TIME Magazine & CNN exposed pushing fake news imagery and propaganda.

a reply to: pavil

Yep. That's Mr. Bean.

I'm just presenting another viewpoint. But one thing I'm sure you and I both can agree on... this cover was designed to trigger people.

Also as I have stated it was based on photographer's assumption. But you are probably right about Time thinking that the girl got separated.

I just love to present different viewpoints.

a reply to: RowanBean

No worries. You post enjoyable stuff.

I just get tired of all of the MSM's "honest mistakes".

They do it to pull strings on both sides.

Btw, that's what we accuse the Russians of doing to us too.

Isn't that interesting?

originally posted by: RowanBean

Did or did not they make the claim that that particular girl was separated?

"Correction: The original version of this story misstated what happened to the girl in the photo after she taken from the scene. The girl was not carried away screaming by U.S. Border Patrol agents..."

Apparently they did. Saying a girl was carried away screaming by US Border Patrol agents? Away from what? Her mother. It's claiming that the separation is taking place at that time, then and there. That's why the correction was issued. Not because it stirred up too much discussion and angst. The truth is she was picked up by her mother.

a reply to: Rewey

Yeah you're probably right. But I think it's brilliant because the cover was designed to trigger Trump followers and it worked so well that everybody is talking about it. Cash cow.

originally posted by: howtonhawky

The mayor in that case was indeed correct in her actions.

They had a list of a couple hundred violent offenders and around 800 or so people whos crime was just crossing the border.

My thoughts; a city use passive resistance by not supporting the Feds, but, should not interfere.

originally posted by: RowanBean
a reply to: Rewey

Yeah you're probably right. But I think it's brilliant because the cover was designed to trigger Trump followers and it worked so well that everybody is talking about it. Cash cow.

Also, this comment from the photographer, suggesting he had to email Time to correct it:

Moore, the photographer, told The Post in an email that Time corrected the story after he made a request minutes after it was published.

But you're correct there - a cash cow indeed. No such thing as bad publicity, as the saying goes. But the US media largely seem to push an anti-Trump agenda (for obvious reasons one might say). That's why I feel this is more than an 'error', and far more egregious than a satirists cartoon.

originally posted by: RowanBean
a reply to: Rewey

Yeah you're probably right. But I think it's brilliant because the cover was designed to trigger Trump followers and it worked so well that everybody is talking about it. Cash cow.

Also, this from Vox:

Time also published an article about the image, which said the girl was taken away, screaming, by border patrol agents.

I haven't been able to find the original, uncorrected article though. It would be interesting to see the actual wording...

a reply to: Rewey

I haven't been able to find the original, uncorrected article though. It would be interesting to see the actual wording...

Yeah. I would like to see that as well but I'm sure that won't happen for obvious reason.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: conspiracy nut
a reply to: face23785

Exactly why I'm calling for a stricter vetting process for assylum seekers, stronger border security and a pathway to citizenship for law abiding people able to take care of themselves without government assistance.

Sounds a lot like the deal the President proposed a few months ago that the Democrats rejected.

BTW they couldnt get enough GOP votes to begin with...

Time Magazine is such a mess.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

a reply to: Xcathdra


Why should I believe anything that man, who now wants to get paid for the his daughter's image, says?

He says everything was so "good", so good that his wife had to run away with his baby daughter to seek asylum in the USA. She paid money to be part of the "protected" group of immigrants famously, caravanning through Mexico to the USA, that he calls "people smugglers" Right! I'm going to believe him?

"Honduran deputy foreign minister Nelly Jerez confirmed Valera’s version of events. " Really? Which events? How good of a husband he was events? Or, the Honduran Government got this woman's, whose asking for asylum from their government, and her child's location and health status from whom, and for what reason?

“If they are deported, that is OK as long as they do not leave the child without her mother,” Valera said. “I am waiting to see what happens with them.”

It's okay with him? PULEASE! That woman and that little girl are never going back to Honduras or to that man. Especially now that he, and the Honduran government, have openly betrayed her and threatened his supposed daughter's future.

www.reuters.com...

With no statement as to the woman and child's wherabouts, from the US governement, I'm not believeing one thing that man has to say, nor his government friends.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Sublimecraft

I understand the intended message and agree it's propaganda, doesn't change the fact that it triggered you and TIME got the desired result/reaction out of you. The propaganda worked.

According to Trump's logic that means they're #Winning. They've got your number.

I would say if you agree with that part bolded, need we let it go?

It is free speech but we have to respond to propaganda someway, somehow, right?

If not what happens?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

The plot thickens.

originally posted by: conspiracy nut
Nowadays the news is full of spin and half-truths even all the stuff that Trump says that I disagree with I find half-truths in what he is saying.

I just wish we could all just come to the table and negotiate and meet each other somewhere halfway.

I think we could if we had a computer program analyze the statements, actions and votes in legislature to determine the actual practiced political ideology. Those called liberals are not representing liberal ideology enough to be called that anymore for one. Nazis doesn't fit the conservatives or Tea Party. But Marxist fits IMO for both NeoCons and Progressives.

If the common citizen truly knew the players in the playing field we can begin this dialogue sooner.

originally posted by: RowanBean
a reply to: Sookiechacha

The plot thickens.

No it doesn't!

Your head might have thickened, but the plot didn't do anything!

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk

originally posted by: RowanBean
a reply to: Sookiechacha

The plot thickens.

No it doesn't!

Good argument.

For those of us with ATS Tenure, we remember what the media did to Ron Paul especially FOX in it's political coverage.
Both the left/right are guilty of trying to shape the narrative on half truths and images both single frame and video to get people to adopt a perspective and opinion to influence political power and social behavior.

News is laced with propaganda like never before, It always was, but the advent of the common person having a recording device and video in their pocket as well as the ability to vet images and videos via the internet is changing people's thoughts on the "NEWS". The scary thing about all this is that when real news now happens, that people don't like, people can just think oh that's "fake news".
Cognitive dissonance has never been higher in America on both sides.....this leads to big problems in society.
For example people on both sides are losing jobs for political opinions, people are one drunk/wasted tweet away from losing it all.
All this propaganda is making people angry and depressed as well.

originally posted by: conspiracy nut
a reply to: face23785

Source? I'll trade the wall for triple the amount of existing border agents and immediate deportations for anyone trying to cross illegaly.

You're really unaware of that development? Where do you get your news from? They don't seem to be keeping you well-informed. Trump offered them a path to citizenship for something like 2+ million DACA recipients in exchange for the wall and limits to chain migration, and Dems turned it down. Even CNBC said they were crazy. It was an excellent deal for the Dems. Kinda made it clear they weren't serious about compromising on anything.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: conspiracy nut
a reply to: face23785

Exactly why I'm calling for a stricter vetting process for assylum seekers, stronger border security and a pathway to citizenship for law abiding people able to take care of themselves without government assistance.

Sounds a lot like the deal the President proposed a few months ago that the Democrats rejected.

BTW they couldnt get enough GOP votes to begin with...

If you got enough Democrats on board you wouldn't need the entire GOP vote. But the Dems absolutely don't want to compromise. They don't want the DACA situation fixed and they don't want this current issue fixed. If those get fixed, they have nothing to campaign on for the midterms.