General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNo Question Now. '60 Minutes' is Deliberate Right-Wing Propaganda.
Last edited Mon Dec 16, 2013, 05:52 PM - Edit history (8)
Two pro-NSA, anti-Snowden segments in a row.
Followed by a segment on how Egyption Copts (Christians) are being abused by Muslims and the Muslim Brotherhood (which is true as far as it goes, but lots of different groups are being abused in Egypt). This after the false Benghazi story debacle, the simple-minded disability fraud segment, and the Jeff Bezos Amazon commercial. 60 Minutes of facsimile Fox News.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
spanone
(135,795 posts)fucked/broken
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)They are both crap. And they both represent the .01% only.
Vietnameravet
(1,085 posts)the law, and whom President Obama has sought to have arrested..that makes him a conservative.. ""
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)Last edited Mon Dec 16, 2013, 11:05 AM - Edit history (1)
But that's not what any of the Tweets are talking about.
Want to defend the Lara Logan segment, too?
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)"Washington Rules" by Andrew Bacevich.
It is not about Snowden or the NSA, it is about the US security state. As a Vietnam-era vet, I think you may find it enlightening. And infuriating. It may lead you to think of Snowden in a different way.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Blah, blah, Snowden, blah, blah Greenwald, blah, blah........
bbgrunt
(5,281 posts)
PSPS
(13,580 posts)What's a week without a #13 Sunday anyway!
Worshiper/Apologist Hit Parade:
1. This is nothing new
2. I have nothing to hide
3. What are you, a freeper?
4. But Obama is better than Christie/Romney/Bush/Hitler
5. Greenwald/Flaherty/Gillum/Apuzzo/Braun is a hack
6. We have red light cameras, so this is no big deal
7. Corporations have my data anyway
8. At least Obama is trying
9. This is just the media trying to take Obama down
10. It's a misunderstanding/you are confused
11. You're a racist
12. Nobody cares about this anyway / "unfounded fears"
13. I don't like Snowden, therefore we must disregard all of this
14. Other countries do it
tkmorris
(11,138 posts)Who wasn't thoroughly cynical when it came to pro-government propaganda. Just imagine how different that little fiasco might have gone if say, someone had exposed the truth about the Gulf of Tonkin incident, or about a million other events that followed.
boomersense
(147 posts)dddd
nikto
(3,284 posts)And then split.
That is a statement in itself.
As in, "ignore".
boomersense
(147 posts)"I agree". That was was my intention--siding with a fellow Vietnam Vet.
HubertHeaver
(2,520 posts)a Vietnam Era Vet. There is a difference.
boomersense
(147 posts)the person of Edward Snowden one of the greatest heroes of all time. Your government is still moving in for the kill, but Snowden, hopefully, slowed it down some. I stand with Snowden, even if I do that is alone. I too am a Vietnam Vet. One that remembers well the Gulf of Tonkin. Even its maliciousness pales compared to what the Fascist are doing now.
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)*WHOOSH*
It's not about Snowden. It's about the NSA spying on everything we do online and on our cell phones.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)You've got to hand it to the anti-privacy people: they stick with their talking points, even when they've been discredited, because they know if one lies with enough frequency the lies will stick (at least, for the less-critically-thinking subset).
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)
frylock
(34,825 posts)
BainsBane
(53,016 posts)As I was told repeatedly during the rape porn threads. If that's the case, how could it possibly matter what is on 60 minutes or any other media outlet?
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)it NEVER happens to men too, ever! Try asking a 50 year old trying to stay ahead of the game in the tech industry with a family, go ahead. I'm sure ya'll can pull 60 hour work weeks on end while only getting paid for 40. So, so easy, I'm spoiled. Oh and just in case there's some friggen misunderstanding, 
Yes cause this half filipino american has had all the breaks. 
-p
BainsBane
(53,016 posts)I believe you told me my appreciation for men who prefer sex with real women to watching porn was insulting to "humanity."
Many others insisted there was absolutely no relationship between rape porn and rape, and I suppose I imagined any criticism of those who object to rape porn involved that same assumption. The alternative is far more pernicious.
countryjake
(8,554 posts)For your clarification, I'll just repeat the above Tweet that Hissyspit provided for us:
@dangillmor: Hey, young people: Believe it or not, "60 Minutes" once stood for solid, deep, important journalism. I know, that sounds absurd now.
I also doubt that many would agree with whoever presented that notion to you.
Regardless, it hasn't much to do with the loss of a once-valuable mover and shaker within the fourth estate.
BainsBane
(53,016 posts)and I respect good journalism. But when people are inconsistent in the arguments they make, I will point it out.
Oakenshield
(614 posts)There's caring about a particular issue, and then there's being obsessive beyond the point of reason. You're clearly representing the latter instance.
BainsBane
(53,016 posts)Or one doesn't. The principal is the same, even if the content of the image differs.
countryjake
(8,554 posts)I've been questioning the motive behind these interviews ever since Thursday night, when they showed that short clip of Miller's segment.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4175179
I'll not be watching now, so thanks for the heads up!
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts). . . after watching this shameful segment:
I gather the producers of 60 Minutes felt the Benghazi report fiasco hadn't done enough damage to the program's journalistic credibility, so they decided to air this outrageously uncritical, blatantly pro-NSA propaganda puff piece. The NSA personnel who appeared in the report all have a vested interest in protecting what the NSA sees as (and many Americans disagree is) its rightful turf.
The bit about the alleged 'BIOS plot' was particularly telling. 60 Minutes allowed an NSA spokesperson to claim that this plot was hatched by a state actor, which she declined to identify, that had the intent to turn computers across the U.S. "into a brick" (to quote the very loaded term used by 60 Minutes) and thereby crash the U.S. economy. Then, in a slick, journalistic sleight-of-hand, the report provided hearsay statements by unidentified NSA analysts that the state actor in question was China, which the agency refuses to confirm or deny. I'm not buying it for a second. The government of China has absolutely nothing to gain, and a great deal to lose, by crashing the U.S. economy. This segment didn't pass the smell test of someone with a raging sinus infection!
2banon
(7,321 posts)Excellent post response to 60 minutes State Sponsored Propaganda Arm... 
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)You are one of the few DUers who consistently calls out these right-wing hacks right where they live.
loudsue
(14,087 posts)Every station. All the time. The right wing owns the media, and calls it "liberal". Barf and bullshit.
jsr
(7,712 posts) 
zeemike
(18,998 posts)It is controlled by the oligarchs, and they are neither right wing or left, they are self interest and play the right wing against the left and use them as thugs to keep us fighting while they control the situation.
And the oligarch have a very vested interest in the NSA keeping an eye on the little people, because if they found out how bad they were getting fucked they might do something about it.
The police state and the NSA is all about controlling the masses and protecting the 1%...the right wing is just their thug corp, like the brown shirts of old...instead of Jews it is liberals they get sicked on.
nikto
(3,284 posts)
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)And it is right wing. Anything that furthers the cause of Fascism is right wing.
ceeRoy
(69 posts)use to work for a local news station in NYC years ago. the man used to wear $2000 suits and drive around the city with corrupted cops and go on raids in ghetto neighborhoods for the entertainment of the racist class that populated NYC back in the day. he used to bragg about it too until they got onto him started to investigate him but he slipped out of town. to my surprise this criminal is now doing 60 Min's propaganda segments.
2banon
(7,321 posts)then sent to every 60 producer and executive. outrageous.
progressoid
(49,951 posts)He is the former Associate Deputy Director of National Intelligence for Analytic Transformation and Technology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Miller_%28journalist%29
2banon
(7,321 posts)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Miller_%28journalist%29
2banon
(7,321 posts)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Miller_%28journalist%29
DontTreadOnMe
(2,442 posts)It's getting harder to even watch MSNBC. Our media has been purchased... just like our politicians.
Response to DontTreadOnMe (Reply #19)
closeupready This message was self-deleted by its author.
greiner3
(5,214 posts)Please qualify your post.
Other than Morning Joe, which gives me a few laughs, I do not find ANY shows that fit your bill of 'laden', so to speak.
DontTreadOnMe
(2,442 posts)How liberal is Mrs. Greenspan?
Do I need to go on?
valerief
(53,235 posts)1000words
(7,051 posts)So much this.
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)complain about the left wing bias in the media. 
The media has become a steno pool. They just read press releases.
I am amazed at the quality of news when I travel out of the country. After my first trip to Europe the BBC became my go to place for news.
It's just taking a long time for some folks to get that.
DesMoinesDem
(1,569 posts)The current Democratic administration supports the NSA and polls show that Democrats support the NSA and oppose Snowden more than any other group. That is the unfortunate truth. Really I don't think it is right wing or left wing, its just government propoganda.
2banon
(7,321 posts)
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)Their biggest "leftist" achievement, after all, was passing the Heritage Foundation's health care plan.
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)The fact that "Dems support the NSA" just means that many are deluded by their Obamamania. Those people also support insurance mandates, torture, chained CPI, Medicare cuts, corporate schools, and KeystoneXL and are against unions, teachers, and public education just because the current president feels that way. They're either not really Dems, or, if they suddenly became right-wing in 2009, thundering hypocrites.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Guaranteed deliberate propaganda.
I guess they were destined ever since CBS news stopped being a separate news division. It's either for ratings or advertising, and since Logan's last bullshit "apology" measured off the charts, it's official.
Good-bye "solid, deep, important journalism"… Now, it's - "TELL us how to report!"
2banon
(7,321 posts) WowSeriously
(343 posts)Just saying.
debunkthis
(99 posts)seems most MSM ( read corporate media ) these days is set on dividing the country along a political left/right paradigm. Divide and conquer, the oldest trick in the book...
octoberlib
(14,971 posts)I highly recommend it. They do some great investigative reporting. David Shuster said they only laid down 2 guidelines on what he could report on: that he be fearless and that he be truthful.
emanymton
(2,102 posts).
http://america.aljazeera.com/
Ema Nymton
~ @ : o ?
.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)My suggestion is Jazz News.
nikto
(3,284 posts)Not saying he's pure and faultless,
but thank God for Snowden.
lunasun
(21,646 posts)Corruption Inc
(1,568 posts)The MSMedia's been pure propaganda for decades "now".
JimDandy
(7,318 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Spread it internet wide. NPR too.
Berlum
(7,044 posts)Sad. The American people cannot trust corporate media at all. They have sold out. Sad.
BornLooser
(106 posts)...I quote what I heard during a "commercial" break from nfl sunday..."The Big Eye Team, keeping government accountable". Made me want to take a ball bat to my idiotic shitbox! The mighty white whine is on full display, for all to see. They, along with the rest, and the rabble who scarf on their shit on a daily basis, with smiles on "faces", don't even CARE that they're opportunistic liars, spewing canned copy, playing to the "base". They REVEL in it. Co-opted Broadcasting Slime, new and improved, with corporates' cock up their collected asses. Hey Dan?, Dan?, wait...oh that's RIGHT, they didn't have the guts, couldn't handle it. Epic FAIL! AGAIN!...
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)go west young man
(4,856 posts)Turn it off, get Netflix or Hulu and save yourself a bundle people. And save your brain in the process.
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)Last edited Mon Dec 16, 2013, 05:37 PM - Edit history (1)
http://gizmodo.com/dont-believe-a-word-of-last-nights-60-minutes-nsa-int-1484074797JAMIE CONDLIFFE on GIZMODOPRIVACY 53 minutes ago
Don't Believe a Word of Last Night's 60 Minutes NSA Interview
Last night, CBS ran a 60 Minutes special about the ongoing NSA debacle. It claimed to give "unprecedented access to the agency's HQ" and "for the first time" explain "what it does and what it says it doesn't do: spy on Americans." It was also, incidentally, a pile of steaming bull.
MORE
Roland99
(53,342 posts)While he's given mostly to Dems over his career, he did support W over Kerry in 2004 as it would have been better economically for his empire.
Seems like he's continuing down that path now.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)That 20 minutes did a segment on the Copts in Egypt shows that. Since the coup in 1952 that removed the King of Egypt, more and more money has gone to the Generals and the people around them, the "old money" in Egypt remains in the hands of the Copts. So much of the hostility to the Copts from the poor reflects this reality.
Back to the USA, look at the "Liberal" things the networks support, they tend to be either things that benefit Wall Street OR divides up Wall Street's enemies. The classic example is Gay Rights. It is a non-issue as far as Wall Street is concerned, for it does NOT affect they bottom line, but it does divide the working class (Who tends to fall back on their family as their safety net and homosexuality is viewed by them as an attack on their extended family).
Whether you agree with homosexuality a threat to support from one's extended family, it is viewed by many working class people as such a threat (So please do not make this an attack on homosexuality or support for homosexuality sub thread, but on how to make Homosexuality a neutral issue among the working class).
People forget the policy of the GOP is to divide the opposition, and they will use anything to do so. I have always had suspicions that the Right wing supported Gay rights issues secretly, knowing it will bring people to the polls who oppose gay rights and once at the polls vote GOP. It is the votes for the GOP the right wing wants, whatever is on the ballot as to Homosexuality is just a means to get people to vote GOP.
Communists used to be used like Gays are today, but with the collapse of the Soviet Union Communism became a dead issue (no one would show up at the polls to vote against a "Communist" after 1990, but would turn out for an issue that could be construed to be homosexual related).
Just pointing out CBS is like the rest of the Networks, pro-Corporate, and if that means being Anti-Gay or Pro-Gay they would be on the same side as Wall Street. Something being Right or Wrong is unimportant to them, it is what Wall Street Wants.
okaawhatever
(9,457 posts)conquer, 60 Minutes is still a right wing shill for corp. America. Having a former Fox News guy over the show probably has something to do with that. Of course with 60 minutes it's more of a natural fit since their average viewer is about 61 years old.
Yes, Corporate America wants all the citizens fighting among themselves while they rob us blind. Do you think it's an accident that some of the most divisive issues are being brought up at the State level and when available at the National level? C'mon Abortion, Gay rights, Immigration.....that's not an accident.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)The classic Conservative was Edmund Burke, who basically supported the US Revolution but opposed the French Revolution. The reason for the difference is America was fighting to preserve what it had had for almost 100 years, de factor independence. The Colonies that later made up the 13 colonies were left alone the only law that applied to them was the Tariff (which was ignored) and Britain made no effort to treat the Colonies are Colonies tell the 1765-1774 period, American yelled "No taxation with Representation" but that meant NO taxation except by their colonial Government. When Ben Franklin went to Britain to lobby for Pennsylvania (and several other colonies) he was told NOT to agree to any representation in Parliament in exchange for the right to tax. The reason being one or two members of Parliament was NOT worth the risk of being taxed by a tax imposed by Parliament that the American Representatives voted against.
Thus Burke saw America as fighting for what it already had, independence. Prior to 1765 America was left alone and was in all but name Independent of Britain. That is what America was fighting for in 1774 to 1776. Only when it became clear that the only thing way to make sure America was Independent was to make sure it was NOT only de Factor (i.e. In fact) independent, but also de Jure (In law) independent. America also accepted that it would have to have a federal government to replace Britain, it took a while but after the Articles of Confederation had failed, the US Constitution was adopted (and the Central Government was strengthen further with the post Civil War Amendments, the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the US Constitution. The 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments rewrote the balance between the States and the Federal Government. Burke saw what American did between 1774 and 1789 as an attempt to change what needed to be changed, but as a whole to preserve what had always been. That rule, change when it is needed, but no change for change sake has been the Call of true Conservatives ever since.
The problem today is a lot of people who call themselves Conservatives are actually reactionaries. A Reactionary is someone who wants to return society to a time period that never was. They want all of the Changes a revolution did that helped them, but undone all of the changes they see as bad, while refusing to see both had to occur together and if you want to undo the later, you also have to undo the former.
The Classic Reactionary period is France 1815-1848. The centralization of Government that was the key to the French Revolution, such reactionaries wanted to preserve, but undo all of the rights given to the lower classes during the Revolution (and refusing to bring back the checks on the Rich that existed prior to the revolution). i.e. they wanted the Church to be to weak to fight for the poor (a key part of pre revolutionary France) and the peasants be treated as the Serfs such peasants had been prior to the revolution (But Serfs that had access to a Strong Church that could over rule the local landlords if what the landlord wanted was excessive). Yes, pre-Revolutionary France had rules that protected French Peasants, but they related to religion issues. The movement to "Freedom of Religion" removed that check on secular courts, replacing them with peasants rights to the law as set forth during the Revolution (including a massive redistribution of land among peasants, that started under the Republic but most of which was done under Napoleon and ended up being Napoleon's core strength, after 1800, and the peasants who benefited from that land transferred loyal to Napoleon's nephew, Napoleon III after 1815 and continuing to almost 1900).
Yes, the reactionaries of France 1815-1848 wanted to undo what Napoleon had done in the form of land reform, but ended up being stopped do to the fear of a Revolution that would install Napoleon III as Emperor (and that is what happened in 1848, through Napoleon III only declared himself Emperor in 1852, he was just President 1848-1852).
I bring this up, for notice France went through radical change between 1787 and 1800. Burke opposes such radical change, not as the Reactionaries did, for such change took away they rights, but on the grounds you were changing the balance of society without thinking and dealing with the bad side of those changes. i.e. Taking the land from the Nobles, while the Nobles still were alive and hating losing their land. To Burke Nobles losing their land was minor, but the Nobles HATING losing their land was important. Furthermore, the weakening of the Church meant that the Peasants had to rely on the feat of revolt instead of interaction of Church officials with the king. The later may be slower, but it was a lot less deadly, not only to the Nobles but also to the King (and remember it is the Nobles who would revert to the use of force to preserve their "rights" not the peasants).
Right wings today are Reactionaries, they want to return to a time period that never was. A time period without unions and low taxation but also no nasty strikes (Return to the 1920s with the peaceful strikes of the 1950s instead of the violent Strikes of the 1920s, which included School Shootings, and an outright armed rebellion). Thus they want to return to an era that never was, an era with no labor tension do to low wages, and low taxes.
West Virginia Coal War:
http://www.pawv.org/news/blairhist.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain
http://www.wvculture.org/history/minewars.html
http://earthfirstjournal.org/newswire/reviews/the-west-virginia-mine-wars-then-and-now-gun-thugs-rednecks-radicals/
ctsnowman
(1,903 posts)estates and will do whatever is required to keep them. Nothing but frontmen for, or sometimes they themselves part of, the 5% that can buy those Mercedes you see on the Christmas commercials run by the same company that owns the...
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Yes. They've crossed over to the Dark Side.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)mitty14u2
(1,015 posts)The name Lawfare refers both to the use of law as a weapon of conflict and, perhaps more importantly, to the depressing reality that America remains at war with itself over the law governing its warfare with others. This latter sense of the word—which is admittedly not its normal usage—binds together a great deal of our work over the years. It is our hope to provide an ongoing commentary on America’s lawfare, even as we participate in many of its skirmishes.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)CBS - now just another crap news source for govt/corporate propaganda.
lark
(23,065 posts)Will never watch those corporate liars for the BFEE & the 1% again. They make me sick.
G_j
(40,366 posts)but doesn't the current administration
echo similar themes?
Betsy Ross
(3,147 posts)60 Minutes, I groaned and said that pretty much seals the record on NPR. My husband objected, saying we should listen to the story first. I went back to sleep.
Vietnameravet
(1,085 posts)Snowden was wrong in the way he went about it..he violated the law and his oath and that is enough for me to say he is no hero...
Should I give away secrets that I promised to keep just because I set myself as above the law?
You can be anti NSA and still be anti-Snowden..
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)you can be anti-leak and still be anti-right wing propaganda.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Are "laws" and "oaths" sacrosanct, even when they serve to oppress the people?
I submit that the need for the American people to know exactly how egregiously the NSA has overstepped its authority far outweighs any loyalty to corrupt laws and oaths to corrupt organizations.
But then again, I'm one of those crazy Leftists. You folks on the Right may have a different viewpoint.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)He always gives excuses for abuse..and has done so for a long time.
2banon
(7,321 posts)John Miller is the equivalent to the Reich's Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels.
Fox "News" serves as a very useful tool in manufacturing and fomenting "outrage" and feigning or greatly exaggerating sharp ideological divisions between the establishment's "two party" system with moronic and/or egregiously deceitful sound bites, "analytical" editorials etc.
So many posts of the outrageous clips from Fox pundits are frequently posted and commented on here.
Yet, rarely if ever do I see intelligent critique with regard to the News Hour, NPR's All Things Considered, and most high on my list of propaganda tools is Charlie Rose.
Is it because it is assumed that Public TV and Radio exist to serve the Left? Because they've been doing anything but that for over a decade now, as they've been dutifully serving the Neo-Conservative Agenda.
It is true, that we on the left will get thrown an occasional carrot or bone to chew on, but on the issues that really matter, forget about it.
It would really go some way in restoring my faith with those who identify as Liberals or Progressives in recognizing the putrid crap for what it is, served to us day in and day out.
eom
On Edit: Curious, was Charlie Rose the Interviewer in the John Miller segment?
Does anyone here have a problem with Charlie Rose having an exclusive show on PBS while simultaneously employed as one of the major Morning anchors on CBS (and I believe on 60 Minutes) as well?