• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

BillBrasky Memorial Political Chat Thread

myDeaconmyhand said:
This isn’t complicated -The lack of coverage implies that the event isn’t a big deal, yet is seems like a pretty big fucking deal when you learn anything about it.
Click to expand...

It isn’t a big deal to many people in the US which it isn’t.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
that is a fucking cop out if I’ve ever heard one, as if these major media conglomerates don’t have any prerogative or jurisdiction over their own content. It’s not fucking Democratic in the slightest - they drive content
Click to expand...
this is pretty far from my point
 
Robert M. Pirsig said:
this is pretty far from my point
Click to expand...
It’s not far at all. You and Ph are using backwards logic, putting the cart before the horse - assuming the lack of coverage is due to a lack of concern, when peoples lack of concern/awareness is directly due to the lack of coverage. How can people care about something they don’t even know about?
 
That’s the whole point - the media is predetermining what we should be concerned about
 
If we are talking about “least favorite” shit, one of my least favorite ad homonyms/criticisms is when people immediately dismiss criticisms of structure and power as “conspiracy theories”. It’s not a conspiracy that media is a business, and that the people in charge of our media are profit driven. What is best for the public and what is most profitable for the network are very often not the same. That’s not a conspiracy.
 
as much as I enjoy dissecting a sentence of my post with you there's a reason I wrote more than that.
 
I’ve not researched the question.

But I’ve been pretty busy and managed to read about this several times shortly after it happened.

?
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
If we are talking about “least favorite” shit, one of my least favorite ad homonyms/criticisms is when people immediately dismiss criticisms of structure and power as “conspiracy theories”. It’s not a conspiracy that media is a business, and that the people in charge of our media are profit driven. What is best for the public and what is most profitable for the network are very often not the same. That’s not a conspiracy.
Click to expand...

we're talking about this specific situation, though, right?
 
if I could distil my post into one sentence:

fuck media conglomerates they're not ever going to be there for you

small orgs and citizen journalists are actually doing a lot of great critical work (that's how we know about this!!) and the plz-CNN-report-on-this-more-because-it'll-wake-people-up is boringly Sisyphusian imo
 
Robert M. Pirsig said:
as much as I enjoy dissecting a sentence of my post with you there's a reason I wrote more than that.
Click to expand...
It was a one sided post, why would I quote the rest of the post when it was just supporting evidence for the 1 side you argued, when my argument is that you omitted the other side? Saying ad driven media coverage is a barometer for appetite is a cop out. Ecological disasters are objectively important to cover, and it’s very arguable that our “appetite” for them is manufactured consent
 
Robert M. Pirsig said:
if I could distil my post into one sentence:

fuck media conglomerates they're not ever going to be there for you

small orgs and citizen journalists are actually doing a lot of great critical work (that's how we know about this!!) and the plz-CNN-report-on-this-more-because-it'll-wake-people-up is boringly Sisyphusian imo
Click to expand...
yeah there's evidence that some Long Island journalists broke the George Santos stuff before the election but the NYT didn't pick up on it and even blamed said journalists for not doing a better job reporting so they could then pick up the story
 
that's exactly why "the media isn't reporting on this" is my least favorite form of media criticism!
 
Robert M. Pirsig said:
if I could distil my post into one sentence:

fuck media conglomerates they're not ever going to be there for you

small orgs and citizen journalists are actually doing a lot of great critical work (that's how we know about this!!) and the plz-CNN-report-on-this-more-because-it'll-wake-people-up is boringly Sisyphusian imo
Click to expand...
“Why waste your time critiquing major media when they are never going to help you” is just not a convincing argument IMO. It’s fine for you to have preferences over how people discuss news and politics online, but I don’t appreciate you stating your preferences as if they are somehow more correct. We are all just yelling into a void here.
 
If we are talking about media as a megaphone, I think it’s fairly empirical that major media outlets reach a much larger audience than the smaller independent media you are extolling. It follows that if my concern is a lack of larger awareness of an event, it would be most relevant for me to discuss the major media outlets who are most capable of informing a larger audience
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
If we are talking about “least favorite” shit, one of my least favorite ad homonyms/criticisms is when people immediately dismiss criticisms of structure and power as “conspiracy theories”. It’s not a conspiracy that media is a business, and that the people in charge of our media are profit driven. What is best for the public and what is most profitable for the network are very often not the same. That’s not a conspiracy.
Click to expand...
So, in theory, NPR and PBS should be outside of this business model. And while I was wrong about the timing of NPR's first mention of the derailment that organization is still under reporting this fiasco. It's not even mentioned in the 11 am top of the hour news headlines today, but they did take time to highlight Nikki Haley's presidential campaign announcement, Mike Pence refusing to testify before a grand jury, a bus crash in South Africa and the US Capitol Architect being fired.
 
Robert M. Pirsig said:
"the media isn't reporting on this enough" is my least favorite form of media criticism

imo you're blaming ad-driven media when they're usually a barometer for public appetite

part of it might be access to the site, part of it might be the railroad PR clamping down, but imo nationally Americans just have a limit to caring if a rust belt town of 4k has to evacuate and we fuck the biome up and the skies rain acid down over there

our modern culture tends to be pretty okay with sacrificial shit like that

but I don't think that's the media's fault, and I certainly don't think this lack-of-action by the media is abnormal, and I definitely don't think the answer is CNN needs wall-to-wall coverage of this especially since they're barely capable of being critical in the first place
Click to expand...
the invisible hand of the media
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top