General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSo I'm watchingthe movie ''The Post'', about the Washington Post on the Pentagon Papers ...
There is a scene in a restaurant where Ben Bradlee won't back down about the Post Reporter, that the Nixon White House, won't approve the reporter credentials.
Bradlee says "We can't have an administration dictating to us our coverage just because they don't like what we print about them in our newspaper."
Imagine if we had an Editor that would be that resolute against the current Administration?
I'm old enough to remember all this.
How far have we fallen!
underpants
(196,158 posts)The slush fund was basically donations to Nixon, who everyone knew was going to win, to gain his favor or avoid his wrath. Sounds familiar.
aggiesal
(10,754 posts)UTUSN
(77,601 posts)SocialDemocrat61
(7,492 posts)All the President's Men make a good double feature.
aggiesal
(10,754 posts)fujiyamasan
(1,621 posts)We have the equivalent of a watergate everyday.
Press gave up reporting on it for the most part.
aggiesal
(10,754 posts)joanbarnes
(2,117 posts)ShazzieB
(22,511 posts)Somehow this film escaped my notice until now, but I definitely want to watch it!
aggiesal
(10,754 posts)The movie is similar to what we are going through right now.
I will not spoiler alert.
Let me know what you think of the movie.
There is an early scene where Meryl Streep's character accidently knock a chair down while walking through the maze of tables.
That was not in the script, but Director Steven Spielberg, said it shows how busy she was, that it was perfect, so he left it in.
Kid Berwyn
(24,167 posts)
"Why Socialism?" from the First issue of Monthly Review magazine in 1949.
The following paragraph from his essay touched on the evils of corporate media consolidation, a problem even at that time. Enstein's observations are even more true now than they were during FDR's day.
"Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights."
https://monthlyreview.org/articles/why-socialism/
DU OP: https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=21097137