Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

["Shea Tisdale" <shea AT sheatisdale.com>]

On Tuesday, Nov. 4...at 4:26 PM, Michael Winslow Czeiszperger
[michael AT czeiszperger.org] wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 04:04  PM, Shea Tisdale wrote:
> 
> > But then again maybe I should question the veracity of this story.
I
> > mean, a "huge network of right-wing lawyers" I can totally buy into.
> > But a "huge network of right-wing lawyers and press outlets" is a
bit
> > of
> > a stretch...  I mean I didn't know there was a right wing press
except
> > for Fox News.
> 
> Over the years billionaire Richard Scaife has given over 200 million
to
> fund more than a hundred "conservative" media organizations ranging
> anywhere from college newspapers the American Spectator. 

Billionaires have given hundreds of millions to almost anything you can
come up with.  Bill Gates has given hundreds of millions to education
and schools around the country.  I guess he's trying indoctrinate
children into his Microsoft view of the world. And Ted Turner donated
some odd 1 billion dollars to the UN.  I guess he's trying to have CNN
be declared the only official media source on earth.  Just because
people with money donate to causes they support, doesn't mean it's a
conspiracy.  Not everything is a conspiracy.

Why is it that the rise of conservative media can only be explained by
liberals as a conspiracy?  Conservative media is not some conspiracy.
It's a natural reaction/correction to the media situation that existed
in the US throughout the past thirty or so years.  It's the market at
work.  The only reason there is a rise in "conservative media" is
because a huge percentage of the population is unhappy with existing
media choices and wants an alternative opinion to that which they were
able to get from ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, the NY Times, The Washington Post,
etc., etc.  

And perhaps it should worry everyone that it takes Billionaires throwing
their money around in order to get an opposing opinion on the air or in
print.  

Me personally, I favor more media of all kinds.  Bring 'em on.  I like
to see a variety of opinion and thought.  

> The way these
> groups work together was exposed by reporter David Brock who worked
for
> the Heritage Foundation and the American Spectator, and then had a
> change of heart. In his book Blinded by the Right Brock describes how
> he made up stories such as the Clinton "troopergate" scandal, and then
> had the stories seeded in the various conservative media outlets. Once
> the story would become popular enough it would be picked up by the
> conservative mainstream press such as the Washington Post and Wall
> Street Journal.

What Mr. Brock says might be true.  I haven't read his book, so I can't
say much about it.  But I would suggest that the fact that he lied
previously for money should have great deal of influence on whether you
believe his current work.  This guy lied for money...he admits his
previous writings are fiction...so I think I would take his current work
as fiction also.
 
> I don't have any problem with news organizations emphasizing a
> particular point of view, but when they manufacture slanders that's
> another thing. 

Just because one reporter manufactured stories doesn't mean the entire
segment did.  By your logic, since a recent NY Times writer made up
stories entirely or falsified parts of them, all liberal papers that
based any stories on reports from the Times are no longer trustworthy
and are now part of some vast left-wing conspiracy led by the NY Times
and its' backers.  NOT...

Typical stories include blaming Clinton for
> orchestrating a killing spree that claimed nearly 40 lives, and using
> the CIA to smuggle duffle bags full of coke to satiate his enormous
> drug habits.

Sort of like the stories about Bush, Sr. being behind the assassination
attempt on Reagan that cropped up when he ran for office.  Or the
stories about Bush, Sr. flying an SR-71 to Iran just weeks before
Reagan's election to make sure the hostages weren't released until after
the election.

Open your mind and realize that both sides play a game with all of us to
keep our focus on what they want us focused on.  They are like a
magician saying "Watch my hand" while he uses his other hand to hide the
coin, only in our cases they aren't hiding a coin, they are looting from
the coffers, stealing billions of dollars and letting their buddies
steal billions of dollars.  

 
> ___________________________________________________________________
> Ending a sentence with a preposition is nothing to be ashamed of.
>          -- michael at czeiszperger dot org, Chapel Hill, NC
> 
> 
> ---
> Come and play at the InterNetWorkers Web site!
> http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> You are currently subscribed to InterNetWorkers mailing list
> To unsubscribe visit
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/internetworkers