Why the Fake News is better than the Real News...
http://movies.crooksandliars.com/TDS-Oprah-RealWorld.wmv
or this
http://movies.crooksandliars.com/TDS-Oprah-RealWo.mov
from here
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/01/31.html
*find oprah vs news
note this entry may eventually expire or get archived, but hopefully it will be relevant and 'live' for a little while...
~~~
In summary, the news stations have been classified by the courts in the US as 'entertainment' and therefore, what they express is not legally required to be truthful whatsoever, apparently. (Hmmm I don't have specific links on this right now, but I saw the relavant news articles on the movie 'the corporation', so www.thecorporation.com probably has links to it for one willing to dig around enough.) 'Real' journalists rarely, if ever, noadays have the balls to actually challenge people on things, and those that do are systemically removed from their positions, and relegated to the less 'prestigious and well paying' "indie" sources of news ... imo ... well, I'm sure there are exceptions, but even mainstream media has become concerned about the rights of the corporations and conglomerates to determine what is news, what the news will say, and even further than this, what 'opinions editors are allowed to express'.
I don't think people should disrespect religious figures, for instance Mohammad, but neither do I think religion should be allowed to determine what is 'truth' or 'allowable' in the news (including xtian fundamentalists and 'creationists'), and I especially don't respects those same religious people, lets call them Zealots, when they threaten violence, murder, public damage, holy war, etc, for similar reasons. Granted, letter writing to members of government and ceo's etc of companies may be forced to burrow laboriously through red tape, and may not be entirely effective; but once you kill someone, sure, you've made your point, but even if people acquiesce, the ('offended claimants') people are still close-minded murderers who (like many of us in the west, as well) think our (or their) religious or moral views should supersede those of others... when laws conflict, whose laws should prevail? People argue that 'God's laws are higher than (wo)men's laws', but I would argue that God enforces his own laws his own way, and does NOT need men to interpret them for him or other people necessarily (maybe this too is a flawed opinion, but at least it supports tolerance, so maybe we'll all live long enough to figure out what really -is- right ...
m_G
or this
http://movies.crooksandliars.com/TDS-Oprah-RealWo.mov
from here
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/01/31.html
*find oprah vs news
note this entry may eventually expire or get archived, but hopefully it will be relevant and 'live' for a little while...
~~~
In summary, the news stations have been classified by the courts in the US as 'entertainment' and therefore, what they express is not legally required to be truthful whatsoever, apparently. (Hmmm I don't have specific links on this right now, but I saw the relavant news articles on the movie 'the corporation', so www.thecorporation.com probably has links to it for one willing to dig around enough.) 'Real' journalists rarely, if ever, noadays have the balls to actually challenge people on things, and those that do are systemically removed from their positions, and relegated to the less 'prestigious and well paying' "indie" sources of news ... imo ... well, I'm sure there are exceptions, but even mainstream media has become concerned about the rights of the corporations and conglomerates to determine what is news, what the news will say, and even further than this, what 'opinions editors are allowed to express'.
I don't think people should disrespect religious figures, for instance Mohammad, but neither do I think religion should be allowed to determine what is 'truth' or 'allowable' in the news (including xtian fundamentalists and 'creationists'), and I especially don't respects those same religious people, lets call them Zealots, when they threaten violence, murder, public damage, holy war, etc, for similar reasons. Granted, letter writing to members of government and ceo's etc of companies may be forced to burrow laboriously through red tape, and may not be entirely effective; but once you kill someone, sure, you've made your point, but even if people acquiesce, the ('offended claimants') people are still close-minded murderers who (like many of us in the west, as well) think our (or their) religious or moral views should supersede those of others... when laws conflict, whose laws should prevail? People argue that 'God's laws are higher than (wo)men's laws', but I would argue that God enforces his own laws his own way, and does NOT need men to interpret them for him or other people necessarily (maybe this too is a flawed opinion, but at least it supports tolerance, so maybe we'll all live long enough to figure out what really -is- right ...
m_G