It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


CNN Mocks "Mock" News

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 01:47 PM
CNN has posted an article describing the relatively new phenomenon of news-parody websites.
While millions of readers read online news daily, hundreds of news-parody Web sites are popping up all over cyberspace. Many simply offer a quick satirical glimpse at recent events. Others dedicate full-blown articles to false stories, often attributing fabricated quotes to well-known people.

Such sites can offer relief from the depressing news reported by the media. And for their part, the sites typically run a disclaimer stating they are not real news.

But some online journalists squawk, saying the sites further cripple their efforts to gain credibility among print and TV peers. Others unleash loud guffaws and immediately crank out e-mails to share the URLs with friends in the industry.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

The article makes a vague distinction between legitimate alternatives to mainstream news and deliberate news parody. Is this a sly attempt to discredit independent and alternative media and the expanding news blogger community, or is CNN just having a chuckle with the rest of us?

posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 03:52 PM
it does appear that CNN is trying to discredit alternative news sites

its funny that they are "threatened" by this

it proves to me; that alternative news sites like this one

are growing in strength and size

and this is their counterattack , a weak one too

main media is losing the battle and they know it

its good news

posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 04:16 PM
Hear hear!

Media giant Rupert Murdoch is feeling the pinch, too.

Murdoch Urges Editors to Embrace Internet
WASHINGTON - Rupert Murdoch urged newspaper editors Wednesday to embrace the Internet, saying print news executives have "sat by and watched" as a new generation of digital consumers has turned away from newspapers.

The chief executive of News Corp. cited a recent report commissioned by the Carnegie Corporation, a philanthropic foundation, showing 44 percent of 18-to-34-year-olds say they use Web sites at least once a day for news.

When the Web was emerging in the 1990s Murdoch expressed skepticism about its business prospects. He referred to himself and other newspaper executives as "digital migrants" who are too old to have grown up surfing the Net but now must learn to direct their business toward those who did.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 05:30 PM
All media except Movies, Video Games and the Web is shrinking..

posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 05:48 PM
Serves them right really.....they only report the official line and don't really give the people the 'real news'.

It is about time more and more armchair journalists posted news and their views. These people have not got a pay packet to protect and will often report fuller content and more accurate news items than the fluff fed to us by the official sources.

posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 06:03 PM
It's a two-edged sword really - bloggers and independent media don't have any loyalties or bias to any particular group because they don't have a paycheck to protect. However that also means that they can publish whatever they want with impunity, regardless of the veracity of their statements, or the validity of their investigation and sources.

posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 11:05 PM
CNN and other networks should be worried. Sites like ATS fully comprehend and exceed the amount of information that they alone can provide, plus allow room for consumers of this information to have meaningful discourse. The closest that purely visual news can come to any sort of dialogue is a split-screen of Mr. Conservative yelling at Mr. Liberal, which is just exhausting to watch.

Televised news is a joke now.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 11:46 PM
CNN only knows for sure what comes across the routers ticker. The rest of the time they might as well be blind. They didnt even get the flight path right when whats-his-name was flying around the world a few weeks ago. Hundreds of miles off, and Im sittin here scratching my head, "No... he just said so himself, he's over there..."

posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 12:07 AM
main stream news sources should be concerned about alternate news sources on the internet. this is the progression of tech.

first there were town criers shouting out news from the king, alternate source was gossip.

then news became more open and wwidly distributed with news sheets from printing presses. the news would be selected and publicised via printers, later editors would fill this role. this would become news papers prity much how they are today as technoligy would progres.

ther was this wonderfull invention of moveing pictures. once talking versions were available it meant that pictures could be shown and commented on. (not sure when it came about but i believe it was before raidio, if someone knows feel free to correct me).

next on the scean was raidio.this alowed news to reach "round the world" in record time unlike newsprint which could take weeks or month to to reach other areas (i have always wondered how many died after a peace treaty was signed back then).

then there was this wonderfull invention called telivision. it combined the speed advantage of raidio with film and pictures able to be presented, and commented on. with the advent of communications satalites, news can now be transmitted as events are occuring live from just about anywhere in the world.

in all the above news forms were controlled by certain people. you have to be rich, or a government in order to have controll of them, as such it was easy to have everyone in agreement on how to slant things. an "olds boys network" if you will. sure there were alternate sources but as it takes masive power to transmit a signal, you would have to be in a location that was reached. with satalites it became easyer to acess but still the average citizen could not aford it. even those who could easily could claim that it was propaganda from another viewpoint.

now we have the "net". instantainious communication from all parts of the world. admittedly it is only the richer countries that average peoples have masive acess. but many more do then don't amounst these "richer" areas. news from iraq for example can reach millions before it can be analized and slanted towards what mainstream media wants. my God if you were on for the papel election, (before we suffered our little problem
), you would have seen all the posting about it as it was anounced. there were views posted before the tv could even react. this was a major show of how media are looseing controll of news.

the only defence left to main stream media is to call it mock, fake or even totaly ficticious. they can not controll what gets out to people anymore. we can discuss happenings before we can be told what we are to know. this is bad for governments especialy, it makes it very difficult to propagandize what they want with the way they want us to think about it. we now have acess to any and every viewpoint on anything that we are told or hear from "official" sources. we must be carefull because now we recieve propaganda from virtualy everyone, some will in fact be true others may only be speculation or outright lies. thing is WE NOW CAN FIND OUT JUST ABOUT ANYTHING. it is up to us to decide what is right and wrong. we now have the power, everyone of us. we are no longer only given what the government and those who controll the main stream media want us to know. as such they have no choice but to try to blind us to what we hear by lableing it falsehoods. it is their only way of trying to prevail.

can you imagine what would have happened if a few germans in ww2 had told the world what was happening? how differant things would have been. or if someone leaked the truths about what the japanese were doing? what might have happened if the revolutionary war had been today?all those colonials telling the world what they were fighting for, even the british government haveing info as soon as it happened instead of in several weeks at the least?

the world has indeed been changed by the net. for the better or worse? that is up to us as individuals to decide. we are no longer only able to hear what those in power want us to know. we can hear just about anything that anyone knows, and just types out for the world to hear. i wonder what the next inovation will be

top topics


log in