![]() | At $100 Oil - What Can the Scientist Say to the Investor? | The Oil Drum | What is your environmental footprint? | ![]() |
372 comments on DrumBeat: January 5, 2008
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
372 comments on DrumBeat: January 5, 2008
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“It's difficult to get a man to understand something if his salary depends on him not understanding it.”
—Upton Sinclair
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
Just who is this guy "MSM"? Is Reuters part of the MSM? Reuters said this morning:
Now that statement is not exactly a "not to worry" line. There is no official MSM line! MSM is made up of tens of thousands of people manning thousands of media outlets. MSM reports the news that they think their readers, watchers or listeners will be interested in.
MSM is basically a mirror of society! MSM caters to the whims of society. They know that society is hungry for news. True, they hope that news is all good news but occasionally the news is bad. MSM ignores bad news only at its peril. If one MSM outlet fails to report bad news and is scooped by another MSM outlet, then that failing outlet loses readers or viewers.
People, for God's sake, stop blaming the media for not reporting the news the way you wish it would be reported. The problem is not the media. The problem, the problem of the peak oil unawareness, is not because the media refuses to report it. The problem is that people do not want to hear it. And MSM caters to what people want to hear.
If there is an event or a statement by OPEC or whomever, whose by its nature is an event, then MSM reports it, good or bad. But if it is only speculation then MSM will print the speculation that its readers wish to hear. I.E. Fox gives right wing speculation, CNBC gives economic speculation that is mostly optimistic and so on. Again, MSM is basically a mirror of the population, or more directly a mirror of the type of audience of which it caters to.
There are no bad news stations or stations that cater to doomers. The world is a cornucopian and the media caters to cornucopians.
Ron Patterson
Hey, the MSM may have ignored peak oil, but they've done a great job reporting about the trials and tribulations of Britney Spears. Last night on the radio, I heard all about her latest drug overdose, hospitalization and child custody battle. And did you know that her 16-year-old sister (Jamie Lynn) is pregnant? What could be more important?
Jamie Lynn Spears' TV show cancelled by Nickelodeon
Get your priorities straight.
do go on!
Please tell me more
Yeah, as Ron stated - the mainstream media will provide what the customers want. Its good business to do so.
WE are the minority.
What percentage of the US are scientists and engineers? I mean REAL ones, not those who just hold the title for a paycheck. The real engineers and scientists are those who live, eat, and breathe science because its their life ambition, just as some people can't see ( and God forbid, record ) enough sports events.
We are ( well, at least I know I am ) seen as social misfits because of our love of discovery and creating new things, and often not compatible with management because of our stubbornness - yet we are that way because we relate to the stubbornness of the laws of physics which assure us that what we design will work.
We are a minority. A lot of us aren't even gainfully employed because of interpersonal issues. We do not control as much spending as those who have better personal skills - dealing with people instead of technical arcana.
Megawatts and BTU's are things of us techies, Dollars and Euro are things of the people. The mainstream media, knowing who controls dollars, caters to the people. Sites like TOD, catering to the interests of the techies, does just that.
The people will take interest in Megawatts and BTU's when they get cold, dark, and hungry, just as engineers and scientists take interest in dollars when the rent comes due or the pizza parlor presents the tab.
But as long as all it takes to satisfy creature comforts is flipping open the cellphone, no one is gonna take much interest in the technical support infrastructure the powers our life.
No one inspects the water pump or spark plugs on their car. They won't get any attention until they fail.
I don't see our Congress or corporations paying our energy situation much heed until the lights go out. Then it will be an all out effort to get it fixed - same as with a water pump in a car.
I believe we still think all we have to do is go up the chain of command until we hit someone with enough signature authority to make it happen, irregardless of geological constraint ( geez, just what is a geological constraint? Speak English, dammit! Now, how about those Cowboys? )
A lot of us aren't even gainfully employed because of interpersonal issues.
You're describing Asperger's Syndrome, a mild form of autism that leaves adults brilliant in some ways, generally in a few very specialized areas (circumscribed interests), and lonely and underemployed because they are perceived as "odd". There does seem to be a bit of that going on around here :-)
Yes, SCT, I have been diagnosed as having Asperger's syndrome. I don't see it in a negative light at all. The managers hired by the Executives saw me as "lacking in people skills", but I considered myself as "focused on the problem".
I feel I can make anything work. The biggest problem is in getting permission to do it.
My sentiments are that as long as corporations are flooded with so much money as to finance tiers over tiers of management "valves", there isn't any need for "pumps" like me. There is already plenty of pressure in the line.
Control seemed far more important than Innovation or Production, and was paid commensurately. The problem for me became acute when the company started getting huge cash inflows from stockholder investments, not sales.
I would have thought a company would want to keep people who had the "disability" of finding enjoyment only through their work and would take no interest in all the social and sports crap. To me, getting rid of this kind of people would be akin to me removing the chunks of carbide off my saw blade.
But then, I have to realize an Executive saw is to look at, not to saw with. A satin color-coordinated finish goes a lot further in the executive boardroom than hard sharp teeth. If its MY blade, I want the hard sharp teeth.
You will get no argument from me on this, my face blind circumscribed interest having brother :-) I have a lighter burden than most, with the social interaction concerns, but I am blessedly not clumsy as some are. Much study in the realm of accessing cues, transformational grammar, and so forth have positioned me to "pass" among the neurotypical - I've massaged myself from downright weird to merely eccentric :-)
I feel your frustration ... I've not had a "job" for almost nine years and while I do miss a paycheck every two weeks I do not miss people with a scanty grasp on cause and effect making bad decisions on Tuesday and then blaming me for the outcome on Thursday :-)
You were shunned because you are weird. I intend no disrespect here :-) Your choices are to work around the fact that you perceive the world differently, or to find a role where your strengths are strengths.
If some area of renewable energy has tickled your fancy you should have no trouble migrating into the field. I have found the barrier to entry to be essentially nonexistent.
Thanks for your honesty. Its refreshing.
I knew I was weird in elementary school. By junior high, I had already built myself a stereo system better than any my friends had, yet I did not pay a dime for it. It was all made from parts the neighbors had junked when they placed old TV's by the curb. Horizontal output tubes make pretty decent audio power tubes! But I didn't have the foggiest idea of how to play baseball, neither did I know anything about football, other than it was some game they played in the stadium.
My latest experimental fancy is lithium bromide absorption refrigeration. I worked with this for several years at an oil refinery (it kept our LNG tanks cold using waste process heat).
If I were more independently wealthy, I would just build an apartment complex, and rent most of it out to tenants while I got the solar powered heating-ventilation-air conditioning (HVAC) running. But I do not have that kind of money.
I need at least 30 feet vertical drop for the gravitic vacuum pump and certain ways of laying out the garden so I can use the leaves of plants as evap coolers much like one uses wood slats in a cooling water tower ( I think cooling water towers are ugly, but I think plants are very pretty, so I want plants ). This necessitates my designing the apartment complex from the ground up as a custom build.
Being I can personally build any interfaces I need to the motors, valves, sensors, whatever, build and program the microcontrollers that run it, I consider the whole thing quite do-able. Its stuff like building construction and welding the collector assemblies, generator, evaporator, and absorber I need help with.
Physically, I am getting old, and I just can not handle the heavy stuff anymore. Or tight schedules. Hell, for all I know I may pass on before I get it done. But I would have more fun building something than sitting on my arse waiting for God to call me.
I am not saying my first one would be perfect, but it would give me empirical data for making the next one better, as well as give me a lot better idea as to the economic feasibility of mass producing the design.
I am getting too old to beg people in power to let me do things. I see where what I consider rather useless people getting paid enormous salaries, but I am told that I have no people skills and need to work elsewhere.
I think the world needs solar powered HVAC a helluva lot more than the world needs what the highly paid guy did, but then that's my point of view.
Control expertise should be in demand - you just need a manufacturer in desperate need :-) I can think of a few offhand right around here and the nation must be brimming with them.
It is good to have weird scrounging skills in times like these ...
A very insightful post Hardhat.
I enjoyed it greatly and can identify with it when I was gainfully employed and roamed thru the world of business.
A short story then.
My office(not a cubicle and it had a real door) was right across the hall from my manager's manager. Each day there was an almost parade of asskissers walking by his door(and mine therefore) with empty portfolios under arms and slowing down as they approached said door.
They would then hope to be recognized and shout inane greetings,mostly containing the words "Super, Fantastic, Awesome and so forth". Shouting these greetings to the said manager and thereby having him register the image of their appearance and demeanor. Naturally he loved the 'strokes' and attention as well as they did.
Truth is they were deadwood. Useless clone drones of the hive but they amazingly advanced up the food chain. They knew absolutely zero technical skills but relied on bullshit and mingling as well as massive ass sucking in order to advance...
And you know what? They got it. Us real techies were let behind as Not People Friendly and not having good interpersonal skills.
I started noticing this action around about the early 80's and maybe somewhat in the very late 90's..It concided with the sudden rush of yuppies jogging around the burbs and becoming conspicuous consumers plus being droids of the worst sort with their smary wifes named Muffy and them being mostly Lances.
IMO the ranks of mgmt were slowly infiltrated with these pod-people in that time frame and mgmt recognizing their own kind began to futher infiltrate the pod-folks into their ranks because of several reasons.
One being that they were very easily controlled. Another was having hired them the pods having no sense of morality would make good spies for spying out the worker bees and tattling on them to the said hiring mgr.
They loved to go to after work gatherings at the tavern or cocktail lounge and drink disguised drinks(7-up,etc) and wait for the drunk bees to make bad statements and thereby come off looking like saints having scored endless points meanwhile to all observers,,those mostly being pods just like them who enjoyed a good podfest.
These pods have now taken over all of mgmt at almost all levels , there being no real managers who will not kneel before the all powerful ego that they posses and cannot live with out the daily adulation and bowing and asskissing otherwise they would have to admit that they are totally useless worthless bottom feeders of the worst ilk of the lowest forms of life in the deepest cesspools of the planet. Sucking up lifesustaining filth and scum so they can continue to destroy what we once enjoyed as fruitful and beneficial employment.
They have sucked the systems dry as an empty eggshell and continue to feast off the lifeblood of the ones who actually still to some degree make the system work.
airdale-my rant for the day...
If you've not done so already, may I suggest a read of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged?
The woman was a sexually compulsive sociopath, but she did have some points in spite of that. I find Nathaniel Branden's Judgement Day a fine balance to and explanation of Rand's thinking, putting a more human face on objectivism.
I read an article once about GTE, published in Physics Today http://www.physicstoday.org/pt/vol-54/iss-2/p38.html
on the difference between first, second, and third generation companies.
I would like to add a fourth and fifth generation company description to the list.
First generation is product engineers. They make something new.
Second generation is process engineers. They make it better, faster, cheaper, smaller, lighter, more reliable, whatever.
Third generation is accountants. They make it cheaper by shutting down R+D.
Fourth generation is marketing. They make it in more colors.
Fifth generation is political. They make it with government assistance.
Which reminds me of Richard Feynman's account of the Challenger disaster. Most people remember him dunking one of the rubber ring seals in a glass of ice water and demonstrating its stiffness. But his explanation of the problem was that, as NASA had progressed from the Mercury and Apollo programs to the day-to-day operation of a fleet of shuttles, its organization gradually changed. There was a gradual infiltration of bureaucrats, whose careers depended not on scientific knowledge and skill with real materials, but rather on influencing other people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman#Challenger_disaster
Feynman's heavily redacted account became a minor appendix to the commission's report:
Thanks, Airdale
Your timeframe mirrors mine.
As a child of the 60's, we actually got to build things, and took great pride in knowing exactly how it worked.
I think the problem arose when we began importing our technology, and no one here even knew how to fix it, much less design it. It is so cheap that one simply throws it away, often when the battery dies.
Its gonna be scary in a way to live in a society where everyone has been accustomed to a steady influx of stuff and the music stops. In a way, I am comforted that I know exactly how my stuff (albeit it is old) works, and I can maintain it.
I have stockpiled lots of electronic parts and test equipment which was made in the days that stuff could be repaired. I could maintain electronic controls at nearly any industrial plant should the need arise - fixing at the component level if necessary should spare circuit assemblies be unavailable, but so far, I have not seen any company who needs that kind of support.
Besides, I am getting older. My ways of doing things are analog design, assembler, C++, DOS, and device drivers.
I'd love to work with a Linux guru a bit and learn to do my stuff under Linux GUI, but who does bit banging anymore?
Companies seem to view knowledge of their stuff unimportant as long as they have vendor support. They do not know how their BMW works either - they have mechanics on call.
Being a loner, its in my "genes" to have an ardent desire to know how my stuff works so no-one can hold me hostage to my ignorance.
Mr. hardhat Sir,
I am more or less enjoying my 22nd year as a unix bigot. If you care to plunge in drop me a note sct at strandedwind dot org - I know of a very busy Linux users group mailing list, perfect for helping one climb the learning curve ...
-SCT
Thanks SCT!
I have copied your post so I can get back to you when I complete a brick project here at the house.
I know a little about the Microsoft MFC and API, but since WIN95, a lot of stuff became useless. I figured the Gnome and KDE GUI programming would be similar. Hopefully if I invested my time in learning Linux, it would not be rendered useless by the next release. Keeping up with Microsoft and all their proprietary stuff is like chasing wind. I can not keep my stuff working across OS revisions.
Especially when I am no longer employed and can no longer afford the Microsoft support subscriptions. I felt like a biological bug manufactured at Synthetic Genomics - specially designed to require some nutrient that only Synthetic Genomics provided so the I could not survive by myself. It was obvious to me Microsoft was doing the same thing to Business, by making sure they were absolutely dependent on Microsoft Support.
I wish I had gotten into Unix a lot earlier. 22 years of it is quite a bit of experience. I betcha you know your box as well as I know my car - we've had 'em about the same length of time. There is so much peace of mind in knowing your box, and knowing its not full of virus, bots, worms, keyloggers, rootkits, or other destructive and untrustworthy vermin.
Having your box do what you tell it to do is priceless.
-Steve
And even more, being able to look at the source code to see exactly how it is done. I always appreciated the modular design of Unix, but Linux allowed me to open up the box and see how it was all put together internally, and build on it. It's beautiful stuff, unfortunately it's a beauty very hard to share with others.
There is no need at all for you to go graphical - I find plenty to do with the text based command line tools. If it weren't for Flickr I do believe I could happily use a text terminal as we did twenty years ago.
Given what I know of you I suspect you're a natural for Jeffrey E.F. Friedel's Mastering Regular Expressions. Regular expressions, or regex, is a powerful text matching system found in all programming/scripting languages used today.
If you really want to do things graphically the PHP language has a large following and the barrier to entry is fairly low. I myself am a bit of an old dog, so its perl for most things and I'm trying to learn the much simpler sed/awk combination(embarrassing to admit). If you've done C++ you will be able to get some basic productivity going with a tool like perl in a day or two ...
In 1995 I bought a computer with the intention of blowing away the M$ software that came with it and installing something else as a learning exercise. I chose Slackware, and have piddled around with Linux ever since. I eventually settled on Debian.
sounds like you must have worked for the same damn company as i. oh................and another thing, my gf's name is muffy.
Alot of us aren't even gainfully employed because of interpersonal issues. We do not control as much spending as those who have better personal skills - dealing with people instead of technical arcana.
Then there are the far larger number of us who aren't gainfully employed (in science) any more.
Our funding is evaporating faster than North Ghawar, and we can't magically get the 1 funding opportunity out of 25 applications even though our "interpersonal issues" are just fine.
That's America, baby, love it or leave it. New Zealand needs engineers.
By the way, irregardless is not a word. Speak English, dammit!
Mea Culpa!
I had to go to the dictionary on that one - irregardless - and you are right!
Thanks!
Thanks for the posts hardhat.
Your solar HVAC peaked my curiosity- I'm in a community college program ATM - so I googled it.
I think this is a likely direction technology will eventually go.
Right on HardHat,
I guess people just want to have a nice smooth day, everyday. No one to ruffle feathers or make a scene about value or quality to the customer. That just gives everyone heartburn. And it makes those who don't know anything feel stupid. I think it's the nature of a corporation. I believe once a company, or any group gets beyond 150 people or so in size, the interrelationships start to get weaker and more abstract and this eventually leads to some of what you describe.
Anyway, thanks for your post.
-Don
I suspect neither Britney nor her sister know how this pregnancy thing happens.
Immaculate Conception.
Eny fule kno this.
That's a very popular method of having children in the US. Just having babies and never any father in sight.
Hey, its good pay as long as she can keep her babymaker working!
"MSM is made up of tens of thousands of ."
Not true.
Or the "people manning thousands of media outlets"
are not the part of the problem.
There are maybe 20 Execs like Redstone, Immelt,
whoever's at Disney (Iger?) that control the info feed.
Ex. Who says Iraq is getting better.
The only sources saying that are from the military
or puppet controlled Iraq gov't.
The NYT's Friedman, Brooks, and Miller all
lied us into Iraq. Anyone hear an apology?
And now, (even now!) W. Kristol, head discredited kook of the neo cons has been hired by the NYT.
"As 2008 begins, here are SOME of the issues that have endangered our democracy and the lives of so many around the world. For all of 2007, there was no action, nor were there any plans to:
• Impeach George W. Bush and Dick Cheney
• End the illegal and immoral wars against Iraq and Afghanistan
• Challenge the lies about a nuclear buildup in Iran
• Investigate what really happened on 9/11
• Repeal the Patriot Act
• Investigate official misconduct by Alberto Gonzalez
• Investigate the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame
• Charge those who allowed the torture of Iraqis
• Investigate rendition and torture of detainees
• Close Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay Prisons
• Challenge the abuse of signing statements by George Bush
• Investigate the administration’s spying on Americans before 9/11
• Challenge the constitutionality of the Military Commissions Act
• Challenge directives giving George Bush dictatorial powers
• Demand accountability for billions misspent and ‘lost’ in Iraq
• Demand accountability for billions paid to private contractors
• Expose the influence of PNAC members on US foreign policy
• Challenge the lies to minimize the dangers of global warming
• Restore the constitutional division of church and state
• Protect a woman’s right to privacy
• Restore habeas corpus and the Fourth Amendment"
http://tvnewslies.org/blog/
This is a myth, pure baloney! Do you guys actually believe that every story is cleared by the CEO, or even that there is some "screening committee" that checks each news story for conflict with advertisers?
News is news is news is news! Who cleared the story about most OPEC nations having no more capacity? Who cleared the story about the coming global food crisis? (jrwakefield posted the URL below)
No advertiser wants such stories reported. If OPEC has peaked then the worlds financial markets will crash in a few years. If the world's food production is about to plummet then the world's financial markets are in even worse shape.
Of course if there were rumors that the CEO of General Electric was a thief, then NBC would not report it, but CBS probably would if there were any strong evidence. And if he were indicted then even NBC would report it.
You guys are just conspiracy theory nuts. The CEOs do not control the media. The events that happen in the world every day are news and are reported whether the CEOs like it or not. Events like dwindling oil supplies and the impending food catastrophe are news and get reported whether the CEOs like it or not. You conspiracy theorists need to grow up.
Ron Patterson
the CEOs can direct the editors to lead the news left/right/up/down/spiraling and this will change what is presented. You have 2 one minute slots, do you fill it with fluff or hard hitting news? which is easier? which makes you the most money?
Someone needs to read "Manufacturing Consent" by one Noam Chomsky.
Noam Chomsky:
... Sam Bowles and Herb Gintis, two economists, in their work on the American educational system some years back... pointed out that the educational system is divided into fragments. The part that's directed toward working people and the general population is indeed designed to impose obedience. But the education for elites can't quite do that. It has to allow creativity and independence. Otherwise they won't be able to do their job of making money. You find the same thing in the press. That's why I read the Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times and Business Week. They just have to tell the truth. That's a contradiction in the mainstream press, too. Take, say, the New York Times or the Washington Post. They have dual functions and they're contradictory. One function is to subdue the great beast. But another function is to let their audience, which is an elite audience, gain a tolerably realistic picture of what's going on in the world. Otherwise, they won't be able to satisfy their own needs. That's a contradiction that runs right through the educational system as well. It's totally Chomsky , which a lot of people have: honesty, no matter what the external constraints are. That leads to various complexities. If you really look at the details of how the newspapers work, you find these contradictions and problems playing themselves out in complicated ways....
Excerpted from Class Warfare, 1995, pp. 19-23, 27-31
or go to informationclearinghouse.com fo 1-4-08 interview w David Barsamian.
Ron, the boss doesn't have to read or ok everything, they just need to make an example of an employee who crossed the line. Remaining employees and new employees will quickly know where the line is and won't cross it (peer pressure will guarantee it). Also, the employee who is reprimanded, won't be rebuked for crossing the line directly, but some other unassociated misdemeanour. This is the way it works, no one is told not to cross the line, they're just made aware that crossing it is not in their best interest.
Journalists are not told to avoid mentioning "peak oil", they're simply aware that it is not in their best interest to do so. No journalist wants to be on the carpet in front of the boss being accused of discrediting the newspaper with unfounded theories unsupported by mainstream research.
If you google "Peak Oil", (when you put quotation marks around a phrase in Google it means that those exact words must be found together in that exact order), you will get 2,420,000 hits. If you News.google "peak oil" you will get 250 recent news articles that mention peak oil. The top few are from National Post, Canada, Economist, UK, Financial Times, UK, Asheville Citizen-Times, NC, Barre Montpelier Times Argus, VT, The Register-Guard, OR,Online Journal, FL and a couple of hundred otheres.
Looks like a lot of people are getting called on the carped Burgundy. And I will guarantee you that in a week you will get that many new listings from around the world. Are all those reporters losing their jobs because they talk about peak oil?
I really don’t think so. You are imagining things Burgundy. Peak Oil is not being censored! You guys are just a little paranoid. When peak oil is news it is reported. And it is being reported one hell of a lot more than it was this time last year. And one year from now it will likely be mentioned far more than Global Warming.
Ron Patterson
News people getting fired for talking about stuff?
Global Warming got people fired till around ten years ago. Peak Oil got people fired till around five years ago. Don't you wish you knew what was getting people fired today?
WK, do you have anything to back up your assertions or are you just pulling them out of your ass. I suspect the latter but if you have any proof please post it and I will apologize forthwith. But I am saying here and now that I do not believe a damn word of it.
Hint: If you make extraordinary claims, as you are, you need proof. You provided absolutely none.
Ron Patterson
Darwinian
So, tell me what will be on the front pages in five years?
Peak Oil? Already there. Oil is a hundred dollars a barrel.
Global Warming? Already there. The insurance industry is going nuts.
What's next? Tell me and I can look it up myself. I am next to a major university so I can find out stuff. Not everything is on the web.
I just figured out that Weyerhouser and the other forest companys are in for a world of hurt. Ordinary farmers can plant low water or high bug resistance crops when the weather changes. What can a forest company do? Twenty to forty years for a new crop. They are trying to figure out what to do about it now. Forestry people have known about this for a while, but I didn't.
But that is only next year's headline. What's coming five years from now? I am open to ideas and I certainly don't mind changing my opinions on new evidence. Loan me a clue.
Tell me.
News people get fired for being gloomy doomy old party-poopers. No conspiracies required.
And that's a fact.
911, and the War on Drugs.
See Gary Webb.
Hello Darwinian,
Your Quote: "You guys are just conspiracy theory nuts. The CEOs do not control the media."
I respectfully disagree. Recall my long ago advocacy for everyone to email Google [and other search engines] to request the placement of an 'unlucky button' on the search homepage that automatically will take the user to Dieoff.com. This would instantly make Jay Hanson's magnum opus the Numero Uno website worldwide. A Google programmer could probably bang out the code in under five minutes once given direction from the Google topdogs.
I would be willing to bet if thousands of TODers and other Peakers have already done this: Sergey Brin and Larry Page are currently very well aware of what I am trying to accomplish with achieving Maximum Peak Outreach.
Recall my earlier post where I suggested that the early premiere of this unlucky button could make their venture capital investment in Nanosolar the most successful IPO in history. Time will tell.
If this happens: recall my earlier post whereby I speculate Tiger Woods will be subsequently seen in TV commercials endorsing Nike brand shovels, picks, hoes, scythes, and wheelbarrows. I suspect we will see many mindblowing concepts when the cascading blowbacks really start to kick in.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
Bob, I had thought better of you. The idea that CEOs are censoring Peak Oil is just plain silly. Do you think they are censoring Global Warming? Of course not! Global warming is all the rage right now and the media cannot get enough of it.
The truth is people are simply not aware of Peak Oil and that is why you don't see much of it in the media. But let a little ripple of fear streak through the average person in the street and you will see peak oil screamed from every headline in the nation.
The idea that peak oil is being censored by CEOs is just down in the dirt stupid! You know better than that crap Bob. I am shocked at your response.
Newspapers and TV report the NEWS! End of story. You guys who think there is some kind of conspiracy to suppress the fact that oil is peaking are just plain wrong. You are just frustrated because the world does not see the facts as plainly as you see them. But that is the way the world works Bob, get used to it.
The world will be aware of peak oil when it bitch slaps them in the face and not one day earlier. And this is not the fault of the media. It is called "human nature". Learn to live with it and stop looking for really dumb conspiracies.
Ron Patterson
I do find it interesting that the media conspricy theorists know what goes on inside news editorial rooms without actually being in them to hear what is really said.
There's no need.
Triangulation combined with history, shows no other possible conclusion.
Combine the above with "the mask is ripped off" scenarios like 911,
Pearl Harbor, Lend Lease Act.
And note how fast legislation is passed when TPTB want it.
Or the Constitution is ignored.
How fast the Fed and World CB's have found almost a trillion $'s
to try and plug the "Subprime to AAA and back again" fiasco.
And how not one single word of this is discussed by the presidential
candidates.
Hello Darwinian,
Thxs for responding. Recall that Jim Kunstler was invited to Google HQ to give a presentation. Google then proceeded to start installing solar PV panels and investing in Nanosolar and who knows what else; that does not sound like FF-energy denial to me. Big Buck$$$ decisions such as these ONLY come from the topdogs from the Executive Board level. IMO, their ACTIONS & MONEY show total Peak Everything Awareness, but they don't yet want the unwashed masses to have the essential google button to direct them to Dieoff [or TOD, or LATOC, or a specific website developed internal to Google].
I would prefer they do it sooner than later to get the Paradigm Shift jumpstarted; I still think Peak Outreach is the best path forward. Within hours of unveiling-->it will be headlines everywhere around the globe. Unless Microsoft or Ask or Jeeves or Yahoo beats them by unveiling their version first.
Have you emailed your request to Google for this clickable link?
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
Bob, I could not make heads or tails out of your reply. No, I have not emailed Google. I don't know why I should. I don't remember even mentioning Google being in FF-energy denial. I really don't understand what you are talking about.
Ron Patterson
Hello Darwinian,
Thxs again. It is really quite simple. Google is rapidly becoming biosolar mission-critical aware as evidenced by their new investments; they are proactively engaged in their future corporate survival. I suggest that they are well informed on WWWeb power problems as explained in Leanan's toplink:
Data Center Power Demands Raising Fears of an Impending Crisis for Thousands of Major Corporations
-------------------------------------
“I’ve got clients who are really worried about this,” Rakesh L. Kumar, a UK-based Gartner vice president and the principal researcher on Gartner’s report, said in an interview. They are right to be worried, Kumar emphasized, noting that many major corporations will have to spend hundreds of millions of dollars per data center to expand their existing operations. It’s either that, Kumar said, or loose direct control over this vital corporate function by contracting with an outside data center.
--------------------------------------
I would expect Google's postPeak strategy is to offer the migration path for these companies by achieving first-mover status to reliable data centers. IF Nanosolar has a viable product: virtually all their output will first be utilized by Google directly, or power companies with an ironclad contract to sell their PV power output to Google first when required. Emphasized again: the keyword is 'Proactive' to insure 'hen and egg' control of electrons thru power cables & photons thru optic fiber; or what Warren Buffett calls as as 'defensive moat' to preclude effective competition.
IMO, currently Google is reactive as far as reporting the news; their search engine just aggregates info from many sources. When they post the unlucky button: they will rapidly move to proactive mode where most of the currently pointless web searches [Britney Spears, salad-shooter shopping, video games, etc] will quickly diminish, saving Google gobs of more computing power and more uptime reliability to sell to the aforementioned companies. The surviving companies, who provide vital needs such as NPK, seeds, clothing, bicycles, medicine, web-based home schooling, etc, will need cheap and reliable web access to service their global customers.
If they are the first with the unlucky button, as opposed to Microsoft or Yahoo being first: their postPeak credibility as the first truly 'proactive' news source will be skyhigh; another defensive moat that will give them loyal users far above the other search engines. This high degree of Thermo/Gene honesty has its own rewards.
Ron, I think you are like me--we both appreciate what Jay has accomplished with his massive compendium of his and other keywriters' works on Dieoff and Yahoo discussion forums. I think you should email Google asking for Dieoff and/or TOD to become the #1 global website to help Peak Outreach. I think it is more important than voting in the next Pres. election.
You have children and grandchildren--they need your help before it is too late.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
Time Warner bought CNN not to own it, but to destroy it. The second they had their hands on it, they cleared the decks of real, intelligent, critically thinking news people, and replaced them with mindless infotainment bimbos. The news network that at one time was watched by world leaders as their best source of info on what was going on in the world, is now laughed at across the planet. Ted Turner has said if he knew what they were up to he would never have sold.
Ted Turner Roars Again
20 September 2006 (StudioBriefing)
CNN founder Ted Turner said Tuesday that the news media are not working hard enough to inform viewers about international events that affect them. "That's one of the reasons I started CNN and did my best to get them to concentrate on serious international news -- so that people would be better informed," Turner said at a meeting of journalists and policy leaders in New York. "If we don't have the right information today, we're doomed."
Redstone Professes Unrequited Love for CNN
12 January 2006 (StudioBriefing)
CBS, which for years has flirted with CNN, may now be eying it as a possible marriage partner. As reported by Broadcasting & Cable magazine, Viacom/CBS Chairman Sumner Redstone told an audience in Beverly Hills Tuesday night that if anyone in the crowd was able to reach Time Warner chief Dick Parsons, "Call Dick. Tell him I want to buy CNN ... because CNN and CBS would be fantastic." Oddly, while he made no such offer to buy Fox News Channel, he was effusive in his praise for it. "They may be biased, but they are dynamic and charismatic, and the result is they are doing better than CNN," Redstone said. "They are doing great because of showmanship." When asked if he believes CNN founder Ted Turner will ever stage a comeback, Redstone replied, "When he sold to Time Warner, that was the end of Ted Turner. ... Control is the thing. I'll never give it up."
Former CNN Bureau Chief Reveals Why She Quit
20 June 2005 (StudioBriefing)
CNN's former bureau chief in Beijing and Tokyo has acknowledged that she resigned from the cable news network because she "had been growing increasingly frustrated with the direction CNN was going in." In an interview appearing in the current Columbia Journalism Review, Rebecca MacKinnon remarked that she had become aware of a trend toward "less interest in serious news and ... towards more infotainment, from anything but a war zone." She said that as "neither a war correspondent nor an infotainment news bunny," she was forced to reexamine her place at the network, especially after being told things by her superiors like, "Your expertise is getting in the way of doing the kind of stories we want to see on CNN" and "We'd like you to cover the region more like a tourist." MacKinnon said that when she came to the network in 1992, when it was still owned by Ted Turner, it placed heavy emphasis on international stories. "There was this real feeling that if a story mattered, we should cover it. If you had a strong argument to that effect and you could pitch that to Ted Turner, the funds would be there, because he viewed CNN as something other than a product that you just sell on the market for profit maximization. He saw it as something more socially significant than that." All that, she said, changed after the merger with Time Warner.
Ted Turner Blasts Fox News Channel
26 January 2005 (StudioBriefing)
The result of media consolidation has been a television industry that is less critical of the government, and, in the case of News Corp, even a propaganda agent of the government, CNN founder Ted Turner said during an address to TV programmers in Las Vegas Tuesday. Appearing as the keynote speaker at the National Association for Television Programming Executives (NATPE), Turner, who once compared News Corp Chairman Rupert Murdoch with Hitler, pressed on with the analogy of governments using media as a propaganda organ by referring to News Corp's Fox News Channel, which has overtaken CNN in the ratings. Not being the most popular news network, Turner remarked, is "not necessarily a bad thing, though I'm not happy about it. Adolf Hitler was more popular in Germany than people who ran against him. Just because you are bigger doesn't mean to say you are right." However, he added, "it does pose problems for our democracy. Particularly when the news is dumbed down, leaving voters without critical information on politics and world events and overloaded with fluff."
Ted Turner: "Bust Up the Conglomerates"
22 July 2004 (StudioBriefing)
Ted Turner has cited Disney's decision to reject distribution of Fahrenheit 9/11 as an ominous indication of the chilling effect of media consolidation. Writing in the Washington Monthly, the CNN founder takes special note of a statement by a Disney executive at the time: "It's not in the interest of any major corporation to be dragged into a highly charged partisan political battle." Turner comments: "Follow the logic, and you can see what lies ahead: If the only media companies are major corporations, controversial and dissenting views may not be aired at all." Turner's advice: "Bust up the big [media] conglomerates."
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0877894/news
I did some screen shots of CNN's "news of the deeply weird" front page a while back ... they're just a joke, but a slightly deformed joke with no punch line. If the FCC's let 'em they'd have digitally enhanced shots of Britney's privates on the front page on a daily basis.
http://flickr.com/photos/avyakata/sets/72157603440806568/
Some of us are old enough to remember what it was like to actually get REAL NEWS on the television. Those days are long past. Today, what they call news is indoctrination with a large dose of showmanship to keep the sheeple watching.
This is a myth, pure baloney! Do you guys actually believe that every story is cleared by the CEO, or even that there is some "screening committee" that checks each news story for conflict with advertisers?
This is the job of the editor, who has veto power over what is published. Censorship is usually unnecessary, as reporters self-censor, as shall be explained shortly, but occasionally the editor must step in and say "no." Sometimes the system fails and something undesirable is published, but this is the exception rather than the rule.
I'm sure you will demand evidence, so I present Reese Schoenfeld, co-founder of CNN, in his own words. The context of this interview was Newsweek's publication of a story about the desecration of the Koran by US service personnel at Guantanamo.
"The government has a right and sometimes a duty to lie. The press must never lie, but has no duty to tell the truth. Editors are for keeping things out of the paper that do no good and can only inflame and hurt... What real difference does it make if we report that or don't report that... I would have never even considered reporting it, I would have sat there in the chair and said, 'no, this does not go in the story'... This whole idea, the public has a right to know. The public does not have a right to know. The editor has a right to publish. That's what the first amendment is about. The guy who owns the paper, the editor, says what does and what doesn't and he doesn't have to tell everything he knows and god forbid that he ever should."
Reese Schoenfeld on the public's right to know
You guys are just conspiracy theory nuts. The CEOs do not control the media.
There is no "grand conspiracy," but market forces do shape the media in ways which could easily be mistaken for a conspiracy. This phenomenon is best explained by the theory of the Propaganda Model, advanced by Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman.
There is a sort of "survival of the fittest" among news agencies, where the ones which bring the greatest profits rise to the top and dominate this particular economic ecological niche. Despite popular perception, the product of news agencies is not news. News agencies sell audiences to advertisers. This dynamic dictates that to maximize profits, and thus rise to the top in the ecosystem, a news agency must obtain as large an audience as possible, while simultaneously avoiding any subject matter which alienates either current or potential advertisers. The news agencies also must pander to the government in order to maintain preferential treatment.
To draw and hold a large audience, which correlates with what they can charge their advertisers, a successful news agency tells people what they want to hear. If the audience rewarded honesty, we would get more of it. Unfortunately, people do not want to hear unpleasant truths, so they are avoided. To attract advertisers, the agency must avoid material which upsets their clients or dissuades the public from being in a 'buying' mood. The news agencies do not even have to be conscious of these principals, as the 'magic of the market' will reward those who follow them, planned or not.
When did the War on Drugs end?
When will there be an investigation of 911?
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2007/12/20/1656/7545
Mexican Officials Fear the Case, if Exposed, Could Jeopardize US Funding for “Plan Mexico”
By Bill Conroy
Special to The Narco News Bulletin
December 19, 2007
The Gulfstream II jet that crash landed in the Mexican Yucatan in late September carrying close to four tons of cocaine was part of an operation being carried out by a Department of Homeland Security agency, DEA sources have revealed to Narco News.
The operation, codenamed “Mayan Express,” is an ongoing effort spearheaded by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the sources claim. The information surfaced during a high-level meeting at DEA headquarters in mid-December, DEA sources familiar with the meeting assert.
Tell me you've seen this story in the MSM.
Or this:
“The network appeared to be obtaining information from every nuclear agency in the United States,” she said.
They were helped, she says, by the high-ranking State Department official who provided some of their moles – mainly PhD students – with security clearance to work in sensitive nuclear research facilities. These included the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory in New Mexico, which is responsible for the security of the US nuclear deterrent.
In one conversation Edmonds heard the official arranging to pick up a $15,000 cash bribe. The package was to be dropped off at an agreed location by someone in the Turkish diplomatic community who was working for the network.
The Turks, she says, often acted as a conduit for the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan’s spy agency, because they were less likely to attract suspicion. Venues such as the American Turkish Council in Washington were used to drop off the cash, which was picked up by the official.
Edmonds said: “I heard at least three transactions like this over a period of 2½ years. There are almost certainly more.”
The Pakistani operation was led by General Mahmoud Ahmad, then the ISI chief."
How come there are no American Drug Kingpins?
Ron, the media is mostly owned by a few large corporations who pay their bills by selling time and space on their 'product' to other corporations. Follow the money.
Peace Be With You, Kurt Vonnegut
by Harvey Wasserman
Last year, apparently on the spur of the moment, he agreed to speak again at Ohio State. It would be his last campus lecture.
When word spread, a line four thousand students long instantly formed at a university otherwise known only for its addiction to football.
Anyone expecting a safe, whimsical opener from this grand old man of sixties rebellion was in for a shock. “Can I speak frankly?” he asked Professor Manuel Luis Martinez, the poet and writing teacher who would “interview” him. “The only difference between George W. Bush and Adolph Hitler is that Hitler was actually elected.”
Forgot the link. Sorry.
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/13/492/
"“To hell with the advances in computers,” he said after he finished singing. “YOU are supposed to advance and become, not the computers. Find out what’s inside you. And don’t kill anybody.
“There are no factories any more. Where are the jobs supposed to come from? There’s nothing for people to do anymore. We need to ask the Seminoles: ‘what the hell did you do?” after the tribe’s traditional livelihood was taken away."
There are tens of thousands of reporters producing a constant stream of information -- they aren't the problem. The Internet helps a lot in allowing average people to sample that raw stream.
On the other hand, there is a relative handful of editors who march to the tune of the corporate owners of the major media -- and it is they who determine what gets published, and therefore, what most people see.
The New York Times famously publishes "all the news that's fit to print." They don't go on to tell you who decides the "fitness" of any given bit of information.
When they feel that the masses need a little information about Peak Oil, they will (and do) let it out. Reuters might be better than Fox -- McClatchy certainly is-- in terms of relative unfiltered sampling of "news." On the whole, I would agree there is not a "conspiracy" of editors -- just that the importance of the news has to be weighed against its ability to promote or detract from the success of the market economy if it is going to be published in a major media outlet.
New York Times...Reminds me of this bit of movie dialog that was filmed in front of the NYT in 1975...Seems this discussion describes the mind set of the majority of Americans...
Higgins: The plan was alright, the plan would have worked.
Turner: Boy, what is it with you people? You think that not getting caught in a lie is the same thing as telling the truth?
Higgins: No, its simple economics. Today its oil, right? In ten or twenty years--food, plutonium, and maybe even sooner. What do you think the people are going to want us to do then?
Turner: Ask them.
Higgins: Now, now. then. Ask them when they're running out. Ask them when there's no heat and they're cold. Ask them when their engines stop. Ask them when people that have never known hunger start going hungry. Want to know something? They won't want us to ask them. They'll want us to get it for them.
'Three Days Of The Condor'
This is probably why that movie is impossible to get now. I've heard of the movie for 20 years and never been able to see it.
It's available on Netflix -- at least, they say it is.
Fleam, 'Three Days Of The Condor' is anything but hard to get...two minutes ago I pulled this search result up on Half.com. I have also seen the movie for sale at garage sales and flea mkts.
http://search.half.ebay.com/three-days-of-the-condor_W0QQmZmovies
Three Days of the Condor: Cliff Robertson, Faye Dunaway, Max Von Sydow, Robert Redford
DVD, 1999 - Buy it for $5.18 (Save 74%)
VHS, 1991 - Buy it for $1.99 (Save 86%)
VHS - Buy it for $1.99 (Save 86%)
Laserdisc - Buy it for $11.50 (Save 67%)
Deleted
Mr. Patterson,
The MSM is not a mirror to society. It creates society. Having been a member of the MSM for many years, I can categorically say that the MSM is a reflection of what the elite, the rich, and the corporation would like society to look like.
The MSM does not report. It merely passes on the corporate message of the day which is framed in a froth of utter BS: all celebrity news, all sports news, all human interest stories and most, if not all, financial news.
The "bad" news it will report is only the immediate, the neutral, the "natural." It reports hurricanes, but not the utterly evil, governmental response, or should I say near lack of response. It reports the numbers on Wall Street, but does not report on the extensive manipulation of stock prices through collusion and naked shorts. It reports high gas prices, but it does not report on the Peak Oil caucus in the House of Representatives.
The MSM will start reporting Peak Oil once its corporate task masters determine the script, the precise response and the desired outcome. Once the message has been crafted, it will flow out to every outlet and enter the Right-Wing echo chamber where the brain-washing will begin. The main-problem they are having is they have bought into the whole techno-worshipper tinkerbell syndrome and they haplessly believe their own propaganda. So, they wait for the next big thing, the techno-saviour to come along and provide them with a script. You already see this to some extent every time you see a story on the oil sands, or the latest deep well in the gulf. You see it whenever some schmo figures out how to microwave/recycle stuff out of trash. Yes, let's recycle our way out of the problem. We have infinite waste! -- yet another example of piss-poor cognitive skills.
The MSM does not simply report the news good or bad. It takes a stand. When the script is written, there is a slant. You hear every editor out there ask ten times a day, "What's the slant?" And the slant is always crafted to guide the reader to certain conclusions about the parties involved. While physical facts cannot be denied, they can be coated with a sweet layer of BS. For instance, global climate change is dreadful news. But, all one has to do is say things like, "Some scientists believe...." Or, when confronted with a range of choices, pick the least objectionable end of the range and flog it. "According to the USGS, oil supplies are unlikely to peak until 2030."
And the main way that the MSM toes the ideological line is through the use of "experts." Most of the so-called experts used by the MSM are provided free of charge by various corporate funded "think" tanks. (I use the word "think" loosely here.) These fake experts spend their time at think tanks concocting ways to spin various news items and popular concerns so that all of the outrage one should feel about an issue is blanched right out. Their duty to the corporation is to discredit bad news and its sources.
The putative left-leaning "expert" will actually be somewhere just right of center. They will espouse weak arguments that the far-right think tank "expert" will be able to knock down with ease. If you parse these "debates" between so-called opponents (they are all really on the same team, TEAM CORPORATE®), you will see that they tend to avoid any substance whatsoever. One will make a broad generalization. The other will do likewise. If they get into actual verbal fisticuffs, it will be over some minor technical detail. If a program has an actual expert making actual alarming claims backed up by tangible evidence, the moderator will remark on how "extreme" this view is. Other guests will simply ignore what was said, not bothering to argue the points, but will instead merely repeat the corporate talking points for the day. If the expert espousing the news that disses the corporation lets his or her voice rise, the moderator and the corporate shills will jump on that person as being too passionate, irrational, etc. This is another powerful device they use: turning topics that should outrage everyone into dispassionate, useless, boring, and well-bounded discussions.
The MSM is the propaganda arm of the elites. They are very, very, good at what they do. Most people actually believe that the MSM is liberal. If there were ever an indication of just how good the MSM is at its propaganda, then that statement should clinch it.
To combat this insidious reality, do what you can on the Internet, talk to your friends, to your co-workers, to anyone who will listen, form groups, and, if you must watch the MSM, remember, it is propaganda. Put on your thinking cap. Ask, how does this benefit the corporate taskmasters?
Thanks for this comment. Appreciate your insight. I also do believe that the subject of Peak Oil is coming more to the front of things in news articles. However, things being as you say they are, I will not wait on the edge of my seat for the MSM to say anything meaningful about it.
An interesting comment:
On BBC News 24, (01:40 GMT), there is currently a discussion of a panel of the senior reporters on what they think the top stories for 2008 will be.
One of them stated "Peak Oil". As bald as that (and also mentioned that many will imbue it with 'capital P and capital O'.
Now, while he still trotted out the "probably not likely until around 2020" line, he did at least indicate that 2008 would be the year that it became part of the vernacular.
The MSM doesn't get more mainstream than the BBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/player/nol/newsid_6610000/newsi...
(Not sure if link will work worldwide)
AKH
Interesting. Will it be archived?
A fairly long search on the BBC website has turned up nothing (I suppose I should have paid more attention to the programme title, but is was 1am at the time :-)
It is, apparently, an annual prediction event - this was the first time it was televised. It's the kind of thing that deserves to be archived.
AKH
John Gowan of the New Mexico organization Libertad stated
J Orlin Grabbe wrote
Pulitzer prize winning journalist Tamar Stieber was fired by the Albuquerque Journal shortly after she wrote
Is this good enough?
Especially with theme music while reading.
Thank you Cherenkov
If you parse these "debates" between so-called opponents (they are all really on the same team, TEAM CORPORATE®), you will see that they tend to avoid any substance whatsoever.
Crossfire: Right and Left do Intellectual Battle
Basketball: The Harlem Globetrotters vs The Washington Generals
Same Game. Same known outcome in advance.
The "Think" tank that they loved to use going into Iraq war was none other than The American Enterprise Institute.
Richard Perle, et al
Good unbaised opinions and motivation no doubt.
To combat this insidious reality, do what you can on the Internet, talk to your friends, to your co-workers, to anyone who will listen, form groups, and, if you must watch the MSM, remember, it is propaganda. Put on your thinking cap. Ask, how does this benefit the corporate taskmasters?
I would highly recommend everyone read this one at least once.
25 Rules of Disinformation: How to Fight Back
8 Traits of The Disinformationalist: What to Look For
http://www.proparanoid.net/truth.htm
http://forum.noblerealms.org/viewtopic.php?id=718
and
More Media Disinformation? FCC Proposes Greater Media Consolidation
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7607
Millions are now seeing first hand, and in many cases for the first time, how much MSM's message is controlled. The formally right/conservatives supporting Ron Paul are waking up very quickly to it. They are watching someone who has raised nearly 15 million and no coverage. The Veil is being torn away.
Cherenkov...What you said...excellent post!
Bravo. Excellent post. That anyone would argue to the contrary is telling. Perplexing, but telling.
Jeff
I have heard Jerome A Paris on Daily Kos refer to "think tanks" as "doublethink tanks". I think the latter term is more descriptive.
“The nature of our media industries results not from some natural “free” market but from explicit government policies and subsidies. As the media firms have grown larger, their power over government policymakers has turned into a vice-grip. They alone control the means of communication, meaning they can shape the manner in which debates over media policy are disseminated and understood.”
http://www.opendemocracy.net/media-globalmediaownership/article_56.jsp
Ron, I usually agree with your anti-conspiracy theory posts. Most people attribute too much to conspiracy. However, what I think the posters above—IMHO—are really trying to express is their outrage if the lack of coverage for a problem that will irrevocably change our world. Call it journalistic integrity—or lack there of— people want more from their MSM.
It would be interesting to compare the horrors of Vietnam and the MSM coverage during the war. If we have any posters here that witnessed the MSM coverage was the bad news contained? I would guess the picture was not as rosy as the one being portrayed right now, Iraq fine, housing fine, banks fine, energy fine...go ahead and continue to spend.
"It would be interesting to compare the horrors of Vietnam and the MSM coverage during the war."
And that's exactly how you do it.
Take a period of time, and or event that you know went badly
for the US (or any other target).
I always refer to Dunkirk.
We know that it was an unmitigated disaster for Britain.
But look at Newsweek and how they covered it.
The Allies kept winning the battles, but every week they were 25 miles closer to the coast.
Same with the collapse of ARVN in 1975.
You'll never hear about our defeat at the Chosin Reservoir.
Or that the Japanese lost the Battle of Leyte Gulf (and the Phillipines)
because they ran out of oil.
Same with the Germans at Stalingrad.
Or the fact that the Nazis were going to shut down the Ford plant
in Stuttgart(?) but realized after study that they couldn't build
trucks any faster than Ford was.
To the present:
When was the War on Drugs over?
How come the US is the largest user of cocaine in the world
but there is no such thing as an American Drug King Pin?
McG: Re the War on Drugs, I think they won when the first quack prescribed Prozac for a kindergarten kid. They are lobbying hard (pun intended) to get Viagra and the like over the counter-once that is accomplished I would award them another battle won. I would say the creation and distribution of dangerous drugs that claim to increase ones mental ability (IQ) would be another important milestone. If high school football is any indication, Mommy and Daddy will be injecting the little brats personally with that one.