Our Treasonous Media Is a Clear and Present Danger

[skeeter]

Hey now... oh are you done already.   hmmmmmm ok
 

In my fondest dreams

[dfwgator]

A "free press" is a press that is not controlled by the government.  That is all that it means.  Your inability to grasp that indicates your inability to come to terms with reality. 

The solution is to set up a competing press.  It's unfortunate that you can't grasp this part of reality, but there it is.

The solution is to break up the media conglomerates. 

[DiogenesLamp]

A "free press" is a press that is not controlled by the government.  That is all that it means.  Your inability to grasp that indicates your inability to come to terms with reality. 

The solution is to set up a competing press.  It's unfortunate that you can't grasp this part of reality, but there it is.

Unfortunately you can't grasp that the Media is in bed with the Government,  and that it is f***ing impossible to set up a trillion dollar broadcasting infrastructure to compete against them.   

[driftdiver]

Unfortunately you can't grasp that the Media is in bed with the Government,  and that it is f***ing impossible to set up a trillion dollar broadcasting infrastructure to compete against them.

@DiogenesLamp
Look at whats happened to those which have tried?   

Breitbart - sudden heart attack.   suspicious but not impossible
Foxnews -

Are there any other semi-conservative news sources which have gotten beyond the niche space  (aka WND)

[Bigun]

Unfortunately you can't grasp that the Media is in bed with the Government,  and that it is f***ing impossible to set up a trillion dollar broadcasting infrastructure to compete against them.

I actually don't think you would need to do that!  IMHO all that would be needed is for someone like the Sinclair group to start providing straight up, accurately reported  NEWS and the marketplace work it's magic.

[DiogenesLamp]

I see a lot of people offering up a problem, but no solution.

What is your solution? Set up a "conservative monitoring committee" which censors what the press is allowed to report and what isn't?

The problem isn't so much the lies that the press makes up and calls "news."   The greater problem in this nation is the press's censorship of important news that the public needs to know. 


They covered up the ugly truth about John Kennedy,   they covered up the ugly truth about Bill Clinton,   they covered up the ugly truth about Barack Obama,   and they are at this very moment covering up the ugly truth about socialism in Venezuela and the nature of the Arab army of men currently invading Europe. 


The media does most of their destruction by refusing to inform the public regarding important news and information.    *They*  are censoring the news.   


A Government by the people cannot function correctly with important information being deliberately withheld from the Public.   

[Mod2]

Hey Mods, what happened to my post? I step away for awhile and when I get back I notice it's gone, along with WTF's.

Did he misbehave again?

@Machiavelli

If you are referring to your reply to WTF, timestamped 11:57 EDT, it's on a different thread, not this one.

There have been no deletions since 10:22 EDT today, and none at all on this thread

[Rivergirl]

Who knew the msm was biased.  We always thought they were as pure as the driven snow.
It's only DT presidency  that they are showing their biases.

[DiogenesLamp]

No, it doesn't.  If it did, places like this wouldn't exist.

ABC has probably 10 million viewers every night.   Places like this are trivial in regards to their impact on the public. 


Stamping out places like this might actually get the notice of the public,  so the powers that be mostly leave them alone.   Nowadays they have their corporate censors like FacistBook and Googlyoutube  censor them.    It makes it look like the government wasn't involved. 

[DiogenesLamp]

@DiogenesLamp
Look at whats happened to those which have tried?   

Breitbart - sudden heart attack.   suspicious but not impossible
Foxnews -

Are there any other semi-conservative news sources which have gotten beyond the niche space  (aka WND)

There are a few online sources that are slowly and incrementally making larger impacts,   and there is OANN that I believe is advancing towards a television presence,   but I'm getting mixed signals about whether or not this is indeed the case.   


But we have nothing like ABC News,  let alone the Television entertainment that is always chocked full of Liberal premises and talking points. 

[DiogenesLamp]

I actually don't think you would need to do that!  IMHO all that would be needed is for someone like the Sinclair group to start providing straight up, accurately reported  NEWS and the marketplace work it's magic.

You've got to get on television,  and you've got to get on television all across the US.   In other words,  you have to have a network to compete with other networks.   


What does a network cost?   Does 100 billion sound about right? 

[skeeter]

If you are referring to your reply to WTF, timestamped 11:57 EDT, it's on a different thread, not this one.

There have been no deletions since 10:22 EDT today, and none at all on this thread

Dad blast it, you're right.

My apologies to all concerned.

@Weird Tolkienish Figure

[Night Hides Not]

Dad blast it, you're right.

My apologies to all concerned.

@Weird Tolkienish Figure

C'mon skeeter, get your act together!   

Not like that's ever happened to me... 

[bigheadfred]

 

[Suppressed]

@Oceander
Umm no

Not even worth further discussion with you.

@driftdiver

I'm curious why you disagree with such a fundamental of America.  @Oceander gave the conservative, traditional American answer: if you don't like it, set up your own competing entity. 

[dfwgator]

He tried to warn us 40 years ago......



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFvT_qEZJf8

[txradioguy]

Unfortunately you can't grasp that the Media is in bed with the Government,  and that it is f***ing impossible to set up a trillion dollar broadcasting infrastructure to compete against them.

Fox News...Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck would beg to differ with you.

So would the Washington Times...National Review and the Media Research Institute.

[txradioguy]

@driftdiver

I'm curious why you disagree with such a fundamental of America.  @Oceander gave the conservative, traditional American answer: if you don't like it, set up your own competing entity.

@Suppressed @Oceander

Because it's easier to blame an omnipresent bogeyman like "Big Media" than to actually do anything.  Tinfoil is pretty cheap these days.

[driftdiver]

@driftdiver

I'm curious why you disagree with such a fundamental of America.  @Oceander gave the conservative, traditional American answer: if you don't like it, set up your own competing entity.

@Suppressed

I'm surprised you would make such a fraudulent charge.    Why don't you go make a competing entity.   What an asinine statement.

[driftdiver]

@Suppressed @Oceander

Because it's easier to blame an omnipresent bogeyman like "Big Media" than to actually do anything.  Tinfoil is pretty cheap these days.

@txradioguy
So is BS, of which you have plenty.

[txradioguy]

Who knew the msm was biased.  We always thought they were as pure as the driven snow.
It's only DT presidency  that they are showing their biases.

@Rivergirl it's like they've forgotten what Reagan accomplished BEFORE there was alternative media.

THAT was a truly stacked deck.

[driftdiver]

Fox News...Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck would beg to differ with you.

So would the Washington Times...National Review and the Media Research Institute.

And yet the majority of Americans get their news from where?

And where did those sources have close familial ties for the last 8 years?

MSNBC admitted they contacted the white house for permission before airing stories.

So much for a free press Mr. BS

[bigheadfred]

I use TBR as my news place. For the REALLY important stuff I go to YouTube.

[txradioguy]

@txradioguy
So is BS, of which you have plenty.

And that's just the kind of answer I'd expect from someone who prefers to wrap their head in tinfoil.

[Oceander]

You've got to get on television,  and you've got to get on television all across the US.   In other words,  you have to have a network to compete with other networks.   


What does a network cost?   Does 100 billion sound about right? 

Putting all of the other outlets aside, are you now suggesting that government must guarantee equal access to media broadcasting outlets?  That the equal time rule must apply to everything, including news stories that don't focus on a particular candidate?  Are we now going to advocate for reviving the now-dead fairness doctrine?