NationStates Jolt Archive

So, my husband and I were watching "The Fifth Estate" the other night. It's a documentary type show, kind of like 60 minutes but only more in-depth about it's subject matter. To most of us who live outside of the United States, this will come I assume as no surprise, but to Americans they might find it quite eye-opening, if of course they have an open mind.

The episode was called "Sticks and Stones" It sums up the way the media in America works these days and why. It also shows how divided the American populace really is. Not to mention the vile that is spouted out by Fox. You can read it, but I suggest watching it, it runs about 42 minutes. If you're on a dial up, I'm not sure how well it will work for you. If you're on high speed you will be fine. All you need is Windows Media Player (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/download/AllDownloads.aspx?displang=en&qstechnology=) or Quick Time (http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/win.html) to view it. The documentary can be found at the top of the page of "Sticks And Stones" just look for Watch the entire documentary online (http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/sticksandstones.html) . It's really worth the time to watch it.

It illustrates quite nicely how "liberal" and "conservative" mean quite different things in the United States than they do in most of the rest of the free world. I really enjoyed it. If you do take the time to watch it, I would enjoy any comments or thoughts you have on the documentary.

Steph.

What? No one has 42 minutes to spare? :D

Is that the one where Bob McKeown catches Ann Coulter out on some BS about Vietnam?

Is that the one where Bob McKeown catches Ann Coulter out on some BS about Vietnam?

Hehe, yeah. Then she goes on Fox and tried to save face by saying 10,000 Canadians crossed over to the United States to go to 'Nam. She obviously didn't understand the difference between Canada sending troops and free men deciding to go on their own. Same as there are Canadian troops in Iraq, but the Canadian government didn't send them. She did make quite the fool of herself. I enjoyed it a lot! *LOL*

What? No one has 42 minutes to spare? :D

No. Next question.




:p

Just watched it, nothing I didn't know.

What's great, however, is the clip of Coulter and O'Reilly getting defensive about it. Remember, kids, Canadians are nazis.

Just watched it, nothing I didn't know.

What's great, however, is the clip of Coulter and O'Reilly getting defensive about it. Remember, kids, Canadians are nazis.

Really? And here I thought we were pinko commie's..lol :p

No. Next question.




:p

Gee, and you use to be such fun! :D :cool:

I watched that entire video and found it shocking. Coulter, Mardsen, Franken and O'Reilly... they're really bastards. They think that their political opponents are the true enemy - Coulter is especially bad in this regard.

Perhaps I expected too much? The average NS Generalite doesn't have the attention span to watch a 42 minute documentary? LOL (just kidding) :D

I will comment in 42 min

Perhaps I expected too much? The average NS Generalite doesn't have the attention span to watch a 42 minute documentary? LOL (just kidding) :D


I'll watch it when I get home from work if I have time. :)

I watched that entire video and found it shocking. Coulter, Mardsen, Franken and O'Reilly... they're really bastards. They think that their political opponents are the true enemy - Coulter is especially bad in this regard.

Coulter is insane. Now, I haven't read her book, but I did notice a chapter entitled "A Muslim by any other name blows up the same" or something along those lines. Bleh.


Anyways, Steph - I'll watch the vid later, heading out of work right now.

Great! It really is worth the watch. Zep and I had a really long discussion about it afterwards. Anything that sparks conversation and discussion is never a bad thing. :)

I will watch it, though I don't know when I'll have time. Consider this thread tagged.
Having said that, this could play merry hell with our broadband download limit. Meh, I'll watch it anyway.

Well, I hope all these people who claim they'll watch it do just that. Maybe some of what we up north have known for a long time will finally sink in (though I wouldn't bet the farm on it).

So lets get discussion going. Why do you think American politics/society is more polarised than at any time since the 1880s?

I blame Bush. ;)


*alright to be honest I have no answers right now*

I've never seen O'riely or coultier before. LOONS

I blame the increasing evolution of politics to comprise of a greater range of opinions and people than ever before. This coupled with America's rise to become the only Global Superpower has given a need to converge and compromise on certain issues, as America need sto respond more quickly and more Strongly on the global scene.

I've never seen O'riely or coultier before. LOONS

GOONS, Gataway, GOONS.

I blame the 2000 election debacle.

I agree, in part. Dont you think that was also a symptom of the growing polarisatrion and underhandedness of politics (And not just in the US) today?

GOONS, Gataway, GOONS.

meh either way

On that note (Not the one about GOONS) I think British politics has actually become less polarised in recent years. General displeasement with Labour and the Conservatives has lead to a lot of people becoming liberal democrats.

Then, in turn, they have become frustrated with The LD's lack of direction and readiness to become a ruling party. So they have defected to parties like Respect. Its all getting a bit messy.

But, like the rise of the SDP in the 1980's, this might all prove to be temporary, but we shall see.

Coultier "Canada sent troops to vietnam"

I'm stunned

I don't see this as stunning. Those outside the 'States have seen this sort of partisianist sensationalism and spin going on in your media for a long time, and in fact tried to tell you on many occasions.

Of course, I don't see how this was in any way helping the problem either. The "liberals" were always going to be all too happy to point the fingers at the "conservatives" at making all the wrong moves, while the "conservatives" were always going to see this production as part of the "liberal" bias. Even while I generally support what is seen as a "liberal" slant, it's pretty obvious that the show's producers did have a similar viewpoint of their own.

I direct blame squarely on a two-party system of government. Such a split in the media was inevitably going to be the outcome of making two parties directly compete against each other in politics. But, then again, what do I know? I'm a Brit.

I don't see this as stunning. Those outside the 'States have seen this sort of partisianist sensationalism and spin going on in your media for a long time, and in fact tried to tell you on many occasions.

Of course, I don't see how this was in any way helping the problem either. The "liberals" were always going to be all too happy to point the fingers at the "conservatives" at making all the wrong moves, while the "conservatives" were always going to see this production as part of the "liberal" bias. Even while I generally support what is seen as a "liberal" slant, it's pretty obvious that the show's producers did have a similar viewpoint of their own.

I direct blame squarely on a two-party system of government. Such a split in the media was inevitably going to be the outcome of making two parties directly compete against each other in politics. But, then again, what do I know? I'm a Brit.

I'm a brit, i'm stunned that people can get away with this sort of thing

I don't see this as stunning. Those outside the 'States have seen this sort of partisianist sensationalism and spin going on in your media for a long time, and in fact tried to tell you on many occasions.

Of course, I don't see how this was in any way helping the problem either. The "liberals" were always going to be all too happy to point the fingers at the "conservatives" at making all the wrong moves, while the "conservatives" were always going to see this production as part of the "liberal" bias. Even while I generally support what is seen as a "liberal" slant, it's pretty obvious that the show's producers did have a similar viewpoint of their own.

I direct blame squarely on a two-party system of government. Such a split in the media was inevitably going to be the outcome of making two parties directly compete against each other in politics. But, then again, what do I know? I'm a Brit.

I blame Marilyn Manson.;)

Seriously, though, I don't think it is the two-party system that is to blame, if for no other reason than the fact that we've had a two-party system for well over 200 years now, and most of that time has not been as acrimonious as now (there have been times when it was more so; Reconstruction comes to mind, for instance).

If I had to guess what the main culprit is, I'd suggest that its the growing corporatization of the news. Because news has increasingly been just another product produced by corporate conglomerates, two things have happened, each of which plays into the other. On the one hand, news has grown increasingly trivial, sensationalized, and celebrity-focused, because the emphasis is now on making news profitable rather than informative.

On the other, because politics has been deemphasized except for those parts which reinforce corporate values (competition, groupthink, doublethink, party/brand loyalty), people in turn emphasize those traits in politics more and more. Conservatives grow more shrill because they have convinced their side that they are the last bastion of defense against a liberal media that is out to destroy all that was good in America, while liberals get more shrill because its the only way to actually have anything that isn't rubber-stamped by corporations said out loud (as an example, when was the last time you ever heard anyone, even on the liberal CNN, criticize NAFTA? Oh, that's right, never).

So lets get discussion going. Why do you think American politics/society is more polarised than at any time since the 1880s?

I blame Bush. ;)
Of course you do, as you would for everything up to and including your grandfather's psoriasis, your grandmother's piles, and your aunt's incipient schizophrenia! :D

Of course you do, as you would for everything up to and including your grandfather's psoriasis, your grandmother's piles, and your aunt's incipient schizophrenia! :D

So what then is the cause of the polarization in US political thinking.

I put it down to the very simple fact that there is no agreed external enemy any more. For a long time the US could have a two party system without ripping its opinionated society apart as there were always the Brits or the Commies to unify the US population in their disdain or hatred or whatever.

There has been an attempt to do this with the Muslim world, but it simply has not stuck. The freedom of religion that is one of the foundations of American society prevents the unified identification of a religious group as the enemy. The muslim world is not threatening the financial wellbeing of the average american in the same way that the Brits and the Commies implicitly did.

So there is no common enemy to unify the people, resulting in a long overdue round of internal accusations and recriminations. The USA is too big to be unified easily on any subject and the average American (not all of them) is to self assured (arrogant if you prefer) to admit to being wrong on anything. Resulting in the inevitable internal conflict.

I've never seen O'riely or coultier before. LOONS

Agreed. It is worrying that people like that are in positions to have such influence. Even more worrying that people seem to believe that it's all true... :eek:

Think I'll stick with the bbc and times for news. You seem to have it bad in America :(

Some really good responses, thank you. I'm off to bed right now, but I'll revisit this post tomorrow and give you some of my thoughts. :)

Steph.

I blame the 2000 election debacle.
It predates that--I'd take it back to a couple of factors. One is the removal of the fairness doctrine and the second is the subsequent rise of loudmouths like Limbaugh and his ilk. Listen to Limbaugh for five minutes on any given day and you hear liberals treated as if they're demonspawn--and that's if Limbaugh is off his game. And Limbaugh is tame compared to some of those people out there--Savage, Liddy, Hannity. Factor in the scorched earth politics of Newt Gingrich and his successor, Tom DeLay, and watch it build like a forest fire.

And the liberals' part in this was that they didn't fight back quickly enough, they didn't realize what was happening until it was nearly too late, and the battle lines had been drawn. Well they're drawn now.

The American media is a disgraceful display of lies, and deciet.

These companies like CNN, and especially Fox, make the pretense of being journalists, pretending to be impartial distributors of truth, and world events.
This was a profession of integrity, and even honor once, but people like Rupert Murdoch and Ann Coulter have turned it into a jaded attempt to manipulate the american political system.

How do they do this?

They tell you first how impartial they are, and how "Fair and Balanced" their shows are.
Then they tell you to believe what they tell you, even if what they are saying to you...are blatant misrepresentations of the truth.

This way...they ultimately influence the way you think..and ultimately..the way you vote.

Murrows is spinning in his grave, I assure you.

Agreed. It is worrying that people like that are in positions to have such influence. Even more worrying that people seem to believe that it's all true... :eek:

Think I'll stick with the bbc and times for news. You seem to have it bad in America :(

I mean if one of our interviewers "debated" like O'Riely did against that guy who lost a father in 9/11 he would be disgraced and probably never work in TV again.

I've just finished watching it.

Now, I wouldn't describe that as unbiased eitehr. it clearly was, but the points and underlying truths it had were correct still. As a non American, I am constantly horrified by the bias and divisiveness of the news networks over there, and this merely confirms my views, as even the CBC seems to have taken the absolutist view of politics the people the call their opponenets have! It is no good on either side.

I've just finished watching it.

Now, I wouldn't describe that as unbiased eitehr. it clearly was, but the points and underlying truths it had were correct still. As a non American, I am constantly horrified by the bias and divisiveness of the news networks over there, and this merely confirms my views, as even the CBC seems to have taken the absolutist view of politics the people the call their opponenets have! It is no good on either side.

I'm not sure that is a fair statement. The CBC gave equal time to both sides. I'd even go as far as to say it gave more time to the right wing media. This also seems to be one of the problems with the populace as I see it. If you call someone on a factual error, such as he did with Annie.. then some how he is biased. No, it's not biased, it's accurate.

Listen, life is stranger than fiction, no movie producer could make this stuff up... *LOL*

Didn't see anything I've not seen before... Same old shit: O'Reilly and Coulter are still asses, and FOX News is an attack machine for the right.

saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaafe.