Encouraging News Media to be MAGA-PAF Should Be a Top Priority for Trump Admin 2025-2029.

originally posted by: TruthJava

originally posted by: WeMustCare
Sunday, November 10, 2024

POTENTIAl FIX: The White House could appoint a CZAR to encourage large media outlets to report MAGA-PAF news and developments HONESTLY, BALANCED, and WITHOUT HIDING POSITVES.

Might sound good in theory, but in reality that would create a very dangerous, slippery slope that we do not want to go down. No matter how annoying MSM can be...free speech should always be allowed (except for the kind that promotes hate or threatens harm to others)

You can't have balanced "speech" when 90% of the Mainstream Media is against what most people voted for. Too many people in this thread are not understanding this....or if they do, they think its OK. I - DO - NOT.

originally posted by: fringeofthefringe

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: WeMustCare

The media doesn't need to be America First, they just need to be objective.

Which they have proven to be incapable of

The Trump administration should include thegatewaypundit and other nontraditional news organizations into the presidential press corp, provide podcastors and others with press passes and make the msm legacy press folks sit there and deal with it. That may be a way of shifting the focus of media access to where people are now actually getting there news from.

That is an EXCELLENT way to start shifting how U.S. News Media is structured in some regards. Great idea! It will be shared with the right people. Thank-you.

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: WeMustCare

sorry, but thats censorship

So be it. 90% of US media being against the majority of Americans is unacceptable.

Nope.

1st Amendment.

originally posted by: nugget1
a reply to: WeMustCare

The main goal is to reduce the number of Anti-MAGA/Anti-Trump big media outlets from 90% of all America outlets, to 50% or lower.

Damn, WMC-you've done gone and turned liberal BAMN flake on us!b 'My way or seven ways from Sunday' didn't sit well with a lot of people, as we saw on 11/5. Careful you don't cancel yourself with your authoritan rhetoric.

CAREFUL has never been an attribute I've wanted attached to me. Getting what I want, is priority #1. For the purposes of this thread, reducing the saturation level of Anti-Trump/Anti-MAGA/Anti-Republican news media in America is WHAT I WANT.

The heads of media companies enjoy the high they get from the mind control power they have in this country. They have tied themselves to political parties, with the Democrats utilizing their deceptive tactics to accomplish what they are trying to brainwash the public to believe a real lot of the time. If the Media is essential to the controlling political party They could gain a lot of clout in the government when they keep that party in power.

The media went from telling us the news to brainwashing the citizens of this country to do things, parroting what they are told to parrot by people associated with that party they are promoting. I would think that there should be a law that would make the media not promote political bias and force them not to publish poor interpretations of evidence that are misapplied to make us think it is real. I can't trust any of the information coming from MSM anymore, I do believe half of the stuff from our local paper and tv channels though...but only half, bias does effect the people working at those places too.

It would be nice to live in a society where everyone spoke the whole truth but I guess we are stuck with what we got.

I see lots of scientific research also being interpreted by consensus of the time, lots of stuff that is real and pertinent in research is removed by peer review because it does not match the consensus of the present consensus of the time. It distorts a lot of the truth by not allowing all the evidence to be given to the teachers and other scientists, we will never get on the right path unless the evidence is properly assessed

So it is not just politics and media that are deceiving us, lately deceivers have lots of influence in things we are led to believe is real...like science and medicine.

I have lost a lot of faith in humanity in my lifetime. We have been programmed over generations and thousands of years to trust in things that can be manipulated to benefit others.

a reply to: WeMustCare

Getting what I want, is priority #1.

Liberal mentality at its finest! What about what others want?

originally posted by: NorthOS

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: WeMustCare

Nope. Free speech must be kept free, no infringement on first Amendment rights.

Here's a new article detailing how NEWS MEDIA being against the majority of Americans is NOT SMART.

Source: thehill.com...

Don't care.

1st Amendment.

Free speech.

I agree.

There is a problem with the relationship that the majority of the MSM has with the Leftists though.

I noticed it first on election night in 2016 when an ABC anchor said “we can still win here” pointing to a state with numbers in favour of Hillary.

They can’t pretend to be a news provider with the baggage of bias they carry.

How to deal with it is through the ratings. Don’t watch.

Problem is that nearly half of your population laps it up like milk.

Former/Next President Donald Trump has correctly labeled the big news networks in America as our greatest enemy. That is 100% true.

Imagine if Donald Trump opened the borders and hundreds of Americans died over a 4 year period. 90% of U.S. news outlets would report this.

That is exactly what has happened since 2021, but how often has ABC, CNN, CBS, etc.. reported this statistic? NONE...because Biden-Harris are responsible.

Donald Trump doesn't say something several times and not take action. The big U.S. News Outlets that choose to stay in business, shall become more Pro-American. That end result is guaranteed.

originally posted by: nugget1
a reply to: WeMustCare

Getting what I want, is priority #1.

Liberal mentality at its finest! What about what others want?

I want what's best for my family and for America. (Family FIRST.)

I gladly accept whatever label you assign to that mentality. 😁

a reply to: WeMustCare

You may see some changes in the media, but not for the reasons you might expect.

First, let's dispel some misconceptions about American media.

How do they make money? Theoretically, just like any other television program: advertising. But if that were the case, they would be off the air by now. Normally, advertisers pay for slots based on viewership. The Superbowl commands premium prices, late night reruns, not so much. Every major "news" outlet has been caught repeatedly lying to the American people, and their ratings have tanked proportionally to their loss of credibility. And yet, for some reason, advertisers still continue to buy time on these shows. The news outlets continue as though their loss of credibility doesn't affect their bottom line. And government spokespersons still treat the news outlets like they still have credibility.

Why?

The answer lies in who the advertisers are.

I haven't watched mainstream media in a long time, but I'll bet the primary advertisers are still the same: financial institutions, insurance companies, and pharmaceutical companies. It's no coincidence that those are also the biggest lobbying groups in American politics, along with weapons manufacturers. So, why would these industries support the MSM? It's all part of a money laundering circle. The lobbyists can only donate so much directly to politicians. Fortunately for politicians, they are immune to insider trading laws. More accurately, it's fortunate they can make themselves immune. That's how the politicians become multimillionaires on a government salary.

In return, the politicians make laws favorable to the industries, and those industries profit. But the politicians need to convince their constituents that these laws are in their best interests. That's where the media comes in. The media's job is to manufacture support for things that the average citizen may not approve, and denigrate any criticism. For this, the media gets financial support from those industries in the form of advertising, regardless of their ratings.

A good example of this was Covid. Pharmeceutical companies were given tax dollars to develop vaccines. Government made laws to make pharmaceutical companies immune to lawsuits. People were forced to take the drugs or lose their jobs. Media outlets pushed the vaccines and disparaged anyone who questioned the "official" narrative. Drug companies made billions, politicians made millions, the public paid for it all, and now the media doesn't even mention all the lies they pushed to make this happen.

--------------

So, yes, I think we will see some changes in MSM reporting soon. I think that they will not complain too loudly when Trump negotiates and end to the Ukraine - Russia war, but they will voice token criticism. With Russia recuperating, and China not quite ready to go after Taiwan, the MSM will be trying to sell the US public on a war with Iran. Instead of criticizing white males, they will be promoting patriotism and unity.

2027

a reply to: Vermilion

Yeah, like I care how I look to you. You cannot see the difference between privately owned news media, regardless of their politics and a media empire controlled by one man who is the President of the United States.

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: WeMustCare

Media is this close 🤏 to being the fourth branch of government and that relationship must be divorced for optimal journalist integrity. Appointing a "czar" to coordinate policy implies the censorship department is under new management as opposed to being removed.

"media czar"

I did Nazi that coming.

I'm kidding of course, I did see it coming.

Extremists from the right are no different than extremists from the left. You're all authoritarians deep down.

Luckily, I have two hands with two middle fingers so I can tell both sides how I feel about their truth police.

originally posted by: BingoMcGoof
a reply to: Vermilion

Yeah, like I care how I look to you. You cannot see the difference between privately owned news media, regardless of their politics and a media empire controlled by one man who is the President of the United States.

You do realize the irony of the topic because you were completely OK with Democrats owning all of our privately owned media in the US verses now.

However, I am in agreement with you.

The media should not serve as the 4th pillar of the system.

They should represent the People.

Free Speech in all its forms is what I require.

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: WeMustCare

Nope. Free speech must be kept free, no infringement on first Amendment rights.

Here's a new article detailing how NEWS MEDIA being against the majority of Americans is NOT SMART.

Source: thehill.com...

That is an interesting article by The Hill. But the author was talking about how in his opinion, the news media should willingly change to become more Trump neutral, in order to stay relevant in the eyes of the American people.

You are suggesting that the Government should take an active role in forcing that change.

I'll take the former; the later is unconstitutional.

Wasn't the right supper upset when Joe Biden sent his CZARs out to encourage large media outlets?

a reply to: rickymouse

As this DOJ Inspector General report points out, improper sharing of classified information and "leaking", between government managers and news journalists, for gifts and favors, has been occurring for several years.

The News Media says what their Owners and what their "friends" in government tell them to say.

Enemies within. Within The U.S. Media and Within the US Government: www.foxnews.com...

That was a major report from I.G. Horowitz. It was totally ignored by almost every news outlet, except FoxNews. The incoming Trump administration will continue draining that part of the swamp. (Some was drained previously on the government side. Next comes the News Media cleanup.)

originally posted by: BingoMcGoof
a reply to: Vermilion

Yeah, like I care how I look to you. You cannot see the difference between privately owned news media, regardless of their politics and a media empire controlled by one man who is the President of the United States.

You’re comparing apples and oranges and you probably know it.
Just admit you’re for censorship as long as it benefits your side, just like the OP.
Why do you keep shying away from that?
You said you don’t care how you look, right.

Also, calling truth social a “Media empire” is laughable.
It’s a tiny MAGA echo chamber LoL.
#7,994 Global rank
#1,712 Country rank

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Where is that function outlined in the parameters of the executive branch as described by the constitution?

I think it's in the same section as where Biden thought he could forgive student loans and generally ignore the Supreme Court. Look there first.

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: BingoMcGoof
a reply to: Vermilion

Yeah, like I care how I look to you. You cannot see the difference between privately owned news media, regardless of their politics and a media empire controlled by one man who is the President of the United States.

You do realize the irony of the topic because you were completely OK with Democrats owning all of our privately owned media in the US verses now.

However, I am in agreement with you.

The media should not serve as the 4th pillar of the system.

They should represent the People.

Free Speech in all its forms is what I require.

The may be just a grammatical point Lum, but much of the msm is not owned by the Democrats. FOX owns Fox and the New York Post and Wall Street Journal and the Washington Times is owned by the Moonies. And even though the rest that I think you understand as being ''owned'' by the Deomcrats I think that rather than that they are all owned by capitalists, capitalists that like to feed cheap crap to their consumers. And yes, for the last decades many of those media have fed ''liberal crap'' to the masses, We could also extend that list that is not owned by the Democrats like Sinclair broadcasting and other secondary mass media but why press that point further.

a reply to: Vermilion

Sure, it was a minute ago, but just wait..... And censorship. Where have I ever endorsed censorship on these forums. You just sound as if you are making things up now.

a reply to: WeMustCare

If you're not happy with the standard of news provided by existing news outlets and/or their content etc then maybe you should consider starting your own.

Surely a free press is a cornerstone of free speech?

Ideally news should be free from any political bias whatsoever but of course we know that in most cases that simply isn't going to happen.
But you can not have governments or 'the people' dictating what news is reported and whatever perspective news organisations choose to give on it.

What you seem to be advocating is exactly the same as what happened in Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Communist China and all other authoritarian administrations. As far as I can tell that is the exact opposite of the spirit the USA was built on and what Made America Great.

It would be a terrible idea as a free press is essential for democracy to function and is more the actions of dictatorships like Russia and North Korea.

It would also cause major harm to to the Trump admin and MAGA movement as the majority of people in Western countries see MSM/journalists as the least trustworthy profession apart from politicians and Trump/Republicans won one of the clearest election victories in decades with the vast majority of US MSM brown nosing the Dems.

From an outside perspective there's far more important things to do such as the economy and geo-politics to focus on instead of removing free speech, free press and imposing propaganda.