The media's web of misinformation
July 16, 2009 3:32 pm ET
Illustrating the media's enthusiastic promotion of the House Republicans' "Organizational Chart of the House Democrats' Health Plan," Media Matters for America offers this handy chart:
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
Upsetting to me, that is, that there are national "news" organizations that are nothing more than promotional units for a national U.S. political party ...
By two viewpoints, I'm guessing you mean the fairy-tale land that spawned the chart in question, and reality?
You also forgot the part where they distill that talking point down to a three word phrase that can be shouted at "liberals" and deaf people. i.e.
Socialist Rationed Care or
And then for the really dumb followers they come up with a catch one word slogan like "Obamacare".
On Twitter, I usually point out that #TCOT really stands for Truth Cannot Obstruct Telling = that will not change.
As is usual with so many liberals here, when MMFA seemingly cannot argue the facts, (or in this case the misinformation,) it attacks the messengers.
Gotta love liberals for their consistency. :-)
The FACT here is that the media is pushing a right wing creation. They are ARGUING that pushing a right wing creation is conservative misinformation.
Lame, AA, lame.
I have no problem with a news organization showing this chart if it is properly identified and the facts have been checked for their accuracy.
What's this YOU stuff?
I don't watch any of those crappy news programs. I have a brain.
MMfA doesn't post about propaganda from the Republicans. It posts about conservative media misinformation, which includes the media pushing the right wing spin on things.
But again, RightON's job is to distract from the topic, not actually discuss the issue, troll that he is.
The topic is, as I said, that the media is pushing a right wing creation.
raises cost of healt (CBO).
Its a bad plan and all should oppose it. Here, no plan is better than this one.
We should just tax the hell out of the "Energy" companies and invest the money in alternative energy sources.
I agree the public option plan stinks. We should simply create the single payer system most of America wants. We could use the gross profits the "Health Insurance" companies make to pay for health care for those that can't afford it.
AA
Dont ya love it when they make your very point for you? They dont care if it is true or not, and as you correctly said, they left has not pointed out any errors in the chart.
The truthfulness of the chart is undeniably irrelevant to MMfA's point. It's a rightwing creation, and it's not the job of the neutral media to push the rightwing (or a leftist) agenda.
So it doesn't matter a lick if the chart has any value. Did you even read what MMfA posted?
Illustrating the media's enthusiastic promotion of the House Republicans' "Organizational Chart of the House Democrats' Health Plan."
They don't say it's full of holes, which the chart is. They don't say that it distorts and misinforms, which it undeniably does. Media Matters only says that their problem with it is that the purportedly fair and balanced media is pushing a Republican chart.
That you can't or won't understand this is not our problem.
So as usual, you and TJ and self described evil one have NO point. Except for pointy's pointy head.
Doesn't matter if its accurate...it came from the GOP and then mouth pieced by Fox and posted on drudge...two outlets? All the while you claim it is undeniably inaccurate and "filled with holes" without ever providing any proof of you assertion. What the hell are you crying about anyways? What with all the other bazillion news outlets that won't talk about it you don't have to hear about it if you don't want to.
What's more of a story of misinformation? Lets play this game...this chart shows up all over fox and drudge...wow...big story...or a chart that no one seems to know what's wrong with, that is from the GOP, is not being reported on by NBC, CNN, MSNBC,CBS, ABC and should I go on?
And I love this one "The truthfulness of the chart is undeniably irrelevant to MMfA's point". Speaks volumes doesn't it.
Yes..it speaks volumes as to what LuLU thinks. And I also dont expect her try to even defend what she has said here. She really cant. She said flat out she does not care if it is true, she only cares who made it. What else could she really say that is more insane than that???
It's adorable to see you wingnuts get so excited you can't read. Must be all those shiny colored boxes and arrows.You're making MM's point.
i AM VERY NEW TO THIS WEBSITE... SO I HAVE TO CATCH UP WIT THE MMFA ARTICLES & WATNOT... BUT ITS BAFFLING TO READ ALL THESE COMMENTS ABOUT WHO KNOWS WHAT AND ALL THESE LOOPHOLES...
IF ITS NOT TRUE PLEASE PROVIDE FACTS.
OR AS A REPUBLICAN WOULD SAY, HE'S AGAINST GOD & IS CONSPIRING AGAINST GOOD AMERICANS...
NEWHO, LET THE KNOWLEDGE BEGIN!
PRIATE SERVICES AND COMMUNICATIONS" is mentioned in the House bill so the "chart" has at least some truth in it.
If you think filing out forms now is bad, wait until
the government that created an 80,000 page income tax law finishes with Health care. People will die filling out forms.
And your slanders of Medicare and say, the French or Canadian or British systems just don't mean a thing. I've lived in Canada, and I experienced far less bureaucracy than the average American doctor's office, where you have to establish your insurance creds, and if the Doc accepts it, and pay your co-pay, whatever that is. In Canada, you give them your card, they swipe it on a card reader, and that's it.
So, before you try this fear-mongering, get a clue. Our current system has delays for many that are much longer than your "horror stories" that are all in your imagination.
Perhaps if the Canadian process was put down in a flow chart with lots of garish and arbitrary colors and bubble shapes and complicated sounding names it would seem daunting too. For example, there is a "Hinged Wooden Intermittent Barrier" which I have to negotiate every time I enter the doctor's office.
The Canadian experience probably wouldn't transfer to the US though, as any public system you come with will doubtlessly be designed specifically to be as confused and onerous as possible so as not to undercut the private corporations ability to suck profits from desperate, sick people.
I've finally stopped laughing at this thread, and I'm going to offer you some helpful advice, coming from a third party reading a discussion. I've been in your spot enough times that somebody outside of my back-and-forth had to point out to me where the misunderstanding was.
You may not have enough experience trying to explain things to the wingnuts here, but I'll give you Tip #1: Dumb It Down. Don't make any assumptions about what they do or do not understand.
What you see as dishonesty or willful ignorance here may be actual confusion. Read the thread again. When you (correctly) stated that the accuracy of the chart is not the issue, a few con posters translated that as "truth is irrelevant".
The chart is nonsense, most people get that, but it's been designed so that most of the elements in it could be described as "not technically untrue". Everything on the chart does exist, and has some connection to the health care plan, even if completely irrelevant to the lives of Americans under the plan.
The wingnuts have been fooled by all of the confusing arrows and colors, and you trying to get them to understand that it's meaningless propaganda is probably like hammering Q-Tips into an anvil at this point.
Please don't take this as condescending towards you, just the opposite.You're assuming they understand everything you understand. I enjoy your posts, I'm just saying I live among Republicans and have been posting at this site for few years, and I've learned to re-calibrate when talking to the GOPpers.
Be aware of the simplistic, concrete thinking you're dealing with. Think small children or ESL students, and start with the very basics. Sometimes nothing works, it can't be dumbed down any further, all you can do is try.
Hypothetical Event
The GOP is in power and trying to pass Bill A.
The Dems check with whatever agency records and forecasts childhood deaths.
Federal Bureau of Dead Kids (FBDK) informs them that they predict X children will die next year.
Dems issue a press release stating that if Bill A is passed, X children will die next year.
Hypothetical Liberal Media reports that if Bill A passes, X kids will die.
Is this acceptable to you?
If not, is the fact that the report is true relevant?
Notice I've given you a little handicap by restricting my hypothetical to something that is objectively true.
I'm not sure where you're seeing slicing/dicing or parsing. I'm really trying to make this so simple a child could understand it. Good luck.
The col makes an intelligent well thought out post.....wait...no one would ever buy that.
my apologies to all.
Hey, you brought up this hypothetical event, not me.
completely irrelevant. I asked you two very straightforward, simple questions. You didn't answer either, only insulted me and tried to veer off into details that don't affect the "ridiculous" analogy. Three separate posts trying to weasel out of it. Lame.
That's good. I'll assume that means you understand the topic now, and are just too embarrassed to admit it. You're welcome.
My questions about the analogy;
1. Is this acceptable to you?
2. If not, is the fact that the report is true relevant?
Until I know what your answers to these are, I can't possibly know what you're confused about, and this is a waste of my time.
EvilCon at least tried to address the questions. It flamed out in a confused story about a fast food offer, but at least he tried.
If you'd care to address what I wrote on this topic below, fine. Otherwise, before you prop up some worthless analogy full of holes and missing pieces in hopes of goading me into playing along, think it through a little bit more.
My simple analogy (that I invented in my own mind-wtf?) was this;
political party creates misleading, logically flawed, but technically true, prop, and gives it to the media.
Media promotes this prop without questioning it.
And none of you can say that this is unacceptable, or that the "truth" of the prop is irrelevant when discussing the failure of the media to analyze it.
Stunning.
I understand she isn't saying the truth is unimportant, she is saying it is irrelevant, in this case specifically. Well this is why I don't think it is. If this were a bogus chart and it's accuracy were the issue, then the fact that the media, even if it is only Fox and Drudge, is pushing it all is a problem in and of itself, albeit isolated to these well-known rightwing outfits.
However, if it is accurate, regardless of the source, then I find it troubling that none of the mainstream media outlets aren't "running" with it. They damn well should be. So yes, the accuracy or inaccuracy of this chart is very relevant.
Stop. Breathe. Relax.
You don't understand Lulu's point. The hypothetical was designed to help you understand it.
I'll assume you're just playing dumb at this point. I hope so.
But if you'd answer my questions, we could move closer to getting you on topic.
Otherwise, it's just playing-dumb, low level troll work on your part.
However, if it is accurate, regardless of the source, then I find it troubling that none of the mainstream media outlets aren't "running" with it. They damn well should be. So yes, the accuracy or inaccuracy of this chart is very relevant"
These are my points above Colonel. Please tell me what I don't understand about this topic and how your useless diversionary analogy helps. It helps you avoid the topic at hand is all it does. If it wasn't so transparently grade-schoolish I would be impressed by your dodging avoidances, but I am not. Sorry.
I don't need to go beyond that point in your comment. You don't think the truth of the chart is irrelevant. Has anybody determined the truthfulness of the chart? Not as far as I know. It's just a bunch of crap thrown together by the GOP to create the illusion of complexity. Mostly opinion, parts of it probably could be argued by both sides with regard to truthfulness.
It's not news. It's not a fact.Propaganda doesn't need to be proven objectively false in the details to be propaganda.
This is the topic. News media is using material from a political party as its source.If that's OK with you, I won't try to change your mind.
If you have some proof of the "truthfulness" of the chart, that would really help your case. Several flaws have been pointed out in other items about it here.
Anyways, haha what was that? That was stupid but it made me laugh. But the bigger point to me now is how condescending you are to us trolls and how unaffected you are some of the most ridicoulous things you say. First, do you even have a TV? The truth is never irrelevant when it comes to reporting...I just don't get it. The GOP has some concerns so they produced a visual...fox and some other networks, that you can count on your three fingered hand, reported it...maybe some more fervently than others. So again I ask to please tell me what is wrong with that and why aren't any other news sources covering it? If the truth is irrelevant then why do we even have news shows?
Second, ending my semi-coherent ramblings is the fact, and Luvlulu did it too, that your whole point is surrounded by the fact that the chart is as irrelevant as the truth to you. Yet both of you, after making that admission, give no proof as to why it's false or not worthy for broadcast news. That is your complaint right? The newsworthiness of that chart? That is the only thing that makes sense...all three of these news agencies saw this as newsworthy...you and the rest of the mainstream media don't think it's relevant. So what's the big deal...?
...your whole point is surrounded by the fact that the chart is as irrelevant as the truth to you. Yet both of you, after making that admission, give no proof as to why it's false or not worthy for broadcast news.
This is the part that contains your basic mistake. I'm pretty bored with hand-holding. Good luck.
You mean you are not persuaded by solon's "is so" reply? Go easy on him, it is the best hes got.
OTOH, MMFA's chart is much simpler and a reasonable person can try to find errors in it.
Want to volunteer?
I will point out that the chart gets something very very right. There is no new government obstacle between you and your doctor created by the DEMs healthcare plans, regardless of what Republicans would have you believe. The direct line between health care providers and consumers is intact.
Why don't you ask what a comparable chart depicting the bureaucracy between patient and doctor looks like in a private insurance model. I'm sure it would include a claims adjuster who makes a bonus by disqualifying you from coverage once you get sick.
Second, does anyone have a clear picture about what the health care plan actually entails. I can't find an outlet that just presents the bill as it stands now.
CBO: Health care overhaul would raise costs
Democrats' health care bills won't meet President Obama's goal of slowing the rise of medical costs, Congress' budget umpire warned.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-07-16-health-overhaul-house_N.htm
That's the CBO - not anyone up on that chart.
The first paragraph from your linked article is
"Democrats' health care bills won't meet President Obama's goal of slowing the ruinous rise of medical costs, Congress' budget umpire warned on Thursday, giving weight to critics who say the legislation could break the bank."
can you provide a link that proves "President Obama's goal of slowing the ruinous rise of medical costs"?
Did he say my goal is to "slowing the ruinous rise of medical costs"?
If not, USA today is projecting.
By the way, I read a third of the article and it was way beyond my comprehensive skills.
I also found this in the same article.
"Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said the budget director's warning should be "a wake-up call," adding, "instead of rushing through one expensive proposal after another, we should take the time we need to get things right."
Then I went to senate.gov and looked up McConnell, KY.
"First elected to the Senate in 1984, McConnell made history that year as the only Republican challenger in the country to defeat a Democrat incumbent and as the first Republican to win a statewide Kentucky race since 1968."
He needs more than 25 years to take the time to do it right?
Except for the health care system that Mr. McConnell has access to, I do not believe this to be true. We spend more on health care than any other country in the world but; data shows we do not lead the world in terms of general health, infant mortality, etc.
I would go on but; I would be just screaming in the wind.
"End-of-Life" more often than not refers to the millions of people who don't just die but instead get old, get a brain disease/disfunction, slow down and finally become completely dependant on people for everything. At the end, they even need assistance in eating (via a tube) so one has to decide whether to "pull the plug" so to speak unless the person mentions it in his/her will. Between the beginning and end of this process, there are nurses and in-home care and infections and surguries and on and on and on. That's what Obama was saying is so expensive. He wasn't suggesting that anyone that might die (even the young) should just be killed because its expensive.
That does make the story less than compelling. The mere fact that the question was asked shows that the answer is uncertain, and that healthcare is rationed as it is right now.
Today your daughter lives and you aren't bankrupt because a insurance claims adjuster decided to let your daughter have treatment, but he could have made the opposite decision and your life would be in the toilet right now. With my father in the Canadian system we never once faced that likelihood. There was no chance whatsoever that he would be refused treatment.
The only point that made any sense to me was thepest's warning of the incompetence of government by using him/herself as an example of a government employee.
P.S. no i'm not making up the story of my child.
Nope.It's just a sad example of the state of the Republican faithful, and their complete and utter hatred of reality. Amazing.
Hmmn, seems simple enough to me too.
If the facts as presented are so bad, why does the left have to make stuff up to have a point to argue?
Things like this just validate the accuracy of the original health care chart, which was taken directly from the 1018 page bill.
Yes, a simple graph made from a 1018 page bill sounds credible to me.....please.
Either offer some solutions or get out of the way. Your party, if you're still one of the 20% who will admit to being a Republican is now a fringe party that offers real Americans zip, zero and less than nothing.