My Photo

December 2022

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

« SCOTUS backs Obamacare (Addended) | Main | Conservatives miss impact of SCOTUS ruling (updated 2jul12) »

29 June 2012


Steven Frisch

Ha...nothing new here, I bet I could come up with dozens of examples of coordinated, well funded, and effective plans to manipulate the media by the Right if I really tried.

Lets just start with this one:

or this one from Frank Lutz on how to "frame" environmental issues so Republicans can appear to be pro-environmental while supporting the industries that destroy environmental assets:

or how about this one, the mother of all memos by conservative interests on how to create the narrative necessary for the promotion of their financial interests:

I coud come up with several more, designed to take everything from Murphy Brown to Jim Hightower down, but what is the point really?

Nothing to see here......

George Rebane

StevenF 711am - I don't think you have yet to find, let alone understand, the subject of the 'Drop Fox' topic. Clue - it is not the generation of policy and position papers by one side to counter the propositions and the propaganda of the other. Happy hunting.

Todd Juvinall

Crafting a message by any person, business or politician is as old as the caveman. Since liberals are from Uranus and conservatives are from earth, it would seem to me their already is bias on both sides for a analysis of a fact. Frisch can't even stay on topic or understand what the post is saying. But that is why he is from Uranus and George is from earth.

I cannot find a conservative out there saying shut down the liberal networks, MSNBC, DailyKos, Media Matters and now the money losing Al Gore Current TV. No it is the left, those nuts from Uranus who want to shut down speech. Conservatives say "give us more speech". So Frisch, rather than making stupid connections I would suggest you get out of Uranus and start proselyting for more free speech, not less.

Russ Steele

Todd in your 11:24 you wrote: "I cannot find a conservative out there saying shut down the liberal networks." Yes, but your can find conservatives competing with them on the air and beating these socks off daily. Just look at CNN, their viewer numbers are at historic lows, same at MSNBC. Rush's number soar with every liberal attack. Conservative numbers are increasing monthly, even Glenn Beck's numbers on the Internet are growing. I think that Media Matters is attacking Fox News just to jack up the attention of their sagging audience.

Ian Random

Steven, everyone is for the environment. I don't think you'd find many people in favor of polluting a river. The difference is that the left will put you out of business for trace amounts, while the right won't.


Frisch, 29 June 2012 at 07:11 AM

I'm not sure what the Luntz paper is supposed to prove, as I can't see anything that isn't moderate and pretty much exactly what you'd expect from any mainstream Republican. The section on global warming was particularly spot on for the time.

Perhaps if Frisch would actually quote a section that supports his characterization that it was "how to "frame" environmental issues so Republicans can appear to be pro-environmental while supporting the industries that destroy environmental assets". Like many, Frisch tends to argue as if Utopia was a realistic option and assume that rationality is code for wanting to despoil the environment.

Why do we allow *any* measurable insect parts in our chocolate bars? Or *any* measurable arsenic in our drinking water? Because such a low bar isn't possible.


George, long before John Henry, there was an explosion of technology between the Roman period and the Renaissance. It was not as dramatic as the steam age, but working fields behind a heavy iron bladed wheeled plow drawn by a horse (enabled by the horse collar) instead of Oxen was a revolution all its own.

My favorite history book (my college required all math, science and engineering majors to take a minor in the humanities, mine was history) was "Medieval Technology and Social Change" by UCLA's Lynn White. The medievalist I took a couple classes from took his doctorate from White, and he described one medieval painting that one of his fellow grad students noticed that fit the concept of the time that to work was to pray, and anything that helped you get more work done was a blessing... The painting was a great mural of a great battle between angels and demons, and the revelation was that the demons were using sharpening stones on their swords, while the angels were using sharpening wheels turned by hand cranks.

George Rebane

Well enough Gregory (843pm), we'll then put the demons down as violating the John Henry Law.


Angels and demons, cogent post, wrong thread...

Sorry... was on the durned smartphone, killing time at a local watering hole, thought I was on the john henry thread. Or was it the double Greyhound or the loud music fogging my brain? No way to tell at this point.

Steven Frisch

The point I am making is that this is sour grapes personified.

First, I have personally crossed two picket lines to see movies in my life, the first Monty Pythons' Life of Brian and the second Martin Scorsese' The Last Temptation of Christ. In one case the Christian Coalition, in another, called for the boycott and picketing the Family Research Council. Only last year the group One Million Mom's called a boycott of JC Penney over the their use of Ellen DeGeneres as a spokesperson because she is gay. The same group called for a boycott of Toys R Us for including a gay character in the Archie comic book series. In 2009 Rush Limbaugh called for a boycott of GM because they took 'bailout' money from the Obama administration. The Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute called for a boycott of Girl Scout cookies because the Girl Scouts support Planned Parenthood. The American Family Association called for a boycott of Old Navy for supporting the "It Gets Better" campaign against anti-gay teen bullying. US Christian Ministries called for a boycott of Starbucks for advertising its tolerance of gay rights and gun control laws. Mike Huckabee called for a boycott of NPR after Juan Williams was fired.

Second, it is ludicrous to critique Media Matters for taking legitimate and constitutionally protected action against a particular media entity when more conservative entities have done exactly the same thing over the years in numerous instances. The Powell memo pretty clearly spells out how conservatives, beginning in the early 1970's, identified that they were losing the 'public relations' fight over the future of America, and went on to build a specific infrastructure to affect American public opinion and media. The memo was picked up by numerous organizations and used as a blue print to construct what David Brock has called the "The Republican Noise Machine". In short, the Powell memo is the Brock strategy, articulated 40 years ago, by the right. And David Brock should know; when he was part of that very same noise machine and writing about the evils of Hilary Clinton he was a darling of the conservative right. Now that he has switched sides and is exposing fallacy on the right he is public enemy number one. The case I am making is that the results of the Powell memo, the building of a conservative media, a network of right wing think tanks using pseudo-science to advance their agenda, and providing a training ground for right wing activists, is no different than what David Brock is doing. It is the height of hypocrisy to object to it on the part of Media Matters, while holding up the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, the Reason Foundation, and Brent Bozells' Media Research Center, which is doing exactly the same thing, as heroes.

And finally, I would ask conservatives here: if they actually support he idea there is something wrong with private sector support for alternative media and criticism? This is protected free speech in our society. The constitution does not limit speech, or the adoption of a strategy to criticize or hold media accountable, on the part of a private party. The constitution protects us from GOVERNMENT intrusion into free speech.

Steven Frisch

Ooops, I transposed 'the Family Research Council', who called for the boycott of the Last Temptation.

George Rebane

StevenF 732am - Thanks for that thorough demonstration of how liberals form analogues. There is nothing in the examples and citations you gave that even comes close in intent and functionality to what Media Matters is doing in their attempt to shut down Fox News. That you equate efforts to START modes of communication and messaging with the opposite efforts to STOP such channels is again most revealing and confirming. It is of a piece to which 'The Liberal Mind' section oF RR is dedicated, and most closely continues such illustrations as

It is such gross differences in the fundamental way that collectivists vs conservatives reason, the logics that they each subscribe to, that makes our co-operative future together doubtful and more unlikely every day. And as has been reported in these pages, the basis for such differences have also been observed clinically in the regions of the brains both sides use when thinking about such topics. We more often than not view each other as somewhat insane.

Todd Juvinall

George, you have shown once again the vacuum a liberal has between their ears. A liberal wants to destroy the competitor of their ideas, conservatives want to encourage more speech.

Regarding "boycotts". The left believes anything goes in life, even pedophilia, and therefore anyone or group that thinks that kind of deviancy is wrong and protests it is somehow bad. (swee ACLU defending them back east).

Having been the target of threats to my life as a conservative official, I can give a first hand account of the vileness of a liberal brain.

Steven Frisch

George, I find it amazing that you never seem to be able to actually answer questions. The strategy of Media Matters is the EXACT same strategy that the Media Research Center is using, with almost exactly the same tactics. Why is it a problem when Media Matters deploys the same tactic? Why do you object to this if it is constitutionally protected free speech? It just goes to show you that your "constitutional" governance position is malarky; it is "the constitution protects my free speech but not your free speech".

Todd, why don't you ever seem to have anything but derivative nonsense to contribute? Did you have an Oxycontin for breakfast?

Todd Juvinall

No StevF, I just enjoy debunking your constant nonsense. I had a nice dose of Twin Cities Church this morning. I find it refreshing to hear about things bigger than some self absorbed narcissistic liberal blather some dish out. Go have another twinkie, that might help you.

George Rebane

The comment thread with Steven Frisch has been made into its own post, and may be continued there.

The comments to this entry are closed.