ABC says conspiracy web sites are contributing to mental health issues

Yes ATS can be easily found in google.

But it don't give us the authority to detain peoples rights based on mental health.

Power to the people for speaking their truth. The media will always use disinformation to plummet the truth and their tactic is to use a subject that would get everyone to agree and rile it non stop. There is a war going on between truth and mainstream fraud.

Do it too many times in the media and it catches on.

So no i dont agree that they should get rid of sites like this as the topic states.

There must be a reason they are feeling the tread and riling the media with sensational stories. Is sometthing hurting them already.

[edit on 15-12-2008 by meadowfairy]

Originally posted by Yoda411
Let's not even call it a mental illness because it is not. Paranoia, and what I have experienced in the past would most definitely be considered a 'mental health issue' by psychological professionals.

Huh? I am trying to follow along here but I keep reading the same kinds of absurdity from the same places on here.

It is not a mental illness because psychological professionals would call it a mental health issue?

What am I missing here? I do not get it at all. You already said do the math. Well so far it adds up to "what?"

This entire thread is full of people saying paranois is an illness, is not an illness, leads to illness, or redefining what paranoia even is just to suit their posts.

The story in question put forth a premise and then backed it up with NOTHING/. Didn't anyone think that was a little strange for a news story?


[edit on 15-12-2008 by angel of lightangelo]

Originally posted by meadowfairy
There must be a reason they are feeling the tread and riling the media with sensational stories. Is sometthing hurting them already.

Exactly. There are maybe 3 or 4 conspiracies on this site that were new to me. How many of you knew this stuff before you came to ATS? I guess they better get hopping on banning and censoring all those internet sites I was learning it from in '70s and '80s. Why do we need to blame conspiracy websites when we can all get this info from books and radio and television. David Icke, Alex Jones, Alien Autopsy....all enjoyed plenty of fame before the internet.

I think any news organization that calls for banning something using the claim of mental illness simply want people to not think of anything other than what they themselves deem ok to think about. That directly conflicts with the entire point of news and free speech. Maybe mainstream media should be banned since a new study that just came out said that too much TV Watchingwas bad for the brain or mood.

But they already are going further by trying to turn information seeking into a crime, if not already a illness they will just invent that one too.

TV: Not the only channel to early sex

TV dramas make people fear hospital, German research shows

New study shows reduction in high quality educational programming for children

Maybe this news stations story fits a typical pattern of low quality programming and maybe they might be the reason people are becoming more unstable, but gee, maybe you think the economy might have a greater influence on us than a conspiracy website? I tend to doubt all the negative reporting on media for the same reason I doubt the reporting on the negative effects of the Internet, usually the agenda ends up being less information and more ignorance and that would be higher mental illness, in other words sights like ATS actually serve a purpose of sifting and filtering through the phony lies and hogwash of standard broadcast news and the ignorance they breed, that means fewer advertiser dollars and fewer bonuses and paychecks, so I guess now the solution would be to criminalize your competitors in a manner that resembles the moves made in the music industry as well, an attempt to cast a black shadow upon those that actively compete for the "eyeball" hours you thought belonged to your target market.

Originally posted by Yoda411
reply to post by mystiq

 

I just think it's a misconception that it's dis-information propaganda towards a new age of internet censorship.

Would you give a book filled up with everything posted on ATS to the mentally ill? Would you not expect repercussions?

I certainly wouldn't give them the mainstream news! Nor do lies benefit anyone. Would you give a bible to the mentally ill?

reply to post by angel of lightangelo


yes

I thought it was very strange

there's something wrong with that article - more than one thing

reply to post by mystiq


bingo

there is nothing you can censor - it's all the same

paranoia can exist even without a source of information - and messages can be received from the Joy Of Cooking just as easily as anywhere else

[edit on 12/15/2008 by Spiramirabilis]

Originally posted by angel of lightangelo

Originally posted by Yoda411
Let's not even call it a mental illness because it is not. Paranoia, and what I have experienced in the past would most definitely be considered a 'mental health issue' by psychological professionals.

Huh? I am trying to follow along here but I keep reading the same kinds of absurdity from the same places on here.

It is not a mental illness because psychological professionals would call it a mental health issue?

What am I missing here? I do not get it at all. You already said do the math. Well so far it adds up to "what?"

This entire thread is full of people saying paranois is an illness, is not an illness, leads to illness, or redefining what paranoia even is just to suit their posts.

The story in question put forth a premise and then backed it up with NOTHING/. Didn't anyone think that was a little strange for a news story?

This is what happens when you jump to the end of the thread without reading through.

Paranoia can most certainly be classified as a mental health issue.

A mental illness is taking it one step further and characterizing it as an illness rather than just an issue.

This article claims that ATS and similar websites can potentially contribute to mental health issues (i.e. paranoia). Take note that they did not say, "Conspiracy web sites cause the mentally ill". Anyone who would argue against the potential for ATS to cause paranoia is a fool.

bingo

there is nothing you can censor - it's all the same

paranoia can exist even without a source of information - and messages can be received from the Joy Of Cooking just as easily as anywhere else

Has ABC, MSNBC, FOX, CNN, or any major news publication ever had an article labeled, "The world is going to end Dec. 12, 2012"?

We can say that paranoia can come from anywhere, because obviously it can. However we are most definitely comparing apples and oranges. Legitimate publications with editors versus anybody sitting at their computer screen unedited.

[edit on 12/15/08 by Yoda411]

reply to post by Yoda411

bingo there is nothing you can censor - it's all the same paranoia can exist even without a source of information - and messages can be received from the Joy Of Cooking just as easily as anywhere else

Has ABC, MSNBC, FOX, CNN, or any major news publication ever had an article labeled, "The world is going to end Dec. 12, 2012"? We can say that paranoia can come from anywhere, because obviously it can. However we are most definitely comparing apples and oranges. Legitimate publications with editors versus anybody sitting at their computer screen unedited.

so much to say...

first - we'd have to have a debate concerning what and what isn't credible reporting

but let's assume that the "credible" sources are just that - credible

they still speculate - and make outrageous and unsubstantiated statements

all the time

it may not be about 2012 - but, the fear mongering is almost wanton

all you have to do is look at what's been coming out concerning - let's just say the economy

anyone who knows nothing about economics (let's just say me - because - it's close enough to being true to be a real, and useful - example) will listen to some of this information - and become anxious - no matter how accurate the information is or isn't

you can argue for responsible journalism all you want - still up to me to figure out what's what - my inability to understand the information before me does not make them wrong - or criminal

this debate will be endless - because - there is no absolute knowledge - or truth

not even in journalism :-)

if you even want to call what we see on TV or buy at our news stands most of the time journalism

it remains subjective - because truth is subjective

so, on to paranoia - another topic too big for this thread - but, let's say we all agree we understand what that really is - and where the line can be established (for certain) between healthy levels of paranoia - and the kind and amount of paranoia that could be considered unhealthy

the only information someone who is experiencing that kind of break with reality could be exposed to without exacerbating their condition would be - no information

it's the processing that happens in the mind - not the information - that is the issue

so, Survivor could be just as problematic as any ATS thread you care to examine

The Today Show is just as dangerous as any conversation about 2012

We can say that paranoia can come from anywhere, because obviously it can. However we are most definitely comparing apples and oranges. Legitimate publications with editors versus anybody sitting at their computer screen unedited.

so now we need a license to write? Do you think that "legitimate" publications should somehow be licensed and approved by either the state or federal government?

because that's what this is about

that is the silent message in ABCs little journalistic...

what would you even call that thing we just read?

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


I in no way mentioned we should need a license to write. Neither am I for Internet Censorship or revoking freedom of speech/press. I am however saying that blatant fear mongering does not take place in modern news. Less obvious fear mongering obviously does to incite fear and hatred and fuel wars such as Iraq.

I also have noted previously that I do not believe a healthy minded individual will suffer from long term paranoia as a result of visiting ATS.

My measly point to be made is that it can indeed contribute to a previously existing mental health issue.

Let's face the facts, not everybody is as mentally competent as you or I. Not everybody has the ability to differentiate reality from delusion. This is the point that the article makes about the man yelling at people on the street about Reptilians ruling the world. Even if that were true and both of us believed it, would you go yelling it to people outside like a maniac?

It reminds me of the homeless people holding up signs like, "The world is going to end tomorrow and you will face your judgment day". It raises a few questions such as where they heard that from, and what factual evidence do they incoherently believe concretely backs up such a radical statement? Let alone whether or not those types of delusions have lead them to a life on the streets.

So, in summary it is not the creation of a new mental condition necessarily. It is the fuel poured on the flame of a pre-existing mental health issue. It is not the people who sit here and debate the issues who are at risk, it is the people who believe anything you tell them who are at risk (and these people exist believe it or not). That is where I believe the trouble lies.

Is there a news article to back up those accusations? Absolutely not, as I have admitted in the past on this thread. The internet has only been around for 20 years mind you. ATS probably about 6 years. The majority of ATS visitors read and do not post, leave with some possibly discredited information which they believe to be true, then apply it incorrectly to reality, thus creating a delusion be it paranoid or not.

[edit on 12/15/08 by Yoda411]

reply to post by Yoda411

Let's face the facts, not everybody is as mentally competent as you or I.

perhaps you assume too much amigo :-)

and, who will we appoint as judge of our marble tally?

I in no way mentioned we should need a license to write. I am however saying that blatant fear mongering does not take place in modern news. Less obvious fear mongering obviously does to incite fear and hatred and fuel wars such as Iraq.

no - you didn't mention anything about licensed writers

but, you are making a case for responsible sources of information as opposed to irresponsible sources

my point - there is no such thing in a country where freedom of speech is a right to which we are all entitled

my point - the only point I really want to make - after all this blathering - is that this "news story", this thread - this subject - has nothing to do with mental illness

mental health is the decoy - we are the ducks

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
reply to post by Yoda411

 

Let's face the facts, not everybody is as mentally competent as you or I.

perhaps you assume too much amigo :-)

Are you to argue that there are no legitimate mental health cases surrounding delusions and paranoia? Understandably the science of psychology has a long road ahead of it, but I sincerely doubt a single studied psychologies (including Sigmund Freud) would agree with that statement.

reply to post by Yoda411


now who's not reading - thoroughly?

:-)

you want to fight

I'm not in the mood

Are you to argue that there are no legitimate mental health cases surrounding delusions and paranoia? Understandably the science of psychology has a long road ahead of it, but I sincerely doubt a single studied psychologies (including Sigmund Freud) would agree with that statement.

first - I'm not questioning your sincerity - or concern - for the well being of those that may be having mental health difficulties

also - never once said that they don't exist

I did (with humor) question your assumption that I am in fact mentally competent

finally - I stand by everything Ive said - this has nothing to do with mental illness

you cannot help the mentally ill by removing sources of troubling information

you can hurt us all by removing sources of "troubling information"

reply to post by cindy22761


Anything and everything can be called mental illness, it's about selling heavy and dangerous pharmaceuticals, not helping anyone. Oh yes there are rare cases, but too few control groups who go to church, who find new friends who know nothing about them, and who encourage and raise their spirits.

So what about conspiracy websites? They are as good as you are, and when truths are revealed they sometimes hurt your feelings. If there is any mental health issue, it is the total psychopathic elite agenda that includes sales for the extremely profitable pharmaceutical industry.

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
reply to post by Yoda411

 

now who's not reading - thoroughly?

:-)

you want to fight

I'm not in the mood

I'm sorry I misunderstood your statement. Yes, I am in debate mode and it blurs the line between sarcasm and sincerity.

Let's take a step back for a moment and define paranoia.

par⋅a⋅noi⋅a
   /ˌpærəˈnɔɪə/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [par-uh-noi-uh] Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. Psychiatry. a mental disorder characterized by systematized delusions and the projection of personal conflicts, which are ascribed to the supposed hostility of others, sometimes progressing to disturbances of consciousness and aggressive acts believed to be performed in self-defense or as a mission.
2. baseless or excessive suspicion of the motives of others.

From the source of dictionary.com. A mental disorder characterized by systematized delusions. In my opinion, systematized delusions can easily be obtained as a result of reading websites containing conspiracy theories.

[edit on 12/15/08 by Yoda411]

The message I took from this article is that they are trying to associate conspiracy websites and those who believe some conspiracies hold water with having a mental illness. I suppose the next step, if this kind of stuff sticks, is to censor this kind of information. I am merely echoing the opinions of many in this thread, but I don't think the ones arguing that this site causes or worsens mental illness doesn't know what they are making a case for.

From what I understand about mental illnesses like this, anything can set them off. Should we also censor sci-fi or horror movies because the mentally ill can't see that it's just a movie? This seems like a moot point. Even if sites like this do significantly contribute to mental illness, is it really any worse than movies or even cable TV? As someone else eluded to, it's not the information that is the problem, it's the way someone with a mental illness processes the information. This is a dangerous argument to support, very dangerous and I'd hope those who are supporting it really realize what they are supporting. Although you may not be supporting censorship of websites like this, that is what this article seems to be hinting at. If opinions like this stick with enough people, that's exactly what's going to happen.

Originally posted by Kratos1220
From what I understand about mental illnesses like this, anything can set them off. Should we also censor sci-fi or horror movies because the mentally ill can't see that it's just a movie?

Key word there. Sci-Fi. There is a reason why it must be labeled Sci-Fi. We have to use our own consciousness to separate truth from fiction on a conspiracy forum, an ability not every individual possesses.

reply to post by Yoda411


no problem -

the heat of battle and all that...

1. Psychiatry. a mental disorder characterized by systematized delusions and the projection of personal conflicts, which are ascribed to the supposed hostility of others, sometimes progressing to disturbances of consciousness and aggressive acts believed to be performed in self-defense or as a mission.
2. baseless or excessive suspicion of the motives of others.

In my opinion, systematized delusions can easily be obtained as a result of reading websites containing conspiracy theories.

again with the humor - just so you know... :-)

that could pretty much apply to all of us here at ATS - so, where do you draw the line?

leaving humor now...

all part of my argument

where do we draw the line? How do we decide who has a problem - who doesn't?

then - how do we determine which information is harmful?

then - how do we control who has access to it - and who doesn't

what you're saying isn't wrong - I am sure that there are threads here that could become a source of information for someone who isn't in a position to determine what's real and what's not

again - maybe that applies to MANY of us

but, making "conspiracy sites" responsible for the health and well being of a certain section of our population - isn't responsible thinking

or reasonable

or right

reply to post by Yoda411


maybe ATS just needs a disclaimer on the home page

Enter At Your Own Risk

the opinions expressed by members do not reflect the opinions...

yada, yada, yada

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


Where we draw the line is almost the subject for a different Internet Censorship thread. I don't believe that censoring the internet solves the problem, because as the article states; many benefit from the community therapy of discussing global issues that deeply concern many.

What is the answer? I have no solution. Once again I will restate the study of psychology has a long road ahead and the way we deal with mentally ill individuals varies from patient to patient.