The media never feasted on Clinton. They helped foster the misconception that the Greatest Liar of All Time was somehow a success while helping to politically assasinate Newt Gingrich over nothing at all. They helped get him elected and protected him as much as possible from his own recklessness. The media had no choice but to cover the bigger news he was making with his shenanigans, but what about all the more dastardly things that never made it into the mainstream press at all or were held-off until after his first election? Higher-ups at 20/20 have admitted that they deliberately sat on the Gennifer Flowers thing until after the ’92 election because the polls were too close for comfort and they wanted "their man" in office.
Remember his nicely-timed Iraq bombing? This nice man was willing to bomb a foreign country – one which he had previously taken a soft-line approach to- to divert media attention away from him, and they did so with great glee, helping to somehow legitimize the timing. He’s our own version of Slobo, without a doubt. Had he been a Repubican, they would have focused all their attention on that rather than alluding to it as a genuine but absurd possibility.
Democrats suck just as much corporate wee-wee as Republicans, including Big Tobacco, by the way, another fact glossed over by the media. But listen, I have much more respect for Browne and Nader (primarily Browne as I am a Libertarian at heart and Browne strikes me as more intelligent than any of the others). The web may be a form of media (small m) but is not part of the US mainstream Media (capital M) The web is part of the internet which is owned/controlled by NO ONE. Not one single governmental organization has total authority over it. That’s why we love it. If ever there existed a powerful tool for the rapid spread of information, to be used for subverting different governmental propoganda and lies, here it is. The US Media (cap M) all have a presence on the web, but no more than anyone else.
Regarding my percentage, I was a little off, I inadvertantly exaggerated the number higher [img]http://www.freakscene.net/ubb/smilies/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]. It is actually 89% which is totally non-representative of the US population, which is my whole point. Here’s a link referring to the poll, as well as more info on media bias, from the non-partisan organization Accuracy In Media:
I’m out of this conversation now, as I come to this site primarily out of love for J’s music and I really hate politics (mainly because I have strong feelings on the subject.) Convincing someone of bias in the media is difficult if that person’s ideals are along the same lines as those being reported anyway, as I mentioned earlier.
Peace to all, at least you are concerned!
[email protected] [img]http://www.freakscene.net/ubb/smilies/earl.gif[/img]
[This message has been edited by hager (edited November 11, 2000).]