DragonFlight

Stephen,
I applaud your mention of Keith Olberman's piece on terror alerts. Period.
dougt

Stephen,

I know I have been watching the JBR news and I agree to some extent regarding the air time this is being given to the exclusion of other political considerations, and no doubt that there have always been diversions when the political heat is on. However, like a moth to the flame, I watch to see what the next JBR development will be.

I think the draw for me is I keep trying to understand what it is that would cause someone to do this kind of thing. We have a face for the alleged crime, and looking at Karr's face and demeanor, I find it hard to believe that he had it in him to do such a violent act, but you never know. What IS the face of a murderer? I met and talked to a murderer once. He looked nice, seemed kind and intelligent, but the chilling thought kept going through my mind that he murdered someone.

I don't think many of us understand how murderers do what they do and we try to see the monster that resides inside them, perhaps for our future safety. Maybe there is something in them that we can recognize in other monsters before they get us...I don't know. I look at that beautiful child's face and wonder what she would have been like had she lived out her life. Maybe I would have never known anyhow. We live in a world so isolated from each other that I think something like this makes us realize that we need to be more compassionate beings, that anyone can suffer a tragedy, even the priviledged...even us.

I think about those parents who lost their beautiful child, and even though I didn't much agree with Patsy Ramsey and the beauty contests, she was still a mother. I cannot imagine the agony they went through, let alone being suspects in their own child's murder. They may have murdered her as suspected as well. What is the face of a murderer?

Maybe we are just simply drawn to what we cannot understand and our need for resolution.

I don't have much else to say, or really any good explanation, but I still watch.

I have no problem with the media covering the JonBenet story. My disgust is with the all-encompassing manner in which the story is covered, as though there were absolutely nothing else happening on earth. What have we heard in the last few days about how many more have died in Iraq? about what's going on in Lebanon? about Bush's over-the-top press conference the other day? about the thousands of other children who are abused every day?

I take issue with a media that cuts into and pre-empts scheduled programming for a "breaking story" that John Karr is on a plane heading for Colorado, that he'll be landing in four hours, and then reports on what he's wearing, what he's eating on the plane, etc. This story may be interesting, but it's not that important in the big picture.

I take issue with a 24/7 television media that can't seem to manage to cover more than one story at a time, which every half hour rehashes the same information over and over, even while there is no substantial information to impart, while completely ignoring the larger issues of the day, ones that truly are life-and-death for many people.

And I take exception to the media which says, "well we just show what the public wants." I don't know about anyone else, but I've never filled out a survey about what I want to see on the news. It isn't the woman-on-the-street who calls the shots about where to send reporters and what stories they do. The funniest of all are the news and infotainment people who ask their guests, as Larry King did, what they make of all this media attention.

Please.

The moment the 'news' department became part of the 'entertainment' department and had to make a profit, what is 'reported' as 'news' became more a matter of what folks will keep the tee vee on for in order to watch the commercials. The so called news is the filling, the bread and butter is the SUV commercial that holds it together. Hundreds of hispanic women are disappearing from the NAFTA inspired maquiladoras (factories) just south of the border and murdered in the desert. Not 'news'. Thousands of African children sold into sexual and military slavery. Yawn. Yet a Laci Petersen or JBenet keeps the right consumer target's tv on. Let's just watch that little white girl with makeup prance around one more time....it's patriotic!

Hi,
As you know i work on missing persons among other things and do the profiling. Deep down, people still believe the parents themselves did it!

Suddenly, someone they don't know, is saying I did it! This same person has talked to the mother on the phone! He also has been writing to the mom for four years, tho the answers were going to someone else who was saving all the emails.

When it comes to children, even civilians think there but for the grace of God go I.

I agree with one of the other comments, believing he did not do it...Almost everyone believes that. At this point, he is arrested for a prior crime, not this one.

We can turn on the news, and we are tired of seeing Iraq, bush, and all that is going on. To find a killer of a child, is big news.

Many people like me, have had time invested in wanting the real person coming to justice.
I know what Iraq, Iran and the world in politics is going on.

I still, at this moment, do not believe he killed her. He may well know who did. There are wealthy groups that sacrifice their children for some gain. So, the child becomes the victim. They are not meant to die. I have had those children, now grown up and running away from this type of clan mentality. He was my patient. He was in hiding to save his son.

This man, as my patient, had learned to totally compartmentalize so he could control his sanity.
The hospitals had to hide his file and use another aka. So did I. Learning from him, and thinking perhaps that little girl was that kind of victim is haunting.

Yes, people want this case solved. What is keeping it in the media is that every day there is a new twist and turn. Same reason people read murder mysteries.

I do not place this case, even tho I vested time, before what is going on in our country. We have learned that bush does not care about anyone or anything. We have no rights, no votes, no decisions. We have become the hated invaders.

So Steve, remember this is ten years of wondering who. I know there were other people in the house the night she was killed. No one has mentioned this. I know the forensics could not even be used. Everything had been changed and moved. No one is saying that..My guess at this time, is he was abused very young.

He was not in the state the night the girl died. Just like in that chat room we go to, people come in to get negative attention.

Hang on Steve, this is news. People believe patty still did it! This supposed killer had talked personally to Ramsey on the phone. How would any one know the exact amount of money that was on a check to ramsey, and ask for it.?

Relax, sweetie, the world is blowing up, Pluto is no longer a planet. People are turning to this case as an escape. You already know what is going on in the world, or we think we know.

Some very interesting and good comments. I have to say I agree to some point with everyone here.

But I have to say,. as much as people want to solve this murder, (and of course it will be the movie of the week..again)., We have more pressing matters at hand.

Why cant the media continue to cover the story of JonBenet, but also keep with the important news of the world. Have people heard about Bush wanting to open up the Sequoia Nat'l Forest to commercial lumber companies? Have you heard that the ozone is showing signs of repair?

Are you aware there is serious consideration that we may go to war with Iran? People are dying!! And more are going to die. There are so MANY things wrong with our country right now, that affect all of us. We really need to concentrate on getting our country back!

And I have to say, I agree with you Steve that it does seem odd that terrorist warnings would spring up everytime Bush found himself in hot water over some revelation that came out. Election time is just around the corner., I'm sure he is happy about this constant news on the JBR case, and while our attentions are diverted, he can screw over this nation again!

Beanie, you’ve scored a bulls-eye equating today’s news with advertising dollars. If ever the A=B, B=C, thus A=C rationale was correct, this is the example. We can just rewrite it as you suggested -- News=Entertainment, Entertainment=Advertising dollars, thus Advertising dollars=News.

It’s quite a sham when the definition of “news� depends on it being entertaining enough for sponsors to invest in, rather than being newsworthy. This has all the earmarks of a disaster in the making. Combine it with the government influencing the media for political reasons, and George Orwell here we come!

******************************

I concur Katerina, “We have more pressing matters at hand.� When real news is put aside while we obsess on sensationalist repetition, we can’t address, evaluate and solve the real concerns confronting us. It’s truly unfortunate the viewing public has become so irresponsible as to support “news for entertainment.� I have to admit at times I get sucked in as well.

And, it's not solely the fault of the networks; they are in the business of making money. As long as we watch what they produce, they will keep producing it. There was a time when news was not the money making branch of a network its become, and more of a public service supported by the rest of the company. Now that is no longer the case, and faux-news is the result. It will change when we no longer watch it.

I agree, to a large extent, with a lot of what is being said here, but the most significant point I've read is your last statement, Stephen.

Ultimately, there needs be a move beyond talking about what is happening, and why it pisses us off, to what we can do to affect change.

Yes, you can equate what is served up as news, or other forms of "entertainment," based on advertising dollars, but somebody, somewhere, is counting those dollars, and has made a determination that enough people watching those ads actually buy the products. It ends with the people mindlessly sitting in front of the tube. I'm not sure those people can be reached, except, perhaps, for us to be part of the entertainment they watch.

It's not necessarily a bad thing to watch and listen to network TV, to what often seems like so much blather, as long as it's balanced by a considered search for other sources of information, and what may be hidden behind the words.

I think most of the people who are reading and commenting here are aware of the insidous manner in which a lot of "news" originates, basically as talking points handed out by political organizations. The connection to advertising dollars becomes somewhat blurred here, but ultimately is manifested in a money/power/control equation that the cable networks have been quick to jump on, and the traditional networks can't afford not to follow.

In the current political environment, there's just not enough dialogue to find any kind of consensus with social issues. I think that's where we come in.

It is that “blur� Doug between hand picked political talking points and advertising dollars which blinds many people to the reality of how news might be compromised or why.

You hit a key point when mentioning watching the networks isn’t in itself bad as long as “it’s balanced by a considered search for other sources of information,…�

This is indeed the real culprit. I see three dynamics at work –- First, more and more people do not read the print media and rely solely on TV and Radio news. Secondly, they attach to one or two shows that tell it like they believe it is and that’s where they stay; stations with contrary views become pariahs which they not only don’t visit, but automatically assumed to be wrong, quite often labeling them “dreaded liberals or conservatives,� and thereby wrong by default. Lastly, too many people don’t appear to do any other types of research, whether on the internet, library, magazines, newspapers, documentaries, interviews, whatever.

This brings us full circle to the idea of our favorite news show as entertainment. It can give us everything we require. We can simply watch it, get ALL our news information without having to be bothered to search elsewhere (you know how tedious that is, getting up from the chair and all), and ironically we always agree with the point of view presented and all is well in our world.

Bottom line, many people are relying on single sources and not getting balanced information. Ultimately this makes it easy for any controlling entity, be it political, financial or whatever, to divide and conquer and thus manipulate public opinion in ways that benefit them rather than truly inform.

Your last statement was interesting Doug, “In the current political environment, there's just not enough dialogue to find any kind of consensus with social issues. I think that's where we come in.� Can you elaborate on that?

Stephen, I'm happy to elaborate on that statement, although it takes us a little off track from the primary emphasis of this thread, which seems to be misrepresentation and misguided emphasis, by the media, of important issues at hand.

All I'm saying is that it's time to find a way to move beyond watching and listening, and to speak or act out in such a way that our voices are heard. Find an alternative to what we're seeing with the status quo of news sourcing, media coverage and intake of information. I don't know what that is, Stephen, but I want to find it and be part of it.

I've come to the point where I don't think there's any chance that the government, as it stands, can ever be truly representative of America. The Republican party has been highly successful pandering to it's base, which seems to be made up of corporate interests, rich folks and fanatical Christians, to the EXCLUSION of anybody else, and I don't know what in hell the Democrats are doing. The very least we can do is to put a spotlight on all the candidates for office in November. Make sure they've had to answer the tough questions, and the masses have at least had the opportunity to know who they're electing and what the consequences might be.

I have nothing against Republicans or Christians, although I have big problems with some of their leaders and guidance. However, I abhor the very thought of any group thrusting their beliefs down my, or anyone else's, throat.

Since we live in a representative democracy, where a majority of votes is going to carry the day, there will always be someone who gets shut out. That should not mean that basic rights are violated. And it should not mean that there isn't compromise for the good of the entire nation.

In your previous blog post, "A Time to Question," you listed a number of issues, and said you would probably revisit those in the future. All important topics that are very worthy of discussion. One key item that was missing, however, was the issue of how our democracy is in peril. The very fact that we basically have a one-party government is dangerous in itself, but follow that with an administration that conducts business in secrecy and, from the glimpses we do get, seems bent on reshaping the Constitution to fit it's own needs and/or desires, and that's downright scary. There has been only a single veto by this president, but over 750 signing statements, by which the administration is basically deciding, on its own, what should be law. Follow that with a Congress that has seen little need for oversight.

I can't believe that everybody who put this government in place wouldn't want to find a middle ground, where we can solve these giant problems together. Given that, and the fact that there are some 75 million eligible voters that didn't participate in the last election, there's an opportunity to mobilize a huge mass, if only they can be reached.

Sorry for the rambling, particularly since I don't have any answers, but you see where my head is. In our time, we've seen a couple of massive social movements, the civil rights movement and the Vietnam war protests, both characterized by civil disobedience. They were successful because they were RIGHT and because they could no longer be ignored. Those actions shaped the news, coverage of the news, public opinion and, finally, policy. In'Shallah, we will find action and leaders and a commanding voice.

Blessings, dougt

Sorry, but I have a correction to my last post, which I unfortunately missed in prviewing...

I meant to say: "... I have nothing against Republicans or Christians, although I have big problems with some of their leaders and guidance..."

dougt

The timing of the JBR (non) news is just off a little. Another week and it would have fallen right on the 1st anniv. of Katrina. Lest we remember...

Bumper sticker seen around town: Orwell Was An Optimist.

Am I laughing or crying...?

The whole JonBenet schtick reminds me of when I first heard about this Lacey woman who was murdered in Modesto(?), allegedly by her husband. I'm not a regular reader of the mainstream press, for sound intellectual reasons (being discussed here). I get the important news that I feel I need from sources such as The Nation, and Link TV. I abandoned the mass media pretty much, soon after 9-11, since there was an awful lot of media-induced hysteria over the whole thing that would not seem to end! But back to JonBenet and Lacey. I saw Lacey's story (didn't bother to read it) in several tabloids in a Paradise Safeway check out line, and immediately asked a checker who the hell Lacey was? The checker said she was a woman who "they" say was murdered by her husband. My reaction was, "And?" The checker said that's it. I said, well what's so special about that? People get murdered all the time. Why are some murder victims so important, when the poor, the homeless, and most others who die in the street, unwanted and unloved, just become statistics? But then, with the current state of the media, one probably just has to ask "Why ask why?" After all, we exist on a small particle of dust in a vast, vast universe, and if you want to ask where God is, I'd say He/She/? is probably extremely busy in some other galaxy. That is, if God actually exists which, as you all know, is definitely subject to debate.