Yellow journalism a threat to democracy .

a reply to: Fallingdown

Like I said several times before, I've been in other countries with similar situations, I lived a few coupe d'état too. Those countries had a constitution protecting the "freedom of speech" too and the yellow journalism cowardly shielded itself behind the constitution. I saw it before.

Weaponizing the constitution is a violation of it and it always ends the same way. Bad use of "Freedom of Speech" has consequences.

Let me tell you one more thing, I never saw a government more patient and tolerant than the one we have now. It's like when a huge amount of energy builds up before a great earthquake or volcano eruption.

Lol.

It's only weaponizng the Constitution when "They" do it.

a reply to: DBCowboy

“Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away”

Elvis

a reply to: Fallingdown

Fallingdown ...

Odd how the media seems to have come full circle on that score, eh?

I'm not sure the media got so far, at any point, from the Yellow Journalism days. There was a period following Watergate in which the media was hailed as the "Fourth Estate". They were then touted as the ones who watched the government and kept officials in line by dent of hard-hitting journalism. At the time, no one bothered to wonder if the media could be trusted to operate without strong political bias. Well, now that issue has surfaced and the answer to that question is clear.

The situation is more complex than a simple matter of political bias, though. The media in its own way was as hidebound in its traditions as the most conservative institutions in the USA. This led to them being bowled over by the revolution in information distribution as represented by the internet. Their subsequent scramble to survive and remain relevant has also fueled the use of sensationalist writing of articles, including the pushing of opinion pieces as if they were objective reporting.

Had a president like Trump been elected in the 1970s, we might have seen less hysteria and more factual reporting by the media. As it is, Trump arrived on the scene at a time when the media, under the pressure of technological change, had already adopted questionable approaches to their trade. His ability to go around them (Twitter) as well as willingness to scold them has IMO pushed them over the edge, and they see nothing to lose by going full-on unprofessional in their behavior.

Cheers

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Fallingdown

You don't want the government deciding truth you want to determine the truth and enforce that on the rest of us via government jailers?

That's not much better, frankly.

So you’re OK with someone yelling I have a bomb on an airplane !!!

Inducing panic is the same thing as inciting a riot free speech isn’t covered by criminal actions ?

Why are you OK with bold face lies being told to the public ?

Here’s an example I like. People still hate Trump because he made fun of a disabled reporter. The only problem was he didn’t. It’s a gesture he has used repeatedly when speaking derogatory about someone .

The main stream media used a partial clip that’s still enrages people to this day .

Pay attention in this video. The second segment was from Myrtle Beach earlier in the speech. The fourth segment was from The same place later in the same speech. Did they show you the earlier segment ?



One of my big problems with the main stream media should be yours too. They lie and make ridiculous accusations because they think a portion of their viewers are dumb enough to believe it and it’s sad to say they’re right . Like I’ve said before . If I was a liberal I’d be pissed off at how stupid they think I am .

a reply to: Fallingdown

We agree on a lot of stuff, but speech is something really to be treasured.

You have to look at the fact that even though "yellow journalism" has been around a long time, it was never constitutionally attacked because even back then, the founding fathers and subsequent political leaders knew the dangers of attacking ANY part of free speech.

a reply to: Fallingdown

Main stream media has ALWAYS lied. MSM has ALWAYS distorted the facts and abused the truth.

This is nothing new.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Fallingdown

Main stream media has ALWAYS lied. MSM has ALWAYS distorted the facts and abused the truth.

This is nothing new.

Consumers should be the only regulator with their participation.

The government wouldn't know where to stop, Obama already proved that with his heavy hand against constitutional rights in regard to speech.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Caveat Emptor

a reply to: DBCowboy

I agree

But everyone seems to be missing my point in that statement. If an institution that should clutch the first amendment to their chest. Instead launch is a three year campaign designed to anger people to the point of violence. People so angry that they’re setting fires, breaking windows and beating up people or like the 67 Detroit riots which was one out of the 109 cities where writing occurred in the summer of 1967 it left 43 dead in 1,100.

I caught the tail end of the 60s and 70s movements. The most dangerous group then was the weatherman. In the here and now antifa is getting close . I’m sure you caught more of it DC I’d like to hear your opinion .

The current atmosphere is building to be far worse and more dangerous in mine .

If the country explodes the instigators need to be held accountable and their first amendment rights should not apply in that situation . 🤬

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Caveat Emptor

The free market is democracy by voting with currency and participation. I quite like it that way.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Fallingdown

Main stream media has ALWAYS lied. MSM has ALWAYS distorted the facts and abused the truth.

This is nothing new.

You are correct. The newspapers had sensationalized the Orson Welles Radio Broadcast myth back in 1938. They were losing revenue to Radio and wanted to make advertisers fear this new medium.

The MSM have a fear of losing revenue again this time to the streaming Internet. They are sensationalizing a few extremes to stay relevant. Pointing their fingers at how dangerous social media has become.

It is true the myth of mass panic from Orson Welles Halloween broadcast was a complete lie, but it did not create panic in the populace or advertisers as they had hoped. Same as today, their lies are easily apparent.


The War of the Worlds panic was a myth Fascinating article on the myth, including how Hitler contributed.

Freedom of speech even when one disagrees should not be hampered. I certainly would not the government silencing speech for that limits discourse and discovery of truth through debate and facts.

a reply to: Fallingdown

But everyone seems to be missing my point in that statement. If an institution that should clutch the first amendment to their chest. Instead launch is a three year campaign designed to anger people to the point of violence. People so angry that they’re setting fires, breaking windows and beating up people or like the 67 Detroit riots which was one out of the 109 cities where writing occurred in the summer of 1967 it left 43 dead in 1,100.

And some make the exaggerated claim right leaning media fuels "white nationalism".

It doesn't matter if the claims are correct, if we allow fear to rule over constitution and reason, the government will take more equity.

If we allow free press to be taken, than personal speech will be next... And it will be monitored through the backdoor put in place when we were scared of terrorists and allowed the patriot act.

Any time you try to silence an opponent, you give them the ammunition and the precedence to take retaliation when they have the opportunity.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Fallingdown

Main stream media has ALWAYS lied. MSM has ALWAYS distorted the facts and abused the truth.

This is nothing new.

But not against the government (those 8 years). Now is different. Their political agenda is anti American.

a reply to: Fallingdown

I want a media, even the MSM to be as harsh and as critical of the government as it wants to be. Because we'll not always have this government. Eventually we'll have the AOC's, the Warrens and Sanders in office and in power.

And I'll want to scream from the rooftop their perceived abuses.

"- I believe that clear thinking and clear statement, accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism. - I believe that a journalist should write only what he holds in his heart to be true."
en.m.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Fallingdown

Any statement that begins "so you're okay with" is a fallacious argument unless you quote something I said.

You didn't. In fact, your post repeatedly argues by trying to put works in my mouth.

You may not know that the whole "false alarm causing panic" thing goes back to the words of Chief Justice Holmes in Schenck v United States (1919).

The keyword often left out is FALSE and FALSELY.

Has a press outlet falsely defamed someone? Let the rule of law take care of it.

Americans don't like what a media outlet says? They'll lose share and the market will address the rest of it.

You don't get to determine for the rest of us what causes panic anymore than you get to decide what constitutes truth.

originally posted by: Trueman
"- I believe that clear thinking and clear statement, accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism. - I believe that a journalist should write only what he holds in his heart to be true."
en.m.wikipedia.org...

Apparently, the journalists stop at that point. Emotions of the heart mean more to be true rather than actual factual truth.

They completely, seem to negate the final paragraph of that creed from your sourced link.

- I believe that the journalism which succeeds best — and best deserves success — fears God and honors Man; is stoutly independent, unmoved by pride of opinion or greed of power, constructive, tolerant but never careless, self-controlled, patient, always respectful of its readers but always unafraid, is quickly indignant at injustice; is unswayed by the appeal of privilege or the clamor of the mob; seeks to give every man a chance and, as far as law and honest wage and recognition of human brotherhood can make it so, an equal chance; is profoundly patriotic while sincerely promoting international good will and cementing world-comradeship; is a journalism of humanity, of and for today’s world.

a reply to: CynConcepts

I would find that a very compelling argument IF this thread were addressing ALL yellow journalism.

It isn't.

I would prefer that news be factual. That results in my reading a multitude of sources to try to winnow the truth out.

That is OUR responsibility as the public. These statist cries to have the government punish political enemies and trample the Constitution is just another wish for a Nanny State to coddle us.

We're Americans, if we can't figure out the truth on our own, we're already lost.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I agree

But everyone seems to be missing my point in that statement. If an institution that should clutch the first amendment to their chest. Instead launch is a three year campaign designed to anger people to the point of violence. People so angry that they’re setting fires, breaking windows and beating up people or like the 67 Detroit riots which was one out of the 109 cities where writing occurred in the summer of 1967 it left 43 dead in 1,100.

I caught the tail end of the 60s and 70s movements. The most dangerous group then was the weatherman. In the here and now antifa is getting close . I’m sure you caught more of it DC I’d like to hear your opinion .

The current atmosphere is building to be far worse and more dangerous in mine .

If the country explodes the instigators need to be held accountable and their first amendment rights should not apply in that situation . 🤬