How I learned To Quit Worrying and Love The Propaganda

[Lazerus]

Originally posted by JB88
so, when you decide to refrain from suchfixed that for ya ;-p things and/or making generalizations without presenting a full attack that spells it out, i may just be the first to agree with you where applicable.

it really dont take much.  just a little critical thinking.


88

There was no 'attack' intended. I recognized that your claim of 'independent' was inaccurate based on your overall presentation of your views, and the media that you post here. There is nothing for me to present, you have done that for me.

Granted, you have expressed views that are in the middle of the political spectrum, but you consistantly express and support the political left's presentation of events. Many of which are obviously biased, such as the article I questioned earlier.

Just a little critical thinking would allow you to see the 'editorialism' in the article you posted. With no link I might add.

Don't mean I hate ya or anything, just don't agree that your stated political affiliation is the correct one.

As far as Libertarians and the Iraq war. The party is against it. One of the people most responsible for promoting their ideals and increasing their ranks is adamantly for the Iraq war. There has been a rift through the party because of this.

[Lazerus]

Originally posted by 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.

But back to the subject.

[JB88]

well.  the democrats had zell.

you call that a rift?

ok.

as far as my "continuous" support of the left.  how?  because i agree with afghanistan and dont agree with iraq?

naw.  thats just my gut talking.

that the left feels similar on that count is just that.

i think that the libertarians are going to have to moderate as well before they are going to be even remotely effective btw.

again, my presentation of media is a response to the issues at hand and the way that they are being presented.

where is the voice of moderation from the right?

i have yet to see one of the "conservatives" put one of thier own in check when they start name calling and adjusting for problems in thier ideologies by clinging ever harder to the root of denial.

i really does need to happen for there to be any progressive discussion.  IMHO.

its easy to spout rhetoric, but i have yet to see anyone step down from a pedestal or publically change thier mind on an issue.

the left is equally as guilty, though usually on the defensive.

i have disagreed with both.

[Lazerus]

Originally posted by JB88
well.  the democrats had zell.

you call that a rift?

ok.

Eh??

Not sure what you were aiming for with that one.

[Raider179]

so if all journalists adopted this policy what would we have? There is a reason they arent allowed to accept money from the government without disclosing it. Because regardless of whether it is an agenda they believe in or not they become tools of the government.

Failure to disclose such payments to the public which you report to border on criminal. As i posted in an earlier post to do this in radio or television is illegal. That is why Williams is being investigated.

Williams "subsequently" promoted the agenda in his work. That means after he got paid. He should have never touched the subject after he got the money. Then there would have been no conflict of interest and his integrity would have been intact. There is no problem with freelancing excpet when you hide it and then expouse those views as your own.

[Martlet]

Originally posted by Raider179
so if all journalists adopted this policy what would we have? There is a reason they arent allowed to accept money from the government without disclosing it. Because regardless of whether it is an agenda they believe in or not they become tools of the government.

Failure to disclose such payments to the public which you report to border on criminal. As i posted in an earlier post to do this in radio or television is illegal. That is why Williams is being investigated.

Williams "subsequently" promoted the agenda in his work. That means after he got paid. He should have never touched the subject after he got the money. Then there would have been no conflict of interest and his integrity would have been intact. There is no problem with freelancing excpet when you hide it and then expouse those views as your own.

Why can they accept money from corporations without disclosing it?

[Lazerus]

Originally posted by JB88
as far as my "continuous" support of the left.  how?  because i agree with afghanistan and dont agree with iraq?

naw.  thats just my gut talking.

that the left feels similar on that count is just that.

[/B]

Well 88, it's the presentation that I see, that's all I can go by. The lack of presentation also. Lack of opposition to actions by the coincidental party that you agree with.

Again, I go back to your posting of an accusatory and slanted article in this thread. Simply because it's here and easy to reference.

again, my presentation of media is a response to the issues at hand and the way that they are being presented.

[/B]

Your presentation of anything is nothing but yours. What you present or post is a reflection of you. On a topic such as this at least.

where is the voice of moderation from the right?

[/B]

There is no moderation from the right or left, that's why they are right or left. The voice of moderation comes from the people that seperate themselves from any party and look at the issues and the facts objectively.

the left is equally as guilty, though usually on the defensive.

[/B]

I disagree. The socialist left is just as aggressive as the restrictive right. More so actually. The modern democratic party is the embodiment of socialism. They are very aggressive in everything they do. The ultra-conservatives are actually a minority in their own republican party and cannot afford to push their agenda for fear of alienating moderates. This is beginning to change I think, but the scale is nowhere near that of the democratic party.

Yet.
 [/B][/QUOTE]

[Raider179]

Originally posted by Martlet
Why can they accept money from corporations without disclosing it?

"There is no problem with freelancing excpet when you hide it and then expouse those views as your own."-raider179

I dont agree that they can, it is not illegal unless you violate your contract. . But I believe that most of their contracts are like the one posted above where they must disclose all financial payments from outside sources.

"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)."

Notice it doesnt say government only. It cover everything he would get paid for.

[Lazerus]

Originally posted by Raider179
Williams "subsequently" promoted the agenda in his work. That means after he got paid.

What about before he got paid? Was he a proponent of the idea prior to his contract?

Perhaps, in his research that he performed in the execution of his contract he found that he believed in the concept? Should his first amendment right to free speech be stifled?

Just a couple of "if's", but that's all you had too.

[Martlet]

Originally posted by Raider179
"There is no problem with freelancing excpet when you hide it and then expouse those views as your own."-raider179

I dont agree that they can, it is not illegal unless you violate your contract. . But I believe that most of their contracts are like the one posted above where they must disclose all financial payments from outside sources.

"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)."

Notice it doesnt say government only. It cover everything he would get paid for.

So your only complaint is it wasn't disclosed?

Great.  i agree.  Game over.

[JB88]

lazerus, ill have to get back to you on this, gotta run, but i think that we have more common ground than either of us are presenting here.  lets continue this conversation though shall we?

88

[rpm]

Originally posted by Martlet
So your only complaint is it wasn't disclosed?

Great.  i agree.  Game over.

The game was over 50 - 60 posts ago, you just refused to admit it.

[Raider179]

Originally posted by Martlet
So your only complaint is it wasn't disclosed?

Great.  i agree.  Game over.

No I also think journalists should not be accepting payment from anything they are for/against. Disclosure though would make it not seem so shady.

[Martlet]

Originally posted by Raider179
No I also think journalists should not be accepting payment from anything they are for/against. Disclosure though would make it not seem so shady.

So they shouldn't advertise on their programs?

[Martlet]

Originally posted by rpm
The game was over 50 - 60 posts ago, you just refused to admit it.

I know.  I was hoping you could come up with something, though.

Wishful thinking.