BS Alert – 9/25/06:

“Annie Leibovitz is tired and nursing a cold, and she’ s just flown back to New York on the red-eye from Los Angeles, where she spent two days shooting Angelina Jolie for Vogue….”

I guess there are no other magazines available to feature stuff like art, photography, pop issues or families and children. Newsweek has to push Afghanistan off the cover in the states to feature this.

Meanwhile the foreign issues note, Five years after the Afghan invasion, the Taliban are fighting back hard, carving out a sanctuary where they—and Al Qaeda’s leaders—can operate freely.

I guess Newsweek figures what you don’t know can’t hurt you. Just shut up and look at the pretty pictures of Angelina’s baby.

But of course our media could suck because we’re so ignorant!



  1. scott says:

    It’s a two way street. Americans care way too much about stupid things like useless celebrities whose lives revolve around themselves, and too little about the world around them. And the media gives us not only what we want, but what they *think* we want, and we all know most people in the media appear to be out of touch with reality.

  2. n says:

    This reminds me of when Steve Irwin was killed. I turned on World News on CNN International and the BBC to see where they put this story. Steve Irwin was the lead on CNN. On the BBC it was “buried” behind the shooting in Jordan, the war in Afghanistan, the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka and a car bomb in Baghdad.

  3. Newsweek is one of the better publications I’m shocked!

  4. Better than what? This is also related to the feminization of American news; women won’t buy the Afghan cover, and men won’t buy it period.

  5. George says:

    Who reads Newsweek? The only time I ever pick up a copy of a news magazine is when I’m killing time in the doctor’s or dentist’s office.

    People who are informed don’t bother with a biased news source that is issued weekly.

  6. Better than the average publication.
    Newsweek and Time usually do a great job in covering world events.
    People have been buying it for years!

  7. Frank IBC says:

    Our media sucks!

    As opposed to the British media, which obsesses over gay male prom queens, topless sunbathers caught on Google Earth…

  8. Mike Voice says:

    They are professionals. They know what sells a magazine in the US’s mass market.

    At least the table of contents shows the Afghan article was only bumped from the cover, not the magazine…

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3720360/site/newsweek/

    I love some of the comments at the BS alert site:

    #2 … and coming up next on CNN, America’s Top Five shiniest objects! They move so fast and sparkle so brightly, can you keep up?

    #3 No, it would be more like… and coming up next on CNN, shiny objects…. CAN THEY KILL YOU WHILE YOU SLEEP?

  9. I’m so tired of hearing that the BBC free radio is the only news source that people can trust…
    Some of the biggest dirt bags work for free for free radio and spend thier days free loading.

  10. 0113addiv says:

    The only way to sell useless product is to keep the masses at an infantile stage. They cannot sell to me because I have an adult mind. I am a reject American because I do not even have a TV in my home. They cannot sell me anything because every thing I need I already have. The greatest evil is the TV which brain-washes everyone DAILY. It keeps people behaving like the way corporate America wants them to behave, like consumption fiends.

  11. Greymoon says:

    Seems to me that the US media likes to cozy up to celebs in order to feed their own self esteem.

    They can run “war” stories anytime. Their friend Annie is photographing their friend Angelina, now that doesnt happen to much, so lets put that on the cover so our friends know we give them free plublicity.

    Maybe that will get them some party invites and exclusives that make the mainstream media think THEY are celeberties. /stroke

  12. Awake says:

    I’m lucky that I speak Spanish. The typical Mexican newscast is 1 hour, with much of it assigned to International events, and contains much much much more world events and ‘important’ news than any of the 30 minute nighly-news programs in the USA. In the USA, just abou tthe only semi-comprehensive news is the nightly on PBS (also 1 hour). The second lead story last night on our local news? Tickle-me Elmo is back and people are fighting for it.
    As far as magazines, the only news magazine worth reading that is available in the USA is “The Economist”, another foreign publication.
    There is still a large percentage of the American population that believe that 9-11 was related to Iraq. Enough said about ignorance of long determined false information?

  13. ChrisMac says:

    The new soap should be called.. “As the pendulm swings”

    None of this is new.. There are just more people (with easier methods) to bitch about it.

  14. tallwookie says:

    quick question – above graphic shows asia/latin america. Now, correct me if i’m wrong, but dont they speak other languages than english there? and if so, why arent those languages on the front cover?

  15. Awake says:

    tallwookie – Untranslated versions of magazines are VERY common in most countries, specially of the news kind. The editorial contents is customized for the local population, but the base magazine is in English. Most upper class / educated people throughout the world (the magazine demographis) speak English, or at least can read it very well, even if they can’t pronounce it.

  16. tallwookie says:

    gotcha, wasnt sure what was going on there – thanks for the clarification!

  17. JR says:

    When in doubt, read the Economist. Mind you, they have different issues, too.

  18. RBG says:

    Maybe if those same continents ponied up a few more troops, they’d be reading about Annie Leibovitz too.

    But then: “Carving out a sanctuary.” That’s supposed to be winning?

    “Canadian troops made significant incursions into territory held by the Taliban in the Panjwaii district of southern Afghanistan.”

    [Edit: Please use tinyurl for long links]
    Yes, Americans and Canadians also couldn’t be bothered with all the “Losing Germany” magazine covers during the WW2 either.

    The sad fact remains that neither the American nor the Canadian people have fully woken up to the fact that they are in a real war. Maybe because they can’t find the right wine to go with it.

    RBG

  19. ChrisMac says:

    yep.. we’re sending two more pellet guns and a zodiac…

  20. ECA says:

    I would rather have ALL the news, or NONE..
    Let me sort what I wish to read.

    with the internet, it would be cool of a news service to let you CHECK oof the email or page you wish to see.
    But even the internet, If it isnt on the front page, most wont read it.

  21. Peter Rodwell says:

    Recommended reading: “Amusing Ourselves to Death” by Neil Postman – he talks about these very issues.

  22. traaxx says:

    I suppose this is an example of government censorship? Really, Newsweek is anti-American and they don’t like show it at home or is Newsweek pro-Bush and doesn’t want to embarass him at home?

    The elites have been conductiong censorship of our new media for so long it not even funny anymore. How many times have you heard “don’t talk politics, don’t talk religion, just get along”. It’s BS and has lead to Americans turning off anyting that isn’t about sex or sports, which seem to be the only safe subject, oh yeah sex if off limit also so that just leaves sports.

  23. Named says:

    #18,

    What’s Canada doing in Afghanistan again? Protecting our borders?

    Steve Harper is just trying to suck George’s Bush. And we know how well that’s working out…

  24. Terry says:

    #23, Nice comment. Real nice. Intelligent too. Oh wait, I’m wrong.

    Never mind intelligent debate, just respond with a smart-ass remark that contributes nothing.

    The worst thing about the Internet is that everyone can put in their 2 cents worth, even if all they have is a penny’s worth. Like you.

  25. Olo Baggins of Bywater says:

    Intelligent debate is the key. The Interweb allows far too many non-intelligent people to debate, but they don’t have the skills to do it well and the web lets them get away with it.

    These mental midgets can’t listen, think, or consider the bias of their sources well enough to develop independent positions; they mostly just parrot others. Highly religious people seem to fall into this trap more readily, possibly because they already fell into it once before.

  26. Named says:

    Sticks and stones ladies…

    There is no intelligent response to why Canada is fighting in Afghanistan when the great, mighty US decided itself that Afghanistan isn’t worth fighting in. Why did the US leave? No interest there anymore. The Taliban have been to the White House so no need to re-invite them. But the US DID have to make some deals in Iraq, so off they went. And now Steve Harper, GWBushes bestest buddy in the whole world (you can tell just be looking at the softwood lumber agreement he hammered out…) is just pandering.

    Now now, the Interweb is the greatest invention since sliced Wonder Bread, as it allows the geniuses among us to attack the messenger and ignore the argument. Someone of your mental strength should have at least attempted to answer why Canada was in Afghanistan instead of stumping for your Lord and King, GWBush. He’s got professionals to do it… He doesn’t need two-bit hacks like yourselves…

  27. James Hill says:

    When in Rome…

  28. RBG says:

    23. Bin Laden’s terrorist training base was located in Afghanistan, a country that supported his efforts.

    Canadians were among the 3,000 or so killed in 9/11. You remember 9/11? Canada would prefer this sort of thing doesn’t happen again to its citizens. Or it’s neighbor’s citizens. Or it’s allies citizen’s for that matter.

    Countries do this thing where they agree to support each other in times of war. It makes any one country stronger when attacked.

    As brave as Canadian soldiers are, their military is not big enough to lead the war in Afghanistan. You might want to check out some of the embedded journalist reports on this. So the idea that the US is not in Afghanistan is incorrect and you made that up.

    Glad to help you out.

    RBG

  29. Terry says:

    Words and facts…
    First, you demonstrate you ignorance by asking “Why did the US leave (Afghanistan)?” They haven’t, and a few minutes with Google will pop up the references.

    Second, why would you even presume that Canada, as part of a UN-sanctioned, NATO-formed force, even needs US permission or approval for it’s actions?

    Third, Liberal Party of Canada. Heard of them? The governing party of Canada before Harper and the Conservatives? You know, the ones who first sent the troops to Afghanistan?

    Figured not.

    Now about your second paragraph. Total smart ass. You do realize that you haven’t said anything useful. The fact that you obviously refer to yourself as one of “the geniuses among us” just tells me that you are so sure of your rightness that further discussion is pointless.

    I know I don’t have all the answers. I may not even have the right ones. Do you have the intellectual honesty to admit the same about yourself? If not, please continue to engage in your mental masturbation.

    By the way, G W Bush is not my “Lord and King”. I am Canadian. Sounds like you are too. Damn.

  30. RBG says:

    18. [Edit: Please use tinyurl for long links]

    If this is important, please provide an easily-found box on your page headed “Tinyurl” with basic instructions and a link. …For the neo-luddites among us.

    RBG


1

Bad Behavior has blocked 4464 access attempts in the last 7 days.