|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
posted September 07, 2015 03:42 PM |
|
|
I think you're exaggerating, but,
What's your solution, anyway? Make laws against it? Well, you're simply transferring the burden from journalists to judges, and as far as the US goes, we're already living in somewhat of a kritarchy as it is. Legislatures don't actually seem to decide policy much anymore. You just wait for somebody to get pissed off, file a lawsuit, and then let it boil up the ranks until 9 geriatrics tell us what the right thing to do is. They're also fictitiously "bound" by a 3 cent piece of paper with some ink splashed on it called the Constitution, which - like any document - is just a Rorschach inkblot that can mean almost whatever you feel like. Law of Life: anything that doesn't come equipped with a tongue is powerless.
You're just taking power away from emotionally invested, passionate, fallible human beings, and transferring it to emotionally invested, passionate, fallible human beings that dress up in a black costume and wield a mallet. Egypt is jailing journalists because they are giving "bias news coverage" which can basically mean whatever you feel like, whenever you feel like it.
The media has ten thousand different facets spread across television, radio, internet, and social media. I suppose you could chase after individual journalists if you're bored. If you really don't like the way people are presenting & interpreting & covering the news, then you need to become a journalist. You can't actually expect journalists to go out there and argue for a side that - whether with or without good reason - they despise. They're flesh & blood human beings with convictions and opinions.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted September 07, 2015 08:38 PM |
|
|
Of course you're always assuming that these thousands of individual journalists are always forming their "opinion" freely and no external motivation or demotivation of any kind is involved, right?  I must say that I fully agree with you about the free, independent journalists - they should be free to say and write whatever they want, even encouraged to do so. How many are they though and what power do they have?
As for the exaggeration - what am I exaggerating exactly? Open 10 random US, UK, even German (so far the German media as a whole has the least polar attitude) or French journalist analyses of the Ukrainian crisis and check how many times the factors - all factors, going more than 2-3 years back - which led to what we have now in Ukraine are analysed and how many bark "Putin this, Putin that". Putin is only one factor in this crisis, not even in top 5 in terms of importance.
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted September 07, 2015 09:52 PM |
|
|
There is a shift happening in the dynamics of media, as more and more people are using smaller, online news sources patented towards their tastes for coverage. Just speaking for the US, you have the big boys: FOX, CNN, MSNBC, etc, but then you can find literally thousands of blogs / minor news source that cheaply & exclusively operate in a digital atmosphere. Anything that doesn't involve bricks & mortar is a money saver. None of my own assets & money are deposited in places that have physical locations (other than the HQ). I'm completely online for better rates.
For media, I think this is both a good and a bad thing. It is a good thing because the media isn't as heavily isolated to a smaller handful (or perhaps even one) source, which I'm assuming is what you're accusing here: that there are corporate interests tainting the industry, or the threat of lack of promotion or job security if you push an unpopular view. The downside is that with these smaller online news source, there is a risk of people getting a very selective picture of the world. They find their little niche or bubble and they don't tread beyond it. Good journalism also requires rigorous and often times very time-consuming investigation, and I'm not sure how well these micro-sources can always offer that, or if they're not piggybacking off of the larger media sources.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted September 10, 2015 10:01 PM |
|
|
|
Nothing has changed in terms of influence. The sources are more but the big sources have much greater impact on the audience than the small ones. People generally don't give a rat's arse about alternatives when they can get their news served and even fed to them without doing more than turning on the TV. The vast majority would also never bother to watch, hear or read more than one "trustworthy" source of information, especially the political zealots. When it comes to articles, be them on-line or in newspapers, many people read just the headlines and form "conclusions" - and pretty often these headlines are some provocative crap at best which might even be disproved to some extent by the following text. Those who might start digging deeper are by default harder to manipulate but the rank-and-file propaganda doesn't aim at them anyway.
|
|
ihor
Supreme Hero
Accidental Hero
|
|
posted February 28, 2022 02:15 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Zenofex, yes Putin wants more territory. In fact he thinks this should be one single country. He dreams about restoring the USSR and he publicly said that the break up of USSR is the biggest disaster of XX century. And here is why this project of Eurasian Union was started.
If you think that Russia doesn't want more territories just because it is already big, that is a very weak point. Some time ago maybe around 12 years ago, there was a conflict regarding Tuzla island, which is tiny. But Russia wanted to sneak it to control the strait of Kerch. And now we talk about the huge regions.
I haven't posted in this forum for years and I know that the forum is pretty much dead. Anyways, I've just wanted to quote my own words from the post on 04/27/2014 (8 years ago!). The comments to that post were so skeptical, even calling this crap, propaganda and brainwashing. Would be interesting what those guys say now. This is a one-time post, I'm not going to reply.
P.S. Thanks to all those countries that support Ukraine now. And I remember there were a lot of Putin supporters here before, I just want to say to you: burn in hell!
|
|
Kipshasz
Undefeatable Hero
Elvin's Darkside
|
|
posted February 28, 2022 08:32 PM |
|
|
Still failing to understand this isn't just about saintly ukraine against satan putin. checks out. I thought pravi sektor/azov liceheads had whacked you though for whatever BS reason they cooked up.
Crimea and Dumbass so called republics will never belong to ukraine again, it's a done deal. thank that fat pig of a candy oligarch you elected before the clown with balls(a welcome surprise he stayed, unlike majority of your so called "elite") and his policies towards the latter pseudostates, which may had a chance to reintegrate, after people dealt with western commies infesting the place, along with all motorolas, nokias and sony-ericsons. At least Liberian drug fuelled warlords had imagination in coming up with their monickers.
Surprised there wasn't a warlord Beluga Caviar, Bumer (as in Series 7 Barrel for Moving Waste) and whatever else east slav savages consider as "top tier"
Enjoy balkanisation. and with all the sanctions against "satanic" russia going, we may see a 2 in 1 deal.
Just don't explode chernobyl or other NPPs, and IDGAF which side of former Mongol fodder does that.
____________
"Kip is the Gavin McInnes of HC" - Salamandre
"Ashan to the Trashcan", "I got PTSD from H7. " - LizardWarrior
|
|
CountBezuhoff
Supreme Hero
Nihil sub sole novum
|
|
posted February 28, 2022 08:43 PM |
|
|
Lithuania's next on the menu.
The Count
____________
|
|
AlexSpl
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 28, 2022 08:46 PM |
|
|
|
The problem is in that ethnically Russian people wanted their soil to belong to Russia. They don't have such a right. The problem is in that Russia did not provide acceptable conditions for emigration. You can't claim soil yours when you share it with others.
|
|
Kipshasz
Undefeatable Hero
Elvin's Darkside
|
|
posted February 28, 2022 08:47 PM |
|
|
CountBezuhoff said:
Lithuania's next on the menu.
The Count
Sure. 32 years and counting. Doesn't help that the parasites kept talking crap since 2004(the year we joined NATO),as if deliberately provoking slav savages into making a move, because now they have someone that will allegedly protect them.
Should be easy pickings though if it does come true. after all, the parasites in charge have been disarming our military, however weak it is in broader european context, and sending all the stuff to aid saint ukraine.
____________
"Kip is the Gavin McInnes of HC" - Salamandre
"Ashan to the Trashcan", "I got PTSD from H7. " - LizardWarrior
|
|
AlexSpl
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 28, 2022 08:50 PM |
|
|
|
Lithuania is in NATO, so if the Article 5 isn't just words, it'll never be occupied again.
|
|
Kipshasz
Undefeatable Hero
Elvin's Darkside
|
|
posted February 28, 2022 08:52 PM |
|
|
AlexSpl said:
Lithuania is in NATO, so if the Article 5 isn't just words, it'll never be occupied again.
Unless we provoke it ourselves.
Remember when turkey sperged about declaring war on ivan over that shot down jet? Erdogan kinda STFU very fast after the head of NATO had a chat with him.
____________
"Kip is the Gavin McInnes of HC" - Salamandre
"Ashan to the Trashcan", "I got PTSD from H7. " - LizardWarrior
|
|
gatecrasher
Famous Hero
|
|
posted February 28, 2022 10:04 PM |
|
|
So you'd rather had seen a Russia-NATO war back then?
You critisise NATO for not starting a war over a shot down jet?
|
|
AlexSpl
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 28, 2022 10:07 PM |
|
|
|
What NATO would do now, if Ukraine *was* the member of NATO? Think about it.
|
|
Kipshasz
Undefeatable Hero
Elvin's Darkside
|
|
posted March 01, 2022 02:30 PM |
|
|
gatecrasher said:
So you'd rather had seen a Russia-NATO war back then?
You critisise NATO for not starting a war over a shot down jet?
Lack of reading comprehension is a terrible thing, yet absolutely hilarious.
On paper, NATO is a defensive alliance first and foremost. And one of it's members going "reeeee we start war with you over your drunk pilot not having a sense of direction reeeeeee" looks bad. Only USSA can declare X as a threat, no debate.
Watermelon Sultan of crashing the country's currency value, his supreme lordship Erdogan decided to go to war over air space violation, a daily thing basically, and I guess expecting all of NATO to follow suit. So the head of the organisation had to tell him to stfu, or proceed with the plans to take on putin, but be booted from NATO and left to fight alone. Even if it was an empty threat, because let's face it, Turkey can do whatever it wants due to it's geographical location and the strategical importance for NATO, it worked. Erdogan shut his goddamn gob, and returned to decimating Turkey's economy, like a good little political failure.
Get it now, or should I explain this on a toddler lever?
It wouldn't had been a NATO-Putler war, it would've been an Erdogan-Putler war.
____________
"Kip is the Gavin McInnes of HC" - Salamandre
"Ashan to the Trashcan", "I got PTSD from H7. " - LizardWarrior
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
