Dan Rather explains compromised, corporate, journalism , page 3

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 66 times

reply posted on 8-9-2008 @ 05:40 PM by kidney thief

reply to post by adrenochrome

Indeed, everything needs to be taken with a grain of salt, you have to find what makes sense to you once you've filtered through everything you can tell has an agenda behind it, that is for sure. As for who owns the canadian media outlets is what interests me in these regards; abuse of power and wealth to regulate information is obviously not an isolated event in regards to borders on a map, its a human endeavour.

By the way love the screen name and avatar. Hunter S Thompson is and always will be one of my heros, and deserves mention that he was, from the start, ferociously against the institutions that run against freedom of information and speech. One of the best at putting whatever he wants to talk about in a context that will make you laugh, and definitely make you think.... I practically know more about the 1972 Presidential Campaign than i do of modern Canadian politics...
Even though he founded a form of journalism that is inherently biased in one sense, it is still pure because it is an immediate translation of the experience as it happens, and not rewritten and spun for an agenda. RIP HST!!! I can only imagine what he would be saying about the state of the world today; then again, i guess his suicide said it all.

"If I'd written all the truth I knew for the past ten years, about 600 people - including me - would be rotting in prison cells from Rio to Seattle today. Absolute truth is a very rare and dangerous commodity in the context of professional journalism. " - HST

"The TV business is uglier than most things. It is normally perceived as some kind of cruel and shallow money trench through the heart of the journalism industry, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free and good men die like dogs, for no good reason. " - HST

and one of my favourites, not much to do with journalism but still a beautiful quote:

"There was madness in any direction, at any hour. If not across the Bay, then up the Golden Gate or down 101 to Los Altos or La Honda... You could strike sparks anywhere. There was a fantastic universal sense that whatever we were doing was right, that we were winning...
And that, I think, was the handle — that sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Old and Evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didn't need that. Our energy would simply PREVAIL. There was no point in fighting — on our side or theirs. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave...
So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high-water mark — that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back" _ HST from Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

en.wikiquote.org...(novel)
www.brainyquote.com...

sorry didnt mean to take away from the Dan Rather story here.

reply posted on 8-9-2008 @ 05:45 PM by Maxmars

Originally posted by kidney thief

sorry didnt mean to take away from the Dan Rather story here.

While I can't speak for the OP, that was well said. I took it as a positive distraction - thank you.

[edit on 8-9-2008 by Maxmars]

reply posted on 8-9-2008 @ 06:07 PM by tomfrusso

The only thing Dan Rather should be explaining is how to put on his "depends" and how many "geritols" to take with your doughnuts and coffee.

Dan you poor old sole, slither away into oblivion where you belong.

reply posted on 8-9-2008 @ 07:09 PM by Symbiote

Originally posted by 12m8keall2c
not regulated by government, assured by government [law].

The difference there is only semantic. Having government regulations concerning an activity means that it is regulated by the goverment.

Substituting "assured" for "regulated" does nothing but possibly obscure the issue for some people.

A free press is a free press. Free press means just what the words say.

In life you sort of have to take the bad along with the good.

reply posted on 8-9-2008 @ 08:32 PM by jmilla

Originally posted by tomfrusso
The only thing Dan Rather should be explaining is how to put on his "depends" and how many "geritols" to take with your doughnuts and coffee.

Dan you poor old sole, slither away into oblivion where you belong.

I take it you're implying that Dan Rather is becoming senile?

So basically we shouldn't listen to anything he is saying, because he wouldn't know; he's delusional!

I think it is safe to say he is one of the only good sources we will ever have on something like this, especially since he is getting older, he has less of an incentive to keep quiet.

You might be right though about him being delusional; we haven't had fair and unbiased press seeking the truth for decades, if not centuries.

reply posted on 8-9-2008 @ 09:03 PM by TaZCoN

I see my thread has sparked a nice lively, civil discussion...

I wish I had an email address to contact Mr. Rather, just to wish him well and tell him I admire his courage. If there is no one to speak truth to power, how is the average citizen to know the truth? Control of the news is both the goal and the hallmark of a dictatorship.

When journalists forget that their primary obligation is in the investigation of a story, in discovery and disclosure, then they fail the test.

Unfortunately, when the "big guns" at CBS went after Rather (with the clear encouragement of the bush team) the media (print, radio and TV) timidly allowed the wailing of the oval office and CBS's mea culpa apology to go unchallenged and unquestioned.

The truth seemed to be of less interest than protecting bush and insuring his election.

They created the conditions for dict...President shrub's election to office and the disastrous events that have followed.

reply posted on 8-9-2008 @ 09:50 PM by cirerr

reply to post by TaZCoN

When I click the link, it says, "Sorry, this video is no longer available?". Any alternate links? Also, why do you suppose the video was pulled (assuming it was pulled)? Thx.

reply posted on 8-9-2008 @ 10:01 PM by stfger

hey the video doesnt work because gaytube is doing maintenance right in primo-time.... they've been doing it for an hour.... big time lame

reply posted on 8-9-2008 @ 10:04 PM by TaZCoN

YouTube seems to be doing some site maintenance...

I'm sure It'll be available again later.

reply posted on 8-9-2008 @ 11:17 PM by BlasteR

Originally posted by nyk537
reply to post by 12m8keall2c

The fairness doctrine is what is truly a joke here.

Perhaps we should just have journalists that want to do their jobs and report the news fairly, instead of pushing their own agenda.

We don't need the government to come in and make sure everything is "fair". There are enough sources out there now that people can get their information wherever they want.

If you don't like the news, don't watch it. But keep government out of it.

While I agree that the fairness doctrine is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of, I disagree with you on the second part about government.

It isn't and has NEVER been the government's job to make the news. That might apply if we lived in Hitler's Germany or Stalinist Russia but we don't. If people REALLY think it is the government's job to decide what we hear and don't hear, then something is wrong with those people. I only say this because of the fact that so many people are already gullible enough to believe everything that is spun and preped for public consumption, that even if the government was doing it instead of the MSM, some people would STILL believe it.

Myself, I am upset of CNN and FOX in particular for a few different reasons. But the entire reason people these days tend to stray from watching MSM news coverage is because it's stupid. The facts become twisted, distorted, opinions become biased, impartiality falls at the wayside, and journalism as it probably SHOULD be is largely a distant memory. It has fallen prey to the great spin doctors of the 20th century in which pretty much everything involving the big news networks is expected to be fake, advocated, and hyped.

-ChriS

reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 12:54 AM by americandingbat

While the video posted by the OP is down, you could go to this article from the Huffington Post, June 8 2008. It includes a video of a 20-min speech by Dan Rather which covers much of the same stuff (not, obviously, the Georgia situation).

Great thread.

Edit: clarifying that there's a video at that page.

[edit on 9/9/08 by americandingbat]

reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 06:27 AM by Tentickles

The thing with today's news is that you have to shift thru the nonsense and make your own opinion.

The Weather Channel is a better news station than the corp. owned.

reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 09:22 AM by kirky

Originally posted by Tentickles
The thing with today's news is that you have to shift thru the nonsense and make your own opinion.

The Weather Channel is a better news station than the corp. owned.

Yea, and even they get it wrong often. Figurs

Peace
Kirky

reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 10:32 AM by zorgon

Best Source of News about events in the USA

BBC News online

news.bbc.co.uk...

reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 10:56 AM by Dronetek

Of course Dan Rather knows about this, hes part of it! Why would I listen to a guy who tried in influence an election with fraudulent documents? Not only that, but he rationalized it!

reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 01:02 PM by tommyb98201

Thanks for posting this. Posts like this and a few others, (very few) keep me visiting ATS every day. Not meant to offend, my interests are just narrowed these days.
Good work
Tom

reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 01:03 PM by ItsTheQuestion

'Network' (1976) describes today's media situation famously. Absolutely worth the watch.

YouTube Link

[edit on 9.9.2008 by ItsTheQuestion]

[edit on 9.9.2008 by ItsTheQuestion]

reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 02:00 PM by Tuebor

Yeah, good luck finding an unbiased news source. Nine transnational conglomerates dominate the global media.

My eyes where opened about America when I lived overseas and relied on the Economist for my news source. If you want to learn what others think about the USA read it.

The Economist

A news aggregator like 1st headlines allows you to pick and choose from several sources from the same page.

reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 02:29 PM by Universal Light

ItsTheQuestion: A 32 year foreshadow....pretty wild. Or have they been pressing the same issues down our throat all this time?

The video is good and should be an eyeopener for those who don't understand how things are.

I just want to make one point about the media that is being missed here:

The media's sole purpose is for brainwashing/mind control.

I can promise it has nothing to do with money. The elites don't need money. When you put everything they have full circle, you can see how much money they truely have. Networks while naturally profitable, are warping people to believe what they want. This is the biggest power struggle they have right now. This is also why their next move is how to slow down the information provided on the internet. It's the most uncontrolled item in their very controlled world.

Good post OP and good discussion in this thread so far.

Peace

reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 02:37 PM by ItsTheQuestion

Originally posted by Universal Light
ItsTheQuestion: A 32 year foreshadow....pretty wild. Or have they been pressing the same issues down our throat all this time?

The video is good and should be an eyeopener for those who don't understand how things are.

I'm always happy to share some great art... And it is uncanny how right-on-the-money 'Network' is. Watch it sometime; you'll see what I mean. Interesting note -- in one of the clips, Faye Dunaway's character, a producer, is grinning with admiration at the newsman's rant. But it's not because she "agrees" with what he's saying. Quite the contrary. I won't spoil the rest.

I just want to make one point about the media that is being missed here:

The media's sole purpose is for brainwashing/mind control.

Now that is a strong statement. Not saying I disagree...

I can promise it has nothing to do with money.

Actually, I do disagree. As you go on to say, "the elites don't need money". True, in the sense that they already have plenty of it. But the people and systems below them in the pyramid need money. All to keep the ones at the top right where they are.

The elites don't need money. When you put everything they have full circle, you can see how much money they truely have. Networks while naturally profitable, are warping people to believe what they want. This is the biggest power struggle they have right now. This is also why their next move is how to slow down the information provided on the internet. It's the most uncontrolled item in their very controlled world.

Good point about the Net. Believe me, though...they're working on it!