5 ms·
Because it's possible, it must be true! Who cares if there's no hard evidence.
by readme 14y ago
Because it's possible, it must be true! Who cares if there's no hard evidence.
- illuminate 14y agoBesides, the simplest answer is that "the media" is selfish, desperate, and cheap. Original coverage, coverage that requires remote HQs, deep coverage is not a priority and those departments were probably axed ten years ago.
- alexqgb 14y ago"Selfish, desperate, and cheap." Yes, exactly. As someone who knows the media world better than he'd like to, I cannot think of a more succinct or generally applicable characterization. You, sir, have nailed it.
- illuminate 14y agoThanks for the opinion, I'm well outside of that but would love to find good sources with more signal than noise.
- alexqgb 14y agoI'd like to stress that this is by no means a fair characterization of all the people who work in media. There are a awful lot who push against this current every day. Some of them (on occasion) win. But it tends to be a fight, and the victories invariably seem like minor miracles. When they're not winning (which is frequent), and thinking "what the fuck am I doing here?" (also frequent) chances are good that whoever or whatever they're getting snowed by can be fairly described just the way you did.
- elemenohpee 14y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model#Case_examples http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model#Case_examples Just because you are ignorant of the evidence doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
- readme 14y agoSame argument can be used to provide plausibility for the existence of the flying spaghetti monster, celestial teapot, and God.
- m0th87 14y agoWait, what? The criticism that the original comment had no meat was fair. But then, when you're linked to concrete examples of the hypothesized Propaganda Model at play, you invoke a generic argument about the FSM? Do you not see how you're making the same weightless arguments by invoking a straw man?
- readme 14y agoNo, I wasn't referring to the "propaganda model" I was referring to his second comment, which btw, does not describe the propaganda model at all.
- elemenohpee 14y agoI can only assume that you missed the part where I linked to the evidence you said didn't exist?
- readme 14y agoI never said evidence didn't exist for ALL conspiracies. I said that there was no evidence in the particular article we're discussing. I know about Iran-Contra, the gulf of tonkin, etc. How about the USS liberty? Your link was very interesting.