Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
Teaching comprehension doesn't have to include any bias, otto. I'll bet you could teach me the finer points of how to boat without me leaving the lesson voting for Reagan.
|
By assuming the need, or by the mere premise that there is a correct way to comprehend media, we have introduced bias. We are trending down a slippery road if we attempt to silence opposing views by nudging the public into "right-think" ... bombarding them with passive-aggressive political re-education. i.e. (paraphasing) ...if a lie is presented as fact, and repeated cosistently with the appearence of authority, it becomes truth in the public eye... for example: "evil empire", WMDs (reps & dems), "transparency", "change", "create or save", "smart/green", "global warmig/climate change"... on and on. I'm sure everyone can add to the list. For as biased as MSNBC (any NBC/GE) or Public Broadcasting is, FOX has as much a right to exist. I hear more political strategy and emotional opinion aimed agaist FOX rather than facts. Nailing down the so-called lies with facts is not happening. I see a well coordinated smear program led from the office of the president in attempt to silence an opposing viewpoint. This is what we should be questioning. Who next is silenced with "right-think" or "media literacy"? This is what's dangerous if you believe in true free speech. The buy-in that FOX is dangerous sounds like the conditioning is working well among the very "useful idiots". Be careful what you wish for. Regarding the Reagan comment... I will not support any leader that puts party and ideology above the Constitution. Reagan, GHWB, and Oliver North should have been prosecuted for Iran-Contra... it's why I voted for Clinton the first time... I'm highly misunderstood. I can live wth that.