Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
No lights-punch-out'ing was intended.
I won't "bring it on". Again, I have no interest in this line of argument, I consider this link-throwing pointless. I have already conceded that there are all kinds of influences on the media, which translate into influence on media consumers.
|
I like this term "media consumers."
It evokes an aspect of the media often ignored...that news shows are merely that...primarily designed for infotainment-consumption. Very good.
But, no problem about not wanting to pursue this "line of argument." It interests me: but I have no agendas to "win," and if you prefer, we can just drop the point.
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
I continue to maintain that a reasonable person will always question what s/he is being fed by the media (including FAIR), and take reasonable effort to obtain as balanced a picture as possible by looking for additional sources of information and expert opinions on the subject of interest.
|
If only this were so, of the population in general. But, if you consider the number of ppl in the US who swallowed the media-driven
"anti-war=anti-American" pablum, then I come to the uncomfortable conclusion that most of us are not "reasonable ppl."
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
In any case, I have somehow managed to maintain a non-black-and-white view of the issue, without any secret know-how.
|
I have always enjoyed our discussions, Daniel: even when we hold polar-opposite opinions. It never descends into name-calling, and that in itself makes me value the exchange, more.