OT: Shooting in Munich and media coverage

[Gsinill]

Being from Bavaria, I was listening yesterday live for over 5h to a Bavarian news radio station reporting on the shooting in Munich.
Not once mentioned either Bavarian or German authorities any indication that the attack was politically motivated or committed by religious extremists.
As a matter of fact, it was reiterated several times that there was no information that would point into this direction even though law enforcement was initially under the wrong assumption that 3 assailants were involved.
Regarding the nationality and background of the killer, it was stated he was "an 18 year old German-Iranian from Munich".

As I am listening to the radio, I head over to CNN.com and the first thing I come across is a phone interview with an eyewitness who claimed that the perpetrator shouted "Allahu Akbar" while he was shooting his victims.
According to CNN, the "terrorist" was an Iranian that came to Germany 2 years ago.
On the same page pictures of several young men with dark complexion sitting on the ground in handcuffs guarded by police.
I am not saying that CNN knowingly lied or aired and/or posted untrue information, there were several incidents and arrests in the center of Munich due to false alarm,
but I found the instant spinning of the little information that was available at the time interesting nevertheless.

I am a firm believer that at this day and age, the media with its instant reach, is by far the biggest influence on public opinion.
To me, this different "approach" in reporting news is a perfect example why the current sociological and political climate here in the US is the way it is.
No gray, only black and white, good or bad...

By the way, it has been confirmed that the attacker was 18 years old, of Iranian decent and born in Munich.
He apparently acted alone, obtained the gun and ammo illegally, was treated for depression and so far there are no signs of religious radicalization or extremism.
Most of the German media I checked this morning are referring to what happened as serial killing or "running Amok" rather than a terrorist act.

P.s. I hope this doesn't turn into political arguing, uncivil name calling, bitching about the current or any previous president, discussion on the 2nd amendment etc.

[dave thompson]

What purports to be "news" in this country can only be politely called 'entertainment/opinion'. Plus I'm of the opinion that the public are, by and large, intellectually lazy and want to be fed opinions that only agree with theirs.

[CampyorBust]

Was in Munich earlier this year, walked through Karlsplatz while some nut job was sitting near the fountain screaming at people, weird vibes.

[Mr. Pink]

I just turn off the TV now, and let time pass a little and get to the point when the facts are actually known. Agreed, it's pretty ridiculous how the so called journalists race around like a dog after a squirrel, reporting hysteria and rumors. But, of course, even our political candidates use these incidents for daily fodder, instead of showing some restraint and waiting for the facts. When the Egypt Air flight went down, Trump immediately said that he and the rest of us should be 100% sure that it was a terrorist attack. Well, they still really don't know what happened, even though the boxes have been found and debri has been analyzed. (Definitely a fire and probably breakup in the air, I last read) but, what does Hillary do a few hours after Trump does a Trump? She calls it a terrorist attack, too, but in more measured tones. My palm goes to my forehead. But, it doesn't matter. The public has the attention span of that dog chasing a squirrel, so, they'll be on to the next small rodent, and will forget about this stupidity in no time. Sells commercials, though.

Another one is Hollande proclaiming that the French military will be intensifying attacks on ISIS in Syria after Nice. What will that do? Dude was a wack loner who got the keys to a truck, and fulfilled a fantasy. But, fills a need for the public staring at that particular squirrel.

[zmudshark]

I get my breaking news from Reddit. It's usually (not always) more accurate than CNN.

[Jgrooms]

So much is often wrong with the initial reports on these events. For example, there is almost always "multiple shooters".

So much misinformation & jumping to conclusions in the rush to meet the hyper news cycle. And I agree that this is when biases slip in.

Unfortunately these early reports often set the tone & then the wrong info becomes the narrative & is hard to dispel.

In this case I've heard CNN lead that he's of Iranian decent & a terrorist. Whereas the BBC point out he's German born, spoke w German accent & was actually ranting about foreigners & appeared to be targeting Turks.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Richard]

Americans see Muslim terrorists behind every tree and under every rock. Speak Arabic (or probably any one of many foreign languages) on a plane and get kicked off.

[Climb01742]

There simply isn't 24 hours of real, factually accurate 'news' every day for 365 days a year. Yet airtime and web pages must be filled to chase ad dollars.

What's equally damaging is, being first to rush out there with some 'breaking news' is seen as more important than being accurate. The economics and dynamics of the modern news/infotainment machine are so screwed up, yet what news organization will stand up and play it straight? A bit like doping, isn't it? Play it clean and come second, third or far lower. Versus get down in the mud and chase success by whatever means necessary.

Problem is, dirty sports don't really impact our greater life. While crap 'news' gives oxygen to all sorts of not great things and people in the world.

[Gsinill]

Was in Munich earlier this year, walked through Karlsplatz while some nut job was sitting near the fountain screaming at people, weird vibes.

Let me check the archives...
CNN probably reported this as "Imam in the heart of a German metropole is demanding the annihilation of Christianity".

[makoti]

Was in Munich earlier this year, walked through Karlsplatz while some nut job was sitting near the fountain screaming at people, weird vibes.

You could have easily been in DC or LA.

[dave thompson]

There simply isn't 24 hours of real, factually accurate 'news' every day for 365 days a year. Yet airtime and web pages must be filled to chase ad dollars.

What's equally damaging is, being first to rush out there with some 'breaking news' is seen as more important than being accurate. The economics and dynamics of the modern news/infotainment machine are so screwed up, yet what news organization will stand up and play it straight? A bit like doping, isn't it? Play it clean and come second, third or far lower. Versus get down in the mud and chase success by whatever means necessary.

Problem is, dirty sports don't really impact our greater life. While crap 'news' gives oxygen to all sorts of not great things and people in the world.Perfectly said. As an old guy, I was brought up listening to Murrow, Cronkite, Schieffer and the like. They presented the facts to the stories and allowed us to draw our own conclusions. That was entertainment!

Today's "news" doesn't encourage critical thinking. Talking politics with younger people today is totally uninteresting.

[Gsinill]

What purports to be "news" in this country can only be politely called 'entertainment/opinion'. Plus I'm of the opinion that the public are, by and large, intellectually lazy and want to be fed opinions that only agree with theirs.

True.
It doesn't bother me when they twist why Bruce became Caitlyn but infusing fear mongering, xenophobia, racial bias etc. is a different story.

[onsight512]

I get my breaking news from Reddit. It's usually (not always) more accurate than CNN.

this.

[OtayBW]

True.
It doesn't bother me when they twist why Bruce became Caitlyn but infusing fear mongering, xenophobia, racial bias etc. is a different story.Yes, of course. But while the fact that something as stupid as 'Someone Farted' can rise to the level of 'breaking news (no pun intended...)', they (the news media) clearly do not have a monopoly on fear mongering, xenophobia, racial bias, etc., particularly in this political climate. 'Nuff said...............:(

[redir]

And CNN is even part of the so called 'liberal' media that right wing pundits complain about. Just imagine what 'news' sites like Zero Hedge and Alex Jones have to say about it.

[Richard]

CNN, MSBNC and Fox are not news networks. At best they are "Infotainment." It sells soap to roil fears and hatred in America.

[malcolm]

There simply isn't 24 hours of real, factually accurate 'news' every day for 365 days a year. Yet airtime and web pages must be filled to chase ad dollars.

What's equally damaging is, being first to rush out there with some 'breaking news' is seen as more important than being accurate. The economics and dynamics of the modern news/infotainment machine are so screwed up, yet what news organization will stand up and play it straight? A bit like doping, isn't it? Play it clean and come second, third or far lower. Versus get down in the mud and chase success by whatever means necessary.

Problem is, dirty sports don't really impact our greater life. While crap 'news' gives oxygen to all sorts of not great things and people in the world.

This is it.

News as entertainment. As climb says there just isn't enough real news to fill the time so the race to be first or have something new is completely out of control often with misinformation and retractions after the fact.

I think the continual beating of the dead horse with innumerable experts/pundits commenting profusely with minimal real info is detrimental to our society. It's no wonder people are out of their minds. The disenfranchised listening to the same pot stirring incessantly 24 hours a day it's no wonder people are shooting cops and behaving in a manner that just defies humanity.

[unterhausen]

all you need to know about CNN is that the anchor that speculated that an airplane had been swallowed by a black hole is still employed there.

Why they allow their anchors to editorialize is beyond me. I watched CNN international back when I was deployed, and it was so much better. If I wanted to hear people's ill-informed opinions about things, I certainly wouldn't watch tv, I'd go to the VFW

[CampyorBust]

Let me check the archives...
CNN probably reported this as "Imam in the heart of a German metropole is demanding the annihilation of Christianity".

You could have easily been in DC or LA.

Totally, though in this case it was a disheveled white woman with wispy graying hair. I don’t speak Doich but it did not sound pleasant, very angry. It was 8am and I was looking for some noodles, Wagamama or something….I found no noodles worth eating, so I found solace in some pastries while peeping into the window of a closed bike shop with some neetos inside.

The sad state of the media over the past 20 years is abysmal, its no longer even truthyness just outright treasonous propaganda and fear mongering. At this point it no longer tries to hide its bias and criminal agenda it just plows right through. What are we going to do about it, complain to Comcast? Ha! Tweet and like your way to justice? Ha Ha! Rage against the machine and occupy something, did ya get the memo? The revolution will not be televised! Tee hee hee. So what now? Well there was once this dood in the woods, some fella that had a dream, a bearded fatty and a wife beating racist that wrote about and used civil disobedience to great effect.

Stupid anecdotes aside, most people don’t know or care to know history, and if they do it’s a miracle if they implement what has been learned in their actions. As the saying goes those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it. So isn’t ironic that as the WWII generation embarks on the next stage of consciousness we are faced yet again with some frighteningly similar predicaments? Doncha think? Granted today we have the internet and more progressive outlooks, but when closely examined those very progressive agendas and technologies are being used against the interest of the people, moreover with the help of the very same people. The organized few have always ruled and sacrificed the somnambulant masses.

There is always alternative media for those who don’t fear rabbit holes and demonization. Blue pill/red pill which are you? Sadly I don’t see the cycle breaking anytime soon, if it aint broke... No comment on the current political nightmare, other than I am saddened that people are still buying into the status quo. There are 26 letters in the alphabet and yet we let ourtselves be cow prodded into choosing A or B every bleepin time. We almost had a C this time, till the C-onformist endorsed the B-itch who has been buddies with A-hole for decades. Still livin’ the dream eh’?:bike:

[oldpotatoe]

What purports to be "news" in this country can only be politely called 'entertainment/opinion'. Plus I'm of the opinion that the public are, by and large, intellectually lazy and want to be fed opinions that only agree with theirs.

Hear, hear!!

[Jgrooms]

We get the government we deserve? So the saying goes. And to the 'media's' credit, the quest for ratings $ (now clicks) shows we want entertainment. The vast majority chose 'news' outlets that reflect ones already solidified views. Its no secret that this has been the formula for Fox. Its 'news' wrapped in a package that drives ratings.
No critical thinking required!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[unterhausen]

I don't know how you can blame us, we don't make these choices. It has been a race to the bottom for over a decade. I can't remember watching any "news" channels for longer than that. So much opinion, so little news. I have to do a major cable upgrade to get Al Jazeera, dont' think I can get BBC at all. If I could watch straight news program, I would.

It's not true that they are doing well. The ratings are horrible. Maybe one of the channels will get the crazy idea of doing straight news without all the opinion and babbling

[slidey]

I heard a westerner mangle out 'allahu akbar' on NPR as well.

It just seems more, and more, that the major news networks (NPR included), are more interested in propagating as much content (not info), when there's an emergency, as opposed to maintaining restraint, and communicating what's known with complete confidence.

[cadence90]

Perfectly said. As an old guy, I was brought up listening to Murrow, Cronkite, Schieffer and the like. They presented the facts to the stories and allowed us to draw our own conclusions. That was entertainment!

Today's "news" doesn't encourage critical thinking. Talking politics with younger people today is totally uninteresting.

No kidding.

Then:

https://static.nbclearn.com/files/icue/govt_politics/constitutional_underpinnings/interactive_constitution/140405_640x480.jpg



Now:

http://www.trbimg.com/img-54d719ef/turbine/chinews-nbc-nightly-news-anchor-br-20150208/640/640x360

[Hilltopperny]

Totally, though in this case it was a disheveled white woman with wispy graying hair. I don’t speak Doich but it did not sound pleasant, very angry. It was 8am and I was looking for some noodles, Wagamama or something….I found no noodles worth eating, so I found solace in some pastries while peeping into the window of a closed bike shop with some neetos inside.

The sad state of the media over the past 20 years is abysmal, its no longer even truthyness just outright treasonous propaganda and fear mongering. At this point it no longer tries to hide its bias and criminal agenda it just plows right through. What are we going to do about it, complain to Comcast? Ha! Tweet and like your way to justice? Ha Ha! Rage against the machine and occupy something, did ya get the memo? The revolution will not be televised! Tee hee hee. So what now? Well there was once this dood in the woods, some fella that had a dream, a bearded fatty and a wife beating racist that wrote about and used civil disobedience to great effect.

Stupid anecdotes aside, most people don’t know or care to know history, and if they do it’s a miracle if they implement what has been learned in their actions. As the saying goes those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it. So isn’t ironic that as the WWII generation embarks on the next stage of consciousness we are faced yet again with some frighteningly similar predicaments? Doncha think? Granted today we have the internet and more progressive outlooks, but when closely examined those very progressive agendas and technologies are being used against the interest of the people, moreover with the help of the very same people. The organized few have always ruled and sacrificed the somnambulant masses.

There is always alternative media for those who don’t fear rabbit holes and demonization. Blue pill/red pill which are you? Sadly I don’t see the cycle breaking anytime soon, if it aint broke... No comment on the current political nightmare, other than I am saddened that people are still buying into the status quo. There are 26 letters in the alphabet and yet we let ourtselves be cow prodded into choosing A or B every bleepin time. We almost had a C this time, till the C-onformist endorsed the B-itch who has been buddies with A-hole for decades. Still livin’ the dream eh’?:bike:

:hello::beer:

[verticaldoug]

Totally, though in this case it was a disheveled white woman with wispy graying hair. I don’t speak Doich but it did not sound pleasant, very angry. It was 8am and I was looking for some noodles, Wagamama or something….I found no noodles worth eating, so I found solace in some pastries while peeping into the window of a closed bike shop with some neetos inside.

The sad state of the media over the past 20 years is abysmal, its no longer even truthyness just outright treasonous propaganda and fear mongering. At this point it no longer tries to hide its bias and criminal agenda it just plows right through. What are we going to do about it, complain to Comcast? Ha! Tweet and like your way to justice? Ha Ha! Rage against the machine and occupy something, did ya get the memo? The revolution will not be televised! Tee hee hee. So what now? Well there was once this dood in the woods, some fella that had a dream, a bearded fatty and a wife beating racist that wrote about and used civil disobedience to great effect.

Stupid anecdotes aside, most people don’t know or care to know history, and if they do it’s a miracle if they implement what has been learned in their actions. As the saying goes those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it. So isn’t ironic that as the WWII generation embarks on the next stage of consciousness we are faced yet again with some frighteningly similar predicaments? Doncha think? Granted today we have the internet and more progressive outlooks, but when closely examined those very progressive agendas and technologies are being used against the interest of the people, moreover with the help of the very same people. The organized few have always ruled and sacrificed the somnambulant masses.

There is always alternative media for those who don’t fear rabbit holes and demonization. Blue pill/red pill which are you? Sadly I don’t see the cycle breaking anytime soon, if it aint broke... No comment on the current political nightmare, other than I am saddened that people are still buying into the status quo. There are 26 letters in the alphabet and yet we let ourtselves be cow prodded into choosing A or B every bleepin time. We almost had a C this time, till the C-onformist endorsed the B-itch who has been buddies with A-hole for decades. Still livin’ the dream eh’?:bike:

The DNC wikileaks database is interesting to browse.

Of course, the media focuses on the DNC working to undermine the Sander's campaign like it is new news. To me the real news is the DNC use of surrogates to spread talking points and the methodology they employ to rotate them, vet them. You can even get the excel spread sheet of surrogates. Discredits a whole list of names.

https://wikileaks.com/dnc-emails/emailid/6788
https://wikileaks.com/dnc-emails/?file=surrogates&count=50#searchresult

It seems like the first thing to ask anyone speaking publicly is: Did you receive talking points from the campaign or the DNC, are you a surrogate?

and just to keep it equal opportunity: the same is probably true for the RNC and their surrogates.

[fuzzalow]

What purports to be "news" in this country can only be politely called 'entertainment/opinion'. Plus I'm of the opinion that the public are, by and large, intellectually lazy and want to be fed opinions that only agree with theirs.

Hear, hear!!

I agree with you gentlemen and I would actually take it one step further: It is less that the average public is intellectually lazy and more that the average public is intellectually incompetent.

I do not believe critical thinking is seen as neccesary or important by the average public - this skill or inclination is neither valued as a personal trait nor is required as a professional skill deemed mandatory to their ability to earn a livelihood. In fairness, one does what is needed to do a job and the employer is not responsible for the intellectual well being of their employees. So the blame for remaining ignorant falls into the lap of each individual.

I can only fear that the comfort of stupidity and a closed mind has seeped into the university system where there have been efforts and behaviours in limiting free thought and free speech. This happening in the singular environment that should value these qualities to young minds above all else. I find this occurrence both confounding and self immolating to students professed to higher education.

The balkanization of media outlets to defined pathways of bias and editorial bent is merely a symptom of a dullard audience exploited by commercial opportunism. I do not blame the commercial mass media outlets, they work in a hot, time-compressed and commercially driven environment - they bear no real responsibility to enlighten their viewers any more than most employers care about the intellectual well being of their employees. That is not what they are there for. Every person bears the responsibility to look after themselves. Water seeks its own level.

If you value quality content I think you gotta pay for it. But I would also never equate news as conflated with content, it is simply news.

[oldpotatoe]

I agree with you gentlemen and I would actually take it one step further: It is less that the average public is intellectually lazy and more that the average public is intellectually incompetent.

I do not believe critical thinking is seen as neccesary or important by the average public - this skill or inclination is neither valued as a personal trait nor is required as a professional skill deemed mandatory to their ability to earn a livelihood. In fairness, one does what is needed to do a job and the employer is not responsible for the intellectual well being of their employees. So the blame for remaining ignorant falls into the lap of each individual.

I can only fear that the comfort of stupidity and a closed mind has seeped into the university system where there have been efforts and behaviours in limiting free thought and free speech. This happening in the singular environment that should value these qualities to young minds above all else. I find this occurrence both confounding and self immolating to students professed to higher education.

The balkanization of media outlets to defined pathways of bias and editorial bent is merely a symptom of a dullard audience exploited by commercial opportunism. I do not blame the commercial mass media outlets, they work in a hot, time-compressed and commercially driven environment - they bear no real responsibility to enlighten their viewers any more than most employers care about the intellectual well being of their employees. That is not what they are there for. Every person bears the responsibility to look after themselves. Water seeks its own level.

If you value quality content I think you gotta pay for it. But I would also never equate news as conflated with content, it is simply news.

Hear hear again..why I worry about this november. :help:

[rustychisel]

Thank you, and goodnight.

[bcroslin]

Always remember, if it's on TV it's entertainment.

[ripvanrando]

My teen son was "forced" to only use CNN as his news source for a presentation in a HS AP class. His use of Al jazeera, BBC, RT, (CNN), and Fox was met with derision and threats of a lower grade for using "biased" sources to which my son responded that they are all biased, which is why he likes multiple sources so that he can filter and form his view. He ended up using only CNN and got am A+.

We tend to believe what we want to believe. For instance, I think the Progressives are the new Brown Shirts. This BS about unity and then squashing anyone else's opinion with ridicule, hatred, and outright violence tears a page right out of Munich's history.

[rugbysecondrow]

Perfectly said. As an old guy, I was brought up listening to Murrow, Cronkite, Schieffer and the like. They presented the facts to the stories and allowed us to draw our own conclusions. That was entertainment!

Today's "news" doesn't encourage critical thinking. Talking politics with younger people today is totally uninteresting.

Talking politics with 99% of the population is uninteresting, old men included.

I suspect when you were a youth, you and your counter parts were just as uninteresting. It is a societal hazard.

[rugbysecondrow]

There is a risk in choice, people might choose unwisely. We can yearn for the days of 18 minutes of evening news with Cronkite, but that was the source and you had no choice but to assume it was valid and true (regardless of whether that belief itself is valid to hold).

Now, there are options, just like with food. Some people do well and choose wisely, others consume ****.

It seems that much of the characterizing going on here does what they have decried themselves: paints a black and white picture.

[FlashUNC]

Hate to tell you guys, but you're reading the media situation all wrong. This isn't a deviation from the norm, this is a return to the norm that existed before an unprecedented era of media "independence."

The media environment that exists now is far closer to the era at the dawn of the penny press than the rather unique post-war media boom that led to the Walter Cronkites and Old Grey Ladys of the world. Media, for vast chunks of our country's history, has been balkanized, partisan, self-serving publications who openly tried to sway the populace's passions in one direction or another. Judith Miller and the NYT and the run-in to the Iraq War wasn't even a novel use, William Randolph Hearst cornered the market on that a century prior.

Those days of large metro newspapers with huge staffs and three networks cranking out sober news reports every night was the exception, not the rule, of the industry. It was a 4-5 decade blip of a variety of economic forces that allowed the concept of that form of journalism to thrive. Notably that both the networks and large papers were effective monopolies, cranking out money in such insanely profitable businesses that in-depth, thoughtful, nuanced journalism could thrive, subsidized almost entirely be Chesterfield commercials and classified ads. And that era emerged after a bloody few decades of trench warfare in the industry, with papers going boom and bust and in-fighting that, again, looks more like what we have today.

But it was an outlier. The media landscape of 1840 or 1870 or 1920 looks far more like what we have today than those -- for lack of a better term -- "Cronkite" years.

You yearn for the exception, not the rule. And the exception is not coming back.

Now, does that mean all media are terrible? Of course not. But it demands a thoughtful reader to separate the wheat from the chaff. And most are unwilling to do that.

[ripvanrando]

It seems that much of the characterizing going on here does what they have decried themselves: paints a black and white picture.

No, it merely reflects deep differences. People have different views. It is not a characterization, it is a reality. Some like Merkel think open borders are wonderful while others don't want undocumented Rapefuges in their country living off them. I am tired of free handouts to illegals and the coddling that they get in our country and that is not painting it black or white. It is black and white.

[malcolm]

No, it merely reflects deep differences. People have different views. It is not a characterization, it is a reality. Some like Merkel think open borders are wonderful while others don't want undocumented Rapefuges in their country living off them. I am tired of free handouts to illegals and the coddling that they get in our country and that is not painting it black or white. It is black and white.


I'm not sure I would consider them coddled. The life of illegals is likely still fairly harsh. The only real handouts are benefits that most needy people in this country obtain. I think people in need of the basics should be considered human beings first and nationality should come second.

The only illegals I've had much contact with have been mexican and that was taking care of them in the ER. I think the majority are hard working and doing the best they can with what they've got. Many times they are preyed upon by less than upstanding natives. Payday robbery by native thugs often quite brutal was common.

Sure a few take advantage of the system, but that's true of all varieties native and otherwise. I think most are just trying to make a life for themselves and their families.

After having said the above I do think there needs to be a legal way to be in the country and it should be required of those that want to be here. I also don't think citizenship should be automatic just because you happen to be born on this soil. Parents here illegally offspring should not be citizens but that's another topic.

Most non native citizens I know tend to be better Americans than most of the natives I know.

[CampyorBust]

My teen son was "forced" to only use CNN as his news source for a presentation in a HS AP class. His use of Al jazeera, BBC, RT, (CNN), and Fox was met with derision and threats of a lower grade for using "biased" sources to which my son responded that they are all biased, which is why he likes multiple sources so that he can filter and form his view. He ended up using only CNN and got am A+.

We tend to believe what we want to believe. For instance, I think the Progressives are the new Brown Shirts. This BS about unity and then squashing anyone else's opinion with ridicule, hatred, and outright violence tears a page right out of Munich's history.

Have to come back and say this comment really struck a cord with me, you get to the heart of the matter. I applaud your courage for saying this here, kudos to ya the good kind!:beer:

It is truly disturbing what your son had to go through, the ministry of truth in action. As someone that sees merit in many progressive points of view I want to try and refute the brown shirts comment and I can’t. I believe they have their heart in the right place, however their lack of tact, wisdom and total embrace of McCarthyistic tactics, intimidation and harassment is detrimental to their cause. They are being provoked and have fallen into a mob mentality. They will ultimately fail and we will all be worse off for it. I believe it is unbecoming of the American ideals some of us were brought up with. I like Norman Rockwell’s America.

I was however pleasantly surprised by the Clinton News Network today. Watching Smerconish in the morning and all of the sudden he has Stephen Cohen on, talking about the neo-McCarthyism and Cold War 2.0. Couldn’t believe it, are the progressives finally coming to their senses? Or just releasing a little bit of pressure before plowing straight ahead into chaos with the most pro-war Neocon to ever slither. Too early for a clip, but on a weekly basis Stephen Cohen has a great interview with John Bachelor on the Nation. Last weeks interview…
https://www.thenation.com/article/neo-mccarthyism-and-olympic-politics-as-more-evidence-of-a-new-cold-war/

I have noticed RT dismissed a number of times here in typical myopic pro-establishment fashion. So a few words if I may, and I appreciate that I may so I do, if you don’t use it you loose it right? I am pretty critical of the network, I think its cheesy, half-assed and at times unprofessional, its coverage choices of world events are somewhat bias. Hold on I just forgot which network I am talking about, train of thought where are you, choo choo oh yes…I would never expect RT to cover the atrocious corruption and abysmal realities of life in Russia. But I don’t go to RT for that, that is not their purpose, they exist to shed light on western crimes, unspoken realities and countless hypocrisies, this they do splendidly. Why is it they are often the first to report on major events? I am a news junkie I notice this, as well as many other patterns. They cover issues in the west that everyone else ignores or quickly glances over and buries on the back pages. Why do they give voice to independents, the green party and the disenfranchised all over the US, while the west shun its own and demonizes them?

Essentially all of my words add up to what has been said already, the media is infotainment. However much like GM korn, kernels of truth sometimes make it through the muck, but digging them out is not pleasant.