Gunmen attack Fort Hood, Texas

[tequila]

Since most Americans are reportedly conservative in their views, how did we as a people let these unethical wackos take over our media? If the overwhelming market share is truly conservative and it is a business driven by profit, then it seems to me that we could unite (maybe on twitter) to boycott stations and/or shows that continuously misrepresent the truth. Opposing ideas are encouraged, but what was mentioned above isn't an opposing idea, it is completely misleading. We need a national movement to bring common sense and honesty back to the media.

I find it funny that you seem to correlate political conservatism with ethical behavior or journalism.

Also the idea that PTSD had nothing to do with this shooting incident is likely true, it does not appear to be the same with this case, which oddly has not been commented on at all in the media in the wake of the recent shooting.

[Bill Moore]

Bill, would you regard FOX as a generally honest network, brimming with common sense?
In my opinion, the rot runs deeper than conservative or liberal.

Fair comments, actually I dislike Fox News spin as much as I dislike the spin on MSNBC and CBS. Instead of debating left and right wing politics I need to do a better job at framing my actual argument.

I find it funny that you seem to correlate political conservatism with ethical behavior or journalism

Based on the way I wrote that post I guess you wouldn't have much choice but to make that correlation, but that wasn't my intent. My point is why don't see public backlash against bad reporting (liberal or conservative?). In this case recent polls indicate that most Americans are conservative (what does that really mean?), so why do leftist shows tend to garner most of the market? Seems to be a disconnect there.

In Iran and Indonesia we have seen recent social movements against the government/media on twitter and facebook. Social movements that in the U.S. could allow the market to mandate more honest reporting, undo excessive political correctness laws (such as tossing a kid out of school because he brings a pocket knife to school), pushing books into our grade schools that promote certain types of behavior, etc. The majority react in shock to this type of Nazi like thought control, but they don't organize to counter it.

[Schmedlap]

My point is why don't see public backlash against bad reporting (liberal or conservative?).

Because the target audience for those programs is largely composed of people who are willfully ignorant or dishonest. Lots of left-leaning individuals are happy to have a blatantly biased left-leaning "news" source. Lots of right-leaning individuals are happy to have a blatantly biased right-leaning "news" source. Most of the people who don't have strong left or right views just watch their local news to stay abreast of weather, local construction, sports scores, and other non-alarmist issues.

There was a great quote in a recent Wall Street Journal opinion piece criticizing Glenn Beck (but it is applicable to all jerk-offs on the left and right, on radio and cable news, on network news and in the pages of various rags)...

These are postulates that it is only possible to believe after you have utterly closed yourself off to conventional ways of knowing, after you have decided that the reporting and analysis and scholarship on these subjects are not worth reading, and that you will choose ideological fairy tales over reality...

... a new kind of ignorance, a coming high-tech dark age in which people can choose to blow off professional standards of inquiry; in which they can wall themselves off with cable TV and friendly Web sites, dismiss what displeases as ... bias...

[slapout9]

In Iran and Indonesia we have seen recent social movements against the government/media on twitter and facebook. Social movements that in the U.S. could allow the market to mandate more honest reporting, undo excessive political correctness laws (such as tossing a kid out of school because he brings a pocket knife to school), pushing books into our grade schools that promote certain types of behavior, etc. The majority react in shock to this type of Nazi like thought control, but they don't organize to counter it.

Bill, you make an important point here.

[Valin]

My point is why don't see public backlash against bad reporting (liberal or conservative?).

No backlash?
see
Freerepublic
Lucianne
From the Right

Democrat Underground
Daily Kos
From the Left

You'll find plenty of backlash.

Also the Blogasphere (both left center and right.

I would also point out there's a reason why subscription rates, advertising revenues for all major newspapers (with the exception of the WSJ) are falling like a rock.
People are voting with their feet

[Schmedlap]

No backlash?
see
Freerepublic
Lucianne
From the Right

Democrat Underground
Daily Kos
From the Left

You'll find plenty of backlash.

I don't think that is a backlash. I think it is part of the problem. The sites that you linked to choose to consume more biased reporting and/or to engage in an echo chamber of like thinking people. They are not looking for objective reporting or dispassionate analysis. They demand agreement with their point of view and demonize those who disagree. Sure, the lefties point out biased reports from Fox and the righties point out biased reports from everyone else. They both turn a blind eye to bias that they find agreeable.

Imam al-Awlaki has written extensively about jihad and has summarized his views in a pamphlet, 44 Ways to Support Jihad.

That reads like something written by the Onion. I'm reminded of this: http://www.theonion.com/content/vide...iracy_theories

[slapout9]

Bill Lind responds to the Ft. Hood Shootings, link to article.

http://www.d-n-i.net/dni/

[Jedburgh]

Bill Lind responds to the Ft. Hood Shootings, link to article.

http://www.d-n-i.net/dni/

A whackjob loser, who happens to be Muslim but whose profile is all too-predictable - failing in his career, failing in his personal life, recently underwent major situational change, is facing a feared life-changing event and goes off the deep-end in a horribly violent manner. Now its 4GW?

Lind is pathetic.

[slapout9]

A whackjob loser, who happens to be Muslim but whose profile is all too-predictable - failing in his career, failing in his personal life, recently underwent major situational change, is facing a feared life-changing event and goes off the deep-end in a horribly violent manner. Now its 4GW?

Lind is pathetic.

Yes, If I am not mistaken it was a Muslim who first confronted Nasan and told him" he had a problem" and also declined his request to be a Religious leader for a Ft. Hood Muslim outreach program! But you don't read much in the press about that.... Tried to find some video but no luck, but I saw it on TV when they interviewed the leaders at the Mosque near Ft. Hood that Nasan attened.

[J Wolfsberger]

A whackjob loser, who happens to be Muslim but whose profile is all too-predictable - failing in his career, failing in his personal life, recently underwent major situational change, is facing a feared life-changing event and goes off the deep-end in a horribly violent manner. Now its 4GW?

Lind is pathetic.

I avoid d-n-i for the same reason I've avoided the associated CDI since the 1970s. There's too much shovel work involved with only the weakest hope of finding a pony.

The Moslem engineers and scientists I've worked with over the years were (and are) nothing like this loser.

[MikeF]

Since most Americans are reportedly conservative in their views, how did we as a people let these unethical wackos take over our media?

My point is why don't see public backlash against bad reporting (liberal or conservative?). Seems to be a disconnect there.

Bill

Here's some interesting articles sent from a group that conducts micro-conflict resolution with Jews and Palestinians that address your questions. This research is important for small wars as well. It shows that the people rising up is not solely based on the perception of security.

Why do good people do nothing, in the presence of that which breaks their hearts, violates their souls, threatens the planet and our children's children? And why do some people step forward to dazzle us with awesome vision and heroism? Weakness in numbers
DIFFUSION OF RESPONSIBILITY

October 29, 2009, National Public Radio hosted Harvard's Professor Mahzarin Banaji to explain why good people have bystander behavior -- passively observing unspeakable violence and other tragedies.
What Bystanders Do When They Witness Violence
STORY
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...ryId=114287592
AUDIO
http://www.npr.org/templates/player/...92&m=114287588

DIFFUSION OF RESPONSIBILITY occurs in larger groups of people when responsibility is not explicitly assigned. With more people present -- caught in group-think -- one is less likely to identify that there is a problem or feel a sense of responsibility to respond. With more people in a group, the individual becomes less responsiblle. Women and men are equally passive or brave in responding to emergencies, showed researchers Latane and Darley.

Their study revealed a 75% chance one observer would respond to a crisis dropping to a 10% likelihood of intervening with six onlookers gathered around.

Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility B. Latane and J.M Darley
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 377–383. 1968.
http://www.wadsworth.com/psychology_...s/ps/ps19.html


ILLUSION OF COURAGE

People falsely imagine that others have more courage and are less vulnerable to social embarrassment. This ILLUSION OF COURAGE in others strongly diminishes individual social responsibility. Also related fear of embarrassment is a potent determinant of in non-intervention in emergency situations. Sadly, inaction is often perceived as the safer personal choice of bystanders to tragedy.

THE ILLUSION OF COURAGE IN SOCIAL PREDICTIONS:
Underestimating the impact of fear of embarrassment on other people
Leaf Van Boven a,¤, George Loewenstein b, David Dunning c
Published in Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 96 (2005) 130–141
http://sds.hss.cmu.edu/media/pdfs/lo...nOfCourage.pdf



We are learning about our human fears and courage.
1. In large groups, individuals are less likely to feel responsible.
2. Smaller groups encourage individual participation and creative initiative.
3. People who are bystanders project onto others exaggerated courage and less fear of social embarrassment.

Great courage is required for a person to step forward from the group -- beyond embarrassment and old, collective thinking. Beneath embarrassment is terrifying fear of exclusion -- social or even physical death. This begins to explain why good people do nothing, and why people find it easier to disengage, blame, and kill -- including risking their physical lives in battle -- than to step out of their clan to engage an adversary face to face. Let us each overcome the "diffusion of responsibility."

[Majormarginal]

Bill

Here's some interesting articles sent from a group that conducts micro-conflict resolution with Jews and Palestinians that address your questions. This research is important for small wars as well. It shows that the people rising up is not solely based on the perception of security.

One of the points of the research mentioned is that people will disengage due to fear of embarrassment etc. I have observed that cops and soldiers will sometimes engage in a face to face confrontation fearing embarrassment if the don't.

[MikeF]

One of the points of the research mentioned is that people will disengage due to fear of embarrassment etc. I have observed that cops and soldiers will sometimes engage in a face to face confrontation fearing embarrassment if the don't.

My guess would be the indoctrination, training, discipline, and unit mentality helps soldiers/police overcome natural tendacies to not stick out from the group. What I found fascinating about the research is that it helps (at least helps me) to better understand why so many Iraqis did so little for so long. I used to bang my head against the wall wondering why it seemed many were apathetic. The current accepted theory of FM 3-24 suggest that the dependent variable to action is security. This research counters that to suggest there are many variables. That makes a bit more sense to me.