John Pilger's religion.

[skywalker]

Guys, you're killing this thread! [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[Ronn_Bman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yorick:


No problem. It's compelling reading considering there are no figures backing up his speculations. I guess he's just 'proclaiming gospel truth'.

Hence my statement above. His worshipers don't seem to question his accuracy, motives or bias.

---

His article(s) seems more like an editorial than a news story from a war correspondent for the reasons you mention.

[Fljotsdale]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yorick:
I think John Pilger should start his own church. His word is already gospel, and he's so healing and positive in his knowledgable writing, one can't help but walk away feeling good about the world when one reads his words.

What does anybody else think?

---

I have a strong suspicion this is meant to be flamebait, lol!

Anyway - no church, I think! I have not seen anyone post anything that idicates any sort of 'worship' of Pilger - and the man himself would probably laugh himself into an early grave at the mere suggestion! :evilhaha:

He is pretty well respected in the media, as I said in another thread, but Brits don't tend to take anyone's word as 'gospel' - we are a pretty cynical lot, lol. Oh, Yorick! - thank you for giving me a good laugh!

[Donut]

quote:

---

Originally posted by skywalker:
I don't mind his stuff too much. Didn't know who he was until yesterday. I like to get info from all sides and get the whole picture so I think his writing has merit!

---

here are some of his awards. People can draw their own conclusions about his merit as a journalist:

1966 Descriptive Writer of the Year
1967 Reporter of the Year
1967 Journalist of the Year
1970 International Reporter of the Year
1974 News Reporter of the Year
1977 Campaigning Journalist of the Year
1979 Journalist of the Year
1979-80 UN Media Peace Prize, Australia
1980-81 UN Media Peace Prize, Gold Medal, Australia
1979 TV Times Readers' Award
1990 The George Foster Peabody Award, USA
1991 American Television Academy Award ('Emmy')
1991 British Academy of Film and Television Arts - The Richard Dimbleby Award
1990 Reporters San Frontiers Award, France
1995 International de Television Geneve Award


I believe he was born in Sydney BTW

[ 11-08-2001: Message edited by: Donut ]

[Fljotsdale]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Donut:


here are some of his awards. People can draw their own conclusions about his merit as a journalist:

1966 Descriptive Writer of the Year
1967 Reporter of the Year
1967 Journalist of the Year
1970 International Reporter of the Year
1974 News Reporter of the Year
1977 Campaigning Journalist of the Year
1979 Journalist of the Year
1979-80 UN Media Peace Prize, Australia
1980-81 UN Media Peace Prize, Gold Medal, Australia
1979 TV Times Readers' Award
1990 The George Foster Peabody Award, USA
1991 American Television Academy Award ('Emmy')
1991 British Academy of Film and Television Arts - The Richard Dimbleby Award
1990 Reporters San Frontiers Award, France
1995 International de Television Geneve Award


I believe he was born in Sydney BTW

[ 11-08-2001: Message edited by: Donut ]

---

Really??

That's pretty impressive, Donut! I had no idea. Thought he was 'just this guy, y'know'? (quote from Zaphod Beeblebrox's shrink!)

[Yorick]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Donut:


here are some of his awards. People can draw their own conclusions about his merit as a journalist:

1966 Descriptive Writer of the Year
1967 Reporter of the Year
1967 Journalist of the Year
1970 International Reporter of the Year
1974 News Reporter of the Year
1977 Campaigning Journalist of the Year
1979 Journalist of the Year
1979-80 UN Media Peace Prize, Australia
1980-81 UN Media Peace Prize, Gold Medal, Australia
1979 TV Times Readers' Award
1990 The George Foster Peabody Award, USA
1991 American Television Academy Award ('Emmy')
1991 British Academy of Film and Television Arts - The Richard Dimbleby Award
1990 Reporters San Frontiers Award, France
1995 International de Television Geneve Award


I believe he was born in Sydney BTW

---

Michael Jackson made some great music in the past. Doesn't mean his new album is relevant or even 'good' does it?

I stand by what I said. A journalist is only as good as his last article. If he's out of the loop, he's out of the know.

I do have a signed copy of 'distant voices' BTW. Also, my mother-in-law would say I'm speaking heresy... ...but there you go.

[Fljotsdale]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yorick:


Michael Jackson made some great music in the past. Doesn't mean his new album is relevant or even 'good' does it?

I stand by what I said. A journalist is only as good as his last article. If he's out of the loop, he's out of the know.

---

Imo, Michael Jackson NEVER made great music!

John Pilger is STILL greatly respected, and very knowledgeable! You cannot take an article from the Mirror (of all papers!) as an example of his usual style (though I can't imagine why he writes for them, apart from the money). The Mirror does NOT like facts and figures. Pilger produces them with ease, when called for, in other areas of the media.

You wouldn't like to be judged on one piece of music you wrote, would you, if it had been designed for a particular audience, but was not what you would prefer to have produced? And journalists have rather less freedom of expression than musicians! [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Yorick]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fljotsdale:


Imo, Michael Jackson NEVER made great music!

John Pilger is STILL greatly respected, and very knowledgeable! You cannot take an article from the Mirror (of all papers!) as an example of his usual style (though I can't imagine why he writes for them, apart from the money). The Mirror does NOT like facts and figures. Pilger produces them with ease, when called for, in other areas of the media.

You wouldn't like to be judged on one piece of music you wrote, would you, if it had been designed for a particular audience, but was not what you would prefer to have produced? And journalists have rather less freedom of expression than musicians! [img]smile.gif[/img]

---

Fljotsdale, Michael Jackson was an incredible child vocalist by anyones standards. The guy was brilliant by any definition of class vocal performance. Tone, control, emotion, timing, soul, energy, interpretation. Genius.

The albums he recorded with Quincey Jones, one of the worlds most respected producers, and a man oozing class and musical brilliance, went on to sell monsterous amounts proving that his music was relevant. It struck a chord with a large number of people, and both reflected and inspired a generation, in terms of dance, music video approach, vocalisations and songwriting/production.

To say Michael Jackson never made great music is to place ones own taste above the historical and cultural significance of an artist.

For the record I don't own a Michael Jackson record, and don't enjoy his music.

He did in the past, make relevant, great music in the opinions of his peers, fellow craftsmen and millions upon millions of fellow humans.

As he has gone on, his estrangement from his muse - his dislocation from normality - has decreased the relevance of his music.

I would argue that the same can happen with a journalist, and that as age catches up, earlier views can become set in stone despite the world moving on.

When I read the Pilger article(s) in question, I read paranoia. I saw no factual figures, no supporting evidence for the conspiracy theory he was hypothesising. Only his much lauded opinion resting on the laurels of previous success.

I'm sorry, but I'm more cynical of the media than to swallow sensationalism like that unquestioningly. Reputation or no, the onus is on him to provide proof rather than wild speculation about motives and causes.

Hard journalism is fact driven.

Oh, Fljotsdale, no I certainly would not like it, but that is the way it works. I've been made painfully aware of that fact in the past. I'm still in the kitchen though.

[ 11-10-2001: Message edited by: Yorick ]

[Fljotsdale]

'Good on yer' for staying in the kitchen! [img]smile.gif[/img]

But doesn't everyone put their own musical preference ahead of every other music type, regardless of popularity or 'genius' of the artiste?
I have very catholic tastes in music myself, liking SOME of many music types and artistes, (but by no means ALL of their stuff) - from Mozart to Meat Loaf, from Brahms to David Bowie, From Vaughn Williams to The Moody Blues, from Carl Orff to Bob Dylan..... you get the picture? And I dislike Jackson as much as I dislike Schoenberg (sp?) I can see no genius in either since they grate on my ears and my mind! Sorry!

As for Pilger - he is actually a very good reporter, regardless of anyone else's views. But he is by no means the ONLY reporter we listen to in the UK! Nor do we regard his pronouncements as cast in stone, lol! Funnily enough, most Brits are capable of weighing things up and forming their OWN opinions based partly on the information we are given and partly on 'reading between the lines, and partly on the innate scepticism of the general public as a whole. (I do not include readers of The Sun, The Mirror, and the News of the World in this generalisation). I think this is probably what most people anywhere do, even Australians, lol!

Mmmmm.... that bit in parenthesis may upset some readers of those rags... but hey! It's only my opinion!

[ 11-10-2001: Message edited by: Fljotsdale ]

[Yorick]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fljotsdale:

But doesn't everyone put their own musical preference ahead of every other music type, regardless of popularity or 'genius' of the artiste?

---

Er... no. Didn't I just do that? You did read my post didn't you? I did make my taste secondary in my brief appraisal of Michael Jackson.

[img]smile.gif[/img]

What kind of music teacher would I be if I told my students what was good and bad based on my own taste? Some of us do have to look past such inconveniences.

Who was it that said "taste is the enemy of art"?