Can progressives media talk like FOX TV,but talk progressive?

26 posts / 0 new
Last post
tayl44's picture

We all see the difference from "mind control media and free media"? We all know most of America is uneducated,progressive media need to adjust! The mind control media play to emotion,free media play to the mind,which win with the mostly uneducated? Progressive media are you too educated/intelligent to play to the emotion of the uneducated??? The life of this planet may depend on it. 


What this planet needs is not

What this planet needs is not for the media to dumb itself down to the lowest common denominator but to figure out a way to bring us back to a point where we can have serious deliberation and critical engagement with political issues.  The type of critical engagement that brought about the revolution or the civil rights movement.  It is absolutely amazing to me that when news was only a few hours at night, the networks managed to cover more material and have more in depth reporting and discussion regarding critical issues, whereas during the current 24-7 news cycle you might see 4 stories in a week and they are reduced to slogans and tag lines.  Pathetic.  Making people more cowed than they already are does us no good.

tayl44's picture
ah2,can you believe there is

ah2,can you believe there is opposite to dumb down? If people can be dumb-down,can progressive use logic to reverse it?  

D_NATURED's picture
Progressives cannot

Progressives cannot communicate the way fox does. I think progressives demand a higher standard for their facts. It's also difficult to boil down nuanced issues into a sound bite. It's easy to articulate emotional blather that way, however.

I think there is a missing

I think there is a missing inbetween area.  What would probably bridge the gap is having a conservative news organization that actually relied on facts and good reporting.  Either that or you are going to have to have progressive news organization actually do some good reporting and open real venues for honest debates about issues.

I don't think you will find that conservatives are going to be willing to listen to logic and real news coming from a liberal viewpoint.  Listening to Fox is so much easier.  You have to have something that truly honors their perspectives but also does good investigative reporting and news reporting.  Otherwise they will just turn it off or turn it Fox and we will never get anywhere.


Good lies frame an emotion or

Good lies frame an emotion or a moralism with "coherence" while the truth tends to be fraught with nuance and subtleties.  To "frame" the truth, one needs to be aware of the rhetoric and picture worth a thousand words aspects of persuasion, but "the simple truth" usually leaves something that matters out.  In the same manner that an ideology can shape reality to fit its narrative needs, but philosophy needs to allow room for that which does not fit neatly and for that which exposes the whole thing as inadequate.  

Liberals have tended to believe in the simple power of reason and truth to convince.  We wonder why Rightwingers who are not rich vote for these bankster class shills.  But, con economics wants us to make rational consumer choices.  The latter is an ideological imperative if their narrative is going to work; and it is why it won't.  For Liberals, however, it means appreciating that the narrative of those who do not love our own provides its own meaning to "issues."  Where we want to convince people "on the issues," they just hear their own side.  If the "big thing" is America moving away from God and "traditional values," abortion is going to mean something other than "a woman's right to choose."  It will be about pissing off God and losing America.

FAUX feeds the narrative with all this crap that makes us wonder how and why anyone can swallow this stuff.  For those in the cult, the "issues" are all about a Liberal/Socialist threat that we neither advocate nor have any idea how to bring to power.  But they see all the signs conspiring as a call to arms.  

I don't think we need an alternate cult voice.  We do need more than the tepid middle or the shock and awe reportage of the geek show on the Right.  We need to appreciate how serious the cult challenge is at the level of emotional and moralistic persuasion as well as the great conservative nostalgia for a lost America.  We need to understand the appeal of the Right, and we need to appreciate why we need to kick the shit out of it rather than just hope it runs out of steam by itself.

This leads me back to the need for an effective narrative presentation with conviction and passion.  If we get over our own nostalgia for a pre-imperial America, we can repent of our own American Century delusions of the Cold War and WWII.  We can understand that Vietnam left the Left with the lessons of history and that the Right just repackaged the American Century in the Southern Cornpone of Cross and Flag with the baptism of Greed and Empire as God's Will.  A familiar story will beat facing the uncomfortable truths almost every time; but it will never bring the healing that we need.  

I see the OWS hook of 99/1 as a very good and pithy message.  We are beginning to appreciate the cost and moral disaster of empire, so real defense cuts could be just over the horizon.  "Bankster" is a word that everyone gets.  But, the decline and fall of empire is hard to sell as what to embrace.  What we need is the rediscovery of what democracy means, what it means to be a "free people" who govern ourselves and who care about the decent opinion of humankind.  We might appreciate why there is no rational or moral case for our present war spending.  We might decide that "exceptional" is both narcissistic and insecure.   

The big problem is that we are for change, not for "reform" of the toxic story because there can be no good ending to empire and messianic delusion.  We need to give up a lot of our favorite myths and flattering lies.  It is hard to sell that until people are ready to come to the revival tent and come forward to receive salvation.

Phaedrus76's picture
Well, placing Thom at the

Well, placing Thom at the extreme end of the spectrum (say he is an 11, which is 1 larger than 10), out on the fact based/ intellectual experiment, and Glenn Beck out on the other end (zero) of emotional stressing, using fear and anxiety to motivate viewers, where would you place Big Eddie, Cenk Uygur, or Stephanie Miller? 

What none of the lefties do is use fear to motivate listeners EXCEPT in cases to promote LGBT issues. About the only thing we can get people moving anymore is to press for gay rights. Otherwise in the last 45 years, the only other two things that have moved the left has been Civil Rights and ending the war in Vietnam. In two cases, we have a group of people who are getting murdered and oppressed for what they are, and in the other 18 yr olds were getting sent halfway around the world to fight to oppress another minority, and the 18 yr olds didn't like that calculus.

Of course, Mittens protested against the anti war movement, and then made sure his pasty white ass had deferments 8 ways to Sunday. Must be nice to be rich.

al3's picture
The one area in which the

The one area in which the left has beaten the right is the social issues.  If you listen to pure social conservatives, they consider themselves as victims of the left's ongoing victories over the last 30 years, ie. Civil Rights, Gay Rights, Immigration, Abortion, etc. etc....they don't even consider the economic part of the equation, where the left has been clearly clobbered over and over again.

That's why Libs/Dems have basically lost the white working class, they feel there's really not much in it for them.  Even today, outside of election rhetoric, there's still not much offered to white working class people.  That's why they cling to their "guns and religion."


Look at what has become of

Look at what has become of the people's airwaves! More and more channels and time given to trivial entertainment, endless infomercials and mind numbing images. We should be proud at how dumbed down the media has made us!

D_NATURED's picture
What is offered to white

What is offered to white working class people by the left is credibility. They won't enjoy it, though, if it means including black people.

That depends upon how White

That depends upon how White they are.  If they can be "European-Americans," and if they don't presume to have a prior birthright to the "newcomers," including black people will be part of the victory narrative of "all of us" against those who split themselves off from the rest and take all the money with them.

If they just wanted to go away and left us in decent shape, they could take a lot of swag.  But they are addicts, and they want it all.  They have lost all sense of proportion and the ability to run a sustainable criminal operation.  They want to steal more than they would were they smart about the way things work.  They want to kill and roast the Golden Goose because the eggs are not enough.

The Left can address the myth of "special interests" to point out that race is about White and Misogyny is about masculinism.  Being real men is not about macho insecurity.  Being real human beings is not about White.  Somebody has to offer this healing and model it.  There is a political advantage to nostalgia and fear of change.  But, that advantage wears out in entropy and when hope is reduced to a few cents raise in the minimum wage we have to appreciate that we have to get our value recalibrated.  There has to be a vision of "Liberty and Justice For All" to rekindle a sense of meaning and purpose to reconnect spirituality to ethics.

Belief in the inevitability of imperial power and force is what sustains it.  Being able to say no to Caesar requires a sense of power and authority elsewhere.  We are taught that our economics are "natural law" and that our imperial politics is "political realism."  They are inevitable, say the flacks. 

I think that NO would be welcome and attractive.  And, it is the movement, not any individual leader, that gives us voice.  Being participants in power is even more fun than rooting for our favorite team to win it all.  Doing what needs doing is a good thing even if the tanks keep on rolling.

tayl44's picture
With all the intelligent

With all the intelligent posts in this thread,it`s very hard to imagine we couldn`t speak progressively to emotional issues. All consevative issues are step behind progressive. The issue of a abortion,all we hear is "baby killers",and having the right to abort. Two emotional issue that need no thinking,what is a emotional issue that would precede these two within the same context? Suicide is the preceding issue, it`s me or the baby,who win?(survival of the fittest) Progressives need to match emotion with emotion, they say baby killers,we say mother killers,which is worse? They say "we cannot spend what we don`t have",we say "we cannot spend what you control,OUR MONEY". We talk to ourselfs on the internet,most of the 99% don`t know the internet,they get the mind control media,we`re totally insane if we don`t communicate with our brothers & sisters in the 99%.They can help or they can "DESTROY"!  Dcr2, can Rush & Beck & etc.. beat truth telling intellectuals in "language speak"? Can the criminals rival tent give "salivation"? Or sell there souls to the "Devil"?         

D_NATURED's picture
tayl44 wrote: With all the

tayl44 wrote:

With all the intelligent posts in this thread,it`s very hard to imagine we couldn`t speak progressively to emotional issues. All consevative issues are step behind progressive. The issue of a abortion,all we hear is "baby killers",and having the right to abort. Two emotional issue that need no thinking,what is a emotional issue that would precede these two within the same context? Suicide is the preceding issue, it`s me or the baby,who win?(survival of the fittest) Progressives need to match emotion with emotion, they say baby killers,we say mother killers,which is worse? They say "we cannot spend what we don`t have",we say "we cannot spend what you control,OUR MONEY". We talk to ourselfs on the internet,most of the 99% don`t know the internet,they get the mind control media,we`re totally insane if we don`t communicate with our brothers & sisters in the 99%.They can help or they can "DESTROY"!  Dcr2, can Rush & Beck & etc.. beat truth telling intellectuals in "language speak"? Can the criminals rival tent give "salivation"? Or sell there souls to the "Devil"?         

That's the thing, Tayl. I don't see the progressives embrace emotionalism to the same degree that conservatives do. It's like we don't trust emotion and they trust nothing else. Fighting THEIR fight is not the answer. When nobody has to make sense, the idots win because we all become idiots.

By the way, I don't hate your idea of reversing their messages to show what their policies mean to us. That is not emotionalism, that is about airing the portions of the whole truth that is ignored by the traditionalists. In so many areas, they rely on partial data to advance their agenda. If we can expose thier deliberate miscarachterizations of the issues, we might have a change to change minds and hearts.

Neo-Conservatism is more

Neo-Conservatism is more belief than allegiance. In that regard it is nigh on impossible to change peoples' beliefs. It takes an epiphany to do that. Neither all the rational argument in the world nor facts and logic will alter a person's beliefs. So why do people cling to Neo-Conservatism the way they do? Fear of change. The Right are peddaling a constant message that Progressivism is the same as Socialism, which they say is the same as Communism, which most people are indoctrinated to equate with dictatorship. Progressives have to find a way to not only counter that message, but to turn the fear campaign of the Conservatives back on itself. In that we have so far, utterly failed. We've not managed to harness the horror of two failed wars that caused tens of thousands of deaths and a global economic meltdown to illustrate the  destructiveness of the Neo-Conservative ideology.

What's the answer? I believe we have to fight fire with fire. If it takes getting down and dirty and playing by the same (lack of) rules that the Conservatives use to stamp out this scourge, then so be it. In doing so, the Right will cry "foul" at every turn as their own tactics are used against them. They will use every perjorative emotive epithet to describe what we do whilst doing the same themselves. We have to do what they do and shrug our shoulders to such claims and say "So what?".

The difference between Conservatives and Progressives (IMO) is that Conservatives have a "born-to-rule" mentality that they think gives them license to condemn others for the same kinds of mis-deeds they themselves engage in. Progressives need to steel their loins and not be cowed by the criticisms of Conservatives.

tayl44's picture
D_ N, progressive aren`t

D_ N, progressive aren`t afraid of emotion,they just don`t use it.The opposition have to use it,you cannot control a free mind.Progressives just have to learn to teach emotional knowledge,if the oppostion can do it,so can we and better. D,i`m not reversing the opposition message,i`m just as you say"they give partial data and in the wrong order",correct the "misinformation" in the right place!(with emotion)           Scott, i agree with most of your post,but don`t agree with a eye for and eye. The opposition realy have no defence,all they have is "divide & conquer". We can attack them straight-up on the issues,they have no defence and use the common bond of "economic justice" for our unity. PS  Mike Molloy have "no problem" with progressive emotional language!

captbebops's picture
Maybe Thom needs a guest spot

Maybe Thom needs a guest spot in a TV series.  I was watching the first episode of the new season of Syfy's "Warehouse 13" and they had Ed Schultz delivering the news report they were watching on TV.



Liberals and Progressives

Liberals and Progressives have always presumed that the America after the Culture War would include the "other side."  I don't get the same feeling from the Right.  We don't come to an accommodation of our differences with them, we only submit or die.  We still want to find a way to an inclusive reconciliation rather than a literal fight to the finish.  We still wish to frame a debate where others who disagree can have some dignity in the rhetorical arena.  We don't begin by calling them thugs and traitors.  We don't begin with racism and sexism.  These have been responses to grave provocations.

This is why the cons try to attack Liberals for attacking back.  How rude and uncivil we have become!  No matter what outrageous crap they have been defending from Rush, if Ed, much less Thom, vents some frustration, he is now the voice of hate who must be punished.

I am not looking for entertainment venting, so Malloy gets old soon with me even if he is correct.  I need to get new material, not just repeat being pissed off by what I already know.  Papantonio brings real knowledge and experience to his passion, but the point is to get more knowledge, not just build the mob anger.  Thom continues to be the best promoter of thinking on the air.

There is a nobility to the desire to be inclusive, even of the Right.  At one level, the only issue that matters is civility and respect.  The Right fails this test in every way.  We cannot even agree to disagree with them and figure out ways to live together in peace.   It hardly matters what the content of our disagreements are if this is true.  Culture Wars are divisive and "total."  Those who wage them are always interested in exterminating what "undermines culture."

The reason Liberals have been "wishy washy" is that we have tried to think in accomodation and compromise rather than our "own agenda."  We have wanted cultural peace more than victory.  I still think it is better to think of peace than conquest; but one must stand up for one's own civil being in the name of civility.  I think it is time to say "we're not going to take it anymore" and stop worrying if the Right goes ballistic about what we say.  Put our passion where our mouths are, but keep the brain connected and I think we might even wake up some Righties to see the error of their ways.  If they can do that, they can figure out what to do about it instead of us trying to tell them how to be themselves.  All we need to do is insist that they treat us like real Americans.  Less than that and we demand an apology loudly and in public.

That would drive them crazy.  Or wake them up to the fact that they already are.  Either way, I am fine with it.

captbebops's picture
Righties tend to subscribe to

Righties tend to subscribe to "one solution."  Liberals are more creative and can see a variety of solutions and we may even argue those amongst ourselves.  ;-)


Why must it liberal or

Why must it liberal or progressive leaning?  The broadcast should be able to stand on the merits of it being fact based and not political or left leaning.  Of course, being fact based, the right will see it as a liberal station.

tayl44's picture
Drc2,i like all the

Drc2,i like all the progressive hosts,Thom is #1 intellectual and Mike Molloy #1 emotional. D , i think you speak for the 99% and make my thread point in saying,"put our passion where our mouthes are,but keep the bain connected". We cannot wake up the people who life depend on ignorance,the only thing that will wake them up is, "another life". The southern confederacy fought to the last to defend the only life they knew,the economic kings will do no less. Lesson learn,this culture war will have to end with "no losers"! An economic system of justice can make "no losers" a reality. D, a very few are beyond crazy(addiction can that) but most of the 1% would love a way out before history take them.The capitalist fought there way in history,we can do no less.( hopefully,we can be more civilize)   

Choco's picture
First of all, we have to

First of all, we have to progressive presidential candidates: Jill Stein from the Green Party and Rocky Anderson from the Justice Party. Both have real progressive platforms while the so called progressive media ignores them and supports the decidely not progressive democrat Obama. I realize Obama is way better than Romney, that's not the issue. Progressives are allowing the far right to lay out the game, to set the goals, to provide the refs to establish the boundaries. When Obama is shot down for trying to eliminate the depletion allowance subsidy for big oil, the progressive talkers roll over and move on as well. They should be pointing out that over 50 percent of every tax dollar is handed over to the military industrial complex and the military's chief role is to provide cover for oil tankers and to invade oil rich nations and protect the oil and gas pipelines from the Caspian. I haven't heard a single progressive talker even do a follow up of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars to see if it was indeed about oil. Of course it was, there are numerous US and British companies operation in both countries under their own and sub company names. No progressive talker has even dared mention the US Azerbaijan chamber of commerce and that the membership is the PNAC boys and a few more global elite cretins.

Progressive talkers accept the Catch 22, that is they think that if they really talk about how bad things really are that they will be shuffled off the airwaves and the public will lose their voice for good. So the talkers should stand together and expose the lies that have led to these wars, they should have demanded that the 2.4 trillion missing from the DOD be accounted for, they should have been talking about oil and gas pipelines in Afghanistan and about the Opium coming into the United States. They should talk about gross conflicts of interest in Wall St. regulating themselves, in the oil and military symbiotic relationship, in the fact that GE paid no taxes yet GE is a military contractor, and most of our tax money goes to the military, it goes on and on and everyone is protecting their own ass while the world burns, and I mean that literally.

Progressive is now a diluted word and means very little anymore. Progressive talkers don't even support progressive candidates because they are AFRAID to. Crap even Jeraldo Rivera and Judge Napalitano on FOX had the guts to talk about how the official story about Building No. 7 doesn't stand up. It's on youtube but nobody really cares. This is the one with the Judge, but Rivera, at least on this subject, shows more courage than our progressive talkers. Truth knows no bounds. The enemy has been emboldened by our silence. What followed 9/11 was millions of violent deaths, skyrocketing oil prices, Wall St Collapse and bail out, Citizens United, fixed elections, complete media takeover, drone strikes, global climate collapse. Those who are protecting their comfy incomes and their status in society are going to rule in a burning hell.

Choco's picture
And further, if 9/11 had of

And further, if 9/11 had of happened on Obama's watch do you think this information and these connections would have been ignored by the reich wing media?

When TH and the other progressive talkers start talking about this stuff then I will be more inclined to pay attention to them again.

The video above connects to PNAC / US Azerbaijan Chamber of Commerce and this, especially this:

If people would just realize that if we had forced our government and media to cover this then the many of the parasites that are killilng this world would have been exposed and eliminated, i.e. put in jail.

Artifex's picture
It's not just about being

It's not just about being able to frame the discussion in a manner appealing to those of different belief/opinion/ideology - it's also about having the ability to carry the discourse, bring it to the point of communication. In that regard I fear progressives are far, far behind supporters of retrograde agendas.  Through decades of calculated effort (See: Thomas Frank and "What's the Matter with Kansas?") conservatives have built a vast array of radio, TV, newspaper, outlets, and a number of well funded partisan 'think tanks' akin to the research facilities and doctors the tobacco industry relied on for years to provide a facade of legitimacy. So talk radio is dominated by the conservative agenda.  The leading TV entrtainment outlet by ratings, viewer numbers and individual shows is Fox.  Key newspapers are under partisan conservative control.  All by design and sustained effort. 

Without the platform the message doesn't matter.  It's like having the most powerful bomb in the world, but no way to deliver it.   In my opinion conservatives effectively control national discourse.  Look how successful they were in branding health care reform as "Obamacare" and attacking a program that helps sick people in need.  Or effectively erasing three decades of trickle down economics failure (plus Bush's billion dollar bailout) and focusing on Obama stimulus?  They got a triple win there - they were able to choke down the stimulus to an ineffective trickle that barely kept the economy afloat, were able to torpedo any chance of recovery during Obama's term in doing so, and still got to beat that old "Spend!Spend!Spend!" horse to death.  Or demonizing teachers?  So this debate about how to engage an ideological mindset used to subsisting on pablum is nice, but other than OWS there has not been an effective platform for engagement on progressive ideals. We need to take over the bullhorn from which to deliver the message before we begin pondering how to make that message effective.    

tayl44's picture
Cho and Art, i agree with

Cho and Art, i agree with most of your posts. The 1% is using every trick in the book to keep power,the progressive want to stay moral. I say the progressive can stay moral and use every trick in the book too!    The most important thing to be done by progressive media is, stepping beyond just reporting the news.They need to lead in reporting "Solutions",the people won`t see any solutions from corrupt media. Progressive media need to talk in emotion to reach the heart of the people and they need to have solid solutions to reach the heart of the people. If the crazy 1% can do it,why not the sane intellectuals can do same?? We don`t have to be racist or sexist or etc. to reach these people,if we cannot do better may we R.I.P.    PS  if people hearts are in the right place,worlds can be move. Progressives is your hearts in the right place?

norske's picture
NemrehBob wrote: Why must it

NemrehBob wrote:

Why must it liberal or progressive leaning?  The broadcast should be able to stand on the merits of it being fact based and not political or left leaning.  Of course, being fact based, the right will see it as a liberal station.

"Reality has a liberal bias" Stephen Colbert

Which is why the corporate owned MSM would never allow such a station to exist....

tayl44's picture
Nor, MSNBC is making

Nor, MSNBC is making corporations money,you see all the ads. commerials?  But they`re a cable,not many get them,but the point is made. Progressive 1% can form there own "PMSM"( P > Progressive) It`s about time to give FOXTV/MSM some "Competition"!