glover’s “Lila’s Child” which provide much “legitimate research” to
the background of ZMM and LILA.
Is there a Guidebook on Goldberg’s work or even a University thesis that
treats it in a positive light? If so, let’s have the references so we can
check them out!
Platt Holden replied January 19th:
No problem. Check out the Media Research Center website for supporting
material to Goldberg's books. Plenty of "university" studies there…
Ant McWatt responded January 26th (after an initial search on the Media
Research Center website):
Rendall (an American philosophy and chemistry graduate) states: “The real
bias in American media is top to bottom. Our media is in favour of the top,
that is the richest and those aligned with corporate interests, and against,
in many cases, human and citizen interests.”
(http://www.axess.se/english/archive/2004/nr5/currentissue/theme_ovrebo.php)
Though I have recently seen university research that support Rendall’s
observations (such as Geoffrey Nunberg’s investigation into some of MRC’s
dubious claims), I have yet to see ANY high quality evidence supporting the
converse and therefore have to presently conclude that Goldberg and the MRC
are not to be trusted as regards the issue of media bias. To use an analogy
– if the suggested bias was an illness in a patient, the view that there is
conservative bias in the mass media has the support of university trained
doctors and surgeons while the view that there is a liberal bias in the
media has the support of the average barfly.
Platt Holden responded January 27th:
Again, note the ad hominem "average barfly." Leftists just can't seem to
help themselves when it comes to leveling insults at individuals and groups
they disagree with.
Ant McWatt notes:
Firstly, just to return to an important point I made in the Summer, it
should be emphasised that I place the MOQ framework before any political
systems. I perceive these as social tools (operated by intellectual
patterns) to provide a (generally) higher (or Dynamic) quality of life. As
such, on some issues such as the privatisation of the military which I
presently support and Platt doesn’t, he is more left-wing than I am. Maybe
I should start calling him “Comrade Platt the Communist” the next time he
refers to me as a “leftist” to we can distinguish his sometimes more extreme
left-wing views?
To be more serious, what I believe (to take some account of Matt Poot’s
request for discussion composed “entirely of every individuals own
thoughts”) is that each social system needs to be assessed on how it best
contributes to maintaining intellectual values of truth, justice, beauty and
the Dynamic value of freedom.
Whether these values are best maintained by the employment of free-market
orientated systems, co-operatives or public ownership needs to be assessed
on a case-by-case basis and open to continual judgement and revision. In
other words, Quality first, the political methods of attaining it second.
The error which I am not being forced into by Platt or anyone else is take a
traditional political stance (such as communist or conservative) and give it
priority over considering what will provide the best social outcome. To do
so would to be to act statically rather than Dynamically.
If Platt can only provide low quality sources for Bernard Goldberg’s texts
(and by that, I ideally mean independent university research papers and
texts written by political scientists – not journalists or so-called “media
watchdogs”) then I think the analogy “that the view that there is
conservative bias in the mass media has the support of university trained
doctors and surgeons while the view that there is a liberal bias in the
media has the support of the average barfly” is a fair one. If Platt is
still in the static communist- liberal- conservative framework of perceiving
the world (rather than the Dynamic framework provided by the MOQ) then that
is his problem. Agreed this is a common problem – even on this discussion
forum - but the longer people cling to their old static paradigms then the
longer and the less likely that any significant Quality improvements will be
introduced on this world. I’m afraid that I am rather frustrated to see so
much creative potential being wasted in gumption traps (such as the
occupation of Iraq to placate the greed for oil) that could otherwise be
going to make the world a more beautiful, peaceful and intellectually
stimulating place.
Ant McWatt stated January 26th :
However, if you think I have overlooked any such university research, please
provide the specific university website addresses or bibliographical
references (if citing papers or texts) so I can examine them and re-assess
my thoughts.
Platt Holden responded January 27th:
Check "Media Bias Basics" on the MRC website.
Ant McWatt concludes:
I have now looked at this page and will provide my full analysis of it over
the weekend though I will state now that if it was a student essay I would
fail it as regards providing reliable academic sources. I therefore still
think that Mark H’s original assertion (of January 18th) that “Platt’s
example of (Bernard) Goldberg’s books is unconvincing” remains fair comment.
Best wishes,
Anthony.
_________________________________________________________________
It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today!
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 28 2005 - 15:54:12 GMT