How I learned To Quit Worrying and Love The Propaganda

[Martlet]

Originally posted by Raider179
sorry but that is all propaghanda. And not all propaghanda is bad.

Yes.

Webster is a retard.

Raider is right.

[Holden McGroin]

So you don't see the difference between saying "Join the Army" and "The enemy is evil, he must be killed."

It is clear to me that the first tells of the need for recruits saying nothing about the percieved enemy of the state, (actually working well in peacetime too) while the second shows the state's enemy as monsters which need to be killed.

[Raider179]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
So you don't see the difference between saying "Join the Army" and "The enemy is evil, he must be killed."

It is clear to me that the first tells of the need for recruits saying nothing about the percieved enemy of the state, (actually working well in peacetime too) while the second shows the state's enemy as monsters which need to be killed.

Yes there is a difference but they are also very much alike. Both are used to spur Patriotism and Nationalism. Hence propaghanda.

They are not trying to sell a product or business unless you believe the military is one of those. Which I do not but can see why some would think it.

[Holden McGroin]

Wanted:

Research assistant in stress analysis laboratory.

Must be able to type 80 wpm, know MSExcel and MSWord, and be able to work long hours alone with lonley nerd.  Big tits a must.  

I want you for the US Army

Both are help wanted advertisements.

[TweetyBird]

This is like watching a runstang auger into a mountain rather than be shot down. Give it up Martlet, game, set, match. Or eat the mountain...

[Raider179]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Both are help wanted advertisements.

Holden I see your point but one is private sector and one is federal government. That to me makes the difference. Now a text ad like that I might give as being an ad over being propaghanda because it does not try to promote anything other than the army. But that is a part of the government so it should still be considered a lower form of propaghanda. But I see your point and well said I might add.

What is your take on gallagher?

[Martlet]

Originally posted by TweetyBird
This is like watching a runstang auger into a mountain rather than be shot down. Give it up Martlet, game, set, match. Or eat the mountain...

Hey!  The peanut gallery is back.

I love moonbats.  You destroy their argument, then they stick around to cheer on whoever picks up the ball.

Nice pom poms, tweety.

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Raider179
What is your take on gallagher?

He's funny, but seen it.

[rpm]

Originally posted by Martlet
If you're going to quote something, link it.  The last time I finally got you to link what you were quoting it turns out you weren't spinning, and the document proved my point.

Let's go for two.

Linky just for Martlet

The full text of the TMS statement:

"Tribune Media Services (TMS) today informed Armstrong Williams that it is terminating its business relationship with him effective immediately. After several conversations with Mr. Williams today in which he acknowledged receipt of $240,000 from the U.S. Department of Education (DOE), TMS exercised its option to discontinue distribution of his weekly newspaper column.

"The fact that Mr. Williams failed to notify TMS of his receipt (through the Ketchum public relations agency) of payments from the DOE is a violation of provisions in his syndication agreement with TMS. The agreement requires him to notify TMS when 'a possible or potential conflict of interest arises due to the subject matter of (his columns) and the social, professional, financial, or business relations of (Mr. Williams).'

"We accept Mr. Williams' explanation that these payments by Ketchum on behalf of DOE were for advertising messages broadcast on his radio and TV shows. Nevertheless, accepting compensation in any form from an entity that serves as a subject of his weekly newspaper columns creates, at the very least, the appearance of a conflict of interest. Under these circumstances, readers may well ask themselves if the views expressed in his columns are his own, or whether they have been purchased by a third party."

From Webster's:

Main Entry: pro·pa·gan·da
Pronunciation: "prä-p&-'gan-d&, "prO-
Function: noun
1 capitalized : a congregation of the Roman curia having jurisdiction over missionary territories and related institutions
2 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
3 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect

Main Entry: pay·o·la
Pronunciation: pA-'O-l&
Function: noun
Etymology: 1pay + -ola (as in Pianola, trademark for a player piano)
1 : undercover or indirect payment for a commercial favor

Both of these were posted earlier, face it Martlet... You have been owned, in the proper sense. Learn to deal with it and get off the Tilt-A-Whirl. Even President Bush has admitted it publicly. Stop embarrassing yourself. You are just proving to be the minion that we already knew you were.

[Raider179]

"The fact that Mr. Williams failed to notify TMS of his receipt (through the Ketchum public relations agency) of payments from the DOE is a violation of provisions in his syndication agreement with TMS. The agreement requires him to notify TMS when 'a possible or potential conflict of interest arises due to the subject matter of (his columns) and the social, professional, financial, or business relations of (Mr. Williams)."

Oh Snap. LoL It was even in his contract to not do this kind of behavior. RPM hats off

[JB88]

[Lazerus]

Correct me if I'm wrong here. A government agency hired a private citizen to compose written material to explain their position on an issue so that it could be published and distributed to the general public.

This private citizen has extensive experience on the subject of the governmental agency's position.

This private citizen is employed by a journalistic institution.

No compensation was given to the private citizen by the government agency to compensate them for promoting any government program in their writings published by said journalistic institution.

Sounds like freelancing to me.

The question I have is: Is it illegal for a governmental agency to hire a private sector contractor to promote a proposed bill, program, idea or ideology.

[JB88]

1/27/2005
Third Columnist paid by Bush Administration


According to a report on Salon.com , another columnist has been paid to promote Bush administration initiatives. Salon claims that the Department of Health and Human Services paid conservative columnist Mark McManus $10,000 to back the Bush marriage agenda. The full registration-restricted article can be found here.

        One day after President Bush ordered his Cabinet secretaries to stop hiring commentators to help promote administration initiatives, and one day after the second high-profile conservative pundit was found to be on the federal payroll, a third embarrassing hire has emerged. Salon has confirmed that Michael McManus, a marriage advocate whose syndicated column, “Ethics & Religion,” appears in 50

        newspapers, was hired as a subcontractor by the Department of Health and Human Services to foster a Bush-approved marriage initiative. McManus championed the plan in his columns without disclosing to readers he was being paid to help it succeed.

        Responding to the latest revelation, Dr. Wade Horn, assistant secretary for children and families at HHS, announced Thursday that HHS would institute a new policy that forbids the agency from hiring any outside expert or consultant who has any working affiliation with the media. “I needed to draw this bright line,” Horn tells Salon. “The policy is being implemented and we’re moving forward.”

[Lazerus]

was hired as a subcontractor by the Department of Health and Human Services to foster a Bush-approved marriage initiative

[/B]

What does "foster" mean in this article. What was he specifically hired to do.

McManus championed the plan in his columns without disclosing to readers he was being paid to help it succeed.

[/B]

First of all, he is an editorialist, not a newscaster.

Second of all, was he fostering the idea, or working to get it passed into law, ie. helping it succeed.

I think if you remove party affiliation from the discussion and concentrate on what is being reported, how it is being reported, and what actually happened the subject would become much clearer .

Links to the quoted (and slanted) articles would also help.


JB88, I hate to tell you this, but you are not a Libertarian. You are a liberal.

Balance your posts with attacks on other parties and present information even handedly and I'll gladly agree with you. A little lip service to your party affiliation doesn't go very far. The theme of your posts carries much more weight.

Just my opinion, not that it matters.

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by rpm
Nash, he's a multimillionare. You don't have to understand his jibberish.

ok, that was funny *golf clap*