White House boasts: We 'control' news media, page 5
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6    7  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 37 times


reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 07:21 PM by sonnny1
reply to post by MrVertigo



Heres an interesting article.I believe that both parties use the media to their advantage.Whoever is in power,wins the day.

www.journalism.org...

Personally,Both parties are weak,and we need a "REAL CHANGE".


reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 07:36 PM by sonnny1
reply to post by Doc Velocity



Doc,please prescribe a catchier phrase for me then!

Yes,I did used part of the one line everyone had fallen for...............


reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 09:14 PM by Phenomium
Originally posted by Misfit
I can't watch the damn thing.

Is anyone else getting extremely irritated with YouTube today?

3 seconds ..... buffer buffer buffer ..... 3 seconds ..... buffer buffer buffer ...... 3 sec ...

[edit on 10/19/2009 by Misfit]


That's not Youtube. It's your bandwidth. Either you have spyware, viruses, trojans or malware. Or you have a 56K modem.....................or more likely that it is a recession and your ISP is making you pay top dollar while robbing you of your true bandwidth. At leaast this seems to be the case with my ISP. Always putting caps on my speed in an attempt to "control" my internet usage. They say you have "unlimited" bandwidth but that is a big fat lie. In answer to your question,......Yes, I am getting very irritated with Youtube lately for bending over for the government and controlling and removing content, that if seen by a greater part of the nation would certainly give a more complete and honest accountability of our country's representatives. The snakes, like international bankers and misappropriators would then be, more than likely, held accountable by the people of the nation....instead of the same snakes in government protecting them at every turn by controlling the media, giving only their side of the story, lying, telling everyone listening that "this is what America is saying" when it clearly is the antitesis of what we are really saying. We are simultaneously, as a nation, yelling at the television screen..........and still, we are not heard. Youtube was made to be a venue for US..."we the people" that it why it is called 'YOU' TUBE...not government controlled tube...but everyone has their price and Youtube is no different.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by Phenomium]


reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 09:36 PM by WeAreAWAKE
reply to post by MrVertigo



Exactly...I hope you realized that I feel that it IS both sides, but one currently in "power". I hope everyone can see that this should show great concern for what is being done against Fox news. While some people will obviously disagree with their views etc...the idea that the government is trying to isolate them, threaten their existence and income potential, as another form of stamping out opposing views and opinions. As much as Fox may be one sided, as others are, we NEED the opposing views.

That was my attempted point.


reply posted on 19-10-2009 @ 11:30 PM by sdcigarpig
This is not the first time that the White House has tried to control the media. If my memory serves correct, the first adminstration was FDR. From what I recall, FDR called all of the news people into a close door meeting and asked them not to run a story, as he laid out to them what the decision was and what the actions would be. He asked, and they agreed, to hold off on running a story and they waited for the agreed on day. And that was right before D-Day, the invasion of France. Now other adminstrations used the media to their advantage, but never to try to control or exclude one over another. The next one that comes to mind is the Nixon Adminstration, where it was to cover up crimes that went all of the way up to the President of the United States. According to the reporters, they were threatened, tailed, bugged and almost had their entire careers ruined so the President could avoid prosecution. Now we have Obama, and they are not wanting to directly talk to the media or answer questions that they have no control over. I think that they forgot 2 things in that little decision, one is that the people, when they view that the current adminstration the people vote in large numbers, and the other is that if push comes to shoves, people start demanding the removal and replacement of their elected officials. Based off of what I am seeing and reading, I wonder how far the current adminstration is willing to control to control the media and if that will cause an outcry of the public.


reply posted on 20-10-2009 @ 12:16 AM by wanderingwaldo
Originally posted by sdcigarpig
This is not the first time that the White House has tried to control the media. If my memory serves correct, the first adminstration was FDR. From what I recall, FDR called all of the news people into a close door meeting and asked them not to run a story, as he laid out to them what the decision was and what the actions would be. He asked, and they agreed, to hold off on running a story and they waited for the agreed on day. And that was right before D-Day, the invasion of France. Now other adminstrations used the media to their advantage, but never to try to control or exclude one over another. The next one that comes to mind is the Nixon Adminstration, where it was to cover up crimes that went all of the way up to the President of the United States. According to the reporters, they were threatened, tailed, bugged and almost had their entire careers ruined so the President could avoid prosecution. Now we have Obama, and they are not wanting to directly talk to the media or answer questions that they have no control over. I think that they forgot 2 things in that little decision, one is that the people, when they view that the current adminstration the people vote in large numbers, and the other is that if push comes to shoves, people start demanding the removal and replacement of their elected officials. Based off of what I am seeing and reading, I wonder how far the current adminstration is willing to control to control the media and if that will cause an outcry of the public.


I'll say it again if nobody else will. This is not what this thread is about. This thread is about a misleading headline which was misinterpreted by the OP. If you watch the video it is a PR person associated with the Obama Campaign talking about how they did their press releases - nothing more. This whole thread is about nothing more than standard PR practice. I have my own qualms with standard PR practice but there is nothing more sinister than that going on based on what was posted.

Seriously people stop jumping all over things that support your pre-concieved notion of reality BEFORE ACTUALLY VIEWING THE EVIDENCE FOR YOURSELF. The bulk of this thread is talking about how stupid this thread is and the rest is full of people who jump all over it based on the title without actually knowing what is actually stated in the video.

Please consult one of the other 20-30 posts about why this thread is about nothing if you do not believe me.

[edit on 20-10-2009 by wanderingwaldo]
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6    7  >>    ^^TOP^^