RE: Lesser-evilism

["David Quarter" <davidquarter@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

  NO -- you condescending %#*!..I was saying that *IF* the media 
was about reporting news and exposing stories they could expose 
just as much dirt on the ruling class without waiting for the story to 
happen. I realize that the media doesn't operate like that. But, I 
was nevertheless responding to Mark's suggestion (at least the 
way I interpreted it)  that reporting news is  some mechanical 
process in which journalists always wait for the controversial story 
to happen rather than expose a controversy in the making. 

Are you dense or something or are just looking for attention?


DOQ



From:                   "Jose G. Perez" <jgperez@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To:                     <marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:                RE: Lesser-evilism
Date sent:              Tue, 22 Jul 2003 01:55:42 -0400
Send reply to:          marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> David,
> 
>       David. There's no point to a pissing match. You think bourgeois
> journalism is doing a terrible job. I just wanted to point out, one
> would only say that if they were under the illusion that there is any
> traditional bourgeois journalism left in the corporate media. 
> 
>       "Journalists" have no control, zero, zip, over the contents of
> the corporate media. They have qualitatively less so *today* than they
> did a couple of years ago, when they had no control whatsoever. 
> 
>       That's right, re-read the sentence. Two years ago they had no
> control. TODAY they have less than that. *Qualitatively* less than that.
> Less than zero.
> 
>       "War is peace..." 
> 
>       "We have always been at war with Oceania..."
> 
>       "U.S. military combat casualties since the war in Iraq ended..."
> 
> 
>       Put Marxmail aside for a few days. Read Orwell. The latest
> headline news from next week's edition of the corporate media are all
> there. And have been for half a century.
> 
> José
> 
> 
>