Sam Smith - The departure of Helen Thomas leaves me as one of the last of those who covered Eisenhower news conferences who is still active in the journalism trade. I will miss her as she was a lonely figure who still remembered how reporters were meant to represent their readers and viewers and not those they were interviewing.
One of the differences between Helen Thomas and myself is that she ended her career for having said something that was not considered appropriate, whereas I have spent my entire career saying things that are not appropriate. This tends to make you more tolerant of the inappropriate, even when you don't agree with it.
Thomas' solution for the Israeli-Palestine problem, while steeped in justified anger, reflects the dangers of trying to recompose history. After all, if her approach were valid, then her family should have been sent back to Lebanon and her home state of Kentucky should be given back to the Indians so they wouldn't have to live in Gaza strips we call reservations.
Much of the seemingly most insoluble problems of the world are based on unsettled ancient anger. Depending on which century or saga one wishes to cite, one can make whatever case one wants. The Israelis remember the Holocaust; Helen Thomas no doubt remembers the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982. The Israelis can recount ancient wrongs; the Palestinians need only go back one week to the nine dead in the supply flotilla.
But with few exceptions - such as the much maligned Jimmy Carter - America's leadership has taken one side in all this and, in the process, has helped to make matters much worse. It now finds itself threatened by radical Muslims - in part motivated by anti-Israeli anger - who have trapped the U.S. in Afghanistan in a near hopeless military dead end and economic disaster.
Behind the excoriation of Helen Thomas is not an American desire for fairness, but an extraordinarily expensive and masochistic commitment to the almost suicidal policies of the current Israeli government.
The fact that her words caused such a furor merely affirms how little America - and its leaders - are willing to deal fairly with the issue. One need only compare the elite reaction to Thomas to the criminal assault on the flotilla to see how lopsided this all is.
It has long been striking how little people are willing to talk about contemporary, rather than historic, problems in the Mid East - problems such as the lack of water and the growing Arab population in Israel. These are hidden subtexts in the debate, but that doesn't mean they disappear.
For example, how much longer can Israel remain a segregated Jewish state? They might want to check out the American experience in this regard; after all the percentage of Arabs in Israel is greater than that of blacks in the U.S.
In 2000 retired Israeli High Court Justice Theodor Or wrote a report in which he stated:
"The Arab citizens of Israel live in a reality in which they experience discrimination as Arabs. This inequality has been documented in a large number of professional surveys and studies, has been confirmed in court judgments and government resolutions, and has also found expression in reports by the state comptroller and in other official documents. Although the Jewish majority’s awareness of this discrimination is often quite low, it plays a central role in the sensibilities and attitudes of Arab citizens. This discrimination is widely accepted, both within the Arab sector and outside it, and by official assessments, as a chief cause of agitation."
Nature takes its course and sooner or later the Israelis may discover that their real enemy was not the Arabs but time - time that inevitably will run out for their purified culture, just as it did for white Americans.
The sad thing is all the time that has been wasted that could have been used to deal sensibly with the problem instead of just slapping down the endless stream of Palestinians and Helen Thomas' of the world and then saying, well, we took care of that.
The techniques for backing off of such madness are complex and not respected. When was the last time you saw a peace expert on CNN or MSNBC?
But they are well worth it. The Strategic Foresight Group has estimated that the lost opportunities caused by conflict in the Middle East from 1991 to 2010 have cost $12 trillion - and a trillion of that at Israel's expense. Their report figures that if there had been peace since 1991, the average Israeli would be earning almost twice as much as under present cultural values and policies.
The World Trade Center attack and other incidents owe a part of their roots to our mishandling of the Middle East conflict. Our collapsing political status in the world and our economic problems are other penalties partially due to our one-sided treatment of this conflict.
We can either let these trends grow and perhaps collapse under the weight of our own self-righteous futility or we can admit the decades-long failure of our approach and try to make some peace and common sense instead.
Showing posts with label MEDIA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MEDIA. Show all posts
June 07, 2010
April 16, 2010
GLENN BECK IS NOBODY; DON'T EVEN IGNORE HIM
SAM SMITH - Thanks to over-anxious liberals and MSNBC talk hosts using him to try to boost their own poor ratings, Glenn Beck has a far greater place in the media mythology than logic would suggest.
For example, American Idol gets 12 times as many viewers as does Beck, and we suspect that not even Simon Cowell remotely shares many of Beck's views.
House and Grey's Anatomy have 11 times as many viewers and Desperate Housewives gets 8 times as many.
Extreme Makeover has 6 times as many viewers and World Wrestling Raw has twice as many. Beck is also beaten by Hannah Montana, I Love New York and Sponge Bob Squarepants.
Less you think this is just a matter of age demographics, consider that American Idol gets four times as many viewers over the age of 50 as does Beck.
Part of the problem is that talk isn't all that popular and while Beck currently leads that noisy cable subculture, even he only reaches about one percent of the American population.
So stop getting so upset about Glenn Beck. If he was on a talk version of American Idol, he probably wouldn't even make it down to the final 12 and Simon would send him packing as nothing but a bad karaoke version of George Wallace.
For example, American Idol gets 12 times as many viewers as does Beck, and we suspect that not even Simon Cowell remotely shares many of Beck's views.
House and Grey's Anatomy have 11 times as many viewers and Desperate Housewives gets 8 times as many.
Extreme Makeover has 6 times as many viewers and World Wrestling Raw has twice as many. Beck is also beaten by Hannah Montana, I Love New York and Sponge Bob Squarepants.
Less you think this is just a matter of age demographics, consider that American Idol gets four times as many viewers over the age of 50 as does Beck.
Part of the problem is that talk isn't all that popular and while Beck currently leads that noisy cable subculture, even he only reaches about one percent of the American population.
So stop getting so upset about Glenn Beck. If he was on a talk version of American Idol, he probably wouldn't even make it down to the final 12 and Simon would send him packing as nothing but a bad karaoke version of George Wallace.
October 16, 2009
MAJOR MEDIA PIMPING FOR THE WHITE HOUSE
Sam Smith - If you see and hear a lot in the media about volunteerism and community service in the coming days, it's no accident. Major media - ranging from Time magazine to a whole string of TV shows - are secretly serving as propaganda pimps for the Obama White House which has chosen community service as its cause of the week.
Time has already run 21 ways you can volunteer; USA Today had a long article and the list of TV program pimps is so lengthy, we've left it until later and below.
None of this has been admitted by the conventional media, but its cover was blown by a working document of the Entertainment Industry Foundation discovered by Big Hollywood webster Jim Nolte.
According to the document, there will be an "unprecedented week-long of television programming on all four leading broadcast networks - ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, and all affiliated broadcast and cable properties . . . beginning October 19" with "organically" created storylines pushing community service.
Of course, this is not the first time the media has surrendered its independence to the White House. The whole notion of the an "embedded media" in Iraq and Afghanistan involves capitulation of journalistic principles for better views of the action.
This now includes, for example, no photos of dead bodies. Grossly underplayed was a story of the military changing its position last month on the issue from discouraging such photos to a rule from Regional Command East at Bagram Air Field stating that "media will not be allowed to photograph or record video of U.S. personnel killed in action." Before the media was not prohibited from covering casualties subject to a bunch of conditions. Clearly the press seemed wimpish enough for the Pentagon to up the ante.
Then you have the Washington Post's pay to play salons at which lobbyists and others could spend an evening with Obama officials for a significant fee. And it wasn't alone, as Politico reported. The Wall Street Journal "is charging a $7,500 for its two-day CEO Council in November, an elite gathering that will include the paper's top editors and high-profile speakers like Tony Blair, Rupert Murdoch, and Education Secretary Arne Duncan. And for a few thousand dollars, The Economist can open the door to intimate off-the-record meet-and-greets with world leaders."
From a journalistic point of view, all the above is cowardly, corrupt and creepy. But the idea of a whole week dedicated to spinning things on TV the way Obama wants them deserves a special honor in the gallery of pimpdom.
Between Oct. 19-25 there will be "more than 60 network TV shows spotlighting "the power and personal benefits of service."
So what's the problem with that?
First, if you do it for volunteerism you do it for other things - like expanding the war in Afghanistan.
Second, Obama may have more on his plate than volunteerism. On July 2, 2008, speaking in Colorado Springs, he stated, "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
In 2006, Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, wrote a book called "The Plan: Big Ideas for America" that called for three months of compulsory civil service for all young Americans. In it he said:
"It's time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, All Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service. . .
"Here's how it would work. Young people will know that between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five, the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian service. They'll be asked to report for three months of basic civil defense training in their state or community, where they will learn what to do in the event of biochemical, nuclear or conventional attack; how to assist others in an evacuation; how to respond when a levee breaks or we're hit by a natural disaster. These young people will be available to address their communities' most pressing needs."
During the last campaign we noted that Obama favors a national service plan that appears to be in sync with one being promoted by a new coalition that would make national service mandatory by 2020, and with a bill for such mandatory national service introduced by Rep. Charles Rangel.
At one point the Obama/Biden campaign website announced that Obama and Biden would expand Americorps and the Peace Corps with "a goal that all middle and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year. . . " When questions began to be raised, the words disappeared from the site.
Up to the last minute, the national service bill in Congress contained a provision for a commission that would consider "a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people" and a possible requirement for "all individuals in the United States" to perform such service.
As the DC Examiner noted of the draft legislation, "Lurking behind the feel-good rhetoric spouted by the measure's advocates is a bill that on closer inspection reveals multiple provisions that together create a strong odor of creepy authoritarianism. . .
"The bill . . . summons up unsettling memories of World War II-era paramilitary groups by saying the new program should "combine the best practices of civilian service with the best aspects of military service," while establishing 'campuses' that serve as 'operational headquarters,' complete with 'superintendents and 'uniforms' for all participants. It allows for the elimination of all age restrictions in order to involve Americans at all stages of life. And it calls for creation of 'a permanent cadre' in a 'National Community Civilian Corps.'"
"But that's not all. The bill also calls for 'youth engagement zones' in which 'service learning' is 'a mandatory part of the curriculum in all of the secondary schools served by the local educational agency.' This updated form of voluntary community service is also to be 'integrated into the science, technology, engineering and mathematics curricula' at all levels of schooling. Sounds like a government curriculum for government approved 'service learning,' which is nothing less than indoctrination."
Add to this the fact that Obama's education secretary helped to militarize a number of Chicago public schools and there clearly is something worth worrying about here.
Further, one of the ways bad ideas get momentum is when world leaders share them. Thus this report from the Guardian last April is worth noting:
[] Every young person will have to do 50 hours' voluntary work by the age of 19 if Labor wins the next election. Gordon Brown said a plan for compulsory community service would be included in Labor's manifesto. Under the scheme, the work - which could include helping charities in the UK and abroad - is likely to become part of the national curriculum. It would be integrated into moves to make everyone stay in education or training until 18 by 2011. Writing in the News of the World, the prime minister said he wanted community service to be 'a normal part of growing up in Britain.'"
Mr Brown proposed the idea of a National Youth Service to channel teenagers into voluntary work last year. It is due to be formally launched in September, and would become compulsory if Labor was re-elected. []
Obama may be on the same path: first boost volunteerism, then make it mandatory. But if it's true, don't count on the American media to tell you; it will be too busy pimping for the White House.
TV programs that have signed on to the Obama propaganda effort
Home Videos
Brothers and Sisters
Castle
Dancing With the Stars
Desperate Housewives
Extreme Makeover: Home Edition
Grey's Anatomy
Hank
Modern Family
Private Practice
Scrubs
The Forgotten
Ugly Betty
All My Children
General Hospital
One Life to Live
The View
Jimmy Kimmel Live!
30 Rock
Access Hollywood
Community
Heroes
The Jay Leno Show
The Office
Today
Accidentally on Purpose
Cold Case
Criminal Minds
Gary Unmarried
Ghost Whisperer
NCIS
The New Adventures of Old Christine
Numb3rs
Rules of Engagement
Two and a Half Men
Late Show With David Letterman
America's Most Wanted
Bones
Brothers
COPS
Lie to Me
Major League Baseball
So You Think You Can Dance?
TeenNick HALO Awards
Army Wives
Wizards of Waverly Place
Hannah Montana
The Suite Life on Deck
Jerry Springer
Time has already run 21 ways you can volunteer; USA Today had a long article and the list of TV program pimps is so lengthy, we've left it until later and below.
None of this has been admitted by the conventional media, but its cover was blown by a working document of the Entertainment Industry Foundation discovered by Big Hollywood webster Jim Nolte.
According to the document, there will be an "unprecedented week-long of television programming on all four leading broadcast networks - ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, and all affiliated broadcast and cable properties . . . beginning October 19" with "organically" created storylines pushing community service.
Of course, this is not the first time the media has surrendered its independence to the White House. The whole notion of the an "embedded media" in Iraq and Afghanistan involves capitulation of journalistic principles for better views of the action.
This now includes, for example, no photos of dead bodies. Grossly underplayed was a story of the military changing its position last month on the issue from discouraging such photos to a rule from Regional Command East at Bagram Air Field stating that "media will not be allowed to photograph or record video of U.S. personnel killed in action." Before the media was not prohibited from covering casualties subject to a bunch of conditions. Clearly the press seemed wimpish enough for the Pentagon to up the ante.
Then you have the Washington Post's pay to play salons at which lobbyists and others could spend an evening with Obama officials for a significant fee. And it wasn't alone, as Politico reported. The Wall Street Journal "is charging a $7,500 for its two-day CEO Council in November, an elite gathering that will include the paper's top editors and high-profile speakers like Tony Blair, Rupert Murdoch, and Education Secretary Arne Duncan. And for a few thousand dollars, The Economist can open the door to intimate off-the-record meet-and-greets with world leaders."
From a journalistic point of view, all the above is cowardly, corrupt and creepy. But the idea of a whole week dedicated to spinning things on TV the way Obama wants them deserves a special honor in the gallery of pimpdom.
Between Oct. 19-25 there will be "more than 60 network TV shows spotlighting "the power and personal benefits of service."
So what's the problem with that?
First, if you do it for volunteerism you do it for other things - like expanding the war in Afghanistan.
Second, Obama may have more on his plate than volunteerism. On July 2, 2008, speaking in Colorado Springs, he stated, "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
In 2006, Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, wrote a book called "The Plan: Big Ideas for America" that called for three months of compulsory civil service for all young Americans. In it he said:
"It's time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, All Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service. . .
"Here's how it would work. Young people will know that between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five, the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian service. They'll be asked to report for three months of basic civil defense training in their state or community, where they will learn what to do in the event of biochemical, nuclear or conventional attack; how to assist others in an evacuation; how to respond when a levee breaks or we're hit by a natural disaster. These young people will be available to address their communities' most pressing needs."
During the last campaign we noted that Obama favors a national service plan that appears to be in sync with one being promoted by a new coalition that would make national service mandatory by 2020, and with a bill for such mandatory national service introduced by Rep. Charles Rangel.
At one point the Obama/Biden campaign website announced that Obama and Biden would expand Americorps and the Peace Corps with "a goal that all middle and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year. . . " When questions began to be raised, the words disappeared from the site.
Up to the last minute, the national service bill in Congress contained a provision for a commission that would consider "a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people" and a possible requirement for "all individuals in the United States" to perform such service.
As the DC Examiner noted of the draft legislation, "Lurking behind the feel-good rhetoric spouted by the measure's advocates is a bill that on closer inspection reveals multiple provisions that together create a strong odor of creepy authoritarianism. . .
"The bill . . . summons up unsettling memories of World War II-era paramilitary groups by saying the new program should "combine the best practices of civilian service with the best aspects of military service," while establishing 'campuses' that serve as 'operational headquarters,' complete with 'superintendents and 'uniforms' for all participants. It allows for the elimination of all age restrictions in order to involve Americans at all stages of life. And it calls for creation of 'a permanent cadre' in a 'National Community Civilian Corps.'"
"But that's not all. The bill also calls for 'youth engagement zones' in which 'service learning' is 'a mandatory part of the curriculum in all of the secondary schools served by the local educational agency.' This updated form of voluntary community service is also to be 'integrated into the science, technology, engineering and mathematics curricula' at all levels of schooling. Sounds like a government curriculum for government approved 'service learning,' which is nothing less than indoctrination."
Add to this the fact that Obama's education secretary helped to militarize a number of Chicago public schools and there clearly is something worth worrying about here.
Further, one of the ways bad ideas get momentum is when world leaders share them. Thus this report from the Guardian last April is worth noting:
[] Every young person will have to do 50 hours' voluntary work by the age of 19 if Labor wins the next election. Gordon Brown said a plan for compulsory community service would be included in Labor's manifesto. Under the scheme, the work - which could include helping charities in the UK and abroad - is likely to become part of the national curriculum. It would be integrated into moves to make everyone stay in education or training until 18 by 2011. Writing in the News of the World, the prime minister said he wanted community service to be 'a normal part of growing up in Britain.'"
Mr Brown proposed the idea of a National Youth Service to channel teenagers into voluntary work last year. It is due to be formally launched in September, and would become compulsory if Labor was re-elected. []
Obama may be on the same path: first boost volunteerism, then make it mandatory. But if it's true, don't count on the American media to tell you; it will be too busy pimping for the White House.
TV programs that have signed on to the Obama propaganda effort
Home Videos
Brothers and Sisters
Castle
Dancing With the Stars
Desperate Housewives
Extreme Makeover: Home Edition
Grey's Anatomy
Hank
Modern Family
Private Practice
Scrubs
The Forgotten
Ugly Betty
All My Children
General Hospital
One Life to Live
The View
Jimmy Kimmel Live!
30 Rock
Access Hollywood
Community
Heroes
The Jay Leno Show
The Office
Today
Accidentally on Purpose
Cold Case
Criminal Minds
Gary Unmarried
Ghost Whisperer
NCIS
The New Adventures of Old Christine
Numb3rs
Rules of Engagement
Two and a Half Men
Late Show With David Letterman
America's Most Wanted
Bones
Brothers
COPS
Lie to Me
Major League Baseball
So You Think You Can Dance?
TeenNick HALO Awards
Army Wives
Wizards of Waverly Place
Hannah Montana
The Suite Life on Deck
Jerry Springer
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)