Quote:
Originally Posted by nameless
The problem with all of these so called expose programmes is that they trivialise a topic which is something yet to be explored in a true in depth journalistic sense. It boils down these topics making what could be an avenue of exploration into plain sound bitey confrontational entertainment.
What truely useful has come from the Ventura programmes?
You could say exposure. The average force fed narcolyptic joe eats a bit of HAARp or 9 11 conspiracy with their tv dinner, thinks "well thats interesting,"; but paradigms remain intact, control mechanisms are still in place and any seed of free will or inclination is now suplicated by the Venturas and Jones who are rocking so we don't have to. Problem spoken about, remains unsolved, case closed.
Maybe the best that comes out of it is that someone might actually think that all is not what it seems. But much like a flashy confrontational t shirt slogan, Ventura has in that one instance unwittingly opened a door and slammed it in a face with a glossy, fast edited, zoomy in, computer graphiced bang.
Entertainment really has become a shiny bauble to distract you from the pickpockets. It is the enemy of art.
Alex Jones is another example of a "face" to fit the new entertainment cycle of topics. The problem again is here we have real issues and topics that need to be explored and this is where I give Ventura real credit and is the only good thing to come from these programmes was at the end of the 911 programme when impassioned and steadfast he confronts the press who try to harangue him over his views and he tells them that he is an ordianary citizen just trying to do the job that they have neglected, ie. investigative journalism.
|
I understand your viewpoint and respect it, but I have to disagree with your overall judgement of Ventura's impact on the populace.
You have to remember that, often times, preaching to the choir is something which is done very often in an unintended fashion through the marginalized or non-mainstream media forums such as Project Camelot, Prison Planet, Media Conscious Network, etc. but try to think back to what it was that first got you into some of these areas of interest in the first place- something had to pique your interest. I'm willing to bet that, at the very least, thousands of people first visit such sites after encountering an overly brief and topical exposure to a particular area of interest for them, and that was enough to catalyze them and trigger them on their own quest or journey. And it's better that it's brief and topical, that it does not capture the full depth of the topic- all the more impetus for the seeker to pursue this on his/her own, in their own fashion.
Jesse Ventura is not a final word, but he is a springboard for many who need just the right trigger released in their mind, and he does his work within a framework that many of us gave up hope on long ago, the mainstream media. It does not need to be a perfected art for him; in fact, the more sculpted and articulated his message, the more in-depth- the more likely to lose the interest of the many who are still entranced and deeply conditioned at a subconcious level and will find it to be too wide a gap to close in their minds. I applaud him for his efforts, I would not have the patience to deal within that framework as he does, and his rudimentary fashion is exactly what is most needed to be effective at that level.
The teacher you draw into your experience is usually the one that you are capable of having and learning from: for some it is Alex Jones, for some David Icke, for some Bill and Kerry, etc. Just as it's been said that the "lie is different at every level' it's also correct that the truth is also different at every level- there is no point in trying to invalidate someone's truth as it is a deeply personal and relative experience- just as what is considered moral and correct in one culture is considered amoral and abhorrent within another culture, truth is also relative and respective of the consciousness of the individual or group.