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.

 

Regulating News Networks (Eliminating Propaganda)

page: 6
17
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 09:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: DBCowboy

We already qualify free speech. Want proof? Yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater.

What I am suggesting is no more than making news organizations responsible for reporting news.

TheRedneck


We, as free people, should be able to self determine what is news and what is opinion, what is fact and what is fiction.


It is irksome to have someone do that for me.




posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy


We, as free people, should be able to self determine what is news and what is opinion, what is fact and what is fiction.


It is irksome to have someone do that for me.

I agree. That's why my recommendation.

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 09:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: DBCowboy


We, as free people, should be able to self determine what is news and what is opinion, what is fact and what is fiction.


It is irksome to have someone do that for me.

I agree. That's why my recommendation.

TheRedneck







but it also means the press will have to be able to voice their actions and sources in a court of law if challenged. Potential damages should be compensation of actual damages to the plaintiff, a forced retraction/correction of the story misreported/misrepresented on primetime TV at least three times, and a nice little fine that would go directly to the government.


Lawyers and the courts to decide what is truth and what is not....really?
edit on 19-7-2018 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: DBCowboy

We already qualify free speech. Want proof? Yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater.

What I am suggesting is no more than making news organizations responsible for reporting news.

TheRedneck


We, as free people, should be able to self determine what is news and what is opinion, what is fact and what is fiction.


It is irksome to have someone do that for me.


In a perfect world that would work, however from the second we are born we are trapped in an ideological prison that prevents objectivity. Are you really free? We live in a world where the powerful lie to us, we know they lie, they know we know they lie but they don't care. We/People say they care but none of us lift a finger to stop it. We don't even know how to stop it because the lies have gone on so long and the narrative has been reduced to such a simplistic 'good vs evil' as the world is too chaotic for anyone to understand.

Nothing ever changes, it's normal. The public, journalists and politicians have retreated into a fake world because every framework applied so far has resulted in catastrophic failure and the only remaining option is admitting the truth that they don't understand any of it and are powerless to change it.

Everyone is biased, including myself, it's incredibly hard to develop the sufficient skills and framework to conduct critical discourse and separate fact from fiction.

In the US people are exposed to an average of 10 hours a day of news media, it's more than we spend with family, friends, colleagues and drastically distorts our view of the world. 90% of news coverage fails to independently verify it's facts and US studies have shown people are more informed and have a more accurate view of the world after six months abstinence from media compared to groups who followed it closely for six months.

Short of spending a few years studying journalism and spending 30 mins or so analyzing each news piece for bias and two hours or so chasing up their sources it's impossible to gain an informed view - it's impractical for anyone with a life/job to achieve yet having an informed vote and access to info is fundamental to a functioning democracy.

The problem is most evident in the current new US AntiFA (dodgy organisation ARA that stole the name promotes violence on anyone they think is racist - completely separate from pre-2006 est. US AntiFA) who are getting radicalized by CNN and extreme-left blogs and far-right blogs radicalizing people into White Supremacy/Grab your guns there's going to be a civil war.

Both groups are idiots who think they're doing the right thing as they're armed with facts but are unable to separate fact, fiction, opinion. As far as I know there's no other country having the same level of division and pointless conflict.

IMO the US used to be a country where people had political differences but were unified as American's at the end of the day. At some point over the last 30 years that's been lost and replaced with mass pigeonholing and polarization of every single topic under the sun. I don't blame the US public, they're some of the nicest friendliest people I've ever met when traveling there; I lay the blame at the media throwing away all ethical principles to chase ratings with over sensationalized 'bibble' masquerading as news.

Is there even any foreign affairs coverage available in the US? All I've ever seen is in the very rare cases another country is mentioned it's only because of US involvement there rather than reporting on the country itself.
edit on 19-7-2018 by bastion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: olaru12


Lawyers and the courts to decide what is truth and what is not....really?

Isn't that already their job?

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: olaru12


Lawyers and the courts to decide what is truth and what is not....really?

Isn't that already their job?

TheRedneck


It's supposed to be, but is it really? Money talks in a broken system. Will it be any different when deciding what is "truth"?
A broken system fixing a broken system...good luck with that!!

This ain't mayberry rfd....
edit on 19-7-2018 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: bastion

It's been that way forever.

The Egyptians probably convinced the Jewish slaves that building the pyramids was patriotic.


I'm only on this rock for a tiny fragment of time. So I'd like to spend my tiny time as free as possible. Just on that principle alone I'd be against more government regulation.





posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: bastion

It's been that way forever.

The Egyptians probably convinced the Jewish slaves that building the pyramids was patriotic.


I'm only on this rock for a tiny fragment of time. So I'd like to spend my tiny time as free as possible. Just on that principle alone I'd be against more government regulation.






Ohh I'm completely opposed to any government regulation - just in other modern democracies the Press have codes of ethics and media standards that are self-regulated by a cross section of editors.

The US is the 2nd worst Western country in terms of Press Freedom, it comes behind Surinam, Chile, Burkino Faso, Romania, Lituania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Namibia, Uruguay, Ghana and many others - rsf.org...
edit on 19-7-2018 by bastion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: bastion

It's been that way forever.

The Egyptians probably convinced the Jewish slaves that building the pyramids was patriotic.


I'm only on this rock for a tiny fragment of time. So I'd like to spend my tiny time as free as possible. Just on that principle alone I'd be against more government regulation.






Ohh I'm completely opposed to any government regulation - just in other modern democracies the Press have codes of ethics and media standards that are self-regulated by a cross section of editors.

The US is the 2nd worst Western country in terms of Press Freedom, it comes behind Surinam, Chile, Burkino Faso, Romania, Lituania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Namibia, Uruguay, Ghana and many others - rsf.org...


Yes, Reporters without Borders blames Trump’s comments. In comparison, the state of Ghana owns one-third of the media, and have criminal code provisions penalizing false news. Their rankings are politically motivated, anti-trump tripe.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: olaru12


This ain't mayberry rfd....

Be awful nice if it was...

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

What are you on about? The US ranking is based on the killing of six journalists, three journalists having equipment stolen by the gov, 19 journalists being physically attacked and 14 subpoenaed.

The 'Trump report' you claim blames Obama who brought in unprecedented whistleblower convictions. Under Obama journalists were attacked at border crossings, arrested, had electronic devices confiscated and searched through and new laws banning the release of public information.

It only mentions Trump by saying his comments have worsened the already hostile environment and that he tried to ban certain media from the White House and revoking of Media broadcasting licences. He's practically a footnote compared to Obama who made rankings plummet from one of the western world's best down to worst.

-----
It appears the Trump effect has only amplified the disappointing press freedom climate that predated his presidency. Whistleblowers face prosecution under the Espionage Act if they leak information of public interest to the press, while there is still no federal “shield law” guaranteeing reporters’ right to protect their sources. Journalists and their devices continue to be searched at the US border, while some foreign journalists are still denied entry into the US after covering sensitive topics like Colombia’s FARC or Kurdistan.
------------

Here's the criteria on how the index works in reality:

1 / Pluralism [indicator scorePlur]

Measures the degree to which opinions are represented in the media.



2/ Media independence [indicator scoreInd]

Measures the degree to which the media are able to function independently of sources of political, governmental, business and religious power and influence.



3/ Environment and self-censorship [indicator scoreEA]

Analyses the environment in which news and information providers operate.



4/ Legislative framework [indicator scoreCL]

Measures the impact of the legislative framework governing news and information activities.



5/ Transparency [indicator scoreTra]

Measures the transparency of the institutions and procedures that affect the production of news and information.



6/ Infrastructure [indicator scoreInf]

Measures the quality of the infrastructure that supports the production of news and information.

A seventh indicator based on data gathered about abuses and acts of violence against journalists and media during the period evaluated is also factored into the calculation.



7/ Abuses [indicator scoreExa]

Measures the level of abuses and violence.

RSF then uses a complex algorithm to assign a score out of 100 to every country, drawing first on six general criteria of pluralism, media independence, environment and self-censorship, legislative framework, transparency and infrastructure; and then factoring in a special ‘violence score’ with a weighting of 20 per cent, calculated using a formula taking account of violence against journalists in the following declining weightings: death of journalists, imprisonments, kidnappings, media outlets attacked and ransacked, journalists who have fled the country, arrests, and attacks (RSF, 2013). An additional co-efficient takes account of respect for freedom of information in a foreign territory. In short, the algorithm strives to add quantitative mathematical rigour to a process that is largely qualitative, with a stronger weighting on acts of violence than upon legislative and systemic anti-media features. The approach incorporates difficult and problematic comparisons of the value of the murder of a journalist vis a vis laws of censorship

So it as bugger all to do with Trump and they're not partisan or political.
edit on 19-7-2018 by bastion because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-7-2018 by bastion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: FingerMan

“The theory of the free press is not that the truth will be presented completely or perfectly in any one instance, but that the truth will emerge from free discussion” ― E.E. Cummings



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Sorry for bumping but going back to the original topic , as odd as it sounds, press censorship is done in the public interest a lot of times. I'd say a good 80% of investigations, stories I had I couldn't report as the consequences would be dire/WW3, being killed or jailed for the job was a badge to be worn with pride but the big stories out there had uncontrollable outfall.

TOP TIP: Did you know if you have a business in the UK or USA that makes a large profit you can claim your profitability is central to national security and have access to the next five years of US and UK intelligence reports and spying operations in every country in the world? You don't even need a security clearance - I downloaded them all by accident when searching the staff intranet of the Uni I worked for (2012 - 2017 plans - if anything happens to Thorium based Nuclear reactors built by Belkin Group in China you know what countries to blame) - was threatenned, had yellow card placed on passport and banned from most countries, MI5 and undercover police did a load of random illegal stop and searches/demanding to see ID at illegal traffic stops, phone being blatantly hacked so if I mentioned a paticular word in an overseas call the line would cutoff the person I was calling then the remaining silent but active line would go 'beep, beep, beep' before finally cutting off.

Suicide and sectioning rates are pretty damn high in the profession - the real world is #ing grim and spending hours every day watching people being murdered to separate what the public can and can't stomach/where gratuity starts isn't nice. In the real world the African World War has killed more than WW1 and WW2 combined but no one gives a # or is even aware it exists as the US, UK and Russia are arming both sides equally so we all get rich from arms sales and get cheap precious metals for the latest bull# phone or computer that's built on planned obsolescence.

The public are given a highly sanitized version for their own good - my girlfriend used to write for the guardian, she was passed Oxford Uni with a 1st two years early while parting every night - she was on the same tube train that was blown up in the terror attacks of 7/7 and it didn't phase her - despite her mental fortitude she still had a complete breakdown and was sectioned for a few months after covering the Victoria Klimbae and Baby P/Rotheram council in general.
edit on 19-7-2018 by bastion because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-7-2018 by bastion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Instead of regulating them, free market demand would take care of REAL news being the most popular, IF news channels werent ARTIFICIALLY sponsored and boosted by shadowy Trillionaires. Changing the laws around funding of News Channels as well as transparency regarding their affiliation with political parties and specific politicians (including affiliations through families and marriage) should fix the issue.

For example, most CNN staffers also have close ties to various Government Departments. They therefore cannot be unbiased. Their would need to be disclosure of such ties.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 02:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Skyfloating

I dunno, the general public have little to no interest in in depth journalism - it's incredibly dry and boring. The press have tried but the public gets what the public wants and in a free market accuracy and credibility are seen as naive, profit dominates.

Unless the general public stop treating news, politics and current affairs as entertainment TV or a soap opera there's no cause for them to change - the more biased they are, the more captive their audience.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 07:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: FingerMan

“The theory of the free press is not that the truth will be presented completely or perfectly in any one instance, but that the truth will emerge from free discussion” ― E.E. Cummings





Beautiful quote. I just don’t think it is applicable anymore.
The facts are muddled in the commentary. People actually believed Obama was not an American and a Manchurian candidate based on Fox News.
People ACTUALLY believe Donald Trump colluded with Russians, or that he is being a crude child at the NATO meetings based on CNN and MSNBC commentary as the news is passed.

People who support DT actually believe this stuff, only to be convinced otherwise by DT supporters Hannity or other.

People cannot make up their own minds without help.

Based on this alone, whether you support DT or not, you know the News system is broken, slanted, propagandized, and needs to be mended.
My proposal is as minimal as possible to be effective and NOT affect freedom in any way.

Something else may be the right answer. I’m open to other suggestions. Kicking the can or accepting this trash is not an answer.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: FingerMan




I just don’t think it is applicable anymore.

Keep the faith baby

If something is true it doesn't stop being true

We live in perilous times. All the more reason to hold on to those things that are true - and powerful

You cannot do people's thinking for them. You can't control their resources or tell them what is and isn't OK to think, but you can help people learn how to think. Even if it's only by example



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 07:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: FingerMan




I just don’t think it is applicable anymore.

Keep the faith baby

If something is true it doesn't stop being true

We live in perilous times. All the more reason to hold on to those things that are true - and powerful

You cannot do people's thinking for them. You can't control their resources or tell them what is and isn't OK to think, but you can help people learn how to think. Even if it's only by example


You are putting words into my mouth. I never once said anyone should do the thinking for them. I am against censorship. I am for organization, as I've already clearly laid out.

The quote is nice. And it is not applicable or true. Ideals must be matched with action. This is just a nice quote that is untrue.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 08:30 PM
link   
Operation Mockingbird..



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 07:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: FingerMan

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: FingerMan

There's bias in every news organization. However, anyone with any common sense can distinguish "facts" from pure hearsay and propaganda. I spend a lot of time watching and reading news from various new sources on TV and online. My wife hates how much time I spend reading and watching the news when she would prefer me to watch Hallmark romance movies with her, lol.

However, it does amaze me how people can follow in-line with Trump and dangerously call the media an enemy of the people. CNN has been labeled "Fake News" by a president who clearly spreads enough fake and false news of his own on a daily basis. Besides that, how can anyone label back to back recorded videos proving lies and contradictions coming straight out of the horses mouth? You can't get any better proof and facts than that!

Not all news content is propaganda. Proving and backing up allegations with videos, recordings and eye-witnesses is not propaganda. Those are proven facts and they should be treated as such. The American public is free to weigh both sides of an issue based upon reports and proven "facts." Saying something just doesn't make it so. Saying something that conflicts with video proof, recordings or eyewitnesses statements is clearly political bias and propaganda to sway public opinion.

To illegitimize a free press and claiming it's all propaganda is dangerous to a democracy...


So that is why freedom of the press is important. Not to protect the rights of newspapers, reporters, radio and television stations and the like but to protect the right of the people to have the information they need to make informed decisions about their government.

And regardless of how poorly the press does its job, the principle of freedom of the press cannot be abandoned because without it, we have no real protection at all. Only an electorate that is informed can make intelligent decisions.


source

How Americans interpret that information should be free from political affiliation and bias.


Good points all. I just strongly disagree with you about "common sense." If it were common, we'd all have it.

And I think people are getting the wrong idea from this proposition. There is no censorship of the press. Zero Censorship!
There is only separation of fact from myth.

I agree with President Trump on a whole host of issues. I personally think the man is a mad genius. And mad genius's are called "mad" for a particular reason. So while I find him correct, right, courageous on most things - there are some things that have turned my stomach. With that said, I am conscious enough to make my own assessment. However, CNN MSNBC NBC CBS and ABC have an agenda of demonizing our POTUS. I do think they have the right to do that. Don't get me wrong. But I do not think it should be mingled with the actual fact disseminating business of the NEWS.

It's a simple point really. I think most of you have a pre-conceived notion of what my proposal was. It is simply to separate fact from fiction. And I do not agree with any of you that would or will say the American populace is smart enough to figure it out. They clearly are not. And for those of you using Alex Jones as an example of censorship and free market,,,, ALEX JONES IS NOT A NEWS NETWORK. Alex Jones is obvious entertainment. But yes, he has stooped quite a few hundred thousand people. Which also validates my proposal of separating fact from fiction, aka News from Commentary.


It's very telling that you do not include FOX on your list of channels. You are showing your own innate bias.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join