Trump Russian Analysts: Trump’s Ideology is a Departure from the Destructive Globalization of Recent Years

[Stratford57]

Basically they want entities like Russia and China which will simply do what they like, use their muscle to get what they want and they don't want anyone in their way. Go Trump, give Russia and China a free hand to fuck anyone smaller.

Cooperation is always better than confrontation and both countries (Russia and USA) will benefit from it significantly, especially when confrontation has been based only on Western anti-Russian propaganda. And Trump is not only smart enough to understand it, but he's not the one whom of the corrupt Elites(basically Mafia) could control, and that's one of his huge advantages.

Look how successfully Russian cosmonauts and American astronauts benefit from cooperation with each other and both sides are happy with each other. Also when the USA and Russia start fighting ISIS together (which can only happen with Trump as a president: Hillary will continue Obama's support of ISIS just because they are father and mother of ISIS), it will be end of ISIS pretty darn quick.

So, you choose yourself what you want: slogans about fighting ISIS and rivers of innocent civilians' blood in your country and everywhere else or putting quick end to ISIS and to all international terrorism.
--------------------------------------------------
Putin: I am surprised to see certain American media outlets criticizing Europe for its excessively tough, as they say, attitude to migrants. However, the United States does not have to deal with such a flow of migrants, while Europe, after it blindly followed instructions from America is now bearing the brunt of the crisis.

We simply need to see what to do next. What is it? The answer is very simple.

First, together, and I would like to stress this word, together we need to combat terrorism and extremism of all sorts, primarily in the problem countries, to resolve this issue – without that any further progress is impossible. How can we make any progress in regions controlled by the Islamic State? It is impossible, people are fleeing those regions, they kill hundreds of thousands, blow up cultural monuments, burn people alive or drown them, cut the heads off living people. How can one live there? Of course, people are fleeing.

First, we must efficiently combat terrorism and extremism together.

Second, we need to restore the economy of those countries and their social sphere. Only this way, by showing respect for the history, traditions and religion of these peoples and countries, we can restore their statehood and provide large-scale economic and political support.

If we join our efforts in all these areas, we will have positive results. If we act separately and keep arguing among ourselves over some quasi-democratic principles and procedures on certain territories, this will get us into a greater deadlock. However, I pin my hopes on a positive development and on joining efforts with all our partners.
Vladimir Putin answered Russian journalists’ questions

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

That was a statement, Stratford. Not a question. Let's move on.......

I noticed you have no comment on the Russians intention to strike the USA and lead a mass invasion on the American people. As you live in the Ukraine and are loyal to Putin's future agenda to bring back the glory of the Soviet era (and reunite w/ neighboring countries by force), this does not surprise me. What you may not understand is that God did reveal what is going to happen to America if they didn't repent. That was many years ago. Over 30 years ago now. The man has already died and went to heaven. But something you may not realize is that once the judgment of God falls (the wicked are God's Sword) they too, will suffer a terrible fate.
It is written:
13 Arise, O Lord, disappoint him, cast him down: deliver my soul from the wicked, which is thy sword:
Psalm 17:13

So the wicked (that would be Russia, China, Cuba, Nicaragua, Mexico...all those who have agreed to join in the invasion of the United States) are God's sword. God is permitting this because of the disobedience of His own people who live here and for the sins of the nation - abortion, homosexuality, foreign gods permitted to be brought here such as Allah, Buddah, etc, dividing Israel's land... But it doesn't end there.......because prophecy in the Bible also describes the day when God shall send his vengeance on Russia - geographically - and upon the Russian people - although some will survive.

I believe that the survivors will be (even as they will be here in the USA - those who live holy unto the Lord) those who Putin is oppressing with his new laws - enacted on July 20, 2016 - which make it against the law for Believers in Jesus Christ to share their faith in their own home, on the internet, or anywhere outside of the Orthodox Greek Church on Sunday or designated religious cites that are approved by the govt. of Russia. From July 20,2016 it is no longer legal to speak about your faith outside of a church building. That means that Christian parents are no longer permitted to speak about their faith to their own children in the privacy of their own home - how will they know? They are under surveillance, of course.

Yes, the Soviet mentality is alive and well... this is evidence of it and when they start arresting the believers of Jesus Christ and putting them in prison we know what will happen. The same thing the Russians have always done to their prisoners. Brutal torture every day they are in there. Yes, it is not a secret - the history of the Russians (who are communists in every sense of the word - even as the Chinese are - albeit a different leader - their was Mao - yours was Stalin) was beyond comprehension -
The Holodomor: Stalin starved 10 million Ukrainians to death between 1932 and 1933....why do we hear so much less about him than Hitler?

I will tell you. The Kremlin has waited out a generation in an effort to erase the true history of the most diabolical devil to ever rule Russia - Josef Stalin.

You say you live in the Ukraine? And you do not know about the history of Stalin starving to death 10,000,000 men, women and children of the Ukraine because of his communist agenda? How is that possible?

I see you desire a return to Soviet Russia and Putin whom you admire is called to be greater than a Stalin... one can only imagine the bloodlust of such a man.

I can only speak the truth of what I am witnessing here in this thread. The naivete' of Americans - appalling. The deception of a few - masterful but not so much as to see what is called "overplaying your hand"..

LOOK AT WHAT STALIN DID TO PEOPLE OF UKRAINE!



... the photos' of children forced to starve in Stalin's planned Genocide - is like Hitler's death camps without the barbed wire...

 

[Stratford57]

"Jeremiah, post: 14834609, member: 40845"
LOOK AT WHAT STALIN DID TO PEOPLE OF UKRAINE!

... the photos' of children forced to starve in Stalin's planned Genocide - is like Hitler's death camps without the barbed wire...

Stalin did that to all people all over the USSR, including Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan. My relatives from Russian towns Kursk and Belgorod were telling us children how terrible it was. Jeremiah, you are full of propaganda like a Xmas goose and you seem to enjoy it. As for me, who was born in the USSR, it's our life and our very sad history and I hate when some not very honest politicians play a "Holodomor" card with those who are absolutely incompetent like yourself.

Also Stalin by his nationality was a Georgian, not Russian (his real name was Jugashvili), so stop blaming Russians and start blaming Georgians for change.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

"Jeremiah, post: 14834609, member: 40845"
LOOK AT WHAT STALIN DID TO PEOPLE OF UKRAINE!

... the photos' of children forced to starve in Stalin's planned Genocide - is like Hitler's death camps without the barbed wire...

Stalin did that to all people all over the USSR, including Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan. My relatives from Russian towns Kursk and Belgorod were telling us children how terrible it was. Jeremiah, you are full of propaganda and you seem to enjoy it. As for me, who was born in the USSR, it's our life and our very sad history and I hate when some not very honest politicians play a "Holodomor" card with those who are absolutely incompetent like yourself.

Say what you will, Stratford. It does not negate the fact that this is the history of your country not mine. The truth is the truth and while you are free to accuse the truth of being propaganda it does not change the fact that what I have told you is the truth. The truth is sovereign. It changes not. If the entire world were to deny the truth it would not alter it one iota. This is the beauty of the truth. The truth stands the test of time. The same cannot be said for propaganda as you well know.

Granted America is facing her destruction due to the judgment of God which is coming for her many sins - the murder of over 50 million babies, permitting the altars of Baal to be erected on this land, dividing the land of Israel, siding with her enemies, celebrating homosexuality, calling evil good and good evil and the list could go on...

Throughout Biblical history (See Habakkuk) we find that God has used a people far more wicked to bring judgment upon a nation He once protected and in the case of the coming Russian invasion, we shall find that history repeat itself. Again.
That too - is the truth.

 

[Stratford57]

What do you know about the truth, Jeremiah? (it's also a statement, not a question).

Seems like you and the truth don't go well together.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

What do you know about the truth, Jeremiah? (it's also a statement, not a question).

I know that you are deeply troubled by my boldness to confront you with it.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Basically they want entities like Russia and China which will simply do what they like, use their muscle to get what they want and they don't want anyone in their way. Go Trump, give Russia and China a free hand to fuck anyone smaller.

Cooperation is always better than confrontation and both countries (Russia and USA) will benefit from it significantly, especially when confrontation has been based only on Western anti-Russian propaganda. And Trump is not only smart enough to understand it, but he's not the one whom of the corrupt Elites(basically Mafia) could control, and that's one of his huge advantages.

Look how successfully Russian cosmonauts and American astronauts benefit from cooperation with each other and both sides are happy with each other. Also when the USA and Russia start fighting ISIS together (which can only happen with Trump as a president: Hillary will continue Obama's support of ISIS just because they are father and mother of ISIS), it will be end of ISIS pretty darn quick.

So, you choose yourself what you want: slogans about fighting ISIS and rivers of innocent civilians' blood in your country and everywhere else or putting quick end to ISIS and to all international terrorism.
--------------------------------------------------
Putin: I am surprised to see certain American media outlets criticizing Europe for its excessively tough, as they say, attitude to migrants. However, the United States does not have to deal with such a flow of migrants, while Europe, after it blindly followed instructions from America is now bearing the brunt of the crisis.

We simply need to see what to do next. What is it? The answer is very simple.

First, together, and I would like to stress this word, together we need to combat terrorism and extremism of all sorts, primarily in the problem countries, to resolve this issue – without that any further progress is impossible. How can we make any progress in regions controlled by the Islamic State? It is impossible, people are fleeing those regions, they kill hundreds of thousands, blow up cultural monuments, burn people alive or drown them, cut the heads off living people. How can one live there? Of course, people are fleeing.

First, we must efficiently combat terrorism and extremism together.

Second, we need to restore the economy of those countries and their social sphere. Only this way, by showing respect for the history, traditions and religion of these peoples and countries, we can restore their statehood and provide large-scale economic and political support.

If we join our efforts in all these areas, we will have positive results. If we act separately and keep arguing among ourselves over some quasi-democratic principles and procedures on certain territories, this will get us into a greater deadlock. However, I pin my hopes on a positive development and on joining efforts with all our partners.
Vladimir Putin answered Russian journalists’ questions

Cooperation is better if all you're thinking about is trade and so on. However Putin uses the US and EU as a nationalistic tool, in order to be able to manipulate his own people. Is it in his interests to be friendly with the US? Not really.

 

[Tehon]

Basically they want entities like Russia and China which will simply do what they like, use their muscle to get what they want and they don't want anyone in their way. Go Trump, give Russia and China a free hand to fuck anyone smaller.

Cooperation is always better than confrontation and both countries (Russia and USA) will benefit from it significantly, especially when confrontation has been based only on Western anti-Russian propaganda. And Trump is not only smart enough to understand it, but he's not the one whom of the corrupt Elites(basically Mafia) could control, and that's one of his huge advantages.

Look how successfully Russian cosmonauts and American astronauts benefit from cooperation with each other and both sides are happy with each other. Also when the USA and Russia start fighting ISIS together (which can only happen with Trump as a president: Hillary will continue Obama's support of ISIS just because they are father and mother of ISIS), it will be end of ISIS pretty darn quick.

So, you choose yourself what you want: slogans about fighting ISIS and rivers of innocent civilians' blood in your country and everywhere else or putting quick end to ISIS and to all international terrorism.
--------------------------------------------------
Putin: I am surprised to see certain American media outlets criticizing Europe for its excessively tough, as they say, attitude to migrants. However, the United States does not have to deal with such a flow of migrants, while Europe, after it blindly followed instructions from America is now bearing the brunt of the crisis.

We simply need to see what to do next. What is it? The answer is very simple.

First, together, and I would like to stress this word, together we need to combat terrorism and extremism of all sorts, primarily in the problem countries, to resolve this issue – without that any further progress is impossible. How can we make any progress in regions controlled by the Islamic State? It is impossible, people are fleeing those regions, they kill hundreds of thousands, blow up cultural monuments, burn people alive or drown them, cut the heads off living people. How can one live there? Of course, people are fleeing.

First, we must efficiently combat terrorism and extremism together.

Second, we need to restore the economy of those countries and their social sphere. Only this way, by showing respect for the history, traditions and religion of these peoples and countries, we can restore their statehood and provide large-scale economic and political support.

If we join our efforts in all these areas, we will have positive results. If we act separately and keep arguing among ourselves over some quasi-democratic principles and procedures on certain territories, this will get us into a greater deadlock. However, I pin my hopes on a positive development and on joining efforts with all our partners.
Vladimir Putin answered Russian journalists’ questions

Cooperation is better if all you're thinking about is trade and so on. However Putin uses the US and EU as a nationalistic tool, in order to be able to manipulate his own people. Is it in his interests to be friendly with the US? Not really.

You are only guessing what Putin's motives are domestically.
The fact of the matter is that the US has created the atmosphere whereby Putin only needs to speak the truth to accomplish what you are claiming.

 

[Stratford57]

Since yesterday USMB has been just flooded by threads like “Trump will give US away to Putin”. Seems like all that paranoia is coming from the same source: Clinton’s team. The reason is simple and always the same: to hurt Trump. Besides for years Washington was successfully playing same card of “Enemy Russia” and some people are already so deeply brainwashed with that obsession that Trump’s statement “I can work with Putin” (“to work” is a key word and it doesn’t mean “to give away” !) is just blowing up those people’s minds.

P.S. If Trump and Putin start fighting ISIS together, ISIS and the majority of all international terrorism will be history pretty quickly. Why? Because they can, they know how and they want to. Unlike Obama’s weak imitation of fighting ISIS, which he and Clinton both have created.

 

[Tehon]

Since yesterday USMB has been just flooded by threads like “Trump will give US away to Putin”. Seems like all that paranoia is coming from the same source: Clinton’s team. The reason is simple and always the same: to hurt Trump. Besides for years Washington was successfully playing same card of “Enemy Russia” and some people are already so deeply brainwashed with that obsession that Trump’s statement “I can work with Putin” (“to work” is a key word and it doesn’t mean “to give away” !) is just blowing up those people’s minds.

P.S. If Trump and Putin start fighting ISIS together, ISIS and the majority of all international terrorism will be history pretty quickly. Why? Because they can, they know how and they want to. Unlike Obama’s weak imitation of fighting ISIS, which he and Clinton both have created.


View attachment 82864

The timing of these stories is no coincidence, right before the open of the convention when Bernie Sanders will try to deliver his people to Hillary. Sanders message since his defeat in the primary has been that Trump has to be beaten at all costs and these stories give more weight to his message.

Of course Trump has done himself no favors and his poor business acumen has worked against him in theses regards.

And I should add that it is all made possible by an American populace devoid of intellectual integrity and an ability to think critically.

 

[Stratford57]

The timing of these stories is no coincidence, right before the open of the convention when Bernie Sanders will try to deliver his people to Hillary. Sanders message since his defeat in the primary has been that Trump has to be beaten at all costs and these stories give more weight to his message.

Of course Trump has done himself no favors and his poor business acumen has worked against him in theses regards.

And I should add that it is all made possible by an American populace devoid of intellectual integrity and an ability to think critically.

It’s not Trump’s fault or Putin’s, it’s the people who got caught with their hands in the cookie jar. The ones committing the offense are the guilty ones, not the people who caught them.

The ones to blame are the people who committed the crime, not the ones who reported the crime.

Trump and Putin are not the only two people in the world who don’t want Hillary to be the next POTUS, are they? Half of your own country (including yourself, Tehon, as far as I know) hates her too. As well as a lot of people in the whole world.

Assange makes no reservations that he’s staunchly against Hillary Clinton becoming president of the United States, as she represents the corruption he sought to combat with the creation of WikiLeaks.
“I have had years of experience in dealing with Hillary Clinton and have read thousands of her cables. Hillary lacks judgement and will push the United States into endless, stupid wars which spread terrorism. Her personality combined with her poor policy decisions have directly contributed to the rise of ISIS,” Assange wrote on WikiLeaks in February 2016.
Why Julian Assange Doesn’t Want Hillary Clinton to Be President
Assange: Vote for Hillary Clinton is ‘vote for endless, stupid war' which spreads terrorism

Arvin Vohra, vice chair of the Libertarian National Committee.: So many people including the Libertarian party chair Nicholas Sarwark predicted months ago that the DNC was going to find some kind of a way to squash the Sanders’ revolution, and force and try to trick Sanders’ supporters into voting for Clinton. I think pointing the finger to Russians is just a way to distract people from the central issue which is that the DNC was using a rigged game to prevent the popular guy from actually getting the nomination.
Clinton aide blames Russia for hacking DNC to ‘distract Americans from its use of rigged game’

Tehon, I know you're a pretty smart and decent person and you always stand for the truth. I believe you'll eventually figure it out.

 

[Tehon]

The timing of these stories is no coincidence, right before the open of the convention when Bernie Sanders will try to deliver his people to Hillary. Sanders message since his defeat in the primary has been that Trump has to be beaten at all costs and these stories give more weight to his message.

Of course Trump has done himself no favors and his poor business acumen has worked against him in theses regards.

And I should add that it is all made possible by an American populace devoid of intellectual integrity and an ability to think critically.

It’s not Trump’s fault or Putin’s, it’s the people who got caught with their hands in the cookie jar. The ones committing the offense are the guilty ones, not the people who caught them.

The ones to blame are the people who committed the crime, not the ones who reported the crime.

Trump and Putin are not the only two people in the world who don’t want Hillary to be the next POTUS, are they? Half of your own country (including yourself, Tehon, as far as I know) hates her too. As well as a lot of people in the whole world.

Assange makes no reservations that he’s staunchly against Hillary Clinton becoming president of the United States, as she represents the corruption he sought to combat with the creation of WikiLeaks.
“I have had years of experience in dealing with Hillary Clinton and have read thousands of her cables. Hillary lacks judgement and will push the United States into endless, stupid wars which spread terrorism. Her personality combined with her poor policy decisions have directly contributed to the rise of ISIS,” Assange wrote on WikiLeaks in February 2016.
Why Julian Assange Doesn’t Want Hillary Clinton to Be President
Assange: Vote for Hillary Clinton is ‘vote for endless, stupid war' which spreads terrorism

Arvin Vohra, vice chair of the Libertarian National Committee.: So many people including the Libertarian party chair Nicholas Sarwark predicted months ago that the DNC was going to find some kind of a way to squash the Sanders’ revolution, and force and try to trick Sanders’ supporters into voting for Clinton. I think pointing the finger to Russians is just a way to distract people from the central issue which is that the DNC was using a rigged game to prevent the popular guy from actually getting the nomination.
Clinton aide blames Russia for hacking DNC to ‘distract Americans from its use of rigged game’

Tehon, I know you're a pretty smart and decent person and you always stand for the truth. I believe you'll eventually figure it out.

I didn't say anything about who might be to blame for the leaked DNC emails Stratford. Only that Clinton is spinning the story in her favor and that Trump is susceptible to the attack. It is going to be a problem for Trump from here on out despite what I think about the charges.

 

[Stratford57]

Waving off the clerics who had come to administer last rites, Voltaire said: “All my life I have ever made but one prayer to God, a very short one: ‘O Lord, make my enemies look ridiculous.’ And God granted it.”

The tale of the thieved emails at the Democratic National Committee is just too good to be true.

The WikiLeaks dump came Friday night. By Sunday, Clinton’s crowd had unleashed the mechanical rabbit, and the press hounds were dutifully chasing it.

The new party line: The Russians did it! Purpose: Change the subject. Redirect the media away from the DNC conspiracy to sabotage Sanders’ campaign. Well, do not the people have “a right to know” of sordid schemes of DNC operatives to sink a presidential campaign? If the Russians were helpful in bringing to the attention of the American people the anti-democratic business being done at the DNC, perhaps the Russians deserve similar recognition.

Since the end of the Cold War, the U.S. has used cyberwarfare to sabotage centrifuges in the Iranian nuclear plant in Natanz. We have backed “color-coded” revolutions in half-a-dozen countries from Serbia to Ukraine to Georgia – to dump rulers and regimes we do not like, all in the name of democracy.

Unsurprisingly, today, Russia, China, Egypt and even Israel are shutting down or booting out NGOs associated with the United States, and hacking into websites of U.S. institutions.

We were the first “experts” to play this game. Now others know how to play it. We reap what we sow.

Will Putin get a Pulitzer?

 

[i.own.agent.smith]

Americans do not want to war with Russia and a lot of us like Putin despite the blitzkrieg of negative press Putin gets in the US media. The media has lost all credibility in America and a recent poll said that only 6% of the American public trusts anything the media says. Personally, I do not believe anything that is reported in the US media unless I can verify its authenticity.

For example, there is 0% media coverage of the US/China - South China Sea dispute that seems to be on the brink of war. Another example, most Americans are disgusted with how corrupt our politicians have become. Most Americans believe we are no longer a bastion for good (and have started to second guess whether we ever were). Ronald Reagan is considered the only recent President that Americans hold in high regard. Reagan is the only President, in recent memory, that Americans really felt were for them and did not promote these globalization policies that are detrimental to American citizens.

This is why Donald Trump has risen like a phoenix. We are sick of electing polticians that make campaign promises and NEVER fulfill any of the promises. Americans wanted a political outsider to "blow up" the current, bloated, rigged, and corrupt political system. Americans want to ally with Russia. Most Americans believe that America and Russia can have a mutually beneficial relationship and almost completely stomp out radical Islam terrorists once and for all. Despite what our US evil politicians say about Russia and/or Putin; most Americans do not hold these same sentiments.

I.own.agent.Smith, welcome to USMB. Your very first post was very smart and profound and it also was in my thread, so I feel very flattered. I think you’ll have a lot of respect on USMB and a lot of people, enjoying your company, if you keep posting like that.

Thank you for all you said about Russia and have fun on USMB! Say hi to those Americans, who think same way like yourself. You convinced me: Russia and USA can be friends when (or if) a right person arrives into the WH.

His first post was on this thread was because he knows you, Stratford.

I don't think so. At least I don't know this guy, unfortunately. Though I wish I could be around him and many other very, very smart and decent people I've virtually met on USMB like Tehon, DarkFury , Vigilante , gipper , JimBowie1958, , Bleipriester , Sbiker , the-human-being and many others. Their countries can be proud of such guys like them. I respect them a lot and I'm happy I had a chance to know them. I'm sorry to distract your attention by mentioning your names, I just wanted to say thank you all.

 

[i.own.agent.smith]

Americans do not want to war with Russia and a lot of us like Putin despite the blitzkrieg of negative press Putin gets in the US media. The media has lost all credibility in America and a recent poll said that only 6% of the American public trusts anything the media says. Personally, I do not believe anything that is reported in the US media unless I can verify its authenticity.

For example, there is 0% media coverage of the US/China - South China Sea dispute that seems to be on the brink of war. Another example, most Americans are disgusted with how corrupt our politicians have become. Most Americans believe we are no longer a bastion for good (and have started to second guess whether we ever were). Ronald Reagan is considered the only recent President that Americans hold in high regard. Reagan is the only President, in recent memory, that Americans really felt were for them and did not promote these globalization policies that are detrimental to American citizens.

This is why Donald Trump has risen like a phoenix. We are sick of electing polticians that make campaign promises and NEVER fulfill any of the promises. Americans wanted a political outsider to "blow up" the current, bloated, rigged, and corrupt political system. Americans want to ally with Russia. M
There is a crisis in media and journalism, and policymakers have to tackle both political and commercial influence in the media.

Political bias has been thoroughly analysed in the economics literature, but commercial bias has received markedly less attention than it deserves. For decades, commercial interests delayed public awareness of tobacco health risks; health risks went essentially unreported in the mainstream press (Baker 1994; Bagdikian 2004) and the public health literature provides systematic evidence on the role of tobacco advertising.

Reporting on climate change and its causes suffered similar delays (Boykoff and Boykoff 2004; Boykoff 2008; Oreskes 2004). More recently, some critics are suggesting that business interests (especially of insurance and pharmaceutical companies) are impeding an informed and balanced media debate on healthcare reform in the US. Others claim that a truly independent media could have helped to avert or mitigate the current financial and housing crises. A more general criticism is that media 'dumbed-down', substituting hard news with soft news, such as personal, emotional and celebrity stories (as documented in Hamilton 2004).

In a recent article, we show how advertising can seriously interfere with the quality, accuracy, and breadth of content and programming in the media (Ellman and Germano 2009). Biased content is most likely when competition amongst media outlets is limited or when advertisers are large and can threaten to withdraw their advertising business from the media. The analysis extends to media dependence on any business or state actors that can substantially affect media company profits.

Analysing the delicate interaction between advertisers, financiers, media outlets, and media audiences within a two-sided markets framework generates new insights for policymakers. Our work points to the need for independent media and makes the case for promoting competition and public funding.

Mechanisms of influence
There are two basic mechanisms, beyond direct ownership, through which businesses can distort media reporting. First, the media earn a share of advertising surplus and can therefore benefit from making advertising more effective. Frequent reporting on cancer lowers returns to tobacco advertising. Reports linking carbon emissions to global warming may put off viewers from buying fuel-intensive cars. Relaxing and dumbed-down programme content appears to enhance most types of television advertising.

How far these advertiser preferences influence media outcomes depends on the structure of the media and advertising markets. There is a subtle interaction between the two sides – advertisers and readers – of media markets: even if all advertisers want the same distortion, increased advertising can actually reduce distortions, because the growing advertising surplus leads newspapers to compete more intensely for each reader. This result provides strong support for regulation to maintain competition.

Second, large advertisers can influence even competing media outlets by threatening to withdraw their advertising; numerous small advertisers can exert influence if they share a common interest and can coordinate (e.g., when represented by an advertising agency). As a result, media competition alone is not always sufficient to prevent commercial media bias.

Trends and current media difficulties
The global financial and economic crises have taken away attention from another crisis – the crisis in media and journalism which pre-dates the others and is now deepening and accelerating. Important newspapers around the world have been shutting down, while others file for bankruptcy or are on the verge of doing so. US newspapers have been particularly hard hit – a recent Pew study shows that 15,000 US journalists lost their jobs in 2008. The European Federation of Journalists warns of similar concerns in Europe (Phillips, 2009). Given the vital importance of the media, this problem deserves urgent attention.

The simplest response to media collapse – allowing media companies to merge – is unwise. Some media economists disagree, but their view derives from focusing on ideological, especially demand-driven, bias, where market concentration is somewhat less of a concern. Our research underlines sharply the need to maintain vigorous competition. The hope that the internet by itself will save journalism is not convincing either. The internet presents significant threats as well as important opportunities. Websites permit individuals to reach potentially vast audiences, but there remain important fixed costs, such as in building and maintaining a reputation for quality and breadth. The combination of high fixed costs and minimal variable costs lead some experts to predict more severe market concentration in the mass audience segments than in traditional media.

So far, media providers on the web have had difficulty getting audiences to pay for news; both subscription and micro-payment models have mostly failed. Advertisers are concerned that internet users are less receptive to news-bundled online advertising, and newspapers have lost classified advertising to specialist websites like Craigslist. To add to the troubles, telephone and cable companies are now seeking to extract greater profits by charging content providers for audience access. Such departures from “net neutrality” are hotly contested. A strong form of net neutrality is necessary if the internet is to fulfil its greatest promise; that of a potentially immense diversity of sites that can be created and accessed by anyone from anywhere.

The future development of the internet remains an open question, but it is sobering to recall that the hopes for radical improvements from an earlier technological innovation – radio – went largely unrealised.

Policy recommendations
Our analysis points to two types of policy response. First, it reiterates the importance of regulating for vigorous competition in media markets. Second, it calls for public funding of informative media as a public good, with designs that aim for maximal editorial independence.

The independence challenge is not unlike that faced by central banks. It is more complex and will require ongoing attention to rules and mechanism design, but creating a wide range of media alternatives at least guarantees a diversity of types of bias.

Some options include:

• creating national endowments for journalism and media to ensure long-term financial independence
• allocating funds to content-providers as a function of audience and/or via a range of voting mechanisms
• expansion of the public broadcasting model to provide space and visibility for these outside content-providers
• subsidising investigative reporting (at the local, national, and international levels) as well as professional training for journalists
• subsidising media infrastructure (see e.g., Obama and Gordon Brown’s commitments to breach the digital divide)
• removing advertising from public TV stations, as imminent in France and Spain. This reduces commercial bias of their content and pressures their competitors to reduce bias; it also shifts ad revenues to private media, complementing plans to subsidise media consumption and media entry.

Ackerman and Ayres (2009), Cohen (2009), and Lambert (2007) discuss these and related proposals in depth.

Doing nothing or reducing media competition (deregulating) in response to the current financial straits of our media is definitely the wrong answer.

References
Ackerman, B., and I. Ayres (2009), “A National Endowment for Journalism,” The Guardian, 31/08/2009.

Bagdikian, B.H. (2004), The New Media Monopoly, Boston: Beacon Press.

Baker, C.E. (1994), Advertising and a Democratic Press, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Boykoff, M.T. (2008), “Lost in Translation? United States Television News Coverage of Anthropogenic Climate Change, 1995–2004,” Climatic Change, 86(1-2), 1-11.

Boykoff, M.T., and J.M. Boykoff (2004), “Balance and Bias: Global Warming and the US Prestige Press,” Global Environmental Change, 14(2), 125-136.

Cohen, J. (2009), “Reflections on Information Technology and Democracy,” Boston Review, 3 April 2009.

Curran, J. (2002), Media and Power, London: Routledge.

Ellman, M., and F. Germano (2009), “What do the Papers Sell? A Model of Advertising and Media Bias,” Economic Journal, 119, 680-704.

Hamilton, J.T. (2004), All the News that’s Fit to Sell, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Lambert, R. (2007), “The Future of the News in the Digital Era,” Economic Affairs, June 2007.

Oreskes, N. (2004), “Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change,”Science, 306, 1686.

Phillips, L. (2009), “Emergency Call on EU to Save Journalism,” EU Observer, 25/03/09.

ost Americans believe that America and Russia can have a mutually beneficial relationship and almost completely stomp out radical Islam terrorists once and for all. Despite what our US evil politicians say about Russia and/or Putin; most Americans do not hold these same sentiments.

I.own.agent.Smith, welcome to USMB. Your very first post was very smart and profound and it also was in my thread, so I feel very flattered. I think you’ll have a lot of respect on USMB and a lot of people, enjoying your company, if you keep posting like that.

Thank you for all you said about Russia and have fun on USMB! Say hi to those Americans, who think same way like yourself. You convinced me: Russia and USA can be friends when (or if) a right person arrives into the WH.

Stratford57, hello my new Russian friend. I am the American that wants to be allies with Russia. I live in the state of Alabama in the United States. You know, "Sweet Home Alabama."

We have been at war over here in America. The American people, led by Donald Trump, are at war with the American elite class (politicians, billionaires and rich, and the media), led by Hillary Clinton. I am sure you have heard some of the news that has been going on over here.

The media always has lied to us and Americans never really trusted what they reported. But, it was always kind of known and rarely talked about. As soon as Donald Trump locked up the Republican Nomination and Hillary Clinton the Democratic Nomination - all of the media launched an absolute and completely open jihad against Donald Trump. Starting Monday, the entire media became HIllary Clinton's own personal propaganda machines.

After the Republican nomination; Trump exploded in the polls. This was the catalyst that caused the media to go all out jihad against Trump. The Reuters poll had Trump +5 against Hillary Clinton. By this point in the campaign; Hillary Clinton has already spent $150 million in negative advertising against Trump. Trump had already spent $0 in ANY advertising for Trump. You have to understand that the Democrats are scrambling nervous because Hillary is supposed to be double digits up on Trump at this point in the campaign.

Donald Trump is a media genius. This man is 50 chess moves ahead of everyone else at all times. He has received $2 billion in free media without paying a dime while Clinton is blowing through all her cash. Trump gets tens of thousands of people at every rally he holds across America. You can't even count all the people because if the stadium is full; people line up for miles on both sides of the roads at every venue Trump goes to hold a rally.

He has been able to get free media becuase Donald Trump goes on every media outlet station and does interviews and answers thousands of questions all of the time. The media HATES Trump; but he still goes and answers any questions they ask him. They HATE him, but whenever Trump is on their show, the show's ratings explode higher than they ever get before.

Trump controls the 24/7 news cycle by always saying something outrageous that he knows this raging liberal media will go berserk over. The other day, he held a press conference on the third day of the Democratic National Convention for 70 minutes answering trap questions from the press. You must have heard that the DNC's server's got hacked and Hillary Clinton said it was the Russians hacking their server. Clinton then immediately accused Donald Trump of colluding with Vladimir Putin and accused Trump of having deep ties to Russia. She had no clue whether it was Russia or not; but for some reason, Hillary Clinton wants to war with Russia. She blames everything on Russia and Trump.

Donald Trump turned the cycle on her head. He stared at the camera during the press conference and said, "Russia, if you have the 33,000 missing emails from Hillary Clinton's server, please send them over." He was being sarcastic and funny but he KNEW the press would try and accuse him of being serious. All pres outlets immediately started broadcasting that Trump just committed treason by asking Russia to commit espionage against the DNC. Hahahaha, it completely dominated the rest of the news cycle taking all the attention away from Clinton's coronation at the Democratic National Convention.

Why the hell does Hillary Clinton want to start World War III with Russia? The press demonizes Russia and Putin whenever they get the chance. One reporter asked Trump how he would treat Putin if he were President? Trump said that the hostility between America and Russia is unnecessary and we need to ally with Russia. Trump said that Russia is one of the few countries we could ally with and serve both countries interests. The first thing he would want to do with Russia is wipe ISIS off the face of the map.

You have to understand the press went bonkers again trying to demonize Trump saying Trump wanted to ally with an evil thug. Trump stood firm. Top US military officials started giving press interviews saying that what Trump is saying makes perfect sense. The American people overwhelmingly have a fondness for the Russian people even though our evil political leaders did not.

Trump said NATO is obsolete and needs to be dismantled. Trump said he would acknowledge Crimea was Russian territory. When Trump made those comments about NATO; the press gasped and went on all their shows saying Trump was a maniac and was going to let Russia take over all the countries in NATO. Trump said NATO was built for the Cold War. The US pays the entire NATO budget and we are supposed to protect all the member countries that are not paying what the treaty says to pay. Trump asked, "What the hell does NATO do?" Everyone looked at each other and couldn't answer his question. Trump asked, "There isn't a terrorism unit in NATO combating terror?" They told him, "No." Trump said this is the incompetent leadership America has been dealing with for the past 30 years that I am talking about. America is in debt, America pays $586 billion NATO budget which is $235 billion more than America should be paying. Trump said, "America is paying for the protection of 28 countries that are not paying?" Trump said, any country not paying the agreed upon 2% of their GDP would not have the USA military coming to protect them if someone invaded them. The press went nuts. Trump said, "It's easy, you pay, you get protection. You don't pay; no protection."

The press, of course, goes nuts for 2 days accusing Trump of abandoning his allies and calling him unfit for office over and over again. However, after they all had time for it all to sink in; everyone was on board with it.

Trump would like to dismantle NATO. It is too easy for the Globalists to try to take it over as their army if they ever tried to implement the one world government again. Trump would not necessarily take an isolationist approach. Trump wants to build the biggest and baddest and most technologically advanced military so we NEVER have to use the military. Trump would still keep US presence around the world, but only to prevent the little power vaccuums that would allow some little jihadi terrorist cell to fill the vaccuum. Trump wants to take care of America's interests and the interests of her allies.

The days of this aggressive NATO constantly poking and provoking the Big Russian Bear is over. We want to build a trusting alliance with Russia. America's imperialism days are over. America would keep order in the west; Russia would keep order in the east. Help each other out when necessary. America and Russia, if allied, might be able to tame the Middle East calmer than it has ever been.

United States does not want to overthrow regimes, nation build, or occupy countries anymore. We feel like that both countries can fulfill both interests without conflict. America wants to negotiate Fair and Free economic trading with every other country individually. No one-world government. No more Satanic globalists.

I am fighting the good fight. The thing is, Trump is going to win in November so get ready for a fully cooperative future alliance and NOT World War III.

How's it going in Russia? Trump and Putin, together, are going to make these Radical Islamist Jihadis take a shit in their pants. As soon as Trump takes office; he will want to start bringing the fear of their Allah to them hopefully with Putin. 60% of Americans feel that they could be involved in a terrorist attack whenever they leave their house right now. Obama does not do shit and lets them slaughter us. Then he says, "They were not Muslim or Islam - Islam is a peaceful religion." 1 hour later an Arab shoots and kills 10 people and screams Alluh Akbar! I am ashamed as to what America has become and Trump just wants to restore her to her former and friendly glory. I got to go. We are winning.





.

 

[Moonglow]

I thought some of you, guys, would be interested to know what Russian analysts and experts think about Trump. Lately I was watching Channel #1 of Russia and heard their analysis which I found pretty interesting and decided even to share it with those of you who might be curious:

“For the first time we have a clear and ideologically completed alternative to the policy of the last decades, which even Americans consider to be a failure.

Trump’s ideology is a departure from the destructive globalization of recent years in favor of a healthy American isolationism.

Like any normal American isolationist , Trump calls for strengthening America. Its military domination has to be the undisputed.

His vision is based on the fact that America needs to pursue its own interests and not impose its values . This is the only way to negotiate . And the constant Trump’s refrain that he would negotiate with Putin is a part of that vision. Generally what Trump says about Putin and Russia sounds like a red rag for any globalist in America or anywhere else.

Carter Page, the man whom Trump called his adviser on Russia. Opponents depict him marginalized only because he blames Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and her people for provoking the coup in Kiev with the aim of seizing power of pro-American radicals. As far as Page’s professional experience goes, an investment banker Page has got three higher educations: the Naval Academy with honors , University of New York and London , a doctoral degree . Page has created from scratch Moscow branch Meryl Lynch , his company advises investors in energy projects in Russia and Asia . Compare to “the main specialist on Russia and Ukraine” in the current administration Victoria Nuland has a bachelor's degree at Brown University , an experience of being a counsel in the pioneer camp in Odessa , an interpreter for the fishing fleet and the distributor of cookies on the Maidan square in Kiev.

No matter what you think about Trump one has to admit : his brief declaration of foreign policy is the only intelligible coherent and adequate one to the reality of American doctrine in the last 30 years. And even such an academic guru as Paul Gregory of the Hoover Institution admits that (in contrast to the political demagogues). “Watching the overall media backlash , I’ve done my own small research among my conservative colleagues (none of them are Trump’s supporters) about what they think of Trump's speech on foreign policy . The general reaction was unanimous . Except for very harsh words about international trade , they almost all agree, "- said Paul Gregory .

Trump has formulated an American anti-globalization and patriotic alternative. An alternative to the forces and interests that have been activated by Ukrainian coup, which goal was to create a self-reproducing mechanism of the Cold War . Trump’s attempt to stifle this mechanism promises nothing good for himself. However, the failure of this attempt does not promise anything good for America.”

Translated from:

Аналитическая программа «Однако» с Михаилом Леонтьевым. Новости. Первый канал

Like we can believe what the criminal Pooten speaks...

 

[DarkFury]

Americans do not want to war with Russia and a lot of us like Putin despite the blitzkrieg of negative press Putin gets in the US media. The media has lost all credibility in America and a recent poll said that only 6% of the American public trusts anything the media says. Personally, I do not believe anything that is reported in the US media unless I can verify its authenticity.

For example, there is 0% media coverage of the US/China - South China Sea dispute that seems to be on the brink of war. Another example, most Americans are disgusted with how corrupt our politicians have become. Most Americans believe we are no longer a bastion for good (and have started to second guess whether we ever were). Ronald Reagan is considered the only recent President that Americans hold in high regard. Reagan is the only President, in recent memory, that Americans really felt were for them and did not promote these globalization policies that are detrimental to American citizens.

This is why Donald Trump has risen like a phoenix. We are sick of electing polticians that make campaign promises and NEVER fulfill any of the promises. Americans wanted a political outsider to "blow up" the current, bloated, rigged, and corrupt political system. Americans want to ally with Russia. M View attachment 83867 View attachment 83869
There is a crisis in media and journalism, and policymakers have to tackle both political and commercial influence in the media.

Political bias has been thoroughly analysed in the economics literature, but commercial bias has received markedly less attention than it deserves. For decades, commercial interests delayed public awareness of tobacco health risks; health risks went essentially unreported in the mainstream press (Baker 1994; Bagdikian 2004) and the public health literature provides systematic evidence on the role of tobacco advertising.

Reporting on climate change and its causes suffered similar delays (Boykoff and Boykoff 2004; Boykoff 2008; Oreskes 2004). More recently, some critics are suggesting that business interests (especially of insurance and pharmaceutical companies) are impeding an informed and balanced media debate on healthcare reform in the US. Others claim that a truly independent media could have helped to avert or mitigate the current financial and housing crises. A more general criticism is that media 'dumbed-down', substituting hard news with soft news, such as personal, emotional and celebrity stories (as documented in Hamilton 2004).

In a recent article, we show how advertising can seriously interfere with the quality, accuracy, and breadth of content and programming in the media (Ellman and Germano 2009). Biased content is most likely when competition amongst media outlets is limited or when advertisers are large and can threaten to withdraw their advertising business from the media. The analysis extends to media dependence on any business or state actors that can substantially affect media company profits.

Analysing the delicate interaction between advertisers, financiers, media outlets, and media audiences within a two-sided markets framework generates new insights for policymakers. Our work points to the need for independent media and makes the case for promoting competition and public funding.

Mechanisms of influence
There are two basic mechanisms, beyond direct ownership, through which businesses can distort media reporting. First, the media earn a share of advertising surplus and can therefore benefit from making advertising more effective. Frequent reporting on cancer lowers returns to tobacco advertising. Reports linking carbon emissions to global warming may put off viewers from buying fuel-intensive cars. Relaxing and dumbed-down programme content appears to enhance most types of television advertising.

How far these advertiser preferences influence media outcomes depends on the structure of the media and advertising markets. There is a subtle interaction between the two sides – advertisers and readers – of media markets: even if all advertisers want the same distortion, increased advertising can actually reduce distortions, because the growing advertising surplus leads newspapers to compete more intensely for each reader. This result provides strong support for regulation to maintain competition.

Second, large advertisers can influence even competing media outlets by threatening to withdraw their advertising; numerous small advertisers can exert influence if they share a common interest and can coordinate (e.g., when represented by an advertising agency). As a result, media competition alone is not always sufficient to prevent commercial media bias.

Trends and current media difficulties
The global financial and economic crises have taken away attention from another crisis – the crisis in media and journalism which pre-dates the others and is now deepening and accelerating. Important newspapers around the world have been shutting down, while others file for bankruptcy or are on the verge of doing so. US newspapers have been particularly hard hit – a recent Pew study shows that 15,000 US journalists lost their jobs in 2008. The European Federation of Journalists warns of similar concerns in Europe (Phillips, 2009). Given the vital importance of the media, this problem deserves urgent attention.

The simplest response to media collapse – allowing media companies to merge – is unwise. Some media economists disagree, but their view derives from focusing on ideological, especially demand-driven, bias, where market concentration is somewhat less of a concern. Our research underlines sharply the need to maintain vigorous competition. The hope that the internet by itself will save journalism is not convincing either. The internet presents significant threats as well as important opportunities. Websites permit individuals to reach potentially vast audiences, but there remain important fixed costs, such as in building and maintaining a reputation for quality and breadth. The combination of high fixed costs and minimal variable costs lead some experts to predict more severe market concentration in the mass audience segments than in traditional media.

So far, media providers on the web have had difficulty getting audiences to pay for news; both subscription and micro-payment models have mostly failed. Advertisers are concerned that internet users are less receptive to news-bundled online advertising, and newspapers have lost classified advertising to specialist websites like Craigslist. To add to the troubles, telephone and cable companies are now seeking to extract greater profits by charging content providers for audience access. Such departures from “net neutrality” are hotly contested. A strong form of net neutrality is necessary if the internet is to fulfil its greatest promise; that of a potentially immense diversity of sites that can be created and accessed by anyone from anywhere.

The future development of the internet remains an open question, but it is sobering to recall that the hopes for radical improvements from an earlier technological innovation – radio – went largely unrealised.

Policy recommendations
Our analysis points to two types of policy response. First, it reiterates the importance of regulating for vigorous competition in media markets. Second, it calls for public funding of informative media as a public good, with designs that aim for maximal editorial independence.

The independence challenge is not unlike that faced by central banks. It is more complex and will require ongoing attention to rules and mechanism design, but creating a wide range of media alternatives at least guarantees a diversity of types of bias.

Some options include:

• creating national endowments for journalism and media to ensure long-term financial independence
• allocating funds to content-providers as a function of audience and/or via a range of voting mechanisms
• expansion of the public broadcasting model to provide space and visibility for these outside content-providers
• subsidising investigative reporting (at the local, national, and international levels) as well as professional training for journalists
• subsidising media infrastructure (see e.g., Obama and Gordon Brown’s commitments to breach the digital divide)
• removing advertising from public TV stations, as imminent in France and Spain. This reduces commercial bias of their content and pressures their competitors to reduce bias; it also shifts ad revenues to private media, complementing plans to subsidise media consumption and media entry.

Ackerman and Ayres (2009), Cohen (2009), and Lambert (2007) discuss these and related proposals in depth.

Doing nothing or reducing media competition (deregulating) in response to the current financial straits of our media is definitely the wrong answer.

References
Ackerman, B., and I. Ayres (2009), “A National Endowment for Journalism,” The Guardian, 31/08/2009.

Bagdikian, B.H. (2004), The New Media Monopoly, Boston: Beacon Press.

Baker, C.E. (1994), Advertising and a Democratic Press, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Boykoff, M.T. (2008), “Lost in Translation? United States Television News Coverage of Anthropogenic Climate Change, 1995–2004,” Climatic Change, 86(1-2), 1-11.

Boykoff, M.T., and J.M. Boykoff (2004), “Balance and Bias: Global Warming and the US Prestige Press,” Global Environmental Change, 14(2), 125-136.

Cohen, J. (2009), “Reflections on Information Technology and Democracy,” Boston Review, 3 April 2009.

Curran, J. (2002), Media and Power, London: Routledge.

Ellman, M., and F. Germano (2009), “What do the Papers Sell? A Model of Advertising and Media Bias,” Economic Journal, 119, 680-704.

Hamilton, J.T. (2004), All the News that’s Fit to Sell, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Lambert, R. (2007), “The Future of the News in the Digital Era,” Economic Affairs, June 2007.

Oreskes, N. (2004), “Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change,”Science, 306, 1686.

Phillips, L. (2009), “Emergency Call on EU to Save Journalism,” EU Observer, 25/03/09.

View attachment 83869 View attachment 83867 View attachment 83869 View attachment 83869 ost Americans believe that America and Russia can have a mutually beneficial relationship and almost completely stomp out radical Islam terrorists once and for all. Despite what our US evil politicians say about Russia and/or Putin; most Americans do not hold these same sentiments.

I.own.agent.Smith, welcome to USMB. Your very first post was very smart and profound and it also was in my thread, so I feel very flattered. I think you’ll have a lot of respect on USMB and a lot of people, enjoying your company, if you keep posting like that.

Thank you for all you said about Russia and have fun on USMB! Say hi to those Americans, who think same way like yourself. You convinced me: Russia and USA can be friends when (or if) a right person arrives into the WH.

Stratford57, hello my new Russian friend. I am the American that wants to be allies with Russia. I live in the state of Alabama in the United States. You know, "Sweet Home Alabama."

We have been at war over here in America. The American people, led by Donald Trump, are at war with the American elite class (politicians, billionaires and rich, and the media), led by Hillary Clinton. I am sure you have heard some of the news that has been going on over here.

The media always has lied to us and Americans never really trusted what they reported. But, it was always kind of known and rarely talked about. As soon as Donald Trump locked up the Republican Nomination and Hillary Clinton the Democratic Nomination - all of the media launched an absolute and completely open jihad against Donald Trump. Starting Monday, the entire media became HIllary Clinton's own personal propaganda machines.

After the Republican nomination; Trump exploded in the polls. This was the catalyst that caused the media to go all out jihad against Trump. The Reuters poll had Trump +5 against Hillary Clinton. By this point in the campaign; Hillary Clinton has already spent $150 million in negative advertising against Trump. Trump had already spent $0 in ANY advertising for Trump. You have to understand that the Democrats are scrambling nervous because Hillary is supposed to be double digits up on Trump at this point in the campaign.

Donald Trump is a media genius. This man is 50 chess moves ahead of everyone else at all times. He has received $2 billion in free media without paying a dime while Clinton is blowing through all her cash. Trump gets tens of thousands of people at every rally he holds across America. You can't even count all the people because if the stadium is full; people line up for miles on both sides of the roads at every venue Trump goes to hold a rally.

He has been able to get free media becuase Donald Trump goes on every media outlet station and does interviews and answers thousands of questions all of the time. The media HATES Trump; but he still goes and answers any questions they ask him. They HATE him, but whenever Trump is on their show, the show's ratings explode higher than they ever get before.

Trump controls the 24/7 news cycle by always saying something outrageous that he knows this raging liberal media will go berserk over. The other day, he held a press conference on the third day of the Democratic National Convention for 70 minutes answering trap questions from the press. You must have heard that the DNC's server's got hacked and Hillary Clinton said it was the Russians hacking their server. Clinton then immediately accused Donald Trump of colluding with Vladimir Putin and accused Trump of having deep ties to Russia. She had no clue whether it was Russia or not; but for some reason, Hillary Clinton wants to war with Russia. She blames everything on Russia and Trump.

Donald Trump turned the cycle on her head. He stared at the camera during the press conference and said, "Russia, if you have the 33,000 missing emails from Hillary Clinton's server, please send them over." He was being sarcastic and funny but he KNEW the press would try and accuse him of being serious. All pres outlets immediately started broadcasting that Trump just committed treason by asking Russia to commit espionage against the DNC. Hahahaha, it completely dominated the rest of the news cycle taking all the attention away from Clinton's coronation at the Democratic National Convention.

Why the hell does Hillary Clinton want to start World War III with Russia? The press demonizes Russia and Putin whenever they get the chance. One reporter asked Trump how he would treat Putin if he were President? Trump said that the hostility between America and Russia is unnecessary and we need to ally with Russia. Trump said that Russia is one of the few countries we could ally with and serve both countries interests. The first thing he would want to do with Russia is wipe ISIS off the face of the map.

You have to understand the press went bonkers again trying to demonize Trump saying Trump wanted to ally with an evil thug. Trump stood firm. Top US military officials started giving press interviews saying that what Trump is saying makes perfect sense. The American people overwhelmingly have a fondness for the Russian people even though our evil political leaders did not.

Trump said NATO is obsolete and needs to be dismantled. Trump said he would acknowledge Crimea was Russian territory. When Trump made those comments about NATO; the press gasped and went on all their shows saying Trump was a maniac and was going to let Russia take over all the countries in NATO. Trump said NATO was built for the Cold War. The US pays the entire NATO budget and we are supposed to protect all the member countries that are not paying what the treaty says to pay. Trump asked, "What the hell does NATO do?" Everyone looked at each other and couldn't answer his question. Trump asked, "There isn't a terrorism unit in NATO combating terror?" They told him, "No." Trump said this is the incompetent leadership America has been dealing with for the past 30 years that I am talking about. America is in debt, America pays $586 billion NATO budget which is $235 billion more than America should be paying. Trump said, "America is paying for the protection of 28 countries that are not paying?" Trump said, any country not paying the agreed upon 2% of their GDP would not have the USA military coming to protect them if someone invaded them. The press went nuts. Trump said, "It's easy, you pay, you get protection. You don't pay; no protection."

The press, of course, goes nuts for 2 days accusing Trump of abandoning his allies and calling him unfit for office over and over again. However, after they all had time for it all to sink in; everyone was on board with it.

Trump would like to dismantle NATO. It is too easy for the Globalists to try to take it over as their army if they ever tried to implement the one world government again. Trump would not necessarily take an isolationist approach. Trump wants to build the biggest and baddest and most technologically advanced military so we NEVER have to use the military. Trump would still keep US presence around the world, but only to prevent the little power vaccuums that would allow some little jihadi terrorist cell to fill the vaccuum. Trump wants to take care of America's interests and the interests of her allies.

The days of this aggressive NATO constantly poking and provoking the Big Russian Bear is over. We want to build a trusting alliance with Russia. America's imperialism days are over. America would keep order in the west; Russia would keep order in the east. Help each other out when necessary. America and Russia, if allied, might be able to tame the Middle East calmer than it has ever been.

United States does not want to overthrow regimes, nation build, or occupy countries anymore. We feel like that both countries can fulfill both interests without conflict. America wants to negotiate Fair and Free economic trading with every other country individually. No one-world government. No more Satanic globalists.

I am fighting the good fight. The thing is, Trump is going to win in November so get ready for a fully cooperative future alliance and NOT World War III.

How's it going in Russia? Trump and Putin, together, are going to make these Radical Islamist Jihadis take a shit in their pants. As soon as Trump takes office; he will want to start bringing the fear of their Allah to them hopefully with Putin. 60% of Americans feel that they could be involved in a terrorist attack whenever they leave their house right now. Obama does not do shit and lets them slaughter us. Then he says, "They were not Muslim or Islam - Islam is a peaceful religion." 1 hour later an Arab shoots and kills 10 people and screams Alluh Akbar! I am ashamed as to what America has become and Trump just wants to restore her to her former and friendly glory. I got to go. We are winning.





.

Welcome to the Alliance Agent Smith.

 

[Stratford57]

Americans do not want to war with Russia and a lot of us like Putin despite the blitzkrieg of negative press Putin gets in the US media. The media has lost all credibility in America and a recent poll said that only 6% of the American public trusts anything the media says. Personally, I do not believe anything that is reported in the US media unless I can verify its authenticity.

For example, there is 0% media coverage of the US/China - South China Sea dispute that seems to be on the brink of war. Another example, most Americans are disgusted with how corrupt our politicians have become. Most Americans believe we are no longer a bastion for good (and have started to second guess whether we ever were). Ronald Reagan is considered the only recent President that Americans hold in high regard. Reagan is the only President, in recent memory, that Americans really felt were for them and did not promote these globalization policies that are detrimental to American citizens.

This is why Donald Trump has risen like a phoenix. We are sick of electing polticians that make campaign promises and NEVER fulfill any of the promises. Americans wanted a political outsider to "blow up" the current, bloated, rigged, and corrupt political system. Americans want to ally with Russia. M View attachment 83867 View attachment 83869
There is a crisis in media and journalism, and policymakers have to tackle both political and commercial influence in the media.

Political bias has been thoroughly analysed in the economics literature, but commercial bias has received markedly less attention than it deserves. For decades, commercial interests delayed public awareness of tobacco health risks; health risks went essentially unreported in the mainstream press (Baker 1994; Bagdikian 2004) and the public health literature provides systematic evidence on the role of tobacco advertising.

Reporting on climate change and its causes suffered similar delays (Boykoff and Boykoff 2004; Boykoff 2008; Oreskes 2004). More recently, some critics are suggesting that business interests (especially of insurance and pharmaceutical companies) are impeding an informed and balanced media debate on healthcare reform in the US. Others claim that a truly independent media could have helped to avert or mitigate the current financial and housing crises. A more general criticism is that media 'dumbed-down', substituting hard news with soft news, such as personal, emotional and celebrity stories (as documented in Hamilton 2004).

In a recent article, we show how advertising can seriously interfere with the quality, accuracy, and breadth of content and programming in the media (Ellman and Germano 2009). Biased content is most likely when competition amongst media outlets is limited or when advertisers are large and can threaten to withdraw their advertising business from the media. The analysis extends to media dependence on any business or state actors that can substantially affect media company profits.

Analysing the delicate interaction between advertisers, financiers, media outlets, and media audiences within a two-sided markets framework generates new insights for policymakers. Our work points to the need for independent media and makes the case for promoting competition and public funding.

Mechanisms of influence
There are two basic mechanisms, beyond direct ownership, through which businesses can distort media reporting. First, the media earn a share of advertising surplus and can therefore benefit from making advertising more effective. Frequent reporting on cancer lowers returns to tobacco advertising. Reports linking carbon emissions to global warming may put off viewers from buying fuel-intensive cars. Relaxing and dumbed-down programme content appears to enhance most types of television advertising.

How far these advertiser preferences influence media outcomes depends on the structure of the media and advertising markets. There is a subtle interaction between the two sides – advertisers and readers – of media markets: even if all advertisers want the same distortion, increased advertising can actually reduce distortions, because the growing advertising surplus leads newspapers to compete more intensely for each reader. This result provides strong support for regulation to maintain competition.

Second, large advertisers can influence even competing media outlets by threatening to withdraw their advertising; numerous small advertisers can exert influence if they share a common interest and can coordinate (e.g., when represented by an advertising agency). As a result, media competition alone is not always sufficient to prevent commercial media bias.

Trends and current media difficulties
The global financial and economic crises have taken away attention from another crisis – the crisis in media and journalism which pre-dates the others and is now deepening and accelerating. Important newspapers around the world have been shutting down, while others file for bankruptcy or are on the verge of doing so. US newspapers have been particularly hard hit – a recent Pew study shows that 15,000 US journalists lost their jobs in 2008. The European Federation of Journalists warns of similar concerns in Europe (Phillips, 2009). Given the vital importance of the media, this problem deserves urgent attention.

The simplest response to media collapse – allowing media companies to merge – is unwise. Some media economists disagree, but their view derives from focusing on ideological, especially demand-driven, bias, where market concentration is somewhat less of a concern. Our research underlines sharply the need to maintain vigorous competition. The hope that the internet by itself will save journalism is not convincing either. The internet presents significant threats as well as important opportunities. Websites permit individuals to reach potentially vast audiences, but there remain important fixed costs, such as in building and maintaining a reputation for quality and breadth. The combination of high fixed costs and minimal variable costs lead some experts to predict more severe market concentration in the mass audience segments than in traditional media.

So far, media providers on the web have had difficulty getting audiences to pay for news; both subscription and micro-payment models have mostly failed. Advertisers are concerned that internet users are less receptive to news-bundled online advertising, and newspapers have lost classified advertising to specialist websites like Craigslist. To add to the troubles, telephone and cable companies are now seeking to extract greater profits by charging content providers for audience access. Such departures from “net neutrality” are hotly contested. A strong form of net neutrality is necessary if the internet is to fulfil its greatest promise; that of a potentially immense diversity of sites that can be created and accessed by anyone from anywhere.

The future development of the internet remains an open question, but it is sobering to recall that the hopes for radical improvements from an earlier technological innovation – radio – went largely unrealised.

Policy recommendations
Our analysis points to two types of policy response. First, it reiterates the importance of regulating for vigorous competition in media markets. Second, it calls for public funding of informative media as a public good, with designs that aim for maximal editorial independence.

The independence challenge is not unlike that faced by central banks. It is more complex and will require ongoing attention to rules and mechanism design, but creating a wide range of media alternatives at least guarantees a diversity of types of bias.

Some options include:

• creating national endowments for journalism and media to ensure long-term financial independence
• allocating funds to content-providers as a function of audience and/or via a range of voting mechanisms
• expansion of the public broadcasting model to provide space and visibility for these outside content-providers
• subsidising investigative reporting (at the local, national, and international levels) as well as professional training for journalists
• subsidising media infrastructure (see e.g., Obama and Gordon Brown’s commitments to breach the digital divide)
• removing advertising from public TV stations, as imminent in France and Spain. This reduces commercial bias of their content and pressures their competitors to reduce bias; it also shifts ad revenues to private media, complementing plans to subsidise media consumption and media entry.

Ackerman and Ayres (2009), Cohen (2009), and Lambert (2007) discuss these and related proposals in depth.

Doing nothing or reducing media competition (deregulating) in response to the current financial straits of our media is definitely the wrong answer.

References
Ackerman, B., and I. Ayres (2009), “A National Endowment for Journalism,” The Guardian, 31/08/2009.

Bagdikian, B.H. (2004), The New Media Monopoly, Boston: Beacon Press.

Baker, C.E. (1994), Advertising and a Democratic Press, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Boykoff, M.T. (2008), “Lost in Translation? United States Television News Coverage of Anthropogenic Climate Change, 1995–2004,” Climatic Change, 86(1-2), 1-11.

Boykoff, M.T., and J.M. Boykoff (2004), “Balance and Bias: Global Warming and the US Prestige Press,” Global Environmental Change, 14(2), 125-136.

Cohen, J. (2009), “Reflections on Information Technology and Democracy,” Boston Review, 3 April 2009.

Curran, J. (2002), Media and Power, London: Routledge.

Ellman, M., and F. Germano (2009), “What do the Papers Sell? A Model of Advertising and Media Bias,” Economic Journal, 119, 680-704.

Hamilton, J.T. (2004), All the News that’s Fit to Sell, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Lambert, R. (2007), “The Future of the News in the Digital Era,” Economic Affairs, June 2007.

Oreskes, N. (2004), “Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change,”Science, 306, 1686.

Phillips, L. (2009), “Emergency Call on EU to Save Journalism,” EU Observer, 25/03/09.

View attachment 83869 View attachment 83867 View attachment 83869 View attachment 83869 ost Americans believe that America and Russia can have a mutually beneficial relationship and almost completely stomp out radical Islam terrorists once and for all. Despite what our US evil politicians say about Russia and/or Putin; most Americans do not hold these same sentiments.

I.own.agent.Smith, welcome to USMB. Your very first post was very smart and profound and it also was in my thread, so I feel very flattered. I think you’ll have a lot of respect on USMB and a lot of people, enjoying your company, if you keep posting like that.

Thank you for all you said about Russia and have fun on USMB! Say hi to those Americans, who think same way like yourself. You convinced me: Russia and USA can be friends when (or if) a right person arrives into the WH.

Stratford57, hello my new Russian friend. I am the American that wants to be allies with Russia. I live in the state of Alabama in the United States. You know, "Sweet Home Alabama."

We have been at war over here in America. The American people, led by Donald Trump, are at war with the American elite class (politicians, billionaires and rich, and the media), led by Hillary Clinton. I am sure you have heard some of the news that has been going on over here.

The media always has lied to us and Americans never really trusted what they reported. But, it was always kind of known and rarely talked about. As soon as Donald Trump locked up the Republican Nomination and Hillary Clinton the Democratic Nomination - all of the media launched an absolute and completely open jihad against Donald Trump. Starting Monday, the entire media became HIllary Clinton's own personal propaganda machines.

After the Republican nomination; Trump exploded in the polls. This was the catalyst that caused the media to go all out jihad against Trump. The Reuters poll had Trump +5 against Hillary Clinton. By this point in the campaign; Hillary Clinton has already spent $150 million in negative advertising against Trump. Trump had already spent $0 in ANY advertising for Trump. You have to understand that the Democrats are scrambling nervous because Hillary is supposed to be double digits up on Trump at this point in the campaign.

Donald Trump is a media genius. This man is 50 chess moves ahead of everyone else at all times. He has received $2 billion in free media without paying a dime while Clinton is blowing through all her cash. Trump gets tens of thousands of people at every rally he holds across America. You can't even count all the people because if the stadium is full; people line up for miles on both sides of the roads at every venue Trump goes to hold a rally.

He has been able to get free media becuase Donald Trump goes on every media outlet station and does interviews and answers thousands of questions all of the time. The media HATES Trump; but he still goes and answers any questions they ask him. They HATE him, but whenever Trump is on their show, the show's ratings explode higher than they ever get before.

Trump controls the 24/7 news cycle by always saying something outrageous that he knows this raging liberal media will go berserk over. The other day, he held a press conference on the third day of the Democratic National Convention for 70 minutes answering trap questions from the press. You must have heard that the DNC's server's got hacked and Hillary Clinton said it was the Russians hacking their server. Clinton then immediately accused Donald Trump of colluding with Vladimir Putin and accused Trump of having deep ties to Russia. She had no clue whether it was Russia or not; but for some reason, Hillary Clinton wants to war with Russia. She blames everything on Russia and Trump.

Donald Trump turned the cycle on her head. He stared at the camera during the press conference and said, "Russia, if you have the 33,000 missing emails from Hillary Clinton's server, please send them over." He was being sarcastic and funny but he KNEW the press would try and accuse him of being serious. All pres outlets immediately started broadcasting that Trump just committed treason by asking Russia to commit espionage against the DNC. Hahahaha, it completely dominated the rest of the news cycle taking all the attention away from Clinton's coronation at the Democratic National Convention.

Why the hell does Hillary Clinton want to start World War III with Russia? The press demonizes Russia and Putin whenever they get the chance. One reporter asked Trump how he would treat Putin if he were President? Trump said that the hostility between America and Russia is unnecessary and we need to ally with Russia. Trump said that Russia is one of the few countries we could ally with and serve both countries interests. The first thing he would want to do with Russia is wipe ISIS off the face of the map.

You have to understand the press went bonkers again trying to demonize Trump saying Trump wanted to ally with an evil thug. Trump stood firm. Top US military officials started giving press interviews saying that what Trump is saying makes perfect sense. The American people overwhelmingly have a fondness for the Russian people even though our evil political leaders did not.

Trump said NATO is obsolete and needs to be dismantled. Trump said he would acknowledge Crimea was Russian territory. When Trump made those comments about NATO; the press gasped and went on all their shows saying Trump was a maniac and was going to let Russia take over all the countries in NATO. Trump said NATO was built for the Cold War. The US pays the entire NATO budget and we are supposed to protect all the member countries that are not paying what the treaty says to pay. Trump asked, "What the hell does NATO do?" Everyone looked at each other and couldn't answer his question. Trump asked, "There isn't a terrorism unit in NATO combating terror?" They told him, "No." Trump said this is the incompetent leadership America has been dealing with for the past 30 years that I am talking about. America is in debt, America pays $586 billion NATO budget which is $235 billion more than America should be paying. Trump said, "America is paying for the protection of 28 countries that are not paying?" Trump said, any country not paying the agreed upon 2% of their GDP would not have the USA military coming to protect them if someone invaded them. The press went nuts. Trump said, "It's easy, you pay, you get protection. You don't pay; no protection."

The press, of course, goes nuts for 2 days accusing Trump of abandoning his allies and calling him unfit for office over and over again. However, after they all had time for it all to sink in; everyone was on board with it.

Trump would like to dismantle NATO. It is too easy for the Globalists to try to take it over as their army if they ever tried to implement the one world government again. Trump would not necessarily take an isolationist approach. Trump wants to build the biggest and baddest and most technologically advanced military so we NEVER have to use the military. Trump would still keep US presence around the world, but only to prevent the little power vaccuums that would allow some little jihadi terrorist cell to fill the vaccuum. Trump wants to take care of America's interests and the interests of her allies.

The days of this aggressive NATO constantly poking and provoking the Big Russian Bear is over. We want to build a trusting alliance with Russia. America's imperialism days are over. America would keep order in the west; Russia would keep order in the east. Help each other out when necessary. America and Russia, if allied, might be able to tame the Middle East calmer than it has ever been.

United States does not want to overthrow regimes, nation build, or occupy countries anymore. We feel like that both countries can fulfill both interests without conflict. America wants to negotiate Fair and Free economic trading with every other country individually. No one-world government. No more Satanic globalists.

I am fighting the good fight. The thing is, Trump is going to win in November so get ready for a fully cooperative future alliance and NOT World War III.

How's it going in Russia? Trump and Putin, together, are going to make these Radical Islamist Jihadis take a shit in their pants. As soon as Trump takes office; he will want to start bringing the fear of their Allah to them hopefully with Putin. 60% of Americans feel that they could be involved in a terrorist attack whenever they leave their house right now. Obama does not do shit and lets them slaughter us. Then he says, "They were not Muslim or Islam - Islam is a peaceful religion." 1 hour later an Arab shoots and kills 10 people and screams Alluh Akbar! I am ashamed as to what America has become and Trump just wants to restore her to her former and friendly glory. I got to go. We are winning.
.

Very well done, Agent Smith! I enjoyed every word! Thank you for calling me a friend, I sure wouldn't mind to be the one: I just love to be around smart and decent people.

I love your optimism, it inspired me, however I am not so optimistic. Remember in his speech at RNC Trump said: "On January 20 2017 all Americans will wake up in a different country." But so will American Elites. And what will make a lot of Americans happy, not necessary will make American Elites happy. Those elites have spent lots of money, time and energy to create the world as it is now, to brainwash a lot of people to make the world suit themselves (in the name of Democracy of course). And they will allow some loud and self confident guy like Trump to ruin all their creation and waist all their money? I don't think so. Instead they will fight for their own goals like pit-bulls using all possible and impossible methods. Dirty methods, because fighting against the truth involves dirty methods only. Sex scandals, for example, are always welcome (remember Dominique Strauss-Kahn? He wanted to run for a French president too. Vs. Hollande). Everybody knows how badly Trump can't stand dumb and lying people, they will use a lot of those to provoke him. And so on and on...

However if God helps us all and Trump wins, isn't killed (like Kennedy) and fulfills all his plans, we really will be enjoying our living in a different and much cleaner and better world. At least he is worth giving a chance to fulfill his plans, I think. But it's all up to American electorate, part of which seems to be hesitant.

 

[Stratford57]

Oh, this is what the Russians think about their "involvement" in American elections (I posted it earlier in some other thread, but seems like it belongs here too):

Wherever American soldiers were killed today, they die from the direct effects of US foreign policy. America really is undefeatable, because she can’t defeat itself. The last wave of Trump-phobia is the Democrats attempt to blame a Republican candidate that he literally forced the Russian espionage against the United States.

Donald Trump: "Russia , if you can hear, I hope you could find 30,000 missing emails ."

It was about 30 thousand records of Mrs. Clinton’s official correspondence, which she erased, hiding them (just reminding you!) not from the FSB but from the FBI. So far FSB and FBI are two different organizations. One may think American electorate should care about their own country rather than Russia, right? However a Russo-phobia wave of paranoia threatens to overwhelm even the US presidential elections.

Looks like “Russian involvement” is the last Dem’s desperate hope in the fight against Trump. Sounds like popularity of Trump is growing because there are people in America who do not want to be paranoid and they listen to Trump and agree with his simple suggestions, making quite a bit of sense.

Obama: "America is already great. America is strong. And I promise you that our strength and greatness does not depend on Donald Trump. "

Well, may be America is not that great since Putin rules your elections (as you Democrats claim!). And Obama has been American president for the last 8 years, not Trump!

July 28, Translated from:
Аналитическая программа «Однако» с Михаилом Леонтьевым. Новости. Первый канал