3 ms·

Society is a system not a collection of individuals. You are talking about some idealistic system that does not exist anywhere. People are easily mislead by cor

by rapsey 6y ago

Society is a system not a collection of individuals. You are talking about some idealistic system that does not exist anywhere. People are easily mislead by corrupt media spreading lies and doubt about anyone. Powerful interests can derail any threat to them. This is why things seldom change in any real way. Take US presidential candidates Andrew Yang or Tulsi Gabbard. Completely reasonable politicians who had to deal with constant lies about them being spread by the media.

mcv 6y ago
Sure, but a country doesn't have to have corrupt media. Many don't. Like you say, it's a system. And as a society, you design that system to suit what you want. It's not like some impersonal outside force is forcing it upon you; it's made by you, by the people in that society. And it changes when the people want it to. It's absolutely true that the US system is incredibly corrupt, and it may be hard to see a way out of that, but a lot of countries are different, and many countries have seen real change. The US could do that too, but the people have to want it.
- rapsey 6y ago
  When the good times are rolling corruption in the media does not reveal itself. Chomsky was writing about corruption in the US media in the 80s and pointing out the things that are plain as day now. Very few listened. Media has always been beholden to powerful interests. Especially now when their revenue streams are drying up. Saying many don't is naive. You just don't see it, because the corruption reveals itself about what they don't print. For that to be obvious you have to be aware what they are hiding from the public.
  - mcv 6y ago
    I do not disagree that a lot of US media are corrupt, I merely disagree that that is the only way it can be. There are many countries where the media aren't that corrupt. The problem is really the toxic situation in the US, not the concept of media itself. Independent media is absolutely essential for a functioning democracy. Of course there's some tension between capitalism and the idea of independent media, because in capitalism, you sell that for which there is a demand, so many US media just say/write whatever their readers want to hear, and if those readers care more about having their own prejudices confirmed and stoking the toxic tribalism that's dominating their country, then that's what purely capitalist media will write. But in many other countries, journalists are more idealistic than that, and have editorial independence. And when the media owner threatens that independence, journalists cry foul and leave. Arguing that media can only be corrupt, is basically arguing that there can not be any democratic accountability. Instead of arguing it cannot be improved, it would be more constructive to demand improvement, demand editorial independence, and follow and pay for those media that offer that.
    - ranguna 6y ago
      I completely agree WITH you. I think rapsey I locked in his own mind and is not tolerable enough to accept that there are countries with different characteristics and culture than the US.

by rapsey 6y ago

mcv 6y ago

Sure, but a country doesn't have to have corrupt media. Many don't. Like you say, it's a system. And as a society, you design that system to suit what you want. It's not like some impersonal outside force is forcing it upon you; it's made by you, by the people in that society. And it changes when the people want it to. It's absolutely true that the US system is incredibly corrupt, and it may be hard to see a way out of that, but a lot of countries are different, and many countries have seen real change. The US could do that too, but the people have to want it.

rapsey 6y ago
When the good times are rolling corruption in the media does not reveal itself. Chomsky was writing about corruption in the US media in the 80s and pointing out the things that are plain as day now. Very few listened. Media has always been beholden to powerful interests. Especially now when their revenue streams are drying up. Saying many don't is naive. You just don't see it, because the corruption reveals itself about what they don't print. For that to be obvious you have to be aware what they are hiding from the public.
- mcv 6y ago
  I do not disagree that a lot of US media are corrupt, I merely disagree that that is the only way it can be. There are many countries where the media aren't that corrupt. The problem is really the toxic situation in the US, not the concept of media itself. Independent media is absolutely essential for a functioning democracy. Of course there's some tension between capitalism and the idea of independent media, because in capitalism, you sell that for which there is a demand, so many US media just say/write whatever their readers want to hear, and if those readers care more about having their own prejudices confirmed and stoking the toxic tribalism that's dominating their country, then that's what purely capitalist media will write. But in many other countries, journalists are more idealistic than that, and have editorial independence. And when the media owner threatens that independence, journalists cry foul and leave. Arguing that media can only be corrupt, is basically arguing that there can not be any democratic accountability. Instead of arguing it cannot be improved, it would be more constructive to demand improvement, demand editorial independence, and follow and pay for those media that offer that.
  - ranguna 6y ago
    I completely agree WITH you. I think rapsey I locked in his own mind and is not tolerable enough to accept that there are countries with different characteristics and culture than the US.