I wish people would protest against the Mainstream Media... It's America's Biggest Problem.

As long as Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, BBC and other Mainstream Media outlets feed the public fake journalism, nothing can get accomplished.

Protest all you want at your Town Hall meetings, Protest in Washington DC, Protest wherever you want, but make no mistake that your protests are pointless as long as the masses are watching the MSM.

Even when you think the MSM is doing it's job, and reporting things that sound too good to be true (Glen Beck & FEMA camps for example).... believe me, it's 98% disinformation. Every now and then you can catch the MSM reporting something they shouldn't be, but it always gets swept quickly under the rug.

I see no reason why we should protest against the Government, as long as the MSM spews out lie after lie after lie that serves the interests of TPTB.

You want a protest to be effective? Start with the mainstream media. Yes,... I want my country back... But I believe we won't get our country back until we get some real journalism first.




[edit on 14-8-2009 by Doomsday 2029]

Excellent topic, Im right there with you friend. Personally, I kill several birds with one stone and on top of protest, push for the boycott of tv and radio all together. As long as the internet is around, no one has any legitimate excuse for watching television, with the exception of the occasional documentary and newscast to test the mainstream waters so to speak. That is unless of course, they enjoy being the puppets of pre-programmed reaction.



[edit on 8/14/2009 by psychedeliack]

Great idea!

If people would demonstrate en masse outside the studios and shout down political commentators from the studio audiences, their voices might get heard. Or at least the fact that people are getting fed up would be more well-known.

I think gullibility is a far bigger issue

if people wouldn't just buy what they hear MSM wouldn't be able to function

-Kyo

In my years on ATS, I have come to hate the MSM less and less, frankly.

Frankly, the MSM spins things and makes mistakes, but many of the "alternative" (and usually ideologically-driven) news outlets seem to have no shame at all about intentionally distorting the facts, or even outright making stuff up.

Whatever suits their political purposes - there is no semblance of loyalty to the truth, only to expedience.

Originally posted by KyoZero
I think gullibility is a far bigger issue
if people wouldn't just buy what they hear MSM wouldn't be able to function
-Kyo

Don't try to mix up the responsibilities, buddy. They lie clearly and heavily with the catastrophically scamming media, NOT with the consumers who are victims of their lies. The OP is right.


[edit on 14-8-2009 by WonderfulWorld]

I was at ground zero of a big media lie campaign that resulted in the shutdown of five plants in my state alone. I have seen several more examples of lie campaigns since then. Now I do not watch TV, read newspapers or listen to radios. I also boycott a lot of the products whose advertising dollars support MSM.

I normally try to go to primary sources such as laws, bills, treaties and such to substanciate any stories I read on the net. I also checkout information from both sides so I get a better picture.

I love answering the phone polls where they ask what your favorite TV programs are and how much time you spend watching TV and listening to the radio. The dead silence after I tell I do not listen makes me laugh

Originally posted by WonderfulWorld

Originally posted by KyoZero
I think gullibility is a far bigger issue
if people wouldn't just buy what they hear MSM wouldn't be able to function
-Kyo

Don't try to mix up the responsibilities, buddy. They lie clearly and heavily with the catastrophically scamming media, NOT with the consumers who are victims of their lies. The OP is right.



[edit on 14-8-2009 by WonderfulWorld]

and that is your opinion and that I respect

I am not mixing responsibilities...I am giving my opinion if that is alright

I do believe they spin alot but frankly if the consumer can't even wake up enough to think they are being swindled then I am not puting 100% blame on MSM.

that's my opinion...you can respect it or not...doesn't mater to me

Let me give you a analogy.

The MSM is like the high-priced lawyer for the government / PTB. How are you going to convict the TPTB in the court of law if they have a dream team of lawyers better than OJ Simpson?

We have a bloody glove

We have a motive

We have trail of evidence

But the MSM wants you to focus on something less important like how Mark Fuhrman is a racist (metaphorically speaking).



[edit on 15-8-2009 by Doomsday 2029]

reply to post by KyoZero

Originally posted by KyoZero
... I am not mixing responsibilities...I am giving my opinion if that is alright
I do believe they spin alot but frankly if the consumer can't even wake up enough to think they are being swindled then I am not puting 100% blame on MSM ...

As you state it’s probably not correct to put the blame "only" on the MSM, ie for “100%”. But they certainly have to take the MAIN responsibility (probably 95%), which you denied in your first post, ie (“I think gullibility is a far bigger issue”). Gullibility is also an issue, but never a “far bigger issue” ie certainly not the main cause.

And you can’t just generally accuse people of being “gullible”. Most people simply lack time or/and opportunity to become informed about background/truth. For instance people without computer or internet. So they hardly ever get a chance to be in the know.

Moreover it’s a moral question. As a matter of principle we must put the blame on the perpetrators of lies, not on the ones being lied to.


[edit on 14-8-2009 by WonderfulWorld]

And that's fine...you have your opinion and I have mine...if you like percentages...which I do

I would say 60% MSM and 40% people

look at all the folks here...they trust nothing until they get to see the story on their own

I don't see why others cannot do the same

yes folks without net and such are limited and there are folks without time and such is life but I have a hard time believing the vast majority can't find some way to figure things out on their own...often times you don't need the net

I don't need outside info to think something is fishy

take infomercials...I know it isn't that hard to cut paper or trim dogs' nails...I didn't need anyone to tell me that

or better yet...despite the fact I disagree...take 9/11...did you guys need the net to tell you something wasn't right?

-Kyo

As long as people are gullible, couldn't any medium of information exchange be used to manipulate them? TV and print media, I agree, are full of slanted information, but look how quickly those hoax emails flood inboxes. Gullible people are the weak link in getting the information to the masses.

reply to post by KyoZero


No, you are wrong about the people here . They preach 'deny ignorance ' a lot , but you watch when a major story breaks regarding a nation like Iran or Russia . They are fully immersed within the propaganda just as much as the people they claim to be sheep . Not all of course , but certainly the large majority .

I am sorry to say but do you think Russia, China, Africa and the Middle East tell the truth to their people, I would say America and Britain is far more truthful to their people than most countries.

But I bet other countries tell more truths about other nations than their own stories, which means to find the truth you have to listen to what they say and to for them to find the truth about them selves they have to listen to what we say. No wonder China and Iran and places around the world want to ban the internet.

Now give me a star.

reply to post by The time lord


There are countries which say little. When they do speak, the words are lies. The difference between those countries and countries such as the US and UK is many of the stricter countries suppress questioning the establishment, while the US and UK are more open, yet the citizens accept what they are spoon fed and question nothing, even though they have that liberty.

reply to post by The time lord


What you do here , is to introduce an indirect relation of the question as a related dependant . By questioning the reliability of the indirect relation , you seek to absolve and lend some kind of pseudo accuracy to the original point by making comparison to your non related parameter and asserting it comes out in favour.

Originally posted by Doomsday 2029

As long as Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, BBC and other Mainstream Media outlets feed the public fake journalism, nothing can get accomplished.

Just turn it off.

To protest against the mainstream media?
Well, let me ask you: Are you watching TV? Reading Newspapers? Magazines?

If your answer is a "yes" to any of the above questions you are not a very good leading example.

All you need to do for protesting against mainstream-media is don't watch, read, listen or buy any of these sources. It's that easy.

You don't even need to leave your house to protest!

[edit on 14-8-2009 by thegreatobserver]

Enough with the MSM blasting. If venting helps you, fantastic. If you are looking to make a positive change, it is a waste of time.

All "news" media is biased. TV, radio, internet, word of mouth, all of it and it always has been. People have been looking to control/manipulate public opinion via information delivery since the first caveman grunted.

What we have in abundance today is a massive amount of sources. Left, right and everywhere in the middle. Your only defense and, of course, we are only talking about YOUR defense because you can not control the stupidity of others is to take pains to get multiple sources of common information and then do your best to form your own opinion, ideally an informed one.

I just spent 6 months in Europe and did not have English TV nor did I buy a newspaper. I caught a bit news on the web. This was in a time of pretty significant "news". I did not miss it. Nor did I miss any "news" that were I to hear it at the time would have caused me to do anything what so ever. The problem with the media is that folks watch it. They also watch the other shows on the networks which have news they disagree with. Folks need to have some back bone. How about missing an episode of the "Family Guy" or better yet, have your kids turn off Sponge Bob and not support the network? Going further, don't support the products that advertise on those networks.

Too many folks want to complain but are too lazy to actually disrupt their lives to make a meaningful impact.

On return to the US, I spent some time in the UK where I learned something critical about the news. The uglier the female anchor is, the more credible the news seems to be, even if they are saying exactly the same thing! In news, Ugly = honesty. Now that I know that, I'll stick with Fox and Megyn Kelly in particular.

Well...I am amazed that others agree with me

I really do think people are a huge part of the problem

-Kyo