How are we manipulated
Here are a few recent examples. It's kind of like, when you don't want to think about what really happens to your food in the restaurant kitchen- how long have they been doing this? (Don't go there.)
..and then, of course, there's the "election time" governmental manipulation.
Comments
Tragedy alone is not enough.
Posted by: Scott | August 12, 2006 7:53 AM
If you know about this story, especially the Reuters' photo scandal and if you read the photographer by-lines in this video, the photographers are Arabs. I think the billowing smoke over Beirut picture is by a guy named Haj(or something like that), who does freelance work for Reuters, but in the past mostly sporting events. In this case, not. Doesn't it make sense not to use people who most likely have an agenda in this story? Duh?????
Posted by: h | August 12, 2006 10:37 AM
Okay, h- You got it down, Babe!
This is the "new h Manifesto":
NO JEWS WILL BE ALLOWED TO DO STORIES ABOUT ISRAEL FROM THIS POINT ON.
Bingo and Duh back at ya.)
Posted by: Almond Joy | August 12, 2006 12:27 PM
No, Bingo and Duh back at you. I have no problem with that.
What's the matter, AJ? Think the Truth and the Truth will set you free.
You can't handle the truth....
Posted by: h | August 12, 2006 2:18 PM
..and no Americans reporters can report on stories about Americans..
(Do I really want to get in this dumb loop?)
I mean, are you both seriouis?
Posted by: Linkweiller | August 12, 2006 2:38 PM
Photographs used to tell people the news are supposed to be honest. Just like news stories, but we have become much more media savvy of late to know that they kneed the truth because they have an agenda. So much of what we read has to be read between the lines. It doesn't matter if it's the WSJ, the NYT, or USAToday. What once was kept to the Editorial pages has found it's way to the front pages. But what we see, with our eyes, as witnesses to an event, are not words- the photographic account is supposed to be the truth. Photoshopping an eyewitness account to an event is the lowest form of propaganda that I can think of. I wouldn't use pictures by an Arab AND I wouldn't use pictures by an Israeli (or Jew) to cover the Israeli/Hezbollah War. Or if I did- I'd make sure that there were other pictures of the event covered by a second source. Guess I'm jaded, but I'm not going to be naive and think that people(s) with a vested interest in the world seeing it their way will rise above a perfect opportunity AND tell the truth.
I don't know if I'm racist, but I certainly have become more suspicious and untrusting since 911, that's for sure.
Posted by: h | August 12, 2006 4:21 PM
Wag the Dog!!
Posted by: Bill the Republican | August 13, 2006 3:40 AM