20455: Esser: Re: 20387: (Chamberlain) 20366: Antoine: Thank you to Esser and Chamberlain! (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: D. Esser torx@joimail.com

While I don't feel inclined to dissect your whole post, I am only
taking one of your statements to show that your argumentation is
false. The term corporate media derives from the fact as to how the
media outlets are owned and operated. To quote F.A.I.R. ( Fairness
And Accuracy In Reporting, a media watchdog group):

"Almost all media that reach a large audience in the United States
are owned by for-profit corporations--institutions that by law are
obligated to put the profits of their investors ahead of all other
considerations. The goal of maximizing profits is often in conflict
with the practice of responsible journalism. Not only are most major
media owned by corporations, these companies are becoming larger and
fewer in number as the biggest ones absorb their rivals. This
concentration of ownership tends to reduce the diversity of media
voices and puts great power in the hands of a few companies. As news
outlets fall into the hands of large conglomerates with holdings in
many industries, conflicts of interest inevitably interfere with news
gathering."

This is part of the definition commonly used for the term corporate
media, it has absolutely nothing to do with "nursery-level
understanding" and is not as derisive as your use of language when
you write on "rent-a-radicals", whatever is meant by that. By not
understanding what "corporate media" entails it is rather difficult
to embark on any meaningful discussion on the subject.

The reporting on Haiti has been dismal and not only in the past few
weeks. It doesn't matter if one has set foot into Haiti, just look at
the many AP articles that get even the most basic facts wrong, such
as the basic meaning of Creole words, it matters if the writer has an
inquisitive mind and is able to locate sources. As far as I know
C.L.R. James has not spent a great amount of time in Haiti, yet his
book, "The Black Jacobins" is widely regarded as one of the seminal
writings on the Haitian revolution.

For my part I would prefer journalists that have done their homework
on Haiti to the many self-anointed "experts" that, even so their
command of the Creole Language is obviously not very good, fail to
consult real experts or even just a native speaker when giving their
sermons on Creole semantics. To write from let's say the confines of
an North American office, it is nonetheless possible to interpret
the actions in Haiti. One can not report "spot-news" while not on the
ground in Port-au-Prince, but even then it is entirely possible to
get the picture completely wrong. And there are many fine journalists
writing for mainstream as well as alternative media, that manage to
even break news while working over phone lines and the internet. The
analysis of a political situation is not so much about gathering
anectdotes, but the careful de-construction of _all_ news sources to
arrive at a conclusion.


Chamberlain wrote:
...

The "corporate media" tag is a product of that tired old fantasy that
reporters everywhere have to write exactly what their bosses tell
them. This is nursery-level understanding of a simple public
institution, the media. Other accuse reporters of writing their own
headlines. The rent-a-radicals need to believe this stuff, these
endless conspiracies to keep their beliefs intacts, so they can
continue ...
.