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: 7
17
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 08:03 AM
link   
Sir you are truly correct. Hit the nail on the literal head. I watch a lot of CNBC and on a slow market day they bring anyone on they can think of just to stir stuff up and make it controversial and exciting, truth be damned. The search for journalistic truth has lost its way in pursuit of the almighty dollar. Sad. a reply to: dfnj2015




posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 08:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: TheRedneck


All we need from government is one simple law that makes it a civil offense to report untrue stories knowingly as news, or to report in such a biased manner as to misrepresent the facts surrounding the story reported on.



Then we're qualifying free speech, negating free speech. Gone are the days of unbiased reporting, but we shouldn't criminalize it.


And how do you determine whether or not they did it KNOWINGLY?



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 08:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: FingerMan
Hello all,

As you can see, I've been a member of this community for a bit. I rarely post, only when I feel the need. And now I feel a need to post something.

I first want to say that I am a proud American. I have traveled the world over many times in service to our country. I do not see people in shades of blue or red when I meet them. I could care less what their political ideologies are. Discussion of politics used to be a barred subject and considered outright rude.

To the point of this thread: News Networks are pure propaganda machines.

Definitions:



"Propaganda is a powerful weapon in war; it is used to dehumanize and create hatred toward a supposed enemy, either internal or external, by creating a false image in the mind of soldiers and citizens." (Wikipedia)




Propaganda is "the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person; ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect" (Merriam Webster Dictionary)




Propaganda "dissemination of information—facts, arguments, rumours, half-truths, or lies—to influence public opinion." (Encyclopedia Britannica)


By reading these definitions, can you think of any examples of propaganda on a news network?
Well, I've gone and done some homework to give some specific examples from each news network:

Fox News:

CNN:

MSBNC:

NBC:

ABC:


I could go on and on in making my point. I'll let others continue with this, for or against.

Is this really harmful? Are people really dumb enough to be influenced by this propaganda machine? I'll let you answer that for yourself. For me, it is an overwhelming and resounding "YES IT IS HARMFUL!"

So, how do we fix this?

I have a solution. One that does not involve modifying our constitution or bill of rights. It is called REGULATION.
CNN, FOXNEWS, MSNBC, ABC News, NBC News, and CBS News should be regulated.
But how one might ask?

By simply removing all editorial and commentary from the News Channel, and clearly labeling it as such.

Screaming "Fire" in a crowded theater is a crime.
And so, spreading propaganda in the form of News should at a very minimum be regulated.

This would create a new market. Network News Channels would have to clearly label commentary and editorial as the "CNN Commentary Channel" or the "FoxNews Commentary Channel". I don't think they would like to call their channel the "FoxNews Propaganda Channel" or the "CNN Clinton Propaganda Machine".

Separating Commentary from actual News would create less confusion and would be much fairer to our chaotic political process.
I don't think there is a simple answer here other than to say Propaganda should be labeled as such within a News Network. And no, people are not smart enough to figure that out for themselves. That much is obvious.

I think it is treasonous what the media is doing to our duly elected President. But I also think that Fox News persecuted President Obama. I think that I'm fair, and I'll take one more step, I think most of us are fair. I don't think there is as large of a divide between Americans as the mainstream media fervently portrays.

The propaganda machine is wrecking our country.

We need some medicine in the form of regulation.

What say you?

R/ The FingerMan





I would be more open to regulation of the press if we were able to hold our PRESIDENT to the same standards. We aren't at the moment and that is arguably just as bad of an issue.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: chiefsmom




So, until some new channel is created, by someone not on anyone's payroll, we are screwed.


Here you go:

Mark Dice



edit on 20-7-2018 by thepixelpusher because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 03:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: DoubleDNH

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.


What! Lol. I lambasted FoxNews. Read the thread before slewing partisan comments.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 03:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: DoubleDNH

originally posted by: FingerMan
Hello all,

As you can see, I've been a member of this community for a bit. I rarely post, only when I feel the need. And now I feel a need to post something.

I first want to say that I am a proud American. I have traveled the world over many times in service to our country. I do not see people in shades of blue or red when I meet them. I could care less what their political ideologies are. Discussion of politics used to be a barred subject and considered outright rude.

To the point of this thread: News Networks are pure propaganda machines.

Definitions:



"Propaganda is a powerful weapon in war; it is used to dehumanize and create hatred toward a supposed enemy, either internal or external, by creating a false image in the mind of soldiers and citizens." (Wikipedia)




Propaganda is "the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person; ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect" (Merriam Webster Dictionary)




Propaganda "dissemination of information—facts, arguments, rumours, half-truths, or lies—to influence public opinion." (Encyclopedia Britannica)


By reading these definitions, can you think of any examples of propaganda on a news network?
Well, I've gone and done some homework to give some specific examples from each news network:

Fox News:

CNN:

MSBNC:

NBC:

ABC:


I could go on and on in making my point. I'll let others continue with this, for or against.

Is this really harmful? Are people really dumb enough to be influenced by this propaganda machine? I'll let you answer that for yourself. For me, it is an overwhelming and resounding "YES IT IS HARMFUL!"

So, how do we fix this?

I have a solution. One that does not involve modifying our constitution or bill of rights. It is called REGULATION.
CNN, FOXNEWS, MSNBC, ABC News, NBC News, and CBS News should be regulated.
But how one might ask?

By simply removing all editorial and commentary from the News Channel, and clearly labeling it as such.

Screaming "Fire" in a crowded theater is a crime.
And so, spreading propaganda in the form of News should at a very minimum be regulated.

This would create a new market. Network News Channels would have to clearly label commentary and editorial as the "CNN Commentary Channel" or the "FoxNews Commentary Channel". I don't think they would like to call their channel the "FoxNews Propaganda Channel" or the "CNN Clinton Propaganda Machine".

Separating Commentary from actual News would create less confusion and would be much fairer to our chaotic political process.
I don't think there is a simple answer here other than to say Propaganda should be labeled as such within a News Network. And no, people are not smart enough to figure that out for themselves. That much is obvious.

I think it is treasonous what the media is doing to our duly elected President. But I also think that Fox News persecuted President Obama. I think that I'm fair, and I'll take one more step, I think most of us are fair. I don't think there is as large of a divide between Americans as the mainstream media fervently portrays.

The propaganda machine is wrecking our country.

We need some medicine in the form of regulation.

What say you?

R/ The FingerMan





I would be more open to regulation of the press if we were able to hold our PRESIDENT to the same standards. We aren't at the moment and that is arguably just as bad of an issue.


Can I offer a different point of view?
I think he is the Frankenstein created by the press. The press literally created, elected, and sustain him.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 03:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: chiefsmom




So, until some new channel is created, by someone not on anyone's payroll, we are screwed.


Here you go:

Mark Dice




We need a balance between parties. The video posted proves further imbalance. This pretty much ensures DT’s re-election.i cannot fathom that Google, MEDIA, or the obstructive far left don’t understand the harder they push,the harder they push the electorate to the right.



posted on Jul, 20 2018 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: FingerMan

Yup, kind of like the ben Kenobi line from Star Wars. “If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine".

The Dems are looking for a walloping in the midterms and 2020!

Already the buthurt Dems have rocketed Trump to higher approval ratings than their God Obama during the same time in his term.
edit on 20-7-2018 by thepixelpusher because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 21 2018 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: FingerMan



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 propaganda machine is wrecking our country.

We need some medicine in the form of regulation.

What say you?


Which words were the words I put in your mouth?

How is regulation not censorship?

Why are you afraid of opinions?



posted on Jul, 22 2018 @ 04:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: FingerMan



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 propaganda machine is wrecking our country.

We need some medicine in the form of regulation.

What say you?


Which words were the words I put in your mouth?

How is regulation not censorship?

Why are you afraid of opinions?



Very simply, regulation is not censorship. A regulation could be:
- don't misquote sources
- don't use drugs whilst reporting
- don't have sexual relations with sources
- don't take bribes/gifts from sources
- keep editorial separate from factual news

See that? In context, it is not in any way censorship.



new topics




 
17
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join