4 ms·

A book about the US media coverage of Central America in the 80’s if I recall correctly. I didn’t experience this period in the news but it was interesting eno

A book about the US media coverage of Central America in the 80’s if I recall correctly. I didn’t experience this period in the news but it was interesting enough for me to finish for some reason. The writing style doesn’t hurt. > Under these circumstances, the task for the media is clear. First, they must apply the standard technique of historical amnesia and “change of course,” which obliterates all memory of U.S. policies and their effects. Virtually a reflex, this device can be applied instantaneously.

roenxi 3y ago
> ...the standard technique of historical amnesia and “change of course,” which obliterates all memory of U.S. policies and their effects... That one is so frustrating. Possibly because I am more comfortable with acting out of raw self-interest than most, but it has to be literally impossible (literal as in there might be a proof-level argument) for people to effect their own self interests if they use that tactic. It makes sense that people don't want to take responsibility for their own country's actions. No biggy, we're none of us perfect and it is a good plan to stick together regardless. But if past policy led to a bad place, what is the path to a good place that doesn't involve acknowledging that? The US's foreign policy muckups have consistently left it worse off. Alright. Bygones be bygone. Lotta resources wasted killing goat herders and witch hunts in foreign lands despite their being no witches. But does it not make sense to stop doing that at some point? The reason the US corporate media have lost all credibility in the internet era is that it is too obvious that this is a thing they do in coordination with each other.
- teddyh 3y ago
  Credibility is only lost (by bad behavior over long periods of time) to those few who have been able to actually observe that same behavior over that long period of time. New people are constantly coming in, saying “Surely everything is good now, right?”. And the new people invariably outnumber the old people, so the new people win the day.
  - 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
    Exactly this. A working American's lifetime capacity to evaluate and fact-check history lessons is vastly insufficient. As a voracious radical most of my life now pushing 40, I am still learning what I don’t know about the basics, and I attend weekly reading groups ffs!
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - rixed 3y ago
    This is not because new people come in greater numbers but rather because of who we want to be true.
  - smaudet 3y ago
    I had an interesting experience lately with a mentalist performer...they were using various subtle powers of suggestion to influence their outcomes to "predict" and "mind-read". And yet when I mentioned the (well documented and studied) effects to some of the folk who attended with me, the immediate and emotional reaction was shock and disbelief, despite a couple of the members of the party having been directly affected. The mentalist performers had even partially explained their trick (without giving away the details). And yet, their level of cognitive dissonance was so high, that they could not accept a plausible explanation for something that they themselves could not otherwise explain. A good lesson being, if a young person is saying "everything is fine", they surely know nothing and everything is far from it, barring substantial proof to the contrary. They are likely to be severely in denial, and much like altering someone's political or religious beliefs, altering their perceptions is likely to be as difficult. Or another way to put it - everyone is in fact an imposter. We only don't notice, because everyone else is just as bad (for the most part).
  - avgcorrection 3y ago
    > New people are constantly coming in, saying “Surely everything is good now, right?”. What? No. People who are naive about this are derided as “Boomers”.
- milchek 3y ago
  > But does it not make sense to stop doing that at some point? Depends who you ask and how much control you believe the Military Industrial Complex exerts. I don’t see an end to conflict in the current system. Also, the statement that past policy lead to a bad place unfortunately depends who is appraising the situation. To citizens; increased hostility, wasted tax payer funds, and lives lost is a massively “bad place,” but politicians would never admit to such mistakes and spin the narrative. Those same political powers can ensure their narrative is amplified by traditional media, and you know how the rest goes.
- globalnode 3y ago
  your "bad place" is a shit ton of profit for me tyvm

roenxi 3y ago

> ...the standard technique of historical amnesia and “change of course,” which obliterates all memory of U.S. policies and their effects... That one is so frustrating. Possibly because I am more comfortable with acting out of raw self-interest than most, but it has to be literally impossible (literal as in there might be a proof-level argument) for people to effect their own self interests if they use that tactic. It makes sense that people don't want to take responsibility for their own country's actions. No biggy, we're none of us perfect and it is a good plan to stick together regardless. But if past policy led to a bad place, what is the path to a good place that doesn't involve acknowledging that? The US's foreign policy muckups have consistently left it worse off. Alright. Bygones be bygone. Lotta resources wasted killing goat herders and witch hunts in foreign lands despite their being no witches. But does it not make sense to stop doing that at some point? The reason the US corporate media have lost all credibility in the internet era is that it is too obvious that this is a thing they do in coordination with each other.

teddyh 3y ago
Credibility is only lost (by bad behavior over long periods of time) to those few who have been able to actually observe that same behavior over that long period of time. New people are constantly coming in, saying “Surely everything is good now, right?”. And the new people invariably outnumber the old people, so the new people win the day.
- 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
  Exactly this. A working American's lifetime capacity to evaluate and fact-check history lessons is vastly insufficient. As a voracious radical most of my life now pushing 40, I am still learning what I don’t know about the basics, and I attend weekly reading groups ffs!
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- rixed 3y ago
  This is not because new people come in greater numbers but rather because of who we want to be true.
- smaudet 3y ago
  I had an interesting experience lately with a mentalist performer...they were using various subtle powers of suggestion to influence their outcomes to "predict" and "mind-read". And yet when I mentioned the (well documented and studied) effects to some of the folk who attended with me, the immediate and emotional reaction was shock and disbelief, despite a couple of the members of the party having been directly affected. The mentalist performers had even partially explained their trick (without giving away the details). And yet, their level of cognitive dissonance was so high, that they could not accept a plausible explanation for something that they themselves could not otherwise explain. A good lesson being, if a young person is saying "everything is fine", they surely know nothing and everything is far from it, barring substantial proof to the contrary. They are likely to be severely in denial, and much like altering someone's political or religious beliefs, altering their perceptions is likely to be as difficult. Or another way to put it - everyone is in fact an imposter. We only don't notice, because everyone else is just as bad (for the most part).
- avgcorrection 3y ago
  > New people are constantly coming in, saying “Surely everything is good now, right?”. What? No. People who are naive about this are derided as “Boomers”.
milchek 3y ago
> But does it not make sense to stop doing that at some point? Depends who you ask and how much control you believe the Military Industrial Complex exerts. I don’t see an end to conflict in the current system. Also, the statement that past policy lead to a bad place unfortunately depends who is appraising the situation. To citizens; increased hostility, wasted tax payer funds, and lives lost is a massively “bad place,” but politicians would never admit to such mistakes and spin the narrative. Those same political powers can ensure their narrative is amplified by traditional media, and you know how the rest goes.
globalnode 3y ago
your "bad place" is a shit ton of profit for me tyvm