As a rule I do not watch cable news. Cable news is a useless exercise filled with distortions and a drive to create fear and sensation. Here is a brilliant example of the lunacy that poses as news.
This is not based on statistics but perceptions. It's not crime that is the highest level, it's the perception that crime has increased. Truth is that Gallup and CNN tell us, statistics for this year will not be out till next year some time.
But, what happens when Cafferty reports in his segment the "perceptions" and "opinions" on crime? People believe crime has increased even though it is just perceptions, opinions and fear mongering. What stays with people is the fear mongering and sensationalism that is cable news.
Tell me what purpose does Cafferty serve? How is he in any way better than Beck, Limbaugh etc? He does not inform, he perpetuates ignorance, misinformation and fear. So, if the people have bad habits, cable news encourages the bad habits and feeds the ignorance.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Rhetorica
Martha Nichols
Jeanette DeMain
Amalias
Ken Honeywell
Patton Lee Beaugus
Salon.com
Comments
R
Unfortunately, Stellaa, a lot of our fellow Americans are people who don't want serious news. You don't have to go very far to see this. For example, I am the only person who regularly writes about business and economic topics. Shouldn't there be more people? And people pretty much ignore what I write. Shouldn't they care about jobs, retail sales, and things like that?
Oh, but we do!! And perhaps they should be fearful as I know there are those who would gladly string them all up from the nearest streetlights as the corporate whores they are!!
Now they have that tool Arianna creating a sensational nothing by writing a post to get Biden to step down. Oh, brother.
I have a tendancy to agree.
Rated.
I don't watch Mathews. I love Joan, but don't watch the other guys either.
Cafferty was reprimanded by the president of CNN when he called Donald Rumsfeld "an obnoxious jerk and war criminal" on the eve of the 2006 midterm election. He made an on-air acknowledgment of having "stepped over the line," but later told the interviewer, "I will go to my grave as Jack Cafferty, private citizen, believing that these people committed war crimes
Governments then use the reaction of scared members of the public to "crack down" on some segment or other of the population, to be seen to be doing something. Perceptions again.
It's a loathsome practice.
Rated
We executed them for war crimes.
And if Rumsfeld authorized that, he's as guilty of a war crime as Hitler's minions were.
Will he ever be prosecuted? Nope. But it is very possible that he IS a war criminal.
My head was aching too hard to interfere, and nobody loves a know-it-some. But as long as the general public accepts inferior product from the media, and parrots that inferior product without inspection nor reflection, we will be brought down by those who care more about whether Britney Spears looks fat then whether forces in Sudan are waging a war with child soldiers.
We are led by fools; we are surrounded by fools. Sometimes I wonder if I'm the crazy one.
Cafferty was actually quoting people who emailed him about break ins or rumors of break ins in their neighborhoods.
Now that I've gone to your source and see that Cafferty is indeed playing upon people's fears by simply talking about the increased crime with only the barest mention of its being perception we're talking about--AND THEN SOLICITING MORE STORIES ABOUT PERCEIVED CRIME--I have only this to say:
What an ass. No, it's worse than that, he's an ass with a public platform.
Phew...now I feel better.
Owl, he was not even talking about crime statistics, actual data, he is talking about a Gallup poll and his blog posts where people think crime has gone up.
Let's leave it there.
A few days ago, a Norwegian newspaper reported that "CO2 levels similar to today's lead to sea level which was 40 meters higher" in the past. Which could have been interesting, except the article failed to answer the question "40 meters higher than what?" Forget that little detail, and the article tells you nothing.
It's like the old joke: "What's the difference between an elephant?"
"It can neither sing."