What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Democracy does not really exist without a free press?

You can't have a true democracy without a true free press

  • true

    Votes: 6 54.5%
  • false

    Votes: 5 45.5%

  • Total voters
    11

Votto

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
28,978
Reaction score
13,161
Points
1,090

Is it true that democracy can't actually exist without a free press?


True of false?
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
73,185
Reaction score
21,189
Points
2,180
Who wants a democracy? Gross
 

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
48,078
Reaction score
12,960
Points
2,190

Is it true that democracy can't actually exist without a free press?


True of false?
That's only half the question. You left out "truthful".
 
OP
Votto

Votto

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
28,978
Reaction score
13,161
Points
1,090

Is it true that democracy can't actually exist without a free press?


True of false?
That's only half the question. You left out "truthful".
The question is definitely a loaded question

As you say, who is truthful? Who tells the truth 100% of the time?

So since no such person exists, as does no media outlet exist,.............. (and if the answer to the above question is true), .................then true democracy can never exist.

Imagine a world where Trump's brother is the anchor to CNN. How would that be embraced? Yet you and the Left have no problem with Andrew Cuomo as a reputable anchor to cover his criminal brother.

How free is the press with democrats censoring all social media, and where all regular media is consistently pro democrat party, even before Trump came to power?


We question how votes are counted, but fail to count how votes are manufactured through propaganda.
 
OP
Votto

Votto

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
28,978
Reaction score
13,161
Points
1,090
Democracy was begun historically in Greece. Did they have a true democracy? Greece was a country where the rich elite spent all day, every day, debating and researching issues. They were self informed, so they were not held hostage by a press to depend on them to do the debating and researching for them. This was only possible because those in Greece had an army of slaves to take care of them, so that their day was not wasted on other things, like trying to survive.

But today, the slaves are allowed to vote, and the dutifully vote who the press tells them to vote for.
 

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
162,504
Reaction score
24,346
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri

Is it true that democracy can't actually exist without a free press?


True of false?
Then start a so called free press. You will find that boring everyday life doesn't sell well.
 

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
162,504
Reaction score
24,346
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri
Democracy was begun historically in Greece. Did they have a true democracy? Greece was a country where the rich elite spent all day, every day, debating and researching issues. They were self informed, so they were not held hostage by a press to depend on them to do the debating and researching for them. This was only possible because those in Greece had an army of slaves to take care of them, so that their day was not wasted on other things, like trying to survive.

But today, the slaves are allowed to vote, and the dutifully vote who the press tells them to vote for.
Ain't life a bitch cause you don't like what some people do.
 
OP
Votto

Votto

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
28,978
Reaction score
13,161
Points
1,090
Democracy was begun historically in Greece. Did they have a true democracy? Greece was a country where the rich elite spent all day, every day, debating and researching issues. They were self informed, so they were not held hostage by a press to depend on them to do the debating and researching for them. This was only possible because those in Greece had an army of slaves to take care of them, so that their day was not wasted on other things, like trying to survive.

But today, the slaves are allowed to vote, and the dutifully vote who the press tells them to vote for.
Ain't life a bitch cause you don't like what some people do.
The lie that the Left feeds us is, a "free" press is not only possible, it is historical. That is a flat out lie fed to you by teachers employed by the democrat party. Hstorically, the press has always been used for propaganda in the US.

Most have no idea what the history of the press is in the US. They really believe that the media at one time, was a wholesome group whose job it was to provide the truth to the American people in order to persevere the democracy which depends upon it. But as with most things presented to us by the Left, this is but a myth.

In 1810, Isaiah Thomas, a printer, newspaper publisher, and witness to the American Revolution, published a book called, "The History of the Printing in America". It was one of a very few works that helped preserve the records of printers during the Revolutionary war period.

A printing press was first established in 1638 at Cambridge, Massachusetts. And as it turns out, the earliest printing press in America mostly debated about religion, and later, promoting the gospel and other books to Native Americans. However, these works were censored. Thomas wrote, "The fathers of Massachusetts kept a watchful eye on the press; and in neither a religious nor civil point of view, were they disposed to give it much liberty. Both the civil and ecclesiastical rulers were fearful that if it were not under wholesome restraints, contentions and heresies would arise among the people"

In 1662, the government of Massachusetts appointed licensers of the press, and afterward, in 1664, passed a law that 'no printing should be allowed in any town with the jurisdiction, except in Cambridge; nor should anything be printed there but what the government permitted through the agency of those persons who were empowered for the purpose. No printing was free from legal constraints until about the year 1755. Thomas wrote, "no pressers were set up in the colonies till near the close of the 17th century." Before 1775, printing was confined to the capitals of the colonies, and the press no longer focused on spreading the gospel, rather, their focus shifted towards spreading revolution. Thomas gives praise to the early printing press for the success of the Revolution, saying that without it, the revolution would probably have never come to be. Perhaps Thomas Pain's Common Sense was the most effective work to gain support for the Revolution. In fact, by the last half of the 1760's, the press had become mostly a partisan tool for the Revolution. Writers regularly proclaimed the virtues of a free press that was needed to have a free society; however, those same writers did their best to silence their opposition, that is, those who were loyal to the King of England.

So was there a free press in the colonies if most, if not all, of the press was controlled by those promoting Revolution against the King of England? And if the press is needed for such political endeavors, does this mean that whoever is best able to use the press as a partisan mouthpiece will be the victorious party?

Exactly how much does the press control us? And is this concerning since there are no unbiased news sources, since there are no unbiased human beings? The printed word takes a great deal of time and money to provide people, so only those with a great deal of time and money can provide it. So what money is funding it, and what are their political views? These are the only questions we should ask and investigate.
 

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
48,078
Reaction score
12,960
Points
2,190

Is it true that democracy can't actually exist without a free press?


True of false?
That's only half the question. You left out "truthful".
The question is definitely a loaded question

As you say, who is truthful? Who tells the truth 100% of the time?

So since no such person exists, as does no media outlet exist,.............. (and if the answer to the above question is true), .................then true democracy can never exist.

Imagine a world where Trump's brother is the anchor to CNN. How would that be embraced? Yet you and the Left have no problem with Andrew Cuomo as a reputable anchor to cover his criminal brother.

How free is the press with democrats censoring all social media, and where all regular media is consistently pro democrat party, even before Trump came to power?


We question how votes are counted, but fail to count how votes are manufactured through propaganda.
Taking my statement to ridiculous extremes you know I never intended is somewhat dishonest. You know what I meant.
 
OP
Votto

Votto

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
28,978
Reaction score
13,161
Points
1,090
After the Revolution, historians write of the “party-press era”, that is, from the 1780’s to the 1860’s. It was a time when most newspapers aligned themselves with a politician, campaign, or party, and did so openly. Charles L. Ponce De Leon, an associate professor at California State University said, “Sparked by divergent plans for the future of the new republic, competing factions emerged within George Washington’s administration and Congress, and by the mid-1790’s, each faction had established partisan newspapers championing its point of view. These publications were subsidized through patronage, and, though they had a limited circulation, the material they published was widely reprinted and discussed, and contributed to the establishment of the nation’s first political parties, the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans. And it did not take them long to learn how best to steer public views”. De Leon continues, “Newspapers like Philip Freneau’s National Gazette, writes the most prominent Democratic Republican organ, crafted distinctly partisan lenses through which readers were encouraged to view the world. Specializing in gossip, innuendo, and ad hominem attacks, these newspapers sought to make readers fearful about the intentions of their opponents. The strategy was quite effective at arousing support and mobilizing voters to go to the polls, after all, the fate of the Republic was a stake.” Thomas Jefferson was attacked by a Federalist newspaper as being a godless Jacobin who would unleash the forces of bloody terror upon the land. There would be murder, robbery, rape, adultery, and incest that will be openly taught and practiced. The air will be rent with the cries of the distressed, the soil will be soaked with blood, and the nation black with crimes.
 
OP
Votto

Votto

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
28,978
Reaction score
13,161
Points
1,090

Is it true that democracy can't actually exist without a free press?


True of false?
That's only half the question. You left out "truthful".
The question is definitely a loaded question

As you say, who is truthful? Who tells the truth 100% of the time?

So since no such person exists, as does no media outlet exist,.............. (and if the answer to the above question is true), .................then true democracy can never exist.

Imagine a world where Trump's brother is the anchor to CNN. How would that be embraced? Yet you and the Left have no problem with Andrew Cuomo as a reputable anchor to cover his criminal brother.

How free is the press with democrats censoring all social media, and where all regular media is consistently pro democrat party, even before Trump came to power?


We question how votes are counted, but fail to count how votes are manufactured through propaganda.
Taking my statement to ridiculous extremes you know I never intended is somewhat dishonest. You know what I meant.
The press is not free. It takes a great deal of money to bring you the news.

So is all of this money being spent to "educate" or "inform" you? Do you really believe that? Or are they merely trying to sell you something with the accepted premise of them being altruistic in what they do?

What say you?
 

dblack

Platinum Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
39,117
Reaction score
6,001
Points
1,130

Is it true that democracy can't actually exist without a free press?


True of false?

A free press is necessary for a free society. But a democracy neither requires, nor guarantees, a free society.
 

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
48,078
Reaction score
12,960
Points
2,190
The press is not free. It takes a great deal of money to bring you the news.
You and I both know that's not what the phrase means.

Stop this idiocy.
 
OP
Votto

Votto

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
28,978
Reaction score
13,161
Points
1,090
I say that whatever political party controls the press, controls the populace.

If so, democracy does not really exist and never has
 

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
162,504
Reaction score
24,346
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri
Democracy was begun historically in Greece. Did they have a true democracy? Greece was a country where the rich elite spent all day, every day, debating and researching issues. They were self informed, so they were not held hostage by a press to depend on them to do the debating and researching for them. This was only possible because those in Greece had an army of slaves to take care of them, so that their day was not wasted on other things, like trying to survive.

But today, the slaves are allowed to vote, and the dutifully vote who the press tells them to vote for.
Ain't life a bitch cause you don't like what some people do.
The lie that the Left feeds us is, a "free" press is not only possible, it is historical. That is a flat out lie fed to you by teachers employed by the democrat party. Hstorically, the press has always been used for propaganda in the US.

Most have no idea what the history of the press is in the US. They really believe that the media at one time, was a wholesome group whose job it was to provide the truth to the American people in order to persevere the democracy which depends upon it. But as with most things presented to us by the Left, this is but a myth.

In 1810, Isaiah Thomas, a printer, newspaper publisher, and witness to the American Revolution, published a book called, "The History of the Printing in America". It was one of a very few works that helped preserve the records of printers during the Revolutionary war period.

A printing press was first established in 1638 at Cambridge, Massachusetts. And as it turns out, the earliest printing press in America mostly debated about religion, and later, promoting the gospel and other books to Native Americans. However, these works were censored. Thomas wrote, "The fathers of Massachusetts kept a watchful eye on the press; and in neither a religious nor civil point of view, were they disposed to give it much liberty. Both the civil and ecclesiastical rulers were fearful that if it were not under wholesome restraints, contentions and heresies would arise among the people"

In 1662, the government of Massachusetts appointed licensers of the press, and afterward, in 1664, passed a law that 'no printing should be allowed in any town with the jurisdiction, except in Cambridge; nor should anything be printed there but what the government permitted through the agency of those persons who were empowered for the purpose. No printing was free from legal constraints until about the year 1755. Thomas wrote, "no pressers were set up in the colonies till near the close of the 17th century." Before 1775, printing was confined to the capitals of the colonies, and the press no longer focused on spreading the gospel, rather, their focus shifted towards spreading revolution. Thomas gives praise to the early printing press for the success of the Revolution, saying that without it, the revolution would probably have never come to be. Perhaps Thomas Pain's Common Sense was the most effective work to gain support for the Revolution. In fact, by the last half of the 1760's, the press had become mostly a partisan tool for the Revolution. Writers regularly proclaimed the virtues of a free press that was needed to have a free society; however, those same writers did their best to silence their opposition, that is, those who were loyal to the King of England.

So was there a free press in the colonies if most, if not all, of the press was controlled by those promoting Revolution against the King of England? And if the press is needed for such political endeavors, does this mean that whoever is best able to use the press as a partisan mouthpiece will be the victorious party?

Exactly how much does the press control us? And is this concerning since there are no unbiased news sources, since there are no unbiased human beings? The printed word takes a great deal of time and money to provide people, so only those with a great deal of time and money can provide it. So what money is funding it, and what are their political views? These are the only questions we should ask and investigate.
The US has free press you may sit down and start your own if you don't like what is out there now.
 

dblack

Platinum Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
39,117
Reaction score
6,001
Points
1,130
I say that whatever political party controls the press, controls the populace.

Democracy does not really exist.

Oh, this is one of those threads promoting state run media. Awesome.
 

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
162,504
Reaction score
24,346
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri
I say that whatever political party controls the press, controls the populace.

If so, democracy does not really exist and never has
one political party in the USA doesn't control every outlet of information.
 
OP
Votto

Votto

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
28,978
Reaction score
13,161
Points
1,090
I say that whatever political party controls the press, controls the populace.

Democracy does not really exist.

Oh, this is one of those threads promoting state run media. Awesome.
Statistics show that the press slants Left.

It has for a very long time. I have presented an article on it you are free to refute. In fact, I can provide many, many, more.

What is new is social media, and with the last election the Left has decided to censor all of it.

What does this mean? This means that baseless conspiracy theories about Trump being controlled by Putin were allowed 24/7, but any conspiracy theories about Hunter Biden or a rigged election are censored.

In fact, polls show that had more people known about the Hunter Biden story, many would not have voted for Biden. The numbers are as high as 36% of voters


Again, a free press is a myth, as is a free democracy.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$350.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top