A recent comment by Jayne to a less recent post asks: “Where are you? I’m looking for inspiration. Have you dropped out or can’t you write and laugh at the same time?”
I apologize for my absence. Jayne is quite correct that it is, indeed, very difficult to write, type, or even refrain from spewing one’s milk through one’s nose, while overcome by the hilarity ensuing from such daily revelations as Blagojagate or the irony of Harry Reid’s racist tendencies. The thing is I’ve been so thoroughly enthralled by all the excellent coverage elsewhere of recent developments, I just haven’t felt the need to contribute.
I admit I don’t have much stomach lately for mucking through the mundane minutiae of the daily news cycle. And, with the growing realization of the absolute corruption of the Corporate Media, I have become increasingly selective in my information gathering habits (mainly to avoid the inadvertent destruction of the inanimate objects that may have been involved in these transmissions).
Therefore I have, for now, temporarily retired to the “Alternative Echo Chamber” the Pumasphere provides those who have developed an aversion to the first hand experience of those conventional news sources we once depended on to keep us informed.
I have nothing but admiration for those who daily brave that swamp known as the MSM — especially the cesspool of cable news I was once addicted to — to deliver the relevant buckets of slime for my perusal. This way, any exposure to “legitimate” news sources such as say, Mike Barnacle, or Chris Matthews and his ilk, are mercifully filtered through the lens of those I have entrusted to warn me about the insanity I am about to witness, before my delicate political sensibilities are subjected to them.
This is how I was informed of the latest projectile emanating from the Propobama Network, AKA MSNBC. Apparently circle jerk extraordinaire Barnacle accuses most of us here in the blogosphere of engaging in mere “therapy”, as opposed to – whatever the hell it is they do over there, I guess…
OK, I confess, Barnacle’s characterization does have some relevancy, but have you looked in the mirror lately, Mike?. Like so much of the “projecting” and “acting out” witnessed on that network and elsewhere, this particular hot-air-seeking-projectile’s explosion illuminates its launch site more than the websites which are its intended target.
There is such a fine line between news, opinion and therapy, isn’t there Mike? Without dwelling on exactly what it is they do do over there at the ICBC (Irish Catholic Boys Club), I propose there are much better places one can receive a reasonable assessment of the news (all of them on the internet) and that their network now performs a very lowly function, indeed, in the dissemination of “information”. It does, OTOH, serve as a classic example of the disinformation and propoganda that now permeate the MSCM (Main Stream Corporate Media-”sphere”).
When not fully engaged in their latest campaign to disinform the electorate, these MSNBC panels often indulge in what could only be described as various bizarre forms of “group therapy”. During the recent War on the Clintons (i.e.: the Democratic Primary), for example, when morale was at its lowest, sometimes even the most diligent propagandist had to take a moment to confront his darkest fears, before regrouping for the next assault.
More often than not, MSNBC’s current arch-nemesis has been the dreaded Clinton Monster. (One could even say the campaign proved too much for poor Timmy Russert. At any rate, with Hillary’s defeat his work on this earth was obviously completed.)
But, go ahead, please, try to convince me that Chris Matthews’ post-NH pouty-faced, hissy-fit performance was about “informing” or even “opining”, and not about his own personal psychological trauma induced by Obama’s loss (more precisely by Hillary’s win). It was also about the overwhelming disappointment at not recieving the outcome he had so diligently promoted with all his half-wit CDS (Clinton Derangement Syndrome) giberings of the last year decade.
Likewise, after each Obama defeat there were similar episodes of confusion, bewilderment, disillusionment and… well, “therapy”. After a particularly demoralizing stretch of bad news and revelations for Obama sometime around the PA primary, ( I don’t have the patience to reference the exact revelations – take your pick…) we found Matthews assuming the roll of Bambi’s therapist – I swear he looked straight into the camera as if the Leg-Tingler himself was right there hanging on every consoling syllable of Tweety’s little pep talk. Ironically, the conclusion was that Barack needed to start getting tougher, scrappier – you know: more like Hillary!
I believe that was the last time I was able to endure the ongoing inner psychodrama of this particular pathetic creature.
OK, we all know about MSNBC – they are the new “progressive” FAUX news. But, even “legitimate” news outlets that are assumed to provide relatively unvarnished coverage…well, I’m not really sure that kind of journalism even exists anymore, if it ever did. EVERYONE has an agenda. I think AP has proven this beyond any doubt. My yahoo home page is set to display as many headlines from as many sources as possible. Even just scrolling through the headlines, it was ALWAYS obvious that AP had an extremely Obama friendly agenda.
Perhaps it was always this way and I was just too naiive or oblivious to notice. Maybe it’s just that the MSM no longer cares about how blatant they are, and keep pushing the envelop of what they can put over on an increasingly gullible public.
Just the choice between reporting one story and not another imposes bias — sometimes in the most subtle and insidious way, especially considering how little effort most voters devote to staying informed. When every “legitimate” news agency limits the choice of information in a similar manner, it is impossible not to imply some overarching agenda.
Often the driest roundup of “today’s top stories” is the most effective propaganda due to what goes unreported – and because the bias goes largely unnoticed.
Pages such as yahoo which feature the headlines from AP, CBS, etc, provide a hierarchy of relevance as the Corporate Media wishes events to be perceived. Print media headline wording and placement reflects the bias of the newspaper, and often doesn’t even reflect the true intent of the writer (One article: 4 different headlines).
One positive result of the PUMA “alienation” from the Democratic Party appears to be a willingness (through necessity) to recognize and utilize — regardless of whether it may be “mainstream”, progressive or conservative — any source which is providing “reality based” information (usually whoever is the least invested in the impact of the information being reported).
It is now obvious that the SCPM (so called progressive media) is every bit as biased as the conservative media. Perhaps bias is not the right word here, as no one could expect a left or right leaning publication NOT to be biased. I am referring to the willingness to deliberately mislead, or engage in what could only be characterized as dis-information.
This is in some ways a reaction to the dominance of conservative media, talk radio, etc. witnessed for the past decade, and parallels the Democratic party’s own “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em” attitude toward using more blatant tactics to insure they “don’t get fooled again” as in recent contests. The only real difference between now and then is in who’s disinformation the Corporate Media seems invested in furthering.
Any given source is assumed to have some ratio of facts & opinion, (and perhaps even a little “therapy” thrown in for good measure). For most of us it’s just a matter of which “echo chamber” we trust to pass along the information we want to hear. But if one remains conscious of the inherent bias and propaganda on either end of the political spectrum, – but especially what normally goes unchallenged in the Main Stream Consensus — one is more likely to see where the most reasonable assessment of events is coming from at any given time. As much can then be learned about the source as the subject.
In many cases, though, such as our friends Tweety & the Barnacle, we’ve learned way too much about the source already to even bother with them at all.
Posted by thenotionthatsomehow 