• Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions.

Joe Biden is now officially the 46th President of the United States of America

Should this thread be locked?

  • Yes

    Votes: 27 64.3%
  • No

    Votes: 15 35.7%

  • Total voters
    42
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
What are you talking about?
@Valwinz is referring to a hidden camera video published by Project Veritas in which a technical director working for CNN describes the inner workings of their news room and calls it "effectively propaganda", or something to that effect. Technical directors have no impact on content, so a pinch of salt is required here, but they can speak in regards to the overall sentiment in the news room. The video led to Project Veritas and O'Keefe himself being banned on Twitter, which is somewhat odd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valwinz

Xzi

Time to fly, 621
Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2013
Messages
17,716
Trophies
3
Location
The Lands Between
Website
gbatemp.net
XP
8,461
Country
United States
The video led to Project Veriras and O'Keefe himself being banned on Twitter, which is somewhat odd.
Probably because it was concluded to have been faked, or at least portions of it. That's typically how Veritas conducted business.

Not that I'm defending CNN, which is largely sensationalist and often low-quality journalism. It's just that most right-wing journalism is even worse than that, because they'll outright lie to your fucking face repeatedly. That or stoke racism and divisiveness. Fucker Carlson on Fox just keeps sinking lower and lower lately to try to compete with bottom of the barrel networks like OANN and NewsMax.
 

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
Probably because it was concluded to have been faked, or at least portions of it. That's typically how Veritas conducted business.

Not that I'm defending CNN, which is largely sensationalist and often low-quality journalism. It's just that most right-wing journalism is even worse than that, because they'll outright lie to your fucking face repeatedly. That or stoke racism and divisiveness. Fucker Carlson on Fox just keeps sinking lower and lower lately to try to compete with bottom of the barrel networks like OANN and NewsMax.
According to Twitter, the ban was a result of O'Keefe operating multiple accounts. He vehemently denies doing so. It had nothing to do with the content of the recordings. I won't comment on the veracity of the story, but the timing seems inconvenient here and certainly comes across as Twitter covering for CNN, as they have previously in regards to the New York Post story about Hunter Biden.
 

chrisrlink

Has a PhD in dueling
Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
5,544
Trophies
2
Location
duel acadamia
XP
5,707
Country
United States
uh remind me what country I live in now?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-creating-harsher-penalties-protesters-123225066.html
out of all the fucked up laws red states are passing Oklahoma and Iowa takes the f-nig cake


Republican legislators in Oklahoma and Iowa have passed bills granting immunity to drivers whose vehicles strike and injure protesters in public streets.


so in other words legal Chaolettsville as long as i don't kill anyone in the process i can mow people down protesting (both peaceful or not) and not get charged? this isn't gonna end well
 
Last edited by chrisrlink,
  • Like
Reactions: KingVamp and Xzi

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
uh remind me what country I live in now?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-creating-harsher-penalties-protesters-123225066.html
out of all the fucked up laws red states are passing Oklahoma takes the f-nig cake


Republican legislators in Oklahoma and Iowa have passed bills granting immunity to drivers whose vehicles strike and injure protesters in public streets.


so in other words legal Chaolettsville as long as i don't kill anyone in the process i can mow people down protesting (both peaceful or not) and not get charged? this isn't gonna end well
I am unironically in favour of this. The street is not a safe place to protest, restricting traffic without prior authorisation and an organised traffic diversion is not acceptable. People are trying to get around town, emergency services require easy access, there's a million reasons why a mob shouldn't spontaneously take to the streets. If you want to organise a protest in the streets, it should be done with the permission of City Hall and an appropriate police escort, otherwise you're just in violation of traffic laws and you're impeding people's right to travel unimpeded.
 

Xzi

Time to fly, 621
Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2013
Messages
17,716
Trophies
3
Location
The Lands Between
Website
gbatemp.net
XP
8,461
Country
United States
uh remind me what country I live in now?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-creating-harsher-penalties-protesters-123225066.html
out of all the fucked up laws red states are passing Oklahoma and Iowa takes the f-nig cake


Republican legislators in Oklahoma and Iowa have passed bills granting immunity to drivers whose vehicles strike and injure protesters in public streets.


so in other words legal Chaolettsville as long as i don't kill anyone in the process i can mow people down protesting (both peaceful or not) and not get charged? this isn't gonna end well
Florida's even worse, they declared that any group of three people misbehaving constitutes a "riot," and that it was legal to run over said "rioters." But I guess nobody should be surprised by Florida one-upping crazy laws. Republicans (governors and constituents) were really hoping for a not guilty verdict on at least one of the counts so they could have an excuse to assault and kill people.
 

chrisrlink

Has a PhD in dueling
Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
5,544
Trophies
2
Location
duel acadamia
XP
5,707
Country
United States
I am unironically in favour of this. The street is not a safe place to protest, restricting traffic without prior authorisation and an organised traffic diversion is not acceptable. People are trying to get around town, emergency services require easy access, there's a million reasons why a mob shouldn't spontaneously take to the streets. If you want to organise a protest in the streets, it should be done with the permission of City Hall and an appropriate police escort, otherwise you're just in violation of traffic laws and you're impeding people's right to travel unimpeded.
so basicly your saying you ok if peaceful protesters (not saying many are) get intentionally run over (like chasing protesters even if they get out of the way) just for shills are you ok with that? cause i bet the law is vague enough that even with intent to injure will be shielded there are plenty of racist/neo nazi's who would exploit this law to the absolute limit
 

tabzer

This place is a meme.
Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
5,844
Trophies
1
Age
39
XP
4,910
Country
Japan
Taking a page from Tabbys book, huh? Like I said, your cheap tactics aren't going to work with me. I already gave you proof. This entire thread. That's ALL the proof you need. Are you wanting me to quote pages and pages and pages worth of comments - including those that have been removed by mods? Bad faith requests, another Tabby tactic. Clap clap. Try reading the entire thing, rather than only the parts you choose. Both sides have been bullying, condescending, and rude. Do you think the mods would be deleting posts from BOTH if only one of them have been doing the things you describe? Have you read the reasons for all of the post removals from your own side of the fence? For you to be so incredibly one sided on cold, hard facts just proves my points about you. Like I said, gtfo of here with your hypocritical bullshit.

@D34DL1N3R is correct in this instance, foul behaviour has been observed on both sides of the aisle, civil behaviour is expected of both the supporters and opponents of the current administration. At this rate, I don't know if we're all going to survive the next four years - I might get an aneurysm reading all the pointless drivel for years on end. It would be nice if we could all get along and discuss the issues instead of pointing fingers, I don't think a debate about who's the "biggest bully" in the thread is productive in any shape or form. This is not a playground for school children, the participants are (presumably) all grown adults, so "bullying" isn't high on the long list of concerns in regards to this thread. Any and all violations of community standards will be addressed as they come up.

None of you are reading if you think I'm on someone's side. I think you are all awful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Foxi4

D34DL1N3R

Nephilim
Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2008
Messages
3,670
Trophies
1
XP
3,220
Country
United States
I am unironically in favour of this. The street is not a safe place to protest, restricting traffic without prior authorisation and an organised traffic diversion is not acceptable. People are trying to get around town, emergency services require easy access, there's a million reasons why a mob shouldn't spontaneously take to the streets. If you want to organise a protest in the streets, it should be done with the permission of City Hall and an appropriate police escort, otherwise you're just in violation of traffic laws and you're impeding people's right to travel unimpeded.

I side with this. Having lived smack dab in the middle of uptown and downtown Minneapolis for 20+ years, I've experienced first hand BLM protestors blocking the streets and even the light rail track! Get off the fucking road and train tracks. It effects far too many people that have nothing to do with what they're protesting against.
 

Xzi

Time to fly, 621
Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2013
Messages
17,716
Trophies
3
Location
The Lands Between
Website
gbatemp.net
XP
8,461
Country
United States
I side with this. Having lived smack dab in the middle of uptown and downtown Minneapolis for 20+ years, I've experienced first hand BLM protestors blocking the streets and even the light rail track! Get off the fucking road and train tracks. It effects far too many people that have nothing to do with what they're protesting against.
Not to be pedantic, but part of any protest is protesting against apathy. They're meant to be disruptive, to a point. This country was founded on protest, so criminalizing it to any degree is dumb/hypocritical.
 
Last edited by Xzi,

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
None of you are reading if you think I'm on someone's side. I think you are all awful.
Hell is other people.
so basicly your saying you ok if peaceful protesters (not saying many are) get intentionally run over (like chasing protesters even if they get out of the way) just for shills are you ok with that? cause i bet the law is vague enough that even with intent to injure will be shielded there are plenty of racist/neo nazi's who would exploit this law to the absolute limit
Intentionally? No. I believe the driver should come to a full stop and announce their presence with the horn. If the "peaceful protesters" refuse to let the vehicle pass and the driver has no other alternative to reach their destination, they should slowly move forward. This allows anyone protesting to get out of their way. If they don't get out of their way, I can't blame the driver - they've taken all the reasonable steps to safely pass through the obstruction. All I expect from the driver in that situation is to inform the crowd - "I am here, I wish to pass, I am going to do so slowly. If you do not move out of the way, you are liable to get hit". I can only see two exception from this rather sensible standard. The first would be the crowd not having any room to move - that does happen, the driver needs to give the crowd a sensible amount of time to relocate if there's very little space available. The second would be the driver getting attacked - if that's the case, pedal to the metal. At that point it's a matter of self-defense, the driver is entitled to use force to preserve their own life and well-being, and a vehicle is as good a weapon as any other. If life and limb are at risk, I'd expect the driver to leave the area where they're in danger immediately - if the escape route is blocked, that's not their fault.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted User

notimp

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
5,779
Trophies
1
XP
4,419
Country
Laos
@Valwinz is referring to a hidden camera video published by Project Veritas in which a technical director working for CNN describes the inner workings of their news room and calls it "effectively propaganda", or something to that effect. Technical directors have no impact on content, so a pinch of salt is required here, but they can speak in regards to the overall sentiment in the news room. The video led to Project Veriras and O'Keefe himself being banned on Twitter, which is somewhat odd.
Thats factually wrong - and frankly I dont know how to deal with a moderator spreading falsehoods and propaganda.

I'm not familiar with the case - but you produce the story in an off handed way, so I cant get familiar with the original sources - and from what I can dig up via Wiki ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Veritas ) this specifically refers to one persons opinion on them handling the russia investigation.

And not to "the inner workings of their newsroom" in particular.

What you are doing is distorting peoples believes in the news ecosystem - by blowing up a story that might have shown misreporting in one case to a "you cant trust this news network anymore - on all topics" -- effectively driving people into the arms of the fraction that brought you this UNDERCOVER REPORTING, which probably has ties to russian PR efforts as well. So from your perspective, people should end up with russia affiliated blogeria - probably? Whats your path of action here?

Id mount a campaign to get you banned from posting in here as a moderator again, simply on that aspect alone - if I werent two strikes away from getting banned, while you had been very effective in the past on driving my warning counter up - whenever I confronted you in the past.

What you are doing here is not ok. You are flipping moving people away from CNN as a news source on all topics, because of how they might have handled one story in the past - based on one of their reporters, who wasnt part of their daily news beat.

Then you do so without posting sources - and flippingly using the pull the moderator badge gives you. I hate it. I hate every part of it.
--

If you do that with every major news source over the years - what do you expect young people to follow? Scandal reporting on Project Veritas exclusively?
-

HOW WOULD A RESPONSIBLE WAY OF HANDLING THIS INFORMATION LOOK LIKE?

First, there are pressures within the news ecosystem to fall in line with government positions on all things "national security related" - basically because they can be searched, pressured and so on by state agencies, if they do reporting that would conflict with national interests.

Thats acknowledged, and most newsoutlets fall within the pocket, that would self censor themselves, before getting into conflict with the state on those grounds.

From that arguably follows a 'self censorship/corporate culture' mentality that f.e. would drive stories against foreign powers you are in conflict with full force - and without 'objective distance' because its perceived as in the interest of the nation. Even down to producing sensationalism.

If that was the case here - we dont know, the other side also isnt just working by handing out lemon tea, but is driving a public perception agenda as well.

It has to be noted, that most of that impacts, how 'much you play' as story, as well as probably 'source selection' and 'the experts you ask' (- which usually would be experts within the Washington bubble and...)


It usually doesnt impact - reporting, and even more so "all reporting". So stay away from commentary - use the reporting (fact based), and you should be fine - because other pressures aside, it still has a negative impact on a newspaper if they are found reporting the facts incorrectly.

If they would start doing so - other journalism outlets could accuse them of misreporting facts - causing them serious economical harm and loss of reader and viewership.

Interpretation? (Commentary) Agenda setting (which stories are played as important), different ballgame. Most of the spin can be found there.


But if we now do what you people are trying to pull off in here and discredit all reporting of a news organisation with hundreds of reporters, following an ethos, now questioning all government statistics they report and at the same time drive people to outlets that are run by one or two flipping nutters, who are solely dependent on ad revenues, they have no idea where they are coming from --

the entire ecosystem doesnt get better, it gets worse.

So making transparent, where "reporting in the bubble" affected journalistic standards negatively - good.
Telling people "dont trust CNN anymore, one of their medical reporters said, that one of their russia stories was pushed because of alterior motives - so now all of CNN reporting bad, because Project Veritas said so (it didnt, btw)" = idiotic.

If you cant be bothered to differenciate between reporting and opinion, move people into worse news ecosystems, dont tell them how the pressures, work, but that they have to differenciate between the "good" newspapers and the "bad" ones, where the good ones are the ones always doing the scandal reporting -- and do that on a forum targeted towards younger people - as a moderator, then get the flack out of here.


Just fyi - there is a "Project Veritas" clone (? - spoken with liberties in interpretation), called bellingcat ( https://www.bellingcat.com/ ) where you can read partlysensationalistic 'exposing the truth' reporting all day. They must be the good ones then? Arguably yes - sure, but their contributers also mainly stem from the security analysts sector within the US.

see: https://www.mintpressnews.com/bellingcat-intelligence-agencies-launders-talking-points-media/276603/

And that source probably has some russian agencies behind them, who paid for that research work.

So now we arent reading bellingcat anymore? Because its propaganda?
-

Here is the simple but essential 'truth' NO ONE will work with the public interest in mind in news reporting, if it were not for bigger news outlets employing enough reporters, that they can debate on topics and look over each others shoulders. Every blogger caters to their audience and their sources as well - at least the vast majority of popular ones do - because then they get the exclusives.

And when CNN does so on a russia story - it doesnt mean, that you cant trust anything that is posted on the platform.

As a flipping result, never trust one source - there isnt such a thing as 'objective news'.

But far more importantly, never trust one guy, that hasnt got a clue about how this works, but is steering people away from trusting in CNN reporting on even mundane stuff - like a statistic, that didnt come with a story, because he read some persons opinion on an "expose the truth" platform.

Even flipping Chomsky - who wrote the theory on how media manipulation works in the west (mainly through agenda setting and giving an aura, on what opinion is ok to hold, or not -- elite bubbles journalism is part of, and ownership concentration -. which lead to proactive selfcensorship and on the flipside the 'sensationalistic article on russia' you might put more focus on because you know its in the interest of the state) still reads the reporting in the New York Times.

Its all about having enough people following an ethos of actual journalistic reporting - in one place - so they can discuss stories, you have as a counterbalance to what you are claiming is the issue here. On factual reporting, facts should usually be checked using different sources anyhow. And if they are not you can congratulate your facebook news consumption habbits, for them not being checked thoroughly, because 'whos got the story first - gets most of the ad money'. One whistleblower once in a while strengthens that concept, but cant replace it.

And yes there are economical pressures, elite bubbles, national interest concerns, that interact with all this. Which is why you read international sources - but still preferable ones where reporting is done - as supposed to "oppinion sharing".

And if you are dependent on mimicking another persons "commentary" - so you can propose, that you've understood how the world works - you havent even done the first step. Commentary usually is - where most of the spin is situated.

Reporting usually is not. And the more boring an article is to read, the more likely that its not drawn up for a purpose.


edit: "Why cant journalism just simple tell me "that truth"" - First, because there is no such thing as "the truth" without a perspective that leads to that assessment, second - because there are 3x more people doing "content production" in marketing agencies and PR firms, getting payed better to produce what they are producing. Journalism isn't immune to those forces - by having a direct line to god, to ask him whats true, and whats not -- so some influence always is implied. You get around it, by reading different perspectives and forming your own opinion, not by putting CNN on a blacklist, because it was featured negatively on Project Truth (veritas) once.

And why not get rid of all the marketing and PR thats driving that stuff? Answer are you kidding - its in the language - you use it every day - trying to influence people, you cant just outrule "spin". No even the professional spin. Again - having more than one person working together with likeminded people, following an ethic of producing content in the public interest is all you have to try to counter it. Do those people have white spots, and biases they might not even realize, or as a result of having grown up with "within the organisation" - sure. But in the end they (that concept), are still 50x better than some anonymouse source posting a tellall article somewhere on the internet. At the same time the tellall articles are important as well - but you dont get their importance without context - and there is where interpretation comes in again. Damn. No Project Truth I can read to only get the Truth news from today on... So sad.
 
Last edited by notimp,

tabzer

This place is a meme.
Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
5,844
Trophies
1
Age
39
XP
4,910
Country
Japan
Thats factually wrong - and frankly I dont know how to deal with a moderator spreading falsehoods and propaganda.

I'm not familiar with the case - but you produce the story in an off handed way, so I cant get familiar with the original sources - and from what I can dig up via Wiki ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Veritas ) this specifically refers to one persons opinion on them handling the russia investigation.

And not to "the inner workings of their newsroom" in particular.

What you are doing is distorting peoples believes in the news ecosystem - by blowing up a story that might have shown misreporting in one case to a "you cant trust this news network anymore - on all topics" -- effectively driving people into the arms of the fraction that brought you this UNDERCOVER REPORTING, which probably has ties to russian PR efforts as well. So from your perspective, people should end up with russia affiliated blogeria - probably? Whats your path of action here?

Id mount a campaign to get you banned from posting in here as a moderator again, simply on that aspect alone - if I werent two strikes away from getting banned, while you had been very effective in the past on driving my warning counter up - whenever I confronted you in the past.

What you are doing here is not ok. You are flipping moving people away from CNN as a news source on all topics, because of how they might have handled one story in the past - based on one of their reporters, who wasnt part of their daily news beat.

Then you do so without posting sources - and flippingly using the pull the moderator badge gives you. I hate it. I hate every part of it.
--

If you do that with every major news source over the years - what do you expect young people to follow? Scandal reporting on Project Veritas exclusively?
-

HOW WOULD A RESPONSIBLE WAY OF HANDLING THIS INFORMATION LOOK LIKE?

First, there are pressures within the news ecosystem to fall in line with government positions on all things "national security related" - basically because they can be searched, pressured and so on by state agencies, if they do reporting that would conflict with national interests.

Thats acknowledged, and most newsoutlets fall within the pocket, that would self censor themselves, before getting into conflict with the state on those grounds.

From that arguably follows a 'self censorship/corporate culture' mentality that f.e. would drive stories against foreign powers you are in conflict with full force - and without 'objective distance' because its perceived as in the interest of the nation. Even down to producing sensationalism.

If that was the case here - we dont know, the other side also isnt just working by handing out lemon tea, but is driving a public perception agenda as well.

It has to be noted, that most of that impacts, how 'much you play' as story, as well as probably 'source selection' and 'the experts you ask' (- which usually would be experts within the Washington bubble and...)


It usually doesnt impact - reporting, and even more so "all reporting". So stay away from commentary - use the reporting (fact based), and you should be fine - because other pressures aside, it still has a negative impact on a newspaper if they are found reporting the facts incorrectly.

If they would start doing so - other journalism outlets could accuse them of misreporting facts - causing them serious economical harm and loss of reader and viewership.

Interpretation? (Commentary) Agenda setting (which stories are played as important), different ballgame. Most of the spin can be found there.


But if we now do what you people are trying to pull off in here and discredit all reporting of a news organisation with hundreds of reporters, following an ethos, now questioning all government statistics they report and at the same time drive people to outlets that are run by one or two flipping nutters, who are solely dependent on ad revenues, they have no idea where they are coming from --

the entire ecosystem doesnt get better, it gets worse.

So making transparent, where "reporting in the bubble" affected journalistic standards negatively - good.
Telling people "dont trust CNN anymore, one of their medical reporters said, that one of their russia stories was pushed because of alterior motives - so now all of CNN reporting bad, because Project Veritas said so (it didnt, btw)" = idiotic.

If you cant be bothered to differenciate between reporting and opinion, move people into worse news ecosystems, dont tell them how the pressures, work, but that they have to differenciate between the "good" newspapers and the "bad" ones, where the good ones are the ones always doing the scandal reporting -- and do that on a forum targeted towards younger people - as a moderator, then get the flack out of here.


Just fyi - there is a "Project Veritas" clone (? - spoken with liberties in interpretation), called bellingcat ( https://www.bellingcat.com/ ) where you can read partlysensationalistic 'exposing the truth' reporting all day. They must be the good ones then? Arguably yes - sure, but their contributers also mainly stem from the security analysts sector within the US.

see: https://www.mintpressnews.com/bellingcat-intelligence-agencies-launders-talking-points-media/276603/

And that source probably has some russian agencies behind them, who paid for that research work.

So now we arent reading bellingcat anymore? Because its propaganda?
-

Here is the simple but essential 'truth' NO ONE will work with the public interest in mind in news reporting, if it were not for bigger news outlets employing enough reporters, that they can debate on topics and look over each others shoulders. Every blogger caters to their audience and their sources as well - at least the vast majority of popular ones do - because then they get the exclusives.

And when CNN does so on a russia story - it doesnt mean, that you cant trust anything that is posted on the platform.

As a flipping result, never trust one source - there isnt such a thing as 'objective news'.

But far more importantly, never trust one guy, that hasnt got a clue about how this works, but is steering people away from trusting in CNN reporting on even mundane stuff - like a statistic, that didnt come with a story, because he read some persons opinion on an "expose the truth" platform.

Even flipping Chomsky - who wrote the theory on how media manipulation works in the west (mainly through agenda setting and giving an aura, on what opinion is ok to hold, or not -- elite bubbles journalism is part of, and ownership concentration -. which lead to proactive selfcensorship and on the flipside the 'sensationalistic article on russia' you might put more focus on because you know its in the interest of the state) still reads the reporting in the New York Times.

Its all about having enough people following an ethos of actual journalistic reporting - in one place - so they can discuss stories, you have as a counterbalance to what you are claiming is the issue here. On factual reporting, facts should usually be checked using different sources anyhow. And if they are not you can congratulate your facebook news consumption habbits, for them not being checked thoroughly, because 'whos got the story first - gets most of the ad money'. One whistleblower once in a while strengthens that concept, but cant replace it.

And yes there are economical pressures, elite bubbles, national interest concerns, that interact with all this. Which is why you read international sources - but still preferable ones where reporting is done - as supposed to "oppinion sharing".

And if you are dependent on mimicking another persons "commentary" - so you can propose, that you've understood how the world works - you havent even done the first step. Commentary usually is - where most of the spin is situated.

Reporting usually is not. And the more boring an article is to read, the more likely that its not drawn up for a purpose.


edit: "Why cant journalism just simple tell me "that truth"" - First, because there is no such thing as "the truth" without a perspective that leads to that assessment, second - because there are 3x more people doing "content production" in marketing agencies and PR firms, getting payed better to produce what they are producing. Journalism isn't immune to those forces - by having a direct line to god, to ask him whats true, and whats not -- so some influence always is implied. You get around it, by reading different perspectives and forming your own opinion, not by putting CNN on a blacklist, because it was featured negatively on Project Truth (veritas) once.

And why not get rid of all the marketing and PR thats driving that stuff? Answer are you kidding - its in the language - you use it every day - trying to influence people, you cant just outrule "spin". No even the professional spin. Again - having more than one person working together with likeminded people, following an ethic of producing content in the public interest is all you have to try to counter it. Do those people have white spots, and biases they might not even realize, or as a result of having grown up with "within the organisation" - sure. But in the end they (that concept), are still 50x better than some anonymouse source posting a tellall article somewhere on the internet. At the same time the tellall articles are important as well - but you dont get their importance without context - and there is where interpretation comes in again. Damn. No Project Truth I can read to only get the Truth news from today on... So sad.

The wall of text will take time to digest. I'll address the first point. How do you deal with media that perpetuates propaganda?

Seek the truth behind it?

Unfortunately too many people react to headlines.
 

Hanafuda

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
4,452
Trophies
2
XP
6,872
Country
United States
uh remind me what country I live in now?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-creating-harsher-penalties-protesters-123225066.html
out of all the fucked up laws red states are passing Oklahoma and Iowa takes the f-nig cake


Republican legislators in Oklahoma and Iowa have passed bills granting immunity to drivers whose vehicles strike and injure protesters in public streets.


so in other words legal Chaolettsville as long as i don't kill anyone in the process i can mow people down protesting (both peaceful or not) and not get charged? this isn't gonna end well

Simple solution. Protest all you like, but don't block public roads.

That's not to say these legislative attempts to do something about it are correct. But they wouldn't be passing these laws if so-called "peaceful protesters" had the sense not to be blocking public roadways and violently fucking with people who just want to get home, or to their job, or to the hospital.

This is stupid behavior being met by a stupid response.
 
Last edited by Hanafuda,

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
*Wall of Text*
I don't know what your problem is. I'm simply describing the story @Valwinz was referring to, I'm not commenting on whether the story is true or not. You're also two warnings away from a ban because your behaviour here is appalling, and hasn't improved over time. You know this, and you've been informed about that being the case not just by myself, but by multiple members of staff, from the very bottom of the hierarchy to the tippy-top of it. I normally don't respond to you anymore because I'm not interested in having any exchanges with you that go outside of my duties on the site, but if you feel the need to post blatant misinformation, you force my hand. For the record, you may as well not reply to this correction, because I certainly won't be responding to your baseless accusations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valwinz

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
6,638
Trophies
2
XP
5,835
Country
United Kingdom
Simple solution. Protest all you like, but don't block public roads.

Or block them better and make sure anyone running into you has a costly insurance claim to make and have to explain why they thought it was a good idea to drive into someone.

The stupid thing about laws against protesting, is it affects both sides. Supporting bans because you hate the idea of black people protesting for rights, will have the same effect the next time the capitol gets stormed.
 
Last edited by smf,

djpannda

GBAtemp's Pannda
Member
GBAtemp Patron
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
2,477
Trophies
3
XP
6,402
Country
United States
sorry I know its a bit off topic.. but is any one watching the Mike Lindell Frankspeech live video..
...He is diff on Crack again... and its FUCKING GREAT!!! He's mad that the Reporters debunked him and called them Chinese spies for questioning him. He's crying stating Smartmatic is Cyberdyne creating Terminators
And Now he's mad they sued him stating thats proof of the coverup!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
    Xdqwerty @ Xdqwerty: @Zurdonx, report it