[dwar0123]

http://eatocracy.cnn...ages/?hpt=hp_t3

I remember when this first hit the news, sounded disgusting but I didn't pay it much mind, most everything about the meat industry is disgusting and as a happy meat eater I have grown accustomed to understanding that and moving on.

My initial thought on reading the headline is great, another outlandish attempt to use legal means to garner unwarranted funds with the only real beneficiaries being the lawyers.

However, I quickly remembered that this industry was destroyed by the media campaign and that I have a strong dislike for the current media environment in the USA. The media sensationalize everything for the all might ad dollar, truth or common sense be damned.

So here is hoping BPI wins and ABC is permanently destroyed, that might actually be dramatic enough to start fixing what could be considered one of the fundamental problems that plague this country.

[jonottawa]

Food Inc

If only there were a way that people who want to eat wholesome food could fight for and win the right to do so while preserving the right of those like OP to continue eating pink slime.

[dwar0123]

jonottawa, on 2012-September-13, 16:09, said:

Food Inc

If only there were a way that people who want to eat wholesome food could fight for and win the right to do so while preserving the right of those like OP to continue eating pink slime.

Chuckle.

I don't eat fast food, in fact I am pretty sure I have never purchased anything that contained pink slime, if I had, so be it, I didn't notice. And from everything I read, I wouldn't notice, probably not a good meal by any means.

Not really the point, if you eat at McDonalds you are not exactly expecting wholesome food and you trying to force 'wholesome' food on others isn't very productive.

My issue here is with how the media gets away with murder in how it spins stories to attract people like you into watching and linking their crap, generating revenue for themselves.

I am not really interested in talking about the merits of pink slime vs wholesome food. I am only interested in the angle that deals with the media's culpability to be fair in how it reports the news.

If you feel that the media reports were honest, fair and balanced then we may have something to discuss

[jonottawa]

dwar0123, on 2012-September-13, 16:24, said:

If you feel that the media reports were honest, fair and balanced then we may have something to discuss

You're right, they're not honest, fair and balanced. They under-report issues like this because they don't want to alienate their advertisers.

But if you want to think that the poor little food industry was 'destroyed' by the big bad media, whatever floats your boat. Americans are unhealthy in large part because of their diet. And they eat what they do because of the food industry.

[dwar0123]

jonottawa, on 2012-September-13, 16:38, said:

You're right, they're not honest, fair and balanced. They under-report issues like this because they don't want to alienate their advertisers.

But if you want to think that the poor little food industry was 'destroyed' by the big bad media, whatever floats your boat. Americans are unhealthy in large part because of their diet. And they eat what they do because of the food industry.

Why would you ascribe to me the belief that the entire food industry was destroyed? Is that easier for you to dismissively argue against then my actual belief that this tiny little part of the food industry was destroyed? Which it was. Such debating tactics is what cheapens discourse in this country and has led to the inability of the two sides to agree on anything primarily because they can't even agree about what they disagree about.

At least we agree that the media is not honest fair nor balanced and I have no issue with that lack being in large part due to under-reporting issues in general. Clearly underreporting is not the issue here, rather the issue is the manner in which it was reported. I hope you are not trying to justify the manner in which it was reported by stating that it is generally underreported? That is a very illogical position to take.

As for the unhealthy aspect of it. it isn't any more unhealthy then what it was filling in for. We also likely agree in general about the unhealthy habits of American eaters, however I feel it is entirely irrelevant to the discussion here.

[nigel_k]

I take a back seat to nobody in my contempt for the mainstream news media, but freedom of expression means that when they are grossly unfair and unbalanced in how they report the news, there should not be any legal consequences.

[jonottawa]

dwar0123, on 2012-September-13, 16:59, said:

Why would you ascribe to me the belief that the entire food industry was destroyed?

I'm sorry, you're right, you only said that the meat industry had been destroyed.

dwar0123, on 2012-September-13, 15:54, said:

... most everything about the meat industry is disgusting ...
However, I quickly remembered that this industry was destroyed by the media campaign ...

[dwar0123]

jonottawa, on 2012-September-13, 18:35, said:

I'm sorry, you're right, you only said that the meat industry had been destroyed.

Hm?
I said the meat industry was disgusting. I said this industry was destroyed, assuming, incorrectly, that this would easily be understood to refer to the pink slime industry. Honestly any other interpretation is stupid and your continued insistence on this track tends to be the sign of someone with nothing left to say.

[dwar0123]

nigel_k, on 2012-September-13, 18:23, said:

I take a back seat to nobody in my contempt for the mainstream news media, but freedom of expression means that when they are grossly unfair and unbalanced in how they reports the news, there should not be any legal consequences.

I worry about infringing free speech with overzealous pursuit of libel claims and it is certainly possible that this would be a case of it, I honestly don't know enough about the actual case.

However I am not of the camp to give free reign to free speech and agree in general with how the libel laws handle it.

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Defamation

[phil_20686]

jonottawa, on 2012-September-13, 16:38, said:

And they eat what they do because of the food industry.

This is where, imo, left wing thinkers leave reality. Sure, at the margin, more people eat fast food, because of advertising campaigns, especially the ones aimed at children. However, statements like this presume that your average consumer, if only they were not hood winked by the Big Bad Advertising, would go on to eat healthily and live long, healthly and productive lives.

What a load of rubbish.

People make bad choices all the time. There is little evidence that better education prevents people from screwing up their lives royally. You are basically proposing the position that environmental factors, like advertising, dominate over free will. However you like to propose it.

Now that is not to say that environmental factors are not important, but advertising is at best marginal. People buy McDonalds instead of oven meals because of advertising. They do not decide not to produce a home made gourmet meal and instead go to macdonalds.