Current mood:
working
Category:
News and Politics Lunch at noon is always an interesting proposition. The former cop and former FBI agent I work with always eat at noon so they can watch the news. The reason the news is on at noon in our break room is only because there is a lapse in soap operas that all the ladies (and some men) watch in our office. Honestly, from 11AM until 3PM, when Dr. Phil comes on, nothing but fucking soap operas. Maybe the occasional courtroom show, like Judge Judy. Why is lunch at noon in my break room interesting? It's because of the former cop, who we'll call Barbrady and the former FBI agent we'll refer to as Hoover mixed with yours truly.
The news in Kansas City generally shifts from local news, then to national/world news, and then to the weather, in that order. Local news wasn't the topic of choice today amongst employees (as opposed to last week), it pertained to what is taking place in the world. As you might be able to gather, the two retired law enforcement representatives are largely conservative, Barbrady more so than Hoover. I'll just come out and say that the discussion was on the war in Iraq and how it is perceived. It is a topic that is not easily avoided now days.
The complaint from Barbrady and Hoover was that the media only focuses on the negative stories that come out of the Middle East. I agree, however only to a certain extent. I believe that America as a society in general is unable to pay attention to anything that doesn't hit them over the head like a two ton weight. Death, violence, and chaos sell very well to the American public and we do not come up short in the currency we spend on stories that involve much sensationalism. We also take our news and cultural phenomenon's in massive doses. Take for example the show "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire!" Remember when that show was on four times a week? America couldn't get enough of it. We had to have it almost everyday. Then what happened? People consumed it until they overdosed on it and threw it away. We take things in at an alarming rate until we are saturated and fat from any particular trend. Then when we tire of it and "get sick of it" or something becomes "so 2006" we throw it out like trash.
Back to my story…
My Republican colleagues questioned the news anchor (who was on the TV, not in the room) why stories that are positive are not portrayed in the news. Hoover enlightened me to a story about how power is being restored in a neighborhood in Baghdad and children are now being allowed back in to school. I agree, more stories like this one should share airtime with negative aspects of the war. However, they did not stop there. The tone they perpetuated was more along the lines of all news should only focus on the positive, and none of the negative. This was my primary concern, I countered that having an opinion on events in the world requires hearing and seeing both sides of the story. Having only positive stories on the war (or any other critical issue) are just as damaging as only running stories and giving airtime to events that are 100% negative. If all stories are positive you gain a false sense of security and believe that everything we are doing is right and just. This sets a very detrimental precedent. It allows you to not question anything, makes you ignorant, and gives you a false sense of security. I believe this to be a fault of some people that grew up in the 50's (as did these men). A utopian society was almost achieved, remember? "The good old days" as most people will refer to them. You know, when women were discouraged to work outside the home and minorities were still discriminated against and segregated from our society? You remember, right? Back when things were right and you felt safe, as both of them say so often.
Barbrady made the quote that "If I were king, the only stories on the war would be positive ones." This proclamation of King Barbrady was very unsettling to me. I came up with an analogy on the fly, likening his statement regarding media coverage on the war to that of a husband who beats his wife and kids but keeps a squeaky clean public image by always paying his taxes, being involved in the PTA and going to church every Sunday. "Wouldn't you want to know of his domestic abuse against his family?" I said. "Being a man of faith, and a former keeper of the peace, aren't you sworn to uphold the rights of those whose rights are being impeded upon? To serve and protect, right?" I was not surprised with the fact that the would-be king had nothing to say about my hypothetical comparison, nor would he have anything to say when I questioned how deep his convictions truly are. Or maybe he was just embarrassed that I pointed out the contradiction in his decree, if he were king.
The second item, and more disturbing of the two to me, was the idea and concept of opinion. As I was explaining to Hoover that what people should be doing in this country is taking into account both sides of what is going on in Iraq and weigh one against the other. You take stories like the one above about Iraqi schoolchildren returning to their education and set that against the backdrop of troops dying every day. You have to ask yourself, is this worth it? Before any intelligent conversation could take place, Barbrady undercut the value of opinions and fell back on his ability to use every clichéd line under the sun. Something about how "opinions are like armpits, everyone has two and they usually stink." Thanks Barbrady, don't use your own thought process to your advantage to draw your own conclusions. I understand that for a conservative, retired police officer that critical thinking isn't something he is accustomed to, but to say that opinions do not matter is just plain ignorant.
As soon as the weather can change on a Kansas City summer day the news changed to the weather as did the conversation. I'm pretty sure I upset them to a certain degree and I'm fine with that. Censoring opinion is all about what political pundicy (I believe I just created a word) is aimed towards achieving. Rush Limbaugh, Mike Savage, Sean Hannity. These men don't want you to have your own opinion, they want you to have their opinion and spread it. They don't want to reveal any truth, they want you all to think the same. I believe both of these former members of our law enforcement community spend entirely too much time doing just that. Whenever they start a discussion with me (because they know I lean left) it usually ends like the situation I listed above. In all of these said conversations it feels like I'm talking to pundits like Hannity or Limbaugh. Rush calls his listeners and fans "dittoheads" for Christ sake. The same arguments and proclamations that come out of the pundit's mouths come out of the mouths of people like Hoover and Barbrady. Unable to strike an opinion of their own from their own thought process brought on by being unbiased in research and the collecting of information. They are content to have their opinions spoon fed to them, so they can regurgitate them on anyone who will listen. It is a sad state of affairs when someone will lead their life and cast their vote based on TV, newspaper, or internet personalities whose only concern is their own bottom line. But hey, that's the "American Way" right?
 | Currently listening :
Kid A
By Radiohead
Release date: By 03 October, 2000 |
2:25 PM - 1 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment - Edit - Remove
No comments:
Post a Comment