Re: [blind-democracy] Re: Media Downplay Class Warfare as 'GOP Victory'

Exactly right. Long ago I stopped paying so much attention to the
wrongness of the Mass Media, and turned more and more to those sources
who made sense to me. After all, I do have to have a baseline from
which to determine what makes sense and what does not. Certainly my
course of action has drawbacks, but I feel better.

Carl Jarvis


On 12/11/17, Roger Loran Bailey <rogerbailey81@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Leon Trotsky once spoke on the question of bias in the news. Actually,
> he was responding to some accusations about his own biases. He said that
> if he was a celestial object looking down on the Earth then perhaps he
> could observe human affairs dispassionately and make no judgements.
> However, he was not a celestial object. He was a human being involved in
> human affairs with, not only his own personal interests, but with class
> interests and so, of course he was biased. But it was not only Trotsky
> who was biased. Any source of information that involves humans is going
> to be biased. There is no way of avoiding it. If you hear claims of
> neutrality from any news source you can be pretty sure that it is a
> false claim. Instead, look for the biases. Consider the source and
> consider the interests of the source. If the source is a profit making
> institution and operates in a system that causes it to be dependent upon
> the profit system then that should be a very big clue to what kind of
> biases it will have right there. Instead of trying to find unbiased
> sources try to be aware of what kind of biases you want your sources to
> have and seek out those sources.
> On 12/11/2017 11:27 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
>> First, there has never been a neutral media in these United States of
>> America. What we consider "The Media" is owned by large corporations,
>> and funded by advertisements from other corporations. No matter how
>> bland the "news" seems to be,, we must keep in mind that the Media is
>> the vehicle that Corporate America uses to "push" their wares upon the
>> rest of America. Whether the Corporate Media Captains admit it, or
>> even understand it, they instinctively protect their "Golden Goose".
>> And the Corporate Media has the center stage, pushing aside such news
>> sources as Democracy Now, to the background. The Corporate Media not
>> only refuses to deal with many central issues affecting the well being
>> of the American working class, but it trashes the efforts of
>> alternative news sources.
>> So we have all been "educated" by a biased Corporate Media, and even
>> defend it as being Fair, or Even Handed. NPR has moved further and
>> further to the Right of Center in its efforts to "Be Fair", in an
>> effort to satisfy their growing need for Corporate Support. Our very
>> public education is shaped by our corporate masters. Our children are
>> being "steered" toward preparing for the jobs required by the American
>> Corporate Empire(ACE). Such jobs as military service, munition
>> factory workers, manufactures of military hardware, law, business and
>> political training lead the way. Social sciences, Human resources,
>> nursing and even doctors are far less important to the Empire's needs.
>> Those Social services can be purchased from anywhere, if you have
>> enough money. And our Ruling Oligarchy certainly has plenty...even
>> though they keep raking in more of our working class wealth.
>> What our Neutral Corporate Media is not addressing is the fact that
>> the American Corporate Empire is headed into rough waters and that it
>> will take all we Americans can produce in order for the ACE to come
>> out on top. Even if it must sacrifice the American People, and our
>> Way of Life. The ACE will go as far as it needs in order to win,
>> because the bottom line is Profit, not People. Not even national
>> boundaries. The Corporate Media is missing the story of the century,
>> the end of American Sovereignty, and the rise of the Mega Corporate
>> States. Unless we manage to blow ourselves to Kingdom Come, this will
>> be an entirely different World, a World of mass enslavement, dominated
>> by huge conglomerates. Cold, unfeeling Masters who will make anything
>> we ever thought we knew about "Total People Control" look amateurish.
>> And mark my words, the outcome of the Alabama senatorial race will be
>> a major sign as to which direction Americans will take. Who will
>> control our lives? We, the People? Or, They, the Corporate
>> Conglomerates?
>>
>> Carl Jarvis
>>
>> On 12/10/17, > Media Downplay Class Warfare as 'GOP Victory'
>>> By Ben Norton, FAIR
>>> 10 December 17
>>>
>>> The fallacy of "neutral," "both sides" journalism rings loud and clear
>>> in
>>> corporate media reporting on the Republican Party's tax plan. The GOP
>>> bill,
>>> passed by the Senate in the early hours of December 2 and described by
>>> major
>>> media outlets as a "tax cut," is in reality an explicit handout to large
>>> companies and the ultra-rich that will actually increase taxes on
>>> working-class Americans.
>>>
>>> But under the cover of a shallow understanding of "balance," corporate
>>> media
>>> have internalized the outlandish idea that it is "partisan," and thus
>>> not
>>> "neutral," to acknowledge the undeniably destructive effects of
>>> particular
>>> political policies. These inconvenient facts are hence not emphasized in
>>> news reporting, and cannot be presented alone without being "balanced"
>>> with
>>> an opposing perspective-even if that contrary view is demonstrably
>>> false.
>>>
>>> In the case of the GOP legislation, which will slash the corporate tax
>>> rate
>>> and add some $1.4 trillion to the national debt, the deception took a
>>> variety of forms.
>>>
>>> The primary distortion, as noted, was portraying the Senate GOP bill as
>>> a
>>> massive "tax break." Headlines and reports spoke of "tax cuts" and "tax
>>> breaks" vaguely, without indicating that the breaks were not for
>>> Americans
>>> as a whole, but rather for corporations and the rich.
>>> .Reuters (12/2/17): "Senate Approves Major Tax Cuts in Victory for
>>> Trump"
>>> .New York Times (12/2/17): "Few Hurdles Left, GOP Is Confident Tax Cuts
>>> Will
>>> Be Signed This Month"
>>> .USA Today (12/2/17): "Senate Passes Huge Tax Cuts After Last-Minute
>>> Changes; Conference With House Next"
>>>
>>> By way of contrast, HuffPost (12/2/17) provided an apt corrective to the
>>> vagueness: "Senate Passes Massive Tax Cuts for the Rich in Middle of the
>>> Night." While The Atlantic (12/2/17) had a euphemistic main
>>> headline-"Senate
>>> Republicans Pass Their Tax Cuts"-the subhead clarified: "The bill
>>> slashes
>>> corporate tax rates, but millions of middle-class families could face
>>> tax
>>> increases under the $1.47 trillion bill."
>>>
>>> The Intercept (12/1/17) stressed further, "The GOP Plan Is the Biggest
>>> Tax
>>> Increase in American History, by Far." After noting that the bill
>>> includes
>>> some $6 trillion in tax reductions, largely for corporations and
>>> households
>>> with annual incomes above $400,000 (i.e. the 1 Percent), reporter Ryan
>>> Grim
>>> pointed out:
>>>
>>> [The bill] gets referred to as only a $1.5 trillion cut because it
>>> raises
>>> $4.5 trillion in taxes elsewhere. But the key question is who gets a tax
>>> hike and who gets a tax cut. Put simply, the bulk of the tax cut is
>>> going
>>> toward the rich, while the tax increases go to everybody else.
>>>
>>> The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a nonpartisan think tank,
>>> reported that, "The lowest-earning three-fifths of Americans would pay
>>> more
>>> on average in federal taxes, while the top 40 percent on average would
>>> receive a tax cut," with the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans receiving
>>> an
>>> average cut of more than $9,000.
>>>
>>> The Institute added, "The legislation is described as tax reform but
>>> would
>>> cut hundreds of billions of dollars in healthcare spending." The AARP
>>> similarly warned that the Senate GOP bill would trigger up to $25
>>> billion
>>> in
>>> cuts to Medicare.
>>>
>>> It would also add at least $1 trillion to the US federal deficit,
>>> according
>>> to Congress' own Joint Committee on Taxation. The nonpartisan Penn
>>> Wharton
>>> Budget Model estimate is even higher, at an additional $1.4 trillion in
>>> government debt. This will no doubt be used to justify massive cuts in
>>> social spending, including Social Security and Medicare, which leading
>>> Republicans like House Speaker Paul Ryan and Sen. Marco Rubio are
>>> already
>>> promising to go after.
>>>
>>> In other words, the Republican tax-deal-for-the-1-percent is nothing
>>> short
>>> of class war: The working class will lose even more of the little wealth
>>> that it has, and the capitalist class will reap all the benefits. The
>>> legislation even includes a tax break for owners of private jets, along
>>> with
>>> banks and oil companies.
>>>
>>> Many reports did highlight some of these deleterious impacts of the tax
>>> plan
>>> in the body of the story, but they buried the lead. And the majority of
>>> Americans do not read past the headline.
>>>
>>> Depicting a Working-Class Disaster as a 'Victory'
>>>
>>> Another way corporate media whitewashed the undeniably destructive
>>> effects
>>> of the Republican tax plan is by portraying it primarily as a "victory"
>>> for
>>> Trump and the GOP:
>>> .Washington Post (12/2/17): "Senate GOP Tax Bill Passes in Major Victory
>>> for
>>> Trump, Republicans"
>>> .BBC (12/2/17): "Tax Bill: Trump Victory as Senate Backs Tax Overhaul"
>>> .AOL (12/2/17): "Trump Wins First Major Legislative Victory of
>>> Presidency
>>> as
>>> Senate Passes Republicans' Tax Reform Bill"
>>> .Guardian (12/4/17): "Markets Rally After Trump's Tax Victory"
>>>
>>> It's striking how little this presentation-from "mainstream" media,
>>> supposedly critical of Trump-diverged from that of right-wing outlets
>>> that
>>> openly support Trump and the GOP, such as Fox News ("Trump Takes Victory
>>> Lap
>>> After Senate Passes Tax Bill, Calls It 'Largest Tax Decrease.by Far,'"
>>> 12/2/17).
>>>
>>> The contradiction was highlighted in a SFGate report (12/2/17) with a
>>> headline focused on political gamesmanship-"Senate Narrowly Passes GOP
>>> Tax
>>> Overhaul Bill in Major Victory for Trump"-but a lead that acknowledged
>>> the
>>> losses for regular people:
>>>
>>> Securing a desperately sought legislative victory for the Trump
>>> presidency,
>>> the Senate approved a $1.5 trillion tax overhaul Saturday morning that
>>> provides massive tax cuts to large corporations and wealthy individuals
>>> but
>>> could lead to higher tax bills for millions of Californians.
>>>
>>> So why not headline the bill's impact on the vast majority of people?
>>> Why
>>> showcase the Trump victory angle?
>>>
>>> ABC News (12/4/17) likewise exhibited these contradictions within one
>>> broadcast. In a segment titled "Tax Bill Seen as Victory by Trump,
>>> GOP,"
>>> the host said, "Right now the bill is pretty unpopular," without
>>> explaining
>>> why or providing any further information.
>>>
>>> "This is a big legislative win, the most significant one for the Trump
>>> administration thus far, and this is something to take home to your
>>> constituents," declared ABC analyst Meghan McCain. The daughter of
>>> neoconservative Sen. John McCain even referred to the Republican Party
>>> as
>>> "we."
>>>
>>> It was not until further in the segment that ABC analyst Matthew Dowd
>>> noted,
>>> "Seventy percent of the benefits of this tax bill go to the very
>>> wealthy,
>>> the top 1 or 2 percent of the country." Refuting the title of the
>>> segment,
>>> Dowd added:
>>>
>>> This may be a legislative victory, but it's not a political victory.
>>> It's
>>> an
>>> unpopular bill, the most unpopular tax bill ever passed, pushed by an
>>> unpopular president, passed by an unpopular Congress.
>>>
>>> More and More Euphemisms
>>>
>>> The ubiquitous term "tax reform" (e.g., CNN, 12/2/17; The Hill, 12/4/17;
>>> Politico, 12/5/17; CNBC, 12/5/17) has a misleadingly benevolent
>>> connotation-who doesn't like reform?-so long as media don't ask who
>>> benefits
>>> and who is harmed. Likewise other headline language, such as "tax
>>> overhaul"
>>> or "revision," that fails to reflect the different impacts of
>>> Republicans'
>>> plan:
>>> .Reuters (12/2/17): "US Senate Approves Republicans' Tax Overhaul"
>>> .CBS (12/2/17): "Tax Bill: Senate Passes Sweeping Tax Overhaul in Early
>>> Morning Vote"
>>> .Wall Street Journal (12/2/17): "Senate Passes Sweeping Revision of US
>>> Tax
>>> Code"
>>>
>>> With euphemisms like "mixed bag" and "mixed blessings," several outlets
>>> seemed to gesture weakly toward the massive assault on working-class
>>> Americans. Reuters (12/2/17) reported that the "sweeping tax overhaul"
>>> will
>>> move "Republicans and President Donald Trump a major step closer to
>>> their
>>> goal of slashing taxes for businesses and the rich while offering
>>> everyday
>>> Americans a mixed bag of changes." The Washington Post (12/2/17) noted
>>> the
>>> bill "bestows extensive benefits on corporate America and the wealthy
>>> while
>>> delivering mixed blessings to everybody else."
>>>
>>> That "everybody else" is reduced to a subordinate clause perfectly
>>> represents how corporate media's pretense of "balance" barely veils
>>> their
>>> reflexive positioning on the side of the rich.
>>>
>>>
>>> e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>