No offense, but if you are gonna use a quote to criticize Bush, or really any politician for that matter, and you use Kanye West......:crazy:

All what was said was: As Kanye West said.....
Yet this is a good example for media control. When Kayne West said what he said - and it was not to the liking of some people -the broadcast was quickly switched.

What broadcast? What are you referring to?

Here is one of many recaps:

Kanye West's Torrent of Criticism, Live on NBC

By Lisa de Moraes

Saturday, September 3, 2005; Page C01

Why We Love Live Television, Reason No. 137:

NBC's levee broke and Kanye West flooded through with a tear about the federal response in New Orleans during the network's live concert fundraiser for victims of Hurricane Katrina last night.


Singer Kanye West arrives on the white carpet of the 2005 MTV Video Music Awards Sunday, Aug. 28, 2005. (AP) (Jeff Christensen - AP)

The rapper was among the celebs and singers participating in the one-hour special, produced by NBC News and run on the NBC broadcast network, as well as MSNBC and CNBC, because, hey, the numbers couldn't be any worse than usual on a Friday night and hopefully they'd raise a chunk of change for a good cause, the American Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund.

Among the performers, Faith Hill sang "There Will Come a Time," which included the lyrics, "The darkness will be gone, the weak shall be strong. Hold on to your faith." Aaron Neville performed Randy Newman's "Louisiana 1927" with its chorus: "They're trying to wash us away, they're trying to wash us away."

West was not scheduled to perform; he was one of the blah, blah, blahers, who would read from scripts prepared by the network about the impact of Katrina on southern Louisiana and Mississippi.

West and Mike Myers had been paired up to appear about halfway through the show. Their assignment: Take turns reading a script describing the breach in the levees around New Orleans.

Myers: The landscape of the city has changed dramatically, tragically and perhaps irreversibly. There is now over 25 feet of water where there was once city streets and thriving neighborhoods.

(Myers throws to West, who looked extremely nervous in his super-preppy designer rugby shirt and white pants, which is not like the arrogant West and which, in retrospect, should have been a tip-off.)

West: I hate the way they portray us in the media. You see a black family, it says, "They're looting." You see a white family, it says, "They're looking for food." And, you know, it's been five days [waiting for federal help] because most of the people are black. And even for me to complain about it, I would be a hypocrite because I've tried to turn away from the TV because it's too hard to watch. I've even been shopping before even giving a donation, so now I'm calling my business manager right now to see what is the biggest amount I can give, and just to imagine if I was down there, and those are my people down there. So anybody out there that wants to do anything that we can help -- with the way America is set up to help the poor, the black people, the less well-off, as slow as possible. I mean, the Red Cross is doing everything they can. We already realize a lot of people that could help are at war right now, fighting another way -- and they've given them permission to go down and shoot us!

(West throws back to Myers, who is looking like a guy who stopped on the tarmac to tie his shoe and got hit in the back with the 8:30 to La Guardia.)

Myers: And subtle, but in many ways even more profoundly devastating, is the lasting damage to the survivors' will to rebuild and remain in the area. The destruction of the spirit of the people of southern Louisiana and Mississippi may end up being the most tragic loss of all.

(And, because Myers is apparently as dumb as his Alfalfa hair, he throws it back to West.)

West: George Bush doesn't care about black people!

(Back to Myers, now looking like the 8:30 to La Guardia turned around and caught him square between the eyes.)

Myers: Please call . . .

At which point someone at NBC News finally regained control of the joystick and cut over to Chris Tucker, who started right in with more scripted blah, blah, blah.

"Tonight's telecast was a live television event wrought with emotion," parent company NBC Universal said in a statement issued to the Reporters Who Cover Television after the broadcast.

"Kanye West departed from the scripted comments that were prepared for him, and his opinions in no way represent the views of the networks. It would be most unfortunate if the efforts of the artists who participated tonight and the generosity of millions of Americans who are helping those in need are overshadowed by one person's opinion."

West's comments would be cut from the West Coast feed, an NBC spokeswoman told The TV Column. (The Associated Press later reported that only his comment about the president was edited out.) The show was live on the East Coast with a several-second delay; someone with his finger on a button was keeping an ear peeled in case someone uttered an obscenity but did not realize that West had gone off-script, the spokeswoman said.

Wow, that guy (Kanye) has got balls - he got his stage and he used it to say what he felt! What's everybody else's opinions on this?

I'll throw mine in now. I think the bit of footage is brilliant, exploiting a live broadcast to cut through the euphemisms that end up clouding everything on TV and getting somewhere that (I feel) is much closer to the truth.

i think its how alot of people felt and have been saying under their breath but were too afraid of how it would effect their carreer (celebrities anyway).

Myers was probably scared that he'd be blackballed and wouldn't bestow upon us Austin Powers 4.

What the hell did he care, half his films are scripted anyway.

Media control? He was there for a fundraiser in raising money for the victims of Katrina. Going off script on the fundraiser to say "Bush doesn't care about Black people" isn't going to really bring in the funds now is it? You say that's media control? Bringing people in to read a script and they go off topic so you pull their ass of the air?

And to my opinion on the thing, I believe that Kanye West knows little to nothing about politics. I bet he didn't vote in the last election. Sure he had guts to come up and say something like that knowing some of the **** he could get for it, but it was also gutless hurting the company he was brought in for.

But all in all, that look on Myer's face is classic.

Well it doesn't sound like he cares too much for the national media anyway, so I'm not sure how gutless it is to hurt a large establishment which you dislike, especially if you are contributing a large amount of money to the cause which it was supporting.

'West: I hate the way they portray us in the media. You see a black family, it says, "They're looting." You see a white family, it says, "They're looking for food." '

They did that with their coverage of the disaster on the UK TV too. I've never heard the word 'looting' used so much before, like they literally do save it up for black people (and Iraqis), while white people truly are described as are 'searching for supplies'. Supplies which don't belong to them - the little thieves!!

Whatever lack of political know-how he may have (comparably to the president maybe) his comments were actually incisive, however shocking the context was.

I'll bet you, if he would have gone off script and said that Bush is great and does everything possible there can be done we would never have heard about that he went off script.
When TV stations ask people on the street for their opinion on anything - for me it would be interesting to know how many people they asked, who said what and which interviews were broadcasted in the end. If done this way - then you and me would have really an idea what these people said.

As for Kayne West - don't know the man, so I can not have an opinion on what he knows or what he doesn't - neither if he voted or not.

As for bringing in funds when saying one's opinion or not - for me this does not matter. If I realize that we (all human beings) are all connected - then I do not need a Kayne West or anyone else to convince me to give what I can, in order to help my brother and sister.

So yes - I call it control, if I can not say what I want to say.
What happened to freedom of speech?

Can only agree with you.
We are all being controlled on a daily basis - and it is time to wake up.
I like your song "The Hidden Hand" which says it all. Right on the spot
Great tune.

It didn't look like, in this case, anybody stopped him from actually saying what he wanted to say. Even after the broadcast was cut, he would still have been free to carry on talking about what he wanted. What they did do was control the medium by which he was able to relay what he was saying to miillions of people.

I'm not sure how this relates to different people's concepts of Freedom of Speech. I've actually already experienced 'Media Control' of a much less significant form when I performed a song at university. There was some swearing in the chorus of my song and the sound engineer kept cutting out the vocal mic on the lines where he knew the swearing was going to be. This was in a PUB remember, at university, where by law everybody actually had to be over 18 and he thought they shouldn't hear swearing!

Freedom of speech has never had anything to do with saying whatever you want, whenever you please, where ever you want. It has had everything to do with being able to criticize your government without being able to be charged with crime being charged as a traitor.

:rofl:

I have to agree with Alejo. I didn't think much of Kanye's remarks. People make passing comments like that all the time. A lot of people were frustrated with the federal response during that time. I think he was letting out emotion that really should've been taken with a grain of salt. Personally, I don't think any celebrity partisan rhetoric should even be publicly scrutizined like Kanye's, regardless of whether it was "crossing the line" or not.

Also, I think when we set global priorities, we'd place national and international security ahead of the domestic policies you outlined, which btw are problems experienced by most countries. We have many different departments in government that are specialized in each particular area. Making GWB the scapegoat of all those "problems" is just an easy, lazy thing to do.

Right - some people just disappear or have "accidents" - or if prominent enough - get shot.
(Just my take on this matter)

So you say it has to do with being able to criticize your government without consequnces to you ?
Is being not broadcasted not a consequence ?

As it was announced, the part where Kayne speaks will be cut out of later (not live) broadcasts. This means the media is controlling the information you are receiving. No they did not lie - but they did only tell you half of the truth in showing you only parts of the entire broadcast. This is where the danger lays - in the half truth we are being fed.

bush has the intellect of a fish and a dumb one at that!! and he smells of poo poo!!!

You have an excellent point.

Damn right. Another problem is that we're brought up on these half-truths and they help to create our representations of reality. So that even when we're fighting against media biases we're mostly fighting against them from our own biased perspectives, which have already been greatly influence by previous media experiences.

Not being broadcasted on a private broadcasting station is not a consequence. Kanye West has NO right to be broadcasted by that station, but instead was asked to come in and help for a fundraiser. His feelings which he stated were deemed inappropriate by that station which chose not to air them. It's a PRIVATE broadcast. They can chose what they want to air and what the don't want to air. It's not that hard to understand.

Its still in the interest of the private broadcasters to suck up to the government at every possible opportunity. They choose which items would be of most benefit to them to air and which could cause problems. This is one of the reasons why little talks like Kanye's will be cut from broadcasts whereas the barefaced, outrageous lies which Bush's speeches are filled with and which are offensive to the lives and intelligences of most people around the world will be allowed to circulate.

My point, thank you.

No it is not hard to understand, you are correct. However....it is the half-truth I am talking about, which we came to used to. Regarding the later broadcast (and I don't know what was said) was it mentioned that this is a PART OF the fundraising program? Pobably it was aired as the program. Therefore viewers must believe that this is the entire thing and that all went nice and well. Nobody made comments which people might not like (regardless how close to the truth they might be).
This is where for me the danger lays. Getting served half of what was really going on.
Yes they can broadcast what they like - but then don't sell it to me as the news or information - when things are taken out. Tell me you are giving me an edited movie - and I will know what I get.

Assuming, as you say, that they are giving us the half-truth. What would you do with the full-truth? Are you saying that all Americans are collectively ignorant on politics and current events because of the information our media and government is holding back? Some information has to be held back; that is the nature of central intelligence. And, media has always selectively presented their news; that is the nature of journalism.
In this case, you're being "inconvenienced" by the media presenting an edited version of a extremist political statement made by a Hollywood entertainer. It's a nonpolitical fundraiser, not a forum for people to promote their extremist politics. It was appropriately edited, because it politicized a nonpolitical event. Think of it as a fortunate thing that entertainers at least have the opportunities to make bold political statemnents. Think of it as a pathetic thing that Americans actually care and are eating it up.

DRMO- I also wouldn't give too much credit to GWB for constructing these "outrageous lies" you speak of. His writing team does more face-saving and exaggeration than lying (nothing that is unique to just this adminstration). Bush merely stumbles through what his staff is telling him to say. Just out of curiosity, how do you know that his speeches are full of lies? Are you in Homeland Security? FBI? CIA? Armed Forces? I think you are telling me the half-truth. ;) From what I can see, his team doesn't even give him much opportunities for him to lie or even tell the truth about policy specifics.

Btw, anyone see the theatrical, rehearsed video Q & A between Bush and the troops? Terrible.

What I would do with the full truth ?
Are you serious with this question? I would have the possibility and all necessary information to make a concious decision.
In an earlier post there is the expample about the information regarding Iraks weapons of mass distruction - and the fairy tale that they can see by satellite that a truck came and the weapons were moved to another location - but they don't know where they were moved to. Do you remember these news?
There are so many satellites up there - there is not even space for new ones. And we will not be told, that they can see all very detailed - so nobody can tell me, that they "did not know where the weapons were taken to". Always assume that there were weapons of mass distruction. So if I have to base my decision regarding who I vote for or what I can and will support or not on the stories I am being told - the full truth would be defenitely better. Don't you agree?

It's like you have an employee which accuses another of wrong doing. What makes a good and fair boss ? The one who listens to one and makes a decision based on one story of one person, or the one who will hear both sides of the story and try to come as close to the truth as possible and then make a decision ?

I am not saying that anyone is collectively anything. It is strange to me that you are the second person here, which has as location USA and feels personally attacked. When I talk about media and governments I do not exclude any government or any media.
No country, race, nationality - or any group has a monopoly on either inteligence or stupidity, on being good people or being bad people.
We are all that - human beings and the planet earth should be ours to live. I have travelled too much and worked all over the world with up to 52 different nationalities in the same place, working together in peace - to believe in seperation by borders, colour, religion, gender etc.

Yes media has always done this - being controlled what to say and how to say it - to get people to believe what they are fed. So you can control everyone. (But it must be true and like this - because it was in the news)
If it is not in the mainstream news - well it probably is not true. This is the idea of most people, which is simply scary.

I have not been inconvenienced - i have not been told the truth. As simple as that. Kayne West has a right to his opinion, I would like to hear it and then think about it and come to my own conclusion.
But I don't want to be told what to think or believe.

I'll throw something else at you: If I tell you, that there was a plane crash, there was a lot of fuel in the tanks and the plane exploded. Due to the heat generated all was burned, passenger can not be identified by remains and also the blackbox was burned into ashes, which is designed to withstand extreme heat. But - one piece of paper did not burn and was found some meters away from the wreck - or what was left of it.
You tell me, do you believe me?

Your prior participations in elections is a total waste. After all, you've never been able to make a 'conscious' decision on politics, because you've never been told the full-truth. Yet at the same time, you have bold statements about Iraq's pre-war WMD controversy.

People are fully capable of forming conscious decisions based on the information that is given to them. Even with all the body of information at your fingertips, I doubt you would change your main ideologies. Most people are already biased towards a generic political position and selectively choose what information they perceive as credible and real, and what they perceive as lies and political jargon. Looking at both sides of an issue seems like a pretty obvious thing in making a strong decision about an issue. Still, I'm not sure if you do such a good job of this, because it seems pretty obvious you're a liberal. I apologize if this is not true or you are offended by this. It is just my observation, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

In this particular example, you yearn for the full-truth of an entertainer's opinion. Not an underlying conspiracy behind a criminal investigation, not an element of war/pre-war/post-war politics, not a terrorism or counterterrorism operation. I bet if Kanye was praising Bush, you wouldn't be here talking about it. You know, I've said things that are analogous to Kanye's remarks before, in passing, with friends, at parties, etc. However, I would never take advantage of a nationwide media outlet and make an unintelligent extremist remark like he did, especially in a nonpolitical climate, trying to raise money for a good cause.

In terms of the full-truth behind major current event issues, most of the "full-truths" are available to you. They are selectively and editorially presented by any given media outlet. Just like how the audience will selectively choose what they want to hear and believe. But, most of the information pertaining to hot topic current event issues like the Bush administrations domestic and foreign policy, Iraq history and culture, WMD and terrorism fact sheets, al Qaeda, Hurricane Katrina, etc. are all widely available in literature, the Internet, etc. Enough info for you or anyone else to disect and pick apart what you will consciously believe and take on as your own platforms.

Taking a break from things, I get personally attacked by bigoted closet-case racists on a daily basis, not by intelligent political back-n-forths on a music message board.

In terms of your last paragraph, no you cannot believe the paper tidbit because you are not presented enough information. That doesn't sound tactical, it just sounds like bad journalism. It has no significance, you can still make a political opinion of the disaster itself. This happened on 9/11, the use of fuel as an instrument of chemical terrorism. There's a lot of half-truths with that event. This would have been a better example for you to use. However, there is enough information presented in literature to know what happened, why it happened, and what can be done in the future. That is all. No matter how politicized it is, the 9/11 commission reports is a good source for such information, enough at least to make a 'conscious decision'. If you wanna know about every detail as to what piece of paper went missing that day, or how many people were stuck in the bathroom on the 57th floor, then you're asking for a body of information that is physically impossible and ideologically irrelevant.

Stopped voting a long time ago - not for reasons of information or non-information - simply to the fact that I left my "official" home country a long time ago and at that time internet and satellite TV was not an option.
I was in the US at the time of "reasons given to go for war", found the "campaign" very extreme and watched news from different parts of the world - which tell the same - yet in a different way. (Besides that I have worked with people in the Satellite business)

I do not say that people are not capable of forming their opinions - especially with all information on our fingertips by now. What I am saying is that still many people choose not to - and simply follow the herd.
And yes, you are correct, that people are biased towards a generic political position - and other generic views, from racism to religious ideas and everything else. And this is going on for generation.
You are calling me a liberal. What is a Liberal ? If you are talking about a "political liberal" - then I have to feel offended. If you talk about the meaning of the word and pick a certain definition - here it is: 5 : BROAD-MINDED; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms
If so, then I am not offended and can say full hearted - Yes.
What would I want ?
What every human being wants. Peace, a roof over our head, clothes to wear (it is to cold here without) food, water and to be with the one I love.
i don't want to be in "war" with my neighbour or with another country. I don't want to run from gunshots and bombs. Don't want to starve or have no water to drink.
These are my simple needs. I have no problem if my neighbour is white, black red, yellow or puple (or whatever color), what religion or what believes one has. I just want my peace and not be told by others how I should live, what I should believe and with who I should hang out with.

I don't think I said that I agree with Kayne's remarks or if I found them appropriate. I just don't like the cutting off part of what he had to say.
Yet, if this is his opinion - so he shall be able to speak. I think we do not speak up often enough "because it is not appropriate". We always try to be politically correct - because we were told and taught so for generations. How nice it is to watch a child when they just speak their mind (and at times embarrasing) but they say what we would never say.
And I am including myself in this. (But working on it- of course)

You are correct regarding some information, which is impossible to find (people in the bathroom on the 57th floor) - yet you got my hint. I have a very different opinion on this entire thing - yet prefer not to go as far as posting it in a public forum. (Besides that I am aware that nothing done on the internet is a secret.....it might would hurt some people and I would prefer not to do that - even without knowing if it did or would hurt them)
If you like, you are very welcome to PM me.

I am sorry to hear that you get attacked on a daily basis by bigoted closet-case racists. This is something I never understood, why people give other people a hard time because of how they look. As I mentioned I come from a multinational environment and I know it does work and is possible. Yet I am not unfamiliar with this issue. We all are human beings and that is all there is to it. At least for me.

No its not. But you are blantantly avoiding the point. His comments weren't untrue. (cept perhaps the final one) and people put them away because it made people uncomfortable.

We shouldn't ignore the facts. Kanye said what millions were thinking.

Of course I'm not in any of those organisations! I live in Birmingham, UK! Did you think this was one of the states?

I don't know how much access you have to non-US media, but I'd recommend watching US-news and news from elsewhere back to back. The inconsistencies are sometimes quite incredible. Particularly, watching George Bush's speeches and then news from another country covering the same topic. Its like they were talking about completely different things.

You are right, this is a nice and eye-opening thing to do. Just to compare CNN US and CNN Europe - is like watching 2 complete different stations.

You're "cept perhaps the final one" shows me exactly how blatantly against Bush you are.

But you are taking what I said out of context. I said it wasn't hard to understand that Kanye West has no right to airplay on that TV station as it is a private broadcast and they have no responsibility whatsoever to play his (in my opinion) ignorant point of view to the rest of the United States.

So are you saying that US media is biased while all other media stations say the "complete truth"? All media is biased in some sorts.

cept for croatian media...;)

I did not read the comment like this.
And I am certainly not saying that only US media is telling half-truth and the other media is not. I unclude all media in that - around the world. (Besides that there are only so many (actually only a few) news agencies (mostly Reuters).
The suggestion to watch outside US news, if available to you, is just for you (or anyone) to see the difference in delivery and views.
News in other places in the world are not presented as dramatic as in the US, and not repeated as much (with the same pictures over and over and over, to hammer it into ones head).
US news often put fear into people, which I think is nothing but controll and a certain way of thinking. Fear your neighbour, fear the one you don't know, fear the hurricane, fear certain religions.........
I am not talking about going through life with open eyes - I am talking about fear.

No. I'm not saying that. Why? Did you want to change my completely valid point into a ridiculous one so that you could argue against it more easily?

That's it.

hey, someone ( i shall not name any names ) is getting a bit paranoid about china getting more and more powerful.....*sigh*...i say humanity has about 20 more years before it all goes to hell....

Bush - First things first, HE IS A SUCKY SPEAKER.

ahh.. now that I got that out there are a few pretty good things about him:
1. I like his ideas and plans on war, they are much more realistic and well organized than the contrary (Kerry).

2. Most of his plans include a quick fix and a good long term role also. (No Child Left Behind)

3. If we didn't invade Iraq, it would have just put off our (probable future) strike at Iran further. (now we basically control their neighbor)

4. Compared to prices around the world, our oil prices kick-ass, in part because we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan.

5. Patriot Act - to me kinda wasteful, like trying to keep illegals out of the US, it is a good idea, in theory, but never really made it. And, for the stupid people out there that think the government really wants to spend there money learning what you like to do, pull your head out of your asses.

6. On Katrina - I think that Bush did a pretty nice job, people just got pissed because they lost most of what they had. (I would have been pissed too.)

7. The one thing that I hate about Bush, HE DOESN"T LIKE STEM CELL RESEARCH! If you want to kill a baby by obortion, at least put it to good use for saving other's lives.

ahh.. comments and political wars are fun..