Question ATS More…

originally posted by: masqua
Stephen Harper, my Prime Minister, would have, and does not, have any qualms about dissing certain news outlets when talking to reporters (which he honestly doesn't do if he can help it at all). His disdain for public opinion is well known.

And here we are, saying an owner of a website should not speak his mind.

So, Stephen Harper is a sooth sayer and we should all follow because he is right. David Cameron is MY Prime Minister ......... i would not trust him, or any Labour, UKIP, Dem, BNP, Monster Raving Loony, SNP, leader a far as i could throw a 1p peice. YOU masqual are missing the point, be defensive, we really dont care and i wont say how it makes you look!!. We, as grown ups, can make our own minds up thanks .......... does not matter what news source is being dissed, as i said before ........ and other members have said ............ YOU have missed the point

Kinda a troll post here but anyways

The Sceptic Overlords sceptism seems to have declined in direct proportion to the amount of advertising on this site
Especially toward members
Just saying, over a decade ago when this site was created it had substance, and good info

Now its pop ups and blurps in meaningless threads

Ranting troll post ended
Thank you

Masqua: I prefer to stick to the topic, thanks. This is about S.O.'s right to voice an opinion on his own website (or not).

Fair enough. It’s just the topic of this discussion was “Question ATS More”
I believe removing said post, for said presence-absence of reason is very much on topic.

But as for the discussion at hand: Of course Skeptic Overlord should have the right to voice on his own website. But most especially this particular topic –which I authored quoting his thread (and thereby, more or less inviting him directly).

But you’d really have to question ATS More (if) not even the owners could freely express their voices (on exactly the same rules as everyone else -of course).

Furthermore: Despite this threads title, despite whatever justices-injustices are on this thread... it really does have to be said that it’s a massive credit to ATS that their front page discussion is “Question ATS More” –few other website owners would care enough (for the free flow of info & ideas) to permit this.

So that doubly answers that question: Of course Skeptic Overlord is qualified to reply, as he shows to everyone he's relatively libertarian (just for not shutting this very discussion shown).

originally posted by: Xcouncil=wisdom
Kinda a troll post here but anyways

The Sceptic Overlords sceptism seems to have declined in direct proportion to the amount of advertising on this site
Especially toward members
Just saying, over a decade ago when this site was created it had substance, and good info

Now its pop ups and blurps in meaningless threads

Ranting troll post ended
Thank you

I would not call it a troll post although i can respect and see where you are coming from, but the defensiveness rather than common sense debate tends to piddle me off, what is with this THOU SHALT and THOU SHALT NOT and THOU SHOULDN'T crap? i'm off to read Jim Stone.

RT is possibly the Russians single greatest achievement in psychological warfare... Winning the hearts and minds. You have no idea of the complexity, panning and effectiveness, by design.

If they are your "go to" source for news and information, or if you accept their spin and narrative on virtually everything... Mission accomplished.

That said, anyone that would rely on any single news and information source have already lost the ability to think for themself.

The battle for controlling popular pubic opinion on virtually all issues of major importance are a top priority in most of the major media and internet news and information, and yes, some state run or controlled sources actually do have sinister objectives.. surprised?

QUESTION EVERYTHING!

a reply to: Liberal1984

Once upon a time the members of ATS could gather here and discuss what we thought was going on in the world. Now the members and owners are arguing on which propaganda outlet should be telling us what is going on in the world.

With the exception of a couple of forums, that keep me laughing and thinking, ATS just looks like another propaganda machine, and used propaganda at that.

Perhaps the owners should ban all major news organizations so we can get back to the important things in the world.

originally posted by: Witness2008
a reply to: Liberal1984

Once upon a time the members of ATS could gather here and discuss what we thought was going on in the world. Now the members and owners are arguing on which propaganda outlet should be telling us what is going on in the world.

With the exception of a couple of forums, that keep me laughing and thinking, ATS just looks like another propaganda machine, and used propaganda at that.

Perhaps the owners should ban all major news organizations so we can get back to the important things in the world.

Ive been coming here for more than a decade. Indeed things have changed. Some for the better, and some for less than the better. As far as Im concerned, every time I log on to the web, I affix my bs filter snugly, as the whole place tends to stink.

a reply to: Liberal1984

I can relate with SkepticLord on his views. However, there is a very distinct difference for sure. RT is straight up propaganda. It is a state funded mechanism for that exact reason.

However, Western Media is also a propaganda machine. It injects enough bias so as not to be truly defined as a propaganda mechanism. It's filled with commercialism, capitalism, bias and spin. It must be said that there is far more independence with regard to media in the US though. It is deeply dictated by the mainstream media outlets though. It's a coin with two different sides with the same purpose in my view. This is all my opinion though. It really is a battle for the minds of citizens. And Russia is an entirely different market than the US and many other Western Regions.

To be honest. I think RT is good sometimes but I don't trust it ever. I trust Western Media about 10% of the time and even then I scrutinize it to hell and back. I am insulted that RT truly believes American citizens are as stupid as they they approach them to be.

I think the moral of the story is and will always be: don't trust the MSM. Call it bias, propaganda, or whatever term you'd like, the fact of the matter is that these media outlets present to the viewer a scripted version of reality, not actual reality.

originally posted by: LightningStrikesHere
But didn't he mention their was backdoor talk about banning RT from ATS ?

maybe this is why some members are upset ?

So lets get this straight from what you've said here.

People are supposedly upset because he was upfront enough to discuss something openly? - Something that hasn't been implemented at all.

Shame on him for being transparent.

a reply to: sixandone

And the propaganda is repeated ad nauseam here at ATS, and of course spiced up with the vitriol that the propoganda is designed to provoke.

I'm beginning to think that Reptiles are in charge of the world.

It's all kinda funny to me. Everyone suspicious of everyone else and their sources... on the most popular conspiracy site on the internet - surprise lol. I'm sorta glad I don't spend as much time on here like I used to. Even my posts from years past reflect how engrossed I was - you gatta be really careful here. This place can actually make you bonkers.

originally posted by: blupblup
The point, IMHO, is that SO - as the site owner - has singled out RT for criticism and attack while ignoring that other US and UK media outlets and channels do The exact same thing

-sigh-
Maybe if I say it, again, in big bold letters, people will understand.

I singled out Russia Today (RT.com) because far too many ATS members and millennials have been fooled into thinking RT is a reliable source of information, and ignorant to the state-funded origins.

But I doubt that will work this time. Far too many with tendencies for pissing on carpets have grasped at hallucinated straws, somehow attempting to imply that, by omission, my opinions of western mainstream news must be positive. Sad.

It won't take much to realize that, when I do post a public thread, it tends to have a singular focus, as does the tendencies for most people who engage in the written word:

Should Huffington Post be seriously reconsidered as your source? - a very similar thread in which I question the ethics of the Huffington Post.

NSA Propaganda: They "Foiled Plot To Destroy Our Economy" - calling out 60 minutes for acting like state media.

"Cowardly" Groklaw, Lavabit, and Silent Circle - complaining about media sources caving to the government.

IAB Brings 56 Small Internet Publishers, including AboveTopSecret.com, to Capitol Hill - I actually got away from the computer, off my fat ass, flew to Washington DC, and directly voiced my concerns to legislators. I actually did something.


As to the rest of many of the posts in this thread…

Personally, the knee-jerk rush to defense of a proven state-controlled propaganda machine that receives direction and funding from a megalomaniac murderer, is not just disheartening, it's the most pure definition of NEXT LEVEL B.S. Seriously. Pathetic.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

-sigh-
Maybe if I say it, again, in big bold letters, people will understand.

I singled out Russia Today (RT.com) because far too many ATS members and millennials have been fooled into thinking RT is a reliable source of information, and ignorant to the state-funded origins.

And as I have pointed out.... several times, the BBC is also state funded, even more aggressively than RT as in the UK you have to have a LICENSE to own and watch a TV..... yes... A LICENSE and the LICENSE fee goes to the government.
It is then spent by the BBC on programming and news.

In the United Kingdom and the Crown Dependencies, any household watching or recording live television transmissions as they are being broadcast (terrestrial, satellite, cable, or internet) is required to hold a television licence.

Businesses, hospitals, schools and a range of other organisations are also required to hold television licences to watch and record live TV broadcasts. Since 1 April 2010 the annual licence fee has been £145.50 for colour and £49.00 for black and white. Income from the licence is primarily used to fund the television, radio and online services of the BBC.

The total income from licence fees was £3.7261 billion in 2013–14 of which 607.8 million or 16.3% was provided by the Government through concessions for those over the age of 75. Thus, the licence fee made up the bulk of the BBC's total income of £5.066 billion in 2013–2014.

en.wikipedia.org...

www.tvlicenceresistance.info...

There is a whole movement set up to try and stop this "License Fee" and there are many who have been fined, jailed etc for not paying it.
I'd say that's pretty bad.


So yes... sigh.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord


Personally, the knee-jerk rush to defense of a proven state-controlled propaganda machine that receives direction and funding from a megalomaniac murderer, is not just disheartening, it's the most pure definition of NEXT LEVEL B.S. Seriously. Pathetic.

Also I'm not, nor have I "defended" Russia Today.... merely pointed out that what they do is par-for-the-course in ALL TV News Channels and corporate media outlets.
Numerous examples have been posted by many in all of these threads.

It's like the cold war never ended....

a reply to: Liberal1984

I read your entire post in detail.

It seems to strive toward sarcasm? Which is fine if the sarcasm somehow furthered making your point, but unfortunately, it doesn't.

Put as simply and plainly as possible...as has been repeatedly articulated by not just Skeptic Overlord, but many others with the same clear understanding...

Western Media is often BIAS...Driven by commercial interests (Advertisers) who benefit when a given programs viewership is LARGE (high number of viewers) AND PREDICTABLE (Specific Demographic that can be marketed/sold to via Ads).

This leads to newsertainment and biased news...aka make the viewer feel good and watch.

Since it is MONEY that drives the bias...that FREE MARKET CAPITALISM also creates competition..which leads to competitive news organizations in the west gleefully pouncing on any news outlet that gets the facts wrong. (Self POLICING)

*Does not exist with Propaganda...PRECISELY THE OPPOSITE...critics of the propaganda are arrested, beaten, murdered. Over 150 journalists under Putin alone thus far.

Since Western Media exists within democracy where political opposition and competitive opinions are enshrined and protected....The citizenry can and regularly does question the news. (POLICING)

* Does note exist with Propaganda....Alternate opinions to State Media are suppressed in Russia.

The result is Western Media is Bias....RT News is outright State Run Propaganda.

I could go on....
But apparently you have read SO posts and still not seen what appears to be a crystal clear explanation.

This looks like an intentional "earth flat" OP.

originally posted by: masqua

How do I feel about MSM (RT included)?

I feel that there are some I trust a little and others I don't trust at all. Every one of them has 'corporate interests', others 'political interests' but almost none are truly unbiased. None. Not even in the 'blogosphere'.

Felt the need to repeat myself, just to be clear on how far I trust the MSM.

a reply to: FlyersFan



Um.... because of this? Did you read the part I quoted SO?

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

-sigh-
Maybe if I say it, again, in big bold letters, people will understand.

I singled out Russia Today (RT.com) because far too many ATS members and millennials have been fooled into thinking RT is a reliable source of information, and ignorant to the state-funded origins.

People, including SO, keep using it as if it's uniquely something that only RT does.
That was my point... not really sure how you missed it if you're actually reading the posts.

I have come to find that the best way I can watch the news... Is to mute it, I dont mean not watch it, but instead watch the people and body language. Watch how one politician stands next to another, watch how a reporter is standing compared to what is going on around them. Stop listening to the people and look at what is happening. Watch any president speak on mute, and you can see how they feel about what they are saying. Of course I get the basic idea of what they are talking about from little "blurbs" on the screen here and there but I get a much greater feeling of what is happening by watching the body language of the person, it goes leaps and bounds to tell if they are BSing.