The MSM is now the Mainstream Activist Media Organizations (usually Leftist)

With this latest school shootings the veil of even the minimal amount of unbiased news reporting has been completely removed on the majority of the "mainstream" news outlets, all with a leftist and fascist leaning ideology. While people have always claimed that Fox has been extremely partisan towards the right or Republicans, I'm not so sure that it is anywhere near as bad as it is made out to be. The thing is that they DARE to cover both sides of the issue and call out the liberal BS when it is appearant and thus they are labeled right with propaganda, when in fact, they call out people on the Right often BEFORE those on the left call out people on the right! The difference is that they try to not paint the person as guilty before proper investigations have taken place or trials have been concluded.

The majority of the media should now be called the Liberal Mainstream Activist Media - or some similar name which emphasizes the activist part. Time after time they ignore glaring facts which totally change the story so that they can frame the story to fit their narrative and political agenda. They are the definition of the propaganda arm of a fascist organization and it needs to be made clear to the younger generations (and older ones who are unaware of such things). If you ask any immigrant who lived in old Soviet block countries they will tell you that the liberal media organizations follow, TO A TEE, the reporting styles utilized by the departments of propaganda in the Soviet Union. This is a very dangerous situation for our youth as they are pliable to this propaganda and many don't have the discernment to differentiate between propaganda and true news reporting.

I'm not sure if there are organizations which review the bias of news organizations within countries, but I think an organization such as this would be extremely beneficial. having people from other countries who can watch our news and identify bias or propaganda and call it what it is and give it ratings on the level of disinformation and misinformation and propaganda levels would be greatly beneficial to see where the country might be heading and it may help some uninformed individuals see that they are being lied to and the events and world are not as they are being reported.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

The majority of the media should now be called the Liberal Mainstream Activist Media - or some similar name which emphasizes the activist part.

I agree that there is a lot of activism going on in the LMAM. The only saving grace is the number and quality of sources that are available online. Of course there is a lot of trash out there, so you take the good with the bad, but consuming the news is like eating, you need a balanced diet.

Personally, I'm a Goldwater conservtive. I believe in maximizing individual freedom to the extent that itdoesn't infring on the rights of others. But, that doesn't keep me from reading everything, even the liberal junk. I say liberal junk tounge and cheek since there is still some truth, you just have to be cognizant of the bias. The same can be said about many right-leaning publications, though.

I heard and interview today on the radio talking about the how lazy journalists are today. The beat journalist woking for the networks is all but extinct. News comes form a single source and it gets parroted, or the journalist is summarizing court briefs to put together a story rather than tracking down reputable first-hand sources.

I think a lot of that has to do with budget cuts that are a direct result of the dilutive effect of the plethora of online news sources who have gutted the traditional print media, and made the space in which jounralist compete for eyes a much tougher environment. News outlets are fighting for eyesballs on the page, but they can only do that by carving out a niche market and being really good at catering to that audience.

There is an article on Yahoo news that talks about how news outlets are starting to put more and more content behind a pay wall.

Paywall

The title is "Free News Gets Scarcer...", but the reality is there is more, and varied, news than ever. The medium by which we consume and learn about the world around us and current events is no longer filtered through the local newspaper, and three networks. The news, and analysis of the news happens in real time. In comment sections of online outlets, in posts to social media, on sites like the chans and here on ATS, youtube, periscope, the list goes on and on.

The MSM is dying. The sway that it holds will go comatose with the baby boom generation, be on life support witI agree h gen X, and the millenials will finally take it off life support.

You are right in being concerned that here is a concerted effort provide a liberal truth and nothing more. It's been like this for a long time, but I think more people are awakening to the lies, half-truths, and propoganda reaching their eyes an ears. I just think that technology, and the evolution in methods of news consumption, will or has leveled the playing field.

So this is more of a rant then. Not news, not new news. Not fake, news, just ,tired, old and run down news that has been riding these boards daily now for what, a decade?

This seems to be an absolute ''truth' to you by the way you present it. Any chance you might be convinced that your are wrong? Might there be any way that you could believe something else?

Like for instance the media is not liberal. The media, today, like it always has, defends the establishment, what ever that establishment is, and that is part of our problem, us liberals and conservatives, we cannot agree on just what the establishment is, we fight over what each of us think it is.

The liberals of the sixties, the radicals back then took for granted that there was a conservative bias across the whole spectrum of ass media.. It was generally assumed that the msm was the enemy. The New York Times, now labeled what ever Trump wants to label it, was reviled for being the News paper of record. It was a bastion of old conservative values all in defense of the status quo.

Does the msm display bias? Oh please, in this world today of great thinkers, everybody has a bias. The main stream media has a bias to, mostly the bias of the owner and the stock holders and the boards of directors. The CEOs and the CFOs. And I can assure you that almost nothing gets done with out the CFOs giving ther blessings. The Chief Financial Officers arn't going to bless something that the msm will do or say unless it meets their bottom line.

Their bottom line. Profit. Bottom line, it is profit, because at it's core, the msm is capitalist driven.
So how, if it is capitalist driven can it be left wing, when the hated left wing is socialist and communist?

a reply to: DigginFoTroof


Poppycock:

thefederalist.com...

Fox has just as many viewers as CNN and MSNBC combined.

The Wall Street Journal beats the New York Times in circulation and subscriptions (also in ad dollars!)

Terrestrial talk radio is domianted by right wing bloviators (because leftists suck at radio).

Deny ignorance.

a reply to: CoramDeo

I heard and interview today on the radio talking about the how lazy journalists are today. The beat journalist woking for the networks is all but extinct. News comes form a single source and it gets parroted, or the journalist is summarizing court briefs to put together a story rather than tracking down reputable first-hand sources.

And this was a well known truth to strong leftists in the 70s 80s and 90s. Some radicals then called it the msm, main stream mediocrity, news to dumb down the populous. Through out that time there were any number of active journalists and authors who chased down those ''hidden stories''. One was Jeremy Skayhill. All by himself, he went under cover and dug and dug until he came up with the story of Blackwater, and brought to light the then infant mercenary army industry.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Through out that time there were any number of active journalists and authors who chased down those ''hidden stories''.

Probably not as much "hidden stories" as they were stories that didn't fit the political narrative at the time.

a reply to: CoramDeo

That is for sure. The political narrative of any time is the narrative that that is set by the politicians and the media, all of it in defense of the establishment. Political narratives may change the clothes it wears but those clothes are they to cover the bits that the establishment do not want to be noticed. I do not say '' establishment dosen't want because I do not see it as one large and controlled entity, rather I say 'do not'', placing the establishment as plural, a vast system of independent entities all working not for the same ''kingpin'' but rather all working the rules of established economics. The real ''establishment'' to me is the economic system.

originally posted by: 0zzymand0s
a reply to: DigginFoTroof


Poppycock:

thefederalist.com...

Fox has just as many viewers as CNN and MSNBC combined.

The Wall Street Journal beats the New York Times in circulation and subscriptions (also in ad dollars!)

Terrestrial talk radio is domianted by right wing bloviators (because leftists suck at radio).

Deny ignorance.

Accurate, on-point, with no B.S..
Excellent Post!