We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
AVI gave us a free mini-post in his comment, here:
Journalism at present involves a great deal of believing that you know other people's motives. We are told that OWS has some legitimate complaints. Not because very many of them are actually clearly articulating legitimate complaints, but because journalists can think of reasons that people might be upset that sell better. This is common in the type of anti-American rhetoric we get explained to us: "Well can you blame them? America has done blah, blah, blah..." Those are not, in fact, the reasons why foreigners hate us. They are the reasons liberals hate us. They project this crap onto others all the time, because they really are that narcissistic and tribal.
So helping out OWS is just a natural extension of that. They are "giving voice to the voiceless, to the inarticulate rage of the disenfranchised, who deeply resent the inequitable distribution of wealth that allows people with unapproved attitudes to...oops, I mean, 'that saddles future generations...' no wait, I'm looking for the right words here... 'that finds a way to make a fortune even in hard times...' damn, this is hard..."
Because they see it as Us vs. Them, zero-sum, for cultural hegemony and prestige. That is the subtext.
Hegemony, prestige... and cash, AVI. OPM. That's what they really want.
If those Occupying idiots can spend hours devising 'hand signals' like Twinkles they obviously are not serious grown-ups, but overgrown children... the sort who grow old without ever having grown up. They yearn to be considered a genuine movement like the Tea Party movement, but they equally obviously aren't.
"Those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them."
Thanks. It is indeed a favorite soapbox of mine. Once you see the technique, it pops up everywhere: educational consultants interpreting children's behavior with plausible but unverified explanations; this year's management craze explaining why employees or bosses or customers do what they do, with little evidence. And everyone does it with their political opponents.
Well, I am excepted, of course. But all the rest of you.
Assistant VIllage Idiot
Journalists have betrayed their profession by not representing all Americans vis-a-vis the various levels of power-hungry government.
Too, journalists have become prescriptive rather than descriptive. Instead of giving us information that enables us to make rational decisions in a given context, they tell us what to think.
Most days, I thank the American taxpayers for funding development of the Internet. For all its warts -- and they are considerable -- it's the best thing that's happened to Americans (and everyone else) since WWII.
America has become the nation of disintermediation.
From all that I can tell, a lot of kids claim to go to J-school these days in order to "change the world." That's what they say when asked. In school, they apparently are never disabused of their misplaced "idealism" nor is it put to them that to form an informed citizenry in a democracy, which I keep supposing is one major raison d'etre of journalism in our country, journalists should write so as to present fact untainted by opinion, not opinion disguised as fact.
I thought of this yesterday, promptly forgot it, then remembered it again this morning. Welcome to my world.
I agree with you, but I disagree that this is a new phenomenon. It has been that way for a long time - basically how newspapers worked.
What has changed is competition for the reading audience. In most major cities, you used to have a plethora of news papers and the choices were varied. You had your organizational biases but they balanced each other out - each organization had to be at least honest in their reporting of the facts - how those facts were interpreted was the difference.
That model became unsustainable and eventually papers collapsed, resized, bought outright, consolidated - whatever terms you want to use the print business contracted leaving only those who could financially with stand the onslaught of declining readership. They naturally turned to what they considered their target audience which, in the case of the Boston Globe under Tom Winship, was a biased liberal approach of the North Shore while the Herald was more biased right to appeal to the Southies and other conservative enclaves within the Metro Boston area. Positions hardened and the result is what you now have.