Climate Change and the Mainstream Media
Here’s an interesting piece on global warming called Our Collective Amnesia on Climate Change, sent to me by Cameron Atwood, longtime 2GreenEnergy supporter and close personal friend. And here’s a discussion between us, for anyone interested:
Craig: Here’s the answer to his question: “Why aren’t the media telling the story?” It’s because there are no more investigative journalists, just like there are no more dodo birds. The people covering our news today do as they’re told, parroting whatever position they’re told to.
Cameron: So sad that dodos perish while parrots thrive, but I agree with your assessment of the media – and the root cause, like that of so many other social ills, is the irrational desire to hoard money.
All media has been profit driven for centuries but, once upon a time, briefly (and by virtue of the once correctly recognized legal status of the broadcast spectrum as a Public Good), our population enforced hard rules of public service and truthfulness upon media entities. Certain levels of journalistic ethics and public trust – and humane honor – were standards also sought for and rewarded by the respect, attention and influence they obtained. No longer.
News is now “infotainment” and ‘both sides’ are forwarded – generally without any context or history, or fact checking – and those ‘both sides’ rarely contain accurate and ethical perspective. Media truly is a highly vital and useful Public Good, which has been bitterly seized and strangled, and in the main is now used merely to sell fear, falsehood, frivolity and fascism.
Humanity’s current nemesis, Donnie Boy, has correctly identified the nature of this shift, and he’s manipulated media’s new form expertly, by trading on their addiction to eyeballs and continuous content feed.
However, it appears that even the media moguls are now coming to regard him as a dangerous drug – highly pleasur(profit)able but ultimately destructive of life as they enjoy it. In fact, he’s dangerous even to them, as he’s volatile and impulsive, and he’s seized upon a popular contempt for what the media has become.
Craig: I wouldn’t call the desire to hoard money “irrational.” I would say that it’s short-sighted and selfish, which is morally repugnant behavior, but, again, I don’t think it’s irrational. In fact, it’s what we’re socially programmed to do ourselves, and to revere in others.
I certainly agree that the Trump phenomenon is the chance coincidence of our ever-widening wealth inequality and the ever-growing ignorance of the common American. This wouldn’t have worked AT ALL in any previous point in history.
And yes, the media is turning on him in a big way. Fortunately, he’s toast.
I fully agree with that position on the media. I figured it out years ago. Even PBS has been affected.
Fully agree with Cameron and Craig and like Frank I figured this out to many years ago .
Its all about keeping the Big Lie going and never getting to the Root causes of things no matter what the issue is.
Yes money was always in the mix but after that brief time Cameron mentioned the media seems intent on creating false equivalencies about things that are clear as black and white.
But they take neutral stand so no Big ad buyer or industry does not cut their ad spending down. Its bad and why our fellow citizens are so Conflicted, Confused , Easy to Manipulate on things
Thanks stating the Truth
Craig,
Not trying to be unkind, but I’ve noticed from your reports of conversations with Cameron Atwood, you appear to be like two football supporters of the same team castigating umpire and hand clapping each other, while singing team songs and telling each how much better things were in the past.
At these sessions you both seem to revel in treating a large percentage of your fellow citizens with contempt as being stupid or easily led mindless sheep (or evil) if they don’t agree with your shared philosophy.
Again not wishing to be impolite, but ol’ Cameron is a master of the distorted cliche, his comments are always contain bitter conspiracies based on unsubstantiated prejudice and supported by trite platitudes.
But I want to be fair, so let’s examine the content of his contentions (excuse the paraphrasing) ;
1)”the root cause,[of media bias] is the irrational desire to hoard money. ”
Until the advent of the internet, only two forms of media existed, privately owned, or government owned.
Because of the huge cost’s involved in producing mass media, all media must receive income to survive. Not just survive, but compete with other media outlets for an audience.
Not all media outlets are forced to rely on advertising and cover sales to generate revenue, some are the organs of sectarian organizations and can rely for part or all of their revenue from subsidies from the parent body. (of course this makes them beholden to the principles of the parent body).
But the idea that any privately owned media, or any commercial enterprise, exists to “hoard money”, is just absurd ! The media, like any commercial enterprise, can’t afford to “hoard” anything!
The idea of Media moguls behaving like ‘Scrooge McDuck’ is a childish fancy.
2) “our population enforced hard rules of public service and truthfulness upon media entities. Certain levels of journalistic ethics and public trust – and humane honor – were standards also sought for and rewarded by the respect, attention and influence they obtained “.
This is a fantasy. (I suspect this statement reveals Cameron’s covert desire for a state controlled media).
Since the inception of the printing press, newspapers and journals always tried to reflect a wide range of opinion and interpretation of events, politics, philosophies, mixed with information and entertainment.
The advent of film, radio and television, created new opportunities for censorship and State control for an important section of the media.
Fortunately, even newer technology once again allowed myriad sources of information, especially internet and social media.
None of this has anything to do with “hoarding money”, or the fiction of a Hollywood’s version of noble reporters.
3)”media moguls are now coming to regard him as a dangerous drug ..dangerous even to them, as he’s volatile and impulsive,and he’s seized upon a popular contempt for what the media has become ”
Like most conversations,(depending on what you’re drinking) the conversation between yourself and Cameron seems to have wandered from deploring a media bias against climate change, (untrue, the overwhelming majority of the media has always been favourable to climate change advocates).
As for Cameron’s contention, the media has never supported Donald Trump ! (Not even media ‘moguls’) The media has spent years ridiculing and parodying the man.
Unlike most politicians, Donald Trump spends very little money on the media, he relies upon his ability to capture support by articulating the fears and opinions of those who feel suppressed and ignored by mainstream media. He feeds off media controversy and condemnation.
To ignore Donald Trump, would be to ignore his supporters,(now that would be media bias). The media exists to report, comment, and convey the news. Donald Trump is certainly news !
It’s my contention the media has never been more diversified, independent and available to the average person.
Blaming the media, is like two football supporters blaming the umpire for not being favourable to their team! What you are really condemning is the idea that not every one agrees with your point of view !
What’s the alternative ? Pravda? The media is made up of human beings communicating with human beings, it will never be perfect (and shouldn’t be), because humans aren’t perfect. Like all of society it has excesses and faults.
Craig, you are part of the ” media “. To your credit you encourage debate and the expression of controversial opinions. I’m sure we both agree the best and healthiest media is one that caters for all aspects and sections of society.
No single individual, or outlet has a monopoly on truth.
LOL. I knew when I wrote it that you weren’t going to like it. 🙂
Craig,
Oh, we all indulge in that type of conversation. I find most of mine take place accompanied by increasing amounts of alcohol ! 🙂
It’s true that the media has not actually supported Trump, but it has provided him with plenty of free publicity. It is at least partly the free publicity that has enabled him to get support.
Hi Frank,
Well, what should the media have done ? Donald Trump is newsworthy, and that’s the task of the media. The fact that he’s the first politician to succeed by courting a wave of bad publicity, is hardly the fault of the media !
Donald Trump has correctly identified a large sector of the US population who believe they are ignored or treated with condescension by both right and left media outlets.
In fact he has a lot in common with ol’ Cameron ! He plays to the fears and prejudices of those who feel impotent and voiceless. he reinforces stereotypes, and replaces complex circumstances with simplistic platitudes.
Donald Trump identifies problems, but offers only vague meaningless solutions. His support comes from those who feel he is making their voice at least heard.
He won’t be elected President because he hasn’t got the logistical capacity to sustain and election campaign against a candidate with a real manifesto.
But, both major political parties shouldn’t get to complacent by the defeat of Donald Trump. He may fade away, but his supporters won’t. The next populist, will be more cunning, more sophisticated and better organized.
That’s the danger of the sort of ranting by people like Cameron. It doesn’t matter whether it’s from the left, right or outfield, it all helps to denigrate US institutions, and opens the door for populists to rule by “bread and circuses”.
Marcopolo,
I too doubt the he’ll be elected president, but I’m less sure than I’d like to be.
Recently, on PBS, Charlie Rose interview someone who think that Trump will be elected. If he were elected, he could create so many problems I hate to think about it. Assuming that he’s not elected, having run could have a beneficial effect if it awakens other politicians to some problems that have been ignored for too long.
@ Marco
Save some of your Wine in case I am able to venture over to the Land of Down Under
As others have said our media is so weak now and that includes PBS ( lots of Koch bro.) control there . It takes lots of research and a strong mind and will to navigate thru the Distractions, Denial, Deflections and Distortions!
The media helped to create the Trump Frankenstein candidacy because they want and need a ratings horse race so they can SELL ADS .
The CEO of CBS was quoted at a Investment Press conference 3 months ago. He said bluntly honestly ( probably the most honest the fella has most likely been in his career for that matter) He said Trump may be bad for america ( to great laughs in the crowd) but he has been great for our tv ratings and our profits and ad bookings at all time High! And the room broke into cheers!
The Folly of Mankind rolls on !
so follow the money and put aside any personal bias a Clouded Johari’s window and face the truth.
The media is Complicit in many of our Issues.
Yes Marco trump makes a feeble attempt to speak out for the so called people left behind by the Investor and Neo Liberal Globalist class which is doing the same all over. Brexit is a another example of the dis connect between the masses and the so called leadership elites that have forgotten the Universal Rules of Cause and Effect and even they are going to be Impacted in ways Yet to come ! Their concentration of the Bounty of the market will be their own undoing perhaps
Martin Luther King said the Truth will set One Free,
Free of Bias , so the media keeps the real truth tainted within its circular sphere of Distortion, Deflection, Distraction and Denial !
for the goal of self preservation !
Amen drink to the 4 D’ s but save some good Red Wine for the Sicilians
BTW another one of the false castles in the sky Trump projects went bankrupt this week in NJ the Taj Mahal -One of the elites which the trump minions rail against ( in their internalized & manipulated self Induced Bondage to false hoods aka confusion ) – Carl Icahn in this case is the victim of the loss as he bailed his crony out a while back. The trump business track record continues to be exposed as one that is full of fraught and failure s !!!!! too numerous to Count!
that is the real record
Minimal coverage as it might break the Fog of confusion in the masses , they just cant allow that to happen in their Quest and Addiction to profits !
Carry On
@ Silent,
I really liked your post.
Many people think that the purpose of the media is to inform the public. Actually, as you will probably agree, the purpose of the media is to maximize profits for the media. That is most effectively done by maximizing audience size which, in turn, maximizes advertising revenue. And, maximizing audience size is most effectively done by entertaining the audience rather than informing the audience. Thus, the “news” is designed to maximize its entertainment value which results in serious distortions.
PBS depends in part on donations for its survival. If PBS excessively displeases the donors, the donors will donate less to PBS. That applies to all donors, not just the Koch brothers. Thus, although PBS does a much better job than commercial stations, it also is influenced by the biases of donors.
Properly utilized, the Internet could significantly limit the undue influence imposed by corporations and highly moneyed people. However, the degree to which the Internet can limit undue influence is determined almost exclusively by users’ ability to think critically and access and weigh various sources, an ability which seems to be excessively limited.
Regarding Trump, of course he is newsworthy and, for that reason, it was right and proper for the media to cover him from the very beginning of his presidential aspirations. However, I think that there was a lack of balance; he was excessively covered and not in the most informative fashion. Had the coverage of Trump been more balanced, probably he’d have a much smaller following.
However, the media were not entirely to blame for the spectacular rise of Trump’s influence and his nomination. There were entirely too many Republican candidates for nomination. Early on it became clear that Trump was getting excessive attention. If the other Republican candidates had been more public spirited and less selfish, they would have agreed to reduce their numbers thereby increasing the odds that some other candidate would be nominated.
Assuming that Trump does not become president, it may be a good thing that he was nominated. It has inescapably made it clear that many people are dissatisfied with the status quo. That may influence Congress to act more effectively to make changes which will benefit the country. The strength shown by Sanders may have a similar effect.
We’ll just have to wait and see what happens.
Um,..Silent,
Three corrections.
1) Donald Trump hasn’t owned or had any connection with the New Jersey Taj Mahal Casino for more than a decade.
2) Martin Luther King jnr may have said “The truth shall set you free”, but he was quoting from The New Testament, in particular John 8:36, but it’s also mentioned in Romans and Corinthians.
3) I can’t find a single mainstream printed media outlet that supports climate change skepticism. It’s equally difficult to find any other mainstream media outlet actively supporting skepticism. in fact the overwhelming majority support GW/CC science, although some opinion presenters may air different views from time to time.
(the actual numbers are easily fact checked).
While I can’t pretend to be an “expert” on all forms of “media” some association has led to a long period of reflection. As a result I do not see the “problem” as simple.
In the US “media” is composed of private businesses. Media is likely to always be influenced by those who pay the bills. Depending upon media politics this is the reading public, or media advertisers (underwriters) or the media bosses. I am not entirely familiar with organizations like PBS or the BBC but these also seem to suffer some financial influence.
The public fails when popular numbers are drawn to what is light, with little substance, or a fad. A society can sustain a certain amount of this but when it becomes pervasive and dominant it is not a strength in society. In the early days of TV there was a debate that asked if the “new” technology should be used as a tool for public education or for popular appeal. Part of the problem here may be education. We have thought that we could simply school a society to a higher level of appreciation and understanding. Certainly we can train people to work on higher levels but this is not necessarily consideration, understanding or reflection. Rather understanding may have an innate component and educational systems that attempt to find the right individuals to school to leadership may have a place.
“As children age we imagine them to be ready for more responsibility. In most US states, one cannot work before 14, drive before 16, vote before 18 and drink alcohol until you are 21. Oddly, we do little to prepare them for these responsibilities. We teach them to drive, yet 400,000 teenage drivers are seriously injured every year.2 We give them the vote, but cut civics education from our curricula. Regarding alcohol, one day they cannot drink legally, the next they can; should we be surprised by the epidemic of binge drinking and alcohol poisoning?”http://www.guidedstudies.com/2012/01/freedom-discipline-and-responsibility/
Media advertisers as well as the writers they employ have also failed our society by pursuing an ever lower standard in an effort to sell more products. Along with the public there sometimes seems to be a race for the bottom. Writers were once primarily paid by the number of words, now the tweet, blog, article or post is the unit of consideration. This leads to abandonment of a well developed thought process in favor of the single post. As a society we are no longer exercising our ability to follow an argument. It is largely not available. We have sound bites and are polled for a reaction.
The bosses of media empires have also simplified their accounting. They would rather pay the independent contractor for piecework. When 90% of the media is simplistic does it pay better to have well considered articles? Why should they carry someone on salary when they can pay for an article with the measure of its worth not the number of words or the research time that has gone into the article but the popular response “the number of hits” or sales?
Media is a problem in and of itself and for the sake of our way of life. A free and independent media is required for Democracy. Freedom cannot exist without the framework of discipline and responsibility. “Freedom, like any other virtue, does not exist in a vacuum. It must be worked and practiced to exist at all. And like any other virtue, it imposes upon those who would have it the unpleasant tasks of discipline and sacrifice. A materialistic people do not learn these tasks by reading posters or listening to pep talks, any more than you can learn to play the violin by the same methods.” (Ralph Austin Bard, United States Assistant Secretary of the Navy,) Our media today lacks both discipline and responsibility.
Breath on the wind,
You talk about democracy, but you seem to dislike its practice !
In the Western world we have a plethora of media, a veritable cornucopia of choice ! The idea that we are victims of media manipulation, is a fantasy of self delusion by those elites who would like to determine what others can read, listen, see or think!
You can’t have it both way’s. People are either fellow citizens assumed to have the same civic rights, freedoms and responsibilities as you, or they’re not. If the ‘people’ don’t share your philosophy or interests, it doesn’t make them lesser citizens.
As a much wiser writer than me observed, “frustrate a socialist and they become a communist, but give a socialist a million dollars and they become an ardent capitalist !”.
The point is you can’t criticize your fellow citizens for their choice of what they elect to do with their freedom. If you do, it stops being free!
Calling people sheep and sneering at popular (everyman) media is exactly why politicians of the left, like Bernie Saunders etc, will never be elected. Joe Public grows weary of being preached at, patronized and having his support taken for granted.
Joe public can sense hypocrisy. By contrast, even Donald Trump appears more honest ! At least his lies and folly are human faults, and not wrapped up in sanctimonious ideological claptrap.
Just because you write a song and no one likes it, doesn’t mean that the radio stations are all conspiring against you, or would rather play “inferior music” . Nor does it mean that people should be better (maybe forcibly) “educated'” so they can “appreciate” what you like.
Maybe, just maybe, it means your song will only ever be appreciated by a limited audience….
It is true that people have many choices where media is concerned. However, it is not that simple.
There is a psychological tendency to access only sources of information with which one expects to agree. Thus, most people who oppose nuclear power will read only material which opposes nuclear power. As a result, their information lacks the balance necessary to have an informed opinion. The same thing is true on issues related to economics, health care, minimum wage, etc. People on both sides of issues have no problem screening out information which opposes their position. Because of the behavior of our media, it takes more effort to be adequately informed than most people can be expected to expend.
Even those few of us who strongly believe in being familiar with both sides of issues often find it very difficult do to so.
As to calling people sheep, there is plenty of evidence to support that position. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, when smoking hit its peak, about 75% of American men and 52% of American women smoked. The mother of a friend of mine actually apologized for not smoking! She said that she had tried to learn to smoke but couldn’t since it gave her a headache. Smoking was considered normal and not smoking was considered abnormal. Those of us who saw smoking for what it was and wisely chose not to smoke were expected to defend our decision not to smoke. It was actually considered rude to ask people not to smoke, even in the confined space of one’s car! I see that as evidence that the majority of people are easily influenced by social pressure to behave irrationally. Isn’t that the definition of sheep?
Well said Frank.
“The idea that we are victims of media manipulation, is a fantasy of self delusion by those elites who would like to determine what others can read, listen, see or think!” I would say you are mistaken as I once played my part in “media manipulation,” but the statement does not quite follow as written. The “idea of victims” is a delusion of … the perpetrators?? Perhaps you intended to say something else? Elsewhere you seem to be arguing against the existence or definition of propaganda.
Perhaps more fundamental is my earlier assertion that you can’t have freedom without a framework of discipline and responsibility. An illustration I have sometimes suggested is the “freedom” to sit at your desk, crumple paper and toss it over your head. Given enough paper you will “pollute” your environment sufficiently so that you can no longer move. Continued “freedom” requires the discipline and responsibility to throw out the trash.
Knowing that you are polluting your environment is a matter of feedback. On a social level such feedback is part of the responsibility of media. Media could exercise it’s “freedom” and tell you everything is peachy. “Don’t look at the man behind the curtain…” Don’t look at the pollution of crumpled paper piling up. But it is not very responsible to exercise that kind of “freedom.” It is well established that we cannot indiscriminately exercise our “freedom” to scream “fire!” in a crowded movie theater. It is actually a crime when it is a false alarm.
But if inciting a riot is against the law shouldn’t it also be a crime to not clear the building when faced with an overwhelming threat? That might bring us back to a certain oil company which through some internal studies might have come to understand the connection between their product and a global change in the environment. If that connection, and understanding could be established isn’t then promoting the exact opposite declarations in media at least propaganda and potentially a crime?
Perhaps I have jumped over the issue you wished to raise, that people have the “freedom to disbelieve” the media. True enough. But there is the issue of knowing when to exercise that “freedom to disbelieve.” The study of Rhetoric gives us a long list of fallacies, essentially unsound arguments. They are such a trap because they are warning signals that we commonly disregard.
A well educated person might be more sensitive to recognizing and analyzing their use. But most of the population may not meet that standard or be so sensitive. So when a public figure makes a statement we don’t immediately think of the fallacy of authority. We instead give added weight to the utterances. When everyone around us is of an opinion we don’t immediately think of the fallacy of the masses, but we feel that we should go along with the popular opinion…. and so on.
Most advertising is built upon one fallacy after another. It becomes tedious to resist them all, all of the time. Exposure tends to wear us down. Therefore:
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Joseph Goebbels
Breath,
When you talk about ” the media” you make it sound as if it’s a single, united entity. (maybe that’s a Freudian slip?).
In fact there is a wide variety of media outlets. The media in the Western world reflects the society (or faction) which it inhabits.
Part of exercising individual freedom is the freedom to suffer consequences. Blaming and bemoaning the media or comparing people as “sheep” is always the language of those frustrated when the majority don’t see the world from their perspective.
“It is a general popular error to suppose the loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for its welfare.” Edmund Burke
Marco, while I was writing my latest comment which you seem to liken to a verbal phallus, John Oliver was about to air this segment on Journalism which reflects many of the same observations. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bq2_wSsDwkQ Perhaps you would also look for phallic comparisons of this “single man’s presentation. I am sure he would be the first to be amused.
From your writing, I find it difficult to comprehend what objection you are trying to express. As with those who are tragically ill but uncommunicative, it is a bit of a guessing game. It is further ironic if the subject is “media.”
But I will take one more guess. Sometimes people complain about lack of public as a veiled effort at control. Such control sounds to some like “taking away my freedom.” The case could be made. If we were walking and about to cross a road, and you deep in expressing your objections to having your freedom hindered, failed to see a car about to make soup of your thought processors stepped into the road, I might, regardless of what you were saying, pull you from your fate.
Now you could object on principal and say that I had no right to interfere with your walking. You could say that you are perfectly capable of seeing cars and making your own decisions. There would be some substance to such philosophical arguments. But your very ability to raise such objections would be dependent upon the inappropriateness of those same objections. Sometimes it is wise to allow freedoms to give way to responsibility, discipline and yes even compassion and a sense of humanity.
I would like to see some “freedoms” curtailed. The “freedom” to be ignorant and uneducated would be one place to start. The “freedom” to fail through poverty and too few choices might be another. The “freedom” to have 90% of the fruit of your labors given or taken by someone else would also be on my chopping block. For just as you might complain that taking away freedom in any form is wrong I would just as vocally argue that the call of “freedom for all” can easily be a trap for those who are uninformed or who like someone deep in conversation crossing the street might be distracted.
We live in a foolishly distracted society. The political ploy is no different today than when ancient Romans adopted a policy of “bread and circus.” To call it “freedom” or “free choice,” might be misguided parroting for some but to others it is nothing less than duplicity and an attempt at social control. “Freedom” with out an accurately informing media is only the freedom to make bad choices.
Breath on the Wind,
Er,…um,..I’m not sure how the term “phallus” got in there ! Just a little too Freudian !
The expression “Freudian Slip” is usually defined as; “an unintentional error regarded as revealing subconscious feelings “.
But hey, whatever takes your fancy….
@ Frank and Breath on The Wind and all others as this is a real important topic that is at the Heart of our Challenges to continue progressing towards a more humane and sustainable future for those that follow.
Frank thanks , and I agree with your analysis on Trump maybe having a positive impact on our leaders and the political elites and cause them to do some Serious retrospection and Re- Calibration .
Same can be said of the Sanders campaign who actually won more thou he lost the rigged votes to the A O Hilly as the whole system was wired in for her coronation ( AO my code word for the Anointed One )
the burning question will the power folks have a Needed Epiphany or not ?? change needed Structural change not more Cosmetic BS !
So Frank our news media no longer is like the Dan Rather or Walter Cronkite era where real in the field reporting was done. that is how the public was educated about the Vietnam War and its multitude of Lies by the power Elites. Good serious reporting in the front lines and be hind the lines and the detailed reports that led to a on going discussion of the issue into the mainstream of public square.
End result the public woke up and turned against it etc etc.
Once money took over Dan Rather was fired by his one time protege who kissed ass and became the top guy , Dan was fired because his truthful story would Expose a serious LIE in the making the character of one upwardly failed dude – a pretender patriot who dodged his service during the Vietnam War. CBS could not publish the truth or stand by it so they Bowed to Money! There it is! Dan helped stop Vietnam War but he was sacrificed trying to prevent the Iraq Fiasco what Rough Justice SAD
Contrast that today with certain cable news spin talking heads calling it shock and awe as bombs and missiles rained down on Innocent civilians in Bagdad or gory pictures of the aftermath of a roadside bomb and what little coverage of Afghanistan is given only most sophomoric slanted false patriotic sound bites. cheer leading for Blood !
This light coverage masks and disguises what the real issue is and the futility of some of this poorly planned and improperly executed waste of our Treasure and Blood and Stains us in many ways.
The media cant report the real story because the ad revenue depends on the companies that are making money off the Racket as that is what it is!
I grew up w PBS and watching great shows in hotel rooms all over America at nite made life on the Highway more bearable. It gave me a deeper appreciation of things as I transversed the Great Plains and did business in the areas of Native american and Settler conflicts. So when I visited museums and battlegrounds etc , it was a enriched experience. Thank you PBS
But they have become more corporated in their funding model and the KOCHs had much to do with getting Bill Moyers and others removed from the Airways . And just think there is a party that calls itself the Freedom Party and minions soak it up. The so called Freedom Party has been behind these expulsions and censorship from the camera!
But why did this happen
Well our colleague Breath On the Wind excellent post spoke to the root causes that lie in our consumer , mentally lazy, Fad chasing – that Wants or Over Needs syndrome that plagues our society at many levels.
Great Post Breath,
You spoke of the lack of civics classes – remember the so called great communicator of the 1980’s his budget cuts and ultra conservative education policy led to the cutting out of Civics classes and thus the dumbing down of America began.
There were more things the removal of the Fairness Doctrine etc.
With reduced budgets the cutting out of real education accelerated, the ultra mobility of people who move West lets say and lose their sense of Community to the urban sprawl of Western US. The lack of community and history was also dumbed down. It goes on a long Litany of Social and Cultural downward spirals have taken place and we are now Bearing the bad crop of Weeds !
Well said Breath and I am copying and pasting to a word your Post as I am off to a meeting of a solar rate policy meeting and your message will resonate with the group .
The intellectual and lack of Critical Deliberative thought in the public arena is rather Appalling and the media is a reflection of this simplistic Pokemon – go culture . latest diversion for simple minds-
Thank My Stars for Good Red Wine and some times some real Good Smoke too it smooths things out living in this Sound Bite Nation of Consumer Fools
Thanks
Carry On everyone
Trump asserted that Obama was born in Africa and wasn’t legally a U.S. citizen. He also said the he sent agents to Hawaii and found that the birth records there had been tampered with. It looks as though he is very impetuous and will simply say anything that pops into his mind with no consideration for accuracy or effect.
He reminds me a bit of Pauline Hanson.
Hi Frank,
Donald Trump may have said and done a lot of foolish and even bizarre stuff, (I would rate his attack on John McCain as the most suicidal) but he is nowhere near as pig-ignorant, petty minded, mean-spirited or vicious as Pauline Hanson, and her pathetic followers.
Fortunately, she has only 4 out of 226 parliamentarians, and she is so odious that both Conservative and Labour can’t seek her support without facing the wrath of their rank and file.
The US must stop squabbling, seeking scapegoats to blame, indulging in useless name calling, scandal mongering, gratuitous sensationalism, and unite behind the only viable leader able to steer the US through the oncoming storm.
The US won’t get give a second reprieve. It’s time to set aside the old mantra’s, indulgent petty politics, grand social experiments. and “social revolutions”, and help the new President, who for all her faults is the best qualified to undertake the burdensome task of re-floating the ship of state, and start ensuring it’s on the right future course to weather the oncoming storm.
The US doesn’t need and can’t afford any more grandiose plans that will never bear fruit. What the US people need is a real policy that can be implemented by all sections of the economy, while flexible enough to allow growth and competitive resilience.
Not all of Trumps complaints are without foundation. The US economy in every area has suffered from poor regulations, badly administered and too often political, rather than practical considerations have been allowed to prevail.
The domestic energy boom has provided America a rare opportunity for restructure and reform. How this opportunity is managed, will be the measure of America for generations.
Every American must compromise and unite behind a common purpose. The US people must start to see that divisive extremism is a common enemy.
The nations people need inspired and competent leadership, but it’s a two way street, the leaders need support from a pragmatic and positive minded electorate.
@ Frank @ Marco yeah I think the constant out breaks of in consistent and outrageous claims and false ones by Trump reflects on a deeply deeply flawed person who has too many serious mental and emotional issues.
Go to a library if you can and get a copy of the June Atlantic Monthly written by a real Medical Psychiatrist. He explains the 5 or 6 main character tendencies which Trump exhibits thru the years. Very interesting and Un flattering to Trump, and serious work.
Far away Marco – the Wine must be of bad Vintage for you to even begin to give the fraudster some breathing room. Would you allow him to build a energy project for you ???
Last week 3 different news organizations reported the close of Taj Mahal a former Trump property – as I stated in my Post I said Trumpers buddy in speculation Carl Icahn was the owner as he helped Trumper out a few years back.
In your Zeal to attack Breath on the Wind with wild ass accusations of extreme socialism and then attacks on Freedom , you just fire back sorta like the Trumper does with limited accuracy !
You do the same deflections and avoid speaking to the points made and allude to some socialist / big government conspiracy , sorta like the trumpster ., and the media does here.
The media has a responsibility to try to present facts for the public etc. If asking for this makes me a socialist or some other Irreverent Leaning Group then Deal me ALL IN!
Again I ask you a real simple question Would you hire Trump to build a Energy project , a fossil fuel one maybe even a coal plant as he is a carbon head and does not believe in global warming or the Green Energy movement he has called solar and wind WEAK toys.
So would you do it ?
If he went to Aussie Land and tried to raise money for a coal plant there would you help him raise money for it ??
I shared Breath on the Winds posting with 14 very serious energy / architect / LEED Design / Solar and Geo thermal HVAC Reps / a couple of female social activists that want more green energy for the masses so we have water to drink in the desert. Also was a Texas State Sen. and a utility law lawyer with 35 years of work experience.
His words resonated quite well with the group – the points made quite clear sense to all and they saw the Common ground presented sensible words.
The media is weak for many reasons and many of them that still play along with the climate deniers and allow them to come to the talk shows and Pawn off distorted climate information that discredits or creates doubt in the minds of the casual listener who does not know the facts or has little time for them. They tend to end discussions with disregard for the science involved and always try to say where there is doubt out there and half the public does not believe the global warming is a real problem stuff. blah blah blah creates Inaction and public resistance to Facts.
They do it all the time still. It goes back to money .
As you said in a witty way too much money creates a capitalist well then it Stands to reason that too much money can CO-OPT a media spokes person into a Shill for the highest or even lowest bidder..
So it Is .
Carry On …
Silent,
I think you miss the point.
The media exists, and always has, in a number of forms. In societies that encourage freedom of expression, the media reflects the different aspects, opinions tastes and personalities of the citizenry.
That’s a “free press” (or free media).
It’s not meant to be “educational’ (although it can be) politically correct (although it can be) propaganda for one cause (although it can be ) it’s meant to be a cornucopia of all things.
Choice is the key . You are your own censor ! You read, see , or hear what you like. Trying to blame “money” is just silly !
Naturally, people pay for what they like. I know that’s hard to accept is you like things that are unpopular or have limited appeal, but that’s the way human society works.
It’s very democratic ! That’s what socialists don’t seem to understand. People have a right to make good choices,but they should also have the freedom to make unwise decisions. Manufactures have a duty to provide information, but ultimately the decision is left to the consumer.
I dislike my neighbors driving large expensive 4WD SUV’s that never leave the black top, simply because such vehicles have become a fashion item. But it’s their decision.
I recently fought the withdrawal of a government arts grant that would have seen a highly modified, customized, vehicle produced as a work of art, by local apprentices and titled” White Lightening ” .
The leftist arts committee decided the subject wasn’t suitable for an expression of young working class art, approving instead a pottery project from a ‘politically correct” feminist university student.
That’s the sort of hypocritical elitist snobbery Donald Trump supporters complain about, the idea that someone else can tell them what they should like or support. At least Trump makes it clear he’s a billionaire, while the hypocritical left try to pretend they’re “of the people”.
Would I do business with Donald Trump ?
Yes, I would and I have. The Trump organization is very easy to deal with and open to new idea’s. As long as you carefully lay out and agree the rules, dispute resolution mechanisms and objectives, the organization is an enthusiastic, cooperative partner.
You must understand at heart, Donald and Trump Organization are developers, promoter and salespeople, they’re valuable partners. Selling commercially viable clean tech to Donald Trump is a lot easier than many “green” politicians.
Show him a profit, and he has no prejudice ! 🙂
@ Marco
Well you confirmed a few things – You would select the trump group to partner on a energy project despite their dismal record in completing projects that go on to be successful – their track record in bankruptcy and business failure is well known.
They are just a over hyped version of Virtual – maybe the tv show has had success but that says more about the poor entertainment choices for many dumb Americans. Or the poor choices the media gives us , maybe both.
Talk about cognitive dissonance – Marco – you claim that people that are anti trump are intellectual Elitists – Wow what a disconnect my distant Colleague –
All Bloviated Ego maniacal trump does in his speeches ( they are not even speeches ) is TALK About Richness and EXCESSES and his properties are designed for the Uber Rich and power Elites he rails against.
Talk about the guilty calling the Kettle Black ! Bloomberg a real successful and productive business person a real Billionaire plainly pointed out the real differences in REAL Success not hype and Lies and Props. All candidates for President file their tax record for public to view. Inaction is a form of action and it means he is Guilty. of deception. No way to SPIN out of that as Mr Bloomberg said so clearly to the Nation.
The dude’s track record is weak and is marked by poor performance. As fr as making ameirca great again by bringing jobs back to the shores , well the message may have some good intent. But Trumps suits, ties, vodka, and all the other BS stuff he has done were made over seas and in many cases he did not pay the bills there – like the bottler of the Vodka in the Netherlands.
He is a master promoter and that is all he has got going – that and the incessant media tendency to promote hype and controversy.
Not a great businessman just a by product of insider tax breaks and cronyism that he and his minions Rail against .
As they say the Emperor has no clothes and probably no under wear either Finito on wasting time on him. Foolishness and waste of time
Back to the media – perhaps in your mind the media is not supposed to serve the public – but I doubt you would win that debate with the majority of humanity. So don’t even go there as it would be a repeat of the Charge of the Light Brigade ! Disaster !
Money does impact speech and it shapes the debate or lack there of a real discussion and only a person who profits off of ignorance or distortion would plead otherwise.
Another land slide loss in the court of public debate.
Thanks for letting us know you would do a energy project with a guy whose construction projects seem to be littered with unpaid contractors, aggrieved former employees or partners many now bankrupted.
I can see the cash flow advantages of 40 year tax incentives ( subsidies) so perhaps from that narrow view there may be some attraction.
Good on you for standing up to stupid policies over there in the Down Under places. Seems like they are just as confused and fragmented as we are over here.
If Trumpeter was so solid a pick why are serious republicons and their allies looking desperately for a another candidate at this late stage in the game – the news on the radio since 5 am this morning speaks to this activity . The goal being to minimize the damage the trumpster is doing to the GOP .
Announced on a republicon hosted show this morning. Stay tuned for 3rd party candidate to further muddy the election Announcement today or its another marketing ploy ??? LOL
How ever Marco your other post saying America needs some stability and good direction and accept that the hilly machine needs support to get us going in right direction so our Role in a drifting world can stabilize things….Now that Spirit I find common ground with you. Logical position.
Don’t be confused, I am no fan or supporter of the AO Anointed One just sorta pragmatic and passively accept her as the lessor of the two evils perhaps. Her foundation is so tainted with dark dirty money and they help to steal Uranium reserves that helped Russia but that is another story.
We all await as the BBC said last nite the trumpers new economic plan he plans to speak to today, so stay tuned for more media fireworks and more evidence of a troubled mind in the trump tower.
The talking heads will be going in frenzied circles oh well its Circus with out the Bread!
Thanks for answering the question
Carry On Mate !
Silent,
I think you’re making the same mistake as the media and other political commentators who haven’t realized or are too outraged to accept that Donald trump has changed the rules !
In the US system, his failure to become President will make him more popular, but rule out any further tilts at the job.
Had he been a little less ambitious, or living in a country without an executive Presidential system, he could easily become an influential Senator, leader of the opposition, or even a Prime Minister ! (think Silvio Berlusconi).
You also have a erroneous perception of the type of business the Trump Organization really operates. Trump is an entrepreneur, a developer and promoter.
Why does he seldom lose in court ? Because when people do business with Trump they don’t really understand the risks and responsibilities. He has excellent lawyers who prepare very concise contracts and documents, in very plain English.
Trumps documentation is always very clear and spells out the risks and penalties.
For some reason, when people do business with Trump or his company they seem to suspend belief and form a totally erroneous position. I no one contractor who admitted he undercharged to get the contract, but thought Trump would mind if the last 25% was a little substandard !
Naturally, Trump’s people caught him and threw him off the job/ Trump refused to pay for even the satisfactory work, just as the contract stated. The contractor went bankrupt.
Hard ? Dishonest ? This person is often quoted by critics a person cheated by Trump. (the circumstances are never mentioned)
Hey, but how honest was the contractor? He was quite happy to take advantage of unsuspecting person to whom Trump sold the development !
I could list thousands of people who swear by Trump and the Trump Organization as good business partners.
When you do business with promoters like Trump, you must understand the name of the game. He’s in a high risk, high profit business, only a percentage of what he gets involved in will work. If you don’t understand the rules, don’t play the game.
But sadly, there are so many out there who think they can outsmart him and his organization. They learn the hard way.
Not all Trump opponents are socialists, in fact most true conservatives oppose him and will support HC.
Marco you supported my position in the end of your Post.
To be blunt I and the circles I run with have too much Gravitas and Intelligence and Principles to deal with a sleazy buffoon like him.
Learned that Leopards don t change their Spots! and one gets Tainted by those you choose to deal with. Adhere to good Standards and you can avoid most of the time sleaze.
he is not worth the time
carry On Mate
Silent,
That’s the whole point, if you don’t like someone you don’t have to deal with him. If you don’t understand or feel uncomfortable with the people or the business, don’t get involved.
High risk, high profit business may be a bit scary, but it’s not necessarily ‘sleazy’. That’s a term often used by people who condemn others for have more nerve and bravado than themselves.
Like I say, it’s not for everyone. I try to see the best in people and value the talents they possess. In business, Donald Trump and the Trump Organization are a catalyst for economic activity.
Nor can you say he lacks courage. Donald Trump has major investments in Malaysia , Dubai, Indonesia and Turkey, normally that would be enough for conventional critics to claim he was “bought’ by Islamic oil interests. Yet he continually provokes controversy by his radical views on Islam.
So far, none of his Islamic investors and partners have complained.
Even more tellingly, other developers pay Donald Trump and the Trump Organization to be the public face for their projects. This business alone brings in enough revenue to value the business at $562 million dollars.
Trump can boast, and quite rightly, that people have enough faith in just his name alone to be worth $562 million dollars ! he can say to his detractors, “how much is your name worth?”.
Trump is also a very canny investor. His hit rate is nearly 95%, that’s astonishingly successful in an increasingly volatile market.
Trump was a fellow investor in Tesla Motors. As usual his timing was impeccable and his assessment of the share value and the reasons behind it’s dramatic rise were insightful. He also has invested successfully in Clean Tech projects, invariably choosing the right technology.
None of this makes him qualified to be President, but it also means he can’t be written off as simple buffoon either.
Marco, it is not my fantasy. I can’t imagine any situation where I would refer to Sigmund Freud. Rather just when I was beginning to think your objections were based largely upon an imagined offense you deny that as well.
@ Breath on the Wind,
Er, I’m not sure what objections you have to the Austrian neurologist or the word fancy, for that matter I’m certainly baffled about your fixation on phallus’s.
The term fancy in that context simply implies, “preference”, while “a Freudian slip”, is just a commonly used expression to indicate the possibility you might unconsciously prefer a monolithic media, which would be easier to label and understand.
Nothing, I assure you, to do with fantasies, Freudian psychoanalytic theories, or phallic symbolism !
Having not heard your term “Verbal Phallus” before, I was curious to understand what such a term meant.( the link you provided is unavailable outside the US) A quick ‘Google’ brought up several references, that only served to increase my puzzlement.
Author Alan Dundes seems obsessed by
“Just as the penis must be bounded by the anus, so the verbal insult must be … one can see that a particularly strong phallus is capable of bursting the anus.”
On the other hand, authors Milton and Gender propose the terms is employed to indicate a Father’s urge to defile daughters while searching for an “impossible maternal phallus” !
A couple of other authors mention Freud (so maybe there is a connection) while Michael O’Loughlin and Marilyn Charles add the definition, ” Boys differentiate from the maternal bond through verbal (phallic) language, a function in keeping with their bodies and mode of jouissance ”
I’m afraid I came away none the wiser.( and not sure I wanted to be 🙂
Perhaps it’s a term in common usage on the West Coast of the US, (possibly San Fransisco), and has a totally different meaning…is so, I would be grateful to be enlightened . (English is a fascinating language).
We seem to be drifting rather far off topic.
Frank,
Yes indeed!
Although, I’m always fascinated by how phrases, axioms, idioms, etc originate. Often the original meanings get lost over time and whole new meanings are adopted.
Marco, perhaps you should be grateful that you can’t receive some of the media that is available in the US. That might serve to explain some of your positions. The reference is titled, “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Journalism (HBO)” The cite is a youtube clip which is part of that little search engine company known as Google.
I have argued in part that our ability to understand what is presented to us in media can be distracted therefore, compromising our ability and judgement. This is a defacto limitation to our “freedom.” This could be intentional on the part of the publisher or advertiser or it might be an unintended consequence of many factors on the part of the reader or listener. One of the factors might be a lack of the right kind of schooling or education. You seem to perfectly illustrate this point by discussing, researching and focusing on “sensational” content rather than 99.5% of the substance contained in the other 453 words in the comment.
While I can appreciate a philosophy that says that the marginal can define the center that really doesn’t allow you to ignore the central point of the writing. That is kind of like reading the first and last sentence then declaring you have read the book.
Assumptions can be problematic to clear thinking. Your “research” seems to ignore the basic premise in the principal of Occam’s razor. Sometimes “verbal” just refers to a type of communication. I don’t live on the West coast of the US. But I do have many friends who live in Australia and the UK giving some insight into usage in these areas. Language can be interesting but it is not of itself opaque.
Educated listening and thinking have historically been working counterpoints to a verbal gusher. But this well seems a bit dry and it is therefore time to move to another topic.
Breath on the Wind,
Um, just one thing. A google search in other countries outside the US is barred with the banner :
” This video is not available in your country”.
I imagine this maybe due to copyright issues than censorship.
Frank Great Point
He drove me off into divergent issues on the other conversation take care
NY State really is putting together a well thought out State wide Energy Plan and they will try for 50 % Renewable s and lots of end use Efficiency, etc. They even came up with a operating subsidy for their 3 nukes that are financially under water. So they spared them for some time to reduce carbon . So some Balance for a change.
take care
Silent,
50% renewables will not eliminate CO2 emissions which is what we have to do.
End use efficiency will help slightly and may even be worthwhile from the immediate economic standpoint, but we should not fool ourselves into thinking that increasing efficiency will make a really significant difference in CO2 emissions.
Finding safe ways to keep existing nuclear plants operating does make a difference.
@ Frank
You points are well taken
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
I have more belief in the ramp up and expansion of Renewable’s and other end use efficiency’s to provide more power or reduce demand.
How ever when I consider the impact on demand in the emerging world and the rise in A / C usages and the increase in energy demand this will bring I then know we have to go back to the drawing boards.
A few Posts ago I spent lots of time out lining the progress of SMR NU Scale and the Idaho Nat Lab project. if the green lights come on then the time frame is 2025 to 2030 which parallels with what you said as market entry time point for SMR’s. It is Up to the nuclear Genie to produce ! ??! ?
so we have common Visions here. I don’t any faith in coal remaining a serious player and the decline will continue and expand and new builds will cease in a decade most likely.
Increased demand may be the driver for new energy in the emerging world much more so than Europe , the Us, or Canada. In those 3 areas demand growth will be slight if any at all.
New homes in US are coming in w HER ratings 35 and below and getting lower. The envelope and plug load efficiency is so high that the house only needs 2 to 3.5 kw of solar . Presently the average kw size of solar nationally while a wide range tends to cluster around 5 to 6 kw. So even solar will see a individual drop due to much better construction and efficiency standards. Lights – LEDS have exploded in sales and they reduce demand for lighting by 80 % and also reduce HVAC loads by reduced heat etc.
One of my close Colleagues is doing a 160,000 sq ft commercial bldg energy retrofit. We are cutting demand from 345 kw per month to around 130 kw with a prescriptive mix of new Hvac, LED s , controls , window treatments and perhaps 75 kw of car port solar parking canopies.
So 215 kw reduction gone and do 5 buildings and you reduced a megawatt …and this is going on all over the US.
California has done over $2 Billion in PACE projects for starters. Even conservative Texas is on board with the PACE program. Utilities will have some stranded assets before all this ends LOL LOL
The world going forward is not the same market that we saw in the 1950′ thru 1980’s demand growth is really reduced here. The data all supports that.
Give the Greens credit they voted to subsidize the 3 NY nukes to keep them going ….so some Collaboration does happen from time to time.
take care appreciate your view point Frank
Silent,
As you point out, there are ways to reduce energy requirements significantly. But regarding solar systems, it is very rare for companies or individuals to sever their connection to the grid. It can be done as evidenced by the fact that some people in remote locations have done so, but the cost of the batteries makes it prohibitively expensive. And, I doubt that they would even attempt to do so if they used electricity for cooking which we must do to phase out fossil fuels.
Obviously it is the intermittent nature of solar systems that causes people to remain connected to the grid. The same problem makes it impossible, with currently available technology, to get all of our power from intermittent sources. Even countries committed 100% to renewables have not succeeded in doing that except where hydro or geothermal power is readily available. That is why I strongly support nuclear power; it can deliver power 24 hours per day 365 days per year.
If, at some future date, technology makes it possible to get reliable power from renewables, if renewables can be expanded quickly, and if the cost is not excessive, then we can stop building nuclear systems and build renewable systems instead. However, we have not arrived at that point and there is no assurance that we ever will.