CDZ An idea regarding the American media

[BlackSand]

Not to mention the fact that it is the corrupt mainstream media that is obviously the problem, here, yet he's only wanting to go after anything that ISN'T the mainstream media. Rather that reforming the mainstream media, he simply wants to entrench it even further by creating a body that calls anything a lie that does not conform to the mainstream narrative.

It is very Orwellian.

It is well-intended, and would be a great idea ... With the exception it is flawed in application, and tries to create truth which exists with or without acceptance, approval or compliance to any standard applied by any governing body, regardless of the authority that body is granted ... Especially when that authority is tied to desire.

Reviewing material objectively, it has become ever more evident that almost everything we digest in media today, is a bunch of half-truths seasoned with commentary for the purpose of dividing us ... And it is amusing how far away from truth, reconciliation, accountability and liberty most people will go trying to secure and validate their own beliefs.

The first step towards correcting a problem, is properly identifying the problem.
If the media you receive can be identified as freaking garbage, whether or not you like what it suggests is true ... Then abandon it.
If you cannot trust, what you cannot verify through actual personal knowledge or multiple reliable sources ...
Then adjust the affect faulty information has over your everyday choices ... That is self-regulation ...

.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Not to mention the fact that it is the corrupt mainstream media that is obviously the problem, here, yet he's only wanting to go after anything that ISN'T the mainstream media. Rather that reforming the mainstream media, he simply wants to entrench it even further by creating a body that calls anything a lie that does not conform to the mainstream narrative.

It is very Orwellian.

It is well-intended, and would be a great idea ... With the exception it is flawed in application, and tries to create truth which exists with or without acceptance, approval or compliance to any standard applied by any governing body, regardless of the authority that body is granted ... Especially when that authority is tied to desire.

Reviewing material objectively, it has become ever more evident that almost everything we digest in media today, is a bunch of half-truths seasoned with commentary for the purpose of dividing us ... And it is amusing how far away from truth, reconciliation, accountability and liberty most people will go trying to secure and validate their own beliefs.

The first step towards correcting a problem, is properly identifying the problem.
If the media you receive can be identified as freaking garbage, whether or not you like what it suggests is true ... Then abandon it.
If you cannot trust, what you cannot verify through actual personal knowledge or multiple reliable sources ...
Then adjust the affect faulty information has over your everyday choices ... That is self-regulation ...

.

As to how to correct the problem, the first step is to encourage children to ask questions instead of demanding they sit still and accept answers.

People simply do not ask questions in regards to our media because they have been trained to accept rather than question. They do not ask themselves "how is this incident being framed?", "What adjectives and adverbs have been chosen to elicit my response?", "What is the greater context of the story", or "Why is only one side of the story being presented?".

In its current state, our mainstream media CREATES rather than reports. They take an event, divorce it from its context, frame it according to preconceived objectives and dress up their reporting with emotive language in order to manipulate the consumer.

I can think of no better example of this than they way they went about quite intentionally to turn Nick Sandman into public enemy #1. They only showed PART of what transpired, framed it in dishonest ways and used emotive language in order to distort. I mean, here all the kid did was smile placidly as a very aggressive older man invaded his space and proceeded to act in very intimidating ways, but after the media was done with him, you could have sworn the kid was the most evil bastard imaginable.

Time after time after freaking time, the media does this, yet the non thinking among us STILL demand that they are the ultimate authority and arbiter of how things are. It has become so ridiculous that they can be told that a violent riot is actually a peaceful protest and all nod their little conformist heads in unison even as they view images of city blocks burning down right before their eyes. They are true believers, not thinking adults, and will go to great lengths to avoid challenging these beliefs.

"Oh, that kid who pointed out that the Emperor is naked? Go get him folks!!"

 

[BlackSand]

As to how to correct the problem, the first step is to encourage children to ask questions instead of demanding they sit still and accept answers.

People simply do not ask questions in regards to our media because they have been trained to accept rather than question. They do not ask themselves "how is this incident being framed?", "What adjectives and adverbs have been chosen to elicit my response?", "What is the greater context of the story", or "Why is only one side of the story being presented?".

In its current state, our mainstream media CREATES rather than reports. They take an event, divorce it from its context, frame it according to preconceived objectives and dress up their reporting with emotive language in order to manipulate the consumer.

I can think of no better example of this than they way they went about quite intentionally to turn Nick Sandman into public enemy #1. They only showed PART of what transpired, framed it in dishonest ways and used emotive language in order to distort. I mean, here all the kid did was smile placidly as a very aggressive older man invaded his space and proceeded to act in very intimidating ways, but after the media was done with him, you could have sworn the kid was the most evil bastard imaginable.

Time after time after freaking time, the media does this, yet the non thinking among us STILL demand that they are the ultimate authority and arbiter of how things are. It has become so ridiculous that they can be told that a violent riot is actually a peaceful protest and all nod their little conformist heads in unison even as they view images of city blocks burning down right before their eyes. They are true believers, not thinking adults, and will go to great lengths to avoid challenging these beliefs.

"Oh, that kid who pointed out that the Emperor is naked? Go get him folks!!"

Everything is a 'production' nowadays.

It starts with lessons in the classroom, and slowly molds children into compliance.
I have reviewed learning materials used in the classroom today, and they are as, if not more, polluted than the media.
Often more polluted, because there is a level of separation being what is being taught, and what those with more knowledge than children are aware of.

It's all dressed up, packaged and reinforced ... Absent the first point you made, and the ability to question anything.
It is also absent the ability to substantiate the possibility what they are being fed is not only misguided, but completely vapid in regards to objectivity concerning anything that doesn't fit the mold, or the base assumption it could be wrong under proper interpretation.

It doesn't make a difference if you dress up the Boston Massacre as a CSI Investigation in fifth grade Social Studies.
If the information you provide the students is absent all the facts available, and you ask them to decide whether or not it was an 'Accident' ...

The message they receive is clear ... 'Obey the Government or die'.

.

 

[XponentialChaos]

The company was broken up by the Roosevelt Administration

the court ruled that what the government did was legal

Neither a president nor a court has pursued such action.

Let me know when that happens. Otherwise it’s a dumb comparison.

 

[XponentialChaos]

I believe in giving liberals their due

many of them are highly intelligent

Too bad that being a little touched in the head is often a side affect of creativity

Many creative people are liberal but also warped and often very unhappy in their personal lives

They slave away in a small cubicle in Palo Alto and live in a lonely world of their own

which gives them plenty of time to spend in virtual reality

You’re just upset that you’re so dependent on the innovation of people you despise.

Are your people not smart enough to do the same? Just make your own social media site and I fully support you running it however the hell you like.

 

[Mac-7]

You’re just upset that you’re so dependent on the innovation of people you despise.

I wish I could “code” like they do

But I dont envy the perversion in their personal lives that seems to go with it

 

[XponentialChaos]

I wish I could “code” like they do

But I dont envy the perversion that seems to go with it

Sounds like your problem, not mine.

 

[JoeB131]

I can think of no better example of this than they way they went about quite intentionally to turn Nick Sandman into public enemy #1. They only showed PART of what transpired, framed it in dishonest ways and used emotive language in order to distort. I mean, here all the kid did was smile placidly as a very aggressive older man invaded his space and proceeded to act in very intimidating ways, but after the media was done with him, you could have sworn the kid was the most evil bastard imaginable.

I'm sorry, he was a smirking entitled punk who disrespected an elderly veteran of color. And frankly, if he was "intimidated" by an elderly man with a tambourine, he's really kind of a snowflake.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

^^^^^^

See what I mean, folks?

The true believer can see one thing and swear up and down that it was actually something else just because he has been conditioned to respond in a certain way by the media that is creating his reality for him.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

This could be a pretty interesting conversation if we can stay calm and focused.

Point 1 - We have a serious and growing problem in this country with a media (across the ideological spectrum) that has (deservedly, in my opinion) lost the trust of the American people. We've all seen and contributed to threads that discuss and catalogue examples of gross bias from both ends of our media.

Point 2 - It's not a stretch to imagine a body that creates, maintains and enforces standards of journalistic integrity and accuracy, in such a way as providing guidance to consumers and provides them with more faith that what they are consuming is, indeed, accurate. Before we devolve and divide much further. I don't know about you, but I don't see a bottom to this yet. BUT I'm not fond of the idea of such a body being government-based. For many reasons.

Point 3 - There are two bodies that provide such services in the financial services industry. The first is the SEC (Securities & Exchange Commission) which is an agency of the US Federal Government. But the second one is FINRA (Financial Industry Regulatory Authority) that is a private corporation that also policies the industry - but it is the industry's self-regulatory body.

Idea - Could such an industry self-regulatory body work with the press? Theoretically it could (a) maintain and enforce standards of journalistic integrity and accuracy, and (b) provide consumers with some kind of roadmap so that they can easily discern fact from opinion. As in, this is an actual news resource, that is an opinion resource.

Look, I'm not going for perfection here. I can already think of some issues with this. I'm looking for (a) some improvement and (b) the hope that such a system would gradually raise standards up to a point at which it was barely needed. THAT would be the goal.

Thoughts? And by the way, if you can think of a problem, perhaps you could also provide a possible solution to discuss. We used to do that, here, in America.

Media should call itself News Entertainment like WWE calls itself sports entertainment. Real journalism should still be called media. Pretty easy IMO.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

^^^^^^

See what I mean, folks?

The true believer can see one thing and swear up and down that it was actually something else just because he has been conditioned to respond in a certain way by the media that is creating his reality for him.

Joe lives in his own fantasy world. See his quote regarding Michael Jordan in my siggy. In truth people seem to see what they want to see.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

This could be a pretty interesting conversation if we can stay calm and focused.

Point 1 - We have a serious and growing problem in this country with a media (across the ideological spectrum) that has (deservedly, in my opinion) lost the trust of the American people. We've all seen and contributed to threads that discuss and catalogue examples of gross bias from both ends of our media.

Point 2 - It's not a stretch to imagine a body that creates, maintains and enforces standards of journalistic integrity and accuracy, in such a way as providing guidance to consumers and provides them with more faith that what they are consuming is, indeed, accurate. Before we devolve and divide much further. I don't know about you, but I don't see a bottom to this yet. BUT I'm not fond of the idea of such a body being government-based. For many reasons.

Point 3 - There are two bodies that provide such services in the financial services industry. The first is the SEC (Securities & Exchange Commission) which is an agency of the US Federal Government. But the second one is FINRA (Financial Industry Regulatory Authority) that is a private corporation that also policies the industry - but it is the industry's self-regulatory body.

Idea - Could such an industry self-regulatory body work with the press? Theoretically it could (a) maintain and enforce standards of journalistic integrity and accuracy, and (b) provide consumers with some kind of roadmap so that they can easily discern fact from opinion. As in, this is an actual news resource, that is an opinion resource.

Look, I'm not going for perfection here. I can already think of some issues with this. I'm looking for (a) some improvement and (b) the hope that such a system would gradually raise standards up to a point at which it was barely needed. THAT would be the goal.

Thoughts? And by the way, if you can think of a problem, perhaps you could also provide a possible solution to discuss. We used to do that, here, in America.

Media should call itself News Entertainment like WWE calls itself sports entertainment. Real journalism should still be called media. Pretty easy IMO.

How DARE you compare mainstream media to WWE!


WWE is MUCH more legit.

 

[JoeB131]

^^^^^^

See what I mean, folks?

The true believer can see one thing and swear up and down that it was actually something else just because he has been conditioned to respond in a certain way by the media that is creating his reality for him.

yeah, here's the thing. We saw what we saw on the tape.

Then Smirky's parents (instead of slapping him upside the head for disrespecting a veteran) hired a bunch of image consultants to get him to go around to all the news programs and emote convincingly about how misunderstood he was, and he was really, really a good kid (who only wanted to take away a woman's right to choose).

So you have a point, The Covington Kid was a case of "media manipulation", just not the way you think it was.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

^^^^^^

See what I mean, folks?

The true believer can see one thing and swear up and down that it was actually something else just because he has been conditioned to respond in a certain way by the media that is creating his reality for him.

yeah, here's the thing. We saw what we saw on the tape.

Then Smirky's parents (instead of slapping him upside the head for disrespecting a veteran) hired a bunch of image consultants to get him to go around to all the news programs and emote convincingly about how misunderstood he was, and he was really, really a good kid (who only wanted to take away a woman's right to choose).

So you have a point, The Covington Kid was a case of "media manipulation", just not the way you think it was.

"We" saw?

There is more than one personality in there, is there?

 

[Shelzin]

^^^^^^

See what I mean, folks?

The true believer can see one thing and swear up and down that it was actually something else just because he has been conditioned to respond in a certain way by the media that is creating his reality for him.

yeah, here's the thing. We saw what we saw on the tape.

Then Smirky's parents (instead of slapping him upside the head for disrespecting a veteran) hired a bunch of image consultants to get him to go around to all the news programs and emote convincingly about how misunderstood he was, and he was really, really a good kid (who only wanted to take away a woman's right to choose).

So you have a point, The Covington Kid was a case of "media manipulation", just not the way you think it was.

You're an idiot. Watch the same video start to finish that this whole thing is based on.

 

[JoeB131]

You're an idiot. Watch the same video start to finish that this whole thing is based on.

I did. I saw a young entitled punk disrespecting his elder.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

^^^^^^^^^^^^

I rest my case.

 

[Shelzin]

I did. I saw a young entitled punk disrespecting his elder.

You didn't. You're bias, but you aren't stupid. I guess you could just be trolling. That's a possibility, but I don't think so.

 

[sartre play]

There is very little real news, just Opinion piled on top of opinion.

 

[Mac-7]

Sounds like your problem, not mine.

At least I’m not you