[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] Indexes: Main | Date | Thread | Author

Re: [ba-unrev-talk] Re: Another aspect of the problematic (like tobaccosales tax all advertising?)

Henry and Gary,

(As interest grabber, it must compete with the stuff supplied by, say, Sports Illustrated.)

Did anyone notice my message on 3/21/03 about  Tom Atlee's (founder and co-director of the Co-Intelligence Institute) profound knowledge and suggestions concerning these problematic education and media issues under discussion?  ... Or, may be because of his lack of  "buzz words", directed "interactive dialog" or IBIS style makes the comunications on this list ineffective?

"[After] an honest assessment of our current economic system in light of these questions reveals serious shortcomings. Much could be done to improve the economic environment for the growth of co-intelligence."


Nevertheless, for your convenience, below are more of his suggestions to consider for an economically oriented path to restore and enhance education and media co-intelligence:

Henry K van Eyken wrote:

Further, a third point against advertising:

3. It distorts truth and the distortion of truth becomes a normal,
accepted part of everyday life and ingrained in our humor.

I may quickly add that the ills of advertising are beginning to be
recognized, i.q. that of tobacco advertising.


On Wed, 2003-03-26 at 09:37, Henry K van Eyken wrote:

Commercial media are paid for by advertisers and reporters need be
granted interviews. So, both on the advertising side and on the
reporting side there is pressure (overt, covert) for favors and, hence,
the commercial press is not fully free, only relatively so in comparison
with a press fully controlled by a regime.

A first point of attack would be to free the press from the bondage of

It should be noted here that the advertisers do not themselves pay for
the adverts; the public does through the price they pay for products.
Advertising is in there. In other words, like governments levies taxes
for public services, so does business by including PR and advertising
costs along with sales taxes in the price of goods and services.

There are two other bad sides to advertising:

1. They waste a lot of viewers' time or of paper (i.e. trees).

2. They encourage consumption, i.e. more than a justified use of
resources because all goods we buy end up as waste - 100%.

I know, I know. Advertising is now seen as an indispensable part of the
mechanisms for economic growth, etc., but it seems wise that we
recognize that this is not an unassailable paradigm.

So at this point, I am looking forward to an article in the commercial
press about the ills of advertising.


On Wed, 2003-03-26 at 08:29, Gary Richmond wrote:

I think that the events of the past couple of years
have made me look at articles like "The Second
American Revolution" (which in the past I too might
have dismissed as mere "conspiracy theory") in a
new light, as hypotheses, shall we say, that now
ought be more seriously entertained and tested.

Contemplating your four points (that Bush was
not properly elected, that his intellectual level
appears to be low, that the assassination attempt
on George Sr. probably made an enduring mark
on the Bush family and political circle,  and the wide-
spread misuse of "political pardon" resulting in too
many members of the "upper echelons"  not being held
accountable) intensifies my discomfort with the
current Administration. Of course the "military-
industrial complex" that Eisenhower warned us
about dominates in a way that no doubt even he
couldn't imagine at the time.

Still, I must agree with your conclusion that only
an expansion of the idea of public education through the media
can hope to impact positively on the situation. Meanwhile,
articles and research on the FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy in
Reporting) website makes me worry about the extent of
media mis-education of the citizenry and just how difficult
it will be to overome that. http://fair.org/

HvE: Ultimately, it is an ignorant and ineffective public that permits the
corruption of politics and business to exist. Which gets us right back
to education and media ...


Henry K van Eyken wrote:


People of a sarcastic bent of mind would simply label "The Second
American Revolution" article as a conspiracy theory and be done with it.

But there are a few things that trouble me about George W. and the
leadership establishment:

1. The absence of properly exercised democracy that caused him to be
elected. And of previous presidents as well.

This is merely my opinion, of course, but what do members of the
electorate really know about their choices? Impressions substitute for
facts. This, of course, applies to electoral processes everywhere. The
U.S. is no exception.

2. Yesterday, I listened to G.W.'s speech on the car radio. It was a
pathetic piece of drivel that would just about flunk a third-grader.
How, I wondered, again, can this man make decisions of policy other than
being simply talked into them by others? When a man of the stature and
accomplishment such as Nelson Mandela calls G.W.'s intellectual quality
in question, we need to worry. (And when the same man speaks of the U.S.
as a terrorist state - or words to that effect - we need to worry even

The thesis is that George Sr. is the man behind all this. Maybe so, but
I do have doubts about that; not if, as has been claimed, Jr likes to
upstage Sr. I would first look at those who advise him. And whether the
process of advising is one where G.W. really listens and digests a
variety of conflicting opinions and then come to a decision or whether
he is swayed by intellectual laziness and emotion.

3. George Sr. was once targeted for an assassination attempt in Kuwait.
Jr. for one during 9/11. And the 9/11 hit on the Pentagon cannot be one
but a constant reminder to Washingtonians. That, I suspect, does affect

4. The process of "presidential pardon" that exonerates corruption for
those who have been well placed in U.S. society. I imagine that this
pardon is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to avoiding to make
members of the upper echelons in society accountable.

Your correspondence makes reference to corrupt leadership in business
(Enron, Anderson). My interest has been particularly focused on the
Dutch conglomerate Ahold and how it neglected the interest of the

Ultimately, it is an ignorant and ineffective public that permits the
corruption of politics and business to exist. Which gets us right back
to education and media ...