| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
On May 17 2017 22:58 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: Well this fundraiser mail was sent out yesterday I can literally read that coming from the democrat side too... It's quite ridiculous already that he's trying to take more money from his already poor existing base. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On May 17 2017 19:33 Acrofales wrote: I'd like to hear the reasoning behind this argument in absentia before I just report you for breaking thread rules and let the mods sort it out. How is the media "fascist"? I'll help you by giving the definition of fascist: and here is the definition of fascism: Lets see. Does the media support a centralized autocratic government? Given their treatment of Trump, it sure doesn't look like they support this government. Perhaps you'd like to try and argue that they are fighting in favour of a more centralized and autocratic government? I'll just say "citation needed" and leave it at that. Does the media support a dictatorial leader? I´ll just feel free to answer for all of "the media" you happily lumped together and answer for all of them: hell no. Except perhaps Breitbart, who is fully in support of the great orange orangutan. Does the media advocate nationalism and elevating race over individual? No, that would also be the great orange orangutan, who came into the white house on a wave of nationalism and racism. And because you are particularly juxtaposing the media as opposed to Trump, you are clearly not talking about the pernicious problem of covering Trump 24/7 and thereby highlighting his platform. Does the media support economic and social regimentation? I have no idea. If that's the aspect of fascism you were trying to highlight, I'll let you make the argument. That leaves the final aspect of fascism: "forcible oppression of the opposition". Which you might want to accuse the media of. Unfortunately for you, the media does not use force, so it doesn't really apply. Moreover, this is not unique to fascism. In fact, none of these points are, fascism is the ideology that arises from the combination of all of this. You can't just throw words around that you think are "bad" and hope they mean something other than they do. it seems like you've defined your terms in such a way that a state's media can never be fascist, at least because the media doesn't use "force" (here strangely construed to include only physical use of). do you think it's possible for a media to be "fascist?" | ||
|
warding
Portugal2395 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
ChristianS
United States3304 Posts
On May 17 2017 23:16 IgnE wrote: it seems like you've defined your terms in such a way that a state's media can never be fascist, at least because the media doesn't use "force" (here strangely construed to include only physical use of). do you think it's possible for a media to be "fascist?" Given that fascism is a form of government, the obvious answer is no. Maybe if they were lockstep with an authoritarian government, regardless of whether what the government was telling the truth? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 17 2017 23:24 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: And here is Trump Jr. confirming the facts of the Comey memo. https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/864844461834219520 Thousands of attorneys are watching this case and will forever use it as an example to convince their clients to NEVER SPEAK. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18280 Posts
On May 17 2017 22:50 pmh wrote: No but all the fascist regimes made heavy use of the media (and education) to indoctrinate the population and stay in power. It is a key component of fascist regimes,without any sort of soft indoctrination it is very difficult to keep the population under control. Anyway I will leave it at this now,thx for response! The fact that totalitarian regimes use propaganda to indoctrinate the population seems entirely unrelated to the (real) problem of media being biased. 1) The media is not controlled by the government in any way, shape or form. If they happen to be biased, that is their bias, and you are entirely free to start up your own TV station that gives a different view of things. The fact that Fox, MSNBC and CNN are all TRASH doesn't mean there is some nefarious plot to shove crap down your throat. It just means your TV is trash. 2) The media is not trying to indoctrinate you. They have no message they are pushing beyond "watch us! we earn a living by showing you advertisement". The different media companies have different biases and cater to different public. Once again, that they all SUCK is not due to some nefarious scheme, it's due to us (their public) not valuing proper reporting. 3) Tangential, but controlling the media is not limited to fascist regimes, it is ubiquitous amongst totalitarian regimes. You can say what you like about Stalin, but he was not a fascist. Yet his control over the Soviet media was just as strong as that of the Nazis, and probably more rigorous than that of Franco or Mussolini. Being totalitarian is not a sufficient (although it is a necessary condition) for being fascist. Finally, there is no liberal plot to bring Trump down. The liberals probably wish there was. What there is is that Trump is a trainwreck, and the whole world is gobbling up every bit of news that comes out of the white house. The news companies have never had it easier. They don't need to (in fact, they probably can't) hype up what comes out of the White House, they just have to copy verbatim what Trump says/does and watch their views skyrocket. If Trump wasn't such an ideal combination of (a) attention whore, and (b) blithering idiot, you wouldn't get nearly as much of this stuff. But unsurprisingly, a reality tv star loves the spotlight and has no clue about politics, so what we have is the 24/7 great orange ape show on every single tv channel (and newspaper). And yeah, reality does have an anti-Trump bias. Because he can't string two sentences together without blurting out an obvious lie or contradiction. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18280 Posts
On May 17 2017 23:16 IgnE wrote: it seems like you've defined your terms in such a way that a state's media can never be fascist, at least because the media doesn't use "force" (here strangely construed to include only physical use of). do you think it's possible for a media to be "fascist?" You're smarter than that. Are you trying to claim that the media is fascist, or are you just being pedantic? As for whether the media *can* be fascist. Of course it can. Goebbels proved that 80 years ago. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Trainrunnef
United States601 Posts
On May 17 2017 23:37 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/864846378358509568 And it is because of these reactions by those who have the power to effect change and correct the course of this presidency that "the media" feels it has an obligation to fight back tooth and nail. If the republican leadership had enough balls to openly criticize the president when he screws up things might be a bit different. | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
On May 17 2017 22:50 pmh wrote: No but all the fascist regimes made heavy use of the media (and education) to indoctrinate the population and stay in power. It is a key component of fascist regimes,without any sort of soft indoctrination it is very difficult to keep the population under control. Anyway I will leave it at this now,thx for response! There is no obvious sign, but there are warning signs as the descent into fascism begins. It typically starts with government wanting more influence on media and the narratives presented there. Since we've been starting a shift into a social media news world, where everyone is a reporter due to their cellphone cameras and easy access to an audience through open media platform, governments are starting to take notice and want to take control of this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countering_Foreign_Propaganda_and_Disinformation_Act The bill said this inter-agency effort should: "counter foreign propaganda and disinformation directed against United States national security interests and proactively advance fact-based narratives that support United States allies and interests." Supporters of the resolution inside the Defense Department have publicly expressed their desire to weaken the interpretation of domestic propaganda protections, laws which prevent the US State Department from gathering information necessary to develop targeted propaganda messaging and prevent them from explicitly attempting to influence opinions. In these public comments it is argued that the Internet and social media is not the American homeland, and therefore not subject to the protections afforded inside the United States. Similarly, laws and legal interpretations such as the Smith-Mundt Revision Act have allowed government generated news media to be distributed to the American public over television, radio and other media. When will we start seeing US government sponsored twitter bots spreading government narratives, I wonder? How much direct influence or manipulation will the US government attempt to enact on the unknown & hidden algorithms that run Facebook? Will the US Pentagon numbers for civilian deaths in Syria/Iraq at the hands of the US-led coalition be the first search results in search engines? But it's of course easily justified with the Russian social media threat out there, always looming. They had an overwhelming influence on the US elections that must be dealt with after all. But now this kind of thing is in the hands of Trump. What's he going to do with it? And whoever follows up after him, after he's made his preferred changes to the libel laws so he can more easily sue all the "fake news" sources like CNN and the NYT? Did we already see the Smith-Mundt Revision Act in action for the Syrian conflict? They're just "moderate rebels", right? There's also the problem of what I can only assume is corporate fascism in social media. I saw some lawsuit going around that accused Montesanto of hiring social media propagandists to counter criticisms in social media against their company. That's just swell. There's also this one, which is even more disturbing (must be more Russian trolls supporting a conservative agenda): http://kdvr.com/2017/05/14/7000-coloradans-names-addresses-used-to-post-fake-comments-about-government-decision/ DENVER -- More than 7,000 Coloradans' names and addresses have been used to post the same fake comment on the Federal Communications Commission's decision on net neutrality. The FCC is collecting public comment on its decision about whether or not to do away with net neutrality rules. Net neutrality rules prevent internet providers from charging websites a fee to boost how fast their content gets to devices. The FCC could soon get rid of those rules. A group or individual in favor of getting rid of the rules has created a bot that's posting the same comment thousands of times under different people's names and addresses. According to a search of the FCC's website, the same comment was posted by more than 7,000 Coloradans. "No, I did not post this comment. In fact, I disagree with this comment," Brad Emerick said. "No, I did not. I have never seen this before in my life," Daniel Trujillo said. Of course, I am disgusted by almost any form of PR and take offense at the slightest bit of marketing on Twitter or even when people post commercials for the NYT in this thread. Maybe this kind of manipulation in social media just "good marketing", and I'm making a big fuss about nothing. | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
And any claims that the USA media is 'fascist' would rely on some kind of assertion that the media is monolithic. Yesterday is a decisive example of just how non-monolithic the American media is. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22308 Posts
On May 17 2017 23:50 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Ryan and McConnell won't do anything because they are complicit. Complicit in what? I doubt they had a hand in leaking classified information, or were in involved in hiring foreign agents to work for the government. Nor are they dumb enough to get involved in obstruction of justice. The only thing they are complicit in is being a Republican. They won't do anything (yet) because they believe the damage to the GOP is bigger from impeaching Trump then it is to let this go on 4 years (I disagree). But considering all the investigations going around I wouldn't use the word complicit. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
On May 17 2017 23:55 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: It has been discussed via Claude Taylor that there are recordings of Ryan and McConnell discussing using Russian funds to finance GOP campaigns. https://twitter.com/RepAlGreen/status/864814620250451971 Already happened hehe | ||
|
Trainrunnef
United States601 Posts
On May 17 2017 23:55 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: It has been discussed via Claude Taylor that there are recordings of Ryan and McConnell discussing using Russian funds to finance GOP campaigns. https://twitter.com/RepAlGreen/status/864814620250451971 Seems a bit premature at this point. I hope we aren't wasting ammo for the sake of optics, and rage over incompetence. | ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
GSL
Cure vs TriGGeR
ByuN vs Bunny
KCM Race Survival
Big Gabe
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Escore
OSC
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
