posted
I know, I know. Do your own work. But this is not about finding things, or writing it or anything, it's about the truth, and which sources are going to give me true facts and objective opinions, which sources are going to give me true facts but biased opinions, and which sources are going to make some of it up and therefore I can't trust them. (I'm presently not trusting any polls. Statements like "of one thousand Americans..." are not very comforting).
So I would really really appreciate it if Americans who read/discuss these things every day would help me out on what is a valid source and what is hogwash.
My essay is on governmental corruption in America (compared with Canada, but I expect Canada to be slightly better source-wise). Specifically, corruption of governmental officials and corporate control of the government (election corruption is also a section, but that's a lot easier, because little or no bureaucracy clouds the subject and there's an awful lot of it that is blatant).
So, what or who can I trust?
Can I trust, for example, the New York Times and the Washington Post? Big names in American journalism? Are there any sites that I should steer clear of, even though they may seem to be fairly reliable?
Can I trust government releases and investigations? I'm leaning towards "yes" here because if the government announces it's corrupt, chances are it's probably really corrupt.
Can I trust exterior sources like literary journals as long as they're not clearly biased? (I'm hoping so)
Can I trust sources like the UN/International organisations? I'm also leaning towards 'yes' for this as long as they are non-corporate based.
Can I trust reliable non-US news organisations (i.e. BBC, CBC)?
I'm not trusting single people/crusaders (like Arianna Huffington and other authors) unless I cross check it with somewhere else. I think Ms. Huffington's jocular writing style is really bad and she's obviously rooting for herself to be elected as a paragon of virtue but her facts are probably mostly correct.
Michael Moore is out .
Thank you thank you thank you!
ps. It's really upsetting that I can't do this without having to pick through twisted truths.
Edit: if you feel the need to NOT help me on my essay, you can just casually discuss the reliability of American Sources of Information and I'll eavesdrop.
posted
Corruption is a judgement of motivations behind actions.
Typically, this infers personal gain - I would recommend very clearly spelling out your functioning definition of corruption then providing facts to support your claim.
Did Bush attack Iraq for personal gain? What did he stand to gain? What motivated his actions? What personal benefit did he reap for those actions?
And comparing corruption between governments is more of a thesis than an essay, so I'd recommend paring your subject down to a specific subject.
I could, for example, critique the availability of healthcare in the US versus Canada, pros and cons. However, evaluating the whole of the US government as corrupt may take more than a few pages of work.
posted
It's quite a strict assignment, unfortunately. I have to focus on at least three pre-defined issues from a list of five. The ones I have chosen as most pertinent to America are the ones I listed. (I'm a first year student so really it's an overview. Believe me, not writing several books on the subjects I have previously covered has been a problem!)
Basically, all I need to know is what's true and what's not, although I appreciate your help, Trevor .
The two news sources I trust the most are The Economist and The Christian Science Monitor. I also consider The New York Times and the BBC as fairly good sources.
Posts: 1592 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Specifically, corruption of governmental officials and corporate control of the government
"In an age of corporate conglomerates dominating news media, the Monitor combination of church ownership, a public-service mission, and commitment to covering the world (not to mention the fact that it was founded by a woman shortly after the turn of the century, when US women didn't yet have the vote!) gives the paper a uniquely independent voice in journalism." About CS Monitor
quote:Generally speaking, the major news sources are reliable if only because if they aren't, they get caught by the other sharks in the tank.
That's a good point. Although the American media is not immune to the lemming effect. Memogate was first discredited by blogs and not by major news agencies.
"Unlike most US dailies, the Monitor does not rely primarily on wire services, like AP and Reuters, for its international coverage. We have writers based in 11 countries, including Russia, China, France, the UK, Kenya, Mexico, Israel and India, as well as throughout the US." About CS Monitor.
quote:Can I trust government releases and investigations? I'm leaning towards "yes" here because if the government announces it's corrupt, chances are it's probably really corrupt.
1. (Corruption of officals) This question asks me about the personal and business interests of public officials interfering with their political agendas.
The obvious issues here are politicans investing and owning Drug Companies and Oil Companies et al and then helping them along. But this topic is like a total hornet's nest. I plan to use the word :allegedly" a lot.
Less obvious would be issues like Government subsidizing of friends (like the Sponsorship Scandal in Canada) and promotion of unqualified friends.
2. (Corporate control) Asks about how companies are kept in check from running amok. My answer here would be similar to the first section of question 1; especially focussing on companies giving politicians money for their campaigns with then, after election, equals the official turning a blind eye or actively helping them. This is similarly hard to prove.
posted
Foreign Affairs magazine and the Financial Times are also excellent sources.
FA generally runs paired articles on controversial arguments, so you get both sides from very knowledgeable people. The FT is just a generally excellent paper, doesn't really use (at all?) wire stories, and has lots of primary source stuff (important people write guest articles for it at a high rate, higher than the NYT (and more important people, often)).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You might explore the Cheney/Halliburton links in terms of personal agenda and corporate influence.
The Florida voting fiasco is another - and some wonder if the President's brother being governor had something to do with it.
You can argue the corruption of ideals and morals with the indefinate detainment of prisoners and the alleged shipping of people overseas to skirt the "we don't torture" rhetoric.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
.![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
