Future Facts

Likely starting next week we will switch from assad is a super bad doctor to lil kim threads.

Are you ready for the shift that is coming?

How do you think the msm will frame this next round of "debates"?

Will they go all out to label him as needing to be removed and rail against the meeting or will they give peace a chance?

Also will gun control be thrown back into the mix with the kim debate just to sweeten the msm pot?

a reply to: howtonhawky

I predict the BBC will focus on Burma and Nigeria again, pretty bad for some people there.
Syria and Russia will be meh.

If your prediction come true, the most likely question I see being raised is the following:

Why should we expect Kim to seriously discuss the denuclearization of a China-backed North Korea, despite the effects of even the harshest sanctions, when, despite acctully bombing his country TWICE! Trump has not been able to get Russia-backed Assad to give up chemical weapons?

Gun control, or more likely, the police use of guns and new controls governing such use, will come to the forefront once more findings regarding the death of Stephon Clark are released.

a reply to: howtonhawky

I do not find the msm as being as nefarious as many others do. I think that the big networks, the msm as they are labeled are fighting for their economic lives. New's stories that used to take months to come to light, stories that would evolve over weeks now evolve on a daily basis. The msm is at it's core ''capitalist'' enterprises. They have always had the motive of profit coming before public concern. If that base motive is threatened, the secondary motive of public concern will become even more secondary.

As technology offers faster and faster transfer of information beyond the traditional avenues of weekly magazines, daily newspapers, radio and TV those older outlets have needed to pick up their pace to keep abreast of the information onslaught, and hence protect their bottom ones.

I think a big problem today is the false distinction of separating msm from ''independent '' new outlets. Independent news sources have the same bottom line, their profit. Certainly the msm is the voice of the establishment, it is so because it has maintained it's bottom line in concert with the flow of the economic establishment since it's inception. Whether the msm is liberal or conservative matters not, it works only to seek the continuance of that establishment, an establishment that needs at all costs to protect the base line of the capitalist system.

I personally reject the idea that msm should be ignored in favor of ''independent'' or alternative outlets. For me, all news outlets are questionable and I prefer to not accept one over the other. Certainly alternative outlets will allow truths to emerge that msm will not. However they will also allow mis-truthes to be pushed upon the public for no other reason than the explosive news they offer is motivated by the very same bottom line. Profit.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
I personally reject the idea that msm should be ignored in favor of ''independent'' or alternative outlets.

Agreed.
It spoke volumes to me when the BBC got bored with the airstikes on Syria, a sort of 'meh' moment. Yet still western people wet their pants when it's only people in faraway lands who get killed in proxy wars.
BBC bored = no longer much of a story if you don't live in Syria.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

I would love to agree with you but........

The masses are starving for real truth style journalism involving the actual factors that matter to the majority of people.

Just look at the empires such as jones and savage despite their black list by major advertisers.

Now perhaps the msm desire for such exist but is being stifled by the gov. propaganda laws and big money advertisers.

The masses are starving for news.

a reply to: howtonhawky

I dispute entirely what you are suggesting.

I am always thinking about all things. I am looking every day at China, Russia, Britain, Syria, the EU. I have bags of time and I am getting to be quite an expert. I particularly am fascinated by International Politics.

You keep on doing this (I mean collectively, not just the OP). All we have is what we have. I tell he Guardian off all the time yet often I think it is wonderful. Basically, I care about it.

I see a place for both. ATS is absolutely God's gift for me. It is the only place I feel comfortable. It matches my myriad and crazy mind and many others, too. ATS is my friend as much as it needs advertising revenue to survive. It has to play the Capitalist game. All media does. You and I do. That is because it is the nature of our system. Russia still has Capitalism. China does, too. Capitalism is the world system.

Your tune is getting old and dated now. You will start to look very left behind and irrelevant because it is the same old whining tune. I stopped singing it a long time ago.

You are no different to anyone else. You say don't follow leaders yet you watch the pawking meters as much as anyone else. You do not see this, but I do.

MSM informs. Yes, we have to analyze constantly. Don't ever accuse me of wandering child attention. LOOK at my posts. I am everywhere and so are many others. I am thinking of Syria all the time because I know how important an issue it is. I have been worrying about it for over seven years now; "Seven Years of Tears". I think every day about as many issues as I can fit into my mind. I am trying to put energy into the world on as big a scale as I can. It is the way of a civilized mind. It is investing in humanity and care instead of the stock market, though both are necessary right now.

Politics is here because humans are so naughty they have to have it. It is all part of the human condition. If we act all ingnorant over it we will end up more barbaric. We must all try and find common ground and evolutionize politcs and politically educate. We are in a political world:



It is either the politics of high civilization or the politics of gangsters, the hood or, worse still, the politics of the jungle. The more we grow conscious of politics and comprehend its place the greater power we have over it and one day we will be so advanced we will no longer need it.

I have got time for the Guardian and I have got a whole lot of time for ATS. You will never be able to rid the wold of Capitalism or politics. The MSM has survived the internet and is now flourishing there, too (it has proven itself to Darwin's "Natural Selection" theory or robot selection, haha). It is very stable actually compared to all the other # and a lot better quality generally.

Trust and doubt. Analyze, don't be scared of it and try to make it go away because it will not. The machine is huge. It is beyond one single human being now. Itr is a monster we must keep analyzing, correcting and taming. Syria shows the savagery that is still in us all. it is this we must keep away from us. That little infection needs dealing with. I hope they do keep the spotlight on it and the pressure for the sake of all those children:

"In Rama a voice was heard, lamentations, weeping and great mourning. Rachel weeping for her children and would not be comfortd because they are not".

If you see a deficit in the MSM then you have to fill the gap. YOU have to keep the plight of Syria alive and YOU have to keep caring about it.

a reply to: Revolution9

they do not care about the children unless it is in their benefit for them to care about such and if the government allows them to care about such at the time.

THIS is not a prediction or a dream.

This is a future fact.

a reply to: howtonhawky

The masses are starving for real truth style journalism involving the actual factors that matter to the majority of people..

I have not found this to be true hawky. Decades ago msm news programming was floundering trying to find advertising. People were either not interested or were tired of the same pablum day after day. In order to enhance revenues for news programs the networks needed to ''punch up'' the way the news was delivered, it needed to compete with entertainment programs for viewership.

Fox News was one of the first to understand this and ran more explosive tabloid type programming that would catch the interests of people with more exciting and entertaining news programs. Where other networks had had scholarly political discussions that were boring and most often leading nowhere, Fox picked up the ball and ran with it offering strong opinions rather than watered down politeness.

Yet still today I think that way many people have little idea or concern beyond any of the daily headlines that concern them directly, and those that do seem satisfied with which ever ''outlet'' they believe they can depend upon.

As to Jones and Savage I don't know as their ''empires' are all that huge compared to the older established outlets. Both of them are ''entertainers. Jones used that excuse a year or so ago when called out over some such libel suit. And I used to listen to Savage way back in the 80s I guess it was when all he had was a couple of hours on late night local radio. He disappeared from that station and the next I heard of him he had gone from moderately toned conservatism to his now rabid vocalizations on every conservative issue in the nation. He had also changed his voice. Where before it had been a regular voice he had changed it to the harsh and accusatory voice he uses now. He is an entertainer as well.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You heard it here first...

Things will remain boring with occasional bursts of something only superficially surprising, which the media will milk until the teats run dry, then they'll go back to their usual job of making mountains out of molehills.