Red Mosquito

Strat wrote:yea but how do you not be completely against trump and everything he stands for and do everything possible to point out how fucking retarded he is?

You run fox

Things fascists do:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/16/opinions/ ... index.html

http://www.rense.com/general37/fascism.htm

If he at least lifts the lid a bit especially in the US about how media is all powerful and shapes literally everything to suit the demands of corporate interests, he's done something good. You guys are on a China/Korea level of being fed total bullshit by your media outlets and it's scary it's never brought up or challenged.

dimejinky99 wrote:If he at least lifts the lid a bit especially in the US about how media is all powerful and shapes literally everything to suit the demands of corporate interests, he's done something good. You guys are on a China/Korea level of being fed total bullshit by your media outlets and it's scary it's never brought up or challenged.

its not that bad.

I love when people say our media is as bad as china or north korea's, and our elections are rigged, but these people have never actually seen what a real state run media or a real rigged election looks like.

I'm not saying there aren't serious problems, but lets cool it with the analogies to brutal dictatorships and third world failed states.

The idea that a fair media will or should always inevitably devote equal or near equal time to both candidate's qualities or scandals is deeply fallacitic.

McParadigm wrote:The idea that a fair media will or should always inevitably devote equal or near equal time to both candidate's qualities or scandals is deeply fallacitic.

so much this

cutuphalfdead wrote:I love when people say our media is as bad as china or north korea's, and our elections are rigged, but these people have never actually seen what a real state run media or a real rigged election looks like.

I'm not saying there aren't serious problems, but lets cool it with the analogies to brutal dictatorships and third world failed states.

I live in exactly that state. The two main parties have been kept there since the foundation of the state by our state run media. Every other party is painted as a fringe/troublemaking element. Understandable to a point given Sinn Feins associations but now that that party have really come to the fore in support and polls, state run media is overdrive to bring them down. And of course a lot of people buy it.

But is there even one major US media a outlet without an agenda? Sure a lot of them go for balance but it's all biased one way or another.

Strat wrote:yea but how do you not be completely against trump and everything he stands for and do everything possible to point out how fucking retarded he is?

Because a race in which one candidate is crushing another is terrible for ratings.

For every foxnews, there is a cnn, msnbc, NBC, ABC, CBS, comedy central, HBO most other cable networks, 90% of Hollywood and lots more. All undeniably biased and pro-democrat. To say it evens out is a complete joke. And it's not just against Trump, though he's brought out the worst in the media's bias. It's anyone who is not a Democrat, particularly establishment Democrat. It's been that way for years. The only reason fox news is as big as it is is because it's the only game in town. It has no real competition.

BurtReynolds wrote:The only reason fox news is as big as it is is because it's the only game in town. It has no real competition.

Breitbart might be giving it some competition soon.

Green Habit wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:The only reason fox news is as big as it is is because it's the only game in town. It has no real competition.

Breitbart might be giving it some competition soon.

Trumpbart: The Only News You Can Trust

BurtReynolds wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:The only reason fox news is as big as it is is because it's the only game in town. It has no real competition.

Breitbart might be giving it some competition soon.

Trumpbart: The Only News You Can Trust

I alone can deliver you factual information!

BurtReynolds wrote:For every foxnews, there is a cnn, msnbc, NBC, ABC, CBS, comedy central, HBO most other cable networks, 90% of Hollywood and lots more. All undeniably biased and pro-democrat. To say it evens out is a complete joke. And it's not just against Trump, though he's brought out the worst in the media's bias. It's anyone who is not a Democrat, particularly establishment Democrat. It's been that way for years. The only reason fox news is as big as it is is because it's the only game in town. It has no real competition.

If you're treating "media" as synonymous with "all entertainment and news television, including Comedy Central and actors as individuals," then who gives a shit if there's an overall bias? Oh no, HBO is liberal! Injustice!

If you speak only of news organizations (and seemingly only about television news), then I would be curious to know what more "balanced" coverage of this election would look like in your mind. To me, it has been insufficient in its coverage of absolutely unprecedented misinformation events and social media-based deception efforts in the Trump campaign, because it has been pulled into the tabloid aspect of the mysogyny...which itself should be enough to end his aspirations.

McParadigm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:For every foxnews, there is a cnn, msnbc, NBC, ABC, CBS, comedy central, HBO most other cable networks, 90% of Hollywood and lots more. All undeniably biased and pro-democrat. To say it evens out is a complete joke. And it's not just against Trump, though he's brought out the worst in the media's bias. It's anyone who is not a Democrat, particularly establishment Democrat. It's been that way for years. The only reason fox news is as big as it is is because it's the only game in town. It has no real competition.

If you're treating "media" as synonymous with "all entertainment and news television, including Comedy Central and actors as individuals," then who gives a shit if there's an overall bias? Oh no, HBO is liberal! Injustice!

If you speak only of news organizations (and seemingly only about television news), then I would be curious to know what more "balanced" coverage of this election would look like in your mind. To me, it has been insufficient in its coverage of absolutely unprecedented misinformation events and social media-based deception efforts in the Trump campaign, because it has been pulled into the tabloid aspect of the mysogyny...which itself should be enough to end his aspirations.

Comedy Central, particularly their news shows, is practically media, at least in practice. Too many people get their "news" from Jon Stewart type shows. Why wouldn't you give a shit? that doesn't make any sense. Of course they influence people. In a broader sense, why wouldn't it concern you that the vast majority of what people see on television is put up by a tiny group of biased people (Hollywood)?

Radio probably leans slightly conservative, but that audience is miniscule. Internet is the wild west, so it has biases all over the place, probably evening out, though I wouldn't call it a good example of fair and balanced. There has to be a better way. Not to mention the fact that Twitter and Facebook's curation leaves a lot to be desired.

On the day the DNC had major shakeups over the email hacking, CNN didn't mention it on the front page of their website, but ran 13 anti-Trump stories including the one about him eating chicken with a fork. I don't think you need to worry that the media isn't suitably anti-Trump. They have that base covered.

cutuphalfdead wrote:

McParadigm wrote:The idea that a fair media will or should always inevitably devote equal or near equal time to both candidate's qualities or scandals is deeply fallacitic.

so much this

Of course. But the perception is that the bias has become so extreme it's to the point where the veracity of the reporting is being questioned. I don't question that many leaders in media feel a moral obligation to stop what they believe to be a type of fascism gaining power, but I worry they are trading a short term win (no Trump) for a long term loss (the hardening of 2/5 of the population against them).



Edit: RT is reporting someone has cut off Assange's internet access. Purely coincidental, i'm sure.

BurtReynolds wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:For every foxnews, there is a cnn, msnbc, NBC, ABC, CBS, comedy central, HBO most other cable networks, 90% of Hollywood and lots more. All undeniably biased and pro-democrat. To say it evens out is a complete joke. And it's not just against Trump, though he's brought out the worst in the media's bias. It's anyone who is not a Democrat, particularly establishment Democrat. It's been that way for years. The only reason fox news is as big as it is is because it's the only game in town. It has no real competition.

If you're treating "media" as synonymous with "all entertainment and news television, including Comedy Central and actors as individuals," then who gives a shit if there's an overall bias? Oh no, HBO is liberal! Injustice!

If you speak only of news organizations (and seemingly only about television news), then I would be curious to know what more "balanced" coverage of this election would look like in your mind. To me, it has been insufficient in its coverage of absolutely unprecedented misinformation events and social media-based deception efforts in the Trump campaign, because it has been pulled into the tabloid aspect of the mysogyny...which itself should be enough to end his aspirations.

Comedy Central, particularly their news shows, is practically media, at least in practice. Too many people get their "news" from Jon Stewart type shows. Why wouldn't you give a shit? that doesn't make any sense. Of course they influence people. In a broader sense, why wouldn't it concern you that the vast majority of what people see on television is put up by a tiny group of biased people (Hollywood)?

Radio probably leans slightly conservative, but that audience is miniscule. Internet is the wild west, so it has biases all over the place, probably evening out, though I wouldn't call it a good example of fair and balanced. There has to be a better way. Not to mention the fact that Twitter and Facebook's curation leaves a lot to be desired.

On the day the DNC had major shakeups over the email hacking, CNN didn't mention it on the front page, but ran 13 anti-Trump stories including the one about him eating chicken with a fork. I don't think you need to worry that the media isn't suitably anti-Trump. They have that base covered.

They most certainly did mention it. Im on CNN like all day everyday enjoying the madness. There was coverage of that. There is also plenty on Hillarys emails. The differnce is, none of this stuff is as damaging and absurd as everything that comes out of the Trump campaign.

Bi_3 wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:

McParadigm wrote:The idea that a fair media will or should always inevitably devote equal or near equal time to both candidate's qualities or scandals is deeply fallacitic.

so much this

Of course. But the perception is that the bias has become so extreme it's to the point where the veracity of the reporting is being questioned. I don't question that many leaders in media feel a moral obligation to stop what they believe to be a type of fascism gaining power, but I worry they are trading a short term win (no Trump) for a long term loss (the hardening of 2/5 of the population against them).

the perception of bias has become so extreme because you have a candidate who ignores every single fact of life and kicks and screams falsities about reporting on him. His core supporters dont search out the news or care to look into anything deeper than "make america great again fuck muslims"

Strat wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:For every foxnews, there is a cnn, msnbc, NBC, ABC, CBS, comedy central, HBO most other cable networks, 90% of Hollywood and lots more. All undeniably biased and pro-democrat. To say it evens out is a complete joke. And it's not just against Trump, though he's brought out the worst in the media's bias. It's anyone who is not a Democrat, particularly establishment Democrat. It's been that way for years. The only reason fox news is as big as it is is because it's the only game in town. It has no real competition.

If you're treating "media" as synonymous with "all entertainment and news television, including Comedy Central and actors as individuals," then who gives a shit if there's an overall bias? Oh no, HBO is liberal! Injustice!

If you speak only of news organizations (and seemingly only about television news), then I would be curious to know what more "balanced" coverage of this election would look like in your mind. To me, it has been insufficient in its coverage of absolutely unprecedented misinformation events and social media-based deception efforts in the Trump campaign, because it has been pulled into the tabloid aspect of the mysogyny...which itself should be enough to end his aspirations.

Comedy Central, particularly their news shows, is practically media, at least in practice. Too many people get their "news" from Jon Stewart type shows. Why wouldn't you give a shit? that doesn't make any sense. Of course they influence people. In a broader sense, why wouldn't it concern you that the vast majority of what people see on television is put up by a tiny group of biased people (Hollywood)?

Radio probably leans slightly conservative, but that audience is miniscule. Internet is the wild west, so it has biases all over the place, probably evening out, though I wouldn't call it a good example of fair and balanced. There has to be a better way. Not to mention the fact that Twitter and Facebook's curation leaves a lot to be desired.

On the day the DNC had major shakeups over the email hacking, CNN didn't mention it on the front page, but ran 13 anti-Trump stories including the one about him eating chicken with a fork. I don't think you need to worry that the media isn't suitably anti-Trump. They have that base covered.

They most certainly did mention it. Im on CNN like all day everyday enjoying the madness. There was coverage of that. There is also plenty on Hillarys emails. The differnce is, none of this stuff is as damaging and absurd as everything that comes out of the Trump campaign.

This was a specific story about DNC resignations, which is a pretty newsworthy thing I think. If CNN did mention it on their website, it was buried far down the page in favor of a dozen minor stories bashing Trump. I took a screenshot of CNN's website because I was so shocked by it, but I'll have to dig it up. I agree the Hillary emails themselves aren't that important, but I do think the media routinely buries news stories critical to the democrats in favor of any minor story bashing Trump. Does Trump's millionth accuser really merit a brand new news story? Not really. And it's not just for ratings or clicks: It's because of an agenda, and one that existed before Trump ran for president.