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.

 

White House boasts: We 'control' news media

page: 5
37
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by sos37
This should be evidence to anyone that there is, in fact, a "liberal media" in place to put spin on events and news in favor of the current administration.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by sos37]


And you think the Obama administration is the first to do this? Sorry friend - this is "Politics 101". It's called message control and it is nothing new.

There's no conspiracy here, no cover up. It's simply the slimy political system at work.




posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 07:21 PM
link   
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".



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 07:28 PM
link   
I would just like to share with you the nightmare I just woke up from. I dreamt that the Daily Mail newspaper had found that they had "blood on their hands", meaning of course that their actions - what they had printed, had led to bloodshed, and that they had printed a newspaper where they had put this information on the front cover. This was a nightmare remember. The next thing I knew I was staring at "Medusa" for about 3 or 4 seconds, but she did not have any snakes on her head. Then the nightmare finished.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by TheDailyPlanet]



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1
Both parties are weak,and we need a "REAL CHANGE".


Boy, that remark sent a chill down my spine. Last time we fell for the "real change" rhetoric, we got Barack Hussein Obama, the hood ornament for left-wing Democrat business-as-usual.

— Doc Velocity



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 07:36 PM
link   
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...............



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1
Doc,please prescribe a catchier phrase for me then!


Well, I would suggest "Forget About Change, Pray For Salvation"... However, the last guy who was dispatched to bring us salvation ended up beaten, stabbed and nailed to a cross.

So I may need to think about this one more carefully.

— Doc Velocity



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 08:18 PM
link   
The media today is controlled, but I put the blame squarely on the media, not government. Of course, governments WANT to control the media. Anyone that doesn't realize that, isn't playing with a full deck.
Today, there are rarely any REAL journalists left- The talking heads merely receive "reports" from government spokespersons, and "report" those items.
It is pure laziness. Woodward and Bernstein, they are not. Gone are the days when journalists dug deeply to ferret out the truth. They don't QUESTION reports that don't make sense- they merely parrot what they have received. "News" has become Hollywood showtime- well groomed talking heads, who don't even attempt to understand what they read from others who don't understand what they were told.
Blame the "news" organizations. They have lost the meaning of what journalism should stand for.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doc Velocity

Well, I would suggest "Forget About Change, Pray For Salvation"...


How about "Take your change and shove it. Give me freedom, liberty and real opportunity.

With freedom, liberty and opportunity we built a nation and changed a world.

Without these important principles we are doomed to fail.

Controlling the spin, and/or the media will not change that fact.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 09:14 PM
link   

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]



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 09:21 PM
link   
I do not understand how people can say "well other admins did it too"
Is'nt that contradicting the very essence of what was to be expected by this administration?
So let me get this straight. We could'nt wait to get Bush out, but the guy you have so much promise for has a free pass to do the same stuff?

I'll start printing shirts for you guys ok... how about

"Can I Have My Vote Back?"



[edit on 19-10-2009 by Mailman]



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 09:36 PM
link   
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.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Walkswithfish

Originally posted by Doc Velocity

Well, I would suggest "Forget About Change, Pray For Salvation"...


How about "Take your change and shove it. Give me freedom, liberty and real opportunity.

With freedom, liberty and opportunity we built a nation and changed a world.

Without these important principles we are doomed to fail.

Controlling the spin, and/or the media will not change that fact.




Yeah, I have noticed that everytime the government speaks of change...they never say "change for the better".....it's always change or change we can believe in.........but never do they say it will be change for the better.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Just keep bickering..............

I don't know about "control" of the media, but they sure have a lot of you under control now don't they.



Oh, and thanks for the heads up about the rogue FOX network. I'll try watching it again.......................

NVM, FOX still sucks, it's like watching soft porn when your down for some real hard core action.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 10:46 PM
link   
I forgot, S&F OP for this. I'm just disappointed that Anita did not give ONE reptilian tongue jab in the entire 9min. vid.

Can anyone tell me what authintisy is? She said it 2X and I'm wondering what the strategery is behind that.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 11:30 PM
link   
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.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 12:16 AM
link   

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]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
Well I watched the video but I couldn't see anything that pointed to them controlling the media, but rather conducting interviews in such a way that gave them control over what message was heard by the viewers of the media.

Before I get bashed for being a blind follower of Obama I would like to say that I don't support the guy. I would have preferred Hillary to him. When he got the Dem. nomination I was set to vote for McCain until I watched him more and more by the day turn into a G.W. look-a-like. In the end I didn't vote.

So while I believe wholeheartedly that Obama is nothing more than a narcissistic, manipulative liar, the OP in this post is looking for something that isn't there and as pointed out before has done the very thing that they are accusing the administration of doing by trying to spin this article into something that it isn't.

Come on people, there are plenty of relevant things to bash Obama over, quit being lazy, and settling for any garbage that comes along.

EDIT TO ADD

This sort of thing isn't even a political strategy as claimed by many, but as mentioned earlier is a marketing technique. What he did is no different than what Tylenol does when you see commercials about how good it works on pain, and fever, but not how it destroys liver function.

[edit on 20-10-2009 by Majiq]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Majiq
Well I watched the video but I couldn't see anything that pointed to them controlling the media, but rather conducting interviews in such a way that gave them control over what message was heard by the viewers of the media.


OMG, someone who actually watched the video. *single tear* Hopefully with it getting late people will stop posting about how "they knew it all along" without knowing anything about anything and this thread can FINALLY die.

[edit on 20-10-2009 by wanderingwaldo]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 01:38 AM
link   
I just have to shake my head and giggle when I see people still denying the fact that the media is controlled by the ruling government of the time ... no matter where you find yourself in the world. Not only that, but more often than not, the media is controlled by entities 'above' the governments.

If you believe anything different, then (as I read someone else saying elsewhere) you need to take your head out ... and deny ignorance!

Um ... er ... unless of course you are peddling BS on behalf of those who do control the media ... and I see there are quite a few people working real hard at it ... smacks of 50c club to me.



new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join