jxxxl Posted November 23, 2004 Report Share Posted November 23, 2004 "1. Don't invent things. I am fully aware that other nations carry out evil actions. However you have an extremely defensive attitude and seem to think that any reference to a bogus administration's questionable activities is an assault upon the "American" culture/people. It is not. Where do you get that idea from? Is that a result of paranoia so prevalent in American media conditioning?" So is anyone that doesn't share your views is "extremely defensive", "paranoid", conditioned? Figjam provided a well thought arument without emotions or basless accusations. If people like you want to have an ounce of credibility, you have to leard how to debate wihtout getting hysterical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorro Posted November 23, 2004 Report Share Posted November 23, 2004 jxxxl said "One of the points Figjam is making is that if there is institutoinalized censorship in the US, give an example; a concrete example not a baseless emotional outburst" I am not sure where i made any baseless emotional outburst. Would you kindly like to quote where i have. I have given concrete examples of press censorship and those are the embedded journalists covering the Iraq war. These embedded journalist have no real freedom to report what they want to. They are controled by the military. I believe also that in the US deaths of US soldiers are not allowed to be shown on TV. Why do you think this might be? Perhaps your average American wouldn't be too gung ho about the war if he saw many of his fellow citizens lying in pools of blood. Censorship has also followed a more subtle form where those who were opposed to the war found themselves risking their jobs for speaking out. Others were branded unpatriotic for not wholeheartedly supporting the war. If you remember Bush's famous line 'You are either for us or against us".....now that doesn't seem to leave much middle ground now does it? If the US wants to take the moral high ground which it purports to then it must try to set higher standards than the rest lest it be accused as it has been as really being only looking after its own interests. Remember when the reason for going to war was that Iraq had WMDs? What happened when this was proven to be untrue suddenly the reason became to liberate Iraq and bring freedom and democracy to the masses. Convenient really but how many people really believe that given that Iraq had been wallowing for years with a brutal dictatorship and there were no great moves to do anything. And what about all the other brutal dictatorships around the world? When will they be liberated? Give me a break please. Propaganda is propaganda and that is what we seem to be being served by the mainstream news broadcasters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALHOLK Posted November 23, 2004 Report Share Posted November 23, 2004 Hi! I strongly believe that cansorship, including press censorship, imposed by religious fanatics in the US is quite relevant to this thread. I personally overheard the leading bible thumper say in an interview after the election that they want to spread their values to other countries and are prepared tu resort to millitary force to do so. regards ALHOLK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jxxxl Posted November 24, 2004 Report Share Posted November 24, 2004 "I strongly believe that cansorship, including press censorship, imposed by religious fanatics in the US" Who are these religious fanatics and how are they "censoring" the press? Give an example, one example please. This is emotional baseless hysteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALHOLK Posted November 24, 2004 Report Share Posted November 24, 2004 Ask someone with a broader view on the world to comapre Fox news with e.g BBC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lazyphil Posted November 24, 2004 Report Share Posted November 24, 2004 I dont think the BBC does much better, although its Cricket coverage is far superior :: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jxxxl Posted November 24, 2004 Report Share Posted November 24, 2004 OK Zorro, here is your emotional outburst: "This thread thou is about press censorship and the point that many are making here is that the free press in the west is not as free as we might like to think it is. This seems to be especially so when we look at the recent Iraq war and the role the press in the US and some other countries . To this view there are quite a few documentaries outlining the spin via embedded journalists took and also let's not forget a lot of the coverage prior to the war was rather lacking in objectivity. You are saying there there is censorship in the US. Do you know what censorship is? Can you give me one example of the US government stoping, by order of law, something from being reported in the press? Do you have any specific examples to back up your Indictment? Just because you heard something in a odcumentary doesn't make it true? Do you believe what you hear from Michael Moore? What you don't seem to understand is the difference between restrictions imposted by the American culture and censorship. There are regulations about decency and what appears on the airwaves. Many Americans don't want to see dead mangled bodies on TV. Nor do they want to see nudity or explicit language. These are restrictions imposed my the culture not government sponsored censorship. You and others may not like this, but that is a result of American culture. There are examples of this all over the world. You are using broadcast news' coverage of the war and politics as an example of censorship? First, broadcast news is entertainment and they have to pay attention to the wants of their sponsors and audience. If their demographic would object to something, should they show it anyway? Any filtering you may perceive is a result of self policing, not "censorship". If you disagree, give me one example. Regarding pool reporting and embedded journalists, this is not censorship. Do you think the military follows the same rules as they do in peacetime? You don't understand that when executing military action, the main objective is to control the environment, including the press, in order to acheive the objective of minimizing casualties and winning the objective. This is not an example of censorship in the US. If you think Americans want to see dead Americans splashed accross the TV screen, you are very wrong. Just becuase people think Americans should be force-fed these images, and aren't, is not an example of censorship. If you want to find images of dead Americans, you can get them on the internet. Is it illegal to view certain internet content in the US? Is it illegal to use explicit language or view nudity? So, please cite an example of censorship and lets go from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jxxxl Posted November 24, 2004 Report Share Posted November 24, 2004 And your point is what Einstein? Is Fox representative of all Americans or American press? Is BBC the objective benchmark in journalism. Why don't you try making an intelligent point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khun_Kong Posted November 24, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 24, 2004 jxxxl said:<snip> There are regulations about decency and what appears on the airwaves. Many Americans don't want to see dead mangled bodies on TV. Nor do they want to see nudity or explicit language. <snip> Hey hey now- don't be messin' wid my Skinemax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jxxxl Posted November 24, 2004 Report Share Posted November 24, 2004 Khun_Kong said: jxxxl said:<snip> There are regulations about decency and what appears on the airwaves. Many Americans don't want to see dead mangled bodies on TV. Nor do they want to see nudity or explicit language. <snip> Hey hey now- don't be messin' wid my Skinemax. Hey, just because 'many' (I doubt it's that many) Americans don't want to see nudity doesn't mean I can't. :: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.