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.

 

Yellow journalism a threat to democracy .

page: 3
27
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

Yes, we can all agree that CNN is irresponsible. Reckless. Abusive. Moronic.

And I remember the 60's and 70's as well.

But as I keep saying, we need to tackle abuses of free speech with MORE free speech, not (what it amounts to) as censorship.




posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 10:41 AM
link   
If the founding fathers were alive today.

The MEDIA would portray them as rapists,tax cheats,Russian puppets,Russian bots,think the world is flat, and MORE government power is a GREAT THING.

Nothing in print or online is even close to being the 'truth'.

It's even infested just about every single genre of film and televsion now.

YOU CAN'T escape the bullsnip.



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 11:40 AM
link   
I do not believe in trampling the first , but we cannot allow the media to be used as the weapon it has been turned into by the left either. I actually think its pretty easy to resolve this situation...A simple law or whatever you wish to call it that states, if you are a news outlet and you have full press privileges, you must state only 100% verifiable and backed with sources news to the American public. If you push lies and BS like they currently are doing, you loose your press privilages period and pay very hefty fines, the kind that hurt the bottom line, not a cheap easy pay out for corporations such as MSNBC or CNN. And if you want to carry on spewing opinions and bias , you must state that the information is in fact OPINION at the start AND end of any broadcast that uses such information so there is no confusion as to which is which...this is the biggest problem, people mainly on the left but yes even those on the right watching Fox, really think if they are being told by their chosen news station that a certain opinion is being represented as a fact, it can only be a fact as its the news telling them this. Using the loophole to give out straight up BS information and then 2 days later put out an equally BS retraction after hours on a Sunday so its buried will no longer be tolerated. Just like the kids today need to be taught...People must be held responsible for their actions and I do mean held responsible , not some silly time out slap on the wrist punishment.

Like several in this thread have stated already, the first amendment does NOT cover shouting fire in a crowded movie theater, nor yelling bomb on a plane...What the media is currently doing is exactly this, they are falsely shouting fire and putting our country in danger by doing so. You cannot say for instance, the president is guilty of such n such just from being accused, they must state, he has been accused and the proper authorities will have to investigate and if all the facts show what he is being accused of is true, he will then be dealt with through the proper channels of justice that covers said realm of law....The Press with access to influence the world must be kept to the highest standards possible or we might as well do away with it completely.



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown


Yellow journalism a threat to democracy.


We don't have a democracy. We have a Constitutional Republic. We don't cater to the majority (mob rule); we protect the smallest minority -- the individual. But with these Constitutional protections, we have responsibilities and privileges. Including thinking for ourselves and acting accordingly.

In life, there will always be lying liars who will twist facts and truth for their own purposes. Always. Always have been and always will be. And there will never ever be a way to stop it. Never.

Our best and greatest hope lies within ourselves. But not once have you attempted to educate and arm people with the tools to do so. Rather, you seem to want the long arm of government to step in and "protect" us... the same government which has made propaganda legal. The same government that uses secret courts and secret gag orders and nondisclosure agreements and confidentiality agreements to make truth criminal. The same government that put an end to the Fairness Doctrine. (Yeah, it was a real thing... look it up.) Because THAT has worked soooooo well, right???

First and foremost, people need to recognize and acknowledge the difference between what they know and what they do not know. The difference between fact and opinion. The difference between truth and beliefs. The difference between documented sources and anonymous leakers. The difference between the subjective and the objective, the tangible and the intangible, what is observed and what is intuited.


News sources like CNN, MSNBC and The Washington Post . Have taken not a step but a giant leap backwards in time. They are the biggest threat to the American people.


Not even close. We are our own greatest enemy when WE refuse to do our own due diligence. We are citizens... NOT subjects. If we fail ourselves, we have only ourselves to blame, and government can't fix that. They can only exploit our self-imposed and self-indulgent ignorance. And they do.

So are you going to be part of the problem or part of the solution??? Are you going to help people understand how to rise above yellow journalism and government propaganda? Or are you going to (continue to) throw us all under the bus and guarantee that we ONLY have government approved propaganda?



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

It is my opinion that news outlets really had no other choice than to go full on tabloid journalism to stay relevant, and I will explain why.

When I was growing up there was no cable or satellite television- at least where I lived. You only got the three main networks- CBS, NBC and ABC. All 3 of these networks showed the national news at the same time followed by the local news. There was nothing to watch BUT the news so everybody watched it or watched nothing.

Many years later in comes cable and satellite television. News programming now had competition. The older folks still watched the news religiously but the younger folks would rather be entertained, choosing MTV or HBO over Walter Cronkite and Roger Mud. Even some of the older folks started drifting away as more and more channel selections became available, so in an attempt to keep up with the times cable news networks began to arise to cater to those who liked being able to watch the news on their own schedules instead of only particular times.

With the rise of the internet cable and satellite television started taking a dive- except for the highly exaggerated world of "reality" television- which is far from being "real" any longer. To keep from losing viewership and as a result advertisers and their dollars news networks took a page from shows like Jerry Springer Show, The Real Housewives franchise, Big Brother and the like and their ratings rose dramatically! The advertising dollars flow like Niagara Falls and the more controversial the reporting the higher the viewership and more advertising dollars are made!

Now the news networks are starting to lose viewership as people are waking up to what is happening. Will they go back to straight reporting of the news without controversial opinionated spins on everything? I guess it remains to be seen!



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk

I will say that I believe that the current state of corporate media is primarily economically motivated rather than politically although their techniques have advanced to the point were both are easily managable simultaneously.

What was the horrible phrase from a few years ago? "If it bleeds it leads?"

They are selling advertising time.

Very astute post.



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

How would the press respond if Trump pulled a Lincoln and shut down papers and deported naturalized congress critters?



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: PhilbertDezineck

SCOTUS found those acts illegal.



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

This post deserves some sort of continual recognition. Bo, very very well-said!



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: PhilbertDezineck

SCOTUS found those acts illegal.


didn't stop Lincoln from doing them, just think if there is a 2nd civil war with Trump at the helm.



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 04:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: PhilbertDezineck

SCOTUS found those acts illegal.


didn't stop Lincoln from doing them, just think if there is a 2nd civil war with Trump at the helm.


I am of the opinion that a second Civil War in the US is unlikely.



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: PhilbertDezineck

SCOTUS found those acts illegal.


didn't stop Lincoln from doing them, just think if there is a 2nd civil war with Trump at the helm.


I am of the opinion that a second Civil War in the US is unlikely.


I do find it unlikely that the conservatives will put up with the BS of the left for much longer. You keep poking the bear and eventually the bear lashes out.



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 05:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Trueman

Good post !

The way the corrupt media hides behind the first amendment. Exploits both our strengths and our weaknesses while sitting in the catbird seat .



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 06:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: PhilbertDezineck

SCOTUS found those acts illegal.


didn't stop Lincoln from doing them, just think if there is a 2nd civil war with Trump at the helm.


I am of the opinion that a second Civil War in the US is unlikely.


I do find it unlikely that the conservatives will put up with the BS of the left for much longer. You keep poking the bear and eventually the bear lashes out.


That's a nice tale for some extremists to tell themselves; that's really all it is.



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 06:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: PhilbertDezineck

SCOTUS found those acts illegal.


didn't stop Lincoln from doing them, just think if there is a 2nd civil war with Trump at the helm.


I am of the opinion that a second Civil War in the US is unlikely.


I do find it unlikely that the conservatives will put up with the BS of the left for much longer. You keep poking the bear and eventually the bear lashes out.


What're you suggesting might happen?



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 06:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: PhilbertDezineck

SCOTUS found those acts illegal.


didn't stop Lincoln from doing them, just think if there is a 2nd civil war with Trump at the helm.


I am of the opinion that a second Civil War in the US is unlikely.


I do find it unlikely that the conservatives will put up with the BS of the left for much longer. You keep poking the bear and eventually the bear lashes out.


What're you suggesting might happen?



IMO I think what will happen is the Republicans will not fail in their investigation of FISA abuses.

that will lead to other domino's to fall, could you imagine 8-10 Democrat leaders in orange jumpsuits.

that would start the Civil war, from the Democrats and the left..



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 06:18 PM
link   
... back to yellow journalism.

OP's examples were a bit one-sided and seem to only include what they believe are media sites with a certainly ideological bent or bias. Of course, since all media is corporate and is really controlled by a handful of people ...

Does anyone have any issues with yellow journalism from sites like Breitbart, Daily Caller, Townhall, Washington Examiner, etc? If so, what are some examples of fake news or tabolid journalism from these guys?



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown


1. Shocking headlines in that are meant to scare people, often of news that wasn't very important (White nationalist!!!!!Russian agent,’!!!! most corrupt president ever, Global warming !!!


Headlines are in large print for a reason: to get people's attention, which, in turn gets them to read the paper. Headlines can't always encapsulate the entirety of the article, which is why it's up to people to actually read the article. And I'll agree, sometimes headlines can be somewhat misleading: see above.


2. using many pictures or drawings (memes)

I rarely see *many* pictures or any memes used by reputable news outlets. Most use words, some pictures, stock photos, political cartoon.


3. using fake interviews

I don't know mainstream outlets that do that purposefully. That is a blatant violation of journalistic ethics.


5. taking the side of the “underdog” against the system.
Racist, xenophobic, illegal immigrants.....etc


Also known as awareness of social issues.


News sources like CNN, MSNBC and The Washington Post .

But not Fox. Why?


For me the words propaganda or even fake news just didn’t fit the bill as a description for their actions. They are the biggest threat to the American people .


Of course you call them propaganda and fake news because they do not fit your skewed narrative. They are anything but fake news.

They report in good faith and do not intentionally lie. When they make a mistake they issue corrections. They do not purposefully peddle false information. Sometimes false information is fed to them (and this is a nonpartisan issue and happens in every administration), but they do their best to check and report. Sometimes, however, the need to "be first" can cause some sloppiness, but they report, for the most part, in good faith.


And to call current journalism yellow journalism and liken it to tabloids is disingenuous. And THAT is the real threat to democracy because it undermines real journalism.
edit on 21-10-2019 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 06:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
... back to yellow journalism.

OP's examples were a bit one-sided and seem to only include what they believe are media sites with a certainly ideological bent or bias. Of course, since all media is corporate and is really controlled by a handful of people ...

Does anyone have any issues with yellow journalism from sites like Breitbart, Daily Caller, Townhall, Washington Examiner, etc? If so, what are some examples of fake news or tabolid journalism from these guys?


NO!



And that's the point!

It's free speech!

I am pulling out the few remaining strands of hair (combover) that I have in frustration here!

OMG!


Might as well ask if anyone has an issue with what I write, because brother?

We're next if this crap continues!!!!



posted on Oct, 21 2019 @ 06:26 PM
link   
I don't think you go far enough, and yellow journalism just don’t have the impact it should portray... it’s flat out WAR TIME PROPAGANDA

It’s like a Nazi news paper vs an allied new paper of the 1940s



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join