On Sun, 6 Feb 2000 16:01:34 -0500, [log in to unmask] wrote:

>My reason for introducing the links to this list was not so much  to
>"prove" who might be influencing whom, but rather to introduce the (my)
>speculation that the "news" show was nothing more than a thinly-veiled
>infomercial, backed by sponsors who were unspecified and who just might
>be pursuing an explicit, yet covert agenda.

A thinly-veiled infomercial,  backed by sponsors who were unspecified and who
just might be pursuing an explicit, yet covert agenda - is just fine IF all the
information presented in it, is correct !

You are putting the cart before the horse.

Motivations *explain* actions, they don't invalidate the actions.

PS  There is no such thing as a "news" program.   6 billion people do several
hundred trillion actions every day.   The act of selecting which 22 minutes is
going to be shown is entirely determined by the bias of the "news" team.
Objectivity is mentally and logistically impossible in such situations.