|
General Dog posted:I don't think Fox News, AM radio, etc. really shape public opinion that much, I think they really just tap into a market for people who want to have their opinions/biases confirmed. Just like you go to church and listening to the sermon helps you to maintain your faith, listening to Rush Limbaugh every day maintains your faith in your politics. Rarely is either going to convert nonbelievers, the goal is just to keep the masses energized. This is interesting. What percentage of our +300million citizens actively consume right-wing media? Is the percentage disproportionately larger than what's found in other countries? I'm just speculating, but I bet among any group of people, particularly in declining powers like the US, there will be a segment of the population that finds Stabbed-in-the-back myths to be agreeable. The disproportionate number of older, less-educated americans we have also might be an issue. BiggerBoat posted:I think you're very mistaken here. Just read the comments section of any news site or the letters to the editor of any newspaper to see how pervasive their influence really is. The buzzwords are always the same in all of these places. ("Socialism", "ACORN", "birth certificate", "cut and run", "tree huggers", "activist judges", "voter fraud", etc.) I could always tell what FOX and Rush were on about in any given week just by eavesdropping in the lunchroom. These shows and their terms have a way of seeping into the discourse almost without people really noticing it. This speaks to how vocal this segment of the population is, but not necessarily their representation in numbers. Anecdotally, you can find a lot of fascist and ultra-nationalist comments under soccer videos on youtube, but I know fans with those views can't amount any more than 1% of all fans. Dilkington fucked around with this message at 13:44 on Oct 17, 2012 |
#
¿
Oct 17, 2012 13:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 17:33 |
|
|
nachos posted:The effect of right-wing media on its consumers is certainly terrible, but the real insidious poo poo about right-wing media is how it affects "neutral" media outlets like CNN. Birthers and their type should absolutely never have been a thing, but Fox News and the right have saturated the market to the point where CNN, in an attempt to construct a false equivalency, has to address it in some form or another. There is no counter to this type of poo poo on the left, so the right wing media basically gets to create its own frame and narrative whenever it wants. http://www.people-press.org/2010/09/12/americans-spending-more-time-following-the-news/ I did a little reading and I was surprised by the number of people who watch the 24 hour news networks. I definitly underestimated their influence on the public discourse:  I wonder if similar delusions existed in other declining hegemonic powers like Venice, Portugul, Great Britain, etc. Widespread access to the Internet is just another interesting wrinkle to consider. Hollis posted:I'm really of the opinion that overall we've lost. I mean it's literally a beast that cannot be stopped now. These people apply to the worst of human nature, fear, racism. Basically of the other. Their audiences are just fanatical. I find the whole thing sad overall, just if there is any decline it truly is because of the propaganda machine that's been in works for 20 years. Rupert Murdoch being the key figure for this, I mean I don't know what the agenda is other than to make so much money but still die and leave a legacy. Haha don't be so glum- generations die and things will change. Things look particularly bad because we have a lot of older Americans who enjoyed a decadent and unsustainable existence. This is just bullshit pop-philosophizing but I think American material prosperity after WW2 created generations of people incapable or unwilling to accept modernity. I think there are interesting parallels here between the US and some nations in the Islamic world. EDIT: Chimp_On_Stilts put it much better than I could Dilkington fucked around with this message at 02:46 on Oct 18, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 02:43
|
|
|
Dr. Quigley posted:I try to pretend I'm independent, and nod along with some of this poo poo cause I don't want to be confrontational. He thinks the entire media is a conspiracy and that Fox News are the ones giving him the real deal. But it's mostly the sort of soap opera politics fluff and not major, substantive ideological issues. You have the right idea because I think the most significant barrier to this sort of dialogue is tonal rather than substantive. Without being condescending, ask them to consider alternative viewpoints, and just have a chat. I think one of the most valuable things I've learned in life is how to criticize a person without attacking them. If you communicate to them that you respect them as a person, and recognize the complex and often contradictory relationship we all have to our beliefs, you're much more likely to have a constructive discussion. Another way to think of it is the situation is not "you vs him," but rather you are working together to better understand something that is a problem for both of you. Also, be prepared to make compromises or change your preconceived notions. You aren't entering the conversation in good faith if you ask the other person to reconsider their ideas and you're not willing to do the same. I think a fair number of people strike up these sorts of discussions because secretly they like getting into shouting matches. I was that person for a long time- my advice is avoid being that person. Seoinin posted:I've been saying this a lot lately, but hahaha hooooly poo poo if you think the boomers are bad just wait until GenX gets their stupid rear end in a top hat hands on the country. Buncha folks that came up in the late seventies and eighties, and think of the Reagan Times as "oh yeah, it was awesome. I loved He-Man." Haha- I hope you're wrong- I don't want to witness Nirvana being abused that way.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 03:23
|
|
|
Dr. Quigley posted:Ah, I had totally forgot about that thread. Thanks! I don't want him to feel like I'm in this to convert him or anything. I don't know if I ever want to get to the point of being condescending since all that does is reinforce the insular mentality I would think. I don't know for sure if the moon landing occurred. All my knowledge of it is secondhand. Nonetheless, it is highly unlikely that the US government, at the height of the cold war, executed and then kept secret the world's most elaborate hoax. People who believe the president is a secret Muslim, or climate change is a big hoax, are guilty of asking themselves "could a person like me believe this?" rather than "do I have good reason to believe this?" A lot of people look at a proposition as a choice between two stances whose only difference is political- I think this is a mistake. Not all propositions are equal candidates for truth. I think this approach is good for reacquainting people with reality, although it doesn't work with arguments about ideology where reasonable people can disagree. e:clarity Dilkington fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Oct 18, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 16:52
|
|