Alex: the essay itself has ventured deeply into untouchable territory, and has encountered the predictable reaction. What, us? I watch the unfoldings around it with both exhilaration and nausea... _____ I had the uncomfortable sensation, when reading the essay, that the author was an asshole and also right in some points. It also dredged up weird feelings about life in the wired world--that there is no news, just marketing to prejudice. You know, if you agree with some of Churchill's points, you fall into marketing group B, and an O'Reilly fan would respond with talking points from the marketing group A list, to which you respond with group B talking points. How to put it? That supporting Bush and hating Bush are both marketing targets, all generated by the same forces, all serving the same ends. That Bush probably loves it that people think him a dummy or a fiend, because that falls into a marketable and controllable reaction to the "current events machine," whose sole purpose is to make people feel alienated and empty so they buy things and don't organize into coherent opposition groups to power. Contra Chomsky, it feels like the simultaneous manufacturing of dissent and consent, in all their discernible varieties, all organized to promote global capitalism by fragmenting views and discouraging action. Every possible kind of clothing, from things to blue jeans to business suits to tuxedos--all made by WalMart for their greater good. Maybe the feeling will pass. I don't expect an action hero to spring me from my pod anytime soon. Eric ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html