Right Wing "institutes" "foundations" = PROPAGANDA

DR STRANGELOVE

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 13, 2003
27,355
51
0
Toronto, Canada
Cato Institute, Heritage Foundation, and others. Every wonder who these people are? They are very frequently quoted for their "information" and often their info is taken at face value as fact. But who are they? What are their motives?

This statment sums it up:

As one investigative journalist stated years ago in a pioneering investigation, "layer upon layer of seminars, studies, conferences, and interviews [can] do much to push along if not create, the issues, which then become the national agenda of debate.... By multiplying the authorities to whom the media are prepared to give a friendly hearing, [conservative donations] have helped to create an illusion of diversity where none exists. The result could be an increasing number of one-sided debates in which the challengers are far outnumbered, if indeed they are heard from at all.
http://www.mediatransparency.org/na...think_tanks.htm

"Summary
In response to liberal academia, wealthy conservative businessmen are funding a growing number of far-right think tanks to establish a theoretical footing for their causes. Lacking all the checks and balances that keep academic research honest, these think tanks produce highly flawed and biased studies whose only purpose is to promote policies that favor the business classes that fund them."
http://www.korpios.org/resurgent/L-thinktank.htm

How has the right been so successful? Research shows that over the past quarter-century a well-funded, tightly coordinated ideological movement has come to dominate our country's marketplace of ideas. Their deeply ideological movement ? with its well-funded advocacy think tanks and aggressive communications strategy ? has increasingly set the public agenda, shifting national and local politics consistently to the right and away from the broader public interest. This movement has undermined society's understanding of the legitimate role of government and the need for balance between community, individual and corporate responsibilities.

Many of the movement?s actions have occurred behind-the-scenes, unrecognized by ? even masked from ? the general public.

It sounds like many voices, but it is really only a few. Imagine: There is an important issue in the news, and you look for information. You read an op-ed piece written by a "policy analyst" from some "institute." The next day, a columnist writes something similar, quoting "conservative scholars." You read a magazine article with a similar message, citing yet more experts. That night, you watch the news on TV and the commentators are expressing opinions that are beginning to sound awfully familiar. A politician?s speech becomes hard to distinguish from the rants of the radio talk-show host. A much-discussed book and a highly trafficked website echo the same themes, in similar language.

In reality, though, these conventional wisdoms are misleading at best. You have heard a repeated message that is actually coming from very few sources who are coordinating or paying many people and organizations to say the same thing in creatively different ways.

There has been no comparable moderate/progressive counter-response to restore balance. As a result, US citizens are witnessing a virtual monopolization of the marketplace of ideas. When one looks at the major print and broadcast media, at public opinion polls, and at the positions taken by politicians of both major parties, it becomes clear that there has been a steady shift toward the right-wing movement?s attitudes and policies.

http://www.commonwealinstitute.org/thereis.html

NOTE: I don't neccessarily endorse these links, but they reflect what I have learned over time.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
One such point is energy. The point that more and more drilling is a must for national security. The other side of that is muffled as much as possiable. You wonder if there is some other reason called money. All we need to do is increase the mileage for our transporation a meer 3 miles to the gallon. Drilling needs are gone. We would save so much energy it crazy. We need to push our auto makers to gives us that better product. Many Many engineers say the tech info needed to do this is avaliable. Not only avaliable but better then 3 miles to the gallon. More like 5 to 6. It is a shame we do not push this issue from this side of that fence as a national security issue. This fight has gone on for last 20 years. As long as the pushed continues for more drilling. The auto makers will hide behind them. Japan will lead the way. Then most everyone in USA will be pissed about it. A middle of the road is out there but no one offers it. Dam Dam shame. Mean while cost all of us more to drive.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top