September 10th, 2004
1. The so-called liberal media are just a bunch of fucking wimps that are just scared shitless about being labeled “liberal,” so they never expose the factual conservative dominance of our media industry.
2. Let me explain what I mean by “factual conservative dominance of our media industry.”
Basically, the conservative movement (through its various think-tanks, foundations, wealthy donors, etc.) learned to game the system/media some 30 years ago, when the conservative movement began its re-ascendance in our country (culminating in Mr. Reagan’s election and continuing to the present). (As reference, look up: The American Enterprise Institute, The Heritage Foundation and Cato Institute — there are others, but these are the principal ones, specially the American Enterprise Institute.)
Furthermore, conservatives of the 1950s and 1960s knew the following: A) They no longer belonged in the (Southern) Democratic party, as the party advocated Civil Rights and the enfranchisement of African Americans; B) They needed to jump ship, so they essentially hijacked the Republican party (note the lack of so-called Northern Rockefeller Republicans in today’s GOP); C) Conservatives of the period devised a strategy to flame the embers of White-male resentment against the politics of the late 1950s and 1960s, accordingly the Southern Strategy was born.
And this, essentially, is the genesis of the modern Republican party. Note how today’s Republican power base is contingent on these two factors: A) The South, and; B) Let’ say, the subtle, encouragement of White-male resentment against a popular culture that many of them feel rejects the White-male iconography.
Of course the preceding brushes over the past 40/50 years in very broad strokes, but I had to provide it as background to support how the “factual conservative dominance of our media industry” has occurred.
i. The conservative movement has laid down a well disciplined, and well funded, infrastructure that’s geared to challenge (and dismantle) the legitimacy of: academia, the news media and a certain brand of popular culture.
ii. To compete against academia, conservatives established think tanks and funded conservative intellectuals. Moreover, to challenge the news media conservative created what was, at the time, new media outlets: talk radio and direct mail (note that Republicans were the first to set up what still is the most extensive and sophisticated voter data-base in the country). Thirdly, popular culture is often used by conservatives to drive wedge issues among the electorate (i.e., homosexuality, feminism, guns, etc.).
iii. Its taken about three decades, but the combination of the factors I listed above have lead to what I referred to as Mr. Brock’s Republican Noise Machine model:
a. Talk radio is dominated by conservatives, which is where many of these stories originate. Accordingly, they give some buzz to whatever story they want to play up that day.
b. A network of quasi-news organizations (including right-wing blogs) provide some ink, to put some meat on the story and get things boiling.
c. Cable Network talking heads (i.e., Hardball, O’Rielly Factor, Sean Hannity, Scarborough, Miller, et al.) then pick up the story, once there’s enough of buzz behind it.
d. At this point the mainstream media is forced to run the story, since by now the item is “newsworthy.”
Now, the key part about the preceding model is this: After 30 years of a concerted and well organized effort to convince the public that the so-called liberal media cannot be trusted, journalists and the public have complete internalized this notion, and don’t even challenge the assumption. Furthermore, it is under these conditions that “Liberal” has become a “dirty word” and, conversely, “Conservative” has become the preferred ideological label for a significant segment of the public, specially White-males. So, finally, we have a system wherein American journalists are afraid to be perceived as having a liberal-bias, for fear of proving the myth true; and, the general public simply assumes that they know what they know, and simply assume that the so-called liberal media must have a liberal bias.
3. Because strong ideological conservatives in the media know that what I have described is true, they know that the wimpy mainstream media journalist will not mount a direct and frontal challenge on the conservative modus operandi. And, if such a challenge were to be raised, conservatives in the media (and the public) would simply charge such journalists as being liberals, thus proving the myth; and, unfortunately, a lot of members of the public would simply accept the charge without questioning it.
Now, here’s what I wrote in another post about the true media bias:
“[T]he media is driven by “commercial” and “sensationalistic” interests, and not by a so-called liberal bias. All of us — all U.S. citizens — have much to complain about regarding the media, and the terrible job they’re doing of covering substantive issues.”
I also offered the following as sources for further reading, and to provide an alternative view-point on what we think we already know:
September 9th, 2004
Oh man, this is just too easy — now let’s just see if the so-called liberal media exposes the blatant bias of the originating source behind the “forgery” story.
First, a little background on the Republican Noise Machine, here’s how it works:
1. Talk radio is dominated by conservatives, which is where many of these stories originate. Accordingly, they give some buzz to whatever story they want to play up that day.
2. A network of quasi-news organizations (including right-wing blogs) provide some ink, to put some meat on the story and get things boiling.
3. Cable Network talking heads (i.e., Hardball, O’Rielly Factor, Sean Hannity, Scarborough, Miller, et al.) then pick up the story, once there’s enough buzz behind the story.
4. At this point the mainstream media is forced to run the story, since by now the item is “newsworthy.”
Of course, the so-called liberal media are just a bunch of fucking wimps that are just scared shitless of being labeled “liberal,” so they never expose the tactical conservative dominance of our media industry. Anyhow, I seriously doubt that I can convince many of this (as you know what you know, and are not about to change your mind); however, I just wanted to offer this backgrounder before getting into the suspicious facts behind the source of this story.
1. CNSNews.com runs story [ link ]:
2. Matt Drudge posts a link to the story on his site (note that the DrudgeReport.com website is one of the most widely visited websites on the web):
3. I presume that this story has been getting a lot of airtime in the talking heads circuit (I’ve not tuned in to cable news today, but the model is pretty solid, so I assume that the talking heads have had a field day with this story).
4. At this point the mainstream media (a.k.a., the so-called liberal media) has to pick up the story, since it’s “newsworthy.”
Now, here’s some suspicious info on the source behind this story:
1. CNSNews.com is run and operated by the Media Research Center:
[ Who Is link may not work as its session specific. ]
2. The mission statement of the Media Research Center (MRC) reads:
“On October 1, 1987, a group of young determined conservatives set out to not only prove – through sound scientific research – that liberal bias in the media does exist and undermines traditional American values, but also to neutralize its impact on the American political scene. What they launched that fall is the now acclaimed — Media Research Center (MRC).”
And:
“That moved MRC founder and president, L. Brent Bozell III, to take the necessary steps to develop the MRC’s News Tracking System (NTS), a custom-designed computer database and archiving system that today provides the conservative movement’s now-thriving media personalities and the public alike, with the evidence necessary to confront the liberal media. This one-of-a-kind research operation combines analytical savvy with state-of-the-art computer technology, providing the means to scientifically track the short and long-range trends of any issue in the media. From a $339,000 initial annual budget, the MRC has grown to be the nation’s largest and most sophisticated television and monitoring operation, now employing 60 professional staff with a $6 million annual budget.” [ link ]
3. Moreover, the MRC offers the Drudge Report as one of their trusted sources for information [link]:
Now, many will simply say, Yeah, we gotta stick it to the liberal media, and that’s just what MRC is doing. Well, that rationalization may be sufficient for many, but to me it simply proves the validity of the Republican Noise Machine model and how, in fact, the media is dominated by a strong conservative tactical bias.
As David Brock, author of the Republican Noise Machine noted (and I paraphrase), It’s not important that Republicans get the facts right, it’s only important that they throw up enough mud to cloud the truth.
Now, let’s just see if the so-called liberal media covers this part of the story.
September 9th, 2004
Looks like the Republican Noise Machine is already well at work!
The Matt Drudge Report is running a story that alleges that the memos questioning Bush’s National Guard service are forgeries. The Weekly Standard, a well known Republican tool of misinformation runs a similar story:
“[T]he apostrophes are curlicues of the sort produced by word processors on personal computers, not the straight vertical hashmarks typical of typewriters. Finally, in some references to Bush’s unit–the 111thFighter Interceptor Squadron–the “th” is a superscript in a smaller size than the other type. Again, this is typical (and often done automatically) in modern word processing programs. Although several experts allow that such a rendering might have been theoretically possible in the early 1970s, it would have been highly unlikely. Superscripts produced on typewriters–the numbers preceding footnotes in term papers, for example–were almost always in the same size as the regular type.” [ link to Weekly Standard story ]
As the author of the Republican Noise Machine notes in his book, and I paraphrase, it’s not important that Republicans get the facts right, it’s only important that they throw up enough mud to cloud the truth.
September 8th, 2004
Just heard an interesting interview (Real Player) with James Wolcott, author of Attack Poodles and Other Media Mutants : The Looting of the News in a Time of Terror.
Mainstream media (CNN, FOX, CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS, et al.) = Lap Dogs of the Right.
August 25th, 2004
OSAMA BIN LADEN
BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE…
“I want justice. And there’s an old poster out West, I recall, that says, ‘Wanted: Dead or Alive.’” [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]
…BUSH DOESN’T CARE ABOUT OSAMA
“I don’t know where he is. You know, I just don’t spend that much time on him… I truly am not that concerned about him.”[President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]
SADDAM/AL QAEDA LINK
BUSH SAYS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEEN AL QAEDA AND SADDAM…
“You can’t distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror.” [President Bush, 9/25/02]
…BUSH SAYS SADDAM HAD NO ROLE IN AL QAEDA PLOT
“We’ve had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in Sept. 11.” [President Bush, 9/17/03]
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
BUSH SAYS WE FOUND THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION…
“We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories… for those who say we haven’t found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they’re wrong, we found them.” [President Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03]
…BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN’T FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
“David Kay has found the capacity to produce weapons. And when David Kay goes in and says we haven’t found stockpiles yet, and there’s theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we’ll find out.” [President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04]
IRAQ FUNDING
BUSH SPOKESMAN DENIES NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE REST OF 2004…
“We do not anticipate requesting supplemental funding for ’04″ [White House Budget Director Joshua Bolton, 2/2/04]
…BUSH REQUESTS ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR IRAQ FOR 2004
“I am requesting that Congress establish a $25 billion contingency reserve fund for the coming fiscal year to meet all commitments to our troops.” [President Bush, Statement by President, 5/5/04]
CREATION OF THE 9/11 COMMISSION
BUSH OPPOSES CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION…
“President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11.” [CBS News, 5/23/02]
…BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION
“President Bush said today he now supports establishing an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.” [ABC News, 09/20/02]
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BUSH OPPOSES THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY…
“So, creating a Cabinet office doesn’t solve the problem. You still will have agencies within the federal government that have to be coordinated. So the answer is that creating a Cabinet post doesn’t solve anything.” [White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, 3/19/02]
…BUSH SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
“So tonight, I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission: securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people.” [President Bush, Address to the Nation, 6/6/02]
GAY MARRIAGE
BUSH SAYS GAY MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE…
“The state can do what they want to do. Don’t try to trap me in this state’s issue like you’re trying to get me into.” [Gov. George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Larry King Live, 2/15/00]
…BUSH SUPPORTS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE
“Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife.” [President Bush, 2/24/04]
SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS
BUSH PLEDGES NOT TO TOUCH SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS…
“We’re going to keep the promise of Social Security and keep the government from raiding the Social Security surplus.” [President Bush, 3/3/01]
…BUSH SPENDS SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS
The New York Times reported that “the president’s new budget uses Social Security surpluses to pay for other programs every year through 2013, ultimately diverting more than $1.4 trillion in Social Security funds to other purposes.” [The New York Times, 2/6/02]
NATION BUILDING
BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING…
“If we don’t stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we’re going to have a serious problem coming down the road.” [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00]
…BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING
“We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people.” [President Bush, 3/6/03]
