Media news bias is ratings driven

Just another reason I rarely watch "Prime Time News" or nationally syndicated news shows like 60 minutes, they bend the news to drive up ratings, in some cases they will just make it up.

Why are the major media outlets content to manufacture or bend the hot news stories in order to drive up ratings?
It's because of the mentality of the old saying, "it's easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission"! Unfortunately the bastardized news stories last for days or weeks, if not months, and the asking for forgiveness by broadcast media never happens, or in the case of printed news, it's relegated to the back pages or a footnote.

Trayvon Martin didn’t deserve to be lying mute in an underground box at the age of 17. Nobody does. He committed no offense to warrant such a fate. He was simply returning from the convenience store and chatting on his cell phone with his girlfriend , a scene that could be replicated a million times across America on any given evening. http://themoderatevoice.com/142893/pictures-and-prejudice-in-the-trayvon-martin-case/

Here’s all we know for certain about the killing of Trayvon Martin: George Zimmerman noticed the black teen wearing a hoodie while within the confines of the gated community, tailed him as a suspicious character, stepped out of his car to challenge him (despite instructions from police to keep on moving), exchanged words with Martin and they both ended up on the ground. Someone moaned for help around the moment that the gun went off, and Martin died on the spot.

Was the neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman out for blood or just taking his job a little too seriously? 

Why was the only picture used by ABC, NBC, CBS, the NY Times and every other major newspaper, from when Trayvon Martin was only 14 years old?
The contrasting photos of cute Trayvon and nasty George undoubtedly contributed to the call for vengeance.
Was the exposure on Zimmerman’s photo altered in some versions to make the half-Hispanic killer look “whiter”?
George Zimmerman is multi-racial. In fact, it’s been said that he has black relatives.

For most of the black community and the left-of-center crowd, it’s an open-and-shut case of a light-skinned racist murdering an innocent African American kid for the crime of “walking while being black.” The Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton showed up to make racial politics, just to add fuel to the fire. The fact that Trayvon was wearing a hoodie has catapulted that essential item of hip-hop apparel to unprecedented glory as a political symbol of unjustly maligned black youth. By now, every Trayvon Martin sympathizer and his brother has been photographed wearing a hoodie. Congressman Bobby Rush was even kicked out of a congressional hearing because he showed up wearing a hoodie. He was kicked out because he did not adhere to the dress code for appearing before congress. Dress code? 'That' is a subject for another day.

NBC altered the 911 call by Zimmerman to make it seem as if Zimmerman was race obsessed, and every news story used it as part of their coverage. 

Photographs, videos, and recordings can be indispensable clues, but our biases, conscious or not, have a way of tampering with the evidence.
Neither man was all saint or all villain. Both should be given an equal chance to be vindicated or judged by proper authorities.

NBC News has since fired the producer who was involved in the production of a misleading taped segment about the Trayvon Martin case in Florida. On April 6th, 39 days after the maelstrom, it appeared as a blip in the news, but not on any prime time news broadcast.

The action came in the wake of an internal investigation by NBC News into the production of the segment, which strung together audio clips in such a way that made George Zimmerman’s shooting of Mr. Martin sound racially motivated. Ever since the Feb. 26 shooting, there has been a continuing debate about whether race was a factor in the incident.

Of course the damage has been done in the wake of a rioting public driven to the media frenzy,
 just as they wanted.

Sometimes you just can't help but be BLUE!

I AM WITH YOU STILL

For anyone who has lost a loved one, as we lost our Antoinette. Hold them always in your heart as the new day dawns.

I AM WITH YOU STILL

I give you this one thought to keep -
I am not gone, I do not sleep.

I rustle your hair when the warm winds blow,
I am the softly falling snow.
I am the gentle showers of summer rain,
I am the fields of ripening grain.

When you awaken in the mourning hush,
I am in the graceful uplifting rush
Of quiet birds in circling flight.
I am the star that shines at night.

I am in the flowers that bloom,
I am with you in a quiet room.
I am the song the birds sing,
I am in each and every lovely thing.

Do not think of me as gone -
I am with you still - in each new dawn.
I'm still here --- I have not gone.
I will always be in your heart.



An adaptation of the poem by Mary Frye





DON'T BE BLUE

The Death of the BOOK

From a link in Arts and Letters Daily.

 

 

 

"Pity the book. It’s dead again. Suddenly they seem clunky, heavy, and almost fleshy in their gross materiality. Their pages grow brittle. Their ink fades. Their spines collapse. They are so pitiful; they might as well be human."

Funny, or not, books are kind of the mirror to the soul. It used to be that when you walked into someone's home or office you would find a bookshelf full of books, or at least a book lying on a table. You could tell a lot about the books represented there. A glimpse into the psyche of one who lives or works there. The books were lined up along a shelf and could show what interested the occupant. You could tell how diverse their interests were and if they were "high-brow" or "low-brow", had a since of humor, or leaned toward the weird and off-beat. You could learn a lot about a person by the books they read.

Not so, anymore. More and more books are being downloaded to computers, readers like Kindle, and to the iPad or smart phones. Now a part of the soul of a person is being hidden from view. People don't need the bookshelf anymore; they don't even print the cover of the book to display their recent interest.

I have books that can be handed down from generation to generation. Books that may spark the interest in some far fringe of the curious who peruse the titles. They can even pick up the book and leaf through it. You can't do that with the downloaded books. They are most likely going to be erased from the memory of what ever they are stored on and lost not only to the owner, but their followers.

I can see the use of downloading a book or two, but at the current cost of the downloaded book compared to holding one in your hand, the cost is way too high. I can usually buy a book for less then $20. The cost to down load most top selling books, or even newly published books is about $9, when it should be less then $2. After all, they didn't have to go through the same publishing process of printing thousands of copies. All they had to do was store the data - once - and send the data to - anyone. Maybe when the cost becomes more realistic, I'll download more books, but for now I like the comfort of holding it in my hands and kind of letting people look into my soul when they see it on the table or in the bookshelf.

 

 

DON'T BE BLUE