• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If You Believe the Goverment, ‘You’re Stupid’

Is MSM-Mainstream Media in the USA corrupted?


  • Total voters
    40
  • Poll closed .
I don't know about the Illuminati and Bilderberg Group, but I'll grant you that it is run by Big Money. As for boycott, I have not had TV since 1990. All info is from the Internet, and lots of surfing for likely truths.

I'm going to guess you don't have much money.

Why don't you start a television network? Then it would be run by little money.

Wait, hmmm, if you could start a television network that means you have a lot of money, so then you would be corrupt. So I gather you want government run television instead, like in Saudi Arabia and North Korea. Then, finally, we'd get the truth - right?
 
Yes, if it is on the Internet it must be true and nothing is more informative than VHS video tape. :lamo

If you get a steady dose of lies, you tend to believe it all after a while, like yourself. Outright lies, lies by omission, lies by framing, distortions, partisanship, CIA media, and bought and sold as commercial content have destroyed the USA Media. It's the "Joke of the World." I'm sure it suits you just fine and doesn't pop your bubble. Have some.
 
I'm surprised that the revelation about NSA spying on everyone hasn't generated more outrage, or calls for resignations and reforms, and general political mayhem.




I guess America as a whole no longer cares about its privacy.
 
It's about money but probably the last 20 years, it's just as much about ideology and it's grown that way since cable news came on the scene.
 
I'm surprised that the revelation about NSA spying on everyone hasn't generated more outrage, or calls for resignations and reforms, and general political mayhem.




I guess America as a whole no longer cares about its privacy.

It's so sad and you're right, they don't care.
 
I'm surprised that the revelation about NSA spying on everyone hasn't generated more outrage, or calls for resignations and reforms, and general political mayhem.






I guess America as a whole no longer cares about its privacy.

I'm surprised that our, the USA, intervention in Ukraine wasn't honestly reported. We created that insurrection in Ukraine and now it's all the Russian's fault. Nice objective truth might be the Media's job so that the citizenry might be well informed. Instead we get programming framed to generate specific points of view. Corporate perpespectives, partisan perspectives, nationalist perspectives, CIA agendas, and any perspective that money can buy, with no interest in truth.
 
I don't care if it is Fox, MSNBC, CNN, or anybody else. They are all corrupt. It is all about the money and ratings. Pathetic.

There was a time when we had journalists in this country who wanted to inform the people. Today, it's not about informing the public, it's about making money and pushing an agenda. News isn't neutral, it's all spin, it's all built up around a particular viewpoint, networks are working for an agenda, not for the truth. Truth means nothing today.
 
One problem with the media is that they learned it is very inexpensive to pick one story, spend 95% of the covering of it with editorial talking heads, incessantly talking about that 1 story. This eliminated all the expenses of investigative reporters around the country and world.
 
I don't totally oppose the government "spying" in the sense of an ability to track phone calls and even reach into computers and emails via the Internet. My wife's business was involved in a matter where the USA and UK intelligent/law enforcement community used that method to identify a lone wolf collection that were planning to blow up a subway - starting only a suspect email.

With that, they could track email communications and telephone communications adverting a horrific terror attack. 4 were convicted in the UK.

Most terrorism attacks are not master planned by foreign adversaries. They are crazy lone wolves - an individual or small group - who are not sophisticated nor understand how surveillance works. Our society is very vulnerable. If a terror attack does happen, everyone will scream why didn't anyone do anything to prevent this. If it is adverted, then people are whining about what the methods used to advert it is.

The intelligence community has done a remarkable job preventing acts of terrorism. I doubt few people understand how many have been derailed and prevented. They are prevented by dumb luck. The are prevented by intelligence work.
 
If You Believe the Goverment, ‘You’re Stupid’

"
A network television correspondent said, “Surely, Arthur, you don’t expect the American press to be the handmaidens of government.”“That’s exactly what I expect,” came the reply.An agency man raised the problem that had preoccupied Ambassador Maxwell Taylor and Barry Zorthian [a press officer based in Vietnam] — about the credibility of American officials. Responded the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs:“Look, if you think any American official is going to tell you the truth, then you’re stupid. Did you hear that? — stupid.”One of the most respected of all the newsmen in Vietnam—a veteran of World War II, the Indochina War and Korea — suggested that Sylvester was being deliberately provocative. Sylvester replied:“Look, I don’t even have to talk to you people. I know how to deal with you through your editors and publishers back in the States.”

“Look, I don’t even have to talk to you people. I know how to deal with you through your editors and publishers back in the States.”

"– Even if regular people don’t know this story, you’d expect it to be famous within the media — and particularly famous at “60 Minutes.” You might even imagine that “If you think any American official is going to tell you the truth, then you’re stupid” would be spray-painted on the walls of the “60 Minutes” offices. But if the performance of John Miller and his producers on the NSA segment is anything to go by, that is not the case.It’s hard to imagine what more the U.S. government could do to get reporters to distrust it, and all for naught. John Miller likely has an office feet away from someone who’s been told by a top U.S. official that reporters are morons if they believe anything top U.S. officials say. Miller’s response? Believe everything top U.S. officials say. (Of course, given that Miller is recreating Sylvester’s career path, it may also simply be that he agrees with Sylvester on the necessity of the press being handmaidens of government.)– Even if reporters have forgotten this story, you’d expect that it would be Exhibit A for left-wing media critics and repeated so often that it would be common knowledge in those limited circles. Yet the forces of forgetting in the U.S. are so powerful that I’d never encountered it, and I’m probably one of America’s top 25 consumers of left-wing media criticism."


If You Believe the Goverment, ‘You’re Stupid’

Was this the first overt manifestation of a corrupt MSM-Mainstream Media in the USA?

Has it become worse?

As these things tend to grow as they mature, is our press completely gov't controlled?

The Church Senate investigation in the 70s found at least 400 CIA assets in MSM jobs, and is that the same or have numbers increased as budgets have increased and the infectious tentacles of corruption spread?

Do you/we approve of a controlled MSM-Mainstream Media?

Should we avoid MSM-Mainstream Media to seek truth?

Are these MSM-Mainstream Media political and corrupting our process?

DP encourages debate in MSM-Mainstream Media streams and is this a good policy?​


They are not corrupt, just more ignorant, which is why they seem corrupt. Many big wigs refuse to even mention Fox News as a legitimate source. Fox News does not declare any other news station as a legitimate source. The Alternative Media thinks everyone else is corrupt and useless. When they all use each other's stories and sources so it doesn't really matter.
 
They are not corrupt, just more ignorant, which is why they seem corrupt. Many big wigs refuse to even mention Fox News as a legitimate source. Fox News does not declare any other news station as a legitimate source. The Alternative Media thinks everyone else is corrupt and useless. When they all use each other's stories and sources so it doesn't really matter.

The point is that all USA Mainstream Media is sold out to the Gov't line. Partisan news. News designed by Intelligence Agencies. News framed to champion only one viewpoint. News distorted to obscure facts. Take a good look at News from Ukraine. Where does the News say that the USA found three Billionaires to put in charge? Just happened to find 3 Billionaires! Is there something about that seems odd? Explaining that would be NEWS.
 
Our media is pitifully misleading and helps restrict thought to the two party totalitarian system. They report dishonestly and instigate powerful dislike of "the other side" regardless of the likeness of days other side. I would not be one to completely throw out the idea that Operation Mockingbird is still in full effect in the United States.

To make a case, poor journalism can be seen in these examples:
2008/2009 there was a revolution in Iceland for the same economic recession that we are still experiencing. The US media did not cover this story at all despite the fact that even CNN Europe did.

As previously stated, the US media has not at all mentioned the five billion dollar sum paid to the Ukrainian protesters.

The media refuses to speak on the fact that the US world with Al Qaeda more than we fight it. Our payment of twenty seven billion dollars to Pakistan and more specifically their intelligence agency speaks to this. It is no secret that the ISI works with Al Qaeda and our CIA works with ISI. We're also funding Syrian rebels which are fighting with Al Qaeda.

To go beyond that, the media does not report on the war crimes committed by our previous two presidents and their high ranking officers. General Mcraven is a war criminal yet I've never heard his name in the media.


There are probably hundreds of other examples from the past twenty years but those are of the top of my head. Our media is nothing more than a function of the state
 
It's a bunch of for-profit enterprises. That's all.
 
So they are making their profit by not serving the group's they profit from?

They profit via ratings, page hits, and subscription numbers. So they profit from the people. And no, they don't "serve" the people, they serve their dollars.
 
Did I say that? I think almost every entity and every person has a political role. That doesn't mean every person or entity engages in purposeful disinformation, does it?

Do you agree that there is quite a large middle ground between "no political role" and "purposeful disinformation"? It's not just one or the other.

In a normal context I would agree on a middle ground. In terms of deciding exactly what many people think (as many people do no digging outside of network "news") I would say there is no middle ground
 
In a normal context I would agree on a middle ground. In terms of deciding exactly what many people think (as many people do no digging outside of network "news") I would say there is no middle ground

Well then of course we're never going to agree then. I don't think any organization has "no political role" nor do I think the media engages in "purposeful disinformation", because I think there are other things in the spectrum between them. If you don't...that's on you.
 
Well then of course we're never going to agree then. I don't think any organization has "no political role" nor do I think the media engages in "purposeful disinformation", because I think there are other things in the spectrum between them. If you don't...that's on you.

There are organizations that have middle ground in this spectrum. It would be foolish to say there isn't.

The media however cannot be. They either serve the people with honest journalism or serve the state with disinformation
 
There are organizations that have middle ground in this spectrum. It would be foolish to say there isn't.

The media however cannot be. They either serve the people with honest journalism or serve the state with disinformation

Or they serve neither, and just want ratings, which is the option I'm going with.
 
Back
Top Bottom