Is Argentina on par with USA regarding Freedom of press?

Bajo_cero2 said:
Well, I guess that the US is not the same after 9/11. That s why now we are almost equals about press freedom.
Regards

correct. there's no question that 9/11 has been used as the basis for the police state that the US is turning into - whether justified or not.

the government would have us believe that a terrorist could potentially be hiding under every rock. at first the terrorists were all brown men with turbans shouting allah akbar. now we have the domestic, "white al qaeda" terrorists, which could be any one of us. maybe it's you. maybe it's me. :eek:
 
You are soo right on all counts.
I so get revulsion from that phrase " y.... roba pero hace ....." I feel that ARGENTINES need to change their mentality , they need to mature as a people. This is something perhaps out of reach , corruption has been institutionalised in he culture of argentines.
Its is such a shame.
Its particularly true what you say about the 2001 crisis . I remcall being on fire island and seeing on TV the " Que se vayan TODOS" pancards. ut , who left ? noone. As a matter of fact there are MANY politicians that are still holding the hammer of power that formed part of the goverment of Isabel peron. Noone left , . There was zip reform.
What does it take ? I bitch and moan about this country , and the seemingly primitive mindset of the argentines , but having been born here , my father having had to emigrate in '67 becasue he had some kind of foresite that this was getting no better, in spite of that , The prevailing wish i have is that this country and its people rise up out of the quagmire , get past their self imposed limitations and do someting with themselves.
Its like a depressed friend ..... :(
 
Idunno , regarding the hightened sense of security , I really have no complaints , . I understand the need for it. However , it must ALWAYS be kept in check . I have been pro gun all my life , i have a lifetime menbership in the NRA . But I cannot under any circumstances accept these domestic militia groups.
Nutjobs like Koresh , McVey , and all these nutties are the counterbalance to the right to keep and bear arms.
I really dont mind the added security at the airport , on the contrary , I welcome it and I understand it . I know that in the states , there will ALWAYS be a moderating force making sure it doesnt get out of controll.
As far as terorists hiding under rocks , well , that is exactly how 911 was able to happen. Nutties that enjoyed the freedoms, and exploted them .
 
TheBlackHand said:
Fox News cancels Judge Andrew Napolitano's show FreedomWatch a couple weeks after this speech aired. Coincidence ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOaCemmsnNk&feature=youtu.be

Still think Freedom of Speech truly exists in the USA ? Good luck with that.

Can't say I agree with this. Fox news is really Faux News in my opinion. Its really just a mouth piece for the right wing of the Republican party. Its anything but fair and balanced. In wouldn't trust anything promoted there beyond the weather report. Its well know that anybody that says anything not in accordance with the party line will shortly be looking for work elsewhere. I don't think Fox is indicative of all media outlets in the U.S. In fact if you compare today with 30 years ago I think you can make a case that freedom of the press has never been greater than it is today. Back in the days before the internet and cable TV you basically had your choice of three TV networks and your local paper. Today you can get whatever you want on TV. Via the internet you can read just about every major paper in the world. I think the real problem to today is that there are too many people who watch stuff like fox or listen to right wing talk radio. They are not watching to be informed but rather to have views they already hold confirmed.
 
willwright said:
Can't say I agree with this. Fox news is really Faux News in my opinion. Its really just a mouth piece for the right wing of the Republican party. Its anything but fair and balanced. In wouldn't trust anything promoted there beyond the weather report. Its well know that anybody that says anything not in accordance with the party line will shortly be looking for work elsewhere. I don't think Fox is indicative of all media outlets in the U.S. In fact if you compare today with 30 years ago I think you can make a case that freedom of the press has never been greater than it is today. Back in the days before the internet and cable TV you basically had your choice of three TV networks and your local paper. Today you can get whatever you want on TV. Via the internet you can read just about every major paper in the world. I think the real problem to today is that there are too many people who watch stuff like fox or listen to right wing talk radio. They are not watching to be informed but rather to have views they already hold confirmed.

You can get whatever you want on TV? Do you know that the three big networks 30 years ago and most of the other cable networks today are all owned by just a few corporations? The big problem in media today is that the media are corporate-owned entities that are not in the business of journalism, but driving and controlling public opinion. You rail against media that roots for the Republican party, but you forget to rail against media that root for the Democratic party. Would you say there's a conflict of interest if the Chairman and CEO of GE, the parent company of MSNBC and NBC News, sits on President Obama's board of economic advisers?

Media literacy is also a problem, but media literacy means nothing if the media (as Mr. Napolitano points out) confines you to a box of false paradigms.
 
bradlyhale said:
You can get whatever you want on TV? Do you know that the three big networks 30 years ago and most of the other cable networks today are all owned by just a few corporations? The big problem in media today is that the media are corporate-owned entities that are not in the business of journalism, but driving and controlling public opinion. You rail against media that roots for the Republican party, but you forget to rail against media that root for the Democratic party. Would you say there's a conflict of interest if the Chairman and CEO of GE, the parent company of MSNBC and NBC News, sits on President Obama's board of economic advisers?

Media literacy is also a problem, but media literacy means nothing if the media (as Mr. Napolitano points out) confines you to a box of false paradigms.

I think you are right that the same thing happens with media outlets favoring Democrats. However, if you look at the volume of bilge there is far more on the right wing outlets like Fox and talk radio. Also you are confusing freedom of press with concentration of ownership which is really a different issue. My point is still valid that you have many more choices today than in the past. Access to more information equal a better informed public and supports stronger democracy.
 
willwright said:
I think you are right that the same thing happens with media outlets favoring Democrats. However, if you look at the volume of bilge there is far more on the right wing outlets like Fox and talk radio. Also you are confusing freedom of press with concentration of ownership which is really a different issue. My point is still valid that you have many more choices today than in the past. Access to more information equal a better informed public and supports stronger democracy.
This Punch and Judy puppet show that pits the Democrats against the Republicans seems to occupy the American public sufficiently so that they don't look closely enough to see that both puppets are controlled by two arms of of the same body.
Are there substantive, cosmetic differences? Sure. But policy wise: new boss same as the old boss.
I wish more people would wake up to this reality.
 
Back
Top