Anybody can play
"There is nothing wrong with your television set. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling transmission. If we wish to make it louder, we will bring up the volume. If we wish to make it softer, we will tune it to a whisper. We can reduce the focus to a soft blur, or sharpen it to crystal clarity. We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. For the next hour, sit quietly and we will control all that you see and hear."
The classic opening from the Outer Limits comes to mind reading this Washington
Post piece: Islamic Group Urges Muslims to Invest in Media.
Information ministers and officials meeting under the auspices of
the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the
world's largest Islamic body, said Islam faced vilification after the
September 11 attacks, when 19 Arabs killed nearly 3,000 people in U.S.
cities in 2001. ... "Muslim investors must invest in the large media institutions of
the world, which generally make considerable profits, so that they
have the ability to affect their policies via their administrative
boards," OIC chief Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu told the gathering in the
Saudi city of Jeddah.
Muslim tycoons should buy stakes in global media outlets to help
change anti-Muslim attitudes around the world, ministers from Islamic
countries heard at a conference in Saudi Arabia on Wednesday.
Commentary
The Organization of the Islamic Conference may be the first
international body to openly suggest that the key to influencing
American policy is not to open larger embassies or hire more
lobbyists, but to buy up the media. And make money into the
bargain. But wait. What good would it do the OIC? If the media were
the impartial reporters of the truth they declare themselves to be
then OIC chief Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu's suggestions would be an exercise
in futility. Is there not a "firewall" between editorial and
corporate?
posted by wretchardthecat at 9/13/2006 05:25:00 PM
9 Comments:
cedarford
Muslims are seeking to emulate Jewish dominance of the American media markets in order to supplant them.
The content won't change a bit, but at least the new owners won't be accused of being self-hating Holocaust-forgetters.
The problem Islam faces isn't a matter of media image. No matter what the camera angle is, al-Qaeda and Iran are effectively mutilating the face of Islam. If Muslims want Americans to be less suspicious, they could try telling their fellow coreligionists to stop declaring "DEATH TO AMERICA". Just a broad hint.
The fact is, there is greater Muslim outrage against America (which has fought on behalf of Muslims...) and Denmark (whose cartoons were very lame) than there is against India for the atrocities in Gujarat and Tamil Tigers for massacres against Muslims. The net effect is to convey to non-Muslim audiences that Muslims prefer us to be abusive, vicious torturers who might condescend into murder if we are feeling nice. When we are told that no matter how nice we are we are the enemy, and we see that Muslims don't terrorize people who use torture but do terrorize people who are nice to them, the net effect is to increase hostility against Islam.
Adults teach children how to behave through incentive, disincentive, and example. Rather than trying to imitate anti-Jewish fantasies of Jewish conspiracies, Muslims may wish to consider that they are training non-Muslims to be the most evil monsters they can imagine. It is as if the Islamists are trying to resurrect Vlad Tepes...
Cedarford,
Without arguing about who "owns" the media, the question is why such a thing should be on the auction block. And if the confluence between media and money is unavoidable, then news outlets should have a moral stature identical to any other company which can be bought or sold. No higher in moral worth than Taco Bell or Halliburton. That's not to say they are criminal any more than to claim Taco Bell is a conspiracy. But once we admit these transactions can take place and that the OIC or the Jewish lobby can participate in them, then the special and quasi-constitutional position of the modern press is placed in doubt.
It appears that those wielding weapons in Islamic circles don't give a hoot about winning hearts and minds. So it follows that this is clearly the mind of the "average Joe - moderate" Muslim apologist wanting the power of the press to run cover for their more extreme brethren.
Kind of like the MSM here running interference for the sodomists, abortionist, obstructionists, etc, etc.
Anyway, let them invest. I don't know how it could get any worse WRT truth and balance in reporting events.
It has always been obvious to me that the importance of an educated and INFORMED electorate was a prerequisite to maintaining a democratic government. Seems like as our electorate gets more educated, the other factor on the graph - possibly the multiplier - being informed, takes a nosedive.
How important is it in today’s world that we hear the right voice? I think it's possible that the best Rx for most of us would be to take control back from the media giants by getting up out of the recliner and unplugging the set.
No more Outer Limits for you!
alexis wrote:
When we are told that no matter how nice we are we are the enemy, and we see that Muslims don't terrorize people who use torture but do terrorize people who are nice to them, the net effect is to increase hostility against Islam.
But Muslims don't terrorize people who are nice to them. For instance, they let those nice FOX news reporters they detained for Q'u'r'a'n study go free after they converted to Islam. But crusader Bush is a committed Christian so he is the eternal enemy of the Prophet(pbuh).
It is as if the Islamists are trying to resurrect Vlad Tepes...
We saw in the Second Lebanese War that six years of (mostly) peace is anathema to Islamists, they need open warfare to justify their (hopefully short) existence.
I think an underbelly of this is that there is an ongoing drumbeat in the Middle East, especially in Saudi Arabia, where THEIR media is telling them how important OUR media is. To me, this is a subtle effort by Saudi media types to piggyback themselves up onto the shoulders of CNN et al in the eyes of the Saudi royals and citizens.
I, for one, keep telling them that our networks and newspapers are steadily steadily losing viewership, power and authority, but the message doesn't seem to be getting through. I think perhaps Arab journalists don't WANT to believe that American journalists are losing power, just when the Arabs feel like they are starting to GAIN power (i.e., al-Jazeera).
But I agree. Let them buy all our media they want to. They'll still be morally, ethically and financially bankrupt, no matter if it's an American oil tick or an Arab one that owns them. And no one will pay any attention to them in the future, no matter who owns them.
cedarford wrote:
You probably heard that Leftist Air America, existing only as a political counter to conservative talk radio, declared bankruptcy. Actually, they have been bankrupt a while but have been kept afloat not by seekers of profitable, surviving business that makes capitalistic sense - but seekers of political advantage.
Brian Maloney, an expert on Err America if there ever was one, says the bankruptcy announcement was a ploy to depress Air America's value so it will be cheaper for one party to buy all the pieces now and lock out any other bidders. But don't pin too much importance on this one "network", the Left now has a small foothold in the market with other, independent talent. But no matter what they do, they will always be also rans, there's no Left version of Rush out there to blaze new trails.
It is almost humorous. Imagine, if you will, the Arabs buying a major network and discovering how much they depend on sex to sell. Imagine what would happen if we started re-broadcasting the stuff to their home countries. See the riots.
He who lies down with dogs, shall arise with fleas.
Hilariously enough, this is a Reuters story. And Reuters is Arab-owned. Notice how they disclose the arabic stake in Rupert Murdoch's news conglomeration, but don't mention their own in the slightest.
Post a Comment
<< Home