|
Semi-formed ideas which I will hopefully expand on later but I'll post them here in case they spur discussion anyway: 1. It takes actual effort now to find factual news, more effort than I'm guessing most people have the patience for. If the news media can't be trusted either to tell the truth, or to call someone on their lies, then how can we expect someone to be well informed? I'm fortunate to have a nice office job and no major responsibilities at home, I don't think it's reasonable to expect someone to monitor multiple news sites and blogs just to get some facsimile of the truth about a news story. 2. Fox is like World of Warcraft, in that no other MMO will singlehandedly kill it. Or, Fox is a big colonial power that can't be unseated by traditional warfare. You need an insurgency to defeat Fox because another news network can't and wont do it. This is why blogs and other micro-news outlets are so important, because the bullshit MSM noise machine will only die a death of a thousand cuts.
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2012 20:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 23:30 |
|
|
Hollis posted:I'm really of the opinion that overall we've lost. I mean it's literally a beast that cannot be stopped now. These people apply to the worst of human nature, fear, racism. Basically of the other. Their audiences are just fanatical. I find the whole thing sad overall, just if there is any decline it truly is because of the propaganda machine that's been in works for 20 years. Rupert Murdoch being the key figure for this, I mean I don't know what the agenda is other than to make so much money but still die and leave a legacy.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 03:28
|
|
|
Mercury_Storm posted:I agree with the person who said earlier that right wing media plays to the fears, prejudices and ignorance people already have to rake in the cash. After all, there wouldn't have been a market for this poo poo in the first place if boomers and their ilk weren't clamoring for it. FOX just gives a giant blow-horn to the stupidity that already exists in America, and its not likely that that mouthpiece is going to be taken away anytime soon seeing how far it has seeped into US politics. U.S. CITIZEN EXECUTED IN OVERSEAS DRONE STRIKE, SAID TO HAVE SPOKEN OUT AGAINST WESTERN IMPERIALISM... Developing...  BIAS ALERT Maddow goes easy on Obama over lack of single payer provision in Republican-authored healthcare bill. e: Ugh, we really do eat our own in a way the Right never does. unlimited shrimp fucked around with this message at 15:07 on Oct 18, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 14:59
|
|
|
al Dajjal posted:If the Left played by the same rules, it might rock the boat too hard. Think about it: one side uses mostly half-truths to sum up their arguments while the other plays a damage-control/defensive game. For example: all the examples of right wing voter fraud go by without a peep on rightwing radio/tv news, but suddenly it's a problem because immigrants. The right relies on people who are out of touch, stuck in the past, whatever. Conservatism historically has this problem because it is so frequently anachronism. The Left could do this too, without resorting to the Othering of entire groups (a la "illegals") or the tabloid gossip nonsense like with Obama's birth certificate. I'm sure there are lots of outlets that do do this, I'm just not aware of them. As an aside, I'm sure many on the Left could find common ground with the some on the Libertarian wing of the GOP, particularly when it comes to foreign policy and keeping the government out of peoples' personal lives. Obviously they won't see eye to eye on the details of most issues, but that's not really necessary in terms of reshaping the broader political climate.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 17:37
|
|
|
UberJew posted:There is no left wing media. For that matter there is no "right wing media" as some sort of ideologically pure entity. There are the wealthy and influential individuals capable of dictating policy in favor of their wealth and power to the entirety of 'the media'. There are subjects where they can disagree (and this is where gay marriage fits into the picture!) but agree on the vast majority of things and market forces drive them to non-coercive collusion.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2012 02:22
|
|
|
Johnny Tranh posted:That seems pretty accurate to me, i'm not sure why it's reductive?  ) conspiracy, they aren't there yet. It's disingenuous to lump Fox in with MSNBC or CNN at this point. You can make the claim that the end result of both their agendas is enforcing a cultural hegemony, but Fox is currently A-Okay with making GBS threads on domestic civil rights (marriage equality, police brutality, etc...) while the other networks are much less extreme on the domestic front. I won't defend any major network on interrogating foreign policy.I think it's a weak argument to claim - at this point - that there is neither a left or right wing media, except in a very abstract sense. Or maybe even in an Objective sense. But when you look at the ideology of, say, MSNBC versus Fox, MSNBC may not help to solve the root problems that are inherent in the Capitalist model, but it will make life better for a majority of Americans than Fox would. It can get very abstract beyond that point -- the idea that MSNBC (and similar "left" media) is only a market force that exists in the vacuum left by an overly-right wing Fox, but have fun explaining such high-level concepts to anyone who isn't already a Marxist or an abstract thinker. I don't disagree with UberJew, I just think the idea is too abstract to be meaningful if the immediate problem is convincing LimbaughFan1990 that they are being fed bullshit. If I had to choose between current evils, I'd still choose CNN or MSNBC or NPR. e: As an aside, if you have to choose an allegiance between (say) Fox or NPR, I don't consider some theoretical Marxist third-way to be an alternative. It's the same reason I'd argue that voting third party is essentially Accelerationism Lite, whether you're a Libertarian or a Leftist. That third way is absolutely something to work towards but, in the mean time, real decisions need to be made based on real options. There will never be a Lenin-who-gets-it-right; change will be incremental one way or the other. e2: When I said "weakest" I meant in terms of its ability to affect change. unlimited shrimp fucked around with this message at 04:43 on Oct 19, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2012 04:28
|
|
|
MoraleHazard posted:I have to force myself to get out of the Drudge / Washington Times / National Review whirlpool much like my liberal friends who I discuss politics with have to get out of the DailyKos / Washington Post / ThinkProgress circle.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2012 09:51
|
|
|
Dr. Cogwerks posted:I don't remember if it was specifically him, but there was a pretty widespread thing in right wing media that literally any criticism of OUR COMMANDER IN CHIEF during wartime was tantamount to treason. They went hog wild over that "you can't change horses in midstream" poo poo too. The most unsettling thing about tribalism is that it is absolutely unconcerned with coherent logic. The ends always justify the means, because the validity or your claim is predetermined.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2012 06:21
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:All I can see is 'Being John Malkovich'
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2012 16:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 23:30 |
|
|
I tried listening to Louder with Crowder. Don't.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2016 15:41
|
|