The new openness

The new openness (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DarkSteven -> The new openness (7/28/2010 6:16:37 AM)
Something I've been pondering... We're in a new era. A politician screws up, and it's all over YouTube. Some politicians refuse to take questions now. Ken Buck and ACORN have been recorded surreptitiously, and then the recordings went viral. Sherrod's statements and the ACORN video were deliberately taken out of context and broadcast. The release of the Pentagon papers caused a huge reaction. Woodward and Bernstein were able to say that they changed the course of history as it increased opposition to the Vietnam war. Today WikiLeaks does the same thing for the Afghhan war with barely a ripple. We're in a new era of openness, unwillingly on the part of the pols. Do you think this is a good thing, or not?

vincentML -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 6:27:08 AM)
Steven; all governments overclassify documents as "secret" to cover their mistakes. It is the proper function of the Press to hold govt to account and to "speak truth to power." We were promised transparency and as usual it was a lie. Govt has a vested interest in keeping info from the citizens under the false guise of "national security" when it is really cya. Free Press.... yes.

Owner59 -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 6:28:41 AM)
Depends.

TheHeretic -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 6:46:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Depends. On which party the leaks damage, right, Basiji? (have you figured out how to Google that yet?)

TheHeretic -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 7:02:58 AM)
These aren't the Pentagon Papers, Steve. It is information that is likely to result in more American and allied soldiers getting killed in Afghanistan, as well as more bribes to Pakistani double-dealing crooks who are all offended because word got out that we think they are double-dealing crooks.

vincentML -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 7:11:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic These aren't the Pentagon Papers, Steve. It is information that is likely to result in more American and allied soldiers getting killed in Afghanistan, as well as more bribes to Pakistani double-dealing crooks who are all offended because word got out that we think they are double-dealing crooks. Naw. Even the White House admits all this stuff was known already. This is only corroberation. None of the documents reveal current tactical data or the names of any informants. What is getting American and Allied troops killed is an ill-begotten military adventure that has mission-creeped into idealistic nation-building. We went into Afghanistan to drive out Al Quaeda. Mission accomplished. Bring the troops home.

DomYngBlk -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 7:14:26 AM)
Would be ok if someone in the media was smart enough to get something right for a change. But it ain't so. Both Sherrod and Acorn were brushed with "scandal" and the media took the bait and the whole fishing pole. Is funny after all the Acorn investigations there wasn't a single charge that stuck. Did that get any airtime? nope

Owner59 -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 7:41:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Depends. On which party the leaks damage, right, Basiji? (have you figured out how to Google that yet?) No.That`s your narrow hack mindset. I`m pissed that tho there was no new news,the wiki leak of the Afghanistan documents could put our GIs in real-time danger. It depends on if it puts people in danger.If any of our GIs get hurt as a result,the wiki leakers should be hanged. That`s why I and millions of normal America loving patriots were outraged that your favorite vice president leaked the existence of a secret over-seas CIA operation,putting lives in danger.As well as the ID of a CIA NOC agent working in a foreign country,putting her life in danger. That`s the depends I was talking about. ~~~~~~~~~~~ For the board: A NOC agent is an individual who takes on a particularly dangerous mission without the cover of diplomatic immunity. What this means is ,if the spy is caught,they won`t have diplomatic immunity to shield them from the foreign country`s espionage laws. It most countries,spying carries the harshest punishments possible. It`s life in prison here,death in most other countries we`re butting heads with. bush/cheney leaking her ID and the intel gathering mission they were on did real damage and put people`s lives in danger. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ To step away from thefuckstick`s hijack...... Viral cuts both ways. Nobody is safe from a camera or the "netz". There`s a story brewing that a number of drunken GOP congressmen have been caught on tape partying with hot-chick lobbyists. http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/pols_warned_on_lady_lobbyists_UB8osujWi4TjdAbi5lmZ3K " Sources say House Minority Leader John Boehner has told GOP congressmen who partied with lobbyists "to knock it off." [:D] Saw someone on TV last night that this is the next big GOP scandal.No wonder boner`s begging.

rulemylife -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 8:05:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven Something I've been pondering... We're in a new era. A politician screws up, and it's all over YouTube. Some politicians refuse to take questions now. Ken Buck and ACORN have been recorded surreptitiously, and then the recordings went viral. Sherrod's statements and the ACORN video were deliberately taken out of context and broadcast. The release of the Pentagon papers caused a huge reaction. Woodward and Bernstein were able to say that they changed the course of history as it increased opposition to the Vietnam war. Today WikiLeaks does the same thing for the Afghhan war with barely a ripple. We're in a new era of openness, unwillingly on the part of the pols. Do you think this is a good thing, or not? Is it openness or is it a dumbing-down effect? Anyone can start a website and claim to be a "journalist", but now many media sources are legitimizing these pseudo journalists and parroting their claims as fact without doing any independent investigation.

vincentML -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 11:09:20 AM)
quote: Is it openness or is it a dumbing-down effect? Anyone can start a website and claim to be a "journalist", but now many media sources are legitimizing these pseudo journalists and parroting their claims as fact without doing any independent investigation. As I understand the process, wikileaks offered the material for review to three newspapers - NY Times, Guardian. and Der Spiegel - who fact checked the information and suggested censure where vital names were involved. This from the founder of wikileaks. As a result, several thousand docs were held back. So, you call him a pseudo journalist. You must have a criteria for judging who is and who is not a journalist. Maybe you would share your idea with us. Not being snarky here, RML.

vincentML -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 11:17:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk Would be ok if someone in the media was smart enough to get something right for a change. But it ain't so. Both Sherrod and Acorn were brushed with "scandal" and the media took the bait and the whole fishing pole. Is funny after all the Acorn investigations there wasn't a single charge that stuck. Did that get any airtime? nope Used to be there were only three major TV news sources and a couple of newspapers and wire associations from which all the hometown, local outlets took their "news." The major TV networks have gutted their news gathering operations in favor of "reality" shows. So now we are confronted with a free market place of news and ideas. The Sherrod "scandal" was rectified. The White House and NAACP sadly played a role in jumping the gun. Acorn still hanging out there. I would still prefer the free market of ideas than the strangle hold on opinion that previously existed. Gotta love the internet despite the misuse of it at times. But there will always be scoundrals.

pahunkboy -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 11:30:01 AM)
I think it is a mixed bag.

vincentML -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 11:30:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy I think it is a mixed bag. Jeez, pa, don't explain.

DomYngBlk -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 11:36:01 AM)
Not old enough for the good ole days. But, just how confident that anything you read is the actual "truth". There is very very VERY actual reporting done. Most of what is done is a opinionated rewriting of AP stories. No one is held accountable for the stories they write. Key word here is "stories"

vincentML -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 11:55:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk Not old enough for the good ole days. But, just how confident that anything you read is the actual "truth". There is very very VERY actual reporting done. Most of what is done is a opinionated rewriting of AP stories. No one is held accountable for the stories they write. Key word here is "stories" Absolutely agree. No one is held accountable. But that is nothing new. The Herst newspapers got us into the Spanish American war with the phony attack on the USS Maine in Havana Harbor; Gulf of Tonkin attack was another phony story widely published by the limited Media of the time, and lead to the death of more than 55,000 Americans; and did you see how all the major news outlets were sucked in by the Bush Administration at the start of the Iraq war? I think Reuters was the only one who demurred. No accountability? YES! And its a fucking outrage; but it is what it is. The only chance for accountability is to have strenuous competition among news gatherers and opinion writers. The outrage agaiinst Acorn has been exposed by MSNBC's Rachel Maddow. Maybe just not enough and way too late since Congress acted so quickly to cut off funds.

eihwaz -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 12:22:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML [...] did you see how all the major news outlets were sucked in by the Bush Administration at the start of the Iraq war? Notably our (United States) "Newspaper of Record."

pahunkboy -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 12:43:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy I think it is a mixed bag. Jeez, pa, don't explain. It is too soon to tell if it is good. I dont think it is bad- but am not quick to say it is great.

vincentML -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 5:13:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: eihwaz quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML [...] did you see how all the major news outlets were sucked in by the Bush Administration at the start of the Iraq war? Notably our (United States) "Newspaper of Record." Most especially The NY Times ....

vincentML -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 5:21:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy I think it is a mixed bag. Jeez, pa, don't explain. It is too soon to tell if it is good. I dont think it is bad- but am not quick to say it is great. I can't imagine it will ever be great. But I have heard it said that mainstream journalists/opinion writers are often afraid to offend pols in power for fear of losing "access." Internet sites provide a source of information that is not necessarily dependent on those in Authority. That's good for starters. Now, whether we are receiving the "truth" is another issue. The truth is always being spun, isn't it?

popeye1250 -> RE: The new openness (7/28/2010 5:34:50 PM)
Steven, I think it's a "good" thing except for when it compromises security like some columnists setting up a scenario on how easy it would be to attack a certain target for terrorists. And I don't think it's a "good" thing to have journalists "embedded" with our Troops for various reasons too numerous to mention here. "Freedom of the Press" is one of our most sacred rights in this country! Look at all the ratbag countries that don't have it! But of course from time to time there will be "problems" with this but we are still so much far better off the way things are now. And of course I'd like to more "openess" and transparency on the part of the federal govt, there shouldn't be a feeling of, "us against "them." For whatever reason it never occurs to the federal govt. to "consult" or "ask" The People what we want them to do. They are supposed to be our employees.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875