Joined: Aug 13, 2004 Posts: 435 Location: Hiding from the All-Seeing Eye
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:43 pm Post subject: Why no PO on the mainstream media?
Alright. In light of the recent debacle on a 9/11 conspiracy thread, I'm going to start a new topic. I have a question: Why, if PO is the biggest challenge the human race will probably face...and soon, isn't it being covered on the mainstream press?
Sure there are little blurbs every now and again but most of us know how big this problem is going to be. There's a hint of conspiracy here (which makes things interesting) but let's try not to let this thread spiral down like Ashlee Simpson's soon-to-be-nonexistant music career. I'm anxious to here from all the conspiracy skeptics because this is a pretty good question. _________________ "Your failure to be informed does not make me a wacko." - John Loeffler
December 23, 2012
Last edited by Riddick on Thu Feb 10, 2005 4:27 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: Aug 13, 2004 Posts: 435 Location: Hiding from the All-Seeing Eye
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 10:08 pm Post subject:
The public doesn't like to hear about murder, rape, and robery either. Not to mention budget cuts, failed school levies, and natural disasters but the press loves it when that stuff happens because it gets them ratings as well as profits. Why, if the media is truely on the side of the public, doesn't it cover things that have a real potential to wipe out the planet? _________________ "Your failure to be informed does not make me a wacko." - John Loeffler
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 10:27 pm Post subject: Re: Why no PO on the mainstream media?
Riddick wrote:
Why, if PO is the biggest challenge the human race will probably face...and soon, isn't it being covered on the mainstream press?
The general consensus is that we have enough oil for 30 years. Nobody views oil as a crisis. Everyone is hearing from the oil traders and OPEC that oil is going back down to $35 in 2005. If it oil is setting new all time highs every day, as it did last summer from July through Sept, then oil is the top story. At $45 oil is just a temporary inconvienence. This summer if we hit $60, I expect it to start showing up in the news again. _________________ Make a man a fire and he will be warm for a day.
Set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
The public doesn't like to hear about murder, rape, and robery either. Not to mention budget cuts, failed school levies, and natural disasters but the press loves it when that stuff happens because it gets them ratings as well as profits. Why, if the media is truely on the side of the public, doesn't it cover things that have a real potential to wipe out the planet?
I can't agree on this one. The public dearly loves blood and gore, and stories about murder, etc. are quite popular. Notice that you recognize that fact when you note that it gets them ratings.
People lap up natural disasters. Hollywood even produces movies about disasters, since people can't get enough of the real thing. And politics? Again, it assures that half the people will be angry (and so, will watch!) and half will be gloating (and so, will watch!).
The problem with Peak Oil is that it projects a difficult future with no easy way - perhaps no way - to improve the situation. People don't want to believe it, and they won't appreciate the message or the messenger. _________________ Dieoff. Fun to watch. Better with hot buttered popcorn!
The problem with Peak Oil is that it projects a difficult future with no easy way - perhaps no way - to improve the situation. People don't want to believe it, and they won't appreciate the message or the messenger.
That is exactly true. I have tried to discuss Peak Oil issues with my parents and with some very intelligent people who I work with. They just don't want to consider the concept or even the downside of a soft landing. My step-mother actually became upset. They all think we will just switch to something else. While I think that substitution will work for some things, I have no illusions that everything will continue as before.
I don't bring up the topic anymore with family or co-workers. It doesnt help and it can only hurt your ability to function within a group under the current system. _________________ Make a man a fire and he will be warm for a day.
Set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
Joined: Oct 18, 2004 Posts: 266 Location: San Francisco, CA
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 10:55 pm Post subject: Cornucopianism
There is a great interview with Richard Heinberg where he does a good job of explaining the general public's refusal to believe PO, and it comes down to the fact that the majority of the public are programmed, at an early age and by every possible means, to believe fervently in Cornucopianism: link
And who can blame them? It's a lot more comforting than believing in PO, believe me!
Joined: Oct 18, 2004 Posts: 266 Location: San Francisco, CA
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 10:57 pm Post subject: Excerpt
Right, well of course the word cornucopian goes back to the mythical cornucopia, the horn of plenty, from which all good things emerge. And, Cornucopianism is actually not confined to a few critics of Hubbert, Campbell, Laherre and those people. Cornucopianism is the dominant ideology of our modern world. It is taught in every school of economics. It is the subtext of every political speech. And virtually, we are soaked in this point of view. The assumption is the economy can grow forever. Human population can grow forever. And we will never actually meet up with any physical limits to the growth of our economy or population. Now again, a few moments thought should point out the absolute absurdity of that way of thinking. But some how it has weaseled its way into our dominant ideology, primarily through the field of economics.
In economics, of course we look not at resources per se, we look at how resources are mediated by money. And money, of course, is something that can be created infinitely and indefinitely. Money is created through the making of loans, and banks create money all the time. So there is no physical limit to the amount of money that can be created. So economists assume that if there is enough money to go around, then when one resource actually starts to become scarce we can just substitute another resource for it. It's the magic of the market that leads the perpetual growth; the order of the day for eternity.
It's a very happy way of thinking. And it is a way of thinking that says - that just as our way of life is more opulent and fast paced than our parents and our grandparents, our children's way of life will be even more opulent and more fast paced, and on and on to infinity. Of course technological changes fed into this too. We developed all kinds of new technologies generation after generation, from the radio, to the television, to the computer, to the cell phones, and so on. And so if technology can continue to become more complex and effective and powerful into the future, where is the limit to that? Where is the limit to human ingenuity? So these are the arguments of the Cornucopians.
Joined: Oct 12, 2004 Posts: 1008 Location: In the suburban sea of strangers
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 11:26 pm Post subject:
Ever looked at how much of the of advertising in a major newspaper paid for by auto manufacturers and auto dealers? Between them and suburban real estate advertisers, practically all of it. How much do you think they would spend on advertising in a newspaper that tried to persuade it's readers that suburban homes and personal motor vehicles have no future and that money spent on them would be wasted? No advertising revenue, no newspaper. Much the same story for commercial television and radio. No advertising revenue, no tv or radio stations.
As with any topic that challenges people's view of the world, there is a (well-warranted) fear that one will be on the recieving end of death threats, legal problems, etc. It's no wonder these issues aren't discussed by the mainstream media.
Gee Riddick, I don't know. Apparently there's a big wig on Broadway working on "Peak Oil, the musical" right now.
Think Wall street, Riddick. What would happen to the stock market if the mainstream started hammering away on this? Oh, and real estate. Think Mcmansion way out in the burbs might plummet in value? They like misery they can package and sell to business that remains in business. You also don't hear much about the impending economic melt-down Same.
All the gory, bloody, depressingly stupid stories they focus on 24/7 rarely attack corporations or institutions. They cover human interest stories. Emphasis on "human" singular. Individuals in isolation are their best targets, because that way they don't alienate potential advertisers.
Joined: May 19, 2004 Posts: 892 Location: San Francisco, California
Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2005 1:40 am Post subject:
Here's a Paul Krugman column from the New York Times that mentions peak oil: link
I think PO gets plenty of mainstream media exposure. The problem is that most people are in denial.
Joined: Oct 20, 2004 Posts: 520 Location: The Land of Do-As-You-Please
Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2005 4:15 am Post subject:
Peak oil is mentioned fairly frequently in the news. For instance it was featured on the front cover of National Geographic (july? 2004 'The end of cheap oil'). People certainly don't want to hear about it, and my experience is that most people have blind faith in alternatives and substitutions, even though they readily admit they don't know what form these would actually take. People's reactions to the concept of peak oil seem to be universally similiar...
After providing for food and shelter most other human effort is expended reducing fear and anxiety before pleasure is pursued. One of the main civilisatory drives is the reduction of anxiety of all kinds from national safety to private insurance contracts to 'trust' in human relationships. There is hardly a topic less palatable than the assured destruction of a society for it's partakers. Why are you surprised at peoples reluctance to their own societies demise. It's like thinking about ones own death. Although an invigorating exercise most of us don't want to join into it. Better living with denial is a sound mental health strategy.
Most people that I have talked to give up instantly if they take PO serious - too big, can't do anything about it. Or it's too bad to happen and they don't take it serious. I am not sure if it is desirable to destruct peoples coping mechanisms. The press needs to report individual disasters because it actually makes people feel safer - gosh, those poor people - what a lucky sod I am that it hasn't happened here or to me.
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Next
Page 1 of 8
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
