The Glade 4.0

There is something wrong when crap like this gets national media attention: http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/21/ ... tml?hpt=T2



This is the 2nd or third story on stupid Facebook groups that I have seen this year. Is it really news-worthy? What is essentially a glorified blog gets front page on CNN...

_________________

IN YOUR FACEBOOK!

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

This stuff wasn't newsworthy when the last guy was President. I guess "prayers" for the death of a white guy are ok if he's not a Democrat.

_________________

Damn....

_________________
The Dude abides.

It wasn't news enough for CNN et. al. when it was Chris Christie ten days ago...

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Dang Vind beat ne to it

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

The CNN article now mentions Christie and Amadenejihad.

Actually, CNN did run this story. It was their front page article for a few hours.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/04/09/teachers.union.governor/index.html

Wow, I missed it, good for them.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

I disagree. It's an intentional smoke screen of fair and balanced pseudo news. Bad for them, equally, on both fronts.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

That's what you get when you let capitalism be the driver for your news source.

Totally 100% incorrect.

That's what happens when you let neo-mercantilism or corporatism be the driver. Capitalism is something else.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Bullshit. The news agencies have evolved to be the way they are for one reason and one reason only, they make more money that way.

Which has nothing at all to do with capitalism. Read, and comprehend, what I said. "Capitalism" has a specifc meaning, just because someone makes money at something does not make it capitalistic.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

The key points in the definition is "competition in a free market".

Those are very relevant to why the news media companies that you rail against are the way they are. They are in the business to make money, they happen to do that by presenting "news". When the primary motivator for their existance is profit and not quality journalism, what you get today is the unavoidable result.

I guess if we were to have a free market and determination by private decision, you would be correct.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

I don't understand what you mean there Vind.

Oh, come on Vind. The news is free market.

Your well reasoned, educated argument has changed my mind! The gov't would never even think of giving billions of dollars to corporations that produce "the news" in exchange for pursuing its initiatives. How could I be so foolish to think that a corporation that runs broadcast and cable news outlets would receive nearly $88 billion dollars in Federally subsidized loans, nah, none of that could ever happen. Man was I ignorant.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Your sarcastic over-the-top nonsense aside, are you then suggesting that the government is giving money to CNN to talk about facebook? If not, can you explain your reasoning behind the implication that if CNN did not receive government loans (and you haven't shown this) that they would not have run this story? Basically, I'm interested to know why government involvement pushed them into writing this story.

Yes because giving money most assuredly only meand direct cash contributions and never things such as FCC regulations or fine or approving or not mergers and em spectrum allotments for others.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Arathain:

Rather than creating a straw man argument that you've manufactured whole cloth, why don't you address my direct refutation of your statement?

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

And, as correct and Vindi, DFK!, and Elmo are here, they don't even begin to address the fact that these news outlets are only a small arm of huge muliti nationals, all of which have direct ties to massive government contracts:

MSNBC is owned by GE, who has nearly 2 trillion dollars in government contracts for wind farm research.

CBS is owned by Frank Carlucci of the Carlye Group, which holds Westinghouse Electric and a variety of other energy companies, most of which opperate nuclear power plants here in the US.

CNN owns, and holds in public sanctioned monopoly, almost all of the cable TV infrastructure in the United States.

These are just a few examples, some off the top of my head, which demonstarate exactly how tied these organizations are to big government and big spending. The level of corruption is absurd, and the legislation is written by the industry experts (read lobbiests) in ways which benifit the industries themselves by garenteeing market share, and having tax payer subsidised bottom lines.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Oh, come on Rynar. The news is free market.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Is this a sarcastic statement? I can't tell, it's kind of poorly written.