How would you truly feel about America if the media wasn't telling you to panic.

[Mountain Man]

Originally Posted by Bass_Man86
Merkel: The US is no longer a reliable ally and Europe's destiny is 'in our own hands'

About time.

[ljadw]

Merkel: The US is no longer a reliable ally and Europe's destiny is 'in our own hands'

So, this is coming from the "left wing media?"

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/m...154408849.html

The president of Tunesia present at a meeting of the G 7

[TactiKill J.]

It's not about the President, it's the people that make or break a country. In that respect, going off of my own personal experiences and disregarding the media, no my opinion wouldn't change. We're not in need of a good president, we're in need of better people. You don't need mass media to realize this.

[Bass_Man86]

I watched John Oliver last night - at this point mostly for the entertainment of watching his sanity death spiral.

Right now the left wing media is pretty much behaving like passengers on a doomed airliner's final plunge. John Oliver looks very nearly broken and the rest of the media continues to plunge deeper into the abyss of panic. The world looks very grim when you look through the bubble of left wing media. It's no wonder people who get their worldview through it are likewise losing their minds. It can be a kind of contagious hysteria.

I had an interesting conversation with a friend and we were discussing media influence and the thought experiment came up: what would America be like if cable news were suddenly vaporized. How much of this "culture war" is fuelled by dueling cable news outlets dumping gas on social anxiety for ratings? How would our culture behave without a 24 hour scream machine telling us that 50% of America is ruining the country?

Because I have to say that when I take my eyes from the hysteria periscope and look around, things aren't looking bad. The economy is up, business is humming along, the country is functioning, and the sky remains firmly in place. There are international tensions, but nothing greater than normal, and overall everyone seems to be taking care of business. Hospitals aren't leaving people to die in the streets and it all looks like business as usual.

So this is my thought experiment. Try to imagine how you would see the world without mass media. This means ALL cable news. CNN, Fox, MSNBC, the whole shebang left right and center and for good measure all national newspapers and websites. If you were to gauge the state of America based solely on America in the real world, without any form of mass media telling you the sky is falling, your primary source of information being nightly news and local papers and interaction with people, how truly scary is life under Trump - or any president for that matter.

Merkel: The US is no longer a reliable ally and Europe's destiny is 'in our own hands'

So, this is coming from the "left wing media?"

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/m...154408849.html

[Mountain Man]

Mutual hate and mockery sells. It's a quick way to appeal to your core demographic, and the reciprocal behavior only further cements the competition in the eyes of the audience. Heck, that can work even here: post a quick derogatory comment about Obama or Trump and you're liable to get some rep. People reward side-taking.

This is like video game developers or console producers nurturing a sense of rivalry between two products to (hopefully) convince people to not only back their product but to boycott the alternative on emotional grounds.

These men aren't idiots. They know what sells to an audience.

But are we the audience they are selling to, or do we think for ourselves?

[Daemon of Decay]

One thing that drives me nuts with the media is when an on air personality takes on another on air personality. Bill O'Reilly and Al Franken are the worst at doing this. I read each of their books once and both go at one another hard and over some pretty dumb stuff.

Mutual hate and mockery sells. It's a quick way to appeal to your core demographic, and the reciprocal behavior only further cements the competition in the eyes of the audience. Heck, that can work even here: post a quick derogatory comment about Obama or Trump and you're liable to get some rep. People reward side-taking.

This is like video game developers or console producers nurturing a sense of rivalry between two products to (hopefully) convince people to not only back their product but to boycott the alternative on emotional grounds.

These men aren't idiots. They know what sells to an audience.

[Checkertail20]

One thing that drives me nuts with the media is when an on air personality takes on another on air personality. Bill O'Reilly and Al Franken are the worst at doing this. I read each of their books once and both go at one another hard and over some pretty dumb stuff.

[Daemon of Decay]

Silly liberal. Fox shows user mail all the time and issues corrections. Looks like someone has their brain hooked up to MSNBC.

Think for yourself. It's fun, I assure you.

Fox has always been a strange beast. Conservative leaning for sure, but their news portion has been pretty solid. The biggest issue to the critics of Fox is how much of their broadcast time they give to pundits and entertainers, which in turn constitute their most watched segments.

The Daily Show had a similar MO, but at least it was on a place called Comedy Central. And Fox certainly isn't alone in that regard, as MSNBC could be seen as the liberal reflection of Fox (though imho I'll take the cringe-inducing Fox faux patriotism over MSNBC's pandering smugness every day).

The major networks all hate posting corrections, but they will if there is no escape. If anything, apologizing at least helps end the story about how they messed up a little sooner.

[Daemon of Decay]

Try the New York Times. Their online site has this going for it:

1) They publish corrections to errors of fact.

FOX does not.

2) They publish HUNDREDS of letters from readers, always including opposing views in the short list of "Times recommend".

FOX publishes no letters from readers of any kind. Which, come to think of it, means that FOX's mode is it fact to TELL its readers what to think.

On the other hand Breitbart does publish letters, which are an order of magnitude even scarier than the articles!

The Times does publish corrections - some painful for them in the extreme.

But the Times is also a victim of its own clout and is, as many conservatives here will be quick to point out, seen as a major symptom of what they dislike about the news media as a whole (they endorsed Clinton, after all).

The AP can be a good source because it posts corrections and has (in some areas) a strong internal sentiment of "get it right first, to avoid having to do corrections". But they, like all such entities, are not immune.

Corrections will always be a dangerous thing because even an honest and open correction may seem manipulative and tardy to those who feel slighted or harmed by the intitial mistake. For some reporters, corrections can be career ending... but in today's age where there is so much competition from social media (which has an abysmal track record for accuracy or corrections) there is a dangerous line being trod.

Deadlines are no longer set in stone; now, stories can break at any time and be in the national discourse long before you can get a story to the printers - and thus have time to really discuss it. And when a press outlet feels pressured by the board and their advertisers to increase sales, that can threaten the role the editor used to play as the captain of his ship.

[Grognard Gunny]

Trump, Clinton, Republican, Democrat, Conservative, Liberal - what does it matter as things are right now ?

By and large they all could care less about me and you and the state of the country !

They're to busy on witch hunts, backstabbing, and political in fighting that they have no idea what's going on themselves.

Power and more money is all the vast majority are after, most are on the same bus. And it doesn't include any of us.

AMEN!

GG

[Pirateship1982]

You have to use common sense when watching the news. Most of the time they report an issue that has some importance but they will make it sound like the country will collapse if they don't get their way on the issue. When I hear this type of reporting I change the channel.

I'm guessing your TV is flicking like a strobe light then?

[Pirateship1982]

Try the New York Times. Their online site has this going for it:

1) They publish corrections to errors of fact.

FOX does not.

2) They publish HUNDREDS of letters from readers, always including opposing views in the short list of "Times recommend".

FOX publishes no letters from readers of any kind. Which, come to think of it, means that FOX's mode is it fact to TELL its readers what to think.

On the other hand Breitbart does publish letters, which are an order of magnitude even scarier than the articles!

Silly liberal. Fox shows user mail all the time and issues corrections. Looks like someone has their brain hooked up to MSNBC.

Think for yourself. It's fun, I assure you.

[Checkertail20]

You have to use common sense when watching the news. Most of the time they report an issue that has some importance but they will make it sound like the country will collapse if they don't get their way on the issue. When I hear this type of reporting I change the channel.

[mconrad]

Try the New York Times. Their online site has this going for it:

1) They publish corrections to errors of fact.

FOX does not.

2) They publish HUNDREDS of letters from readers, always including opposing views in the short list of "Times recommend".

FOX publishes no letters from readers of any kind. Which, come to think of it, means that FOX's mode is it fact to TELL its readers what to think.

On the other hand Breitbart does publish letters, which are an order of magnitude even scarier than the articles!

[mconrad]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin View Post
a big difference is that Trump is not a politician
he doesn't need votes/etc--so he doesn't have to try to ''double talk'' for votes, or be politically correct
he doesn't go as much for political back rubbing or back stabbing

You're smoking a whole truckload of crack, aren't you?

-- Agree. No one outdoes Trump on flip-flops. For someone not needing votes he seems awfully concerned about his margin of victory. For someone who is not a politician he seems extraordinarily sensitive to criticism, image, and flattery. Agree that he doesn't like back-stabbing --- on the receiving end. On the giving end, he has knives in both hands. So much so that the Democratic strategy is to wait until enough Trump voters figure they've been betrayed.