I think its interesting how the media is blamed for the increase in anorexia but also blamed for the increase in obesity hmmm
what the media IS blameworthy for, the corporate media, is what people need to know to intelligently run a democracy that it adamantly refueses to tell us about for its own vested reasons. which is why indipendent media is essential. =^^= .../\...
Not that puzzling, once you realize that the media has only one goal, and multiple ways to get there.
oh yes. Otherwise if the majority of the American people had any sense there would be an uprising by now... but the sheep are all too happy to simply sit in front of their televisions ignore the problems of the world.
And we must be as wish wish the world to be... The concern is for us to assume responsibility for all we do, and justify each action each day with a greater purpose. Given some form of consideration, I dont think anyone can justify watching a TV show everyday at 9pm in the eyes of the greater good... particularly when the show is of no use beyond selling products that would likely not exist (or be in a completely different direction) if the TV did not exist. In fact the INC controlled media is useless... and the only proper protest can be to not watch any of it. Pointing out what the "majority" does only serves to remind those on the fence what the "easy" way out is... even though the given "majority" path is neither easy nor beneficial. So, instead of reminding what we are to believe most people do... perhaps it would be better to simply inform the world in a positive way how *you* handle things, from there anyone may view your way and decide their course of action accordingly
The media forces both ideals upon the masses as a reality... TV shows dedicated to both. The individual mind may adopt either as reality... whereas if not presented with the sensically absurd option of either, would likely have never concieved the notion of eating excessively or not eating. If we were born and raised on an island, we would (as any animal does) eat exactly as much as we need to sustain ourselves. So yes, the media can be blamed for the insertion of ideas... and the media concieved society can be blamed for accepting those ideas as reality. The solution... be your own media outlet, have no fear of opinion expression, and have no fear of changing that opinion when a better idea comes along - thats the our way out of this mess of a world our forefathers helped create
Turn off your TVs, read books, live naturally, eat healthy, only take what you need, don't leave anything behind, help others!
I dont really agree that the commercial media is to blame. I think that the commercial media is simply a reflection of what society as a whole wants. Newspapers, TV News, Internet news etc. etc. etc. are all simply vessels for delivering advertising to the masses and as a result, they need to provide something that the general public want to see. Fact is, to most people, a humanitarian crisis in some far flung African country that they couldnt even locate on a map has no bearing on their life and makes them (at best) feel a little uncomfortable in a "That's so sad, but I cant do anything to help" kind of way, and at worst it just makes them bored. Meanwhile, a video of David Hasslehoff trying to eat a hamburger in a hotel room while pissed IS something they want to see, because it doesnt make them uncomfortable, and everyone has heard of him. The news directors choose to run with these types of stories because people will watch, and the advertisers will get more exposure. This wont change until people start to take an interest in the "real world". I do agree that independent press is very important to finding out exactly what goes on, and in Australia, we're lucky enough to have the Australian Broadcasting Corp. which is not legally allowed to be affiliated with companies or political parties. This is a great system for getting balanced news, but it's still not perfect, on account of being run by public servants who are heavily pro-union and pro-Labor Party (So am I, but I value totally indpendent media more). But, in that, I dont think it's possible to ever really be 100% independent, because an editor's personal beliefs will still play a part in the way they run stories anyway.
The news corporations are always going to be biased towards profit. NPR is supposedly free but you can still see/hear a slanted view. The individuals doing the reporting are only human and as such bring their own prejudices to work. We as consumers choose which news programs we watch based on who we agree with. Very few liberal Dem's watch Oreilly or Limbaugh. And an ultra Conservative would feel the same about Moyer or Mahr. The corporations say that they program according to the interests of the average viewer, they define that by the demographics of the people who buy their sponsors products. If you want to change programming write the sponsors and tell them you are going to boycott their products if they continue to advertise on a particular network or news show. Watch how fast they change. Better yet start a thread of sponsors for people to e-mail with the threat of boycott.
First of all American media is such nonsense and had been that way over the last 20 years or so.The 24 hour news(infotainment) networks just make things alot worse,because they are on all the time.And they are shown all over the world so people outside of America get a very distorted picture of the US if they view cnn,fox etc.I would love to see the 24 hour stations be banned,but that would never happen.
Also there never used to be a left or right wing media.20+ years ago an anchor person would keep their personal views 'personal.They would not say whether they are republican,a democrat etc.Proper journalism is supposed to keep things honest and NOT take a view.And in the US I dont even know how people view the news on television that is,half of it is commercials.They actually used to regualate how many commercials could be shown,they do not anymore in the U$.
