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.

 

A Media Accredidation Company to Stop Fake News, What Would You Do ?

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

It will not work, remember that the advertisement in the net is now controlled by a few groups we are very familiar with, money talk and news move around in the net.

Is all about the money.




posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:20 AM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

The only solution to the problem of people being unable to tell if what they read is true or not is to teach critical thinking, starting from an early age. No government can be trusted to censor or rate journalism, and private organizations can be biased or bought. Journalism should be taught as part of education in communications skills as well; that way people can distinguish between a story that is presented honestly with reliable sources, and one that is based on rumor and innuendo.
edit on 2-1-2017 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:36 AM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

Journalist already operate under this code of ethics.
They value their reputations and ability to obtain accurate information.
Even those who quote "a reliable source" must actually have that source even though they don't have to reveal what or who that is.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: StolidPanda

Why shouldn't snopes be used?
They are reliable and trusted.
What do you know about them that others don't?



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: whyamIhere

Journalist already operate under this code of ethics.
They value their reputations and ability to obtain accurate information.
Even those who quote "a reliable source" must actually have that source even though they don't have to reveal what or who that is.


The problem is that there are people who are posing as journalists who are just fantasists, and that some people believe these fantasies are journalism.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

That's true. I'm applying these ethics to actual professionals and in defense of mainstream media who do operate under these codes.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

In the real world mainstream media isn't being rejected.

The alt right who has an agenda isn't the whole world.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 08:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: whyamIhere

I'm picking up on a general consensus here Why. Money. How do we set this up and keep it free of money ?



They have .

www.wimbledon.com...



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

You can't fix stupid.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

I have worked in both cable news and local news organizations, above and below the line.

Set up a production company, and operate it like ATS thru an interwebs platform, acquire sponsors, have a board of directors, staff, crew and an unbiased source of information and you're good to go....

Perhaps you can ask the 3 amigos if they will sponsor your efforts. Dreams usually are somewhat expensive....I can help






edit on 2-1-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Great Idea, the only problem is money. If the check is big enough any company will fall back onto bad habits and bad journalism in favor of getting a higher salary.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

I disagree.

The last thing I want is another organization telling me what is true and what isn't.

Yellow journalism has been around since Gutenberg invented the printing press.

It won't end or change with yet another agency determining what we should or shouldn't believe.

Less restrictions, more freedoms.

We should all be able to determine for ourselves what is and isn't valid/true/factual.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

Or you could be a one man orginization and start a blog, facebook page, twitter account, all social media and
just express your own opinion on what's true and/or BS. Get enough followers and make a few $$$.
I Have friends making a lot of money with a Youtube channel; over a million followers.

or

web site format with a poll type input where the "suscribers" could vote on different news items in a multiple choice questionnaire. Consensus driven, But that would quickly devolve into a trolling station, like....perhaps I shouldn't mention any names, eh?

What the hell....Be the New Drudge Report without the uber right slant.

With New Media in a state of total flux, you can write your own ticket almost.

I personally think your proposal has REAL merit!! Make...."fair and balanced" actually mean something!
edit on 2-1-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: whyamIhere

Or you could be a one man orginization and start a blog, facebook page, twitter account, all social media and
just express your own opinion on what's true and/or BS. Get enough followers and make a few $$$.
I Have friends making a lot of money with a Youtube channel; over a million followers.

or

web site format with a poll type input where the "suscribers" could vote on different news items in a multiple choice questionnaire. Consensus driven, But that would quickly devolve into a trolling station, like....perhaps I shouldn't mention any names, eh?

What the hell....Be the New Drudge Report without the uber right slant.

With New Media in a state of total flux, you can write your own ticket almost.

I personally think your proposal has REAL merit!! Make...."fair and balanced" actually mean something!


That is interesting thinking.

This Seal would not be for the informed, but the uninformed.

People hear something and spout it like fact.

At least we could reply that they are listening to a proven liar.

But, I like your thinking, just a few people could get this thing going.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:42 PM
link   
You are onto something. Not going to point out points already pointed out by others, but this immediately struck me. Accuracy cannot be the only measured value. This could result in very vague and mundane news services getting highest ratings: "Scientist confirms, there is life on planet earth!"...



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:47 PM
link   
The media has no problem with stating facts, it's the after opinion that causes the trouble.

Example. Church was set afire and the words vote Trump written at the crime scene. Fact.

Real news used to insert fake narrative.

Example: Obviously, Trump is racist and wants to burn down black churches. Arsonist is guilty of hate crime. Now front page news.

Truth comes out. Investigation finds black congregation member of Church person of interest. No hate crime. Retractions of hate crime not published until election is over in back section of news papers. Guess no crime in MSM trying to influence election?



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

Best way...3 strikes and you're out.

Third time a deliberate fake news story is broadcast or printed....revoke broadcasting licences for 6 months...total ban.

Lose advertiser, lose revenue and all staff (minus those involved with the story in question) receive full pay for the ban period from corporation profits and assets.

If a second 'third strike' is reached in a two year period, criminal charges for the board, and a lengthy prison sentence, high punitive fines for all board members, and a 12 month ban on print and broadcasting.

See how fast the rats fall into the holier than thou routine when they see chief execs getting locked up and having their properties forfeit to pay the high fines for misleading the public.

Apply the same laws to politicians and we'll have the perfect systems we ought to already have today.

It's the only way forwards.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 02:13 PM
link   
a reply to: MysterX

Wow, those are great ideas.

You could use their broadcasting license as a weapon.

You could take their license or make them stop broadcasting news.

It could be done. Heavy fines for liars and 3 strikes is a 10 year ban.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 02:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: whyamIhere
a reply to: MysterX

Wow, those are great ideas.

You could use their broadcasting license as a weapon.

You could take their license or make them stop broadcasting news.

It could be done. Heavy fines for liars and 3 strikes is a 10 year ban.



Do you honestly think the FCC will kill the goose that lays the golden eggs? News channels are just the excuse to hang advertising on....It's not about news....everyone knows that. sheesh....It's under the control of the Corporate Oligarchy....This isn't mayberry RFD you know!!!!

To make those kind of changes you need to be a politician and ready to go to court for years and years....you up for that?
edit on 2-1-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join