Jump to content

Media


Recommended Posts

I'm going to put this bluntly:   If half the country - a little less, voted for Trump, and the mainstream media (constituting how much of the viewpoints in news media in the country?  95%?) only puts out liberal viewpoints that are supposedly "fair and balanced" (forgive the pun), what are we talking about here?

 

Let me give liberals a little advice - cut the media propaganda out.  Even if I were a liberal, it would give me pause.  It's disturbing and Pravda-esque.  I know it's organized.  I know it's for some nefarious purpose relating to corporate control - which I think we can all agree is bad. Only people who are in on the game think otherwise, yes?

 

It wouldn't be so bad if it were just liberals speaking their point of view - but it's supported so much en masse by the media - it's bothersome to everyone. 

 

Thoughts?  Liberal and conservative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Crom33 said:

I'm going to put this bluntly:   If half the country - a little less, voted for Trump, and the mainstream media (constituting how much of the viewpoints in news media in the country?  95%?) only puts out liberal viewpoints that are supposedly "fair and balanced" (forgive the pun), what are we talking about here?

 

Conspiring to sway an election with false information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Crom33 said:

I'm going to put this bluntly:   If half the country - a little less, voted for Trump, and the mainstream media (constituting how much of the viewpoints in news media in the country?  95%?) only puts out liberal viewpoints that are supposedly "fair and balanced" (forgive the pun), what are we talking about here?

 

Let me give liberals a little advice - cut the media propaganda out.  Even if I were a liberal, it would give me pause.  It's disturbing and Pravda-esque.  I know it's organized.  I know it's for some nefarious purpose relating to corporate control - which I think we can all agree is bad. Only people who are in on the game think otherwise, yes?

 

It wouldn't be so bad if it were just liberals speaking their point of view - but it's supported so much en masse by the media - it's bothersome to everyone. 

 

Thoughts?  Liberal and conservative.

This concept that there is a "Liberal mainstream media" is the only genuine Hoax out there.  I have to hand it Fox for creating this Hoax.  Their strategy is to say that if the outlet is not pushing our heavily biased view its "Liberal".  It's a brilliant business model.  Cable news was dying until Fox got into the game.  They came out with "opinion" shows claiming to be news.  They were originally called out on it, and their argument was their viewers were smart enough to know this actual news, but opinion shows.  This business model was the copied by MSN because there was an untapped Liberal market.  If you want to stay in the cable news business you have to pick a bias.  There hasn't been any fair and balanced news in a long time, and Fake I mean Fox News is the King of Crap; however, there is no true objective news because no one would tune it.  People want to hear that their view is the "truth" and their the good guys.  It's all partisan and is what's driven this country to be so polarized.  I get it's a business, and my hat's off to Fox for creating this Hoax, but the copy cats have to take blame too.  The question is what will it take for the citizens of America to realize these stations they worship telling us the other side is the enemy and we're the good guys (regardless of which side your on) is what's actually the problem.  Talk radio of course was the original sin, but hopefully someday we'll figure out we're more alike then different.  We actually want the same things, we just disagree on how to get there 40% of the time; however, no politician will work with the other side because of this partisan stalemate.  There's a lot of blame to go around, but "the Liberal Media" is a Hoax. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Sane said:

This concept that there is a "Liberal mainstream media" is the only genuine Hoax out there.  I have to hand it Fox for creating this Hoax.  Their strategy is to say that if the outlet is not pushing our heavily biased view its "Liberal".  It's a brilliant business model.  Cable news was dying until Fox got into the game.  They came out with "opinion" shows claiming to be news.  They were originally called out on it, and their argument was their viewers were smart enough to know this actual news, but opinion shows.  This business model was the copied by MSN because there was an untapped Liberal market.  If you want to stay in the cable news business you have to pick a bias.  There hasn't been any fair and balanced news in a long time, and Fake I mean Fox News is the King of Crap; however, there is no true objective news because no one would tune it.  People want to hear that their view is the "truth" and their the good guys.  It's all partisan and is what's driven this country to be so polarized.  I get it's a business, and my hat's off to Fox for creating this Hoax, but the copy cats have to take blame too.  The question is what will it take for the citizens of America to realize these stations they worship telling us the other side is the enemy and we're the good guys (regardless of which side your on) is what's actually the problem.  Talk radio of course was the original sin, but hopefully someday we'll figure out we're more alike then different.  We actually want the same things, we just disagree on how to get there 40% of the time; however, no politician will work with the other side because of this partisan stalemate.  There's a lot of blame to go around, but "the Liberal Media" is a Hoax. 

A hoax isn't a hoax if it is self evident. 

 

Fox News is biased as crud for financial reasons - as are all the others (can I cuss on these forums? I'd rather use the term Bad word, and I'd read the TOS but it's usually a waste of time if admins deem otherwise), and so is CNN, MSNBC, WAPO, NYT, HUFFPO - ALL of them. 

 

You seem reasonable.  Let us reason together.  You really can't believe media isn't biased way more than even under Hearst.  If you do not - I'd expect you to defend that position better than above.

Edited by Crom33
I dunno - add stuff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sane said:

This concept that there is a "Liberal mainstream media" is the only genuine Hoax out there.  I have to hand it Fox for creating this Hoax.  Their strategy is to say that if the outlet is not pushing our heavily biased view its "Liberal".  It's a brilliant business model.  Cable news was dying until Fox got into the game.  They came out with "opinion" shows claiming to be news.  They were originally called out on it, and their argument was their viewers were smart enough to know this actual news, but opinion shows.  This business model was the copied by MSN because there was an untapped Liberal market.  If you want to stay in the cable news business you have to pick a bias.  There hasn't been any fair and balanced news in a long time, and Fake I mean Fox News is the King of Crap; however, there is no true objective news because no one would tune it.  People want to hear that their view is the "truth" and their the good guys.  It's all partisan and is what's driven this country to be so polarized.  I get it's a business, and my hat's off to Fox for creating this Hoax, but the copy cats have to take blame too.  The question is what will it take for the citizens of America to realize these stations they worship telling us the other side is the enemy and we're the good guys (regardless of which side your on) is what's actually the problem.  Talk radio of course was the original sin, but hopefully someday we'll figure out we're more alike then different.  We actually want the same things, we just disagree on how to get there 40% of the time; however, no politician will work with the other side because of this partisan stalemate.  There's a lot of blame to go around, but "the Liberal Media" is a Hoax. 

Reality dictates that there is a "liberal  mainstream media".....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Crom33 said:

Answer the question - if half the country voted for trump - why does 95% of the media hate him? ANSWER THE QUESTION.  Let us be honest.

Because the liberal MSM now has a monopoly and is pushing leftist ideology onto all  Americans .......and that is reason 1 of many.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Crom33 said:

Answer the question - if half the country voted for trump - why does 95% of the media hate him? ANSWER THE QUESTION.  Let us be honest.

Half the country voted for Trump because he received 80% of the Liberal Main Stream Media coverage during the election.

BECAUSE HE MADE NEWS, SO HE SOLD ADVERTISMENTS.

Now, 95% of the LMSM hate him,

BECAUSE HATING TRUMP MAKES NEWS, SO IT SELLS ADVERTISMENTS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Whitemajikman said:

Because the liberal MSM now has a monopoly and is pushing leftist ideology onto all  Americans .......and that is reason 1 of many.

And they do it because?  They're owned by larger corps that want control - but yes, reason 1 of many.  So what do you do to fight this tide?  Give power to the people to make money, gain capital, fight the fights that need fighting.  You don't regulate it - you fight it.  You got an Apple that bans people - you got a Google that regulates people's searches - give the small business owner the capital to fight that - and they can.  That's my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, peter45 said:

Half the country voted for Trump because he received 80% of the Liberal Main Stream Media coverage during the election.

BECAUSE HE MADE NEWS, SO HE SOLD ADVERTISMENTS.

Now, 95% of the LMSM hate him,

BECAUSE HATING TRUMP MAKES NEWS, SO IT SELLS ADVERTISMENTS.

Definitely true.  Well said.  Might be as simple as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Crom33 said:

A hoax isn't a hoax if it is self evident. 

 

Fox News is biased as crud for financial reasons - as are all the others (can I cuss on these forums? I'd rather use the term Bad word, and I'd read the TOS but it's usually a waste of time if admins deem otherwise), and so is CNN, MSNBC, WAPO, NYT, HUFFPO - ALL of them. 

 

You seem reasonable.  Let us reason together.  You really can't believe media isn't biased way more than even under Hearst.  If you do not - I'd expect you to defend that position better than above.

I look at this from the financial world.  In the 90's cable news was going out of business.  No one was watching.  The Fox business model brought "opinion" shows to TB.  It was brilliant and quickly copied by MSN because there was an untapped audience.  The problem is that the snowball effect is if you are to stay in business you need to pick as side.  If I was to say President X did Y about Z with only factual information.  No one would watch.  Listen to some of the extreme crap on this site.  Partisanship has become religion re enforced by the media outlets you choose to listen to.  Fox came up with the business model, but the copy cat's are just as guilty.  It's about Benjamins.  The question is where do we go from here?  The hardcore only care about demonizing and attacking the other side.  This makes it impossible for bipartisan solutions.  No one cares if something positive was accomplished if you had to work with the "enemy" to get it done.   That thought process is what is actually the enemy.  The end result is the "media" has driven us apart and I don't know how to solve that problem.  Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Crom33 said:

Answer the question - if half the country voted for trump - why does 95% of the media hate him? ANSWER THE QUESTION.  Let us be honest.

95% I would say that's little high, but I guess it depends on what you consider hate.  He does some crazy incompetent things.  If you call him out on it, is that what your defining as hate?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sane said:

95% I would say that's little high, but I guess it depends on what you consider hate.  He does some crazy incompetent things.  If you call him out on it, is that what your defining as hate?  

You want me to quote the internet? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Crom33 said:

You want me to quote the internet? 

I'm not sure the internet is the most objective of sources.  I would say a gauge on emotion isn't really objectively quantifiable.  What metrics can you use?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sane said:

95% I would say that's little high, but I guess it depends on what you consider hate.  He does some crazy incompetent things.  If you call him out on it, is that what your defining as hate?  

Here's a few from today.  I've never seen him DO any incompetent things.  EVER.  Name one.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/?noredirect=on

 

https://www.nytimes.com/

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/

 

http://www.latimes.com/

 

http://www.msnbc.com/

 

http://www.bbc.com/

 

https://www.npr.org/

 

https://www.reuters.com/

 

Those are national/international papers - you go to the locals and they're not covering it.  THAT is why you fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sane said:

I'm not sure the internet is the most objective of sources.  I would say a gauge on emotion isn't really objectively quantifiable.  What metrics can you use?   

Here's some locals - and DMN is as liberal as you please

 

https://www.dallasnews.com/

 

https://www.miamiherald.com/

 

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/

 

https://www.arkansasonline.com/

 

https://www.kansascity.com/

 

https://lasvegassun.com/

 

https://portlandtribune.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Crom33 said:

Here's a few from today.  I've never seen him DO any incompetent things.  EVER.  Name one.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/?noredirect=on

 

https://www.nytimes.com/

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/

 

http://www.latimes.com/

 

http://www.msnbc.com/

 

http://www.bbc.com/

 

https://www.npr.org/

 

https://www.reuters.com/

 

Those are national/international papers - you go to the locals and they're not covering it.  THAT is why you fail.

Speaking of emotion.  He seems to get his economic policy from right wing media.  That's not an indictment (forgive the term) on the entertainment business that is now the "media".  He doesn't listen to his advisors.  He doesn't read his daily briefing, he watch's Fox.  The president should have a vision that he comes up with based on knowledge.  That president would then appoint advisors who share and can help achieve that vision.  When you don't listen to your advisors that's a sure sign you don't really know what direction your headed nor the consequences.  Including the plan to navigate the waters because nothing is smooth.  Even if you have the best plan. That's incompetent.  I didn't have a team in place for the transition of power.  Probably because he didn't really thing he was going to win.  I think it was publicity stunt gone wrong.  Opps I won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sane said:

Speaking of emotion.  He seems to get his economic policy from right wing media.  That's not an indictment (forgive the term) on the entertainment business that is now the "media".  He doesn't listen to his advisors.  He doesn't read his daily briefing, he watch's Fox.  The president should have a vision that he comes up with based on knowledge.  That president would then appoint advisors who share and can help achieve that vision.  When you don't listen to your advisors that's a sure sign you don't really know what direction your headed nor the consequences.  Including the plan to navigate the waters because nothing is smooth.  Even if you have the best plan. That's incompetent.  I didn't have a team in place for the transition of power.  Probably because he didn't really thing he was going to win.  I think it was publicity stunt gone wrong.  Opps I won.

"Seems?"  What is "seems?"  Where are you getting this? Because the news tells you he watches Fox News?  Of course he does.  So do I.  I don't take it seriously.  I would assume as an intelligent man, he doesn't either.  It sure is cathartic though.

 

This is an ad hoc argument you're making.  I can argue with facts (sometimes) and with arguments, but I can't argue with ad hoc statements with nothing to back it up.  Try again, please. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...