5 ms·

Why is it that nobody takes seriously the concept that mainstream media is a propaganda source for government, even in the West? Everyone jokes about how bad i

Why is it that nobody takes seriously the concept that mainstream media is a propaganda source for government, even in the West? Everyone jokes about how bad it is developing nations (and dictatorships), and makes fun of everyone that raises concerned about western countries as being nut-job conspiracy theorist who believe in lizard people or whatever. US News in particular is breathtakingly propagandist. It is like watching a US themed Russia Today. And only the "comedy" shows in the US, and some internet-only sources really provide a moderately unbiased view.

marcosdumay 12y ago
Who do you want to take the concept seriously? The mainstream media? The Internet is a great achievement. For the first time we can get the information the media isn't wiling to share with us, and it is damaging. People are noticing. They are just not reacting the way you (and me) expected - what should be expected.
- lukifer 12y ago
  The counter-point is how PR folk have been learning to master the art of viral, distributed propaganda. While it's harder to control than broadcast (memes have a life of their own), active manipulation of public narrative for profit remains alive and well on the Internet.
leereeves 12y ago
Every media source is biased. Even The Daily Show and Colbert Report. Even reddit and Hacker News are biased (reddit calls it the hivemind). That's not the same as being a propaganda source for government, unless the only viewpoint anyone is allowed to express is the one approved by the government.
- grecy 12y ago
  > That's not the same as being a propaganda source for government, unless the only viewpoint anyone is allowed to express is the one approved by the government. In the west (especially the US) I'd say the media is a propaganda source for big businesses, and the only viewpoint anyone express is the one approved by big businesses.
  - leereeves 12y ago
    I agree. The media IS big business, owned by even bigger business, and that's their point of view.
    - grecy 12y ago
      And that big business is buying the government more and more every day.. which indirectly means the only view in the media is that of the (big business owned) government.
- cma 12y ago
  Journalists trade puff-pieces for leaks and exclusives. Only those in power typically have leaks to trade.
- fnordfnordfnord 12y ago
  Bias != propaganda. You definition of propaganda is overly specific. If you're waiting for leaflets to be dropped out of airplanes, you're going to be disappointed. >unless the only viewpoint anyone is allowed to express is the one approved by the government. That's totalitarianism, at least WRT the media and public discourse.
  - leereeves 12y ago
    If simply expressing a point of view is propaganda, we're all propaganda sources. The mainstream media expresses plenty of opinions the government doesn't share. Consider Fox News during the Obama administration.
cdcarter 12y ago
This article is written by a major dissenter in the US Govt, and published in one of the most read newspapers in the country, trying to demystify and make public the actions of the government and trade partners. Perhaps it's just the exception that proves the rule.
api 12y ago
Because the "conspiracy theory" charge is used to successfully lump all investigative journalism in with people who think the queen of england is a reptile.
swatow 12y ago
It's a difficult point to argue without going into specifics because everyone has a different concept of what the nature of the government is, and so they will interpret being propaganda for the government differently. E.g. Chomsky sees the government as a vehicle for the rich elite, and so when he speaks about being propaganda, he has in mind the media spreading messages that benefit the rich elite. E.g. he thinks that the US encourages a right wing regime in Israel in order to stir up trouble in the middle east, which I think is ridiculous. Someone on the economic left (without Chomsky's social or geopolitical viewpoint) might consider the government to be working to lower wages by doing deals with other like minded governments. And (as people are saying here) the media would be complicit by not reporting this. I think that the government is primarily controlled by ideological forces, and that the government does not exercise much direct control over the media, but that both the media and government are heavily influenced by the same ideologies.
- lukifer 12y ago
  It is worse and simpler than ideology: self-interest demands collusion. Media conglomerates benefit from political ad revenue and "access"; political figures benefit from corporate news channels that won't rock the boat. Individuals who buck this trend from either side are filtered out, usually before they set foot in the door. Those who remain are only too happy to believe the narrative that benefits them.

marcosdumay 12y ago

Who do you want to take the concept seriously? The mainstream media? The Internet is a great achievement. For the first time we can get the information the media isn't wiling to share with us, and it is damaging. People are noticing. They are just not reacting the way you (and me) expected - what should be expected.

lukifer 12y ago
The counter-point is how PR folk have been learning to master the art of viral, distributed propaganda. While it's harder to control than broadcast (memes have a life of their own), active manipulation of public narrative for profit remains alive and well on the Internet.

leereeves 12y ago

Every media source is biased. Even The Daily Show and Colbert Report. Even reddit and Hacker News are biased (reddit calls it the hivemind). That's not the same as being a propaganda source for government, unless the only viewpoint anyone is allowed to express is the one approved by the government.

grecy 12y ago
> That's not the same as being a propaganda source for government, unless the only viewpoint anyone is allowed to express is the one approved by the government. In the west (especially the US) I'd say the media is a propaganda source for big businesses, and the only viewpoint anyone express is the one approved by big businesses.
- leereeves 12y ago
  I agree. The media IS big business, owned by even bigger business, and that's their point of view.
  - grecy 12y ago
    And that big business is buying the government more and more every day.. which indirectly means the only view in the media is that of the (big business owned) government.
cma 12y ago
Journalists trade puff-pieces for leaks and exclusives. Only those in power typically have leaks to trade.
fnordfnordfnord 12y ago
Bias != propaganda. You definition of propaganda is overly specific. If you're waiting for leaflets to be dropped out of airplanes, you're going to be disappointed. >unless the only viewpoint anyone is allowed to express is the one approved by the government. That's totalitarianism, at least WRT the media and public discourse.
- leereeves 12y ago
  If simply expressing a point of view is propaganda, we're all propaganda sources. The mainstream media expresses plenty of opinions the government doesn't share. Consider Fox News during the Obama administration.

cdcarter 12y ago

This article is written by a major dissenter in the US Govt, and published in one of the most read newspapers in the country, trying to demystify and make public the actions of the government and trade partners. Perhaps it's just the exception that proves the rule.

api 12y ago

Because the "conspiracy theory" charge is used to successfully lump all investigative journalism in with people who think the queen of england is a reptile.

swatow 12y ago

It's a difficult point to argue without going into specifics because everyone has a different concept of what the nature of the government is, and so they will interpret being propaganda for the government differently. E.g. Chomsky sees the government as a vehicle for the rich elite, and so when he speaks about being propaganda, he has in mind the media spreading messages that benefit the rich elite. E.g. he thinks that the US encourages a right wing regime in Israel in order to stir up trouble in the middle east, which I think is ridiculous. Someone on the economic left (without Chomsky's social or geopolitical viewpoint) might consider the government to be working to lower wages by doing deals with other like minded governments. And (as people are saying here) the media would be complicit by not reporting this. I think that the government is primarily controlled by ideological forces, and that the government does not exercise much direct control over the media, but that both the media and government are heavily influenced by the same ideologies.

lukifer 12y ago
It is worse and simpler than ideology: self-interest demands collusion. Media conglomerates benefit from political ad revenue and "access"; political figures benefit from corporate news channels that won't rock the boat. Individuals who buck this trend from either side are filtered out, usually before they set foot in the door. Those who remain are only too happy to believe the narrative that benefits them.