I couple of days ago I saw this post from a Chinese site concerning Charlie Sheen. It from a Chinese view concerning Sheen actions in terms of parental fealty (that is respect for one’s parents and family name) Sicilians are very big into this so the article interested me. The author talked about how media influences behavior:
How many young people have been led astray by Sheen’s boasts about his substance abuse and freewheeling sex life? And that was when he was in character on national television, as a randy bachelor in Two and a Half Men.
The author then talked about the difference between how such a situation would be handled in a Chinese culture rather than an American one.
Take Edison Chen, who humbly apologized and slipped away to Canada. Or Li Gang’s father, who wept as he sought forgiveness on his son’s behalf.
The fact that Sheen continues to embarrass himself unabated, becoming even a hero to many, points to the vast differences in cultures.
Now there is a lot of talk about how TV really doesn’t have an influence and it doesn’t really matter. It is to those people that I direct the next line:
He ignored his own father’s advice to keep quiet, who was once the president of the US. emphasis mine Sheen is a disgrace, unfilial to his father and his fatherland.
You are likely laughing right now. Look at this guy who doesn’t know the difference between West Wing and reality, what a maroon. Consider how many years West Wing was on, how many people who don’t pay attention to this kind of thing, or lived overseas with no other point of reference actually believed what they saw?
Which brings us to NPR.
One of the things that makes institutional bias the “media template” so insidious is the effect of a false background message on people who do not pay attention to what is going on. True or false it becomes what “everybody knows”.
When a person or a group has an acknowledged bias (For example I am unapologetic conservative Catholic) those biases are out there and people can make an informed decision on what to believe or not. When you have a large company supported by tax dollars feeding biases such as shown in the NPR videos you are simply providing propaganda to a particular side, and to those who are either not paying attention regularly or to those listening overseas it becomes what “everybody knows”.
I don’t think this is a bug, I think NPR considers this a feature. How many people have a false impression of the Tea Party, a position that would be moot if they attended a meeting or two?
And that is why government funding doesn’t belong, if people or groups want to give their money to support a point of view that’s one thing, its a free country. To use public funds, particularly when we have a deficit, to do so that’s another.
Update: Fealty was misspelled in the Chinese article and I copied that misspelling, corrected.
Update 2: The damage control keeps up first Ron Schiller, then Vivian Schiller now Ron again
Aspen Institute communications director Jim Spiegelman says in an e-mail: “Ron Schiller has informed us that, in light of the controversy surrounding his recent statements, he does not feel that it’s in the best interests of the Aspen Institute for him to come work here.”
The NPR executive caught on video bashing the Tea Party and saying that NPR didn’t need federal funding will not be heading to the Aspen Institute. Ron Schiller had been scheduled to start his new position as director of the Aspen Institute Arts Program and Harman-Eisner Artist-in-Residence April 1, according to a glowing press release distributed last week.
But now Aspen Institute communications director Jim Spiegelman says that Schiller will not be working there.
Rush is now reporting that Ron Schiller is claiming his statements do not reflect the views of NPR or his own. Say WHAT?