Damn fine points you make TL (grumble grumble [img]smile.gif[/img] ), and you have in your own inimitable style made nearly all the points that I would have made in reply.
The only bit that is left for me to deal with is this :
Quote:
Davros,
It it possibly the News is OZ is Slanted to what they think their viewers WANT to hear or to what they wish to tell their viewers?
|
JD - your short answer, at least under the present media rules and watchdogs is NO. The story was reported this way in all news channels and radio. We don't have the extent of media bias that you have in the states. News stations are required to report the facts, and with minimal commentary in their news broadcasts. If any of the news departments of the 4 major networks fall foul of these rules they are reported to our media watchdog thingy that polices this. The media tribunal acts on and investigates public complaints of bias in news broadcasts, and the penalties for bias are substantial. If a station wants to take a political stance they are required to confine those views to shows that are termed current affairs commentaries or by judicious use of theright guests at late night entertainment shows. That is one of the resons that my stomach churns when I watch a FOX NEWS broadcast - it's plenty foxy but it just aint news. Well maybe it's life Jim (I mean NEWS), but not as we know it. I realise that this will be difficult to accept for you, coming from a situation where most of your stations lie their ass off in support of their bosses political proclivities.
Contraty to what you may percieve, we in OZ don't have a rabid "let's knock America" phobia, nor do we have a more than general information level on American politics. We tend to be proud to be on what most of us think is the right side of this fight (and that is the same side you are on John), but that still doesn't stop us from wanting to know the truth - whether we were conned or not and whodunnit. The news reports we heard didn't say that the admin did it, nor did it say the admin was innocent. It said that the CIA blundered, the info was false, and it looks like there never were the significant threats that we were all promised as "most definitely existing". The news report went on to say that the panel had not been allowed to look into the question of potential interference or manipulation by the admin, but that further work would be addressed by the panel in phase 2 due to report back sometime after the November presidential elections.
So just summing that answer up again - well said TL - and JD - NO.