|
You refusing to try to make distinctions between things, because all bad things are the same, doesn't make it true. Fox News and much of the rest of the right wing media are demonstrably a propaganda operation, with marching orders & talking points, who will swivel their narratives on a dime based on whats most politically advantageous to the conservative movement at the moment. Chinese media is much the same. Mainstream networks are not the same at all. The big networks evidence a definite bias towards the desires of their corporate masters, and of course the class beliefs of the elite reporters & pundits that dominate the shows... but this is entirely different from being an organization that actively holds the truth in contempt. Your world-wise affectation that everything is propaganda doesn't mean you've seen through it; it means that propaganda efforts have worked on you. https://twitter.com/Kasparov63/status/808750564284702720
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2020 16:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 05:22 |
|
|
I personally know people who work for English language media in China (original reporting as well as translating Chinese media into English) and you are entirely off the mark saying such things. Even CPC party outlets don't twist the facts so much as omit certain things selectively and even so, it's usually for a reason like "not wanting to spark a panic" such as it was with a lot of the early reporting on the coronavirus back in January. It's extremely hard to state things like "they hold a deliberate contempt for the truth" without showing a lot about where you get your own information from and bias of your own. Chinese media simply does not work the same way as media does in the US and the CPC doesn't have nearly the amount of control that people seem to think it does, although being able to exercise enough to avoid the Chinese media landscape functioning like the right-wing corporate US media is hard to see as anything but a bonus. "Propaganda" is propaganda. It's impossible to be truly 'objective' and trying to do so is what's exhausting. Just recognizing where interests lie and picking and choosing based on what's important based on the circumstances is enough.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2020 16:58
|
|
|
The New York Times supported the Iraq War because the owners of the paper supported the war, not because of some nebulous desire to maintain balance.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2020 17:02
|
|
|
If anyone's curious, whoever is filling in for (hopefully soon dying a painful death) Rush Limbaugh, the narrative is "isn't it odd that all of the hot points of the corona outbreak in the US are in sanctuary cities and run by progressive mayors?" but, sure, the left is politicizing this. Took me TEN SECONDS of listening to hear this trash so I can only guess what the whole 3 hours is. For some reason, the most populated and compact cities have higher infection rates. Wow, no way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2020 18:11
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:If anyone's curious, whoever is filling in for (hopefully soon dying a painful death) Rush Limbaugh, the narrative is "isn't it odd that all of the hot points of the corona outbreak in the US are in sanctuary cities and run by progressive mayors?" but, sure, the left is politicizing this. Took me TEN SECONDS of listening to hear this trash so I can only guess what the whole 3 hours is. It only infects libs, duh
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2020 18:28
|
|
|
So what would be some examples of better-respected right leaning news papers in the US? The Wall Street Journal? edit: I'm willing to consider Chinese source but they are a total unknown quantity for me. It would make this: HiroProtagonist posted:Just recognizing where interests lie and picking and choosing based on what's important based on the circumstances is enough. really difficult, which was kind of my thinking there
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 03:37
|
|
|
The Economist is British, but it's generally considered to be good journalism (and extremely free-market). WSJ is another poo poo Murdcoh rag by all accounts I've heard lately. If you want good right-wing journalism from the states I'd recommend the New York Times.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 09:32
|
|
|
The Scientist posted:So what would be some examples of better-respected right leaning news papers in the US? The WSJ is not that different in standards from the NY Post these days. For the Centrist as gently caress moneyed intellectual take look at the Financial Times.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 09:34
|
|
|
greazeball posted:If you want good right-wing journalism from the states I'd recommend the New York Times. Hah, you are the first person in my entire life that I've heard refer to the NYT as right-wing. Are you saying that because its Right-wing by European standards?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 17:39
|
|
|
The Scientist posted:Hah, you are the first person in my entire life that I've heard refer to the NYT as right-wing. Are you saying that because its Right-wing by European standards? It's because they allow their opinion section to feature such hits as bedbug Bret Stephens going to bat for Woody Allen w/r/t "Cancel Culture".
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 18:02
|
|
|
The Scientist posted:Hah, you are the first person in my entire life that I've heard refer to the NYT as right-wing. Are you saying that because its Right-wing by European standards? They actively propagandized for the Iraq War, for starters
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 18:07
|
|
|
Not only that but one of the most prominent writers at the New York Times went on TV and said the Iraq War was necessary because after 9/11 America had to go door to door in random Arab countries breaking into civilian homes and saying "suck on this" as a form of collective punishment. So it's not even as though the New York Times only publishes bloodless technocratic advocacy of the forever war, some of their most prominent voices are advocating for foreign policy stuff that would have sounded completely at home coming from the spokesperson for any far right dictatorship.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 18:11
|
|
|
The Scientist posted:Hah, you are the first person in my entire life that I've heard refer to the NYT as right-wing. Are you saying that because its Right-wing by European standards? relentless warmonger fucks utter contempt for organized labor platforming and sympathising with nazis outright refusal to use the words "liar" or "racist" in reference to the president Plus I can't think of any actual leftist position they have taken in the last 10-15 years. They (and a lot of the American public) have swallowed the right-wing narrative that the NYT is somehow the mouthpiece of the left when the most charitable thing you can actually say is that they're a bunch of sycophantic centrists.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 19:13
|
|
|
The WSJ used to have a reputation of solid business-oriented reporting firewalled from a balls-out libertarian op-ed section. My understanding is that that firewall broke a long time ago, and the quality of their reporting went into drastic decline, though I haven't read the paper myself in ages. Back in the day they actually put out some interesting investigative reporting. There's no real reasonable conservative media in this country for pretty much the same reasons the Never Trump movement is useless. 'Reasonable conservatism' was squeezed to death by the far right a long time ago. Helsing posted:The New York Times supported the Iraq War because the owners of the paper supported the war, not because of some nebulous desire to maintain balance. ....Like I explicitly said in the sentence you are purportedly responding to?  greazeball posted:relentless warmonger fucks Herp derp   All I did was look at the last week's editorials, no straining required. Rating the New York Times as right wing based on cherrypicked op-eds is like calling Time magazine fascist for having Hitler as Person of the Year. You just, I don't know, maybe you should actually read the thing you are criticizing instead of handing down judgement based off some outraged tweets you read. It is amusingly reminiscent of right-wingers calling it a communist rag based off putting in op-eds by Mikhail Gorbachev. Like, I'm all on the FTFNYT bandwagon, but please have a clue what you are talking about.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 20:40
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mmfa/status/1243586823080808462
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 20:49
|
|
|
Imagine spending your dying days continuing to be Rush Limbaugh.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 20:59
|
|
|
die of cancer bitch
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 21:00
|
|
|
I gotta be honest, he could die a little faster
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 21:03
|
|
|
The Scientist posted:Hah, you are the first person in my entire life that I've heard refer to the NYT as right-wing. Are you saying that because its Right-wing by European standards? It's right wing by any objective standard, Europeans tend to have a vastly less skewed view of political spectrums owing to their (usually) having actual left-wing political parties active in their electoral system, as well as the fact that parliamentary systems/proportionate representation systems don't actively exclude alternative choices beyond two (but they can, and do, and have marginalized them as much as possible within that framework). That being said European politics have their own bugbears so don't take this as an endorsement of anything but the fact they recognize correctly that the two mainstream parties in the US are both right wing and the mainstream media outlets, major donors to them that they are, are also thoroughly right wing--aside from the examples published as opinion pieces which are subject to comparatively little editorial review. The Scientist posted:edit: I'm willing to consider Chinese source but they are a total unknown quantity for me. It would make this: China Daily has a pretty wide English distribution and is mercifully free of Falun Gong axe-grinding nonsense. There are others as well I can list if you're interested.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 21:28
|
|
|
There's a line where this has gone too far and we have clearly crossed it
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 21:44
|
|
|
Even if NYT hadn't cheerleaded the Iraq War doing the false "balance" poo poo when your two parties are far-right and mostly center-right you're going to end up right wing anyway. Most of our media just act as stenographers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 21:56
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:The WSJ used to have a reputation of solid business-oriented reporting firewalled from a balls-out libertarian op-ed section. My understanding is that that firewall broke a long time ago, and the quality of their reporting went into drastic decline, though I haven't read the paper myself in ages. Back in the day they actually put out some interesting investigative reporting. I got a subscription after the election because I wanted to support "America's finest journalism" or whatever and I honestly couldn't stomach it after just a month. I think it was the series of "who are these alt-right figures that are being unfairly silened???" and Bari Weiss poo poo-pieces that did for me. I've read it, it's revolting, I pity the actual journalists who aren't allowed to have social media accounts while Bedbug and Friedman try to get professors fired and wring their hands about decorum. The most annoying thing about the NYT is that you can only cancel your subscription with a mf'n phone call. A bunch of thin-skinned cowardly socialites barely distinguishable from the idiot king himself.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 22:03
|
|
|
Just smoke 50 cigars at once then while hooked up to oxygen so the world can be rid of you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 19:42
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1244085811466899459?s=21
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 03:51
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:....Like I explicitly said in the sentence you are purportedly responding to? Lets just pretend I was emphatically agreeing with you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 03:59
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:The WSJ used to have a reputation of solid business-oriented reporting firewalled from a balls-out libertarian op-ed section. My understanding is that that firewall broke a long time ago, and the quality of their reporting went into drastic decline, though I haven't read the paper myself in ages. Back in the day they actually put out some interesting investigative reporting.  
HiroProtagonist fucked around with this message at 06:22 on Mar 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 06:19
|
|
|
You're completely uncredible if you don't understand class interests in the media, period. The idea that the media is left wing at all is not supported by anything, not a scan of headlines, not a review of content, nothing. It even historically has been like this. Did you even know that when Time put Hitler on the cover, there was a major campaign ongoing to protect major corporate interests in Nazi Germany at the time? Do you know that campaign continued well beyond the end of WW2? The media has always been like this. Jesus christ, pull your head out of your rear end already. edit: "business oriented perspective" yes, this is factual, and strangely this is all also connected. Can you figure out why 'business oriented perspectives' and apologia for wars, terrorism and nazism are all also connected? 
HiroProtagonist fucked around with this message at 06:30 on Mar 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 06:26
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:
The irony of this is that Henry Luce, the founder of Time Magazine, was actually quite enamored with Italian fascism and had - at bare minimum - proto-fascist political leanings. In Fortune, another magazine he ran, he dedicated an entire issue to Mussolini: Henry Luce, Fortune, and the Attraction of Italian Fascism, Michael Augspurger posted:The July 1934 issue of Fortune magazine focused entirely on Italy, a country led at the time by the fascist Benito Mussolini. The articles covered topics ranging from Italy's economy to the fall from grace of its old aristocracy. But while the essays were often critical of the government and economy of Italy, the issue was far from an indictment of fascism. It was positive enough, in fact, for historian Robert Herzstein to generalize that Fortune had "lauded Mussolini as a decisive leader who had remade Italy." The mix of critical distance and admiration that characterized the issue appeared most clearly in the opening editorial comments, likely written by Fortune's founder and editor Henry Luce. The column tempered its sense that "no 100 percent journalist can be more than a few percent Fascist, which is to say, by definition, he is a non-Fascist" with the statement that "the good journalist must recognize in fascism certain ancient virtues of the race, whether or not they happen to be momentarily fashionable in his country: discipline, duty, courage, glory, sacrifice." Fortune combined a denial of fascist affiliation with a nostalgic embrace of the spirit of fascism. Even as the magazine refused to offer its full support to Italy, the editors pointed to its government as an exemplar of timeless values apparently "unfashionable" in the United States in 1934. Americans, they insisted, could learn something from Italy.1 quote:The conflicts and tensions inherent in Luce's ambitious goals would produce frustration and blindness in his dealings with "the masses"; his impatience with and disregard of these masses eventually encouraged a sentimental view of fascist politics. Luce saw the market as a competitive game in which young men could prove their mettle and join an "aristocracy of worth" based on business performance. Similarly, he felt that this managerial "aristocracy" deserved the mantle of leadership, because they knew best how to produce a rational, efficient, and modern economy and society. But his desire for a business "aristocracy of worth" led to a refusal to consider the effects of business competition on the masses, and his ambition for an efficient business leadership resulted in a frustration with those masses' lack of compliance to managerial control. This blindness and frustration opened Luce to a sympathy for the order and hierarchy of fascism. He supported individualistic ideals in regards to his own business, and yet still fantasized about fascistic control in regards to others' actions. The division of the United States into an "aristocracy of talent" and "the masses" provided the ground for a double standard that allowed Luce both to fiercely defend individualism and wistfully admire fascism. It is probably also worth noting that the principle inspiration for the Nuremburg racial laws in Germany was the racial apartheid of the American southern states. This history has been erased from collective memory but in the 1930s the United States was at the cutting edge of legally enshrined racism and the Nazis were very keen to adapt American ideas to their own anti-Jewish programs (though the Nazis actually found the Jim Crow era racial definitions too strict and relaxed the one-drop rule). So the fascination actually ran both ways: prominent American businessmen and leaders thought fascism was a potentially superior form of government that would combine the competition of capitalism with a state powerful enough to win in war and to suppress any communistic or socialist tendencies among the masses. The Nazis in turn saw America as an example that might be emulated in terms of legally ordered race relations, even if they also saw much of American culture as degenerate. Fascism has been transformed into this exotic - one could almost say orientalized - ideology that is seen as inherently foreign to America. So much so that people just take it for granted that suggesting a major American business magnate from the 1930s would be fascist is taken as prima facie absurd. But the fact is that American business leaders and politicians were just as impressed by fascism as most of their European counter parts and indeed the fascists also saw plenty to like in America.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 15:11
|
|
|
They probably liked how Hitler was working hand in hand with big business in Germany. I'd think they'd have also liked how the Nazis destroyed all the unions and forced everyone into one bit Nazi Union that existed purely to keep workers in their place.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 16:36
|
|
|
lol https://twitter.com/The_Infranaut/status/1244245397159260162
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 14:21
|
|
|
http://www.newshounds.us/massie_shrugs_off_covid_19_risk_congress_pretty_good_healthcare_032820 Rep. Massie Shrugs Off Stunt's COVID-19 Risk: Congress Has ‘Pretty Good Healthcare’ quote:Massie didn’t care: “Congressmen have their health care paid for by the taxpayers and it’s a pretty good health care package,” he told Cavuto. He told Fox host Shannon Bream something similar last night: “These Congressmen make $174,000 a year. They’ve got the best health care that you can buy these days right now.” Yeah, gently caress you, buddy. Every American citizen should have the same coverage you do. quote:Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), in purely symbolic opposition to the $2.2 trillion emergency coronavirus legislation, forced hundreds of his colleagues to risk their lives — literally — by flying back to Washington. So what if many of the lawmakers are elderly and at high risk? quote:Massie, a believer in the “deep state” conspiracy, is a product of the tea party, a protege of Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and a collaborator with outgoing Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), who is becoming Trump’s chief of staff, when they tried to oust then-Speaker John Boehner. “I’m ready to be unpopular,” Massie said after his 2012 election, and he has opposed even anti-lynching and human rights legislation — and celebrated when he uses “the process” so that “things die.” Seriously, gently caress this guy. I thought Randians hated the idea of the government providing services through tax dollars?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 16:46
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:
Only for other people
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 18:21
|
|
|
Yeah, the full lolbertarian creed is "gently caress you, got mine."
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 19:49
|
|
|
Libertarians take tax money in one if two ways--by begrudgingly accepting it and not openly admitting to it like Ayn Rand did; or using the government like their own piggy bank.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 19:53
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/AdamTaylorBates/status/1244749627745845254
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2020 01:02
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1244460058139750401?s=20
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2020 13:06
|
|
|
Who the gently caress listens to this poo poo? And why does anyone care what these 2 people think? Why are they famous? Where did they come from? https://twitter.com/JasonSCampbell/status/1244730489757368321
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2020 13:07
|
|
|
my bad
unknown butthole fucked around with this message at 18:24 on Apr 1, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2020 13:19
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Who the gently caress listens to this poo poo? And why does anyone care what these 2 people think? Why are they famous? Where did they come from? They're Trump supporters/grifters. It's basically a stupider version of "I can't be racist because I have a black friend"
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2020 13:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 05:22 |
|
|
What if this is all viral marketing for or a Sacha Baron Cohen style remake of Bamboozled?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2020 14:07
|
|
