THeBlueCashew

Quote from: "cc"We are living through the greatest mass hysteria in American history. For many Americans, the McCarthy era held that dubious distinction, but what is happening now is incomparably worse.



For one thing, albeit poorly directed, any hysteria that existed then was directed against the greatest evil in the world at the time: communism.



In contrast, the country is choking on hysteria over the extremely unlikely possibility -- for which there is still no evidence -- that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 presidential election, and the absurdity that President Trump works for Russian President Vladimir Putin





The mainstream media did not support McCarthy. Most in the media were highly critical of McCarthy.



will live in infamy as much as the Pearl Harbor attack or Kristallnacht[/b]."



All this hysteria is built on next to nothing. At its core, it is an attempt to undo the 2016 election. The mainstream media refuse to accept that Hillary Clinton lost. They said she would win -- handily. They predicted a landslide. How could they have possibly gotten it so wrong? Their answer is they didn't; Trump and Putin stole it.



If truth mattered to the media, their ongoing narrative would be: "Democrats and the left still do not accept Trump victory."



If truth mattered to the media, every American would know Trump has been harder on Russia than former President Barack Obama was. Every American would be reminded that Obama reassured Putin's right-hand man, then-Russian President Dmitri Medvedev, that he wouldn't be too tough on Russia. Thinking his mic was off, he whispered into Medvedev's ear: "This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility."



If truth mattered to the media, every American would be reminded that Obama sent Army meals to Ukraine and Trump has sent anti-tank missiles and other arms to repel the Russians.



If truth mattered to the media, every American would be reminded that Obama watched Syria burn and Russia come to dominate that country, while Trump has bombed Syrian military installations, including one where Russians were killed.



If truth mattered to the media, every American would be reminded that it is Trump who has weakened Russia's ally Iran, while Obama immeasurably strengthened it.



Instead the media scream "treason," "impeachment" and the like 24/7; Hollywood stars curse the president; others curse his daughter or the first lady (one of the most regal in American history) and show President Trump in various death poses. Meanwhile, leftist mobs shout at administration officials and Republican members of Congress while they eat in restaurants, shop in stores and sleep in their homes.



If you vote Democrat this November, you are voting for hysteria, lies, socialism and even the cheapening of the Holocaust.



But more than anything, a vote for Democrats in November is a vote for hysteria -- the greatest and darkest in American history.



Friendly Source, yes. But I challenge anyone to prove the guts of it it to not be the case (//https)

Quote from: "cc"Editorializing seems all media is doing of late.



Actually, it's FAR worse than that. Many so-called reporters are making these hysterical claims not as "opinion" or "editorializing" ...  but stating what their own mind creates within themselves  as "actual fact / news"



Our own main networks are as guilty as those in the US as they have caught the hysteria virus and state their fears as fact  and / or  simply parrot what so-called reporters in the US state or make it up themselves .... Europe similar ... treating their own hysteria as if its reporting of facts



Sadly, some people believe what they are told (made up) by "supposedly credible" reporters. Things are not looking good for Western society

Quote from: "Fashionista"


But, even the most pro pan green or pan blue news source is not as dishonest as what I'm seeing in North America right now.

Quote from: "Bricktop"Its all about the money.

Quote from: "Bricktop"So, FNC whips up a frenzy on the right, and CNN preaches to the left. At least both are guaranteed an audience of sorts.

Quote from: "Bricktop"I am aware of that. You've just corroborated my comment, that media is now tailored to a specific, not general, audience. Hence there is a total absence of objectivity.



So, the leftards tune in to CNN, and nod their heads in agreement whenever they attack the right. The right tunes into FNC and nods their head in consensus with their observations of the left.



But where is the objective centre? There isn't one...because it doesn't pay. People no longer want information, they want confirmation that their views are the correct ones...and the mass media spoon feds them all the confirmation they need.

Quote from: "Bricktop"I can't say...I don't watch CNN or MSNBC. Is that where the show featuring a desk full of leftard hags sit around talking crap about things they nothing about. Whoopi Leftberg is on it.

Quote from: "Bricktop"I am aware of that. You've just corroborated my comment, that media is now tailored to a specific, not general, audience. Hence there is a total absence of objectivity.



So, the leftards tune in to CNN, and nod their heads in agreement whenever they attack the right. The right tunes into FNC and nods their head in consensus with their observations of the left.



But where is the objective centre? There isn't one...because it doesn't pay. People no longer want information, they want confirmation that their views are the correct ones...and the mass media spoon feds them all the confirmation they need.

Quote from: "Wazzzup"

Quote from: "Bricktop"I am aware of that. You've just corroborated my comment, that media is now tailored to a specific, not general, audience. Hence there is a total absence of objectivity.



So, the leftards tune in to CNN, and nod their heads in agreement whenever they attack the right. The right tunes into FNC and nods their head in consensus with their observations of the left.



But where is the objective centre? There isn't one...because it doesn't pay. People no longer want information, they want confirmation that their views are the correct ones...and the mass media spoon feds them all the confirmation they need.

How do you figure out what is the objective center?  The left (and their media) keep getting more and more extreme, the right in general more moderate .  Bill clinton ran as a moderate democrat.  Trump is only implementing polices that clinton implemented, like border enforcement,  and the left is going batshit crazy.  The right of today is the moderate left of 20 years ago.  



I think, correct me if I'm wrong,you are under the impression that the right and left are equally to blame in the US.  This is not even close to the case.  Look at how extreme the left has become, how violent and vicious  they are as well, there's really no comparison.

QuoteHow do you figure out what is the objective center? The left (and their media) keep getting more and more extreme, the right in general more moderate . Bill clinton ran as a moderate democrat. Trump is only implementing polices that clinton implemented, like border enforcement, and the left is going batshit crazy. The right of today is the moderate left of 20 years ago.



I think, correct me if I'm wrong,you are under the impression that the right and left are equally to blame in the US. This is not even close to the case. Look at how extreme the left has become, how violent and vicious they are as well, there's really no comparison.

Quote from: "Thiel"

Quote from: "Wazzzup"

Quote from: "Bricktop"I am aware of that. You've just corroborated my comment, that media is now tailored to a specific, not general, audience. Hence there is a total absence of objectivity.



So, the leftards tune in to CNN, and nod their heads in agreement whenever they attack the right. The right tunes into FNC and nods their head in consensus with their observations of the left.



But where is the objective centre? There isn't one...because it doesn't pay. People no longer want information, they want confirmation that their views are the correct ones...and the mass media spoon feds them all the confirmation they need.

How do you figure out what is the objective center?  The left (and their media) keep getting more and more extreme, the right in general more moderate .  Bill clinton ran as a moderate democrat.  Trump is only implementing polices that clinton implemented, like border enforcement,  and the left is going batshit crazy.  The right of today is the moderate left of 20 years ago.  



I think, correct me if I'm wrong,you are under the impression that the right and left are equally to blame in the US.  This is not even close to the case.  Look at how extreme the left has become, how violent and vicious  they are as well, there's really no comparison.

I just returned from an extended stay in the states. The economy is on fire. But, I have never seen the country this polarized. Even when GW Bush was president.

Quote from: "Bricktop"

QuoteHow do you figure out what is the objective center? The left (and their media) keep getting more and more extreme, the right in general more moderate . Bill clinton ran as a moderate democrat. Trump is only implementing polices that clinton implemented, like border enforcement, and the left is going batshit crazy. The right of today is the moderate left of 20 years ago.



I think, correct me if I'm wrong,you are under the impression that the right and left are equally to blame in the US. This is not even close to the case. Look at how extreme the left has become, how violent and vicious they are as well, there's really no comparison.

If I have conveyed that sentiment, I apologise. I am definitely NOT attributing the violence, dissent and civil disturbances to BOTH sides. Clearly, the chaos is driven by communist inspired civil insurrection. That is not disputable.



Nor do I criticise Fox. It does not pretend to be centrist while pushing a conservative agenda, unlike the leftard media which aims to convey that it is unbiased and objective, when it clearly is not.



What I am saying is that biased news media is not a good thing. There is a desperate need for a more neutral news organisation that looks at issues from both sides.



As much as you despise the communist-left, it isn't going away any time soon. The way, in my view, to diminish their impact, is for a reasoned argument from an objective source that challenges their idiocy with logic and fact. When FNC attacks the left...who cares? That is the reason for their existence and so cannot in ANY way be regarded as objective. Even when they are.

Quote from: "Bricktop"Its all about the money.



Their job is not to inform, but make a profit. So they go where the money is, and that is inciting rage on one side of the political spectrum or the other.



When any debate about the bias of the media is engaged, too often their primary goal as an organisation is ignored. If people stopped watching or reading, they don't get paid. So they shout out to specific segments of the community, rather than rely on appealing to the wider population.



There's no money in the middle of the road.



So, FNC whips up a frenzy on the right, and CNN preaches to the left. At least both are guaranteed an audience of sorts.



Its a business. Bias, in lieu of greed, is good.



But the inherent problem with pandering to a specific segment is that you're preaching to the choir. The net effect is miniscule. It may look and sound like an incitement to war...but in reality its just screaming from the pulpit what the pundits want to hear.



Journalists no longer want to report the news, they want to BE the news and attract a following that pays the bills.



The following chart clearly illustrates why mass media journalists are becoming more shrill and sensationalising.



//https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/industries/tmt/media/outlook.html



Newspapers are losing money every day. TV only slightly less so. And this trend will continue. What we are really seeing is journalist scum inciting public division, hate and violence to save their jobs.

Quote from: "Wazzzup"trumps presidency has been like  the "The Live" Sunglasses.  Somehow he caused the left to shed all pretenses --they are showing themselves for the hardcore, totalitarian, control-everyone's-life extremists they really are.



I used to say the media is biased.  they are not biased, they are now full out SJWS getting paid for their activism, trying to get Trump anyway they can.



Maybe in America 2.0 we'll insist on a more objective media.

Quote from: "Peaches"

Quote from: "Bricktop"Its all about the money.



Their job is not to inform, but make a profit. So they go where the money is, and that is inciting rage on one side of the political spectrum or the other.



When any debate about the bias of the media is engaged, too often their primary goal as an organisation is ignored. If people stopped watching or reading, they don't get paid. So they shout out to specific segments of the community, rather than rely on appealing to the wider population.



There's no money in the middle of the road.



So, FNC whips up a frenzy on the right, and CNN preaches to the left. At least both are guaranteed an audience of sorts.



Its a business. Bias, in lieu of greed, is good.



But the inherent problem with pandering to a specific segment is that you're preaching to the choir. The net effect is miniscule. It may look and sound like an incitement to war...but in reality its just screaming from the pulpit what the pundits want to hear.



Journalists no longer want to report the news, they want to BE the news and attract a following that pays the bills.



The following chart clearly illustrates why mass media journalists are becoming more shrill and sensationalising.



//https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/industries/tmt/media/outlook.html



Newspapers are losing money every day. TV only slightly less so. And this trend will continue. What we are really seeing is journalist scum inciting public division, hate and violence to save their jobs.

I agree, almost completely.



All arguments about the relative purity of leftish media vs rightish media are only clouding this central issue.

Quote from: "Blazor"

Quote from: "Wazzzup"trumps presidency has been like  the "The Live" Sunglasses.  Somehow he caused the left to shed all pretenses --they are showing themselves for the hardcore, totalitarian, control-everyone's-life extremists they really are.



I used to say the media is biased.  they are not biased, they are now full out SJWS getting paid for their activism, trying to get Trump anyway they can.



Maybe in America 2.0 we'll insist on a more objective media.

Ha!  :laugh:



You're right. Only the left hasnt "put their glasses on". Also, Alphabet agents are deeply embedded in media. Who did Trump want to punish.... Alphabet agents.

Quote from: "Wazzzup"

Quote from: "Blazor"

Quote from: "Wazzzup"trumps presidency has been like  the "The Live" Sunglasses.  Somehow he caused the left to shed all pretenses --they are showing themselves for the hardcore, totalitarian, control-everyone's-life extremists they really are.



I used to say the media is biased.  they are not biased, they are now full out SJWS getting paid for their activism, trying to get Trump anyway they can.



Maybe in America 2.0 we'll insist on a more objective media.

Ha!  :laugh:



You're right. Only the left hasnt "put their glasses on". Also, Alphabet agents are deeply embedded in media. Who did Trump want to punish.... Alphabet agents.

I should have given you credit, you were the inspiration for that comment.



Yeah the alphabet agencies have been corrupted and politicized to the left just like the media.  That ls the real story.  While the Russian lie is going on, behind the scenes the left was and is trying to reverse the results of a democratic election. Unfortunately because Jeff Sessions is a cowardly idiot they will never be punished for it.

Quote from: "Wazzzup"The unbiased media has been obsessed with the Russia collusion conspiracy lie for two years.  Day in and day out,.  



But when a chinese operatives spies on a senator and member of the senate intelligence committee for twenty years its no big deal to the unbiased media.



WASHINGTON — Imagine if it emerged that the Republican chairman of the House or Senate intelligence committee had a Russian spy working on their senate staff. Think it would cause a political firestorm? Well, this week we learned that Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., had a Chinese spy on her staff who worked for her for 20 years, who was listed as an "office director" on payroll records and served as her driver when she was in San Francisco, all while reporting to China's Ministry of State Security through China's San Francisco Consulate. The reaction of the mainstream media? Barely a peep.



Feinstein acknowledged the infiltration but downplayed its significance. "Five years ago the FBI informed me it had concerns that an administrative member of my California staff was potentially being sought out by the Chinese government to provide information" Feinstein said in statement — which means the breach took place while Feinstein was heading the intelligence committee. But, Feinstein insisted, "he never had access to classified or sensitive information or legislative matters" and was immediately fired. In other words: junior staffer, no policy role, no access to secrets, quickly fired — no big deal.



But it is a big deal. I asked several former senior intelligence and law enforcement officials how serious this breach might have been. "It's plenty serious," one former top Justice Department official told me. "Focusing on his driver function alone, in Mafia families, the boss's driver was among the most trusted men in the crew, because among other things he heard everything that was discussed in the car."



A former top CIA clandestine officer explained to me what the agency would do if they had recruited the driver of a senior official like Feinstein. "We would have the driver record on his phone all conversations that Feinstein would have with passengers and phone calls in her car. If she left her phone, iPad or laptop in the car while she went to meetings, social events, dinners, etc., we would have the driver download all her devices. If the driver drove for her for 20 years he would probably would have had access to her office and homes. We would have had the source put down an audio device in her office or homes if the opportunity presented itself. Depending on the take from all of what the source reported, we would use the info to target others that were close to her and exhibited some type of vulnerability." "In short," this officer says, "we would have had a field day."





Feinstein owes the country a detailed explanation of how she let a Chinese spy into her inner sanctum. And the media should give this security breach the same attention they would if it involved Russia and the Republicans.