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.

 

Bush controlling the 'free' press - for what purpose?

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2005 @ 07:39 PM
link   
I saw a show on TV last night that had a PBS reporter on who had done a show on how a small town in mid-America was really suffering economically. He said that Bush and Co had come down on them for 'liberal bias' because of the show. In addition, Bush and Co has reduced funding for PBS from $400 million to $300 million for the same reason. See this link:

www.cpb.org...

I also saw a show a while back that complained about Bush and Co actually creating media stories about administration issues, paying journalists to represent certain issues, etc. See this link:

www.mediainfo.com...

Supposedly, we have a free press. In reality, it would appear that our press is far less free than it used to be.

The real question is what exactly is the intent of the administration in controlling the press? How much of what we hear in the mainstream media today can actually be believed, and how much is just Bush and Co propaganda like the recent 'outsourcing' of propaganda overseas?




posted on Jun, 11 2005 @ 07:52 PM
link   
The truth is you don't have a free press, you have a press that is motivated by people who want power they will distort the facts to get that power. If you want real news watch the BBC they can be trusted.



posted on Jun, 11 2005 @ 08:00 PM
link   


The truth is you don't have a free press, you have a press that is motivated by people who want power they will distort the facts to get that power. If you want real news watch the BBC they can be trusted.


Tell it to the people who investigated them over the reporting of the run-up to Iraq. Do you recall the 'sexing up the dossier' scandal that the head of BBC resigned over?

I think they're all crooked, which doesn't bode well for the future of a free press.

BTW, I do also routinely read the BBC and other foreign press, but with Bush's new foreign propaganda scheme ... Well, who knows how far that little restraining claw reaches.



posted on Jun, 11 2005 @ 08:01 PM
link   
It's for our own protection, don't ask any questions and go back to watching the Michael Jackson trial



posted on Jun, 11 2005 @ 08:03 PM
link   


It's for our own protection, don't ask any questions and go back to watching the Michael Jackson trial


Yes, but they won't let us in to watch! The government is controlling access!



posted on Jun, 11 2005 @ 08:45 PM
link   
I don't think you can blame Bush for controlling the press.
The press has been under the thumb of big business and big government for decades.

The notion that we are getting fair and unbiased reporting all the time is a joke and any news outlet that claims to be ALWAYS truthful....well, I don' think so


And, it's not just big stories, but small, local stuff too.
All you have to do is know about something first-hand and then see what the meida does to it. You probably won't recognize what you experienced.

And, oh, yeah, what Lecky said. All these titillating stories to take our minds off reality, like Michael Jackson, Scot Peterson, Teri Schaivo, Ilian Gonzalez, all the reality TV shows and on and on.



posted on Jun, 11 2005 @ 09:01 PM
link   


And, oh, yeah, what Lecky said. All these titillating stories to take our minds off reality, like Michael Jackson, Scot Peterson, Teri Schaivo, Ilian Gonzalez, all the reality TV shows and on and on.


Part of the problem is they're all in it for the money. Gossip magazine type stories sell copy. Pretty soon, no one will be willing to cover the actual news because it's not exciting enough.

I do think the government has an agenda, though. I think controlling the press is all about keeping power in Washington. There may be some motivation beyond that - that's the part I'm not sure about.



posted on Jun, 11 2005 @ 09:26 PM
link   
to futher bush and Co. greedy goals of course... you have to spend money to make money you know... well, you have to spend lots of money to make lots and lots of money...



posted on Jun, 11 2005 @ 09:28 PM
link   


to futher bush and Co. greedy goals of course... you have to spend money to make money you know... well, you have to spend lots of money to make lots and lots of money...


Yes, yes! If only it were their OWN money they were spending! Unfortunately, it's ours .... And they're not giving any of it back!



posted on Jun, 11 2005 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by AWingAndASigh
I do think the government has an agenda, though. I think controlling the press is all about keeping power in Washington. There may be some motivation beyond that - that's the part I'm not sure about.

Well, sure they have an agenda,
But, don't stop with Washington. Every state and every political entity in those states have agendas.

They have to sell the people to get road bonds on the ballot, or to get that millage increase. Whatever.
And they slant what they say to get to do vote the way they want.



posted on Jun, 11 2005 @ 09:47 PM
link   


They have to sell the people to get road bonds on the ballot, or to get that millage increase. Whatever.


If I could be certain that their motivation was benign, I probably wouldn't worry so much. However, the government that's open and responsive to the people is usually the best government. They have fewer opportunies to pull dirty tricks in those cases.

MKULTRA, Syphallis experiments, radiation experiments ...

Well, sometimes it's not in the public's best interests to trust the government. In this case, the level of control over the press is far greater than anything I've seen before. That's what concerns me. Why would they go to that much trouble unless they had something really important to hide?



posted on Jun, 11 2005 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by AWingAndASigh


to futher bush and Co. greedy goals of course... you have to spend money to make money you know... well, you have to spend lots of money to make lots and lots of money...


Yes, yes! If only it were their OWN money they were spending! Unfortunately, it's ours .... And they're not giving any of it back!


yea, those dam bastards, our tax dollars goes to a worthness cause... again! this nation need to be reminded of what our founding fathers frought for...

[edit on 11-6-2005 by ulshadow]



posted on Jun, 11 2005 @ 10:27 PM
link   
The thing is they want us to think we are getting free press and never hearing propaganda, they want us to be dummied down so we believe whatever we are told. They need people willing to believe that they are doing good everywhere and those crazy people all over the world who hate us don't have a reason, oh yeah I forgot they hate our freedoms, now anyone who swallows that one is already dummied down they ahve suceeded.



posted on Jun, 11 2005 @ 10:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by goose
The thing is they want us to think we are getting free press and never hearing propaganda, they want us to be dummied down so we believe whatever we are told. They need people willing to believe that they are doing good everywhere and those crazy people all over the world who hate us don't have a reason, oh yeah I forgot they hate our freedoms, now anyone who swallows that one is already dummied down they ahve suceeded.


yea thats way bushco. rating just went down by like 11 percent... now like 60-70% of Americans don't support bushco. the rest of us are too corporate brainwashed to worry about these things, but we are waking up...



posted on Jun, 12 2005 @ 12:23 AM
link   
I think it's funny how people are looking to government owned and sponsored organizations such as PBS & BBC for "free" press...hasn't the free press always been privately owned, independent media?



posted on Jun, 12 2005 @ 01:13 AM
link   


I think it's funny how people are looking to government owned and sponsored organizations such as PBS & BBC for "free" press...hasn't the free press always been privately owned, independent media?


Well, personally, if it's my tax money that's funding the freaking thing, I don't want it to be a propaganda tool for the government!

And I wish the privately owned, independent media were any different from the PBS!



posted on Jun, 12 2005 @ 11:28 AM
link   
When has the press been free?
The press is very biased and has been. It is very biased to the left, and only the blind can't see that. PBS is about the worst, but the difference is, MY tax dollars go to supporting that crap. All tax dollars should be taken from PBS. It's days and reasons are over.

Now, look at the otehr side of American news, the "Fair and Balanced" FOX News Channel. While the rest of the media continues to feed the Tulipwalkers their daily dose of manure, FNC feeds the majority of America who is sick of the left bias of the rest of the media. Great, you say? Well, that might be the case, were they to actually report what needs reporting! They do not and they will not. FNC is to control while soothing the paranoid.

The BBC is real news? LOL! As I've seen way too much crap come from that agency, it can't be called "free press". As Mr. Johnston pointed out, that, and PBS, should be the last places one would look for the truth. As a matter of fact, you're looking to be lied to if you think you're going to find "free press" anywhere in the Matrix.



posted on Jun, 12 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   


The press is very biased and has been. It is very biased to the left, and only the blind can't see that. PBS is about the worst, but the difference is, MY tax dollars go to supporting that crap. All tax dollars should be taken from PBS. It's days and reasons are over.


IMO, it's in our best interests to have a press that's directly opposed to the administration in power. What's we DON'T want is a press that merely passes along the manure shoveled from Washington as if it were fact.

I don't particularly care what the slant of the press is as long as it doesn't match Washington. Otherwise, what hope do we have of getting any real idea of what's going on?



posted on Jun, 12 2005 @ 12:40 PM
link   
I think we might need to look at it in another way...

The media is owned by the large corporate conglomerates, which are far from liberal entities.

The reporters and writers that work for the media outlets are the liberal voices that infuriate you. But one thing that you don't ever see is the filters that are in place to only let through what the owners want. The journalists get their assignments from the top, and they report on that assignment. The specifics are up to them, but the actual subjects are controlled.

I've said this before on here, but I'll just keep saying it I guess because some people haven't heard it...

Trying to say that the journalists / reporters control the content on the media outlets is like saying that the workers on the factory floor of a car manufacturer get to design the automobiles themselves.



[edit on 12-6-2005 by benign]



posted on Jun, 12 2005 @ 12:55 PM
link   


Perhaps the people that control Bush also control the media. Or it may be more of an agreement, that they have "similar interests" and they will pursue those interests by cooperating.


All the more reason to want the two separate. Sounds like the NWO - now the Anti-Christ is running the show with Bush and the press as his/its lapdog?







 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join