just a try to give some points bout mediainformation in english...hehe

[KALONY]

i come from germany, if i would live in the us, i never woulda vote for bush, but i dont know, if kerry would be any better...but thats not the point i try to tell u now.

i travel alot around the world and i was a few times in the usa. 1 time 3 months 1 time 6 weeks and 1 time 4 weeks, and i was travelling a lot around. i tried everyday to meet some ppl, to talk to them to get some impressions from the country and the people who live there. one vacation was verry important, coz it was in the time of the iraq war.

so what i figured out, was that the mass of the us people are verry UN-INFORMED for my taste. or let me say they are only informen from one side. the us-side. and they trust in it. they never asked just believe it. it remembers me the time when germany was splited and i lived in the east side of germany...u know, the socialists and comunists ruled there...hehe....we were uninformed to abaut all what happen in the world. we only got those informations, wich were needed to make us believe in comunism. so i know now how important it is to have a free press a free tv and a free mind, so that i can think myself bout all things.

i dont want to say that u are completly affected, but i made the experience, that no1 was thinking himself ESPECIALLY in the countryside of the united states. in the big citys on the coasts it was ok, i met there some good open minded people.

i hope the media in germany will never be again like 1933, like east-germany, and like the media in the US....THATS IT

KALONY

[Caid Ivik]

Like german media were somewhat perfect. Na ja, was kann besser sein als RTL  ;D

[KALONY]

no, thats not the point.....bad medias r all over the world. but if u sit at home, and in every channel and in every magazin they r talking the same to u, than its a kind of affection. ok, in the first week u will search the internet to c whats true and whats not, but after a while u will believe all they say. thats human.

KALONY

[Caid Ivik]

Surely, but that's what we have internet for, to collect and share as much valuable information as possible. Massmedia show what their bosses want and when they want it, so why rely on it. It's not only the information itself what you need, there is also that ansicht of info's creator easily visible, while massmedia try to hide it. To believe that something happened, ok. Problem is in interpretation, and the internet has its strength in this.

[KALONY]

yeah, and were u ever in the countryside of the us? there it isnt so usualy to search the internet. there u believe what ur father believe...if u know what i mean...

KALONY

[Caid Ivik]

With internet I don't mean chaotic googling, but seriously pointed discussions like this ;)  And one friend took an anthene for connection even to his trip in Mongoly, so why would it be a problem?

[nemafakei]

That would be an antenna?

Not everyone can afford that sort of stuff in the country, Caid.

The 'capital' of my county only got broadband a year ago. And we're in the London commuter belt. How the devil are people in the middle of nowhere in the US going to get a reliable access to internet media - and why woud they, when they've got the best they've come across...

[Caid Ivik]

I agree that not everybody could afford it, but it depends on his priorities. Well, best form of communication is a dialogue between four eyes (metaphore...).

[nemafakei]

English, please?!

[Anathema]

Talking "between four eyes" is a metaphor for a private 1 on 1 conversation.

[KALONY]

yeah right....conversation is the best way for sure, but if u live in the middle of the dessert, it doesnt matters, when u talk 1 on 1 with ur neighbour all ur life.

KALONY

[Mozared]

I dont think you got it.

"Talking between 4 eyes" is as in having a real CONVERSATION, not like a forum what we are doing now. or a phone, a letter, just TALKING. Between 4 eyes is just a methapor, it doesn't mean that it's like you should talk to only 1 person.

I hope that cleared up.

Mirrored derazoM

[Caid Ivik]

Telephone isn't right as well. I would say it is even less useful than internet discussion, as in telephone you don't have both feeling of anonymity like on internet (what erases limits in saying anything you have on mind) and also voice intonations can be easily expressed in writing. Well, there are much more expressive signs as words, which couldn't be seen in such remote forms of communication.

[thomas]

well for the most part, CNN is decent but FOX is terrible biased, and i mean this to the point where their own hosts are constantly promoting the republican party.

and people in general here are ill informed, it's kinda sad

[erjin999]

I think Al-Jazeera and their ilk showed that there is a side of these stories that aren't shown, even if they are sides we would rather not see or hear.

[Caid Ivik]

Showing only another side doesn't mean it is perfectly balanced. Journalism must be strict, and only extreme is enough bright to be declared as "strict truth".

[erjin999]

The fact that another side is being shown, and that neither our media nor any government are not accusing them (the people showing the other side) of lying, says to me that there is a part of the story we are not being told.

Maybe its just as biased as the other, but 2 biased views are better then one.

[Caid Ivik]

2 extremes showed, so you can watch the golden middle path? What for are the media then, when they don't have a better information value than a market myth.

[Shiroko]

All media is biased, some less some more.

If you see it only in Fox News, it's obviously because you don't agree with them.

People don't see a station/paper as biased if it fits with their agenda usually.

Anyway, looking up info on the internet is not a solution. Simply because I read a bad newspaper every morning, and I ain't gonna trade it for the net, for the simple reason I can't surf and eat comfortably.

Though it's a good base rule to check and not automatically believe what's in the media.

A movie like Farenheit 9/11, is a good example to how media might work. You must know to question those things.

-Shiroko

[erjin999]

Well said Shiroko.

Caid, I am not looking for the golden middle path, I just think it is more balanced to see that both side can exaggerate, it reminds me that I will not get the whole truth from either of them. Like Shiroko said, "all media is biased, some less some more".

One source of info is not as good as many sources. Even the Secret services here in England complained about not having enough people on the ground in Iraq before making their reports. They, obviously enough, know that while they cant trust every Iraqi informant, the more they have, the more they can look for consistencies in what they say, building up a more accurate picture.