I find Fox News funny...what scares me though is some of the stuff that is reported is actually taken extremely seriously by a fair few viewers.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
Printable View
I find Fox News funny...what scares me though is some of the stuff that is reported is actually taken extremely seriously by a fair few viewers.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
You don't know that. I get a huge tongue in cheek vibe from the production and I assume most of their viewers aren't all total morons. I mean, check out this clip from Bill O'Reilly:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FARDDcdFaQ
It's like, "I don't understand all the big words you're using so I'm going to assume I won this debate".... I mean, how can it get funnier than that? It's hilarious.
Nothing is funnier than morons on TV who think they're clever and smart and the more they get wound up the more they think they're being clever. It's like reality TV, but a lot more cruel. Fox rules...
I haven't seen the debate, and a debate among the republicans was not something I was really interested in watching anyways. I actually favor the republican party most of the time, but the party as a whole has been tarnished by the Bush anomaly so this time around I'm not really wanting a Republican President.Quote:
Originally Posted by DOMLORD
Were the questions harder? Couldn't tell you, as I think that kind of thing is hard to quantify from a viewer perspective. Why didn't I slam CNN? I didn't because I haven't seen the blatant liberal reporting that Fox does on the conservative end. That doesn't mean they don't do it, just means I haven't noticed it.
I've actually stopped watching TV news for the most part. I read most of the news I am interested in now. The "Breaking News.... Someone is driving a truck fast on the interstate in California" just doesn't interest me. Nor does the story about some cop who killed his wife and kid.
The only way to get a fair account of political truth is to observe the reporting from all liberal and conservative reporting. The problem is that few people have enough time to do this. That's why news agencies broadcast at specific times with their particular slant, which is very obvious at said time.
I like to listen to all the news broadcast and I do have the time. I still do not receive the whole truth but I am really better able to tell those who did not have the truth when they don't know. My judgment is still far from perfect.That's how Socrates knew that he was the wisest man in Athens. He knew not but knew when he knew not. The men of Athens knew not but did not know they knew not. That's what Socrates said. He believed that people who were sure they knew something that they did not know caused a lot of confusion. That kind of reporting led to Socrates' death.
Now, how do we solve this issue? I don't know!
I don't watch the TV news either. But unlike you, I'm more interested in that high speed chase or that killer cop than any more politics. I don't want to see any debates, don't want to see the conventions, not interested in the campaign commercials. To my ears they all say the same thing: "I'll promise to do better than my opponent, at least until you dummies elect me, then I'll do whatever the hell I want anyway."Quote:
Originally Posted by IDCrewDawg
In fact, it's gotten so bad that I would almost, ALMOST, rather hear more news about those Hollywood/Pop star train wrecks than listen to more political crap. It's a close race.
I feel your pain Thorn. I read technology news, environmental news, and pay attention to the world politics. I read over stories on the race for the presidency, and use several sources to capture a broad report of what is going on so that I can make an informed choice when the time comes to be at the ballot box. Knowing what the issues are, and then seeing how the candidates stance changes over time as stories come out into the mass media reporting rather than the backwoods reporting that hasn't gotten the sensationalist spin on it yet tells me something about the person.
I think your brought up a good point about something that is going on. People are tired of hearing about it. Unless they are a political news junkie they are tired of hearing about it, and so ignore the issues, ignore the flip flopping that goes on. As a result of this apathy the issues are lost on the public. They would rather read about someone stealing money from Ms Spears, or watch "reality TV"; be entertained, and get caught up in the story line of fantasy, rather than pay attention to the story line of the things in life that affect them.
But Thorne and ID, isn't this just the sign of modernity. This is what Internet has done. We, (consumers) have much higher demands on information today and don't want large amounts of information to sift through, (like our recent ancestors wanted). We want it as condensed and relevant as possible.
All you two are saying is that politics in a democracy is in crisis, because we don't vote for ideologies any more or political images. We vote for concrete acts. Or at least think we do. With the risk of stating the obvious. After a politician is elected they can only promise to give it a try. They cannot promise anything at all. So people get bored with politics. It's been reduced to the art of avoiding saying anything while still seeming likeable. And now we have reality TV. Which is the exact same spectacle. So of course nobody cares about politics any more.
I do think this is a good development. The old post industrial age nobility can't get away with only pretty speeches. "Ich bin ein berliner". Even though people are voting less, we're seeing more democracy. Step one in a democratic process is the public informing themselves. Thanks to the Internet this is happening more than ever before.
Just because people aren't listening as much to people in grey suits looking as serious as possible, doesn't mean the guy in the suit has anything to say. That is just falling for the image.
I'd say this is a new golden age for democracy. The old images and ideologies are dying and we're in the middle of a revolution where we're relearning how to learn about our world and who to listen to. Democracy is a bottom up process. I'm sure that when people our age, (I'm 33) are dead politicians will have radically different messages and will be voted in on completely different conditions. People in my generation are still letting politicians get away with doing virtually nothing at all, and are still talking about bullshit things like who's image is the best. I'm sure this will change, and will as long as politicians want to get elected in the future, and voters care about money. Change is just slow.
Tom your modernization point is part of it. However, letting the politician get away with saying they will try and do something while in office, and then vote in the opposite direction when the time comes is part of the apathy I refer to. Americans don't for the most part pay attention to those details. We re-vote incumbents into office for no other reason than our perception they have done a good job, which in many cases is not even close to the truth (Bush as a perfect example).
For the last two Swedish elections there's been a few web applications where you could fill in your political opinions and it would generate a list of all the politicians and their parties on what they where planning to do within these issues, and their track record of making good on earlier promises. They where sorted after their dependability. These were created by the biggest newspaper sites.Quote:
Originally Posted by IDCrewDawg
This was just one example. The Internet is changing the world. No politician can dig themselves out of a hole with pretty speeches any more. Also voters are learning that their high demands on image is having effects on politicians. In Sweden, most politicians don't want any higher positions because it effectively stops them from having a life like ordinary people. And this is Sweden. We don't mind politicians getting drunk and fucking lovers.... They still find the pressure to high. So we as voters have to ask ourselves. What is it we're voting for. Ability to lead and dependability, or a spotless and boring private life.
The latest example is Obama's Muslim outfit. If people care about stuff like that, we're still back in the pre-Internet political climate.
But it'll change. The old coots who care about still like this will die out. I'm sure of it.