I think Chomsky's explanation of how media propaganda works (manufacture of consent) is spot on. He explained it very well in this interview he gave to Andrew Marr years ago. What's amazing about this interview, that viewers outside the UK might not appreciate, is that Andrew Marr is himself an example of what Chomsky is talking about here in the UK because he was very much a media facilitator for Tony Blair in the lead up to the Iraq war. He was basically the main media figure who enabled the government to lie its way into the war. So his challenges to Chomsky are highly ironic in that context.
The people are mobilizing Mr Drumpf
by Simon 127 Replies latest social current
-
-
OUTLAW
Maybe Trump's campaign slogan should have been " Lets Make America White Again ".....Finklestein
.........
-
Finkelstein
What Chomsky is noted for is his unbiased open evaluation of what US federal foreign policies causatively create to those particular countries and now back to the US and the reason why the US inherently took those positions.
I cant say I agree with everything he says but he does come up with some valid points.
This video explains from his viewpoint why the Middle Eastern countries hate and distrust the West but goes light on the differences in regards to religious affiliation where the US is Judeo Christian and the Middle East is mostly Muslim in origin.
-
Simon
Carson will make a great surgeon general.
Is that before or after he builds pyramids to store the grain harvest? :D
-
OUTLAW
Is that before or after he builds pyramids to store the grain harvest?.....Simon
.....................
-
Island Man
Racism against blacks is because blacks have made the news more for crimes and violence and wearing their pants on the ground, etc.
You have that all wrong. The disproportionate amount of black Americans being in the news for crimes and the wearing of their pants on the ground, etc are all symptomatic of problems in the American black community that are the result of them being subjected to decades - centuries - of racism.
-
Billy the Ex-Bethelite
Personally, I don't think that Trump had any intention of appearing at the event.
The protesters at UIC did exactly what he wanted them to do. Pictures can now circulate among his supporters showing "real americans" getting attacked by crowds of minorities and liberals.
-
Coded Logic
Thank you SBF and Fink for your links. What Chomsky had to say was certainly . . . bizarr.
Concerning media propaganda, he seems to think that the British press not covering the US rejection of a conditional Iraqi retreat from Kuwait was somehow informative. I don't understand why he thinks this. Especially when the US had specifically stated it would not accept anything other than an unconditional retreat. Is there some reason that the British media should have covered this non-story going on in the back doors of US negotiations?
Next he says the US media initially wouldn't cover COINTELPRO. This is only partially true. It took years for all the facts to come out about the program after the FBI field office had been broken into and it's not uncommon for newspapers to sit on stories for months at a time while they collect all the facts before they will publish. Chomsky then tries to say it's meaningful that the reporter interviewing him (admittedly not the brightest crayon in the box) knows about Watergate but has never heard of COINTELPRO. As though these two things are comparable? The FBI being caught with it's hand in the cookie jar (not the first or last time) is not the same as a US President attempting to steal an election and being forced out of the oval office. This would be like saying "Well you know who Monica Lewinsky is but how come you don't know who Paula Broadwell is?" These two stories are not equal.
I agree with Chomsky that there is a lot of media bias. But his additional step that all reporters are indoctrinated and tools of propaganda is moon landing conspiracy stuff. There's a huge difference between newspapers being, at times, incompetent (Iraqi WMDs anyone?) vs. reporters deliberately turning a blind eye to inconvenient facts.
I think Chomsky is well informed and has a good handle on the facts. Unfortunately, his conclusions from those facts seem to be completely unbridled by reason. It's as though the emperor purchased the best clothes he could find but then decides not to wear them every time he goes out for a walk.
-
slimboyfat
Chomsky describes the filter system at about 10.40. It's not so much that reporters self-censor. It's that people who don't share the hegemonic view of the world don't get into those positions in the first place. They are early on labelled as cranks and marginalised. Very few people who actually question the system itself slip through the net. Robert Fisk springs to mind as an exception, but it's not been easy, and you don't see him often in mainstream media.
I agree with Chomsky that there is a lot of media bias. But his additional step that all reporters are indoctrinated and tools of propaganda is moon landing conspiracy stuff.
Well I don't think it's in any way a conspiracy theory to note that the media plays a key role in upholding the current capitalist and imperialist world system. It's a straightforward statement of fact. The media may be good at spotting and exposing corruption operating within the system and eliminating it. But asking basic questions about the corruption of the system itself? It just doesn't happen, and for the reasons Chomsky gives.
-
talesin
Thanks, Gio. I thought a bit of history might flesh out the perceptions of The Donald. Much appreciated.
