I don't think American's "don't care" about Iraq.

[Atman]

The thread about ABC's "The Note" has some interesting comments, some of which are along the lines that Americans are complicite in the media's performance (or lack thereof) because we don't demand to know the truth. But I think the people making such claims are giving the general population far too much credit/responsibility.

How are they supposed to know they're being lied to, or even further, how do they know when they're NOT being told something? If they're told an outright lie that is easy to point out, that is one thing. But we're in kind of a BushCo/Saddam situation here -- we seem to be expecting Americans to be outraged at something they don't even know is happening, because the media hasn't told them. Like Bush demanding Saddam prove he had nothing. How the hell do you do that? Show 'em an empty box and say, "See? Nothing!"?

If you haven't done so already, if you are strong-willed enough, turn off your computer for a week. At the very least, NO DU. NO Bartcop or Buzzflash or RawStory or BradBlog (you can still visit NBY, though! ;) )
and listen/watch/read only what is available to you over conventional channels, or the "Mainstream Media" as we so affectionately call it. I've done it. You'll be amazed.

Away from the constantly-updating world headlines of DU and its thousands of on-the-job "reporters," the world sounds just peachy, thank you very much. BushCo says jobs are booming, so is the economy. BushCo says housing is doing great. And freedom is on the march. We know because the evening news tells us so. Why shouldn't we believe them? We've all grown up with teevee news and figured it's been on the level. Why would Mr. & Mrs. American Gothic have any reason to think otherwise? Like it or not, the reality is MOST Americans still get their news from the evening Network dinner-time broadcast. World News Nanosecond followed by an hour of ET and Everybody Loves Raymond. Clearly, if our government was under seige by extremist whackos, our trusted news media would tell us, right?

Don't jump all over the sheep for being part of the flock. They think they're being protected by the sheep herders, and they've no reason to think otherwise. The Sheep herder shows up every night and tells them they're safe, that they're being protected.

We just need to find a way to unravel the wolf costume.

[knowbody0]

1. three days of truth on msm

and everything would turn around

[The_Casual_Observer]

2. There is plenty of news about Iraq in the papers and TV

The same stuff thats on DU.

People don't give a shit, they are too busy buying stuff using the money from their new low interest mortgage.

The US public is no different than the German public in the late 1930's and early 1940's.

[atreides1]

3. They Know, It's just easier to ignore, because it's not them

I have taken a vacation from my computer, with the exception of playing games, and I wasn't amazed at the gallons of kool-aid that I saw the sheep drinking, but then again maybe I'm a stronger person then you.

It could be that I'm just a born cynic who doesn't buy into the crap, that the sheep seem to lap up with abandon.

On my way to work everyday I see panhandlers on the medians selling papers or holding up signs asking for help, and they multiplied in that week.

Sheep are only good for one thing, lambchops, people who refuse to take off their rose colored glasses, are only to be pitied, but not
for ever.

Sheep also allow themselves to be led to the slaughter by a Judas Goat, and the human sheep are no different, just ask the Germans
who looked the other way in WWII. They've paid for their lack of
interest, and so will the American sheep.

There is no way to unravel the wolf costume, it's been reported that no WMD's were found, it's been reported that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, to the sheep that you consider so dear, it doesn't matter.

You see, they would have to admit that they have blood on their hands, they helped to kill thousands of people who did nothing to us.
And that is an admission that their kool-aid addled minds cannot deal
with.

But you go ahead and try, keep us informed of your progress.

[Wright Patman]

4. One day far in the future

people will understand that our own government carried out 9-11 and it was "for our own good." But it will not be commonly understood until 75 years later or something, much as the JFK assassination records.

[Atman]

5. I disagree that it is in the papers and on the news

Even the WaPo story about the UK memo which got everybody crowing "Lookie, the MSM is covering the memo!" was actually posted on Page 18a.

Here in the Hartford area, there has been no mention of the memo story in the Tribune-Media owned papers (the only ones we have). I watch the most liberal of the mainstream evening news broadcasts, CBS, and even they say just about nothing about this stuff. You sound like you stepped away from the computer but still tried to pay attention. That isn't what I said. Pretend you're "Soccer Mom" taking kids to games, making dinner at 6:00 - 7:00, going to Curves, up at dawn with the kids; or dad in the office or at the plant all day, plunking down with a beer when he gets home, taking in a little news before dinner. I'm sorry, but I completely disagree...You hear nothing about anything bad. You hear hints and buzzwords like "some democrats are upset..." which means nothing to Joe Soccer or Mom. They hear that in every news story. Embattled Tom Delay saying "The democrats are lying! They have no class!" "Democrats ask Bush to exlain a memo which has been circulating for weeks" sure doesn't sound too scary.

My point is, we tend to think that if it is NEWS, it will be a lead story. Big. I for one, if I see a breaking story, I used to turn to CNN to get the up-to-the-minute poop. Now, you turn to CNN and they're talking about Jacko or Sanjay Gupta is telling you how to treat your allergies. It certainly gives the impression that there can't really be much scandal going on if "the most trusted name in news" is talking about diets and allergies and Jacko, now does it?

Finally, to atreids1 I ask...Exactly what "mission" do you think I'm on? I don't understand. I made an observation, not a sweeping call to action or even an apology for the ignorance. Just pointing out that I think it does indeed exist, and our total immersion in politics is not the norm for 99% of Americans.

[Alpharetta]

6. They probably have numbers to justify not airing the reports

It would be easy to demonstrate that Americans change the channel when the talking head mentions the latest car bombing or US casualties in Iraq.

The networks use that data to justify not paying for Iraqis to provide news segments from Iraq. They use that data to justify not sending their own staffers to hole up in the Green Zone.

The truth is, all those macho embedded reporters aren't tough enough to embed themselves in the convoys on airport road or the gunships hovering over western Iraq. Just like Bush, they dressed up in military garb but they hide from the combat.

[Atman]

7. Actually, the military will not allow reporters to leave the hotel

They are virtually imprisoned, probably another good reason not to waste the money or risk the lives. If you've notices, every reporter on every station files his report against the same backdrop of the Hotel Rhiad compound. Literally, every one. If they can only report what the Pentagon provides them in briefings, why on earth fly into an anarchic war zone when you could provide the exact same report from the safety of a studio set?