- Vincent Van Goatse
- Nov 8, 2006
-
Enjoy every sandwich.
-
Smellrose
|
And has it gotten us very far, do you think?
I already said that yes, they will report on the worst excesses of the system they propgate, but they will equally turn vehemently against any attempt to usurp that system. This is part of the problem. This is why they are so effective an obstacle. They say on the one hand that terrible things are happening, but on the other work hard to obfuscate any systemic, left wing critique of why they happen.
Do you not think this contradiction is a problem? Do you not think that perhaps the contradiction is fuel for all the far right stuff I assume you dislike? When you have a press that tells you terrible things are happening but cannot offer you a coherent explanation for why, and equally can have a section of itself, by virtue of private ownership, more than willing to voice the extreme right answer to why the world is hosed, do you not think this represents a systemic problem with the press and how it affects society?
It is terrible that people die hungry or sick, but UBI or medicare for all or a 15 dollar minimum wage are unworkable programs, and also theyr'e socialism and socialism is worse than hitler and it's actually the fault of the drat immigrants and that's why we need to invade syria. These are your three flavours of content produced by the US media and most media in the west. They at best identify problems, in the middle rail against the left solution, and on the right they promote the vilest solutions. But it's all part of the system. It is a holistic thing. They're all organized the same way, and they cannot deviate from that because what wealthy and powerful institution is going to advocate for things that threaten itself?
It doesn't matter what individual journalists might want, they can't change the way their industry operates. They won't change the way the media as a whole affects society. It doesn't matter how many reports on bad things they put out because they will be followed up with a stifling of the left and a fostering of the right, ever and always. It's a three hit combo. You say society is rotten, you paint the good solutions as wrong in some way, morally or practically, and you offer people the far right line that acknowledges the rot in society and gives the wrong solution.
You may not do it consciously but that is the effect. It is not all done by the same company, but it is all done by the same mode of organization. Which is wealthy private or state owned media with a remit to seek profit and readership. This can cover all positions but the left wing one quite effectively, because the democratic left wing position is opposed to the wealthy privately owned model, and the state ownership model is similarly oligarchic due to the nature of it being controlled by representative democracies which themselves are generally steeped in the wealth and privilege of the political class which makes it makes it inherently hard for a left wing government to maintain control of, and it becomes a very effective instrument in the hands of a right wing one.
I don't know how a collectively owned media might work out because it'd have to be a massive structural break from the normal hierarchical organization I think. It's unknown enough that I couldn't venture a view on it. With the british labour party's ideas about transferring some things to collective or municipal ownership though it might possibly be an option we could see in the future.
Gibberish.
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2019 01:41
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2024 16:15
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2019 01:41
