I didn’t set out with a desire to re-post something(with just a few slight tweaks) that I first wrote 6 years ago.
But… because the underlying topic, the foundation behind this dispiriting issue, is still so prevalent, well.. I just had to (its sorta in my nature ;)
Still, it was my intend to use this time to whip up a poll around the very inspiring subject of “money multiplication” — as in, growing the digital ‘fiat’ cash in your bank/brokerage account and turning most of it into real assets that accumulate into sustainable wealth.
But, that’ll have to wait (or not, if you’re already a paid-up M4 Insider member)… as for now, I’ve got a gripe with the MSM (Main Stream Media), as expressed through 60 Minutes.
In 2011, as Leslie Stahl was introducing her segment called The Big Gamble (video below), my mind was instantly wired to hear a report on the the state of the industry, what new methods people are using to win big, or simply just the psychological make-up of somebody who goes “all in” (er, bets BIG).
Little did I expect to see one of the most biased, my-agenda-has-been-set interviews ever orchestrated by the 45-year-old TV news magazine…
First, the entire premise — even if only passively alluded to throughout all the commentary and questioning — was nauseating:
That the so-called “new” slot machines, currently operating in 38 states, somehow, some way, COULD be making their players addicted to… er… yup… here it comes… playing them.
Almost as if they’ve been installed with some magical invisible “continue-playing-me-until-broke” pixie dust that transfers itself into the player’s bloodstream (yeah, that’s how distorted the reporting was on this. I was expecting Ms. Stahl to say that any second).
> So, why pass along the video segment to you, if it was truly just another blatant attempt by the power elite to see how far they can push independent thinkers and self-responsible adults?
> Why even give it energetic legs if — when you strip away the gloss and veneer of the purported Sunday night news show that most believe provides a level of unprejudiced reporting — in the end it’s simply another tool?
… A tool used by those select few in high places who relish in conditioning The Crowd that human flaws are bigger social problems, aggravated by enterprise.
The statement above, alone, could attract quite a few labels to be slapped on me (“ut-oh,” as I’ve heard before, “he’s arguing again that the memes of the many are influenced by the diabolical purpose of the elusive few.”)
But it could also cause some readers to think harder about things:
#1) Just because an authoritative, long-standing TV news magazine reports it, and guides me to “feel” something, anything, for those in need, do I have to view them as victims?
#2) What’s the context of the story? Are they providing me equally intelligent and rational evidence on both sides of the debate, issue, or argument?
#3) Is the problem they’re reporting on, in the grand scheme of things (and my life), trivial… or… is it something I should be active in solving?
#4) And, if I feel I need to help solve it, is the message that it can be solved by passing along common sense and self-responsible thinking to my fellow humans… or, is the pitch that it requires action and regulation by government and political organizations?
In any case, I’ll give you my specific thoughts about this episode below the video. For now, just keep the above questions in mind as you watch it:
My takeaway, as it applies to one of the dominant themes swirling around in younger impressionable minds these days?
Whatever isn’t working right for me in my life, there must be something, or somebody, I can blame! Big Brother, I’ve got a complaint… make it go away!
In a world of unlimited possibilities, only hampered by our own interest in self-accountable thinking and unbridled imagination, the percentage of people who won’t or can’t look in the mirror is way too big.
Did you notice how Ms. Stahl never cornered any of the “addicts” — especially the big granny with the curls all over her big head — by simply asking a question about themselves?
For example, how about:
“So, Big Granny, how do you see your own habits playing into all this?” Or, to be more direct, “What do you think caused you to plant your butt in the car and drive it to the Casino, and then plop it down on the slot machine chair?”
Nah, when you look back into how the MSM tackles issues of personal action and self-defeating methods of operation, they really just don’t know how to engage.
And, the sad part is this: 60 Minutes, of all news operations, should be able to pull off mildly confrontational questioning to somebody who, instead, is coming off as a victim of big business, industry, or capitalism gone bad.
But, nope… rather, it’s fashionable to give these poor-me types the benefit of the doubt.
One of the commenters on the 60 Minutes “The Big Gamble” page put it nicely:
“I’m so sick of hearing about the ONE PERCENT of people who have problems and develop addictions, when 99 PERCENT of those who gamble do so responsibly. What next? A story about fine wine or the beer industry that focuses most of the segment on alcoholism? Fact is, the cost of living in a FREE SOCIETY is that some people can’t govern themselves.”
So, as the world turns, so do people who’ll continue to blame everybody but themselves for their issues, and their own repetitive bad experiences. And, whether those experiences are good or bad, they can only occur, mostly, through our own actions.
As another commenter said:
“She [Stahl] should have explored and reported on compulsive behaviors, and addictive personalities that some people have. Who is the person that gets addicted? Just anyone? She didn’t, or maybe it was edited out, and this left the viewer without a context for understanding that it takes two to tango. 2. Continuing on that point to this, Rendall, I believe, got so upset because Stahl indeed was not hearing or accepting what he was saying — basically that it doesn’t really matter where the casino is, the addictive/compulsive nature in some human beings will seek it (craving) out.”
I’ll salute anyone reading this who is willing to buck up and take a level of ownership for their own results and experiences in life… for understanding that, regardless of what has happened to you in the past (even beyond your direct control), it’s still up to YOU, no one else, to get it right in the present and future.
And, I’ll call you out on anything that reeks of victimitis and thin-skinned beliefs toward what and who you think you should listen to.
For instance, this person — a Facebooker attempting to garner sympathy for her past lack of parental love — I’m sure was looking for agreement on her plight.
“Remember no matter what age you are… The first five or six years of one’s life formed them! If you didn’t learn to care, share, empathy, compassion etc by five years….. Good luck at any of the other ages!”
“That’s gotta be one of the most defeatist, high and mighty resolute attitudes I’ve seen in awhile. Kinda like saying: ‘hey, your whole ability to express goodness, to love others, is all controlled by your past relationship with your parents.’ Damn, that’s some seriously $%^&ed-up psycho-babble. And, it sure as hell takes away any self-accountable actions for taking the reins of your life and CHANGING YOUR COURSE.”
In closing, dear reader, I’m getting utterly sick over seeing and hearing people who think it’s normal and okay to operate as victim-minded beings and expect people to tell them what they want to hear… that things will get better.
Ah, let’s keep it real here: THEY WON’T… unless you’re willing to start hearing things about you that you need (and must) hear.
Where do you find such honesty about YOU?
Another topic for another time… until then, if you stink up your own bathroom, don’t blame it on the cat, the neighbor, or the repair man.
Get my drift? Hope so!