I came across this post earlier today. It is an Open Letter to Michael Moore suggesting that he make a movie much like Sicko, Bowling for Columbine, Fahrenheit 911 or Roger and Me. I have yet to see Sicko, but I have seen his other movies. I do find his movies thought-provoking enough that it has ignited an urge to find out more about the topics he chooses to grapple with. While some would challenge the validity of the facts Michael uses in his films, ( and I'm not going to debate that point ) he clearly wishes to see people dig deeper that what they are commonly exposed to via major news outlets.
Which brings me directly to the point of this post . . . Do you trust the news you receive regardless of its vehicle or source of delivery? The news you watch on TV? The news you read in magazines? Newspapers? Internet? Even if there was some sort of expose would it really make a difference?
Which brings me directly to the point of this post . . . Do you trust the news you receive regardless of its vehicle or source of delivery? The news you watch on TV? The news you read in magazines? Newspapers? Internet? Even if there was some sort of expose would it really make a difference?
It's no major secret that many television news stations are owned by a very small handful of corporations.
As hearusnow.org points out:
I've always believed that the media should be objective. Just the facts. I'll form my own opinions. But, it would appear that the media decided differently. It seems there's a common goal amongst media companies that they have to either side with one opinion or attempt to sway perception. It's pretty obvious why they do this. It really all boils down to ratings and money. People like to hear their own opinions validated. Once a person finds a media outlet that provides them the substance they need to make themselves complete in thought and message, they'll come back again and again.
Think of it like this . . . imagine the media was peddling skinny pills. They don't want you to think that you are getting skinny no matter how many times you tune in. So the message is that you're fat and in order to get skinny ( or at least feel better about the fact that you are trying ) tune in again to receive the next dose.
Some of the blogs I read include those written by book agents and publishers. Some of them cast quite a dismal view of the chances of newcomers to the writing profession ( novels, that is ) getting published - especially by the big publishing houses. What they want are successful writers who already have a steady stream of readers or a history of getting published. If you happen to be a celebrity already, that's even better. In other words, they want people who will sell immediately to an established audience. Since an awful lot of publishing houses are owned by media corporations I think we can connect a few dots. If the evening news is anything like writing genres ( romance, horror, fantasy ) the talking heads are really nothing more than entertainers fulfilling a ready-made audience drawn to that particular genre.
With that being said isn't Michale Moore fulfilling a niche or ready-made consumers willing to hear the latest and greatest conspiracy theory or whatever the newest flavor of what's-wrong-with-this-thing-now genre? It's not my intent to insult anything Michael has done over the years. I've heard good things about Sicko. But, if the media ( and couldn't he technically be referred to as a part of the media ) can't be trusted how do we know that he can be trusted?
As hearusnow.org points out:
Today, six corporations control most of what you see on television. One company has gobbled up more than 1,000 radio stations across the country. And since 1975, two-thirds of all independently-owned newspapers have disappeared.If you're really curious to see Who owns what here's a decent link. If you know of a better one be sure to leave a comment as I'd love to see it. That kind of limits your sources when you really think about it. Although there are thousands of newspapers, books, magazines, radio stations and television stations, their content is in the hands of very few corporations. What makes this even more interesting is that each of these corporations has their own opinions, agendas and objectives ( besides making money and satisfying their shareholders ).
I've always believed that the media should be objective. Just the facts. I'll form my own opinions. But, it would appear that the media decided differently. It seems there's a common goal amongst media companies that they have to either side with one opinion or attempt to sway perception. It's pretty obvious why they do this. It really all boils down to ratings and money. People like to hear their own opinions validated. Once a person finds a media outlet that provides them the substance they need to make themselves complete in thought and message, they'll come back again and again.
Think of it like this . . . imagine the media was peddling skinny pills. They don't want you to think that you are getting skinny no matter how many times you tune in. So the message is that you're fat and in order to get skinny ( or at least feel better about the fact that you are trying ) tune in again to receive the next dose.
Some of the blogs I read include those written by book agents and publishers. Some of them cast quite a dismal view of the chances of newcomers to the writing profession ( novels, that is ) getting published - especially by the big publishing houses. What they want are successful writers who already have a steady stream of readers or a history of getting published. If you happen to be a celebrity already, that's even better. In other words, they want people who will sell immediately to an established audience. Since an awful lot of publishing houses are owned by media corporations I think we can connect a few dots. If the evening news is anything like writing genres ( romance, horror, fantasy ) the talking heads are really nothing more than entertainers fulfilling a ready-made audience drawn to that particular genre.
With that being said isn't Michale Moore fulfilling a niche or ready-made consumers willing to hear the latest and greatest conspiracy theory or whatever the newest flavor of what's-wrong-with-this-thing-now genre? It's not my intent to insult anything Michael has done over the years. I've heard good things about Sicko. But, if the media ( and couldn't he technically be referred to as a part of the media ) can't be trusted how do we know that he can be trusted?
I try to watch the news from all over the world and it's very interesting to see how the same event can be told in so many different ways...
Surely there are some news I'm not gonna even bother watching...f o x ;)
Very interesting post my dear - glad to see you back.
I refuse to watch the news - if I have to work that hard to figure out the truth, I will watch a soap opera. Having been in sales for almost 20 years, I know the value of "spin." But, unlike news agencies, I actually leave the facts in there. The bigger issue is that the media gives the majority what they want to see. I have never been one of the sheep, so I will not be blindly let down the path.
Michael Moore is very interesting - when I was still in pharma, we were "warned" that he was making a movie on the pharma industry and to be careful and not talk to any of his agents. It seems he interviewed reps and doctors at dinner programs to find out what the programs were really about. The industry went bezerk trying to control him and limit his contact.
Is he a niche market guy? Probably. I would hope that people - for the sake of discussion - see the movie and start talking about the system we currently have. I believe that is the value people like him bring to the table...
It appears that the Rightwing Media, which seems to be everywhere these days, and the Republicans are terrified of people like Michael Moore and Al Gore.
Missfits, wimps and cowards like O'Reilly and Hannity have nothing of substance to report and bore us all with their tabloid-type gossip. And when all else fails, they attack the messengers who bring us useful and insightful information. Those so-called high ratings attributed to Fox have me wondering. Maybe Rupert owns the companies that are coming up with these figures. Michael Moore needs to do some investigating.
Sick of Faux News