If we didn't watch tv news any more...

[Delta4Embassy]

Thinking of the polarizing nature of politics today, fear of Islam, ISIS, ebola, etc. all comes from news media, what would we lose if we quit watching news broadcasts? Anything important?

Am trying a personal experiment and not following any news whatsoever. See if I'm unable to function in society for it. My hypothesis is I'll actually function better, lose a lot of stress, and lose alot of aggitation at what's going on while not noticing anything different from my immediate surroundings. Short of the President or ISIS or ebola coming to my neighborhood none of it really exists unless I make it exist by watching tv news.

 

[BlackSand]

People would become more self-interested if they chose to forego National news ... But more as a matter of experience than the desire.

No matter what you watch on television ... It doesn't do anything to add to or diminish the actual threat jihadists, ISIS, Ebola and whatnot pose ... They will kill you if they get the chance. So if your idea is to stick your head in the sand and pretend things don't matter because you aren't paying attention to them ... Then I don't think anyone would be interested in holding a gun to your head and making you watch the news.

It is possible that you will experience less stress when you decide to handle things you have more control over. Join the rest of us folks who can watch the news, digest what is significant ... Then turn around and do what we can, where we are to actually be productive and successful, help other people and enjoy life without the need to tailor every experience to a grand plan.

.

 

[Taz]

If we didn't watch tv news any more...

There'd be more noob threads like this.

 

[blastoff]

Anyone who relies chiefly on television for news very well should give it up.

Most of us have the ability to dig farther into any story - local, state, federal, etc. - right at our fingertips today. That and a little desire to know is all it takes to generally figure out the whole or real story, or at least be able to make an informed judgement about things.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

People would become more self-interested if they chose to forego National news ... But more as a matter of experience than the desire.

No matter what you watch on television ... It doesn't do anything to add to or diminish the actual threat jihadists, ISIS, Ebola and whatnot pose ... They will kill you if they get the chance. So if your idea is to stick your head in the sand and pretend things don't matter because you aren't paying attention to them ... Then I don't think anyone would be interested in holding a gun to your head and making you watch the news.

It is possible that you will experience less stress when you decide to handle things you have more control over. Join the rest of us folks who can watch the news, digest what is significant ... Then turn around and do what we can, where we are to actually be productive and successful, help other people and enjoy life without the need to tailor every experience to a grand plan.

.

Without public support for military solutions to things like ISIS there wouldn't be a military solution. But if the public isn't afraid of ISIS because they haven't been watching coverage about it they wont be afraid. So much of what the government does is because we are getting conditioned to fear things by news broadcasts. Watching such news doesn't do anything useful or desireable, just makes us into lab rats jumping and running the mazes our overseers wish us to.

Same with watching or learning of the beheadings by ISIS. Without knowledge of it would you hate ISIS? Would you support airstrikes? Ground operations? If you're not afraid you wouldn't support any of that. Media is designed to make us fearful of whatever we're supposed to be afraid of. But if we refuse to digest that information you can't be manipulated by the propaganda about it.

 

[BlackSand]

People would become more self-interested if they chose to forego National news ... But more as a matter of experience than the desire.

No matter what you watch on television ... It doesn't do anything to add to or diminish the actual threat jihadists, ISIS, Ebola and whatnot pose ... They will kill you if they get the chance. So if your idea is to stick your head in the sand and pretend things don't matter because you aren't paying attention to them ... Then I don't think anyone would be interested in holding a gun to your head and making you watch the news.

It is possible that you will experience less stress when you decide to handle things you have more control over. Join the rest of us folks who can watch the news, digest what is significant ... Then turn around and do what we can, where we are to actually be productive and successful, help other people and enjoy life without the need to tailor every experience to a grand plan.

.

Without public support for military solutions to things like ISIS there wouldn't be a military solution. But if the public isn't afraid of ISIS because they haven't been watching coverage about it they wont be afraid. So much of what the government does is because we are getting conditioned to fear things by news broadcasts. Watching such news doesn't do anything useful or desireable, just makes us into lab rats jumping and running the mazes our overseers wish us to.

Same with watching or learning of the beheadings by ISIS. Without knowledge of it would you hate ISIS? Would you support airstrikes? Ground operations? If you're not afraid you wouldn't support any of that. Media is designed to make us fearful of whatever we're supposed to be afraid of. But if we refuse to digest that information you can't be manipulated by the propaganda about it.

World Wars I and II both happened without wall to wall coverage by Fox or Network News. It makes a difference when you decide to address a threat and recognize its danger.

.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

People would become more self-interested if they chose to forego National news ... But more as a matter of experience than the desire.

No matter what you watch on television ... It doesn't do anything to add to or diminish the actual threat jihadists, ISIS, Ebola and whatnot pose ... They will kill you if they get the chance. So if your idea is to stick your head in the sand and pretend things don't matter because you aren't paying attention to them ... Then I don't think anyone would be interested in holding a gun to your head and making you watch the news.

It is possible that you will experience less stress when you decide to handle things you have more control over. Join the rest of us folks who can watch the news, digest what is significant ... Then turn around and do what we can, where we are to actually be productive and successful, help other people and enjoy life without the need to tailor every experience to a grand plan.

.

Without public support for military solutions to things like ISIS there wouldn't be a military solution. But if the public isn't afraid of ISIS because they haven't been watching coverage about it they wont be afraid. So much of what the government does is because we are getting conditioned to fear things by news broadcasts. Watching such news doesn't do anything useful or desireable, just makes us into lab rats jumping and running the mazes our overseers wish us to.

Same with watching or learning of the beheadings by ISIS. Without knowledge of it would you hate ISIS? Would you support airstrikes? Ground operations? If you're not afraid you wouldn't support any of that. Media is designed to make us fearful of whatever we're supposed to be afraid of. But if we refuse to digest that information you can't be manipulated by the propaganda about it.

World Wars I and II both happened without wall to wall coverage by Fox or Network News. It makes a difference when you decide to address a threat and recognize its danger.

.

Has coverage via radio and at least with 2 film coverage playing in theatres.

 

[BlackSand]

People would become more self-interested if they chose to forego National news ... But more as a matter of experience than the desire.

No matter what you watch on television ... It doesn't do anything to add to or diminish the actual threat jihadists, ISIS, Ebola and whatnot pose ... They will kill you if they get the chance. So if your idea is to stick your head in the sand and pretend things don't matter because you aren't paying attention to them ... Then I don't think anyone would be interested in holding a gun to your head and making you watch the news.

It is possible that you will experience less stress when you decide to handle things you have more control over. Join the rest of us folks who can watch the news, digest what is significant ... Then turn around and do what we can, where we are to actually be productive and successful, help other people and enjoy life without the need to tailor every experience to a grand plan.

.

Without public support for military solutions to things like ISIS there wouldn't be a military solution. But if the public isn't afraid of ISIS because they haven't been watching coverage about it they wont be afraid. So much of what the government does is because we are getting conditioned to fear things by news broadcasts. Watching such news doesn't do anything useful or desireable, just makes us into lab rats jumping and running the mazes our overseers wish us to.

Same with watching or learning of the beheadings by ISIS. Without knowledge of it would you hate ISIS? Would you support airstrikes? Ground operations? If you're not afraid you wouldn't support any of that. Media is designed to make us fearful of whatever we're supposed to be afraid of. But if we refuse to digest that information you can't be manipulated by the propaganda about it.

World Wars I and II both happened without wall to wall coverage by Fox or Network News. It makes a difference when you decide to address a threat and recognize its danger.

.

Has coverage via radio and at least with 2 film coverage playing in theatres.

The point about World Wars I and II is that if people were paying attention to what was happening earlier ... Then it is possible the situations would not have been allowed to escalate to a point the whole world was engaged in war.

.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

People would become more self-interested if they chose to forego National news ... But more as a matter of experience than the desire.

No matter what you watch on television ... It doesn't do anything to add to or diminish the actual threat jihadists, ISIS, Ebola and whatnot pose ... They will kill you if they get the chance. So if your idea is to stick your head in the sand and pretend things don't matter because you aren't paying attention to them ... Then I don't think anyone would be interested in holding a gun to your head and making you watch the news.

It is possible that you will experience less stress when you decide to handle things you have more control over. Join the rest of us folks who can watch the news, digest what is significant ... Then turn around and do what we can, where we are to actually be productive and successful, help other people and enjoy life without the need to tailor every experience to a grand plan.

.

Without public support for military solutions to things like ISIS there wouldn't be a military solution. But if the public isn't afraid of ISIS because they haven't been watching coverage about it they wont be afraid. So much of what the government does is because we are getting conditioned to fear things by news broadcasts. Watching such news doesn't do anything useful or desireable, just makes us into lab rats jumping and running the mazes our overseers wish us to.

Same with watching or learning of the beheadings by ISIS. Without knowledge of it would you hate ISIS? Would you support airstrikes? Ground operations? If you're not afraid you wouldn't support any of that. Media is designed to make us fearful of whatever we're supposed to be afraid of. But if we refuse to digest that information you can't be manipulated by the propaganda about it.

World Wars I and II both happened without wall to wall coverage by Fox or Network News. It makes a difference when you decide to address a threat and recognize its danger.

.

Has coverage via radio and at least with 2 film coverage playing in theatres.

The point about World Wars I and II is that if people were paying attention to what was happening earlier ... Then it is possible the situations would not have been allowed to escalate to a point the whole world was engaged in war.

.

WWI at least happened because of a chain reaction of treaty obligations. WWII at least in the European theatre was justified on just humanitarian grounds alone. The Pacific theatre is more complicated and foggy.

 

[Pogo]

Thinking of the polarizing nature of politics today, fear of Islam, ISIS, ebola, etc. all comes from news media, what would we lose if we quit watching news broadcasts? Anything important?

Am trying a personal experiment and not following any news whatsoever. See if I'm unable to function in society for it. My hypothesis is I'll actually function better, lose a lot of stress, and lose alot of aggitation at what's going on while not noticing anything different from my immediate surroundings. Short of the President or ISIS or ebola coming to my neighborhood none of it really exists unless I make it exist by watching tv news.

Television is the most effective propaganda tool ever invented. Orwell could see it in the 1940s ("telescreens"). It's incapable of rendering information honestly; it infuses its message on a viscerally emotional-sensationalistic level that is necessarily a gross distortion. And because TV news depends on building "ratings" (read: running commercials) for its income, it cannot be honest about what stories it emphasizes either.

"To me there's something incredibly sad about a bunch of human beings sitting down watching something take place. Of course, in that context I was thinking a lot about film. I love movies as
much as anyone else, but the spectacle of millions and millions of people sitting in movie theaters and in front of television sets every night, watching a second, or third-hand reproduction of reality
going on, when the real world is right there in their living room, or right outside on the street or down the block somewhere... I think it's a tool to sonombulize or hypnotize people into kind of a waking sleep." -- Jim Morrison, 1970​

 

[Pogo]

People would become more self-interested if they chose to forego National news ... But more as a matter of experience than the desire.

No matter what you watch on television ... It doesn't do anything to add to or diminish the actual threat jihadists, ISIS, Ebola and whatnot pose ... They will kill you if they get the chance. So if your idea is to stick your head in the sand and pretend things don't matter because you aren't paying attention to them ... Then I don't think anyone would be interested in holding a gun to your head and making you watch the news.

It is possible that you will experience less stress when you decide to handle things you have more control over. Join the rest of us folks who can watch the news, digest what is significant ... Then turn around and do what we can, where we are to actually be productive and successful, help other people and enjoy life without the need to tailor every experience to a grand plan.

.

Without public support for military solutions to things like ISIS there wouldn't be a military solution. But if the public isn't afraid of ISIS because they haven't been watching coverage about it they wont be afraid. So much of what the government does is because we are getting conditioned to fear things by news broadcasts. Watching such news doesn't do anything useful or desireable, just makes us into lab rats jumping and running the mazes our overseers wish us to.

Same with watching or learning of the beheadings by ISIS. Without knowledge of it would you hate ISIS? Would you support airstrikes? Ground operations? If you're not afraid you wouldn't support any of that. Media is designed to make us fearful of whatever we're supposed to be afraid of. But if we refuse to digest that information you can't be manipulated by the propaganda about it.

World Wars I and II both happened without wall to wall coverage by Fox or Network News. It makes a difference when you decide to address a threat and recognize its danger.

And the backdrops to those Wars were a hell of a lot more realistic events than Ebola, ISIS, "New Black Panthers" and the so-called "knockout game". IOW the threshold has plummeted dramatically.

 

[whitehall]

If we quit reading books we wouldn't have to worry about historic perspective and those damned math. problems. There are lots of benefits to being ignorant.

 

[Pogo]

If we quit reading books we wouldn't have to worry about historic perspective and those damned math. problems. There are lots of benefits to being ignorant.

The glaring difference of course is that the book is a passive source that the reader mines at his/her own speed, depth level and side interests, in the reader's own time of readiness, while the boob tube sits its victim down and actively pours a premasticated psychologically-engineered complete sensual package designed to hypnotize the subject into a state of obedient catatonia. The book (including the audio version) allows the imagination to breathe and fill in the details and contexts. The TV by contrast prohibits imagination. It dictates everything.

Walk into a room where people are watching TV and instead of following the herd to look at the telescreen, watch the watchers and note what you see -- passive sponges, sitting silently eyes wide open, obediently infusing every nuance of artificial experience the boob toob dictates, unaware of the real world or even the real people around them. All sensory input is shut down, because that input is already dictated by the telescreen.

The purpose of all of this is to spongify the subject so that he/she will be vulnerable to the advertising message, whether direct (in a commercial) or indirect (in the script). It's hypnosis without the countdown. And it produces the same kind of zombified drones.

If you ever get a chance, meet a child who has never seen television. The vibrancy will be immediately obvious.

 

[Treeshepherd]

Thinking of the polarizing nature of politics today, fear of Islam, ISIS, ebola, etc. all comes from news media, what would we lose if we quit watching news broadcasts? Anything important?

Am trying a personal experiment and not following any news whatsoever. See if I'm unable to function in society for it. My hypothesis is I'll actually function better, lose a lot of stress, and lose alot of aggitation at what's going on while not noticing anything different from my immediate surroundings. Short of the President or ISIS or ebola coming to my neighborhood none of it really exists unless I make it exist by watching tv news.

several disparate points...

TV news exists for the sole purpose of selling you stuff you don't need.

People talk about supply-side economics- if you build it and market the everlovin' holy crap out of it, they will buy it.
I see a lot of what I call 'supply-side journalism'. If you report a story and you tell them over and over again that the story is important, they will watch it. And these push messages are usually a part of a larger narrative. NBC News, for example, is pitching you on more than just Lipitor, Cialis and Heavy Duty trucks.

There's a famous study in marketing called the Pepsi Paradox... In a blind taste test, the majority of people surveyed will always choose Pepsi over Coke. Pepsi is slightly sweeter and less carbonated. But in taste test where the samplers drink out of Coke and Pepsi cans, a majority of people always prefer Coke. People have fond memories of seeing that Coke banner at the game, or seeing the cute polar bear ad during Christmastime. Coke simply has had a larger and more effective ad presence over the years. But, what's truly interesting about the Pepsi Paradox study is that it showed that the marketing changed the actual experience of the flavor of the drinks. The taste of the Coke, for a majority of people, improved by simply being aware that it was a Coke.

Neuro-marketing is the new science of the study of marketing at a brain wave level. You go inside the brain and measure the effect of slogans and buzzwords and images. Marketing was once a creative art. It is ever becoming more of a hard science.

Finally, how does all this relate to politics? Isn't the art (and now the science) of politics just a form of marketing? Yes, politics is essentially marketing. And that's where the danger lies in all this Big Data collection business. A common response to government surveillance is, "So what? I'm not doing anything wrong". The purpose of the Panopticon is not simply the catch the bad guys. The purpose is mainly to systematically maintain real-time profiles of individuals and communities and regions and to deliver them scientifically engineered 'advertizements' that have to do with selling the next humanitarian war, or too-big-to-fail bailouts, or terrifying fiscal cliffs, or swine flu, West Nile virus and Ebola.

 

[BlackSand]

And the backdrops to those Wars were a hell of a lot more realistic events than Ebola, ISIS, "New Black Panthers" and the so-called "knockout game". IOW the threshold has plummeted dramatically.

Thanks for helping me make the point that getting ahead of the curve can help deter things from becoming a more severe backdrop.

I mean if you think you can get by without understanding the threats in front of you ... No matter how trivial they may be at the time ... Then you are free to wait around until the enemy blows up a few buildings in New York so we can send some troops overseas. Don't worry about Ebola (or whatever else comes along) ... You can just help me with body bags when the time comes because we aren't prepared to handle things we could prepare for.

.

 

[Disir]

Thinking of the polarizing nature of politics today, fear of Islam, ISIS, ebola, etc. all comes from news media, what would we lose if we quit watching news broadcasts? Anything important?

Am trying a personal experiment and not following any news whatsoever. See if I'm unable to function in society for it. My hypothesis is I'll actually function better, lose a lot of stress, and lose alot of aggitation at what's going on while not noticing anything different from my immediate surroundings. Short of the President or ISIS or ebola coming to my neighborhood none of it really exists unless I make it exist by watching tv news.

Local news is about it.

If you only watch tv news then you might get side blinded. If you utilize other news sources then it will be fine.

 

[saveliberty]

There is no tv news. It is televised events editorial programs. My life became more positive when I stopped taking the local paper and just listened to local radio news. Try not watching national news for a week. Surprisingly the world goes on, despite all the doom and gloom you missed on the television.

 

[whitehall]

I

If we quit reading books we wouldn't have to worry about historic perspective and those damned math. problems. There are lots of benefits to being ignorant.

The glaring difference of course is that the book is a passive source that the reader mines at his/her own speed, depth level and side interests, in the reader's own time of readiness, while the boob tube sits its victim down and actively pours a premasticated psychologically-engineered complete sensual package designed to hypnotize the subject into a state of obedient catatonia. The book (including the audio version) allows the imagination to breathe and fill in the details and contexts. The TV by contrast prohibits imagination. It dictates everything.

Walk into a room where people are watching TV and instead of following the herd to look at the telescreen, watch the watchers and note what you see -- passive sponges, sitting silently eyes wide open, obediently infusing every nuance of artificial experience the boob toob dictates, unaware of the real world or even the real people around them. All sensory input is shut down, because that input is already dictated by the telescreen.

The purpose of all of this is to spongify the subject so that he/she will be vulnerable to the advertising message, whether direct (in a commercial) or indirect (in the script). It's hypnosis without the countdown. And it produces the same kind of zombified drones.

If you ever get a chance, meet a child who has never seen television. The vibrancy will be immediately obvious.

I'

The difference between books and T.V. is what? The passive source that "the reader mines at his/her own depth level and side interests"? What is it about T.V. news that prohibits the reader/observer from mining information at their own depth level and interest? The dirty little secret is that the radical left today isn't much different from the radical left that determined Nazi policies in the 1930's. Certain information would be available to citizens but book burning would be a legitimate form of censorship.

 

[Asclepias]

Thinking of the polarizing nature of politics today, fear of Islam, ISIS, ebola, etc. all comes from news media, what would we lose if we quit watching news broadcasts? Anything important?

Am trying a personal experiment and not following any news whatsoever. See if I'm unable to function in society for it. My hypothesis is I'll actually function better, lose a lot of stress, and lose alot of aggitation at what's going on while not noticing anything different from my immediate surroundings. Short of the President or ISIS or ebola coming to my neighborhood none of it really exists unless I make it exist by watching tv news.

I did the same thing about 4 years ago. You will be fine. Its actually refreshing.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Thinking of the polarizing nature of politics today, fear of Islam, ISIS, ebola, etc. all comes from news media, what would we lose if we quit watching news broadcasts? Anything important?

Am trying a personal experiment and not following any news whatsoever. See if I'm unable to function in society for it. My hypothesis is I'll actually function better, lose a lot of stress, and lose alot of aggitation at what's going on while not noticing anything different from my immediate surroundings. Short of the President or ISIS or ebola coming to my neighborhood none of it really exists unless I make it exist by watching tv news.

Local news is about it.

If you only watch tv news then you might get side blinded. If you utilize other news sources then it will be fine.

Last time I checked out local news a local girl had been kidnapped and murdered. News is a waste of programming slots. It's worthless.