Operation Deflect: White House/GOP Digging up Dirt on Journalists

originally posted by: EartOccupant
a reply to: angeldoll

I do!

If you read my posts in this topic you will see that i agree to some points, but i raise the question: What to do when the media is out of control ?? Not one.. not 4.. the whole system and function of the media in a democracy.

Thats what i wonder.

They are responding to a White House and a President who is out of control.

*I think this all began with the 24 hour news stations. They hammer and hammer every thing to fill the hours in a day.
It does get old and they get carried away at times...

Reporters who rise to the top of their field are a sordid bunch. They have to be. Lots of radioactive dirt and skeletons in their closets. Get ur popcorn ready!

Well, when the press starts spreading twisted representations against our politicians to gain readers, then I think they should be charged with slander and fined extensively so they stop the practice. It has gotten way out of hand. I don't care who is president, I would not agree with the press doing this to Clinton if she was in the White house. (cringe) I respect the office of the president. Now if the president is actually doing something wrong and if the press is not twisting or glorifying it, that is freedom of the press and it is essential to have that. What has been happening is not freedom of the press. I did not agree with some of the stuff Fox was spreading before, but that is nothing compared to what MSM has been doing lately.

originally posted by: EartOccupant
a reply to: angeldoll

I do!

If you read my posts in this topic you will see that i agree to some points, but i raise the question: What to do when the media is out of control ?? Not one.. not 4.. the whole system and function of the media in a democracy.

Thats what i wonder.

If that ever happens, they will not be making the big bux anymore. I used to work in media...they need credibility to make money. Yes there may be a lean left or right, but its all to make their advertisers money and to increase viewship so they can ask for more money for advertising.

Also, lets say by chance money doesnt matter to the greedy media owners and we are fed straight up cow sh*t...turn off the TV, the radio, do not open the newspaper.

We still have to choice to not look at it or listen to it.

We should ALWAYS be taking the news in with a grain of salt anyway

originally posted by: Irishhaf

originally posted by: DanteGaland

originally posted by: EartOccupant
a reply to: DanteGaland

Fair enough...

But what when the media is out of control or out of balance ?

NEVER.

Personal responsibility to use common sense, logic and CRITICAL THINKING

It is up to YOU, not the government to form YOUR beliefs.

So the media supported by billionaires should be free to print anything regardless of the truth with zero fears of repercussions then?

yes!......however, that does NOT MEAN anyone will believe their "coverage".....the "repercussions" are, no one caring what you write or put out in the media world, and few people will give a damn.

a reply to: veracity

I agree with you in theory.

But..

For a multi billion dollar company or political, ideological party or even worse a cartel of both.. owning the news(station) or several in between them, could just be written of as marketing costs. Because the local and or global benefits to the entire cartel would outweigh the losses of the news station. (marketing branch )

In today's world with mega companies , perpetual wars , owning the news is a must.

Count to that the masses, the voting masses..those who do not have the time, intelligence or interest of seeking the truth and relay on what they read and see in the MSM (including the entertainment part) then it is a done deal.

And.. i dare to say.. its not fiction anymore if it ever was...

But it is getting worse.. and somehow.. something is gonna burst... and usually when something bursts on this scale.. the people will pay the bill.

I like how you underline and cap words to help make your point when there is no point to be made. It's like your a polishing a turd. And not just any either. A runny chunky turd.

If this is true. I don't blame them. Dems keeps accusing and reporters constantly lying. I understand freedom of speech but it has its limitations. You can't just say whatever you want and expect no retaliation.

I hate how our president has to try and melt all this snow you people keep throwing at him. Why? What are dems so afraid of? If we start to dig. And I mean get down and dirty. Elbows deep. Will we find pizzagate being an actual thing. What do you not want Trump to find out. Because he will. Sooner or later your closets are going to open and we will not like what we see.

This whole thing was started because of you. Now he's going to finish it. And it's about damn time too. This is old. Really old

a reply to: Krazysh0t

This should be raising tons of ethical concerns because it isn't the government's job to vet journalists.

This White House couldn't care less about ehtics. They're bottom line is "If it's not illegal, do it!" Trump's cabinet members are exempt of ethic rules, Ethics Office directors have resigned.

originally posted by: DanteGaland
This SIGNALS a new and dangerous precedent ... the GOVERNMENT taking active measures against coverage it doesn't like. The GOVERNMENT is not the truth police.

No precedent here. Obama spent 8 years talking crap about FOX news and their coverage of essentially all things political. Why is this (poorly) being presented as a novel strategy by a seated administration?

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Krazysh0t

This should be raising tons of ethical concerns because it isn't the government's job to vet journalists.

This White House couldn't care less about ehtics. They're bottom line is "If it's not illegal, do it!" Trump's cabinet members are exempt of ethic rules, Ethics Office directors have resigned.

didnt they try and gut the "ethics committee" as soon as don became president?

a reply to: ConscienceZombie

It's like your a polishing a turd. And not just any either. A runny chunky turd.

That's what reading your post felt like.

originally posted by: veracity

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Krazysh0t

This should be raising tons of ethical concerns because it isn't the government's job to vet journalists.

This White House couldn't care less about ehtics. They're bottom line is "If it's not illegal, do it!" Trump's cabinet members are exempt of ethic rules, Ethics Office directors have resigned.

didnt they try and gut the "ethics committee" as soon as don became president?

Yes they did!

a reply to: rickymouse

Well, when the press starts spreading twisted representations against our politicians to gain readers, then I think they should be charged with slander and fined extensively so they stop the practice.

But, it's okay for the Government to do that to journalists? You're willing to sacrifice the 1st Amendment because you're offended by opinion based views of current event?

originally posted by: EartOccupant
a reply to: Krazysh0t

It's not journalism, it is a witch hunt.
Those are not journalists, those are bought and paid for propagandists.
And those who are not, are afraid for their money and Job's system, or even jail-time.

It has nothing to do with real journalism for a long time now.

People should realize that Trump is not the reason, he is the effect.

Stand up for descent news, instead of attacking each-other.

Blah blah blah. I didn't see you demanding Fox News be accountable for their witch hunt over the 12 investigations into Benghazi. But let me guess, "that's different"?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So, what happened at Benghazi?

originally posted by: EartOccupant
a reply to: Krazysh0t

So, what happened at Benghazi?

Irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Trying to indict Hillary over the events was a witch hunt. Plain and simple. No one was calling on the government to vet the journalists spouting that conspiracy. Or hell, let's go with a proven hoax. Birtherism. No one demanded the government vet journalists spouting that piece of fake news. No that # stain of a story continued up until Obama's Presidency ended and was even pushed by the now President. So all you are doing is pissing on the 1st Amendment by defending Trump trying to build this taskforce. It is unethical and should be raising serious Constitutional concerns in you Constitutionalists. That is if you really DO value that document and aren't just using it as a political football like I highly suspect.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: rickymouse

Well, when the press starts spreading twisted representations against our politicians to gain readers, then I think they should be charged with slander and fined extensively so they stop the practice.

But, it's okay for the Government to do that to journalists? You're willing to sacrifice the 1st Amendment because you're offended by opinion based views of current event?

Journalists are supposed to print the news, not twisted versions of it to promote sales. I like to read the news and know it is real information in the article without having to read the whole article to identify it is not real information in the title and first paragraph.

a reply to: rickymouse

There is no law saying what journalists are supposed to print. A Fox affiliate won a lawsuit saying they are allowed to lie to the public, remember?

originally posted by: windword
But, it's okay for the Government to do that to journalists? You're willing to sacrifice the 1st Amendment because you're offended by opinion based views of current event?

LMGDAO!!!!!!
You honestly believe the US media qualifies as a "free press" when 90% of it is owned by 6 conglomorate multinational corporations? But the Trump Administration is a huge threat to freedom of the press? Ya, Oh-kay... suuuurrrrreeee.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

IOW: What difference does it make?!!! amirite?
*chortle*snort*guffaw*