'Conspiraloons' in the ascendancy?

[kyser_soze]

Anyone who suggests that they just happened to spout exactly the same lies by chance is a naive fool.

Including, presumably, Noam Chomsky? That the process of collusion isn't overt, it's behavioural, a manifestation of a kind of group think, which is common in many areas of human activity?

Again, pisspoor trolling.

 

[phildwyer]

Do they get naked and worship Molocha as well?

OK, let's get this straight. You don't believe that Rupert Murdoch invites leading politicians, editors and columnists to spend long weekends together in order to "discuss current affairs." Is that right? You find this concept implausible?

If so, you are a perfect example of a loony-tunes conspiracy denialist. You have no idea how the world works. You are nuttier than the craziest conspiracy theorist. And far, far more dangerous. You would believe anything you are told by people in authority, and you would do anything they told you to do.

 

[phildwyer]

Including, presumably, Noam Chomsky? That the process of collusion isn't overt, it's behavioural, a manifestation of a kind of group think, which is common in many areas of human activity?

No, it is not "overt," in the sense that it is public. But it is most certainly overt in the sense that it is conscious and deliberate.

Are you really saying that you don't believe leading politicians, publishers, editors and columnists co-ordinate their activities in secret?

It doesn't surprise me that an ignoramus like 8den should be such a naif, but I'm surprised at you tbf.

 

[8den]

OK, let's get this straight. You don't believe that Rupert Murdoch invites leading politicians, editors and columnists to spend long weekends together in order to "discuss current affairs." Is that right? You find this concept implausible?

No I find it hilarious that you seem to think it strange that a multibillionare media tycoon would do such a thing.

How should he spend his weekends? Eating beans on toast and voting on the X Factor?

If so, you are a perfect example of a loony-tunes conspiracy denialist. You have no idea how the world works. You are nuttier than the craziest conspiracy theorist. And far, far more dangerous. You would believe anything you are told by people in authority, and you would do anything they told you to do.

Phil be a dear and change the fucking record.

 

[kyser_soze]

No, it is not "overt," in the sense that it is public. But it is most certainly overt in the sense that it is conscious and deliberate.

Are you really saying that you don't believe leading politicians, publishers, editors and columnists co-ordinate their activities in secret?

It doesn't surprise me that an ignoramus like 8den should be such a naif, but I'm surprised at you tbf.

I think that the process is far, far more complicated and varied than you're attempting to make out. Do I think that there can be collusion between MPs and journos and publishers? Yes. Do I think that Dacre, Wade et al all sat down with Alastair Campbell, Karl Rove, Murdoch, Rothermere and the Barclay twins to sketch out how, when and what would be published? No I don't, because it didn't need to happen - as you well know this collusion doesn't require meetings in back rooms and quiet lunches in private dining rooms - it's a function of the press that it reproduces r/c memes...depending on which bit of the r/c that paper happens to support...which is why there was such a disjunct between the Observer and Guardian's editorial position on the war (and as everyone who has read Flat Earth News knows, the Observer's position on this was largley the result of having an editor who was completely inexperienced in dealing with politics (his previous position was editor of the sports section) for example.

 

[claphamboy]

or at least bright enough to dazzle a driver , causing him to crash

or could it be that those 2 witnesses were the only ones near enough to see what happened?

It was only one witness in the underpass, his evidence was directly contradicted by his wife who was in the car with him and he had pervious criminal record for offences involving dishonesty.

Operation Paget Report - chapter 7 - but that's over 870 pages in total, so you may want to just check the reference to it on Wikipedia

The detail of eyewitness testimony was thoroughly reviewed and Operation Paget officers succeeded in uncovering two new witnesses. The police found that only one eyewitness at the scene of the crash, François Levistre, made a clear, specific reference to seeing a bright flash. He claimed to have seen it in his rear-view mirror and recounted other elements of what he saw in considerable detail while he was negotiating the difficult bend out of the tunnel, a task which would have required his full attention on the road in front of him. Crucially, however, his testimony was directly contradicted by his then-wife, who sat in the passenger seat next to him. Television documentaries produced by Channel 4 in 2004 and the BBC in 2006 both raised the issue of Levistre's prior criminal record for offences involving dishonesty.

Other eyewitness testimony made little reference to the appearance of any inexplicable flashes at the crash site. Several witnesses who would be expected to have seen a blinding flash made no reference to one.

In any event, the detailed crash reconstruction revealed that the chain of events that led to the car unavoidably colliding with the pillar started well before it was at the mouth of the tunnel where the flash is alleged to have been discharged. Furthermore, a strobe light of the type that was alleged to have been used is so powerful that a flash emitted from it would have been bright enough to illuminate a very wide area. It would have likely blinded not only Henri Paul, but also the driver of the white Fiat Uno, the pursuing paparazzi and witnesses standing at the road side. The Operation Paget report concluded the alleged flash did not happen.

 

[phildwyer]

No I find it hilarious that you seem to think it strange that a multibillionare media tycoon would do such a thing.

I don't find it strange in the slightest that he spends his time conspiring.

I do find it strange that, despite your admitted knowledge that such conspiring is commonplace, you still find it appropriate to deride those who theorize about such conspiring.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Sure.

Fleet St.'s editors and columnists are from the same class as the politicos. They went to school and uni together.

Except, of course, for the many who didn't.

They socialize together all the time and they co-ordinate their objectives together--yes I know this for a fact, I'm not from the same class or school, but I am from the same university.

Not, though, from the same faculty.

Anyone who suggests that they just happened to spout exactly the same lies by chance is a naive fool.

As opposed to a non-naive stirring fool such as yourself?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Oh do fuck off like a good chap, if they're all best chums with the old school ties, why the fuck did fleet street and the Mail, put in the boot to everyone in the expenses scandal? Or Cash for Honours? Mark Oaten? The Jo "good day to bury bad news" Moore's 911 e-mail? Peter Hain's resignation? David Kelly?

You're talking fucking nonsense Phil.

Now there's a surprise.
All that sleep deprivation seems to have sent him a bit garritty, or he'd realise that subscription to a dominant discourse (which some editors and journos did indeed subscribe to, to a lesser or greater extent, over the basis for war in Iraq, isn't quite the same as there being an airtight "old boy network" between the political establishment and the media.

 

[ViolentPanda]

So I'm told.

Only by your sycophants though, phil.

 

[phildwyer]

I think that the process is far, far more complicated and varied than you're attempting to make out. Do I think that there can be collusion between MPs and journos and publishers? Yes. Do I think that Dacre, Wade et al all sat down with Alastair Campbell, Karl Rove, Murdoch, Rothermere and the Barclay twins to sketch out how, when and what would be published? No I don't, because it didn't need to happen - as you well know this collusion doesn't require meetings in back rooms and quiet lunches in private dining rooms - it's a function of the press that it reproduces r/c memes...depending on which bit of the r/c that paper happens to support...which is why there was such a disjunct between the Observer and Guardian's editorial position on the war (and as everyone who has read Flat Earth News knows, the Observer's position on this was largley the result of having an editor who was completely inexperienced in dealing with politics (his previous position was editor of the sports section) for example.

Well it's a combination of the two innit.

There most certainly are meetings where Murdoch, Rove, Campbell et al sit down and conspire about what should be published, when and where. You bet your life there are.

On the other hand, as Chomsky notes, one effect of such meetings is to produce a climate of opinion, a limited range of possible viewpoints, which dictates that the desired effect is communicated to the public mind by discursive auto-pilot.

We see on these boards every day how people's opinions, and more importantly the range of opinions considered sane and acceptable, are determined in this manner. Part of this process is to allow a certain amount, and a certain kind, of dissent. We've moved far beyond the crude methods of mid-C20th totalitarians.

But no-one should be in any doubt that our rulers actively conspire among themselves all the time. That is their job.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I can see that "twat" and "foreigner" are like a couple of characters apart, and contain many of the same letters.

So we'll go ahead and add, racist, to the list of things Phil is*

So I may be a foreign twat, but, I'm a foreign twat who got a much greater working understanding how UK newsrooms work, than you Phil.

*List stands at: unfunny, liar, ignorant, immensely punchable, bigot, and clueless asshole"

You forgot "deliberate shit-stirrer, egotist and troll".

 

[8den]

I don't find it strange in the slightest that he spends his time conspiring.

For all you know they're conspiring about what desert to have.

I do find it strange that, despite your admitted knowledge that such conspiring is commonplace, you still find it appropriate to deride those who theorize about such conspiring.

You mean, I'd like to see evidence of a coherent plot that came out of these meetings. For example, despite this level of control that you claim Murdoch has, he's never been able to break up the BBC, something that infuriates him. He's also thrown his weight behind Cameroon, and he's still not PM.

Suspicion of conspiracy isn't evidence of conspiracy you simple minded gerbil.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Do they get naked and worship Molocha as well?

You forgot about them all chugging each others' pipes.

 

[claphamboy]

Suspicion of conspiracy isn't evidence of conspiracy you simple minded gerbil.

I wish to protest about this statement on behalf of gerbils worldwide.

 

[ViolentPanda]

For all you know they're conspiring about what desert to have.

The Mojave is Murdoch's favourite.

You mean, I'd like to see evidence of a coherent plot that came out of these meetings. For example, despite this level of control that you claim Murdoch has, he's never been able to break up the BBC, something that infuriates him. He's also thrown his weight behind Cameroon, and he's still not PM.

That's all part of the conspiracy! (taps side of nose with index finger).

Suspicion of conspiracy isn't evidence of conspiracy you simple minded gerbil.

The distinction doesn't matter if you're a shit-stirrer.

 

[8den]

I wish to protest about this statement on behalf of gerbils worldwide.

It's not all Gerbils, it's the simple minded ones, you know the ones that eat their wheel, and then try and rape the water bottle.

 

[kyser_soze]

There most certainly are meetings where Murdoch, Rove, Campbell et al sit down and conspire about what should be published, when and where. You bet your life there are.

OK, you see this is where it goes a bit awry. People like Campbell and Rove attempt to manage media output, and control the agenda - as does anyone who works in what can universally be termed 'PR'. They do not sit down together and 'conspire' to produce a completely controlled outcomes with the proprieters and editors - they don't need to.

Indeed, knowing several people who work in govt communications, this really isn't how it works - much to their chagrin in fact.

The climate of opinion Chomsky talks about doesn't require such meetings to take place - as you well know, political journos will be threatened with loss of access to ministers (for example) if they step out of line. The process of control is far more subtle and insidious than totalitarian regimes, as you say - which is why the clandestine meetings aren't required, this is a self-starting and maintaing process of...manufacturing consent, which is a process that is 00s, if not 000s of years old the difference now being that it's now visible because the scale of it runs beyond small elite groups such as priests and noblemen...it's all there in Machivelli and the behaviour of the Medici, and no doubt there are examples of it before then too.

 

[fogbat]

It's not all Gerbils, it's the simple minded ones, you know the ones that eat their wheel, and then try and rape the water bottle.

That pretty much is all gerbils, tbf.

 

[claphamboy]

That pretty much is all gerbils, tbf.

Racist!

 

[8den]

Racist!

I once had a hamster that committed suicide by jumping off my sister.

I heard Murdoch made him do it.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I once had a hamster that committed suicide by jumping off my sister.

I heard Murdoch made him do it.

Perhaps the hamster had been watching "V", and thought your sister was going to eat it?

 

[fogbat]

Racist!

I'm not a racist, I just think that all non-indigenous rodents would be happier in their country of origin.

 

[trevhagl]

I once had a hamster that committed suicide by jumping off my sister.

I heard Murdoch made him do it.

maybe it saw you coming with a roll of sellotape

 

[trevhagl]

Does the cognitive dissoance give you many headaches?



Thats a massive "or could". You've no way of knowing this, you just like to believe this, despite the fact that their accounts don't match other eye witnesses.



Yes you little wanker I went to Eton and quaffed champers with Dave and Boris.

I'm sure coming up with these little crude sketches of those who disagree with you, makes it easier to continue your bigoted narrow minded worldview.

sure does!!

 

[8den]

Perhaps the hamster had been watching "V", and thought your sister was going to eat it?

And Murdoch has never invited a rodent to his remote parties. Or maybe he does, and they're on the menu. ICKE WAS RIGHT!

 

[8den]

sure does!!

Hmmm was I using too many big words there trev?

maybe it saw you coming with a roll of sellotape

Are you suggesting that I enjoy being cruel to small animals trev?

 

[trevhagl]

as for the conspiracy thing with the media and top politicians, lets look at the benefits clampdowns.
Did the govt and all the tabloids start branding claimants as scroungers and calling for a harsher system at the same time, sorta great minds think alike, just a coincidence?
Or was there some agreement that the tabloids wouldn't slag the govt for persecuting the disabled etc?

 

[trevhagl]

Hmmm was I using too many big words there trev?



Are you suggesting that I enjoy being cruel to small animals trev?

ha ha, just another one of those mental images i like to picture when arguing with you.

 

[8den]

as for the conspiracy thing with the media and top politicians, lets look at the benefits clampdowns.
Did the govt and all the tabloids start branding claimants as scroungers and calling for a harsher system at the same time, sorta great minds think alike, just a coincidence?
Or was there some agreement that the tabloids wouldn't slag the govt for persecuting the disabled etc?

Yes because calling people on benefits "scroungers" is a really new thing that newspapers never engaged in until the government benefits clampdowns.