djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 17, 2013 12:15:54 GMT -5
Regardless- this is a national story. And yet, it's not. I have no doubt that you can find instances- and you'll find more instances as the left wing press is dragged kicking and screaming into covering it. they cover it to the degree that the market demands, and that their advertisers tolerate. period. this is not a conspiracy against conservatives, Paul. it is just business.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 17, 2013 12:16:34 GMT -5
Regardless- this is a national story. And yet, it's not. I have no doubt that you can find instances- and you'll find more instances as the left wing press is dragged kicking and screaming into covering it. This strikes me as having the ring of truth to it. The lamestream media spend a great deal of time and money focused upon Pro-Choice stories. But the story of the Baby Butcher of Philadelphia is buried, pretty much across the spectrum of media services. Paul's point seems well-taken in this instance and dead on target. DOA is more like it.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 17, 2013 12:17:02 GMT -5
It would be interesting to compare the ratio of media coverage to the extent of a tragedy (in terms of loss of life) for a number of different stories.
Consider that the three deaths at the Boston Marathon are racking up thousands of broadcast hours per hour as we speak. Nationally, the US might very well end up with hundreds of thousands of broadcast hours per victim.
I don't know how many children died in Dr. Gosnell's clinic or how many media hours have been devoted to the story, but it wouldn't surprise me if the total media coverage amounted to a few hours per victim since the story broke. Then compare that with the 100,000+ hours per victim in the Boston Marathon story, and you're looking at five orders of magnitude difference.
Depending on the contrast in ratios, it isn't unreasonable to claim the media is "ignoring" a story even when a great deal of coverage exists on the web. A more appropriate term might be "abnormally underrepresenting" a story, but at what point are the ratios so distorted that "ignoring" is a fair characterization?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 17, 2013 12:29:36 GMT -5
It would be interesting to compare the ratio of media coverage to the extent of a tragedy (in terms of loss of life) for a number of different stories. Consider that the three deaths at the Boston Marathon are racking up thousands of broadcast hours per hour as we speak. Nationally, the US might very well end up with hundreds of thousands of broadcast hours per victim. I don't know how many children died in Dr. Gosnell's clinic or how many media hours have been devoted to the story, but it wouldn't surprise me if the total media coverage amounted to a few hours per victim since the story broke. Then compare that with the 100,000+ hours per victim in the Boston Marathon story, and you're looking at five orders of magnitude difference. Depending on the contrast in ratios, it isn't unreasonable to claim the media is "ignoring" a story even when a great deal of coverage exists on the web. A more appropriate term might be "abnormally underrepresenting" a story, but at what point are the ratios so distorted that "ignoring" is a fair characterization? i think this would make a very interesting case study, indeed. but fortunately, you don't have to do that work. someone else has done it for you. it is called Project Censored. if you review their top 10 lists from every year, you will indeed find SOME stories of conservative PR interest. but the vast majority of quashed stories are of liberal PR interest. when i say vast, i mean well over 80%.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 2, 2024 9:51:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2013 12:39:41 GMT -5
It would be interesting to compare the ratio of media coverage to the extent of a tragedy (in terms of loss of life) for a number of different stories. Consider that the three deaths at the Boston Marathon are racking up thousands of broadcast hours per hour as we speak. Nationally, the US might very well end up with hundreds of thousands of broadcast hours per victim. I don't know how many children died in Dr. Gosnell's clinic or how many media hours have been devoted to the story, but it wouldn't surprise me if the total media coverage amounted to a few hours per victim since the story broke. Then compare that with the 100,000+ hours per victim in the Boston Marathon story, and you're looking at five orders of magnitude difference. Depending on the contrast in ratios, it isn't unreasonable to claim the media is "ignoring" a story even when a great deal of coverage exists on the web. A more appropriate term might be "abnormally underrepresenting" a story, but at what point are the ratios so distorted that "ignoring" is a fair characterization? A reasonable exercise, but your bias is showing a little bit. Gosnell is being charged with 8 counts of murder. We don't really know how many other children he may have murdered. The fetuses he aborted can count towards his moral culpability, but not his legal crimes. The Boston Marathon bomber will likely be charged with 3 counts of murder. It is possible that they will add in some charges of attempted murder for the several hundred injured individuals. So, 8 vs 3. But for good measure, we should probably throw in some serial killers, maybe the Jon Benet Ramsey case, or what's her face in Italy? Scott Peterson? There was a fetus involved in that one too, right? And then we need to compare apples to apples. Coverage of the crime and arrest are different from coverage of a trial. Crimes are interesting. Arrests are interesting. Convictions are a little less interesting. Trials are nearly always boring. Important - but boring. I was at a museum that was showing an exhibit on the Nuremberg trials - and the defendants were daydreaming and eating pistachios. The most heinous crimes in history, and even the trial participants were bored.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 17, 2013 12:45:40 GMT -5
Tell that to DJ. You couldn't blow the notion that works by Kant, Locke et al. are intrinsic to liberalism out of his head with dynamite. Do you mean 'deduction'? DJ from a week ago: "i am going to take you to task for thinking that tacit or direct support of pedophilia in any way meets the standard of ANY valid political or social philosophy. and if you are saying that you never claimed that, then what you DID claim is that liberalism is logically invalid prima face, which i ALSO disagree with- so i take you to task for that." Hence in your mind, I've either claimed one or the other. My assumption is that your "tak[ing] me to task" is that you want me to identify which of the two possibilities is correct, and to defend it (or simply give up). Do I believe liberalism is logically invalid at a glance? No. If I did, your first clue would be the nonexistence of our debate. Hence what were you expecting me to do here besides defend the first claim: "pedophilia in any way meets the standard of ANY valid political or social philosophy"?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 17, 2013 13:00:39 GMT -5
I'd argue that it's fairer to use the former when quantifying the extent of a crime. But I agree that it's safer and more defensible to user the latter.
True, but I was referring to the start-to-finish coverage. Hence we would compare the total number of hours devoted to Dr. Gosnell from the time of his arrest through to the end of his trial, and compare that to the hours devoted to the Boston bombing from two days ago through to the conclusion of any trials involved for the culprits.
I'd still wager we'd see a factor of at least 100 in the hours-per-death ratio.
Based on their current "top 25" I see no inherent political alignment in most of the stories. I'm as conservative as they come and I can't find one story on the list that challenges my worldview.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 17, 2013 13:18:18 GMT -5
Tell that to DJ. um...i am dj, dude.You couldn't blow the notion that works by Kant, Locke et al. are intrinsic to liberalism out of his head with dynamite. true. but i don't treat their work as scripture. the basic logic of their work informs my logic, however.Do you mean 'deduction'? no, i mean introspection. you often accuse me of being bad at stuff that you are bad at, just to be clear.DJ from a week ago: "i am g......" no, you took me wrong. i was asking for examples of evil being reasonable, Virgil.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 17, 2013 13:21:07 GMT -5
Based on their current "top 25" I see no inherent political alignment in most of the stories. I'm as conservative as they come and I can't find one story on the list that challenges my worldview. but i thought we agreed that you were a centrist, Virgil. have you shifted since the last election? no matter. i am pleased to hear that you don't think that the top 25 would be useful to either POV. that is great. i figured i was going to have to spend a week or two defending Project Censored.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 17, 2013 14:11:35 GMT -5
Based on their current "top 25" I see no inherent political alignment in most of the stories. I'm as conservative as they come and I can't find one story on the list that challenges my worldview. but i thought we agreed that you were a centrist, Virgil. have you shifted since the last election? no matter. i am pleased to hear that you don't think that the top 25 would be useful to either POV. that is great. i figured i was going to have to spend a week or two defending Project Censored. It looks like a site that would give frankq a coronary. Maybe he'll debate you.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 17, 2013 18:46:23 GMT -5
but i thought we agreed that you were a centrist, Virgil. have you shifted since the last election? no matter. i am pleased to hear that you don't think that the top 25 would be useful to either POV. that is great. i figured i was going to have to spend a week or two defending Project Censored. It looks like a site that would give frankq a coronary. Maybe he'll debate you. i can't imagine why anyone would object to an organization that spends it's time fishing around for uncovered stories.
|
|
cereb
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 23, 2011 0:33:47 GMT -5
Posts: 3,904
|
Post by cereb on Apr 17, 2013 18:47:04 GMT -5
"We're five weeks into a story of an abortion mill house of horrors where there is testimony of screaming babies being delivered alive, infant decapitations, babies ripped apart, body parts in jars-- all at a clinic apparently owned by the wife of Attorney General Eric Holder who has gone to extreme measures to abuse the power of his office to restrict the free speech rights of the opponents of abortion. And NOTHING from the fringe left media."
Paul, can you ever tell the truth?
The abortion clinic in this story is not owned by Eric Holders wife. The building she co-owns with her sister is in Atlanta Georgia. She owns the building, not the clinic. The Atlanta clinic's physician is under indictment for medicare fraud, not infanticide.
Shesh.
|
|
cereb
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 23, 2011 0:33:47 GMT -5
Posts: 3,904
|
Post by cereb on Apr 17, 2013 19:00:41 GMT -5
* Let's not resort to name-calling, eh? - mmhmm, Administrator
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,326
|
Post by swamp on Apr 17, 2013 19:59:54 GMT -5
|
|
pappyjohn99
Familiar Member
The driveway needs a little work.
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 1:01:13 GMT -5
Posts: 928
|
Post by pappyjohn99 on Apr 19, 2013 0:41:05 GMT -5
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 19, 2013 8:22:31 GMT -5
bzzzzzzzzt, I can name 3 liberal doctrines without even trying:
1. Capitalism is the source of all suffering and evil in the world and must be controlled, checked, and eventually destroyed so we can move to the next level of societal evoloution.
2. Women make less than men for doing the same job for no reason other than that they are women.
3. Conservatives are racist, bigoted, sexist, homophobes. The only reason people are conservative is due to the fact they are racist, sexist, bigoted homophobes, OR they're ignorant.
4. Government spending stimulates the economy. Cutting government spending would kill economic growth.
5. Cigarettes are evil.
6. The chief cornerstone of women's rights is abortion on demand. Anyone that opposes abortion is against women's rights.
7. "White privilege". It's a doctrine- I can't explain it, but Salon.com recently disgraced themselves trying to make the point.
8. Tolerance equates to acceptance of anything no matter how sick, twisted, or just plain weird.
9. Diversity of skin color is vital. Diversity of ideas? Not so much.
Ok, that was 9 and I could post like 15 more. It was easy once I got rolling.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 19, 2013 8:29:56 GMT -5
You had to search it. Here's the CRIME page at CNN. See if you can find it: www.cnn.com/JUSTICE/It's story number 6 under "SCOTUS Rules against police in drunk driving case" and "Justices Back Corporations in Overseas Abuses Case" It's under "Top Legal Stories" but the point I'm making is that it is HEADLINE NEWS and it's hardly clear what it is even if you go to the CRIME page. In other words- it's just another obscure crime story.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 19, 2013 8:32:51 GMT -5
I want you to again imagine this was something else- imagine it was a puppy mill and something like the 58 horrific details pappyjohn posted had happened at a puppy mill? We'd be having hearings on Capitol Hill right now on closing down breeders, and pet stores all over the country. Speaking of which- why are there no calls for hearings on standards of practice in the abortion industry right now? IF this was ANYTHING else, congress would be having very high profile hearings on this. Some people need to step up.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 19, 2013 9:23:51 GMT -5
bzzzzzzzzt, I can name 3 liberal doctrines without even trying: 1. Capitalism is the source of all suffering and evil in the world and must be controlled, checked, and eventually destroyed so we can move to the next level of societal evoloution.. your failure to distinguish between communism and liberalism doesn't make them the same thing. edit: i don't think capitalism is "evil" at all. most liberals i know don't think so, either. most liberals are quite capitalistic, ime.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 19, 2013 9:30:21 GMT -5
8. Tolerance equates to acceptance of anything no matter how sick, twisted, or just plain weird. this one is constantly foisted on liberals, but it is mostly false. we only tolerate twisted stuff that doesn't harm the person or property of non-consenting others. and yes, we pretend to celebrate those things just to stick in your craw, i have to admit.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,326
|
Post by swamp on Apr 19, 2013 9:55:23 GMT -5
You had to search it. Here's the CRIME page at CNN. See if you can find it: www.cnn.com/JUSTICE/It's story number 6 under "SCOTUS Rules against police in drunk driving case" and "Justices Back Corporations in Overseas Abuses Case" It's under "Top Legal Stories" but the point I'm making is that it is HEADLINE NEWS and it's hardly clear what it is even if you go to the CRIME page. In other words- it's just another obscure crime story. I dunno. I didn't have to search it. I found it on the home page over on the left.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,715
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Apr 19, 2013 10:39:20 GMT -5
bzzzzzzzzt, I can name 3 liberal doctrines without even trying: 1. Capitalism is the source of all suffering and evil in the world and must be controlled, checked, and eventually destroyed so we can move to the next level of societal evoloution. 2. Women make less than men for doing the same job for no reason other than that they are women. 3. Conservatives are racist, bigoted, sexist, homophobes. The only reason people are conservative is due to the fact they are racist, sexist, bigoted homophobes, OR they're ignorant. 4. Government spending stimulates the economy. Cutting government spending would kill economic growth. 5. Cigarettes are evil. 6. The chief cornerstone of women's rights is abortion on demand. Anyone that opposes abortion is against women's rights. 7. "White privilege". It's a doctrine- I can't explain it, but Salon.com recently disgraced themselves trying to make the point. 8. Tolerance equates to acceptance of anything no matter how sick, twisted, or just plain weird. 9. Diversity of skin color is vital. Diversity of ideas? Not so much. Ok, that was 9 and I could post like 15 more. It was easy once I got rolling. Interesting POV. As a real liberal versus being you a conservative who thinks they know what liberals think, I'd have to say a huge swing and a miss. I believe cigarettes are bad for health, but don't see that as a liberal/conservative/libratarian issue. To me its a health issue. It would be nice if someday you would actually get it right though for women's rights over their bodies. That is the primary right, everything else is secondary. I will have to say the concept of abortion on demand is a intentional misleading phrase as if any surgery is really ever done on demand. The closest anyone gets to that is probably emergency cases.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 19, 2013 11:22:14 GMT -5
Ok, that was 9 and I could post like 15 more. It was easy once I got rolling. don't underestimate yourself. you could probably post 150 more lies.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 19, 2013 12:47:12 GMT -5
Ok, that was 9 and I could post like 15 more. It was easy once I got rolling. don't underestimate yourself. you could probably post 150 more lies. Typical religious zealot.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 19, 2013 14:07:15 GMT -5
don't underestimate yourself. you could probably post 150 more lies. Typical religious zealot. LOL! yeah, right.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 22, 2013 17:58:31 GMT -5
No. 6 and No. 9 are spot on. Many of the others range from "likely" to "extremely likely", although they aren't universal enough to be considered doctrinal.
The only one that isn't a majority opinion among self-identified liberals is No. 1.
No. 5 is questionable, depending on what is meant by "evil".
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Apr 22, 2013 18:09:56 GMT -5
No. 6 and No. 9 are spot on. Many of the others range from "likely" to "extremely likely", although they aren't universal enough to be considered doctrinal. The only one that isn't a majority opinion among self-identified liberals is No. 1. No. 5 is questionable, depending on what is meant by "evil". Yeah- considering that ALL my liberal friends smoke and NONE of my conservative friends smoke- maybe I should say "Tobacco Companies" are evil because hey- aren't ALL corporations evil?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 22, 2013 19:15:03 GMT -5
No. 6 and No. 9 are spot on. Many of the others range from "likely" to "extremely likely", although they aren't universal enough to be considered doctrinal. The only one that isn't a majority opinion among self-identified liberals is No. 1. No. 5 is questionable, depending on what is meant by "evil". Yeah- considering that ALL my liberal friends smoke and NONE of my conservative friends smoke- maybe I should say "Tobacco Companies" are evil because hey- aren't ALL corporations evil? I find most liberals are fine with corporations as long as the corporations make an effort to appear concerned about their employees, humankind, and the planet at large. The main problem with this is that public perceptions of "being concerned about their employees, humankind, and the planet at large" doesn't always sync up with corporations that actually care about their employees, humankind, and the planet at large. The only documentary of Michael Moore's that I like is called "The Corporation", in which he makes the argument that corporations, if analyzed as human beings, are ostensibly psychopathic. And I agree with him on that point. Corporations have a unique way of diffusing blame, breaking huge evils into lesser (more rationalizable) evils, causing men to lose perspective, and justifying terrible harm to society. A corporation can take 1,000 people who individually wouldn't harm a flea, and turn them into an engine that accidentally poisons a million people and then fights to the legal death to continue doing so. A corporation has no singular conscience or sense of morality to stop it from causing harm in pursuit of its business interests. And in fact, the only real protections we have against corporate malfeasance are the media, government (i.e. regulations), and public activism. Liberals tend to be more acutely aware of the problems corporations cause, while conservatives focus more on the benefits they provide. Two sides of the same coin. If you had to place me on one side or the other, I'd join the liberals on the "corporations are evil" side. It's not that corporations are evil; it's that they have no internal conscience if business happens to run afoul of people's rights. The arguments "But the shareholders would never let XYZ Corp. ..." or "The board would never let XYZ Corp. ..." are a happy fiction. A corporation can and will mow you down if not doing so has a significant negative impact on the bottom line. All of the forces that prevent it from doing so are external in nature.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 22, 2013 22:08:25 GMT -5
No. 6 and No. 9 are spot on. . #6 is totally wrong. the birth control pill is the corner of women's rights in the modern era. prior to that, it was voting rights. the fact that you don't know that kinda undermines most of your arguments on this subject, here. as far as #9 goes, that is also completely false. most liberals don't give a crap about diversity of skin color. it is equality of opportunity that they care about. if you and Paul have managed to convince yourself that this is a fair picture of what we have in the US today, then that is just ducky. but i am not. at all.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 22, 2013 22:11:26 GMT -5
Yeah- considering that ALL my liberal friends smoke and NONE of my conservative friends smoke- maybe I should say "Tobacco Companies" are evil because hey- aren't ALL corporations evil? I find most liberals are fine with corporations as long as the corporations make an effort to appear concerned about their employees, humankind, and the planet at large. The main problem with this is that public perceptions of "being concerned about their employees, humankind, and the planet at large" doesn't always sync up with corporations that actually care about their employees, humankind, and the planet at large. The only documentary of Michael Moore's that I like is called "The Corporation", in which he makes the argument that corporations, if analyzed as human beings, are ostensibly psychopathic. . that is a great documentary, but MM didn't do it. it was done by Sut Jally at the Media Education Foundation, i believe. i might be wrong. i am totally going off memory. but i know it wasn't MM. way too cult and way too in your face for him.
|
|