I watched Oprah Winfrey's townhall show today. She had just read Frank Rich's book "The Greatest Story Ever Sold" and had him on as a guest for a townhall show. Frank works for the New York Times... one of the largest left biased papers in the US. Frank however states he is not "left" but has some "liberal views"... yeah, whatever Frank.
So, here is my take on the show. When I first started watching and saw the Frank was the main guest and the title of the book, I thought: "Oh no, another propaganda show by the media to push their left agenda". I just about turned it off because I get enough of this in the media. To my surprise, there was intelligent conversation going on. Bear with me here. It was a relief to my blood pressure levels when Oprah ran a very fair and balanced show. To balance the left spin from the guest, as a townhall, the audience participated. Although Oprah asked Americans to question whether there is critical thinking and why people aren't informed, it was apparent that many in the audience were well informed and critical thinkers. Chalk one up against Frank Rich because I guess the idea was, if they agree with the government instead of the MSM, people must not be informed or critical thinkers. The audience proved them wrong.
Frank began his spiel with the whole idea that the government "sold" America on the Iraq war by misinforming them about WMD's and misinforming America that Iraq needed to be attacked as they were responsible for 9/11. Lo and behold, thanks again to the audience and Oprah's questions, when Oprah asked the audience if they believed at the time they went to war with Iraq that Saddam and Iraq were responsible for 9/11, a huge majority of the audience did not believe Sadam and Iraq were responsible. Then Oprah asked if people had heard that Saddam was involved with Al Qaeda in the media. Again, an overwhelming majority agreed they had heard in the media that this was true. To top it off, it was agreed that the Bush administration had not said that Iraq had caused 9/11, but Frank stated that he "suggested" this by mentioning them in the same sentence sometimes, by innuendo etc. So, lets recap: Frank Rich states that Bush "sold" America by "mindmelding" (as one audience member said) and innuendo, the audience all agreed they heard from the media that Iraq was involved in 9/11, yet overwhelmingly the audience did not BELIEVE at the time that Saddam and Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. Hmmmm... sounds to me like critical thinking and being informed regardless of the media, innuendos, etc. Kind of blows the theory and his book to smithereens.
He also says that Bush scared people about WMDs and threats of a "mushroom" cloud. This is another issue and I, personally, still believe there were and they were hidden or moved to Syria. He states that Hans Blix said that Saddam was "starting to cooperate" when Bush started the war. I say, this is after 19 UN sanctions were still being thwarted by Saddam. As one audience member pointed out "what is a country to do". I agreed with this audience member. The funny thing is that Oprah just showed a program about the danger of North Korea yesterday and the scary fact that they now have nuclear capabilities. The rest of the world are in a quandary and NK is threatening the US now that it has them. Much of the US is calling for some sort of action and lamenting previous inaction. I believe Iraq could have been NK if left to their devices. Anyway, I will continue with the show...
Frank Rich proceeded to say that the media misleads and focuses on the "fireworks" of bombs going off but do not show the horror of bombs being dropped on families, etc. He talked about how they instead show a small group of Iraqis bringing down Saddam's statue for hours and that Iraqis had not truly welcomed the invasion. Again, thank heavens for the audience. Immediately, two different audience members (one a soldier who had been in Iraq and one whose cousin had served in Iraq) agreed with Frank that the media definitely misinforms. They talked about how the media focuses on the blood and the bad but never tells the stories of how over and over again, Iraqis thank the American soldiers in Iraq. They state that the media never shows all the gratefulness of many Iraqis and the positive and rebuilding going on and kids going back to school. Hmmmm.... blows Frank's theory again. On the other hand, another soldier did stand up and say some soldiers were confused.
I could go on but suffice it to say, it was illuminating. The audience was asked if they believed the media. Again, an overwhelming majority do not believe the media. Here is my opinion: the media have been overwhelmingly biased in their reporting and have been getting "bad press", particularly papers like the New York Times for pushing their agenda into stories instead of reporting the facts and a balanced approach to let readers and viewers make up their mind. Frank proceeds to write a book with the basic premise that people are believing misinformation on:
- "suggestions" and "innuendos" from the government.
- the positive slant on Iraq from media
- are not critical thinkers and not informing themselves
- did not believe the "suggestions" from the government
- believe there is a much more negative slant from the media on Iraq than the reality and don't believe the media in general
- are critical thinkers and trying to inform themselves
7 comments:
I thought it was quite well-balanced and was very impressed both with Oprah and the intelligence of the audience members. If we weren't in Iraq right now, maybe we'd have more options in North Korea...
Hi Archana:
I notice you dislike us "right wingers". S'alright.. I have my own biases..LOL
I tend to think that if we weren't in Iraq, perhaps Iraq would have nuclear capabilities like North Korea. Don't worry, I know all the arguments and just disagree. I just went through alot of arguments with my sister so I'm argued out!
Regardless, I do agree that it was much better than I thought it would be as the audience was fabulous and Oprah tried to keep a good balance. I'm glad I didn't turn it off when I saw who the guest was.
As another note, please realize that at this point in time, there is not 1 UN sanction against North Korea yet. Besides asking the obvious of "why not", what makes North Korea more worthy of our military than Iraq. Both despicable dictators with dreams of destroying the US. Both had intentions of creating nuclear weapons. Can you imagine how much Bush would be criticized if he had attacked North Korea? Heck, he would have been criticized by the left if he attacked Darfur as the UN didn't and as of this moment, doesn't condone interference at this point. In my opinion, all of these issues are worthy of standing against militarily. Unfortunately, as you said, there are limits to what the west can stand against in the world. At this point, the fact that North Korea already has nuclear weapons makes military might a heck of alot trickier.
Okay, now I am argued out.
Great post, Lanny. :) There are many sides/opinions to be heard and I am happy to have read yours.
The last point about Dafur has always puzzled me. How can anyone suggest Canadian or U.S involvement when the U. N. has and the Dafur government have rejected involvement? And, as you say, not one sanction against North Korea yet, and the antiBush crowd shout "Why arn't you invading NK"? And then conclude it's because they don't have oil!!! By the way, my understanding is that Iraq and Saddam had 29 U.N. sanctions against them, not 19, but I may be wrong. Good blog. Too bad we don't get a clear cut disection of some of these issues by the news media.
I meant to say "how can anyone who is against the Iraq war suggest involvement in Dafur----"
Did you see Oprah's townhall meeting with Bill O'Reilly? Just wondering what you thought of it...
Post a Comment