Why are "ideas" so threatening to some?

[Gold Winger]

"Well, other than FoxNews , I don't accept that most news is distorted. "

 

Other than "there was a crash on the turnpike" type of story, most news has a slant. Often quite a strong slant. When you look at what the news has done over the years, in their efforts to "tell the story that needs to be told . . ." What comes to mind is

 

The 60 Minutes interview with Gen. Westmoreland in which they snipped and clipped to make his answers what they wanted them to be.

 

The NBC news people that rigged a GM truck with explosives so that it would explode in a crash.

 

In Maryland, at a press conference to demonstrate how deadly an "assault rifle" was, the police shot a watermelon with an SKS. The bullets passed right through. So a State Troop said, "watch this" and shot it with his service pistol and the watermelon exploded. The news ran the footage showing the SKS firing and the watermelon exploding, never explaining that a pistol did the damage.

 

The famous letter about Bush and the Air Guard that turned out to be fake.

 

Every now and then someone is beheaded or falls on their sword over one of these events but how many incidents are never discovered.

 

 

[scoutmomma]

You created your own slant by editing out my followup sentence: Broadly stereotyping reporters is an easy dodge, the same as labeling all lawyers as rapacious ambulance-chasers, and I don't accept either stereotype.

 

The examples you cite do not mean that all news is distorted nor that all reporters are dishonest.

[Gold Winger]

Perhaps not, but just as cops treat us all as potential criminals because it is safer, it is safer to assume that all reporters are biased and likely dishonest.

[evmori]

The news is now sensationalized! Every story is big news even when it isn't! They toss teasers at you to keep you watching! It all about ratings not reporting.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[OldGreyEagle]

WHo was it that said you will never go broke underestimating the taste of the American Public?

 

Why do networks sensationalize news? Because we the people, the public want them to. DO you remmber the coverage of OJ in the white Ford Bronco? The Networks learned will watch real time news, eevn when nothing happens. Networks show what makes them money. They sensationalize news because its what the public wants. If they just tell the news without sizzle, the ratings fall and the station that sells glitz and glamour and no substance ratings rise. As a society we keep looking for someone to blame. Its the media's fault for the way they cover news, its Hollywoods fault for making lewd entertainment available, its the politicians fault for the state of the country and we need term limits to eliminate the bums, I guess voting bad politicians out of office is no longer an option. We want to blame everyone for everything, rather then realizin we live in a culture we created, if we want to change it, EVERYONE has to do their part

[scoutmomma]

Thank you, OGE, you articulate the case very well indeed

[scoutmomma]

Perhaps not, but just as cops treat us all as potential criminals because it is safer, it is safer to assume that all reporters are biased and likely dishonest.

 

You know what, I don't accept that all cops treat everyone as a potential criminal either.

[Beavah]

Yah, sorry OGE. I'm not as sanguine about lettin' the media off the hook.

 

Sure, bein' shrill and sensational gets viewer attention, eh? The same applies if I'm walkin' down the street. If I start shoutin' loudly that somethin' bad is happening or going to happen, I'll get a lot of folk to pay attention to me, eh? At least for a little bit.

 

That's not their fault. Citizens should be alert to the possibility that somebody shoutin' sensationally is really in need of help, or is issuing an urgent warning, eh?

 

There was a time, I think, when being a reporter was considered an honorable profession. Honor means, in part, self-restraint. Honor also means truthfulness and honesty, even if it means you sell less papers or your own personal point of view doesn't carry the day.

 

Sayin' that the media are just giving us what will sell best to my mind is another way of saying that the media are not honorable. They've lost sight of that fact that they aren't just an advertising, money-making engine. They are the 4th Estate, the folks in a democracy charged with the uniquely important role of keeping their fellow citizens well-informed, for the sake of the nation.

 

If they don't do their job with honor, they put the community at risk.

 

Beavah

 

[scoutmomma]

There was a time, I think, when being a reporter was considered an honorable profession. Honor means, in part, self-restraint. Honor also means truthfulness and honesty, even if it means you sell less papers or your own personal point of view doesn't carry the day.

 

Beavah, you are stereotyping too: local newspaper reporters are not the same as national news anchors and smalltown newspaper publishers are not the same as international media conglomerate corporations. What goes on in "the media" in terms of ratings and selling papers has nothing to do with the actions of individual reporters and everything to do with changes in the industry where stockholders must be appeased and shrinking markets with media monopolies holding sway. Those changes were effected by newspaper and broadcast media owners, with the help of the government that loosened the regulations on media acquisitions and mergers. To blame those changes on reporters is, again, an easy dodge. We have the media we allowed to develop. It's specious to blame the street reporters for what has happened at management's upper levels.

[skeptic]

So, should I draw the conclusion that the original question will not get answered; or that perhaps who exhibit the symptoms queried do not have an answer that makes sense?

 

Meanwhile, perhaps someone should spin off a thread to deal with the media discussion. It seems to have a lot of interest, but does not fit with the original thread intent.

[Beavah]

[removed at skeptic's request]

 

We now return you to why some folk are threatened by ideas....

 

B(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[Eamonn]

I'm not sure if I'm threatened by ideas.

At times I'm scared or become defensive about things I don't understand or ideas that challenge my ideas; more so if they make me feel uncomfortable.

At times my best defense is simply not knowing or wanting to know.

The idea of eating sheep eyeballs turns my stomach. I can't say that they are not good as I have never eaten them.

I used to eat breaded veal patties, till one day I took the time to read what went into them.

Being raised in an Irish Catholic family, in an Irish Catholic community, the idea that Roman Catholics had the market on getting into Heaven cornered was pounded into my head. In fact every Easter we prayed that one day the Jews see the light.

Over time I have developed my own value system. These values are mine. While things that once were unacceptable or were acceptable do change, my core values remain the same.

I have to own up to being lazy. I don't get involved. This leaves an open field for the special interest groups (Both on the right and on the left) to push forward with their agendas.

Sometimes I agree with these groups and sometimes I don't.

Sometimes I see and hear people making a big fuss about something which in my view is a storm in a tea-cup.

I don't care if Pepsi or was it Dr. Pepper? Uses "Under God" on the can of soda pop. I don't drink the stuff.

I don't need 200 e-mails telling me that God isn't on the President One Dollar coin and asking me not to use i. Heck give me a truck load of these coins and you bet I'll use them! (I think God is on the side of the coin.)

As a parent I have knowingly and unknowingly tried to pass on my core values to my son. Some things seemed easy" don't do that because it's wrong." Or "Do that, because it's right." Now at 19 he has his own ideas and his own values. At times we disagree.

Of course I think I'm right and try to let him see why I'm right. For example we disagree on the death penalty. He is for it and I'm not.

While of course he is entitled to his own opinion. I at times worry how he got there? To my way of thinking, he isn't as involved as he should be in what is going on around him in the world. He has been raised in a time where what happens to Brittany Spears is more important than the HIV -AIDS epidemic in Africa is. He knows how much a presidential candidate spends on a haircut but has no idea what the candidate stands for.

There are of course times when I see and in my opinion the special interest groups go over the top. I don't have any problem with a "God Rock", but can see that it being placed on church property might have been a better idea. I know that had the KKK placed burning cross in the park, I'd find it offensive.

I of course am a product of my time, my environment, my education. All of these have helped shape my values and helped create my "Comfort Zone". Sure at times other peoples ideas do make me uncomfortable, but rarely if ever do I feel threatened.

Eamonn.

[scoutldr]

I thank God that I live in a country where I can hear ALL ideas. Not just the ones that make me comfortable. It's sort of comforting too, to hear all sides. As my office-mate used to tell me..."without them, we'd just be average."

[packsaddle]

"ideas", by themselves, should not be threatening to anyone. In terms of the physical world, there is actually no evidence that they exist outside the minds of people who have them.

 

I think that some people worry about actions others will take as a result of certain ideas. To me the ideal would be a world in which all ideas can be expressed openly, subject to a free market in which ALL ideas can be criticized without fear. And then let Darwinian forces select for the better ones and eliminate those that can't compete. But this ideal is threatened, oddly, by the 'idea' that such a market should not exist, at least not as a free one.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

I'd like to state that I think there are few things MORE threatening than ideas. They can easily outlive people, and often entire civilizations; they can spread quickly, and are hard to suppress because the very attempt to suppress an idea can contribute to its spread; and even if the originator of the idea changes his or her mind, they are usually unable to stop their original idea being propagated by others.