Saturday, April 17, 2010

BloggeRhythms 4/17/2010

In putting together yesterday's entry, part of the writing concerned the New York Times. For many years I was a subscriber and avid reader of that paper. Then, more recently, perhaps five years or so ago, I began to have second thoughts about its content, particularly regarding politics, international affairs and socio-economics.

Now, I've been around long enough to realize that just about every entity in the media disseminating information publicly that deals with the issues I just mentioned, has some kind of bias or slant, and that doesn't bother or upset me. But, hiding behind an image earned for other reasons and then promoting a veiled but biased position does.

And, in the case of the Times, I believe their position was attained as "the paper of record" a long, long time ago and for then valid reasons. But today those reasons, particularly that of maintaining neutrality, have long been forgotten by them. Yet, they still employ that no longer valid reputation of fairness in reporting, to add credibility to their publication's promoting a particular political agenda.

I'm bringing this up today, because yesterday's mention of the Times got me to thinking again as to why particular people, especially liberals of Jewish persuasion read that paper. And from that pondering, certain pieces of the puzzle began to fit more clearly in my mind.

For example, I was reminded of spending some time visiting a friend who happens to be quite devoted regarding religion. There are quite a few television sets in this person's home and, most often, at least one of them is turned on. Regardless of how many sets are running however, each and every one is tuned to CNN.

Now, I mention that because every time that person and I have a discussion about politics, international affairs or socio-economics and I happen to state a differing point of fact I heard or read elsewhere than CNN, the response I generally get is "Gee, I didn't know that". And, that applies quite particularly to religion because so much of what's being done today will potentially have huge impact in that arena, but there's little my friend can do about it if he's unaware because it isn't reported by the news source he chooses to watch.

Well, that unawareness on my friend's part is only a small indication of the lack of input available to those having entrenched viewing or reading habits, particularly in the areas I mentioned above. And, obviously, if nothing else, their audiences' viewing and reading habits are intimately known and manipulated by the information providers.

So, with that, let's return to square one. I have very little doubt that the typical liberal Jewish person would have anything to do with a broadcaster such as Fox, after all someone like Sean Hannity is likely worse than the plague. And, God forbid one should come within earshot of Limbaugh...a fate worse than death itself. Beyond those two, it's likely the whole aspect of conservative talk shows or news outlets are to be condemned according to liberals.

Consequently, if the two alternative providers of information are so extreme, i.e. the Times and Fox as examples, and each of them is totally despised by those with other beliefs, where is one to go to get both sides of any story. The answer is, I believe, probably nowhere. And, that's how both sides get away with what they do. They can tell their devoted audiences just about anything they choose with little chance of contradiction. And, I sincerely believe, that in today's day and age, that's exactly what happens.

There are, of course, alternatives that claim to be simply providers of information and/or entertainment, such as NPR. But, I don't think that their neutrality is entirely true, because, regardless that they get a significant part of their funding from donations, government grants and support bolster their budgets too. One way to prove the point about the slant of their fare, if you have an open mind, is to simply tune into their station.

So, where does this leave us? It seems to me we have two major sides regarding the three issues I originally mentioned above. And, each of those sides is entrenched to the extent that any conflicting data to their beliefs is to be absolutely avoided. Because the biased data providers have axes to grind and thus are not to be trusted. Consequently, the two sides operate in informational vacuums regarding what's really the truth. And that, dear friends, is why as I wrote here yesterday, I think there's a very good chance that Israel is going to wind up being pushed into the ocean.

That's it for today folks.

Adios

No comments:

Post a Comment