[ito]

http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2004/

Heard about this today in my Journalism class, one of the girls brought it in and my teacher had worked on one of the previous books. Has anyone here read it? If so what did you think of it?

For those of you who don't know about it, the publication started out with some undergrads and has grown over the last 20(I think)years. They publish the stories that they feel should have been covered by the mass news organizations over the year.

So ya, opinions and thoughts if you have any.

The Ito

 

[BurlyShirley]

Id say get a new journalism teacher.


That crap would get you laughed out of Berkely. No offense, but i think that we all know the news loves nothing more than some controversy, and any chance they have to bust the next watergate...they're going to jump at it. Reading through some of those, it all looks pretty shoddy to me.


EDIT: What I meant to say was, if any of that crap was based off of factual events with credible sources..the news would be all over it.

 

[Jorvik]

I especially like #4. Seems very likely. What better way to save American lives than having terrorists kill them?

I doubt even 15% of that stuff is true.

 

[DRB]

How urban legends get started.

 

[Spud]

Many of these stories are well documented and have been covered in major media sources. Looking at the presentation at the website it is obviously biased – but that doesn’t negate the basic facts that many of these events are true. How we choose to interpret them is another thing.

#3 - the US Removing Pages from Iraq's WMD report to the UN that was covered mainstream before the war.

#11 US implicated in Taliban Massacre – Newsweek covered that in detail, there's plenty of room to argue and interpret those events.

#17 Clear Channel Monopoly Draws criticism – Been around for at least two years

#25 Convicted Corporations Receive Perks Instead of Punishment – that’s shocking now isn’t it?

 

[DRB]

Originally posted by Spud
Many of these stories are well documented and have been covered in major media sources. Looking at the presentation at the website it is obviously biased – but that doesn’t negate the basic facts that many of these events are true. How we choose to interpret them is another thing.

#3 - the US Removing Pages from Iraq's WMD report to the UN that was covered mainstream before the war.

#11 US implicated in Taliban Massacre – Newsweek covered that in detail, there's plenty of room to argue and interpret those events.

#17 Clear Channel Monopoly Draws criticism – Been around for at least two years

#25 Convicted Corporations Receive Perks Instead of Punishment – that’s shocking now isn’t it?

So they weren't censored then if they are well-documented and been discussed in detail in the media.

 

[Spud]

Yep. I'd I agree with that. Just because people didn't become enthralled with the story doesn't make it censored or an urban legend.

My GF got a book similar to that project censored website for christmas - I haven't browsed through it yet. I think it is more of an X-files Roswell sort of thing though.

What's pissing me off nowdays is how much news we are missing because such an insane amount of coverage on the 2004 election. And they are covering the horse-race not the positions.

Tell me about how we are going to establish a government in Iraq by this summer,

What's the impact of the proposed budget

The Arizona prison standoff is nearly 2-weeks old

I really don't give a damn about the significance of Arizona on Wes Clark's fund raising ability.... Or if Howard Dean is laying off the Red Bull.