|
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 08:56 PM by cprise
I've seen the recent reports on how a subject like Global Warming still had major news bureaus (like NYT) coddling the deniers. In fact, a couple years ago NYT environment writers were polled on their thoughts about AGW and most of them didn't believe it was true.
The RW protests are small (though sometimes armed) and yet they receive the lions share of exposure.
What we think of as the 'anti-MSM' are often part of the problem, subsisting on a diet of stories like 'Did you hear what Fox News just said?!' and the usual 'But what will the Tea Party think of this?' Most of our websites have been clogged with this crap since before the 2000 election, which is why I used to call a certain website "Common Nightmares". The so-called 'progressive' journalists have followed so far in the MSM's wake that they are compelled to constantly coo and dote over the same little band of white, gun-bedecked darlings as if these journalists were still teenagers fawning over the latest corporate-formulated pop bands. Sadly, this reinforces their critical targets through the 'Devil You Know' effect, propagating RW ideas which Democrats reflexively act on because that if what everyone's head os crammed with (whether you watch John Stewart or Hannity).
Meanwhile, people engaging their lives with real progressive change are treated as clowns suitable only for lampooning if they get any coverage at all. Mostly it is just cold silence unless you do something wrong.
There won't be any real, positive change in this country until the media undergo major structural reforms. Their corporatized, post-merger business model quite simply is an engine working against the public interest.
|