Call a spade a spade is the old saying

  • News
  • Thread starter polyb
  • Start date
In summary, a right-wing pundit was recently exposed as being on the government's payroll to promote one of its policies. The president vowed that this will not happen again and that their agenda should be able to stand on its own two feet.
  • #1
polyb
67
0
Call a spade a spade is the old saying. I found this article and it struck me with the WTF jaw drop, it appears that a lot of people were on the pay roll. From the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050127/USMEDIA27/TPInternational/?query=alan+freeman

WASHINGTON -- U.S. President George W. Bush vowed yesterday that his administration will stop paying newspaper columnists and pundits to back its policies after the second right-wing commentator in a month acknowledged receiving a contract from a government agency to help promote one of its policies.

"All our cabinet secretaries must realize that we will not be paying commentators to advance our agenda," Mr. Bush told reporters. "Our agenda ought to be able to stand on its two feet."

Just how long have these people have been up to this and how many pundits were bought off? As if it wasn't obvious.

Who remembers Jessica Lynch?

A definition just for the heck of it!
pro·pa·gan·da:
2 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
3 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=propaganda&x=20&y=15
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
It makes you wonder doesn't it...maybe this sort of thing has always been going on and will continue to go on, but things have to get quite bad before it's considered propaganda maybe...anyway, "welcome to the real world", hehe, I want to be a pundit when I grow up!
 
  • #3
What else is new? :zzz: :zzz: :zzz:
 
  • #4
spender said:
What else is new? :zzz: :zzz: :zzz:

The expose'! :bugeye:
 
  • #5
jammieg said:
It makes you wonder doesn't it...maybe this sort of thing has always been going on and will continue to go on, but things have to get quite bad before it's considered propaganda maybe...

I have known for long enough that 'NEWS' has served varied interests. Look into Chomsky sometime to read his critiques, he is all about that. The difference now is that this administration has been caught red handed and has used tax dollars for this propoganda. This question is how extensive is the network and how far will this crew go if they feel comfortable enough to be open about it.

BTW, the connotation of the word does not changed the denotation of it. Of course most people respond to perception 'as if' it was reality and why connotation carries more weight with a lot of people.

jammieg said:
anyway, "welcome to the real world", hehe, I want to be a pundit when I grow up!

Great, another windbag and pulp waster to squandor resources! :rolleyes:
 
  • #6
Very interesting stuff Polyb, after some more thought you know they have vowed to stop now, they admit it was wrong and are very sorry but I have a feeling these are mostly more again, although I'll bet most administrations got away with "covert means of mass public informing" or whatever it's called...It's almost like having a farther who does all the thinking for me.
 
  • #7
Second political pundit? That's old news. The day directly after Bush made that comment about not paying any more pundits and news-people, a third pundit was revealed as being on The Administration's payroll.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=61735
 
  • #8
:eek: ... government sanctioned propaganda ... how low can they go ... :devil:
 
  • #9
polyb said:
...this administration has been caught red handed and has used tax dollars for this propoganda. This question is how extensive is the network and how far will this crew go if they feel comfortable enough to be open about it.

I suppose now there will be an investigation...and questions of how this may have swayed election results...tampering...like Watergate...leading to impeachment proceedings. Yeh, about like there have been investigations into whether intelligence was falsified about Iraq. It really wouldn't matter anyway, because Bush supporters will justify it in some way--like responses that this happens all the time, so what's the big deal?
 
  • #10
SOS2008 said:
I suppose now there will be an investigation...and questions of how this may have swayed election results...tampering...like Watergate...leading to impeachment proceedings. Yeh, about like there have been investigations into whether intelligence was falsified about Iraq. It really wouldn't matter anyway, because Bush supporters will justify it in some way--like responses that this happens all the time, so what's the big deal?

Well, it does, doesn't it? At least Bush is saying he shouldn't be doing it and plans on stopping. Not that I believe him, but this makes little difference to me anyway as I've learned not to trust the media as a reliable source of information. Someone as cynical as yourself should be a big believer that everyone does this. Even the author of this thread posts quite a bit of factually incorrect propaganda, although granted, it isn't the same coming from a nobody on an internet forum and coming from the president of the USA. Although technically, this might not qualify as propaganda under certain definitions of the term. If you believe any solicited support to be propaganda, then it does. But many will stipulate that to be propaganda, the information disseminated be false, which this article never says took place. The definition posted is a pretty weak definition and under that definition any political commentary whatsoever, whether solicited or otherwise, is propaganda.

Anyway, it's pretty sick that journalists would do this, and I know they do it all the time, along with making up sources and not confirming others and injecting their own biases into supposedly neutral newscasts. I think I have less respect at this point for most journalists than I do for most politicians.
 
  • #11
What's wrong with paying newspaper columnists to promote the govt policies. Its just like advertising right?
 
  • #12
No, it's not ! :mad:

When you advertise your product, we know that it is you that is trying to sell it to us.

When you pay a reporter to praise your policy, you are misleading the people into believing that they are reading an independent opinion.

This is a shameless, despicable, cowardly act !
 
  • #13
loseyourname said:
Someone as cynical as yourself should be a big believer that everyone does this.

Yes I can be cynical (and facetious), and yes I believe everyone uses propaganda to some extent. But it seems that since 9-11 things have become extreme, both in practices of politicians and the media, and acceptance by the public. While it probably wasn't a good idea to investigate the PDB after the 9-11 attack, due diligence should have been done prior to invading Iraq, and questioning of the every-changing reasons for the war since. Then came Slampaign 2004, with all-time lows from agencies like FOX News, and now this. Think of all the time and tax dollars spent on something like Whitewater, not so long ago. But now everyone is so complacent, saying this is just the way politics and the media have always been. I don't think it has always been this bad. Maybe I'm too idealistic.
 
  • #14
By the way, a subscription is required to read the full article. It would be nice to actually know the contents before getting inflamed over them.
 

Related to Call a spade a spade is the old saying

1. What is the meaning of the saying "Call a spade a spade"?

The saying "Call a spade a spade" means to speak honestly and directly, even if it may be uncomfortable or unpopular. It originated from the Greek philosopher Plutarch's quote "I am a plain man, and I call a spade a spade," meaning to speak plainly and truthfully.

2. Where did the saying "Call a spade a spade" come from?

The saying "Call a spade a spade" can be traced back to the ancient Greek language. It was used by the philosopher Plutarch in his work "Moralia" to emphasize the importance of being honest and straightforward in one's speech.

3. How is the saying "Call a spade a spade" used in modern language?

In modern language, the saying "Call a spade a spade" is used to encourage people to speak truthfully and directly, without sugarcoating or avoiding uncomfortable truths. It is often used to criticize someone for being too indirect or avoiding difficult conversations.

4. Is the saying "Call a spade a spade" considered offensive?

The saying "Call a spade a spade" has been used in a derogatory manner in the past, as the word "spade" has been used as a racial slur. However, the origins of the saying have no racial connotations, and it is generally accepted as a colloquial phrase with no offensive intent.

5. Are there any alternative versions of the saying "Call a spade a spade"?

Yes, there are several alternative versions of the saying "Call a spade a spade." Some variations include "Call a shovel a shovel," "Call it like it is," or "Speak the truth." These versions all convey the same message of being honest and straightforward in one's speech.

Similar threads

News 3rd Pundit revealed as being on Bush Admin's payroll.
    • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
News Bush Honest & Trustworthy Until How Many Lies?
    • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
8K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top