On the DC radio stations in the late 70s there was a payola scandal; it was found out because some of the DJs were pushing the upcoming Led Zep show. What they were doing when they weren’t being paid off was playing ther Stiff Records catalog.

But since then history has sucessfully been changed and now Led Zep was the greatest band as recognised by everyone throughout the 1970s.

It began in earnest in the early years of the last century, with the work of Freud’s favorite nephew, and the man—incidentally—who coined the phrase “the manufacture of consent,” Edouard (“Edward”) Bernays, Sigmond Freud’s favorite nephew and, when the old man was in the States, his amenuensis. It has continued unabated for close to 100 years. Bernays appropriated the old man’s ideas, wholesale, and wove them into the fabric of both ‘industries’ in which he as a major figure: ADVERTIZING, and the ‘field’ he is credited with founding, PUBLIC RELATIONS.

In the meantime, in the last 30 years, civic education has declined to the point of invisibility, while the schools bent every effort to ‘teach’ students to be willing, passive, uncritical consumers of media, especially television.

We may well despair for the fate of the country when we see such examples of propagandized ‘thinking,’ but really, we should be happy that it isn’t more wide-spread than it already is (though there is no reason to believe it will not become so).

Would you be shocked to hear that my spring of 2004 government/civics (public school) class didn’t discuss it at all? It might be because we only had one semester of it, or because the majority of my classmates were default Republicans (and the teacher was a closet democrat who didn’t want to sway the class with his personal political view).

Those of us familiar with Orwell aren’t surprised about the misperceptions, misconceptions, twisted truths, clever conceits, or abiding deceptions. We’re just wondering, 1. Who’s going to pass out the soma, and 2. Where’s the line start?

Thinking’s dead. Party on.

notsneaky, I think the problem with the lauding of the stones and the beatles is that too many people from that era (“oldies”) are haven’t moved on from their 16 year old self rather than, as you say, just listening to it. Otherwise they might have realised that much, much better music has come along in the meantime, and those early bands were poor efforts who were in the right place at the right time.

Come to think of it, Led Zeppelin are in this league too. Nothing they have ever done compares to a single song from the classic first album by Annihilator, anything the ‘Irons have ever done, anything by Slayer up to and including Seasons of the Abyss, or the first 10 years of Metallica’s glorious march through modern music. Led Zeppelin were in the better half of a bad bunch.

Which is still better than the Stones – when Kirk Hammet farts he makes better music than those guys.

Actually my feelings on this is that there’s a sweet spot which you hit somewhere in early post adolescence. When you’re young your instincts are good but you don’t have experience or a very well developed sense of perspective (the fact that you tend to have strongly held political opinions at this age tends to make this even worse, as you’re very apt to confuse your (usually fairly shallow) ethics with your aesthetics). When you’re old somehow you end up thinking Phil Collins (or the generational equivalent) is ‘subtle’ and great contrary to all the sensory evidence contrariwise. So the pinnacle of your taste takes place sometime in your 20’s. Unless you actively cultivate it.

And cultivating it means listening to, but not emulating or trusting, your 16 year old self:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_4aGXTHo7w&feature=related

So you’re saying that Zeppelin are shit compared to the Stones and Oasis? ‘Cause clearly Oasis is more popular than either Zeppelin or the Stones in the UK. It’s really no argument.

What watson said. And I love how massive media campaigns that played out over years are suddenly transformed into conspiracy theories whenever it’s expedient for the view from Wingnut Bizzarro World. Don’t believe your lying eyes! The Power of the Right compels you! (And extra points for the sheer nuttiness of implying that Michael Moore just sort of made up the 2000 and 2004 election scandals. Your judgment must surely be unimpeachable.)

I’m dead chuffed that Nancy L’s noticed it. Back in the day, I used to look out for her posts on rasfw.

More to the point, here’s a heavily paraphrased comment from a historian (not an obviously left-wing one, either) I was talking to today:

“Historians think that they are contributing to a liberal understanding of the past. But they are not. In practice, knowledge of the past serves mainly to justify nationalistic crimes in the the present.’

The historian in question was not the author of this thing, but it’s worth a read in any case:
http://www.historyandpolicy.org/papers/policy-paper-66.html

ObZep: there is no ObZep today.

Any reasonably competent civics or current events class would have discussed the distortion of issues surrounding Afghanistan into claimed justifications for Iraq, which has certainly been a policy (call it a “sinister plot” if you feel you should) of the Bush administration. Do you know of any that do?