For a concise, readable summary of iTulip concepts developed over the past 16 years and a vision of a challenging next decade and how to navigate it, read Eric Janszen's book "Post Catastrophe Economy".
Join the discussion of today's events with a wide range of professionals with an interest in economics and finance.
Register to join our 50,000 plus member registered community from 78 countries today.
Subscribe to iTulip Select for access to the longest running, deep, accurate, and unvarnished macro economic trends analysis and forecasting available, since 1998.
If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
It's funny to me, because Brian Williams kind of looks like somebody blended images of Mitt Romney and John Kerry. So corporatist, middle of the road, milquetoast. Just happy to rake in cash and be the next Brocaw - who incidentally has been warning about this guy lying for a while.
It's hilarious to me that they're trying to pin him as partisan. As if Williams cared who wins the Whitehouse.
Always did think he put himself in the story a little too much. Reminded me of that kid from the Wire. (Warning: language below.)
As if anyone would ever "accidentally misremember" whether they did or didn't get shot at.
I am beyond tired of people saying "accidentally misremembered" when they mean "made it up", just as I am sick of people "mispeaking" when they are outright lying.
Is anyone in the press ever again going to use words like "lied" or "fantasized" when they are reporting deliberate falsehoods?
I am beyond tired of people saying "accidentally misremembered" when they mean "made it up", just as I am sick of people "mispeaking" when they are outright lying.
Is anyone in the press ever again going to use words like "lied" or "fantasized" when they are reporting deliberate falsehoods?
I don't understand the fuss?
Wasn't truth in reporting a casualty long, long ago?
Wasn't truth in reporting a casualty long, long ago?
Did it coincide with the collapse of mass media ownership?
It feels like a cross between 1984's "Chocolate ration increasing from 30 to 25 grams per month" and corporate public relations damage control.....in what passes for news.
That and the calculated divisiveness for maximum profit.
I am beyond tired of people saying "accidentally misremembered" when they mean "made it up", just as I am sick of people "mispeaking" when they are outright lying.
Is anyone in the press ever again going to use words like "lied" or "fantasized" when they are reporting deliberate falsehoods?
Early in the genesis of iTulip as I saw Ben Stein put up as a credible source of news about the economy and Jim Cramer about the markets I realized that the business media had figured out that its audience had no interest in or patience with facts or tedious details about how the economy actually works.
They want a good story and to not have their misguided beliefs contradicted.
That's it.
How hard is that?
Brian Williams did what his employers asked him to do. Now they are throwing him under the bus for doing it badly.
What's the message to the those who are employed by the media to do the same?
Don't get caught, stupid. You are paid a ridiculous salary to tell consistently clever lies not easily discovered fabrications that in the telling offend those in the know.
The media now selects for competent liars.
Brian Williams' replacement will be the next Dan Rather.
williams' story reminded me so much of hilary getting shot at when she landed in bosnia [actually she was greeted by a child who gave her a copy of a poem]. i guess we expect a lot more accuracy from our news anchors than our politicians.
Jon Stewart’s departure matters, Brian Williams’ doesn’t
It was only minutes into an interview with Jon Stewart before a screening of his film, “Rosewater,” last November when I knew he would never fully return to “The Daily Show.” Working on that heartfelt and effective movie about an Iranian journalist who was imprisoned by the regime for 118 days made the comedian wax poetic about how lasting and indelible film was compared to a television show.
He was explicit about his change in attitude in his surprise announcement that he was leaving at the end of Tuesday’s show. “What is this fluid,” he said, pointing to his eyes. “What are these feelings,” he said pounding the desk. He then confirmed what he had hinted at a few months earlier. “This show doesn’t deserve an even slightly restless host.”
There had been signs. He had become a factory of satire and social commentary, attracting and developing talent that often bid fair to surpass the master. John Oliver has taken uncovering the truth into new territory, rooting out corruption in places as varied as the Miss America pageant and for-profit schools that exploit veterans.
Maybe after 17 years he felt – as many of us do – that he just couldn’t face the void of another election. He made exposing mealy-mouthed politicians look like shooting fish in a barrel. Maybe the sight of all those dead fish become too much to look at.
What’s certain is that Stewart’s departure will have a greater impact on the American public’s news literacy than the suspension of Brian Williams from “NBC Nightly News.”
Williams is a newsreader of the conventional wisdom, albeit one with 8.43 million viewers. Stewart’s four-nights-a-week skewering gets an average of 1.3 million viewers, but these are in the coveted 18-to-29 demographic. When the Pew Research Center asked four questions to measure knowledge of political news and current events, “Daily Show” viewers did significantly better than network news viewers.
The comedian’s segment on the Williams debacle was Stewart-in-full. First came criticism of Williams’s fictional brush with combat-zone danger, then the human sympathy for the humiliated anchor – a sharp contrast to the joy so many rivals seem to take in his fall. Then Stewart pivoted to a much larger point: the relative triviality of Williams’s offense compared with the far greater lies told about the Iraq War that will forever go unpunished.
Stewart showed that Williams gave an initially accurate rendition of his helicopter ride in Iraq but that as the years passed, the story grew. By the time Williams made his fateful comments about surviving the shoot-down of the chopper on the “Late Show With David Letterman” in 2013, he was infected with “infotainment confusion syndrome,” which occurs when the “brain’s applause center” pushes a celebrity into “full-blown anecdote mode.”
Stewart came as close to defending Williams as he could by putting his downfall in its proper context. “Finally, someone is being held to account for misleading America about the Iraq War,” he said. “Never again will Brian Williams mislead this great nation about being shot at in a war we probably wouldn’t have ended up in if the media had applied this level of scrutiny to the actual (expletive deleted) war.”
Was it spending time with Bahari – the Newsweek reporter portrayed in “Rosewater” who put everything on the line to tell a life and death story of imprisonment – that convinced Stewart to move on? Or maybe he found it too disheartening that no matter how many fish in the barrel he shot, new ones kept coming, as if politicians, and the voters who elect them, had learned nothing from all those nights Stewart spent exposing mendacity and folly.
The creator of Indecision 2000 will leave us to figure out Indecision 2016 on our own. It won’t be easy.
Jon Stewart’s departure matters, Brian Williams’ doesn’t
.....Stewart came as close to defending Williams as he could by putting his downfall in its proper context. “Finally, someone is being held to account for misleading America about the Iraq War,” he said. “Never again will Brian Williams mislead this great nation about being shot at in a war we probably wouldn’t have ended up in if the media had applied this level of scrutiny to the actual (expletive deleted) war.”....
and just never mind that had they applied that same level of scrutiny to Indecision2008(+'12) that resulted in the most inexperienced+unqualified POTUS in US history - but guess thats a 'different topic'
but seems maybe the 'meme of media accuracy' is now being exposed for what it is - or isnt - this one ought to be a beauty:
Americans see their leaders in Washington as overpaid agents of wealthy individuals and corporations who are largely disconnected from the concerns of average Americans.
Don't take my word for it: For our series "United States of Influence," which debuts today, CBS News asked Americans why they are so constantly frustrated with the men and women charged with representing them. (Read more about the series)
quite a few interesting obs in this piece - but the final pgph is THE MOST interesting (and we'll see how and maybe even WHO)
In addition to this story, there will be two installments in the series this week: The first, on Wednesday, will look at the career of New York Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer, who has maintained a reputation as a liberal lion even as he has been a strong ally of Wall Street.
And the second, on Thursday, will examine why members of Congress are so much wealthier than the average American. The series will then continue in regular installments throughout the year.
altho this probably doesnt have much to do with it - ya think?
Questioning Pelosi: Steve Kroft heads to D.C. \"Nobody would talk to us." That's what 60 Minutes correspondent Steve Kroft says happened when he tried to get members of Congress to talk about "insider trading" on Capitol Hill. Back in November, when 60 Minutes aired "Insiders," it was illegal for member of Congress to make stock trades using inside information they learn while working on legislation. Kroft had some questions about unsavory-seeming stock trades by lawmakers, but unsurprisingly nobody would give him an interview. So, Steve had to find other ways to get some answers.
As you'll see on Overtime this week, Steve called on lawmakers at their homes, attempted to track others down in their offices, and finally ended up asking questions at press conferences held by Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner.
"You don't like to do that stuff," Kroft told Overtime producer David Rubin. "But on the other hand, if they don't want to talk to you and they don't want to give you an interview, and they are in powerful positions and play a prominent role in the story that you're doing, then you feel like sometimes you've got to do it."
and just never mind that had they applied that same level of scrutiny to Indecision2008(+'12) that resulted in the most inexperienced+unqualified POTUS in US history - but guess thats a 'different topic'
but seems maybe the 'meme of media accuracy' is now being exposed for what it is - or isnt - this one ought to be a beauty:
"...As you'll see on Overtime this week, Steve called on lawmakers at their homes, attempted to track others down in their offices, and finally ended up asking questions at press conferences held by Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner..."
When I read this I couldn't help but recall Michael Moore's comparable antics in "Roger and Me". Hard to believe that film was done a quarter century ago.
Tweet
Comment