I knew that comment would open a can of worms. One might also argue that the shabby quality of education has a bit to do with it as well.
>I don't quite follow. It's not like there is some naturally occurring flow of newspapers, radio and television broadcasts that discuss with the correct, important issues in an intelligent way,
The ownership of media in the US is not as diverse as you might think. The content is also not (at least IMO) as diverse as it would be absent improper influence.
>and some sort of cabal (the media) has come in and suppressed all that
Would you believe Carl Bernstein if he told you that the CIA had operatives at all levels of major news media outlets within the US, and a history of manipulating the news? http://carlbernstein.com/magazine_cia_and_media.php
If not him, have a look at the Church Committee reports on intelligence activities along the same theme.
Neither is proof that the activities were continued after being caught red-handed, but, it is enough that I would consider naive the notion that the gov't/intel community had completely ceased such activities, as opposed to just being more careful. As far as I am concerned, given the past (the part that is public record) the possibility that the gov't/intel community aren't still successfully manipulating domestic media coverage can't be dismissed without a credible investigation, or credible oversight, or something to that effect. To put it another way, public exposure of NSA activities is being treated by NSA as a threat to their continued operations; and they will use the tools in their arsenal to fight that threat.
> so they could force toddlers and tiaras down their throats.
If you have a monopoly/oligopoly/cartel in a market, you can feed your customers pretty much anything, and still make a living.
>I don't quite follow. It's not like there is some naturally occurring flow of newspapers, radio and television broadcasts that discuss with the correct, important issues in an intelligent way,
The ownership of media in the US is not as diverse as you might think. The content is also not (at least IMO) as diverse as it would be absent improper influence.
>and some sort of cabal (the media) has come in and suppressed all that
Would you believe Carl Bernstein if he told you that the CIA had operatives at all levels of major news media outlets within the US, and a history of manipulating the news? http://carlbernstein.com/magazine_cia_and_media.php
If not him, have a look at the Church Committee reports on intelligence activities along the same theme.
Neither is proof that the activities were continued after being caught red-handed, but, it is enough that I would consider naive the notion that the gov't/intel community had completely ceased such activities, as opposed to just being more careful. As far as I am concerned, given the past (the part that is public record) the possibility that the gov't/intel community aren't still successfully manipulating domestic media coverage can't be dismissed without a credible investigation, or credible oversight, or something to that effect. To put it another way, public exposure of NSA activities is being treated by NSA as a threat to their continued operations; and they will use the tools in their arsenal to fight that threat.
> so they could force toddlers and tiaras down their throats.
If you have a monopoly/oligopoly/cartel in a market, you can feed your customers pretty much anything, and still make a living.