It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wow....talk about a spin on the topic....seriously? Paris terror attack: Journalism is under fire

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: stosh64

I completely agree that the terrorists that killed them should be wiped off the planet along with all their brothers/sisters. I was really just trying to point out the spin that the article tried to put on it by saying this was a blow to all courageous journalists around the world.

Many stories have aired about ISIS and Islamic terrorists and whatnot, yet none of the actual news outlets have been attacked.

My view on this is that the news outlets with journalists are trying to piggy back on this for a more sensational view of their own reporting. My thought is that these guys would actually laugh in the faces of the ones that wrote the story in my OP and write a cartoon mocking them as well.




posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Satire as serious political commentary goes all the way back through Orwell and Jonathan Swift to Aristophanes.

But in the final analysis it doesn't even matter. What they were doing was legal and they were murdered. This is the West and if you want to live here you have to live by the existing cultural standards which are centuries old.

These people need to be hunted down with the full resources of the civilized world and locked away for life to make an example of them.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 02:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Why does it matter what you call them? The point of the article was to say that these people were being courageous for posting their cartoon without fearing the retribution.


I read the article with a completely different view. I read it as the media trying to use this as a way to give themselves more credibility and to make the public seem like they needed to be afraid for their lives as well.

The guys that were killed would likely have mocked the story in my OP I believe.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I guess I'm not understanding your pov. If you are writing about a crazy lunatic religious ideology and using satire as your style to make your point, and that very same bunch of lunatics threaten to kill you for it, but you continue to expose their ideology as ridiculous AND dangerous anyway, YOU don't think that is being courageous? We all know that the West has been infiltrated and/or have homegrown radical Islamists within their borders even as we speak, so I fail to see where the country matters.



My POV is that this article is calling satirical journalism, courageous journalism.



It is actually doing a disservice to real media outlets by lending credibility to a satirical publication because of an attack on the publication headquarters.

.


Please name a "real media outlet' for me.

They are all talking heads that read the same spin. It is all controlled propaganda. Some spun a little to the left and some spun a little to the right. Its ALL spun.

ETA: There is no 'true' journalist in the MSM anymore.



To preserver the freedom of the human mind ... and freedom of the press, every spirit should be ready to devote itself to martyrdom; for as long as we may think as we will, and speak as we think the condition of man will proceed in improvement.
Thomas Jefferson

edit on 1 7 2015 by stosh64 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe


I am not defending what happened to them in any way, but look at it like this.....school shootings happen because of a bully that arguably uses something similar to "personal satire"....bullies poke long enough and unleash a beast.

The alternative is to remain silent - so that we don't risk angering people

This is not an acceptable solution

If you consider what we do here at ATS - just chatting and sniping and poking the other person's bear - it doesn't seem like that big a deal. But, words can change the way people perceive their reality - they can change hearts and minds. They can save lives - and take them

Poking the bear in public is sometimes all we can do to keep that bear honest and in check. It provides people - especially people in situations where they don't always have freedom of speech - a certain amount of power

There are plenty of people here at ATS that will explain to you that nothing important or worthwhile can be had without some risk. Ideas are very powerful things - it's hard to measure the power of a joke, but a joke can be a weapon that's not so easily blown out of the water - if you know what I mean



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Why does it matter what you call them? The point of the article was to say that these people were being courageous for posting their cartoon without fearing the retribution.


Indeed, and they subsequently made the ultimate sacrifice with their lives, for standing up for what they believed in and not cowering to madmen and crazy ideas.
Thats brave, that is honourable, I wish more people in the world would follow their example.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Why does it matter what you call them? The point of the article was to say that these people were being courageous for posting their cartoon without fearing the retribution.


I read the article with a completely different view. I read it as the media trying to use this as a way to give themselves more credibility and to make the public seem like they needed to be afraid for their lives as well.

The guys that were killed would likely have mocked the story in my OP I believe.


Here is the bit of the article that you posted in your OP:

The danger now is that journalists around the world will engage in self-censorship, that they will pull back on aggressive reporting and analysis of Islamic terrorism. For every potentially provocative article, headline or cartoon, some will ask themselves, is this worth the risk?


How does that read like the media is patting itself on the back? To me that reads like a call to not cower in fear because something you put out there may cause a violent reaction from an upset party.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 02:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

I understand what you are saying completely. On the flipside is that had these satirists not made fun of someone else's ideas/beliefs, they would not have been killed.

However, this isn't the point of my OP. It was to point out the fact that the story was calling them journalists and latching on to that term to make it seem like there was a credible threat to MSM journalists in some way. I found it a cheap way to spin the story to make them on the same playing field......which I do not consider them at all.

These guys were smart and good at what they did...journalism goes for sensational headlines for the most part....these guys were looking for a reaction, but in a very different way from journalism.

I find it cheap that MSM tried to compare themselves to this group.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: OneManArmy

Such is the blowback for writing good satire... The dumb ones tend to be the most violent and dumb people generally don't get satire.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Because the writing styles are completely different from what these guys died for.

I feel like MSM was trying to latch onto a story that they consider big in order to glean some of the spotlight by comparing themselves to those that died in some fashion.

MSM, as far as I know, has never had a mass killing like this in the recent past.

Seems the terrorists have a much thinner skin than anyone knew in that they can take a story being written about them, but not someone making fun of them.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 02:59 PM
link   
I'm for destroying anyone who kills because of what another person wrote or said. I'm for destroying anyone who is fanatical in their religion to he point where they feel the need to kill. I'm against giving them a voice for murdering people. There is too much death and destruction.

I have avenged the great prophet was the one that lead me to the above. Brain damaged zealots need to be destroyed. You make an example out of them to curb the other zealots. If they don't get the moral to the story, they go out bloody also. You can be compassionate towards them and blame their actions on anything you want. You cannot condone innocent murders. You're damned right I want them dead and I hope the burn in hell.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 03:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe


These guys were smart and good at what they did...journalism goes for sensational headlines for the most part....these guys were looking for a reaction, but in a very different way from journalism.

I find it cheap that MSM tried to compare themselves to this group.


This is why journalism is not the same thing as the media that features it. This event will likely make a lot of journalists wary. Trying to sort out those that work hard to bring us the news from those that just package and sell the news - yeah - a lot of people are going to be worried because I don't think terrorists are really that bothered with the details

But I'll give you that Vasa Croe - I have to agree. It pisses me off no end the kinds of people that try to pass themselves off as journalists...

But - maybe we should leave it there and not go down that road :-)



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 03:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: OneManArmy

originally posted by: Pants3204
How is journalism NOT under fire? You absolutely must be courageous to be a reporter covering stories regarding Islam. Did 13 people not just get shot for what was published in a magazine? If I was a journalist I would really think twice before publishing the truth because who knows who will get shot or blown up for what you say?


And by those actions you would give the terrorists a victory.
Appeasement is NOT an option. It would only justify the actions of the terrorists.
The worlds media should unite in ridiculing the cowards that carried out this attack. A cartoon of mohammed on every front page, are the terrorists then going to kill every journalist in the world?
What we need is solidarity, not seperation, not fear, and certainly not appeasement.
Appeasement has gotten us here in the first place.


I wouldn't call it appeasement, if that were the case we would probably be looking at the Islamisation of Europe. At the moment, they are exploiting our tolerance and that's the worrying thing.

When has terrorism ever ended without one of two things happening? It's either a pre cursor to revolution or it ends up in negotiations with each side making concessions. Sure, it can last for years, but that's the only way the War on Terra can conclude.


Just the other day thousands were marching in Germany against "the Islamification of Europe", 18,000 in Dresden alone.
Then just a couple days later...this.
I really do agree that they are exploiting our tolerance. But tolerance isnt changing our culture to adapt to them, they should change themselves to adapt to our culture. If they dont like it here then instead of trying to change it here, they should go to where they like it.
The political class has created political correctness. It has made us subservient to the sensibilities of "others".
That is the appeasement that has led us exactly to where we are today.

Lets not forget that the west has been using these "radicals" to destabilize the middle east for decades. The chickens are finally coming home to roost.

The War on Terror isnt meant to be won its a perpetual money spinner for black projects and slush funds.
Which goes back into funding these radicals in the first place. And so the cycle is complete, the world stage is set, and the play goes on. All sides are funded and the psychopaths that run our own countries continue the charade that they "care", while using every opportunity(ie terrorist atrocity) to erode our freedoms, destroy our standard of living and take our livelihoods and destroy our culture while rewriting our history as they go. Going down as the heros and names of history.
We need satire to point out this craziness.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 03:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
a reply to: stosh64


My view on this is that the news outlets with journalists are trying to piggy back on this for a more sensational view of their own reporting. My thought is that these guys would actually laugh in the faces of the ones that wrote the story in my OP and write a cartoon mocking them as well.


I agree, good point.
Sadly, the only 'true journalists' I can think of anymore are free lance. And I think the only way you can get their TRUE stories are online or maybe through a privately produced documentary.

Sadly the majority of sheeple will never hear truth.

I am not saying it is all the journalists faults. I believe there are some at the major networks that would want to report the truth as they see it. But they need their paycheck and are thus stifled by the ones that control the strings.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I'm not sure why you don't consider satirical media sites as part of the MSM. They certainly "report" on things and people certainly believe them. Therefore they certainly shape public opinion. Also the label "satirical media" means that they are a form of media. They are mainstream, therefore the label "Mainstream Media" (MSM) should apply.
edit on 7-1-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 03:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

Many stories have aired about ISIS and Islamic terrorists and whatnot, yet none of the actual news outlets have been attacked.



Even the story you posted references James Foley and Steve Sotloff who were journalists killed by ISIS.

What alternative position do you think "the media" should take besides standing up for these guys in France?

Say that it's their own fault for making fun of terrorists?



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 03:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: OneManArmy

Such is the blowback for writing good satire... The dumb ones tend to be the most violent and dumb people generally don't get satire.


And the dumb ones are the easiest ones to manipulate and control with ridiculous ideologies.
Simply because they cannot put two and two together for themselves and rely on others to create their worldview for them.



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 03:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: OneManArmy

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: OneManArmy

originally posted by: Pants3204
How is journalism NOT under fire? You absolutely must be courageous to be a reporter covering stories regarding Islam. Did 13 people not just get shot for what was published in a magazine? If I was a journalist I would really think twice before publishing the truth because who knows who will get shot or blown up for what you say?


And by those actions you would give the terrorists a victory.
Appeasement is NOT an option. It would only justify the actions of the terrorists.
The worlds media should unite in ridiculing the cowards that carried out this attack. A cartoon of mohammed on every front page, are the terrorists then going to kill every journalist in the world?
What we need is solidarity, not seperation, not fear, and certainly not appeasement.
Appeasement has gotten us here in the first place.


I wouldn't call it appeasement, if that were the case we would probably be looking at the Islamisation of Europe. At the moment, they are exploiting our tolerance and that's the worrying thing.

When has terrorism ever ended without one of two things happening? It's either a pre cursor to revolution or it ends up in negotiations with each side making concessions. Sure, it can last for years, but that's the only way the War on Terra can conclude.



The War on Terror isnt meant to be won its a perpetual money spinner for black projects and slush funds.
Which goes back into funding these radicals in the first place. And so the cycle is complete, the world stage is set, and the play goes on. All sides are funded and the psychopaths that run our own countries continue the charade that they "care", while using every opportunity(ie terrorist atrocity) to erode our freedoms, destroy our standard of living and take our livelihoods and destroy our culture while rewriting our history as they go. Going down as the heros and names of history.
We need satire to point out this craziness.



Very well said!



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 03:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: LOSTinAMERICA
I'm for destroying anyone who kills because of what another person wrote or said. I'm for destroying anyone who is fanatical in their religion to he point where they feel the need to kill. I'm against giving them a voice for murdering people. There is too much death and destruction.

I have avenged the great prophet was the one that lead me to the above. Brain damaged zealots need to be destroyed. You make an example out of them to curb the other zealots. If they don't get the moral to the story, they go out bloody also. You can be compassionate towards them and blame their actions on anything you want. You cannot condone innocent murders. You're damned right I want them dead and I hope the burn in hell.


I would like to point out some small irony.

"There is too much death and destruction"

"Youre damned right I want them dead and I hope they burn in hell"

Dont you understand? Thats exactly the same thinking driving these religious nuts.
Thats exactly the same thinking that drives lynch mobs.
Thats the kind of thinking that gets innocent people killed by mistake. Once they are dead the mistakes cannot be put right.
Im not religious, but I do take the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" very seriously.
Its not "thou shalt not kill, except for those I think are murderers"
Its "Thou shalt not kill."

You sound like you have been whipped up into a bit of an islamaphobic frenzy.
Or am I misunderstanding your post?



posted on Jan, 7 2015 @ 03:44 PM
link   
a reply to: OneManArmy

My way, it ends.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join