Hanky the Terrorist, Uncle Scam and Mega Media

A week or two ago I was watching Charlie Rose and he had that basset hound Henry Kissinger on, and the inevitable "Iraq question(s)" come up. The parallels; escalation, insurgency, civil war...

But it's absolutely amazing how Charlie can be so off point and more, a softballer. I mean, he's the ONLY talk show that will guest Chomsky, which just goes to show how deep the "Jewish mafia" runs in mega-corp controlled mass-media. Btw, for anyone who doubts the Janus faced history of Jews in Hollywood, just read Gabler's, "An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood." Jesus Christ (how's that for irony?), I thought my peeps were fucked up in terms of self-image. It cracks me up - wryly, of course - how, whenever I speak on a panel or at a seminar, inevitably I meet up with wide-eyed film students, hoping against hope that theirs is the lucky lotto number....

Shudder.

These poor kids - they spend tens of thousands of dollars on a film school "education" but can't tell you who this is...


let alone this dude


and god send money should they know who THIS is...


...cause I'll need a Costco sized bundle of tp to wipe my ass from the shock shit.

So. Charlie "sometimes on point" Rose has Henry, "I systematically TERRORIZED millions of mud people got a Nobel Prize out of it and some fat ass speaking engagements," Kissinger on. Asking the Iraq questions. The parallels.

THE PARALLELS???

I got your parallels, hanky, ya punk ass beeeatch, hiding behind your rat-bastard nixonian presidential seal while pushing buttons that terrorize; how about some donkey balls parallel to your chin muthaphuka??? How about THIS for a parallel, that you ILLEGALLY and sytematically TERRORIZED millions of Asians via the TET fucking offensive, you putrid piece of regurgitated bukake?

"The terrorists," "the war on terror" ... Parallel this: We're the laughing stock of the world because of this embarrassment of an administration.

Just as with the nixon administration.

I think this is the great trick of uncle scam; the games he sets up are basically elementary - taking a page from Goebbels and another from Bernays while being later deconstructed by Herman & Chomsky:

1. Control messaging via mass-media. Check.

2. Make sure the freeways that govern access to political power are constantly jammed with over 30,000 lobbyists, each wtih a man purse of laundered money. Check.

3. #2 also serves another purpose; it effectivly cuts off the .000001% of the riff-raff mud peeps that have a smidgen of power.

3. Have an endless supply of diversions - concocted or not - that mis-direct the laity and can be amply farmed out to #1. Check.

4. Liberal (in the conservative sense of that word) mentioning of buzz words/phrases; "freedom," "democracy," "America loves freedom," "war on terror," etc., while making Hegel twist in his grave by antithetically citing "the enemy," and that, "they're jealous of our freedom."

5. Lather, rinse... you now the drill.

It goes without saying so I"ll say it; sell-outs like this reprobate


not to in any way be corn-fused with THIS dude


are a necessary part of uncle scam's equation as well.

It's one of the most energy-sapping things to watch, the way these devils run their games.

I'ts also hard to critique when most of us are so self-involved with our own personal crap, because while the game is basically fundamental, it's macro. And we're not trained to think macro, much less long-term, much much less, critically, much much much less analogically.

For ONCE I'd like to see our mainstream journalists grow some nuts - JUST ONCE, so that I can have a smile fest for a minute just watching human puss sacks like Kissinger squirm in his grease. This is why Howard Stern, despite ... well, you know, he's Howard, it's why things like sending Stuttering John out to completgely deflate pompous celebs were fucking brilliant. Sasha Baron Cohen ain't got nothin' on Stern.

For someone like me, born in Hollywood (Kaiser, right on Sunsent), mass media's in my DNA. Just not in the, "I'll-degrade-myself-to-sub-species-level-AND-eat-mega-corp-conglomo-mierda-to-even
have-what-I-think-is-a-shot-at-working-FOR-FREE-on-your-plantation," sense.

Hanky, do humanity a favor; shove a burnt weenie sandwich up yer butt so that weasels rip your flesh to get at it.

Allusions and wordplay in this post: At least two. I think. (I'm particularly proud of the last one...)

A "New" Spin on Mass Media Conglomeration

check this out. newspapers are now jumping onto the citizen journalist bandwagon.

whoopee friggin' DOO.

newspapers are no different from any of the other mass media merchants in that they don't get it or they can't execute efficiently.

they don't get it - meaning, isn't the fact that this story is only appearing NOW, in 2006, proof enough??? mass media news simply can't seem to pry open their minds and look around at the paradigm shift occuring at this very moment in the music industry. they can't think, let alone see, analogically, therefore they can't draw lessons from it.

they can't execute efficiently - mass media, by definition, must carpet bomb on a large scale in order to cut operating expenses. (thus, the stereotypical centralized news source - a national desk - that farms out to its local channels.) this is one of the dynamics i talk about to indie filmmakers, that because big studios are over-concerned with mass market capture, the only approach that makes sense for indies is to target a niche market that's being ignored or under-served by the studios.

that last principle applies to any industry dominated by mega corporations.

anyway, this latest attempt to co-opt grassroots appeal is anything but new; after all, how long has "america's funniest home videos" been around???

-jp


Gannett To Change Its Papers' Approach

By Frank Ahrens
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 7, 2006; D01

Gannett Co., the nation's largest newspaper chain, is radically changing the way its papers gather and present news by incorporating elements of reader-created "citizen journalism," mining online community discussions for stories and creating Internet databases of calendar listings and other non-news utilities.

The McLean company has 90 newspapers, including USA Today, the nation's largest. Like all major newspaper firms, Gannett has watched circulation and advertising revenue slide over the past decade, as readers turn to television and the Internet for news and information.

Gannett is attempting to grab some of the Internet mojo of blogs, community e-mail groups and other ground-up news sources to bring back readers and fundamentally change the idea of what newspapers have been for more than a century. The attempt to involve readers in news-gathering is part of a larger plan that also calls for Gannett to merge its newspaper and online operations into single units to speed delivery of news and improve its offerings to advertisers.

At Gannett's Des Moines Register, for example, editor Carolyn Washburn has moved desks to re-organize her newsroom. She created a Data Desk to build reader-searchable databases on topics from restaurant listings to a recent mumps outbreak. Though USA Today will not undergo a similar overhaul, it has merged its newspaper and online staffs.

Gannett's ideas are shared by a growing number of people in the industry who believe that news organizations have driven away readers by becoming too imperial, too distant and not fast enough to respond to reader needs and desires.

While other newspapers, including The Washington Post, have aggressively expanded their online presence or merged it with their print newsrooms, Gannett's move is the industry's first wide-scale overhaul, in name and purpose.

"It's pretty big," said Michael Maness, Gannett's vice president of strategic planning. "It's a fairly fundamental restructuring of how we go about news and information on a daily basis."

The most intriguing aspect of Gannett's plan is the inclusion of non-journalists in the process, drawing on specific expertise that many journalists do not have. In a test at Gannett's newspaper in Fort Myers, Fla., the News-Press, from readers such as retired engineers, accountants and other experts was solicited to examine documents and determine why it cost so much to connect new homes to water and sewer lines. The newspaper compiled the data and wrote a number of reader-assisted articles. As a result, fees were cut and an official resigned. Maness called it a "pro-am," approach, referring to a golf tournament in which professionals play alongside amateurs.

"I am very impressed with the Fort Myers" experiment, said Jay Rosen, a New York University journalism professor. "If that becomes the direction at a lot of Gannett papers, we could learn a lot from that."

Elements of Gannett's plan are seen elsewhere.

Rosen recently founded the Web site NewAssignment.net, which bills itself as "an experiment in open-source reporting" and is being partly funded by the Reuters news agency. Another Web site, NowPublic.com, claims of 31,000 citizen reporters in 130 countries who post news, photos and video to the site. NowPublic reporters were active in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina.

Gannett has been testing its new system at a few of its newspapers since July. Now, all of the company's newspapers are being urged to make the transition quickly.

Changes began with newsroom labels. Newsrooms divide coverage by traditional topics, such as national, foreign, local, features and sports.

Gannett's plan renames the newsroom an "Information Center" and divides it into seven areas: public service, digital, data, community conversation, local, custom content and multimedia. In a memo to employees Thursday, Gannett Chairman Craig Dubow said the company's news will be "platform agnostic," meaning it will be delivered however the reader desires -- on paper, on the Web, on a mobile device and so on.

Faced with declining average daily circulation since 1987, newspapers have been struggling to reinvent themselves and stay relevant. Before the Internet, many newspapers tried to look brighter and less staid, following the lead of USA Today, as a flurry of redesigns swept the industry. More newspapers began using color photographs, colored boxes and other design devices, and articles became shorter. Circulation did not improve. Now, newspapers look to the Internet.

Gannett's stock peaked in spring 2004 at more than $90 a share, but steadily declined to $52 a share during the summer. The stock has been rising since, closing yesterday at $58.77 a share, up 75 cents.