Look, I lean pretty far to the left, but this list is bullshit. The MSM organizations are no angels, but I just don't see enough here to justify an allegation of censorship; the compilers of this list complaining about censorship are just as wrong as the intelligent design folk who do the same thing. As the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and the evidence presented here simply does not make the cut.
Let's examine a few of the problems:
They took a few minor problems with a couple specific GM crops and took the unjustifiable leap of stating that "Several recent studies confirm fears that genetically modified (GM) foods damage human health." The actual evidence presented, even if true, does not justify sensational news coverage.
The statement "A group of scientists led by biochemist Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini from the University of Caen in France found that human placental cells are very sensitive to Roundup at concentrations lower than those currently used in agricultural application" does not support the statement that roundup in general is harmful to human health. Where's the connection between the concentration used in the field and the concentration in the finished food? They might not even be remotely related. Placental cells placed in a pure caffeine solution will die, yet we consider is safe to drink Coffee! Again, not newsworthy yet. Show me a peer-reviewed, published study that's been reproduced at least once that links roundup (as consumed by humans) to health problems and I'll change my mind. That would be newsworthy.
Haliburton is a wicked company, yes. But whether legitimately or not, it has grown to become one of the major suppliers of services to the US government. We must do something to curb its power, yes. However, simply because one of the hundreds of contracts given to Haliburton was not extensively covered is not a reason to think that the MSM is hiding that the sky is falling.
The OPEC article is fluff, yes. But do you expect the government to not have a plan about reconstructing the oil industry?
I don't have time to analyze the entire list. But given the obvious deficiencies in some of the listed entries, very good reasons for not covering them extensively in the media, why should I be convinced that the others were censored?
Come on, the MSM is no group of angels, and certainly has an agenda, but this article paints us lefties as a bunch of lunatics out of touch with reality, and so does more harm than good for our cause.
Look, I lean pretty far to the left, but this list is bullshit.
I lean pretty far to the left too, and also detect bullshit. Cheney is murderous scum, and I don't buy that Haliburton doing so well when he holds the (theoretically) second-highest position in the Executive Branch is coincidence. But Cheney is getting the same deferred salary payments for his employment *prior* to being Vice President that he would have gotten anyway and his stock options have already been irrevocably given away, it's just up
Scare-Mongering Bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's examine a few of the problems:
I don't have time to analyze the entire list. But given the obvious deficiencies in some of the listed entries, very good reasons for not covering them extensively in the media, why should I be convinced that the others were censored?
Come on, the MSM is no group of angels, and certainly has an agenda, but this article paints us lefties as a bunch of lunatics out of touch with reality, and so does more harm than good for our cause.
Re: (Score:2)
I lean pretty far to the left too, and also detect bullshit. Cheney is murderous scum, and I don't buy that Haliburton doing so well when he holds the (theoretically) second-highest position in the Executive Branch is coincidence. But Cheney is getting the same deferred salary payments for his employment *prior* to being Vice President that he would have gotten anyway and his stock options have already been irrevocably given away, it's just up