What fascinates me most in the way the legacy media is directed is to know who - if anyone - is ‘directing’ it. Obviously the owners will have their ‘target market’ in mind: they know most of their news-seeking population is happy to rub along with the same pre-conditioned pap they’ve been used to imbibing for decades. It’s part of their individual identity after all just like the many half-hour TV Westerns of the fifties and sixties are part of mine. (A colonialist part which I now see the true meaning of). Such is the attitude at BBC News.
Then there are the geopolitical considerations and their own personal convictions and affiliations and this is where it gets interesting. Are all these disparate owners acting independently or are they in some kind of ‘club’? And if so how do the orthodoxies of the ‘club’ impose themselves down through the journalistic chain of command?
If we knew the answer to this part of the puzzle it would help enormously in better understanding why the legacy media is indeed so out of touch as you say.
IF he media actually wrote the copy it reads and publishes, we could ask why the members of the media complex are out of touch. Sadly, they only read what Israel and the CIA hand to them to read, and it's all crafted to try to control their particular narrative. Media personalities are totally beholden for their livelihoods and job security to their "handlers," so couldn't venture too far from the established narrative for fear they will not have a job to go to. Besides, media "personalities" no longer have the skills to do real investigative journalism any more, either because they're out of practice or never learned how in the first place.
I'm sure certain harmful mindsets like racial superiority, looking down on Third World countries, pure arrogance, etc are inherent in some of these outlets and their staff as well. Hence, their willingness to just go along with Western mainstream narratives.
The term “Techno-feudalism” was first coined by the leftist-Marxist economist (& ex Finance Minister for Greece) Yanis Varoufakis. It’s the title of his latest book.
Its not a matter of being "outdated" or having "legacy" views.
The mainsteam media are deliberately stuffed with dangerous ideologies, people with malicious and racist agenda, and outright propaganda handworkers of evildoing - with the recent exposes about editors at BBC or Axios and NYT that are KNOWN agents of genocidal organization.
It's a dangerous promise to "write as long as you live" and one which no person can guarantee. Many failings in physical and mental health, and the onset of neurological diseases may intervene with such plans.
And guess what? As you get older, you may find you do not become the person you expected. Your interests, motivations and priorities may change. In fact, it would be exceptional if they do not if you live to a good age.
What fascinates me most in the way the legacy media is directed is to know who - if anyone - is ‘directing’ it. Obviously the owners will have their ‘target market’ in mind: they know most of their news-seeking population is happy to rub along with the same pre-conditioned pap they’ve been used to imbibing for decades. It’s part of their individual identity after all just like the many half-hour TV Westerns of the fifties and sixties are part of mine. (A colonialist part which I now see the true meaning of). Such is the attitude at BBC News.
Then there are the geopolitical considerations and their own personal convictions and affiliations and this is where it gets interesting. Are all these disparate owners acting independently or are they in some kind of ‘club’? And if so how do the orthodoxies of the ‘club’ impose themselves down through the journalistic chain of command?
If we knew the answer to this part of the puzzle it would help enormously in better understanding why the legacy media is indeed so out of touch as you say.
IF he media actually wrote the copy it reads and publishes, we could ask why the members of the media complex are out of touch. Sadly, they only read what Israel and the CIA hand to them to read, and it's all crafted to try to control their particular narrative. Media personalities are totally beholden for their livelihoods and job security to their "handlers," so couldn't venture too far from the established narrative for fear they will not have a job to go to. Besides, media "personalities" no longer have the skills to do real investigative journalism any more, either because they're out of practice or never learned how in the first place.
'They’re stuck in an old paradigm...'
I'm sure certain harmful mindsets like racial superiority, looking down on Third World countries, pure arrogance, etc are inherent in some of these outlets and their staff as well. Hence, their willingness to just go along with Western mainstream narratives.
The term “Techno-feudalism” was first coined by the leftist-Marxist economist (& ex Finance Minister for Greece) Yanis Varoufakis. It’s the title of his latest book.
Its not a matter of being "outdated" or having "legacy" views.
The mainsteam media are deliberately stuffed with dangerous ideologies, people with malicious and racist agenda, and outright propaganda handworkers of evildoing - with the recent exposes about editors at BBC or Axios and NYT that are KNOWN agents of genocidal organization.
It's a dangerous promise to "write as long as you live" and one which no person can guarantee. Many failings in physical and mental health, and the onset of neurological diseases may intervene with such plans.
And guess what? As you get older, you may find you do not become the person you expected. Your interests, motivations and priorities may change. In fact, it would be exceptional if they do not if you live to a good age.