Showing posts with label misinformation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label misinformation. Show all posts

Saturday, April 3, 2010

Is All The Anger Messing with Our National Culture

I would say a big YEP! This is what deception, in the form of misinformation and over-stating, and fear-mongering does to a community and, if on a large enough scale, an entire nation.

Apparently anger has become the crucible upon which our national culture is to be forged - - an acceptable means of expression on the campaign trail, at town-hall meetings and in Congress. The lunatic fringe engages in the interchange of opinions without factual underpinnings or respect for rational debate. And since especially politicians on the right fail to condemn outrageous statements by political opportunists in their ranks the lunatic fringe moves ever closer to defining conservatives and the Republican Party.

There doesn’t seem to be any sense of honor among fanatics, just irresponsible partisan rage from politicians and media hucksters who say, with a straight face, that they are true patriots. Those Republicans in Congress who refuse to state unequivocally that they believe President Obama to be a natural-born citizen provide cover for ‘birthers’, the latest of whom is Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, who says he won’t follow orders issued by the president unless he sees his birth certificate. Will the Army actually put up with this, issue an order to cease and desist or go straight to a court martial proceeding?

Somehow we have reached a point in our history where civil disobedience has become synonymous with armed resistance and a total misreading of what our early forbears fought against in the early days of British dominance on our shores. “No taxation without representation” and the flinging of tea into Boston Harbor has morphed into a false analogy that even what an elected majority of our own citizens proposes is unacceptable, as if there were no such thing as free elections and legislative initiatives. Accompanied by blissfully incoherent rhetoric, supporters cling to irrational premises to feed their angst encouraged by irresponsible pols who turn logic on its head.

The recent arrest of homegrown insurgents who believed they could start an insurrection by attacking law enforcement personnel followed by armed assaults at their funerals is a disturbing extension of the violence and anti-government sentiment that has begun to permeate our world. When the initial shock wears off among the information-challenged rank-and-file voting public the inflammatory violence to decent discourse will no doubt continue unabated. Instigators are unlikely to acknowledge that words can have serious consequences and that their verbal assaults often bear bitter fruit.

It seems to amuse listeners when Sarah Palin tells them to stop motorists who have Obama stickers on their cars and ask them “how’s that hopey, changey thing workn’ out for ya?” Either she is unaware or doesn’t care that a driver in Tennessee was forced off the road by an angry partisan for just that reason. Neither does it concern her that her November electoral map highlights Democratic candidates in the cross-hairs that all gun handlers will recognize. In fact conservatives in general dismiss any connection between their overblown rhetoric and the behavior of would be government removalists.

And it isn’t just among the obvious disrupters in the political world where violence and incivility occurs. Anyone who has attended a child’s sporting event will probably have experienced a parent yelling at an official or even physically attacking a coach. At one game when my own eleven-year-old son was pitching I could hear “meatball, meatball” from the bleachers across the field and remarked that the coach shouldn’t allow his team to behave that way, only to be told it wasn’t the kids but the parents of the opposing team.

Sadly the lack of respect and deeply disturbing behavior of both adults and young people in our midst played out in the tragic suicide of a young female student at South Hadley High School last week. No adequate explanation has yet been made as to why members of the faculty and other students who knew of the bullying and harassment of the girl took no action or why such behavior is often tolerated nationwide. Is it a sign of our times that violent words and actions are simply accepted as part of growing up? And is it only after some dreadful incident that a knee-jerk response is generated in the community and guilt-ridden overreaction confounds the original transgression? A local resident told me that a friend has stopped going to meetings in South Hadley because there is such disruptive shouting and screaming on the part of attendees. Sound familiar?

Whatever disagreements continue to exist in the political world and in our communities it is well past time that we took a critical look at the environment we have created and for partisans to acknowledge that radical elements in the media and among supporters do great damage to our way of life.

Please respond to Ann Davidow's commentary by leaving comments below and sharing them with the BuzzFlash community.

FINDING A VOICE by Ann Davidow


Let The Sun Shine In......

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Why Won't the Media Correct Past Lies?

by David Swanson
ACORN is shutting down because of a fraudulent video pimped by the corporate media.  U.S. forces in Afghanistan have heroically laid seige to and conquered a fictional city, helping build the case for further escalation.  A cable news channel has created a right-wing mass movement by pretending it already existed.  Congressman Dennis Kucinich voted for a health insurance bill he believed would deprive more people of healthcare (and wealth and homes), because fraudulent reports had convinced his constituents of the opposite.  The peace movement was defunded in November 2008, because of a fraudulent presidential election campaign.  71% of Americans believe Iran has nuclear weapons.  41% of Americans think the quality of the environment is improving.  Has the power of the corporate media to overwhelm all before it begun to sink in yet?

ACORN's funders didn't have to run and hide because of a bunch of laughably bad lies, but they were afraid.  The most common excuse of progressive congress members for anything they do is fear of the media.  The peace movement didn't have to shut down, but its funders had used war as a criticism of Republicans; opposing war for its own sake was secondary, and their televisions told them peace had arrived.  Kucinich could have stuck to his No vote on healthcare, but he probably wouldn't have lasted long in Congress.  We don't have to be suckered by comically manipulative war news, but all the big media outlets want war -- and the Democratic-party outlets especially favor war now.  Fox News could not have created the Teabaggers on its own, but MSNBC and the Democratic blogosphere spend a majority of their time focused on Teabaggers and Republicans because it unites their viewers/readers against something uglier than elected Democrats, never mind that in Washington the Democrats technically have all the power.

We need independent media.  Is that not yet crystal clear?  The strongest grassroots community organization in the country, ACORN, has been swatted away like a fly through the endless airing of fraudulent, badly edited, and irrelevant, but salacious video clips.  Elected officials or electoral candidates succeed or fail at the whim of the media cartel.  And the biggest lies of all are buried so deeply beneath the hot news stories that they're almost impossible to see.  Does or does not Iran possess nuclear weapons?  That question hides the insidious assumption that if a nation possesses nuclear weapons, then our nation can and should launch an illegal war of aggression against it.  Or at least our nation should have a debate over how best to take action against our "enemy," a debate that will represent us all because it will include two political parties.

This is the biggest lie of them all: the system works.  Vote for this corporatist war party or that warmongering corporate party, and you will have played your role well.  The system works.  The president makes the laws.  The Congress gets in the way.  The two parties are significantly different from each other and represent our views.  News stories that include the views of both parties are complete and admirable journalism.  The journalism itself has no viewpoint at all.  The role of a citizen is to support politicians and parties.

Imagine if Bush wanted to try alleged terrorists in court (as in fact he did).  All the Republicanites would have cheered (as in fact they did).  Imagine if Bush had pushed a health insurance bill written by the industry and had cut deals with the insurance and drug companies.  Imagine if Republicans had called a private program for 3% of Americans a "public option".  All the Democratites in the country would have denounced the whole thing as a scam.  The problem with "balanced" reporting is that those who consume it pick one of the two partisan positions presented and follow it as if they'd thought of it themselves.  This mindless obedience is going to destroy us all.

We need independent media, meaning sources of news that are independent of either political party.  We could easily find the money to create it right now if we chose to make that a priority.  We will do so or we, and this republic, and the world as we know it will perish . . . in horrible pain, with a grin on our face.

David Swanson is the author of the new book "Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union" by Seven Stories Press.  You can order it and find out when tour will be in your town: http://davidswanson.org/book.


Let The Sun Shine In......

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Seems the problems with communications are getting worse rather than better

Nevertheless, one can never really tell. Just when all seems lost, a fool, given enough rope, will hang himself. Whole groups of fools will hang themselves.     



However, this from Dissident Voice for your political edification?

Our Information Dilemma


What is to be done when the major means of communication with the majority of a nation’s people is under the control of select groups that consistently distort and fabricate the information delivered?


This is the situation that the whole world faces. The major points of contact with the information that the world’s people require in order to make personal and societal decisions are primarily: TV, radio and print media, and internet sources that are driven by these sources; other internet sources are more correctly called propaganda tools regardless of their ideological position.


The primary “news” sources lay claim to some degree of neutrality and veridicality; but, they only pretend “neutrality” on issues that do not directly concern their owners or the self-interest of individual reporters and “news” departments. They use the cheap device of giving “equal time” and authority to positions whether or not there is any valid reason to assume equality; they always distort and ignore news that would negatively impact the economic and political elite.


The consequence is that there is no consistently reliable source for vital, informing descriptions of the conditions of our world. We cannot act with any confidence that the information upon which we must act is accurate. While we know we are being lied to, there is no source that stands as sufficiently honest and unbiased that we can use it as a reference to measure the maelstrom.


Of course, some people with enough time, experience and determination can often piece together descriptions of events in ways that they might reasonable trust as veridical, but there is little or no way that their efforts can be generally disseminated – or for that matter, separated from the propaganda that is boiling up as a substitute for real information. So, regardless of the motives, of which there are many (to be looked at more closely in moment), the result is the almost complete impossibility of the general public having the information that they require to act in response to the actual events and processes going on in the world. This is the loss of a most basic survival tool: accurate information to inform action in the environment.


Insidiously, the non-news part of media acts to set the base-line expectations for the “news” itself. ‘Every’ person in TV dramas carries a gun, drives a Land Rover, uses a satphone and lives in a million dollar house or condo; even if they have a 50K job doing what, in the real world, might be some form of accounting. ‘Everyday-people’ have al Qaeda sleeper cells in the house next door to them. Serial killers roam the streets of every neighborhood. And personal success and satisfaction is never ever seen as a moment of quiet reflection.


If we average the content of the lives we see portrayed on our “home theaters” and compare them to the actual modal lives of American citizens, the disconnect rises to the level of the pathological: the stories that we tell about ourselves have absolutely nothing – nothing – to do with the lives we lead, even as we attempt, as we always have done, to model ourselves after them. For every film like The Remains of the Day, there are hundreds where the moral choices are drawn in crayon and gratuitous blood.


People embrace the entertainment media, giving it 50, 80, even 100 % of their non-working life (and many times part of their working life) not so much to be entertained, but to be part of the common human experience. If people felt fully connected to flesh and blood people, then they would not spend 5 hours a day watching 2-dimensional electronic representations of people that they can’t know, can’t touch or ask a question. If people felt informed and competent in the execution of their lives, then they wouldn’t so desperately seek the slick and phony “competence” of media “heroes.”


The professional news media is now only an extension of this pattern. To a large extend it is competing with fictional stories, with the carefully rehearsed control of emotional content and production values, while at the same time purporting to discover and extract accurate descriptions of events and behaviors that talented and powerful interests wish to remain hidden. My critique in no way is intended to suggest that this social role and responsibility is easy, only that this vital role is being thoroughly mishandled and abused.


The reasons for the abuse run from the most mundane to the most violently draconian. Reporters and editors have often been the targets of the forces who wish not to be reported on. In 2006, 81 journalists were killed (other accounts give the number as 110) and 871 were put in jail worldwide. 2007 saw 86 (95) killed and hundreds more jailed. The assumption is made that the vast majority of the journalists so treated were acted on in response to their reporting things that someone really didn’t want to see made public. A message was being sent: speak and die; this would distort what is reported on.1


But there are many other ways to motivate the distortion of information. Limbaugh is reported to have a 400 million dollar contract! Top TV “news” anchors are all in the 6 to 8 figure range. These amounts of money create organized interest groups deep within the media beast with a disproportionate voice in how stories are framed so that the “news” show can ‘get its story’ day after day. The self-interested corporate ownership of media has its own influence.


At the other extreme the public must be appealed to to watch and listen. This has become about polling and presentation, personality and production values, matching expectations and desires more than giving the most straightforward accounting of events no matter where the chips may fall – there must be no chips, though sparks are good, i.e., there must be no real consequences, just shiny things to distract attention. If real substantive stories with real consequences that led to human action were presented, people might come to expect, and eventually demand, substantive information…. And then there would be the danger of the numbers a couple of paragraphs above going up – it is a tough decision: package a dishonest product, have sycophantic fame and make lots of money… or tell the greatest truth that can be divined from the muscular digging of evidence and be ignored, rejected, threatened, fired, jailed or killed.


What matters, what gets lost in the wailing over this and that specific crime against the public good, is exactly that, the public good. Just as wind sailors died from the lack of specific vitamins, so societies die from the lack of accurate information on the vital details of life. A social order cannot sustain on lies. It is just so simple: the biophysical world in which we live requires that it be responded to from veridicality. The ‘vascular system’ through which is pumped the information necessary for societal and individual survival is diseased and failing. The informational nutrients of life delivered by it cannot be trusted and we accept them with reluctance even as we must, at some level, accept them.


What hope there is in this model of our informational dilemma comes from those who will not give up trying to organize, out of the cacophony, some bits of the real. So long as this impulse is alive there is always a corner to be turned. Like the creature that collects tiny drops of water, one at a time, from the morning dew in a rainless land, those who have the ability and inclination to organize some more truthful image of our present time must do so to stay mentally alive. As those people spread their efforts and share their methods for making sense of the intentional chaos perhaps, just maybe, a critical mass can demand even more.

For comparison, there are 50 to 100 teachers for every journalist. Teaching can be very dangerous in regions of deep social conflict and tyrannical governments, teachers are jailed and killed for their teaching, but the numbers are generally small and certainly far below the proportional rates for journalists. I couldn’t find a source that totaled the numbers of teachers killed or jailed for their professional activities, but a ‘back of the envelope’ calculation gives me numbers perhaps half those for journalists, almost all in the most troubled places. This would make journalism about a hundred times more dangerous given the smaller numbers. []


James Keye is the nom de plume of a biologist and psychologist who after discovering a mismatch between academe and himself went into private business for many years. His whole post-pubescent life has been focused on understanding at both the intellectual and personal levels what it is to be of the human species; he claims some success. Email him at: jkeye1632@gmail.com. Read other articles by James, or visit James's website.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.


"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......

Wednesday, September 2, 2009

You Have A Right To Be Heard!!!

Please take time to be heard on the health-care issue. Help us slap down the crazies and their fear-mongering, deceitful, hateful blabbering.

Our health-care system is broken and stands to become even more broken if there is no reform which includes a public option.

It is now or never, Peeps.


 DEBUNK HEALTH CARE REFORM MYTHS (click to send a letter to your hometown news paper)

Write a Letter to the Editor
Myths, distortions, and bald-faced lies about President Obama's proposed health care reform have been cynically promoted by the insurance industry and right-wing extremists for several weeks now.  And to some partisans, killing health care reform by whatever tactics are necessary is simply a way to derail the Obama presidency. 

Evidence is now emerging that these falsehoods -- amplified by millions of dollars in special interest advertising and the 24-hour news cycle -- have begun to set in among otherwise conscientious citizens, threatening our reform efforts.

Submit a letter to the editor of your local newspaper today to make sure your neighbors know the cost-reducing FACTS about health care reform and the public option.

Don't forget to COMPLETE YOUR LETTER by clicking on one or more talking point (Step 2)!



IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.


"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......

Making liars pay a price

It seems that Americans, themselves, should have legal recourse against elected officials and ACNM (American corporate news media) who misinform or(disinform) them about any issue, especially extremely important national issues such as fixing a very broken healthcare system not to mention dragging our country into a war of aggression and the war crimes that are soon to follow the mother of all war crimes. 

News media, under the Constitution, have special privileges for a very good reason. Our founders knew that a Democratic Republic could not long function without an informed electorate. When our modern-day, 24-hour, corporate-owned news media (print or electronic), misinform us out of laziness or disinform us for reasons of propaganda, they are committing no less than treason. 

The American people must insist on truth from our elected officials and the news media whose job it is to report the truth, not simply repeat talking points from spokesmen of either political party. We have, for too long, put up with lies from both American officials and the news media. We should have legal recourse against those who betray us with deceit and fear-mongering to protect the greedy and those who lust for absolute power.

Tuesday, September 01, 2009

This article by Edward Wasserman is generating some discussion about what the traditional media should do when influential people spread misinformation to the public. Propaganda works essentially by means of repetition, so reporting the lies only to correct them typically assists in disseminating them. No wonder that so many Americans believe the nonsense being spread by opponents of health care reform, given that the US media, without bothering to explain the details of the proposed reforms, has played those myths up even when reporters did point out that the complaints are imaginary.


Wasserman is of course right that merely debunking persistent lies doesn't work to deflate them. But his proposed solution won't work either.


Wasserman, taking his cue from Greg Marx's post at the Columbia Journalism Review, argues that the trad media should somehow train itself to just ignore the liars and thus deprive their lies of oxygen. But that takes no account of Fox News, viral emails, televised blab fests, and all the modern means of disseminating politically convenient lies.


As tristero points out, that solution would have done nothing to halt the disastrous rush to war against Iraq with all the misinformation being spread by the Bush administration and its busy little helpers. But tristero's solution, for the media to learn to mock the liars, is unlikely to happen. And though it would be a good start, it's insufficient because rebuttals are necessary as well. It's hard to harness ridicule to serious fact-checking.
A better solution is for the media to make sure that the liars pay a steep price for every lie they try to disseminate. Here for example is a scenario offered by Wasserman:

Suppose some headline-loving political eminence announces that the reason the health system is in crisis is illegal immigration. Now, you could refute that with experts, with numbers, with facts. And it wouldn't matter a bit -- not if you lead your newscast with him, if you let that week's debate revolve around his claims. You'd still whip up rage, you'd still give him a soapbox, you'd still bleed off attention from the issues lawmakers need to tackle to fix healthcare, you'd still create a population that believes something that isn't so.

The real solution seems pretty self-intuitive: Make the story about a liar spreading lies. Put your politician on the defensive by making him the focus of the story. Describe how he is making things up, call them 'lies', show the extent to which he's doing it deliberately, and let him try to defend himself. If he weasels out or backtracks, ask him when he's going to set the record straight publicly and if he'll be apologizing to the people he misled. If necessary, target the liar repeatedly and remind your audience of other lies the politician has foisted on the public.

In other words, confront the sons of bitches who are screwing up political discourse by spreading lies. Make it clear that there's a heavy price to pay for lying, and lies will become less attractive.
Didn't any reporters in America ever learn how to deal with schoolyard bullies? Punch the political bullies hard in the nose and they'll leave us in peace. Maybe literally.


N ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.


"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Fox Reporter Contradicts Fox:

 DHS Report On Right Wing Was ‘Requested By The Bush Administration’

Yesterday, a Department of Homeland Security report about the rising radicalization of “rightwing extremists” was leaked. The right wing was immediately incensed, viewing the report on radical “extremists” as an attack on “conservatives.” MSNBC host Joe Scarborough, for example, tried to suggest it was a report about Republican “loyalists.”

However, this morning, Fox News’s Catherine Herridge revealed that the report, along with an earlier report on radicalized left-wing groups, was actually “requested by the Bush administration” but not completed until recently:
HERRIDGE: Well this is an element of the story which has largely gone unreported. One looks at right-wing groups, as you mentioned. And a second is on left-wing groups. Significantly, both were requested by the Bush administration but not finished until President Bush left office.
Herridge’s reporting undermines her network’s own “reporting” over the past 24 hours. Since news of the DHS assessment broke yesterday, Fox anchors and guests have been seizing upon the report as evidence that the administration is trying to intimidate tea party goers or “stifle speech”:
– ANDREA TANTAROS: It’s free speech and the Obama administration is trying to shut it down.

– JAY ALAN SEKULOW: The Obama administration here under Department of Homeland Security has allowed a new regime to come into place that basically says this: Our focus is going to be on the right-wing groups.

– SEAN HANNITY: What do you think of that interpretation, especially coming from a guy that started his political career in the home of an unrepentant terrorist who bombed the Pentagon and capital and sat in Reverend Wright’s church for 20 years?


– DANA PERINO: If Bush had done that we would be having a very different conversation. It wouldn’t have taken a week to find it out. There would have been a special prosecutor. We would have had to come out and apologize.
Watch a compilation, ending with Herridge’s report:



To recap, the Obama administration was apparently following the lead of the Bush Homeland Security Department in assessing the very real threat of violent right-wing extremism.

Indeed, Bush appointees such as FBI Director Robert Mueller have acknowledged the threat of right-wing extremism multiple times.

Of course, we can always trust Fox News to jump to conclusions before fully weighing the facts.


Let The Sun Shine In......