Sunday, January 17, 2010

Noam Chomsky on Allen Johnson on Isabella Adkins and Greensboro's news and political industry

Is the delivery of consumers to merchants
the objective of Greensboro's local news industry?

The beauty of the democratic systems of thought control
as contrasted with their clumsy totalitarian counterparts,
is that they operate by subtly establishing on a voluntary basis,
aided by the force of nationalism and media control by substantial interests,
presuppositions that set the limits of debate
rather than by imposing beliefs with a bludgeon.

Should news stories and editorial board opinions
conceal correlations to advertiser or parent company profit?

Then let the debate rage,
the more lively and vigorous it is,
the better the propaganda system is served…

Why would some local news organizations
criticize policy positions of some,
while receiving undisclosed and/or indirect compensation from others
interested in non-attributed dissention?

Those who do not accept the fundamental principles of state propaganda,
are simply excluded from the debate.
(or if noticed, dismissed as "emotional," "irresponsible," etc…)

Noam Chomsky

It is difficult to get a man to understand something
when his salary depends on his not understanding it.

Upton Sinclair

If Greensboro's media companies know how much capital political candidates raise,
could profits be enhanced by targeting news coverage
to influence campaign advertising money flows?

Could a percentage of what you think,
be what some frequently suggest you think?

Should centralized information outlets lose influence
as more independent internet based sources proliferate?

Is it worse that Greensboro’s political & news industry leadership
didn’t see the municipal budget crisis coming,
or that they did and failed to act?

Bookmark and Share

No comments: