Is it News? Or a Consumer Report?

Most people think today's news is just infotainment, but consumer news is important too. Consumer news tells investors and investor-wannabes what to invest in, and where. The news tells us if it's still safe to buy stocks in Roche and Tamiflu, and whether or not to pull our money out of Venezuela. We read the news to learn what technologies and start-ups are hot, so we can add them to our portfolios, and find out which items in the latest product line-ups might be perfect for home, work, or play. The headlines don't say "consumer report," but smart people know what's happening, and how to read between the lines and use the information to get ahead. The thing is though, the big boyz have other, better sources, and newspapers used to be a tool for democracy, not a consumer guidance system. Newspapers used to tell people what needed their attention, what they could do, and when – as voters – to influence political decisions. Newspapers used to flag political activities that might remake – or break – our world. And the Free Press used to support individual power. But no more. Now we have infotainment and consumer reports. The Free Press, and the role it once played in democracy's drama, has been written out of the script.

---

It’s an old story. Once upon a time, there was a Free Press. And the Free Press was all about democracy. Serving democracy. Feeding democracy. Supporting democracy. But democracy is a wild card – a negative factor whose impact cannot be predicted, except that it is guaranteed to screw up growth projections. And cut into corporate profits. Democracy is bad for business. Very bad. And the Free Press was democracy’s critical supply line. Kill the Free Press and democracy’s army will die of malnutrition. So the Free Press was killed, and Corporate Media took the throne. The King is dead. Long live the King. The End.

***

The media industry is owned and controlled by a few of the world’s international corporations, and of course, the bankers behind the throne. Hence the modern focus on infotainment and consumer reports. And also hence the current dismissal of democracy and the democratic process. It’s bad for business.

But it so happens that I believe in democracy. I believe that even the most ignorant uneducated person is better equipped to make right and honorable decisions – about things that affect themselves, their families, and their world – than any impersonal international corporation that’s accountable and responsible to no one and nothing except the bottom line. I also believe that big government and big business are the exact same animal – and bad for people. Just like people and democracy are bad for business, except reversed.

Does this make me an anti-American socialist commie? Poke no. And trust me, if I were a professional agent with a subversive agenda, I would have access to much better information, not just garage sale books and magazines and accidental finds on the Internet. I would get briefings, and do a lot more homework, and do a way better job. I used to be a professional, before I got sick. In fact, I used to be a real dragonlady. Before I got sick, I could crunch the numbers, whip out a budget, and write up a business proposal or grant application in no time. I could manage the project and write ad copy too. I always knew what was happening and what move was the right one to make. But no more. Now, I’m not in any loop, and my skills and abilities are not so reliable either. It takes me a while. And like most people, I’m kinda figuring things out as I go along.

The thing is, I have a lot of time to think because I’m sick and disabled. And it’s dangerous, thinking is. I don’t consciously decide what to think about though. I just sniff around the Net, pick up on things that interest me – like health, science, the environment, money – and sort of smell out the stuff that seems important. I’m fairly obsessive about synthesis, and can’t help looking for the big picture. So I’m always trying to build a better framework, and find the unifying theory. It’s my nature.

It’s true though. What I really want to do is not Politically Correct. I admit that. I want to do good old-fashioned common sense journalism, and support democracy. Poke the consumer reports. I want people to wake up. Smell the roses, and the stench of corruption too. I want to move them, inspire them to action. Help change the world, in my own small way. It’s my production background: See a problem; Get on it; Fix it. So I read the news reports, and between the lines, and I see what’s happening in the world, and to it – like, who could not? – and I want to tell people, and shake them, and scream, “Stand up! Shout! Be counted. Don’t let it slip through your fingers. Please.”

I want to ferret out the stuff that the corporate media doesn’t want us to know about – and examine the facts in a way that makes our corporate rulers poop their pants. I want to talk about political decision-making before we’re stuck with a done deal.

Yeah, I get creative about short circuiting the editorial controls. It’s what I’m good at, and I have a lot of experience doing it. Give me a funding program, any one, and I will tell you how to package or re-package your project to fit the guidelines. Again, it’s not like I consciously plan it out. I just jump in the river, go with the flow, and ride the current. I used to have a real 6th sense about it, and it always worked for me.

But yeah. I seem to keep missing the mark here. I end up dancing around the key issues; I get close, but never quite get there.

Like my podcast series on democracy: that was close. But no cigar. For the past 200 years, the United States has been famous for being the world’s biggest, best, and greatest democracy. Now, the corporate-funded social engineers want us to believe that the USA is a republic not a democracy, like the two are mutually exclusive, and representative democracy doesn’t count, and poke all the old books and dictionaries that say otherwise. But did I lay it out? Tackle that issue head on? No. I dropped the ball.

Then there was my Quakes Trigger Quakes podcast. I covered one new article, published under that title. Turns out it's common knowledge in geophysics not only that quakes trigger quakes, but that oil and gas drilling also trigger quakes. So that means that oil and gas drilling trigger quakes that might trigger other quakes. It also turns out that drilling and mining change the earth's geodynamics, and alter the planet's structure in ways that can amplify seismic waves, making it even more likely that quakes will trigger quakes. Now that's good to know. But does corporate media cover this stuff? Of course not. They bury it. Do they want us talking about it and digging around for more information? Not a chance. But did I get it right the first time? No. I experimented with the media.

And my last fiasco – the article on CDC secrecy and the “select agent” gambit – again, close, but no cigar. If I could re-write history and that particular article, I would do it very differently. For one thing, I would go straight to the bottom line: Prevent this plague and democracy might have a chance; don’t intervene, and it’s game over for democracy and the Free World.

At every turn the message from corporate media is the same: Stay out of it. This is not a democracy. You have no part in the decision-making process. You don't know enough to have a say. It's out of your hands. But really, that is not true. None of it.

Do I make mistakes? Drop the ball? All the time. Is it gameover? Poke no. I didn’t hear the fat lady sing.

The truth is I’m a natural born pot-stirrer. Always have been. It’s not that I try, it just happens. I’m the one who always asks, “What clothes are you talking about? The emperor is naked.” But hey, it’s marketable, honest observation is, and it’s served me well. Corporate and business managers love people like me, harnessed and re-directed. At my best, I’m persistent; I get straight to the point; go right for the throat of any issue; and wield logic, reason, and language like a surgeon’s laser.

But six years ago, I got really really sick, and then disabled. It shouldn’t have happened, in my opinion. I was diagnosed with fibromuscular dysplasia (FMD) in 1990. It was handled. I thought. But in 1996, I was exposed to hepatitis A - and my doctor gave me a gamma globulin injection. Surprise, surprise (not, according to the medical literature) - the gamma globulin triggered the underlying FMD, caused it to spread through my body, and speeded its progression. Now, besides the FMD, I am diagnosed with osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, enhanced pain syndrome, irritable bowel, a large lesion on my brainstem, probably from a stroke, assorted other problems - and chronic obstructive respiratory disease (COPD) too, the source of my husky-sexy 1-900 voice. All incurable, untreatable, chronically debilitating, and all associated with FMD in the medical-scientific literature. Waaah. I'm too young to be this old.

Anyway, I lost everything – my savings, pensions, home, car, and credit. It took a while. I down-sized and down-graded several times. Finally, I had to choose: live in a for-real down-and-out dirty slum; or take that cute little 3 bedroom, with front and back yards, on the river, in a housing cooperative. The co-op won, hands down.

And my chatter about worker owned and run cooperatives? Well, it’s like this. I think I still have a lot to offer, but I can’t work. I never know when I’ll be choking my lungs up, puking my guts out, so doubled up in pain I can’t think straight, or so crippled I can’t walk or bend my fingers to write. I can’t hold a full or part time job. Can’t do contracts either, because I might not make the deadline. And I already blew my reputation trying that route. Fact is, this economy has no place for me. Me and my abilities are too unreliable. I need an alternative. Just like half the adult American population.

The real problem is this: Our country already has too many people who are chronically debilitated and drawing disability. Once bird flu hits, the numbers will skyrocket. Then, the government will have to make a decision: Blow the budget on disability pay-outs, or look at euthanasia. All things considered, which way do you think that particular wind is gonna blow?

Me, I have no doubt at all. So I want a fallback position. Fast. And from my vantage point, worker cooperatives look like the only game in town. I don’t think communism is good. But I do I think we’re all being herded to slaughter, and I’m gonna run – flat out – in other direction. I want to find some way, any way that might work, to be financially independent again. So I won't be euthanized for being a "useless eater."

I’m a real person, with real problems. The way I see it, real people write real news. Real people see what’s real, behind the press releases and consumer reports. We see what’s gonna hit us where we live.

In my opinion, that’s what makes ATS the best conspiracy site on the Net, and ATSNN soon to be the best alternative news network. Real people write real news here. We nibble at the edges of press releases. We chew on consumer reports, and we work together to get the juice out. It works, in my opinion. And it works because together, we look past what the corporate media wants us to see, and find what’s real.

That’s my take. That’s my story. Now, I’m gonna duck.




[edit on 26-10-2005 by soficrow]

Excellent just excellent. if theres anything I learned from my cultural cousins in Colombia its this. If we want to expose the truth we're gonna have to get into the media. I know for a fact there are at least 2000 regular unique members on this web forum. We carry a combination of economics and financial experts, those with knowledge in the field of certain sciences, excellent writers, especially you soficrow, that have the potential for journalists to report the truth.

If 2000 of us members could pool at least 50$ a month, and I am sure we can, we could raise $100,000 of investment capitol in one month. Thats equal to $1.2 million dollars in one year. If we could gather our financial experts here on this board to help us come up with an investment plan to give a return on the members investments as well as make it multiply we would have the potential to create a brand new independant media company.

Of course due to it being a threat to the current corrupt media companies and the government, we will also have to take advantage of our second amendmant rights of the freedom to bear arms in order to physically arm and secure our new broadcast center.

We have the potential, we have the manpower, we even have the education, we now just need leaders to take action to create AboveTopSecret corporation. Simon Gray I am talking to you man. Let us all take the next step in organizing your dream of truth and freedom and denying ignorance to the next level and make this website into a power to compete and educate the masses. After all you own the name.

What do you say all? Shall we begin researching the proper funding required to make ATS into a media company and utilize the many expertise and skills that we all have in order to make it prosper?

Oh dear. Great enthusiasm DYepes. And thanks.

But not what I was thinking at all. For me, maybe a small group of locals who could turn trash into art, or maybe a gardening service. And pick up each others stack when we can't carry our own weight. That's the problem I'm trying to solve - not being able to maintain, and fit into a standard economic structure.

As far as ATS goes - it ain't broke, so why poke it?


.

Thats the point I am also attempting to solve. You would have a very great economical use in an ATS media company. Pretty much you could do exactly what you do now, but it would reach a much larger audience of people who don't already know these things. On top of that you would be getting paid for it. If you can still write, or for that matter think, then you have a use yet.




Hey google wasn't broke when it was just a simple search engine. It has however been turned into a huge revenue machine, expanding into many markets. And the people who originaly invested in it have become rather wealthy.

Why not apply the same concept here. Except instead of providing a search engine we are providing a media service. Of course some things would have to become a little more serious, but not only would it give this nation and even the world a new information hub of truth and exposure of corruption, it will also give the 2000+ original investors some good return on their investments. Google has made a wealth of revenue by selling advertising. This is how all media companies gain their wealth, advertising.

Of course we wont become a Time Warner overnight. However, we could offer airtime for products and services that probably have a more difficult time getting exposure on the monopolistic present powers. Such as startup companies that can integrate solar heating and power into homes, or other related services. We would be encouraging the newer and better services and needs of society while also feeding them the truth about those who are trying to hold it back for power and profits.

The ATS board would stay free and still be the same. Wouldnt you enjoy be able to get your ATS headlines now by simply turning your tv into a certain channel and seeing it being reported by the very members of this site? And you knowing that you contributed and are even benefeting yourself from helping making it happen?

All I know is im 19 years old, working for Wal-Mart and I have 5000$ at least worth of credit and willing to put in as much as needed on a monthly basis to startup a power that can reckon with those who wish to stomp on our fellow citizens rights and force feed them lies daily.

If ever we wanted to make a difference without using violence, this would be the way.

And if the damn feds come knocking on my door tomorrow ready to take me in because of it, well damnit I am going to die in a hail of bullets but not without taking some of them down with me!!!

[edit on 10/26/2005 by DYepes]

[edit on 10/26/2005 by DYepes]

Thank you DYepes. I really appreciate your support. I know darn well I'm still useful. But thanks for telling me.





You have great ideas DYepes - and wonderful enthusiasm! You go.

But the thing is - there's a big difference between a) some people getting together and starting a business, and b) those people looking to buy into one that already exists.

Simon Gray started ATS, then SkepticOverlord joined him, then Springer became a partner. And these guys have worked their butts off, and sweated, and put up their own cash, and worked really hard to make ATS what it is. If I were them - I wouldn't be looking to sell out or dump the business or turn it into a worker owned co-op. It's theirs - by right of blood, sweat, tears, and cold hard cash.

I can be here, and be a part of it all, already. That's what I'm doing. I don't need shares to benefit, or to be a part owner.

And BTW - it's corporations who buy the advertising. So if they don't like what you say, they won't buy from you. Then, no more media machine. Gameover.

ATS can do what it does because it manages to strike a balance. I'm absolutely positive that it's not easy to accomplish. Kinda like dancing on knives, I would think. ...I keep waiting for a nice polite note telling me to pack it in and shut up for a few weeks. It hasn't happened so far, but if it ever does, I would understand. Media is hard - but it's simple. Keep the advertisers happy and you're sailing. Peese 'em off, and you're dead in the water.




Stay mad guy, and don't give up. But don't quit your day job either. There's a lot to learn about how things work before you can make 'em work. You're on the right track.




You got it! ...but it doesn't need to be a business, and it doesn't need to be big. Just keep working, talking, and posting, and you can make a difference. The biggest redwood in the world started from a tiny little seed.



.

Well you have definetly pointed out things I didn't think about at first. I still think it would be nice to have an ATS fortress that boradcasts the truth 24/7, but the more I think about the little server that this site is hosted on is just that. A fortress protected by the freedom of speech and the right to protest.

Hey but at least you guys know, if ever your looking for expansion, I will be here to help fund it in any way possible.

On another note, where can I find a radio transmitter like the ones college kids used to use to broadcast a show on campus? Im not exactly sure of what specific words to search for on google because I do not know what the thing is called. Of course I would have to get a permit from the FCC and the thing probably wont go farther than a few blocks, but I would love to try it out and see how it workss Radio can be an excellent way of spreading a message too.

Somebody please explain what in the world this nonsense is supposed to mean?

Newspapers used to be a tool of democracy? Riiiight. And I forgot, you're Canadian and don't understand that eh nation you always gun for (America) was designed to be a constututional republic. Which points to another obvious thought; nations other than "democracies" have papers and journalism.

The "Free Press" used to support individual power? You do realize that makes no sense whatsoever, don't you? Individual power, corporate power, communal power (which is what I thought you'd be for) really doesn't make a difference when it comes to reporting whatever it is that a paper or other news agnecy or medium is going to report.

Just when do you think that the newspaper concept was pure and virtuous? Do you know how old the term, "yellow journalism" is? Seriously, this is nothing more than fictitious crap you spin on the fly in order to push your agenda. I see little difference between such activity and the activities of "them" (and you know who they are). Create a fabricated problem and offer the solution.

Does this make you an anti-American? You even asked that question in your rant. Why was the focus on America? You do not live in America, so why do you concentrate on America? You now live in Canada; do they not have newspapers? I really thinkthey do; I read on-line editions from that country from time to time. Shoot, as a matter of fact, I read online papers from all over the world! Some of them from nations that aren't free, and I always find little nuggets of knowledge. Point is, for some reason, you think that newspapers were created to supprt democracies, and that newspapers have always been owned by people who have absolutely no agenda and are totally unbiased.
Well, no, you do not think that. You and I both know that, just as you and I both know that you are aware of the fact that this nation was never meant to be a democracy and that we were warned of those dangers by some of our founding fathers. Why do you continue to say things that we both know that you know is not the truth? You know the answer, and I have my suspicions. The word Agenda comes to mind; elsewise, why would a person continue to make assertions known to be untrue?

You see, here's the deal; you say you want to be a journalist. By your own definition, you cannot be, as you continuously "report" misinformation, and that is wrong.
A newspaper should be unbiased and report objectively. That is to say, it should not have an agenda. What newspaper that would fit your own definition be able to hire you? The answer - none.

I'm glad you realize that you are a pot-stirrer, but what you really should understand is that it does not simply "happen"; you do it on purpose, and you do it with erroneous information and you do it even when logic and facts are presented to you. you do it so you can do just what you say, to sit back and watch. That is not right. As a matter of fact, that is downright wrong.

Again, you say that you want to be a real reporter because you are a real person. I have just outlined the reasons why you cannot be a real reporter (by your own definition), so you should give it up. Don't worry, though, if you set your sights just a bit lower, you could possibly get a job with the New York Times or the Washington Times. Both spin their stories to suit their agendas; one is left and the other is right.

I regret that you have your ailments;that is really an unfortunate situation. However, that you have all this time to read and think does not mean that you read factual information or come to the logical or correct conclusion. You will argue with those who spend 1,000's of hours studying the point of contention, and when all the facts are laid in front of you, you duck and weave and maneuver like a pro boxer.
Maybe you are better suited for CNN or Fox. As a matter of fact, you could really sit in for O'Reilly, as I have noticed many a time that he can be right for the wrong reasons and wrong for the right ones. That happens when you come to a conclusion and then look for supporting facts. This is something that a real journalist would never do.

I think we stumbled into the personal blogs area by accident.

Sofi, in response the portion of your Op/Ed actually on topic this is the sort of thing I see. Advertising as Payola: Who Really Owns CNN?

In response to the rest, you know I like you but this is poor judgement. The difference in the title, opening paragraph and actual story (which seems to be you) is too much to swallow this time.



[edit on 27-10-2005 by RANT]

I think we have another deceptive or inappropriate (at the least) title here.

I don't see anything about "consumer report", which is typically editorial content intended to help people make retail purchase decisions.

In any regard, Thomas is certainly correct. Even venerable Ben Franklin new that newspapers where mouthpieces and editorial agendas were unavoidable. The real difference between then and now is the collective intelligence of people who consume the news. Ben and his closest friends knew in their heart of hearts that supporting a freedom of speech in all forms was among the most important aspects in the founding of this republic. Agendas, bias, and even yellow journalism from all angles would constantly pose a challenge for the government to be answerable and push people to contemplate multiple viewpoints.

But as I said, the collective intelligence and literacy of those consuming the news in Ben's time as opposed to know is astoundingly different. This is really the only difference... as a populace we have lost the ability discern what is biased news, what is an agenda, and all too often what is yellow. Combine this with a philosophy of only prompting "news" that increases ratings... and we have a scenario where the only possible source of real news is from the people... like right here on ATS.

If Ben and friends were juggling their revolutionary thoughts these days, looking at the general population, they may have thought different of a "free" press.

This "nonsense" explains what you persist in calling my "agenda" - and shows that it comes from personal need - necessity - NOT political or ideological commitment. It is also meant to show that many other people on this board and in the world have similar needs and motivations.

If you question the legitimacy of the solutions I have identified for myself, perhaps you would like to offer an alternative? Other than euthanasia.




The problem isn't fabricated. I wish it were. Moreover, billions of people in America and around the world share similar problems. These articles talk mainly about deaths from chronic disease - but the real social, economic, and personal crises result from the billions of people with chronic disease who do not die - but live, disabled and unable to work in the current economic system.

Bird Flu and Beyond: Chronic Disease to Kill 400 Million
The top 5 chronic diseases - heart disease, cancer, stroke, COPD, and diabetes - cause more than two-thirds of all deaths in the USA. More than 90 million Americans are diagnosed with chronic disease. Over 45.8 million Americans have no medical insurance, and thus, no diagnosis or treatment.

Bird Flu, and the "Neglected Epidemic"




TC - obviously we have been exposed to a completely different set of history books, references, and teachers. I certainly am willing to accept that you have been taught what you think is truth. I only ask that you recognize that there are other teachings, and other truths - and that we can only find what's real by putting ALL the information together.




I am very interested in the idea of education - and the fact that an individual's power is pretty much dependent on their ability to read. Which is why there are huge chunks of history where it was illegal for most people to learn to read. Which also is why women only were allowed to be 'educated' very recently in history. And even if they did manage to learn to read, people who couldn't afford a formal education or books got most of their 'learning' from newspapers.

Of course the media is and has been used as a tool for population control and manipulation. But the other side of media history is that newspapers also were used by those wishing to break away from that control - a legitimate, and significant, part of newspaper history. I am talking about that part of newspaper history.




:sigh: I am American by birth. I moved to Canada recently, but I care about my home. Not that I think my birthright is pertinent on an international website.




1. I don't "gun" for America.
2. I believe I am fighting for America.

Your difficulty seems to be that we have distinct and different ideas of what makes America what it is - and you seem to be entirely unwilling to allow me my perspective, and my commitment to democracy.

Again - obviously we have been exposed to a completely different set of history books, references, and teachers. I certainly am willing to accept that you have been taught what you think is truth. I only ask that you recognize that there are other teachings, and other truths - and that we can only find what's real by putting ALL the information together.

And as I have said before, I have stacks of old dictionaries and references that say republics are representative democracies. Ie., the 1946 "Funk and Wagnalls New Practical Standard Dictionary." So please, deal with it.




Of course it does. This is so self-evident that I don't know how to even begin to respond.




If you acknowledge the existence of "yellow journalism," surely you can see there are corollaries?




TC - I disagree with you. I do believe this nation was meant to be a democracy, and that some of our founding fathers tried to prevent it from becoming one. Just as you have evidence to prove your argument, I have documentation to prove mine. ...Not least of which is the fact of America's worldwide fame as a democracy.

And just as some of our founding fathers warned against the dangers of democracy, others warned that large corporations are a threat to democracy.

Re: Agenda. I have seen a huge increase in websites that are built around the theme "America is a republic, not a democracy." I haven't done deep research, but this increase seems to result from a corporate-funded social engineering campaign designed to facilitate the transition from the USA being a nation state to being a corporate state.

I don't want to see that happen, I want America to regain her place in history as the world's biggest, best, and greatest democracy. I am willing to put personal resources into working against it. So if that means I have an "agenda," I guess I do.




Examples please.




I challenge you to find any newspaper anywhere that is totally unbiased and "objective." Not possible, IMO.

Re: misinformation. Examples please.




TC - you have no right to presume you understand my motives. As far as erroneous information, examples please. When you say "logic and facts presented to me" - again, examples please. I am getting tired of hearing charges with no specific referents - it's kinda like those blanket accusations that were handed out in the Inquisition, or like the Patriot Act stuff. I think we can be more specific here.

Like, maybe I should be given the opportunity to defend myself against the charges? Or is that not part of your agenda?




Hmmm. I said ATSNN is special because real people report real news, and then pick it apart to find the truth behind the camouflage - which they can do primarily because they are real (meaning their "agendas" are personal), and because of the collaborative process. I think we have some darn good reporters here. And I think they're good because they're real.

Maybe you could be more specific? I don't quite get what your point is against me.




In all the disagreement I have encountered lately, I have seen very few actual references, points, or even arguments. Mainly what I hear is raging and character assassination. Perhaps there were a few points and references buried in the vitriol, but I must have missed them. I confess I put that stuff on mental ignore.

If I "duck and weave and maneuver like a pro boxer," maybe you could stop swingin' and start talkin? Like, allow discussion to proceed on a different plane?

But I do find it intriguing that you question both the veracity of my information and conclusions, as well as the legitimacy of my ability to successfully defend my positions. That's a no-win Catch-22 structure you're trying to make me buy into. Back to the Inquisition and the Patriot Act.

...FYI - My resume includes: Advertising manager of a corporation that sold franchises, I helped bring the company from 7 to 22 new franchises in a single year. Managing editor of an industry-funded magazine, with a multi-million dollar budget - I built it from the ground up. I have negotiated with industry and government lawyers, sat in high level board meetings, and made things happen.

If you attack me, my propositions, or my work - I know how to mount a defense. If you choose to collaborate and work productively - I know how to do that too. ..But I can't help suspecting that the real issue is that I have the actual temerity to fight back, unlike the noobs,
and
to question your party line.


Also, I do hope you understand that aggressive modes actually create positions, and solidify disagreement?




You are saying you don't want me around, and that I don't belong on ATSNN. But IMO - you have not provided any real reason beyond your unproven suspicions that I am a liar with motives and an agenda that is not personal. I have attempted to explain who I am and where I'm coming from, and put myself out on a limb to do it. What else can I say?




It may be. I honestly wasn't sure if I got too personal - but I do know that "human interest" is a legitimate component of news stories. I put this in Op/Ed though, because it is NOT news. ..Also, as I am consistently attacked on a personal level, I felt it to be legitimate to defend myself on a personal level, with reference to the big picture - and my and others' place in the big picture.




Back to "human interest." ...I could have interviewed a different person to make the same points. Would that have been more legitimate in your view?

IMO - I showed that different members bring different sensibilities and perspectives to ATS, based on their personal experience - and said this adds to ATS' integrity, simply because it IS based in the personal. I am saying that is legitimate, although you may not agree.

...I showed that what might appear to be political agendas often are not. In my case for example, I am responding to necessity.

...I highlighted the fact that the media is a tool for population control and manipulation, saying modern media is nothing more than a "consumer guidance system" - a fact not in question for any honest media professional or historian - and suggested how and why media can be, should be, and IS used differently.

...I provided examples of current media manipulation, admitted to blowing my coverage at the starting gate - and said ATS' strength is that media deconstruction and news analysis does not stop at the lead article - which is what makes this a great site.

...There are significant crises facing us that are misrepresented, under-represented, and ignored outright by the media. If we don't look at them squarely, we will continue to be herded - probably somewhere we do not want to go. I think ATS does a good job identifying what's really happening, and busting population control through media manipulation.

That's my point SO. That we are being fed "consumer reports" that tell us where to invest, what to support, and more - without formal acknowledgment that that's what's going on. In practise, the notion of "consumer report" has been expanded far, far beyond the idea of helping people to make retail purchase decisions.

I am saying that contemporary news defines people exclusively as consumers, and leads not just towards purchases of end products, but larger and more ambiguous investments. For example: investing in something, which might lead to supporting a war to protect that investment.




Agreed.




And I am saying that part of the explanation for this phenomenon is that we are being treated as consumers - that we are not given news, but rather are fed consumer reports that lead us to pre-determined attitudes and decisions. ...and also, which prevent us from developing alternative attitudes, and making decisions contrary to the plan.




Yeah ATS!




And what do you think that might be?



ed. to add point under attitudes and decisions

[edit on 27-10-2005 by soficrow]

As the current Blog Czar I have to say excellent Blog!

It has it all. Some thoughts on corporate media and so-called "news." Futher a personal account of threads made that just didn't get enough response or garner enough attention. And finally the trump card of a humanity story of a disability.

Like I said, great Blog.

Problem is....this isn't a Blog. It's ATSNN. Sure it's an OP/ED but about WHAT exactly? Corporate media who doesn't visit your threads enough, but they should because you're disabled?

Yes, I know. I missed the whole point I'm sure, but I wanted to at least give my feedback Sofi.
Personally...you lost me at hello.

(zinger coming here)

Since when did ATS members start paying attention to "history books"?

Yes... idealistic views of history may look back at the evolution of journalism with very rosy glasses, but it doesn't take much effort to find contemporary commentary from the late 1700's throughout the 1800's to discover that the "free press" of the day was, in many ways, far worse than what we have now.



Blame that press manipulation thing.



Let's shift things a bit, and get past generalizations to specifics...

Which do you think would represent a "better" United States?

A. All-encompassing Federal Government ruling the states.

B. Nearly autonomous states under an organizing Federal Government.

Rats. Busted.

But seriously - I'm not saying the "free" press is the only history - or even the dominant one. Just IMO - the most important one.







Okay. I give you that point, just for the sake of argument though not because I really think you're right.

Anyway, given that the USA is world famous for being the biggest, best etc democracy - but that was actually a misundertanding and not true at all - what about the idea that when enough people believe the same thing, however mistaken, that the dominant belief becomes the reality?




Big government scares me - it's too easy to manipulate. I support autonomy - BUT - qualify the position by saying that such autonomy cannot be accomplished when there are global corporate states in existence - which there are.

IMO - autonomous states could NEVER stand up against already established super-rich corporate states, or function autonomously - and individuals don't have the chance of an ice cube in hell.



.

As Reagan would say, "There you go again!"

You say one thing (that is to say, you make a thesis), and when your ears are pinned against the wall, you try a changeup. Guess what, I don't play that game.

You are right in that we read different "history" books. I read real, honest to goodness history, not garbage that pushes a line of politics that fits my view. See, there is the huge difference. My "opinion" in regard to my country (I'm referring to mine, not yours as I know nothing about Canadian politics except that it does not share our constitution) is formed through understanding how it was supposed to be. Knowing that much, I know where we have strayed and why we are not living up to the expectations set forth by those really smart guys whose words you should read and study if you want to dance with me. See, that is why I can sniff out a fraud in a drop of a hat, and I'm hot on your trail; you simply try and ignore the hot breath and growls in hopes I will go away and allow you to lie all you want.

You do not believe you are fighting for America, don't feed me that BS. You don't like what America is supposed to be. That is why you speak out against America and the vision the Founders created for us. You want to say we believe the same thing, and then out of the other side of your mouth, you say I won't allow you your commitment to "democracy". It has been explained to you that this nation was not supposed to be ruled by a democratic government, and it has been explained to you why that form of government is so dangerous, yet you insist on pushing the LIES that you so fervently desire others to share.

Do you understand that when you continue to claim something even though it has been thoroughly explained that what you say isn't true, that you are either a stone-cold liar, or you are suffering from a mental disorder?

Oh, and as far as that "other truths" BS, thatis precisely what it is - BS. 2=2=4, I don't care what you say. There is no truth anywhere that would lead one to believe that two pennies placed in a pocket with two otehr pennies will somehow created $1.45. The crap you have been allegedly taught was a lie. Funny how you claim that "the man" is real and is trying to get us, yet you seem to believe his fundamental lies and try and do the work for him as you are doing on this board. Furthermore, as I said before, I am not in the least bit concerned about your dictionary collection as it is clear that because one collects books filled with words that one can understand how to make sense out of them when they are strung into sentences and paragraphs. You keep on bringing up a dictionary, and I keep on telling you to read one collection of essays called the Federalist Papers which would mke things clear to you, yet you try and tell me a dictionary has explained the nation to you. Do you see the obsenity in that statement.

You know what I believe? I'll tell you what I believe. Seeing how you refuse to do nothing but push your socialistic agenda, since it has been explained to you how you are emphatically wrong in every wretched point you've thrown against the foundation of this nation, since you want me to believe that you are simply here at this board (while sitting in Canada) to make America better by spreading lies, I have come to the conclusion that you are a bored, lonely soul who comes to this baord to get attention by posting outrageous and extrememly ignorant crap. Why would you do this? Simply because you know that there are people who knowthe truth who will try their best to educate you. In the process, you get all the attention you can handle. This thread is the perfect example; you make a title that has nothing to dowith the body of the ramble, and the bounce around scattered thoughts that are mostly based on either bad teaching or erroneous conclusions of your own based upon your own twisted ideas of how your neighboring country should be, and then you tell us how you want to be a reporter. Upon telling us that, we are to ignore your inability to stick to unbiased and untarnished truth-telling and yor inability to find and embrace simple truths, much less obscure and hidden factoids by the "evil corporations". On top of this, you try and garner sympathy by telling us about yor medical woes. Guess what? I'm not impressed. I've got friends who could write a book about medical woes, and you don't never hear them trying to get sympathy and any slack cut for them because of it. AS a matter of fact, there are a couple people at this site that are going through crap that would bring most to their trembling knees, but they drive on in a manner that doesn't allow most people to have a clue what is going on in their lives.

You are eitehr in denial of the truth or you are trying to bulldoze over the truth, and this is obvious to anyone who knows the truth. And, yes, I said the truth, as that is all there is, unless you are able to cross into alternate universes.

Enjoy your days in the sun and warmth off attention-getting. I assure you, people who spread lies are not tolerated well on this board. If one reads the terms and conditions, one would see that doing so is not allowed. Some are simply trying to see if you are lying or simply deluded. I already know the answer.

You might ought to redirect your attention to Canada. Not that I wish that on Canada, but I'd have not a clue if you are spreading lies unless they are very blatant.

...90 million people in America are diagnosed with chronic disease - millions more likely are undiagnosed. This is a huge population - the nation cannot afford to support these people and keep them alive, and autonomous states wouldn't have a hope.

It is a death sentence if you force these people to work - in the existent economic system. I am recommending an alternate economic system for this population - and that people who are disabled by chronic disease create cooperatives - an autonomous state, based on a different economic system.

Many argue that it's not government's place to support 'unfit' people - but it seems the same premises/argument also are used to question the validity of the disabled population creating its own system, or 'autonomous state.'

IMO - radical situations call for radical solutions. Obviously, I'm not going to support euthanasia.

Does anybody see any other alternatives?


.


.PS. TC - there you go, ranting again. You need to separate your points out, and use quotes. I don't know what you're referring to, except that you're on about my credibility.

[edit on 27-10-2005 by soficrow]

That number must be wrong. You're talking 30% of the US population! That's just crazy to think that many people have been diagnosed with a chronic disease.

Where on earth did you get such a high number?

SO,
Here is a link to see this info

www.cdc.gov...

Well... that's different isn't it?



If you read the entire piece, these are projected estimates based on death-rates, etc. These estimates are very different than saying 90 million people have been diagnosed. And... the CDC has been widely known (very often) to pad numbers (especially projections) while in bed with their pharma friends.

I would also like to point out that it is an issue of Symantics as well. Asthma can be considered a "Chronic Illness" and many other diseases that have some impact on day to day lives depending on severity, but not like disabling conditions such as MS, CP etc.