now tell me the bad news...,
| Main |
disagreeing to agree...,
FAIR is fair:
they manage to cite the rightwingnut Media Research Center in their brief history of iraq's wmd in the american media without a hint of sniggering condescension. The MRC's original headline, "A CBS News reporter too biased even for Dan Rather?" "Belligerence" is just another "phrase" you might "hear" about "American hegemony" and "the American desire to control the oil supply", and, uh, "that kind of thing".
Normative, subjective terms such as these have no place in our national discourse. Rather, we require concrete, descriptive phrases, like "drinking Saddam Hussein's Kool-Aid"; "officials fear"; "They hate America. They align themselves with Saddam Hussein. They align themselves with terrorists all over the world"; or "Hussein finds American collaborators among senior congressional Democrats"...
I don't even remember this one:
October 14, 2002: Illustrating the range of debate in the corporate media, Time magazine pairs a piece by Wesley Clark, headlined "Let's Wait to Attack," with an article by Kenneth Adelman headlined, "No, Let's Not Waste Any Time."
Or about half the others, so I can only presume it to be beneficial to your further perusal. Some of them are pretty fucking funny. Like a cabaret show or a chorus line with jokes. Here's another:
October 25, 2002: The Chicago Reader reports that a Quaker group attempted to buy airtime on WBEZ in Chicago to publicize a candlelight peace vigil. WBEZ told the group that their underwriting announcement could say they were "exploring issues of morality and war," but that this so-called exploration "could not use the word[s] 'peace,' 'candlelight,' or 'vigil.'"
That shit is high vaudeville.
:: posted by buermann @ 2007-03-20 12:07:54 CST |