This is for topical issues effecting our fair world... you can quit snickering anytime. Note: It is the desire of the leadership of SFDebris Conglomerate that all posters maintain a civil and polite bearing in this forum, regardless of how you feel about any particular issue. Violators will be turned over to Captain Janeway for experimentation.
Agent Vinod wrote:That does happen anyways, but it's time for the Ivy League Gang to learn that they cannot just yell from the mountaintop unchallanged.
Can they do that now?
I mean, YOU can challenge the Ivy League Gang armed with nothing but a webcam and an internet connection. And plenty of people DO challenge them armed with nothing more. Some of them rack up tons of views.
Agent Vinod wrote:That does happen anyways, but it's time for the Ivy League Gang to learn that they cannot just yell from the mountaintop unchallanged.
Can they do that now?
I mean, YOU can challenge the Ivy League Gang armed with nothing but a webcam and an internet connection. And plenty of people DO challenge them armed with nothing more. Some of them rack up tons of views.
The erosion of their power goes down quicker with my suggestion.
Agent Vinod wrote:The erosion of their power goes down quicker with my suggestion.
What power do they have, though?
The 'Ivy League Gang' is usually associated with the left, so I assume that where you're coming from. (if not, I apologize) And the left looks pretty powerless right now. Republicans own all three branches of the federal government. They own 26 state governments outright, and have partial control of 18 others.
The left is absolutely neutered in the United States, politically speaking. What power are you are worried about countering?
Agent Vinod wrote:The erosion of their power goes down quicker with my suggestion.
What power do they have, though?
The 'Ivy League Gang' is usually associated with the left, so I assume that where you're coming from. (if not, I apologize) And the left looks pretty powerless right now. Republicans own all three branches of the federal government. They own 26 state governments outright, and have partial control of 18 others.
The left is absolutely neutered in the United States, politically speaking. What power are you are worried about countering?
Culture and the shame factory. I would have loved to see the right wing press being forced to debate pre Iraq anyways.
Oh. Well, I personally think it's a very bad idea to get the government involved in the culture business, at least any more than is absolutely necessary. Government attempts to change culture almost always end up goes badly, and I fail to see how it would help anything. The reason that the right wing press didn't debate Iraqi weapons of mass destruction in 2003 is that their audience didn't want to hear it. We live in an age where you pick your media. If someone says something you don't like, you simply change the channel. And thanks to the internet, there are infinite channels to pick from. We can't regulate that problem away...but we could do some real damage attempting to.
LittleRaven wrote:Oh. Well, I personally think it's a very bad idea to get the government involved in the culture business, at least any more than is absolutely necessary. Government attempts to change culture almost always end up goes badly, and I fail to see how it would help anything. The reason that the right wing press didn't debate Iraqi weapons of mass destruction in 2003 is that their audience didn't want to hear it. We live in an age where you pick your media. If someone says something you don't like, you simply change the channel. And thanks to the internet, there are infinite channels to pick from. We can't regulate that problem away...but we could do some real damage attempting to.
How do you know they were not interested in the debate?
Agent Vinod wrote:How do you know they were not interested in the debate?
Because I was there. I kept trying to have it. And I was shut down, totally, time and time again. Friends, coworkers, family. Do you remember what it was like back then? Bush had a 90% approval rating. Merely questioning his judgment was proof that you were anti-American at heart. People would stand up at rallies and express their desire to have the government go through their toothpaste if it meant stopping terrorists. Mob mentality ruled.
Agent Vinod wrote:How do you know they were not interested in the debate?
Because I was there. I kept trying to have it. And I was shut down, totally, time and time again. Friends, coworkers, family. Do you remember what it was like back then? Bush had a 90% approval rating. Merely questioning his judgment was proof that you were anti-American at heart. People would stand up at rallies and express their desire to have the government go through their toothpaste if it meant stopping terrorists. Mob mentality ruled.
If the norm was at least for a couple of years that journalists have regular debates with smart people...
I doubt the press narratives would had been swallowed so quickly.
Well, you could solve that with breaking up monopolies and some media trust busting. My journalism classes (around '04-'05) were already centered entirely around content PRODUCTION, not quality, since the '96 telecom reforms meant only two outlets were handling news distribution to local outlets. Classes were geared towards teaching you how to hash out the articles off the AP wire and dumbing down print media for wider distribution. Which wasn't their fault, of course, they were just trying to give us the skills that would actually GET us jobs, because turnover was valued more than actual value.
SuccubusYuri wrote:Well, you could solve that with breaking up monopolies and some media trust busting. My journalism classes (around '04-'05) were already centered entirely around content PRODUCTION, not quality, since the '96 telecom reforms meant only two outlets were handling news distribution to local outlets. Classes were geared towards teaching you how to hash out the articles off the AP wire and dumbing down print media for wider distribution. Which wasn't their fault, of course, they were just trying to give us the skills that would actually GET us jobs, because turnover was valued more than actual value.
Journalism already barely makes money i doubt that sort of disruption would be good aside from the precedent it would set.
