In Defense of Exposing Lies
The complaint (printed in the February 2012 issue) against FAIR for using “the demonizing technique to whip up support for its cause” sounds like yet another disguised way of saying—if you don’t have anything nice to say then don’t say anything at all. A worthless policy for exposing lies.
That one fundamental difference between using truth versus using lies “to whip up support” has to be deliberately ignored in order for a glib statement like “sorry, demonizing is demonizing” to seem valid. So then is exposing lies the same as telling lies? No, it can’t be.
Using the implied fallacious logic that somehow “demonizing” does not differentiate between telling a lie and exposing a lie, the assertion that “one very effective measure” of removing demonizing is to refrain from demonizing is then easily translated into “one very effective measure” of making sure there are less lies in the world is to refrain from exposing lies. This can’t be true, but artful word play in that complaint letter allows for this interpretation.
The endless lies corporate media use to fuel their various hate campaigns are absolutely deplorable. If we want to see less of this in the world, the first step is exposing and acknowledging that it is a problem that needs to be resolved. Ignoring problems for the sake of “staying positive” guarantees that problems will get more out of control. The most positive attitude a person can have is believing that problems can be solved, and FAIR is an indispensable ally in facing the big lie of censorship that defines what corporate media is all about.
Not Enough Election Coverage
How disappointed I was to open up Extra!’s February 2012 issue and not find one word about Campaign 2012. Nothing about the candidates, the Super PACs’ wild spending, the cache that broadcasters are taking in.... Nothing.
In fairness, perhaps your deadline was too early, but Iowa and New Hampshire were bombarded by ads, as was my home state of South Carolina in January. I hope you will devote more space to political campaign ads AND the techniques they use to sway voters.
Frank W. Baker
U.S. Nuclear Hypocrisy
Regarding the January 2012 Extra! article “On Iran, an Unsmoking Nongun,” I believe it is important to point out the extreme hypocrisy evident. How can the U.S. media raise concerns about Iran’s nuclear weapons program at the same time the U.S. is boosting funding for its own nuclear weapons program?
Royal Oak, Mich.
I love your magazine and read it cover to cover when it arrives. You do a terrific job identifying how the U.S. propaganda machine works.
You spend a lot of time analyzing how the New York Times and the Washington Post deal with national issues. However, I live in a rural district and our newspaper is full of stories from the AP, which are just as controlled as the Times and Post. Please include an analysis of the AP in your stories; so many of the papers throughout the country rely almost exclusively on the AP for its news.