What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Are we purposefully being distracted from the most important issues facing our country? (1 Viewer)

adonis

adonis

Footballguy
Is it accidental, or purposeful, that most of our time spent "discussing" things as a society are spent on trivial, piddling ####?  Stuff that won't matter in a few hours, much less days or weeks?

Is it natural for society to be so ADD that it gobbles up all the shiny objects, consuming all the energy and righteous anger, with little left over to spend on stuff that really matters?

Are there not forces out there that benefit from this paradigm?  Where the big issues go unaddressed, but the little issues that get our attention for even a little while, are amplified?  

Step back and take a look at the vast majority of what's in our national dialogue on a daily/weekly basis, and ask yourself if we're really addressing the issues that matter most, or are we being misdirected, accidentally, intentionally, or both, to be a society that misses the forest for the trees.

What say you?  Are certain groups purposefully distracting us from the important issues, for their own gain...or is this an accidental result of the system we have...or some combination of both, or neither?

 
People like the quick hitting gossipy stuff. Cable news is pretty ratings-driven and a lot of "big issues" tend to be slow moving and technical - not great TV. Climate change is a great example - considering the stakes, it probably should be headline news every day. Even on MSNBC, though, climate stories are ratings killers - Chris Hayes discussed this on twitter a while back

 
I'm not sure if "it" is being done with purpose, however, one thing, in a distorted kind of way, Trump is correct on, is that the media is not, and continues to not discuss what is important to our society. FOX News definitely does not do our society justice, however, CNN and some other news outlets have not done what the media was meant to do. I'm not saying they are "bought and paid for" but the media, as a whole, is not doing the job they are meant to do.

 
Mario Kart said:
I'm not sure if "it" is being done with purpose, however, one thing, in a distorted kind of way, Trump is correct on, is that the media is not, and continues to not discuss what is important to our society. FOX News definitely does not do our society justice, however, CNN and some other news outlets have not done what the media was meant to do. I'm not saying they are "bought and paid for" but the media, as a whole, is not doing the job they are meant to do.
Click to expand...
There are worthwhile news sources. They just aren’t on TV for the most part. 

 
Here it what I believe: 

most things that happen are not purposeful. Conspiracies are extremely rare: the ones that do occur are usually so stupid and bungling that the perpetrators get caught. Most events are caused by luck and chance more than any other factor. The most common attributes known to man are confusion and utter dum####ery. 

 
Mario Kart said:
I'm not sure if "it" is being done with purpose, however, one thing, in a distorted kind of way, Trump is correct on, is that the media is not, and continues to not discuss what is important to our society. FOX News definitely does not do our society justice, however, CNN and some other news outlets have not done what the media was meant to do. I'm not saying they are "bought and paid for" but the media, as a whole, is not doing the job they are meant to do.
Click to expand...
corporate media is bought and paid for

 
adonis said:
Is it accidental, or purposeful, that most of our time spent "discussing" things as a society are spent on trivial, piddling ####?  Stuff that won't matter in a few hours, much less days or weeks?

Is it natural for society to be so ADD that it gobbles up all the shiny objects, consuming all the energy and righteous anger, with little left over to spend on stuff that really matters?

Are there not forces out there that benefit from this paradigm?  Where the big issues go unaddressed, but the little issues that get our attention for even a little while, are amplified?  

Step back and take a look at the vast majority of what's in our national dialogue on a daily/weekly basis, and ask yourself if we're really addressing the issues that matter most, or are we being misdirected, accidentally, intentionally, or both, to be a society that misses the forest for the trees.

What say you?  Are certain groups purposefully distracting us from the important issues, for their own gain...or is this an accidental result of the system we have...or some combination of both, or neither?
Click to expand...
Yes. 

caustic said:
People like the quick hitting gossipy stuff. Cable news is pretty ratings-driven and a lot of "big issues" tend to be slow moving and technical - not great TV. Climate change is a great example - considering the stakes, it probably should be headline news every day. Even on MSNBC, though, climate stories are ratings killers - Chris Hayes discussed this on twitter a while back
Click to expand...
And the bolded may be part of it. There are so many things deemed "news worthy" and much of the consumption is made via 140 characters. We are being fed quantity over quality. 

 
timschochet said:
Here it what I believe: 

most things that happen are not purposeful. Conspiracies are extremely rare: the ones that do occur are usually so stupid and bungling that the perpetrators get caught. Most events are caused by luck and chance more than any other factor. The most common attributes known to man are confusion and utter dum####ery. 
Click to expand...
I view it more as alignment of incentives. Politicians aren't rewarded for longer-term thinking. The media has a hard time covering abstractions. Many voters don't have the luxury of thinking past their immediate needs. Special interests can spend a lot of money to reinforce the status quo bias.

Climate change is the perfect example, IMO. We are gradually rendering our planet uninhabitable. But because it's happening gradually, it's hard to capture the attention of voters or the media. Meanwhile we have a party who, whether motivated by ideological or financial reasons, increasingly comes to not just oppose specific actions to combat CC, but to disbelieve its very existence.

 
We are a nation of 300 million people yet we only have three newspapers of any consequence. One is controlled by Rupert Murdoch. One is owned by Jeff Bezos. And one is controlled by Carlos Slim. Of course we are being led astray from the issues that actually matter.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Murph said:
We are a nation of 300 million people yet we only have three newspapers of any consequence. One is controlled by Rupert Murdoch. One is owned by Jeff Bezos. And one is controlled by Carlos Slim. Of course we are being led astray from the issues that actually matter.
Click to expand...
We have more access to different sources of news than at any time in human history. 

 
Don Henley knew

I make my living off the evening news
Just give me something-something I can use
People love it when you lose,
They love dirty laundry

Well, I coulda been an actor, but I wound up here
I just have to look good, I don't have to be clear
Come and whisper in my ear
Give us dirty laundry

Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em all around

We got the bubble-headed-bleach-blond
Who comes on at five
She can tell you 'bout the plane crash with a gleam in her eye
It's interesting when people die
Give us dirty laundry

Can we film the operation?
Is the head dead yet?
You know, the boys in the newsroom got a running bet
Get the widow on the set!
We need dirty laundry

You don't really need to find out what's going on
You don't really want to know just how far it's gone
Just leave well enough alone
Eat your dirty laundry

Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down

Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're stiff
Kick 'em all around

Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down

Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're stiff
Kick 'em all around

Dirty little secrets
Dirty little lies
We got our dirty little fingers in everybody's pie
We love to cut you down to size
We love dirty laundry

We can do "The Innuendo"
We can dance and sing
When it's said and done we haven't told you a thing
We all know that Kraft is king
Give us dirty laundry!

Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down

Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down

Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down

Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down

Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down

Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down

Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down
Kick 'em when they're up
Kick 'em when they're down

 
To answer OP's question, yes.

The misinformation campaign being conducted by the President, the administration, and the right wing media has created an alternative universe where everything is upside-down.  Trump tweets his daily BS early in the morning and thereby sets the agenda for what is going to be talked about that day in both the mainstream media (trying to disprove the BS factually), members of the administration, and the right wing propaganda machine (rising to defend the BS with dog whistles and whataboutism). 

In the meantime, the systematic dismantling of our federal government is being undertaken by a massive criminal conspiracy designed solely for the benefit of the rich and well-connected.  This conspiracy has no concern for the law or national loyalty, and will sell whatever it can to whomever will pay the highest price (donors, big corporations, Russia, Saudi Arabia).  The conspiracy is making friends with our enemies and ostracizing our allies.  It tramples on the Constitution and basic principles of democracy like voting rights and a free press.  The conspiracy then calls out scapegoats and builds fear as a way of demanding authoritarianism, with a not so subtle hint of fascism, in order to protect the conspiracy from detection, investigation, and prosecution. 

What is happening right now is unprecedented and scary as Hell, but all we are talking about is kids in MAGA hats and "Crazy Bernie".

 
I been barking about this on these boards for most of this decade. Stasis was not planned nor sought out, but quickly recognized as the optimum condition of government for those who wanted to exploit it financially.  It became a flat-out shooting barrel for K St when the GOP announced their job to be blocking everything Obama proposed.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Murph said:
We are a nation of 300 million people yet we only have three newspapers of any consequence. One is controlled by Rupert Murdoch. One is owned by Jeff Bezos. And one is controlled by Carlos Slim. Of course we are being led astray from the issues that actually matter.
Click to expand...
I somewhat agree but we the people have created this reality. We stopped supporting our high quality local papers. We chose TV news over print news. We click on dumb clickbait stories and get wrapped up in gossip. We allowed journalism to be shifted from "controlled by journalists" to "controlled by profiteers". So we want crap and the people who only care about money feed it to us while ignoring stories that won't get views. The caged migrant children and the backdoor attempt to give SA nuclear secrets should be all anyone in the news is even talking about 80% of the time but instead those stories just seem to drift on by since the consumer appetite for them is low. 

Also this is not a new problem in this country by any stretch. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Reminds me of the Ragu/Preggo anecdote from a Gladwell book. Companies used to try to come up with the best tomato sauce. Then they discovered everyone has their own preferences (chunky, smooth, spicy, etc) so they just made lots of different kinds- one kind for every taste. That has happened to the news. Instead of trying to deliver the best most accurate news, it is better to create the news that certain segments of the population want. You want it super liberal? Hardline conservative? With a hint of conspiracy theories? Just celebs or sports? The world is whatever you like. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jonessed said:
And a lot of them are garbage.
Click to expand...
And inversely a lot are very useful and informing. But unfortunately sticking strictly to facts is boring. Sensationalism, bias, and slant is what gets ratings and clicks. People flock to the sources that confirm their views.

 
Ilov80s said:
I somewhat agree but we the people have created this reality. We stopped supporting our high quality local papers. We chose TV news over print news. We click on dumb clickbait stories and get wrapped up in gossip. We allowed journalism to be shifted from "controlled by journalists" to "controlled by profiteers". So we want crap and the people who only care about money feed it to us while ignoring stories that won't get views. The caged migrant children and the backdoor attempt to give SA nuclear secrets should be all anyone in the news is even talking about 80% of the time but instead those stories just seem to drift on by since the consuer appetite for them is low. 

Also this is not a new problem in this country by any stretch. 
Click to expand...
I know precisely when we crossed over - when it became clear that more Americans knew where Monica bout the soiled dress than knew a single policy initiative of the Clinton Administration. OJ and gossip shows/Court TV made us scandalous & Lewinsky swallowed us up.

 
Mr Anonymous said:
And inversely a lot are very useful and informing. But unfortunately sticking strictly to facts is boring. Sensationalism, bias, and slant is what gets ratings and clicks. People flock to the sources that confirm their views.
Click to expand...
Sure but hasn’t this been the complaint forever? Joe Pulitzer and William Hearst had way more power than other publishers because their newspapers were more sensational. They even got us into a war with Spain. 

What should we do? We can’t force anyone to watch what they don’t want to. 

 
wikkidpissah said:
I know precisely when we crossed over - when it became clear that more Americans knew where Monica bout the soiled dress than knew a single policy initiative of the Clinton Administration. OJ and gossip shows/Court TV made us scandalous & Lewinsky swallowed us up.
Click to expand...
Probably right as it also coincided with the rise of 24/7 news stations and a more pronounced shift control of "the news" from journalists to Wall Street investors. 

 
timschochet said:
Sure but hasn’t this been the complaint forever? Joe Pulitzer and William Hearst had way more power than other publishers because their newspapers were more sensational. They even got us into a war with Spain. 

What should we do? We can’t force anyone to watch what they don’t want to. 
Click to expand...
Right, this isn't a new problem. All we can do is not click or watch the trash, encourage others to dump the trash, spend our news $/time on high quality sources and vote for intelligent and dutiful leaders. 

 
purposefully?  I'll say no.

willingly?  yep

No person in their right mind will attempt to defend the nonsense coming out of this administration.  I've never seen anything like it.  It seems in an effort to avoid defending it people look for the dumbest comparisons, whataboutisms, etc of the past to compare and get people focused on how bad those comparisons are instead of how dumb this administration is.  It's either that or they go right to the personal insults.

 
Ilov80s said:
Probably right as it also coincided with the rise of 24/7 news stations and a more pronounced shift control of "the news" from journalists to Wall Street investors. 
Click to expand...
The Communications Act of 1996, which loosened the licensing controls and public service obligations of media entities (as well as str8up giving away control of the celliverse, valued then, a decade before smartphones, @ $700 billion) had a good deal to do with killing the concept of news as a lossleader and public trust.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ilov80s said:
I somewhat agree but we the people have created this reality. We stopped supporting our high quality local papers. We chose TV news over print news. We click on dumb clickbait stories and get wrapped up in gossip. We allowed journalism to be shifted from "controlled by journalists" to "controlled by profiteers". So we want crap and the people who only care about money feed it to us while ignoring stories that won't get views. The caged migrant children and the backdoor attempt to give SA nuclear secrets should be all anyone in the news is even talking about 80% of the time but instead those stories just seem to drift on by since the consumer appetite for them is low. 

Also this is not a new problem in this country by any stretch. 
Click to expand...
Definitely not a new problem but I do believe it's getting worse with media consolidation.

As to whether "we stopped supporting our high quality local papers." I suspect every market probably has a different story. Here in Boston the Globe used to be a high quality newspaper. Then John Henry (owner of the Red Sox) bought it to serve as a mouthpiece for the team's interests and to be a plaything for this trophy wife. People didn't stop buying it because they don't support quality journalism. People stopped buying it because they stopped giving us quality journalism.

 
timschochet said:
Sure but hasn’t this been the complaint forever? Joe Pulitzer and William Hearst had way more power than other publishers because their newspapers were more sensational. They even got us into a war with Spain. 

What should we do? We can’t force anyone to watch what they don’t want to. 
Click to expand...
Yes, I believe has been an issue for far too long. And I wish I knew what could be done about it. On the one hand I wish journalists had integrity hammered down their throats while earning their stripes. On the other hand when FOX News opened an even bigger can of open bias and the ratings followed, how can you stop businesses from following suit and going the route of bigger profit. CNN and other outlets did what any business would do in response. It's a question I don't have an answer for. It likely won't end until the masses stop being so easily persuaded. If that ever even happens. Maybe one day people will realize that both sides of the political spectrum are equally culpable of letting us all down. As long as there is a voracious appetite for "this side is superior, and that side is evil" there's really no end in sight.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
wikkidpissah said:
The Communication Act of 1996, which loosened the licensing controls and public service obligations of media entities (as well as str8up giving control of the celliverse, valued then, a decade before smartphones, @ $700 billion) had a good deal to do with killing the concept of news as a lossleader and public trust.
Click to expand...
Great call. Was that around the same time regulations for pharma ads on TV were gutted and drug companies turned prescription medicine into the next soft drink market?

 
Ilov80s said:
Great call. Was that around the same time regulations for pharma ads on TV were gutted and drug companies turned prescription medicine into the next soft drink market?
Click to expand...
When that happened, 30% of Pharma budgets was research and 10% marketing. Last i saw, Pharma budgets were 30% marketing & 7% research

ETA: Bill Clinton gave far more of the store away trying to prove that Dems could be business-friendly than Reagan did as a matter of policy

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Murph said:
Definitely not a new problem but I do believe it's getting worse with media consolidation.

As to whether "we stopped supporting our high quality local papers." I suspect every market probably has a different story. Here in Boston the Globe used to be a high quality newspaper. Then John Henry (owner of the Red Sox) bought it to serve as a mouthpiece for the team's interests and to be a plaything for this trophy wife. People didn't stop buying it because they don't support quality journalism. People stopped buying it because they stopped giving us quality journalism.
Click to expand...
I think by that time it was already in trouble. Paper employees were taking pay cuts, staff had been reduced, etc. I think the NYTimes was even threatening to shut it down. I know in Detroit it was the 90s where the papers bottomed out with strikes, declining subscriptions, etc. I would assume that was happening everywhere, but maybe not. 

 
Ilov80s said:
I think by that time it was already in trouble. Paper employees were taking pay cuts, staff had been reduced, etc. I think the NYTimes was even threatening to shut it down. I know in Detroit it was the 90s where the papers bottomed out with strikes, declining subscriptions, etc. I would assume that was happening everywhere, but maybe not. 
Click to expand...
You're right. I didn't mean to downplay the paper's financial struggles before Henry bought it. But at that time they were still doing great work. Today they're putting out garbage and it hasn't really helped their bottom line either. In other words, it's not necessarily true that going lowest common denominator/click-bait city equals giving the people what they want.

 
The Jussie Smollett hoax is still on the news almost every night. I would venture to say the 75% if not more of America had no idea who Smollett was before this story. 

 
People love the trashy controversy.  They eat it up and it's not surprising that this is what is provided.  

I think the switch from actual tv to reality tv played a role too.  Execs realized that people cared about nobodies as long as there was drama.

between this and social media out culture truly is doomed

 
Murph said:
You're right. I didn't mean to downplay the paper's financial struggles before Henry bought it. But at that time they were still doing great work. Today they're putting out garbage and it hasn't really helped their bottom line either. In other words, it's not necessarily true that going lowest common denominator/click-bait city equals giving the people what they want.
Click to expand...
I bet they have saved a ton on overhead. 

 
Da Guru said:
The Jussie Smollett hoax is still on the news almost every night. I would venture to say the 75% if not more of America had no idea who Smollett was before this story. 
Click to expand...
Yup - five of my ten "Trends for You" on Twitter are related to an actor I've never heard of from a show I've never watched.

 
Media trust at a new low for Republicans. How to we rebound when the media is more interested in clickbait?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ren hoek
I think voters are worse than nonvoters
Replies
22
Views
997
ren hoek
ren hoek
glvsav37
Where is the Male Image/Role Heading?
2 3
Replies
101
Views
2K
Manster
Manster
timschochet
The chaos theory
Replies
26
Views
870
SeniorVBDStudent
SeniorVBDStudent

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top