Skip to main content

View Diary: NPR falsifies "facts" about Social Security (184 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I've given up on NPR. (4+ / 0-)

    I used to TREASURE having that service available. Now, it's just another piece-of-shit hegemony-server just like all the rest of them, just with a more respectable facade. I'M LAMENTING THE TOTAL DESTRUCTION OF TRUTH IN THE USA!

    OWS (Occupy Pittsburgh) - REAL MOVEMENT of, by, for AND from the people!

    by waiting for lefty on Wed Dec 07, 2011 at 03:54:35 PM PST

    •  You mean "respectable" (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      waiting for lefty

      Like the oh-so-serious Charlie Rose, NPR packages its establishment-enabling lies and memes in a manner meant to appeal to and impress equally oh-so-serious middlebrow types who fancy themselves serious and thoughtful people of grave concern (i.e. fatuous college-educated yuppies who want to maintain the facade of being liberal and serious while actually mostly concerned with their own material, professional and financial interests). These outlets serve the purpose of helping these people rationalize their hypocrisy.

      I.e. political Whole Foods.

      "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

      by kovie on Wed Dec 07, 2011 at 08:06:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, NPR is actually perfect for the kind of (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        waiting for lefty

        democrat that wants to see Obama re-elected, actually. NPR remains very popular with 'liberals' precisely because they view it as "intellectual street cred." After all, NPR reported it, and they're a respectable news organization, right?

        •  Well, JBF, I too want to see Obama reelected, but (0+ / 0-)

          mostly because of what we'd be avoiding. Though I have to admit I'm seeing much more encouraging signs from Obama right now. We'll see how credible those overtures are before long, I'm sure.

          OWS (Occupy Pittsburgh) - REAL MOVEMENT of, by, for AND from the people!

          by waiting for lefty on Thu Dec 08, 2011 at 11:06:03 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  We've already seen how credible they are. (0+ / 0-)

            He wasn't a fire-breathing FDR liberal in the '08 campaign, but he sure as hell wasn't the President Republican-Lite we've seen for the last three years, either. His campaign rhetoric is something I place at about the same level of credibility as anything, say, Newt Gingrich says.

        •  I have friends who still buy this shit (0+ / 0-)

          They're smart, educated, left of center, politically aware, etc. Just the sort of person who almost always votes Dem. And they're almost all clueless about how politics really works these days, and what's really going on beyond the canned sound bites and uncritical reporting. Which is why they turn to NPR and such for their news, because it validates what they believe (or want to think they believe) and does it from a lefty-seeming perspective, even though they're confusing its lefty-seeming reporting style with the right-leaning substance of its reporting.

          And you know what? I think that many of them know this on some level and pretend to themselves that they don't, because if they did, it would make them really uncomfortable given the clearly right-leaning choices they've made in their lives, like working for the sorts of companies that have been destroying the economy, middle class and country. I think that NPR is part of the hypocrisy that has ruined this country, much of it coming from ostensibly liberal but actually quite conservative people. They pretend to be liberal to salve their delicate consciences, NPR helps them keep up this pretense, and everyone gets to keep on working for big banks or big pharma or big oil and be none the wiser for it.

          A whole shitload of people have made personal, financial and professional bets on the conservative dream ushered in by Reagan--many of them people who claimed to despise him--across the political and ideological spectrum, and they're terrified of having to admit that they were wrong, both practically and morally. And so the charade goes on, aided by establishment media outlets like NPR.

          Until it implodes. Which it's in the process of doing.

          "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

          by kovie on Thu Dec 08, 2011 at 01:11:25 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, Charlie Rose, is a super-smega-whore. (0+ / 0-)

        Can't stomach him. I used to tune in at times just to see who his guest might be; I would watch at least some of it if I thought it was someone who could easily handle him; Nancy Pelosi MASTERED him - she politely stayed with her intended remarks to the conclusion SHE had chosen for each point, staying her course throughout Rose's especially long-ass meandering questions dripping with self-important in-the-knowness and attempts to off-track her with tweaks and after interrupting his guest's replies just as she was about to make a crucial point. Pelosi got her points made DESPITE ROSE'S INTERFERENCES and with FULL INTELLECTUAL COHERENCE. More than once, she quickly answered his new tweak and went RIGHT BACK to the context that allowed viewers to follow and understand her completed thought. THAT WAS WORTH SEEING. Not long after, I put Rose on final probation in the aftermath of his announcement one Monday evening that his scheduled interview with Michael Moore night ("Captialism.." opened not long before) would "be seen at a later time," to present the drivel of some alleged crisis. I tuned in each night thereafter just to see if Moore would be on - turning it off when not. Rose finally aired a truncated and choppily edited Moore interview that FRIDAY night - a night the FEWEST viewers would see it. A high schooler learning an editing deck could have assembled that footage more crisply - they clearly cut out a lot of MM's remarks (and there were multiple separate guest interviews with others that evening; they probably taped an hour interview with Moore and cut it down to about 8 minutes). The last time I ever knowingly glanced upon Rose's show was when he and Bush henchman John Negroponte shared a hearty laugh over U.S. torture. If I ever see Rose in person I'll berate and shame him til his cowardly, totally bitched-out ass scurries away and hides. hahaha

        OWS (Occupy Pittsburgh) - REAL MOVEMENT of, by, for AND from the people!

        by waiting for lefty on Thu Dec 08, 2011 at 10:49:10 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Rose is SUCH an easy read (0+ / 0-)

          Sure, he's "smart", educated, erudite, sophisticated, etc., in that savvy urbane man about town witty way you really have to be to run in the circles he clearly runs in. But it's all surface, all about fitting in and kissing up to the people who decide who's in and who's out at the rarefied levels of social, political, economic and artistic society that Rove so desperately wants to be a part of, even if it's as its designated lapdog PR flak. He knows what that role is and what's expected of him if he wants to keep it, and he simply plays ball.

          He is, in short, a disengenuous, glib and fatuous ass-kissing gasbag, upper east side NYC version. You can almost smell the overeager desperation to belong and willingness to do anything to make it happen through the TV.

          As for the people he kisses up to, I'm guessing that for most it's about their own insecure need for validation and promotion, which Rose amply provides them with, in exchange for which he gets to interview them at length and sit next to them at Jean-Georges or Nobu or wherever the hell the urbane savvy set with deep pockets or expense accounts eat at these days. But for the real power brokers of our society, the politicians and bankers and CEOs and such, they get the sort of surface respectability among intellectually lazy center-right to center left voters they crave and which he can grant. And he gets a pat on the head.

          Nice work if you can get it.

          "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

          by kovie on Thu Dec 08, 2011 at 01:00:55 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site