The election process and the media. Can't we do better?

[TankRizzo]

I heard on the radio on my way home yesterday that people generally distrust the media. I believe the number was around 60% and that got me thinking about the election and everything leading up to it.

First off, the debates are a joke. It's basically one big scripted event and if you're lucky there's one off the cuff comment made every 2 or 3 debates, and then that's usually just a quick slam of one of the opponents. They don't get asked tough questions, they don't get any surprise questions, they know everything in advance and have their answer pre-memorized. The whole thing is just laughable.

Second I don't think political ads should be legal. Or at least have some guidelines of what you can and can't say, and should probably be limited to content about themselves and not about their opponents. The slanderous ads, the polling that goes into measuring the reaction to the ads, it's all a game of puppetry and button pushing.

Finally the credibility of the media. 24 hour news channels are probably one of the worst things to happen in the past 20 years. There is no integrity that goes into it, again, it's a numbers game of giving people what they want to see and hear. So, I guess in the end it's our fault, but still. There will need to be a backlash attached to the negative opinion poll for there to be any change in that process.

It's just sad to think that people are elected on sound bytes and other extraneous factors and not issues.

[Thorgrim]

I think CNN was quite a classy outfit in the early 90s when it was by itself...it was quite trusted and I think they made few mistakes

[Tessy]

TankRizzo,

Well, you can see that media is BS but you don't seem to know why it's BS.
You see that the debates are basically just minor disagreements over the
implementation of a given initiative or policy they all share anyway = no
real difference or debate.

But you don't get that the corporate news (NBC, CBS, Foox, CNN, ABC, and
other CFR controlled outlets) and the candidates (all CFR members) are on the
same team, and in the same actual political party (which is the International
Banker brand of Fabian Socialism)?

I guess you're also missing that there is a national election fraud syndicate in
operation and that the "elections" and "debates" are just a show to convince
the public that they have a choice in the matter and are free when the reality
is actually quite different.

I think the "scripting" that you're detecting runs much much deeper than just
the debates.

[TankRizzo]

[Thorgrim]

While the primaries could possibly be a fraud...the general election?

Please...we went from far-left liberals like LBJ to reactionary conservatives like Reagan...

Big business tried to kill FDR in a coup (read Gen. Butler's testimony)

Both sides play dirty tricks, but in the end, they are minor

One key example: a few changed votes in IL and Nixon would have been president in 1960, many thing there was fraud involved, if there was a conspiracy, why against Nixon? If he was "in on it" why the disgraceful run for governor, and if they were "anti-Nixon" why did he win 2 terms with breath-taking ease?

[Tessy]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

While the primaries could possibly be a fraud...the general election?

Well just look at the last two... Kerry was going to fight it and get serious
about it. Everyone was very very upset. Then he just conceded and gave
up and never mentioned it again. WTF?

Please...we went from far-left liberals like LBJ to reactionary conservatives like Reagan...

Big business tried to kill FDR in a coup (read Gen. Butler's testimony)

Both sides play dirty tricks, but in the end, they are minor

One key example: a few changed votes in IL and Nixon would have been president in 1960, many thing there was fraud involved, if there was a conspiracy, why against Nixon? If he was "in on it" why the disgraceful run for governor, and if they were "anti-Nixon" why did he win 2 terms with breath-taking ease?

Yeah, I think the "national fix network" have only been in place for 10 or 15
years. Before that it was media media media and a few well placed fixes.

It's just what I see tho. There sure seems to be allot of supporting evidence
if you look for it.

[Tessy]

Originally Posted by TankRizzo

Tinfoil hat? No I don't believe invisible lizards are controlling anyone and I
don't believe if there are flying saucers that they come from outer space. I
do believe men and especially politicians jockying for position of "the most
powerful man on the planet" are corrupt and will do anything to procure it.

International Bankers jockying for the wealth of the planet are certainly no
exception! It's TFH time to believe anything other than that.

[Tessy]

I think this is actually pretty close to the truth... even tho it's intended as satire.

Diebold Accidentally Leaks Results Of 2008 Election Early | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

[TankRizzo]

Originally Posted by Tessy

Tinfoil hat? No I don't believe invisible lizards are controlling anyone and I
don't believe if there are flying saucers that they come from outer space. I
do believe men and especially politicians jockying for position of "the most
powerful man on the planet" are corrupt and will do anything to procure it.

International Bankers jockying for the wealth of the planet are certainly no
exception! It's TFH time to believe anything other than that.

In this day and age, NOBODY can keep a secret THAT big. The media cares about one thing and that's ratings. Politicians are an exercise in "it's now what you know, but who you know". But that's where I think it ends.

[Tessy]

Well, independent news organizations have issued 100s if not thousands of
reports on it. It's only the corporate news and their affiliates that don't report
on it.

Then if you talk to an investigator who's for real they use terms like "criminal
enterprise" and "election fraud syndicate" to describe what they see and find.

Why does everyone always assume that it's being kept a secret anyway? You
were just told about it and by conditioning or for some other reason you chose
to shun it and call it a TFH thing. Shrug.

I'm not trying to put the blame on but isn't that what just happened?

[A_C_E]

I'm just going to ignore Tessy, as I often do.

But you are correct, Tank, in that 24-hour profit-driven news syndicates are the worst thing to happen to American politics in the past 20 years. For my part, I like that I can flip on CNN or MSNBC at any time of the days and check the news, but the fact that these CABLE stations need maximum viewership to survive and optimize profit is troubling. It lends itself to sensationalist reporting, stupid celebrity stories, and horse-race polling politics.

But I wonder, perhaps, if the dumbing-down of the American public through TV, film, and the internet isn't more responsible for most of these problems, and the corporations just know how to benefit from it.

[Thorgrim]

The "Situation Room" does a good job still...CNN...not surprisingly

[A_C_E]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

The "Situation Room" does a good job still...CNN...not surprisingly

Either way it's still horse-race politics. They talk a lot more these days about who's ahead and who can win what delegates/votes where than they do about issues.

[Galactic Gigolo]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

The "Situation Room" does a good job still...CNN...not surprisingly

I can actually agree with you on this. Blitzer is one of the few 'journalists' who, after years of watching him report, I can't really identify his personal political beliefs.

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by A_C_E

Either way it's still horse-race politics. They talk a lot more these days about who's ahead and who can win what delegates/votes where than they do about issues.

Back in the day the Big Three Networks all ran an evening news hour at the same time as a public service. It was not ratings driven.

I think the ratings war results in less news and more info-tainment! When the majority of viewers are average to below average IQ that is your market!

However, I think the market helps keeps the news less politically biased. No matter how you spin a story they "all" must run the stories the public wants to hear about no matter if it hurts a Republican or a Democrat. If you want your liberal nut sack massaged you can always stick to NPR/PBS and pretend they have no bias. If you get a paycheck from the government, any government, your bias is to protect that interest.

[bheld]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

Back in the day the Big Three Networks all ran an evening news hour at the same time as a public service. It was not ratings driven.

I think the ratings war results in less news and more info-tainment! When the majority of viewers are average to below average IQ that is your market!

However, I think the market helps keeps the news less politically biased. No matter how you spin a story they "all" must run the stories the public wants to hear about no matter if it hurts a Republican or a Democrat. If you want your liberal nut sack massaged you can always stick to NPR/PBS and pretend they have no bias. If you get a paycheck from the government, any government, your bias is to protect that interest.

Yeah, damn NPR and PBS for having such a bias toward reality.

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by bheld

Yeah, damn NPR and PBS for having such a bias toward reality.

The Rev. Otis Moss, the new Pastor of Trinity does not think so much of NPR:

“The lynching was national news. The RNN, the Roman News Network, was reporting it and NPR, National Publican Radio had it on the radio. The Jerusalem Post and the Palestine Times all wanted exclusives, they searched out the young ministers, showed up unannounced at their houses, tried to talk with their families, called up their friends, wanted to get a quote on how do you feel about the lynching?” he continued.

In Easter Sermon, New Obama Pastor Charges Rev. Wright Victim of ‘Lynching’ - America’s Election HQ

Kind of tell us how totally unobjective people with extreme political views can behave, don't it!

[Tessy]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

Back in the day...

I remember Walter Cronkite's first broadcast. By then the News was already
kinda messed up. Everyone thought it was to tone the shock values and the
offensiveness down a bit. By the 70's it was very messed up but lost was the
knowledge of why it was being painted. Now it's just a joke. There is no news
any longer. Seriously, it's all gone. All you're getting is flavors of corporate
messaging bought and paid for - usually by their fascist corporate owners.

[Kytro]

People should distrust the media, all media.

Even the most unbiased are still have bias, have you ever seen a news stroy that presents just the facts and allows you to make up your own mind?

Politicans and the media both use physcological techniques to influence people. Try avoiding advertisement for a period of time, say 2 months or so and then go back to it - people spouting off emotive arguments sound like they treating you as a child, even if you agree with thier position

[motivez]

I think we should take a page from the UK and make candidates answer real questions from audience members about things

Even the "town halls" we have are a joke, only ardent supporters are let in, questioners are screened, and the candidates know what's coming

Compare that to this clip, which I've posted several times on this site:

http://x.w3rd.org/blair.mov

Real, honest dialogue would benefit everyone except candidates who aren't able to answer tough questions.. and IMO those types of candidates aren't the type of people we need in office anyway.

I don't see any good reason that politicians should live such sheltered lives like they do in the US.. I can't imagine Bush going on a show like that, answering those questions from a hostile audience.