Dismantle Mass Media News

a reply to: Skyfloating

So...she's reporting from a CNN Studio Tour? And then what?

How is this criminal conduct on the part of CNN?

She has an account on Twitter and Youtube - took me 5 minutes to find them. She's done a bit of broadcasting her self. I'm not sure what you're really trying to say here. She may or may not be a criminal - we'll see what happens after a trial

Are you saying that we should do away with mass media because occasionally they might have crossed paths with alleged criminals?

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: Skyfloating

So...she's reporting from a CNN Studio Tour? And then what?

How is this criminal conduct on the part of CNN?

She has an account on Twitter and Youtube - took me 5 minutes to find them. She's done a bit of broadcasting her self. I'm not sure what you're really trying to say here. She may or may not be a criminal - we'll see what happens after a trial

Are you saying that we should do away with mass media because occasionally they might have crossed paths with alleged criminals?

No because they aid, abet, and harbor criminals, and they welcome criminal activity against the current president and supporters.

Fox news hasn't done any of those things so leave them alone, except to re-establish a unified code of conduct when reporting news and hold them to it.

LOL!!! omg.. you guys are hilarious, seriously. Fox never lies.. Trump never lies.. HAHAHAHAHA!!!

Seriously this is sad. Basically you are saying that every news source that opposes your viewpoint lies, and those that do not oppose your viewpoint are truthful. What a load of bullsnip. It's equally sad that Trump tries to sell the same crap... and his sheep believe him.

shutting down the mass media is a ludicrous idea but expanding it is a tenable one. Allow new news networks to air on cable to compete with the MSM and that will solve many problems

originally posted by: fleabit

Fox news hasn't done any of those things so leave them alone, except to re-establish a unified code of conduct when reporting news and hold them to it.

LOL!!! omg.. you guys are hilarious, seriously. Fox never lies.. Trump never lies.. HAHAHAHAHA!!!

Seriously this is sad. Basically you are saying that every news source that opposes your viewpoint lies, and those that do not oppose your viewpoint are truthful. What a load of bullsnip. It's equally sad that Trump tries to sell the same crap... and his sheep believe him.

Haha you suckered right into that one didn't you.

In 1983, 90% of the media was owned by 50 companies.

By 2011, that same 90% was owned by just 6 companies.

Nice graphical illustration: globalization102.wordpress.com...

All the while genuine journalists such as Julian Assange are locked up and not allowed to communicate with anyone.

If THAT won't wake people up to what MSM really is, I dont know what will.

originally posted by: Skyfloating
All the while genuine journalists such as Julian Assange are locked up and not allowed to communicate with anyone.

If THAT won't wake people up to what MSM really is, I dont know what will.

The only logical libertarian solution to the problem is to loosen regulations about broadcasting rights (a naive sigh that it will never happen and let China News Network and MSNBC compete head to head with new networks that are independently owned like INFOWARS (even though they vacillate in degrees of credibility) and other independent news networks. I am for free speech and taking down the MSM is totalitarian to say the least even if they are completely venal

originally posted by: ScreamButterfly


The only logical libertarian solution to the problem is to loosen regulations about broadcasting rights (a naive sigh that it will never happen

and let China News Network and MSNBC compete head to head with new networks that are independently owned like INFOWARS (even though they vacillate in degrees of credibility) and other independent news networks. I am for free speech and taking down the MSM is totalitarian to say the least even if they are completely venal

I actually agree.

Im not saying that free speech should be dismantled. I believe the MSM as it exists now, is an organized conspiracy. And THAT is what should be dismantled. Not media itself.

If everyone had the right to broadcast their views, its a whole different story.

a reply to: Skyfloating

Corporations, headed by left-wing elitists, have taken over the public square. We are entering a dangerous time in history, comparable to the rise of the Nazi Party in Germany and the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. How far we will let it go, is still to be seen.

it's not about censorship or getting rid of news. what needs to happen is to break up the news cartels. it's the fact that most media is controlled by a very few, which makes it a monopoly which is the real problem. there should be no way so few should be allowed to control the people's perceptions the way they are now. and it's not just broadcasters and print media which is a problem. another big part of the issue goes even further, with companies like Reuters being a big part of the problem. they might not be the ones mainly putting the news out there. but with so many western mainstream news media relying on things like Reuters for their news gives them the power to decide what people know. so we also need to go back to the days where all the news media relied on their own reporters all over the world.

i remember one situation in particular where it was not necessarily the main stream media that was the problem, but it was Reuters that was giving out the misinformation that pretty much ALL western, English news media printed and broadcast. it was sad to see that pretty much every news media in the US, Canada, the UK, and English media around the globe all pretty much cut and pasted the exact same story from that one source. in fact the only media where i was not seemingly reading the exact same story, was the media from the country where the event took place. and to make things worse, that one story that the world was given was missing all the relevant facts of the situation. facts that were well known about the event were known within a couple of hours after it occurred, forget the half day later the story the world got was put out. and without those missing fact the story although based on a true event, became fake news by leading the world to belief the false assumptions they were able to give everyone by leaving out that important information. thus taking a true story and falsifying it. would that have happened if all those media outlets from around the world, were each writing their own version of events? based upon their own journalists in the country where the event occurred, people living and working covering news from that country daily, instead of relying on that one single person/source for their news? if nothing else it would have given a lot more sides to the story so people could try to find the truth instead of being bombarded with that fake news story from just about every media source.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Skyfloating

originally posted by: introvert

So yes, your reasoning is to stifle free speech and freedom of the press.

You see it that way because you think the press is free. I wish it were.

Just because you have the freedom, does not mean it is free or without a cost.

Regardless, your reasoning and logic is highly flawed and lazy.

Even if the media is owned by a handful of people and they repeat the same messages, that is their right. That is free speech and freedom of the press.

So if that is your reasoning, then yes, you want to stifle their rights. Not because you have bad intentions, but because you do not know what those rights even are.

When they become a biased propaganda tool for one side or the other, they should no longer be considered press.

When they twist or only give half truths to further one party over another, they are no longer press.
They are propaganda tools, nothing more.

We have very few actual members of press. What we have is a mass of talking heads more like parrots than anything else.
Quad

The media manipulates the minds of the masses. In doing so it manipulates the outcome of elections.

originally posted by: Skyfloating

originally posted by: CoramDeo

I also don't think news outlets need to be fined or shut down, they will eventually do that to themselves. The only thing they sell is credibility, which is being rapidly eroded due to the dilutive effect of more, independent news outlets online, and the proliferation of news on social media. (The censorship by social media outlets is another story, but eventually that will come back to bite them as well. Ya hear me FB, YT, Twot...?).

I agree that the free market naturally disposes of bad apples. Except when actual crime organizations are involved, manipulating the market behind the scenes, which I suspect to be the case with some of these news outlets.

Bingo, so what we need are our crime fighters to do their jobs. But the cabal is controlling them from all the evidence we are allowed to see we can't touch the real criminal element.

The only thing left to do is get LEO's finding these people. The LEO needs to be single and without children or living relatives seems to be the case.

We have a conundrum.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Skyfloating

The point too many are missing is that many of these polls assume that the average American is too stupid to discern what is true and false in the media.

It's like they want us to be stupid so they can tell us what to think.

While many Americans ARE too stupid to discern the truth, they are probably watching CNN and MSNBC so it doesn't much matter any way.

Emphasizing the point, I recall Kissinger after his days with Nixon stating the plan was to dumb America down and bring the world up. We were too far ahead and it was going to be better to make us meet in the middle. YUK!

Can't bring people up by dragging down the ones reaching the heights that improve things for almost all those living throughout the Planet. That drags us all back down and dragging us all back to some Medieval lifestyle while the Oligarch reign again and we would be forced to live a communistic one. "1984" is transitioning to "Brave New World".

a reply to: CB328

Socialism rewards bad apples and gives them all the power, what are you smoking? Trump haters is the ultimate proof of that.

Fixed for accuracy.

a reply to: CB328

I don't think you understand capitalism... At all.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: CB328

I don't think you understand capitalism... At all.

They don't.

Capitalism is pure darwinism.

The strong survive the weak get eaten.

Social engineering is the antithesis of capitalism.

The weak eat the strong.

they aid, abet, and harbor criminals, and they welcome criminal activity against the current president and supporters

Opposing the President is not criminal, especially when he aids, abets, and harbors criminals constantly. Look at what he's been doing recently trying to undermine the trial of Paul Manafort who has been shown guilty of massive tax evasion.

Trump is a criminal himself, so opposing him is patriotic and supporting him is wrong, in addition to stupid.

originally posted by: neo96
They don't.

Capitalism is pure darwinism.

The strong survive the weak get eaten.

Social engineering is the antithesis of capitalism.

The weak eat the strong.

That's not actually what capitalism states. What you are quoting is a redefinition of it that came from an economics professor who liked justifying his cutthroat ultra competitive ways.

What Darwinism actually says isn't that the strongest survive, but rather the most adaptable survive. A strong position that is unable to adapt to changing market conditions (Blockbuster) will lose out to something that can (Redbox/Netflix).