Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1626176420648026113 Funny you say that...
It's not unthinkable that they'd move the transponders for a secret mission, no? Also Hersh's point about the NATO head being an asset in his late teens is definitely feasible, as that was exactly what the Norwegian government did at the time - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lund_Report
Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them
401–410 of 844 posts
Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them
#402There are literal mountains of sociological studies on how (state and corporate) media have been in service of the powers that be, for decades, and how exactly this works. With a mountain of examples. So, for sociologists, this feels like "wow, it only took half a century to trickle through." Though of course this is the wrong reaction; it has always trickled through. Only that, in the past, it took a few years or de…
Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them
#403Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you really think that this started with Trump, you must not have been paying attention before. The media (conservative media in particular) hounded Obama about some extraordinarily stupid things. Famously there was a significant controversy one time about the color of his suit [0]. I honestly can't remember whether Bush 43 got similar treatment. Maybe the prominence of clickbait/outrage journalism didn't come abou…
It got way WAY worse with Trump. Many news organizations happily threw out their journalistic integrity to "fight Trump". Honest reporting became taboo. You were either FOR or AGAINST Trump, and anyone not choosing a side was just secretly on the other side.
Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them
#404Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is "the media" that lied about every? It's not one uniform block, it's thousands of people with different intensions and knowledge.
Well, since you asked for it, here you go. 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ranFhYpq6UE 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAkQlZgnbUQ
Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them
#405There are literal mountains of sociological studies on how (state and corporate) media have been in service of the powers that be, for decades, and how exactly this works. With a mountain of examples. So, for sociologists, this feels like "wow, it only took half a century to trickle through." Though of course this is the wrong reaction; it has always trickled through. Only that, in the past, it took a few years or de…
This is such a black and white spin. First: I don't know which sociological studies you refer to, but most of it is politically colored arm chair philosophy. These insights didn't come from sociology, but from political movements. Second: there's a difference not providing a full picture of a war or a new economic policy, and outright lying. I expect news organizations to provide me with the basic info: incomplete, b…
> Saying they're all lying and always have is a (probably politically motivated) spin against normal news organizations.
Perhaps the most wooden way to interpret what they're is saying. I think that most people would read this as "by in large, most are lying".
Pointing this out is useful because it shows the irony in the whole matter. This kind of wooden interpretation of words and lazy disqualification is what leads someone to the "black and white" spin you're accusing the GP of. This falls in line with the type of _gotcha_ logic that insists: "Well you said x, and x means X regardless of rhetorical device usage." and "OP has expressed sentiment in Y, which leads me to believe he's actually Y and therefore not $CREDIBLE".
The point is, engaging like this deprives the dialogue of nuance, rhetorical freedom and grace. If we continue with this way of interpreting one another we'll likely fall into the same polarization that we're complaining about (again, a grand irony).
Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them
#406Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But many of the structural pressures that sociologists have long identified shape commercial and state sourced news stories just don't apply to independent journalists If Matt Taibi get Keshloggied it would not amaze me if his former colleagues bury the story or even spin it as a good thing. I don't predict he will actually get killed but ask yourself, would you be surprised if he was or does a part of you half exp…
Taibbi is making a great living by being a reactionary on podcasts and fringe outlets. Journalists are suckers. He hasn't done "journalism" in forever. Editorialism is where it's at.
His detractors are mostly doing far less journalism than him.
Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them
#407Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, since you asked for it, here you go. 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ranFhYpq6UE 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAkQlZgnbUQ
And that's still not "the media" but only a part of it.
Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them
#408Genuinely surprised its only half because Fox News viewers often think CNN is lying and CNN viewers often think the same about Fox News. Both groups can therefore answer 'Yes' if asked if they think news organisations deliberately mislead. I'm picking those two as being big news channels but I think it holds for other tv and for newspapers too.
Like, how often is there a viewer who actively watches both/switches between the two?
It's very polarizing.
I can't think of any way to fix it culturally. One party thinks the other is deranged and lying.
Will it get worse? Will it get better? Where does this lead us?
Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them
#409It's easier to fool people than it is to convince them that they have been fooled. -Mark Twain
Re: Half of Americans now believe that news organizations deliberately mislead them
#410Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was not a fan of trump, at all, but even I noticed this. If trump scratched his butt in public, figuratively speaking, the media jumped on him for it, and would then decline to cover any story about whether butt scratching (figuratively speaking) was ever appropriate. The media also cast his supporters in an incredibly dark light, which was worrying because that was roughly half of voters who voted for a major cand…
If you really think that this started with Trump, you must not have been paying attention before. The media (conservative media in particular) hounded Obama about some extraordinarily stupid things. Famously there was a significant controversy one time about the color of his suit [0]. I honestly can't remember whether Bush 43 got similar treatment. Maybe the prominence of clickbait/outrage journalism didn't come abou…