Tuesday, February 22, 2005

Objectivity in Independent Media

By B. J. Sabri
Kim Petersen

Read full article...

Posted 02/22 | Add a Comment

    Comments:

    You must register to comment.

    Login | Register

  1. Something I see alot of around me is a screaming lack of any sort of intellectual curiosity on the part of my fellow suburbanites.I think this has contributed to the ability of the mainstream US media to morph into “entertainment"rather than actual truthseeking or telling.I guess I was lucky to have had a life were the people who were most influential on me encouraged me to be curious,ask questions,and then investigate on my own.I always thought I was fairly average,but this leads me to think maybe I’m not.Simply because there seems to be no real DEMAND for truth from the american public,and not alot of people(numbers wise)seem to even want to know.If there was ever a time we needed to know,it would be now.

    Maybe the way we live has just worn people out,I don’t know.It’s usually not just one thing at the heart of a serious problem.I’ve heard alot of phrases tossed around the ol’ neighborhood lately;"Those people over there"(meaning anyone not HERE),a disconnection from the rest of the world.Or,"How do"those people"live?They don’t even have a McDonald’s or a WalMart"(or insert one’s favorite american corporate icon in place of the two mentioned),assuming that all the poor people need is a greasy burger and fries,access to alot of cheesy plastic crap,and all will be well.Never occurs to a soul that life without those things could still be worth living.

    I had thought 9/11 would have helped crack that self imposed shell most people live inside,but it seems to have reinforced it.IMO,the media(and the wheels grinding behind it)is directly responsible for a fair share of this.Their feet should be held to the proverbial fire,but I’m not holding my breath until that happens.

    Posted by Mom Anonymous from GA,USA  on  02/23  at  06:27 AM

  2. Fun with political epistemology!

    I am not qualified in any way to comment on the authenticity of bin Laden’s inexistence.

    However, long ago, I adopted extreme scepticism regarding media spectacle. It’s how I read the papers and watch the news. (Not only because I have read some philosophy ... I have also seen ... ‘The Matrix’.) Imagetic manipulation for propagandistic purposes, no matter how crude, is a fact these days. (Remember the fake photograph of John Kerry and Jane Fonda hanging out?)

    I agree Marquardt’s response to Peterson opens up many, many questions.

    I know next to nothing about conspiracy theory. Still, When M. answered P. thusly:

    ‘Kim, the whole world is not filled with conspiracies.’

    The implication is not only that conspiracy is leading the question. His wording implies that P.’s thought is mired in conspiratorial musings.

    Furthermore:

    ‘While they [conspiracies] do occur, most of the time what you see is what exists, as long as you open your eyes and do not let your sight be guided by personal biases.’

    Of course we moderns don’t really think that way. For example, looking at your keyboard or desk, they appear stationary, single obects. However, we theorize that it is actually composed of countless particles in ceaseless motion. (I can comprehend this whether my eyes are open or closed.) One might argue that new physics are simply a personal bias. That is where why we originally developed the scientific method: to agree upon a reasonable interpretation of reality.

    In the informational sphere, taking things at face value is simple intellectual laziness.

    Peterson’s question was completely reasonable.

    Posted by Theo from Greece  on  02/23  at  06:50 AM

  3. Hi Mom,

    I’d say that your thought about ‘mainstream US media to morph into “entertainment” rather than actual truthseeking or telling’ is right on.

    For example, there is little coverage of the reality of the war in Iraq in the U.S. media compared to what I get from international sources. While almost no ‘reality TV’ is happening in Iraq, there was an effort by FX to create a TV drama like ‘NYPD Blue’ set in Iraq.

    I imagine the coupled effect would be to replace an objective interpretation of the war with a fictitious storyline.

    How many people can only think of M*A*S*H when asked about the Korean War?

    Posted by Theo from Greece  on  02/23  at  06:58 AM

  4. Again, I apologize for this horribly unedited posts of mine.

    Posted by Theo from Greece  on  02/23  at  07:05 AM

  5. Theo,
    Your mention of the TV show led me to something else…

    Notice the proliferation of “law enforcement and crime solving"themed shows lately?Just off the top of my head I can think of at least 9 shows on various networks devoted to some sort of crime drama.(The CSI and Law and Order dynasties not withstanding)

    I come from a family with a law enforcement and military backround,people I love are or were cops and soldiers(a couple of firefighters too),so I knew some of the good guys,and there are some.(slightly veering off for a moment,I also knew alot of guys who came home from Vietnam completely fucked up,people I had adored as a little girl,loving and kind young men who doted on me and bragged about my talents,boosting me along as it were.After they came home,that was gone,never to return-all are dead now,with one exception)Sadly though,as we grow more and more soul dead as a nation,these"good guys"are lost in a sea of the undead.

    I keep asking myself why these shows are so popular,besides the fact that little else but some variation of"reality TV"is on,and all I can think of is people love a good story.Ok,I’ll buy that,humans have been telling stories in some form or fashion since WAY back in the day.The thing is,with all the “stories"out there happening for REAL we honestly don’t need anyone to come up with “based on reality"storylines.I should ammend what I said above I think,people love a good story,IF it can be wrapped up fairly prettily in about 60 minutes(minus commercials of course).Much of the problem with the media is directly related to a lack of curiosity on the part of those consuming it.Which came first,the media or the apathy and sluggishness?

    Posted by Mom Anonymous from GA,USA  on  02/23  at  07:35 AM

  6. Good closing question Mom. I’d like to think that people watch TV fiction and hold that little thought close to their heart:

    ‘I know this is irreal, a mere staging.’

    But the fact is that a lot of intelligent, even brilliant people get lost channel surfing between programs that are uncannily similar.

    We can all start adopting the images we are exposed to as representative of real life. Which they are not.

    So I think it’s that the magnitude of the living in a informational world swamped with these illusory spectacles that’s responsible. I suppose I’m saying the the everpresent media faciliates sluggishness.

    Maintaining a critical outlook takes energy and people easily gravitate to laziness, seemingly.

    Posted by Theo from Greece  on  02/23  at  09:45 AM

  7. An interesting thing about people who are entranced is, traumatic events rarely wake them out of their trances.  They just interpret the traumatic event within the framework of their trance (i.e. “we are a freedom loving people and they are a freedom hating people, so they attacked us because we love freedom").

    Posted by Nader Rider from  on  02/23  at  10:09 AM

  8. Ron Suskind, “Without a Doubt,” New York Times Magazine, Oct. 17, 2004: “In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn’t like about [George] Bush’s former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush… The aide said that guys like me were ‘in what we call the reality-based community,’ which he defined as people who ‘believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.’ I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ‘That’s not the way the world really works anymore,’ he continued. ‘We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.’”

    The Wizard of Oz wasn’t exposed by some eloquent response to his public utterings.  That would be playing his game; the game of responding within the framed universe created by the Wizard.  Instead, he was exposesd by a little dog, Toto, who tugged at the curtain which hid the little, pathetic man who play-acted the Wizard.  Where is Toto when you need him most?

    Posted by Nader Rider from  on  02/23  at  10:57 AM
    9. Commenting is not available in this weblog entry. {/if}

    Next entry: The Gray Line

    Previous entry: The New Abolitionism: Capitalism, Slavery and Animal Liberation

    [ads]

    Support Press Action