We Need a Media System That Serves People’s Needs, Not Corporations

basquebromance

Diamond Member
Nov 26, 2015
109,396
27,005
2,220
Our corporate media system prioritizes making money over producing adversarial journalism and covering working-class issues. We should dare to imagine something different, my friends: a public media system that privileges regular americans over profits.

it doesn’t have to be this way. Another media system is possible...one that’s democratically governed and accessible to all.

Chomsky has a great phrase for informing ourselves (rather than being abused by media)-"intellectual self-defence"

the media is rigged against Bernie and Gabbard and Yang, all the good ones!

CNN just rigged its New Hampshire town halls by snubbing Tulsi Gabbard
 
Our corporate media system prioritizes making money over producing adversarial journalism

You say that like it's a bad thing. Media IS a business. They get paid by getting people's attention. You don't do that with the minutes of the local council meetings for by dwelling on the nuts and bolts of civics.

Dog bites man isn't a story. Man bites dog is a story.

The only alternative to corporate media is state run media ... which, if such a thing is conceivable, is much worse.

Today we have more options for sources of news than at any time in our history. It's up to the individual to read or watch as much as they can stomach, and use their own brains and experience to decide what to believe and what to ignore.
 
Our corporate media system prioritizes making money over producing adversarial journalism and covering working-class issues. We should dare to imagine something different, my friends: a public media system that privileges regular americans over profits.

it doesn’t have to be this way. Another media system is possible...one that’s democratically governed and accessible to all.

Chomsky has a great phrase for informing ourselves (rather than being abused by media)-"intellectual self-defence"

the media is rigged against Bernie and Gabbard and Yang, all the good ones!

CNN just rigged its New Hampshire town halls by snubbing Tulsi Gabbard


Then I'll have to write her in.
 
Our corporate media system prioritizes making money over producing adversarial journalism and covering working-class issues. We should dare to imagine something different, my friends: a public media system that privileges regular americans over profits.

it doesn’t have to be this way. Another media system is possible...one that’s democratically governed and accessible to all.

Chomsky has a great phrase for informing ourselves (rather than being abused by media)-"intellectual self-defence"

the media is rigged against Bernie and Gabbard and Yang, all the good ones!

CNN just rigged its New Hampshire town halls by snubbing Tulsi Gabbard
and the dnc is also rigged .....on that point why should anyone believe that the left wing media and the democratic party are above lying ,spying and fabricating to remove Trump when they cant be trusted to be fair to members of their own party .
 
Our corporate media system prioritizes making money over producing adversarial journalism and covering working-class issues. We should dare to imagine something different, my friends: a public media system that privileges regular americans over profits.

it doesn’t have to be this way. Another media system is possible...one that’s democratically governed and accessible to all.

Chomsky has a great phrase for informing ourselves (rather than being abused by media)-"intellectual self-defence"

the media is rigged against Bernie and Gabbard and Yang, all the good ones!

CNN just rigged its New Hampshire town halls by snubbing Tulsi Gabbard
Just figured this out?
Biden has been chosen for you.





Obey!!!
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #8
real-world examples suggest that media subsidies aren’t a slippery slope toward authoritarianism. Democratic nations around the globe heavily subsidize media while enjoying democratic benefits that put the US to shame.
 
real-world examples suggest that media subsidies aren’t a slippery slope toward authoritarianism. Democratic nations around the globe heavily subsidize media while enjoying democratic benefits that put the US to shame.


Utter nonsense. The media establishment, both public and private, is the leftist drivel of statist elites, and the latter loath the middle class and working poor. The alternative media is the voice of the people. You're just another brainwashed nincompoop of a lemming. .
 
One way in which the news media complicate economic debates is by using large numbers without providing context. This issue comes up in most policy areas but likely has the greatest relevance in budget debates. The US is a huge country with more than 320 million people, and as a result its government has a huge budget, at least in terms of the amount of money that ordinary people see in their daily lives. This means that when we hear that the federal government is spending, say, $17 billion a year on food stamps, the core government welfare program, we are likely to think it’s a great deal of money.10 After all, none of us will see $17 billion in our lifetime.

This could lead people to believe that TANF is a large portion of the federal budget. This belief would lead people to think that spending on TANF beneficiaries was a major part of their tax burden. It might also lead them to think that beneficiaries were receiving large amounts of money. These mistaken views could cause people to both resent the program as a source of strain on their own pocketbooks and to resent TANF recipients as being the beneficiaries of an overly generous program. In fact, the $17 billion spent on TANF each year is "less than 0.4 percent of the federal budget."

But few news listeners are aware of these facts. That's a grave problem, my friends!
 
another example, a 2013 poll found that on average respondents thought that 28 percent of the budget went to foreign aid (Kaiser Family Foundation 2013). The actual figure is 1 percent. The media’s pattern of reporting is likely a major factor behind this misunderstanding, and it could be easily countered if reporters made it a standard practice to put huge numbers in a context that is understandable to their audience
 
My suggestion: needs are air, water, food, shelter and clothing with the last two being optional based on climate-

However, to the OT- Needs don't pay salaries- desires do. If one (or a bunch) want a press to serve their desires then they might consider paying the salaries of those approved sources- and they would be well served to know that words mean things (difference between want and need is a good place to start or it's merely contributing to, not solving) from the get-go- otherwise they might be sold a bill of goods.
 

Forum List

Back
Top