Page 2 of 3

Re: Media

PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 7:14 pm
by Kriswest
mr reasonable wrote:
Kriswest wrote:
mr reasonable wrote:Kris you said it in your OP here that media was a powerful tool. So why is it suddenly the fault of the victim of that tool when it comes to light that people on the far right are wanting to use it to weaken the democratic process?

LOL, Far right? They are the only ones?
Victim is one word to use. It works but, not fully. I am asking whys, whats and hows.


I didn't say it was just the far right. Someone's got a case of the "onlys". But you are aware of the citizens united and the mccutcheon decisions right? Those were heavily advocated by right wing groups that want to use media, the very effective kind that you mentioned in your OP without limits to influence our democracy. They literally spent huge money and time to see to it that campaign finance reform laws all became ineffective.

Now who should win an election? The guy that's really who everyone wants? Or the guy who had a billion dollars to spend on the really effective advertising that you mentioned? I mean in current events, there's no doubt that those 2 supreme court decisions effectively create a situation where elections are more buy-able than ever before, and there's no doubt that they were brought fourth and advocated for by the financiers of the republican candidates.

Should corporation's dollars be the same as your vote?

Uuum I mean that about weakening the process.
The left is working just as hard at it.

Re: Media

PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 7:51 pm
by James S Saint
It is a Cold War and there are no good guys in a war, because both sides have to use the same weapons against each other, "whatever helps you can be used to hurt you". Deception in Media is merely one of the many weapons with which to fight the war between the bad guys on the left and the bad guys on the right, the "two hands" with which to clutch the population and control it. The war is between the socialist elite Godwannabes and the general masses. The "war" between conservative and liberals is merely the stage play with which to keep the masses confused and distracted while conquering them.

Re: Media

PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 10:35 pm
by Arminius
James S Saint wrote:It is a Cold War and there are no good guys in a war, because both sides have to use the same weapons against each other, "whatever helps you can be used to hurt you". Deception in Media is merely one of the many weapons with which to fight the war between the bad guys on the left and the bad guys on the right, the "two hands" with which to clutch the population and control it. The war is between the socialist elite Godwannabes and the general masses. The "war" between conservative and liberals is merely the stage play with which to keep the masses confused and distracted while conquering them.

"News" for US people:

The "contrast" of being "conservative" and being "liberal" in the USA means the "contrast" of being "conservative/liberal" and "socialist/politically-correct" in Europe. That's absurd and ridiculous.

The "war" between conservative and liberal "parties" in the USA or the "war" between "conservative/liberal" and "socialist/politically-correct" "parties" in the EU are merely the stage play with which to keep the masses confused and distracted while conquering them. Motto: divide and conquer!

Re: Media

PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 3:00 am
by James S Saint
Arminius wrote:"News" for US people:

The "contrast" of being "conservative" and being "liberal" in the USA means the "contrast" of being "conservative/liberal" and "socialist/politically-correct" in Europe. That's absurd and ridiculous.

Well Europe is legally and openly socialist. I don't have a problem with nations being honest about what they are doing. But in the USA, Socialism is directly ANTI-Constitution, and actually illegal. So they have to hide doing it, pretending to be a capitalist nation, pretending to be supporting the Constitution, pretending to allow citizens to vote for Presidents, pretending that citizens have any rights at all. Obama has made a campaign toward not pretending any more and just making it all legal to be a dictatorial socialist nation with totalitarian rights for the President (A Pharaoh).

Re: Media

PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 3:34 am
by Arminius
It's just like this:
Image Image

Re: Media

PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 5:10 am
by James S Saint
Kriswest wrote:Ok so James, how do you suggest stopping it?

I had to think on that for a while. It isn't a trivial issue.

In Sight of SAM.

Re: Media

PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 5:24 am
by Moreno
Kriswest wrote:James I don't think you are old enough to remember how reporters were up until mid 60s.
They were flat, dry unemotional. They reported only facts not opinions.
They likely thought they were facts, but they were manipulated by corporations and governments, and individuals as much as reporters are today. The difference between then and now is 1) journalists have less time and funding to research things, fewer companies own the mainstream media then they did back then, new is seen as entertainment primarily.

Re: Media

PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 5:38 pm
by Arminius
James S Saint wrote: But in the USA, Socialism is directly ANTI-Constitution, and actually illegal. So they have to hide doing it, pretending to be a capitalist nation, pretending to be supporting the Constitution, pretending to allow citizens to vote for Presidents, pretending that citizens have any rights at all.

In the EU it is the same!

Re: Media

PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 8:20 pm
by James S Saint
Moreno wrote:
Kriswest wrote:James I don't think you are old enough to remember how reporters were up until mid 60s.
They were flat, dry unemotional. They reported only facts not opinions.
They likely thought they were facts, but they were manipulated by corporations and governments, and individuals as much as reporters are today. The difference between then and now is 1) journalists have less time and funding to research things, fewer companies own the mainstream media then they did back then, new is seen as entertainment primarily.

The biggest difference that I can give credit to is that the Media was eventually united (1981) into a single organizational mindset with censorship guiding it (as was required by the government during the 70's so as to allow it to be considered as the "Fourth Branch of the Government" - Propaganda Ministry) with an agenda (what you know as Agenda 21 from the UN). Because as the socialist political leaders of the world openly proclaimed, "Because this is the future that WE want" (Ref: Agenda 21 Rio +20).

Re: Media

PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 11:03 pm
by Kriswest
James S Saint wrote:
Kriswest wrote:Ok so James, how do you suggest stopping it?

I had to think on that for a while. It isn't a trivial issue.

In Sight of SAM.

You are right it is not trivial.
SAM is a good proposal. I work for a company that is slightly like that. You work for the whole, the owners will pay you well and help when you need it. They see the company as a family of sorts.
I see the goal but, not a clear path. I do know it must be grassroots method.

Re: Media

PostPosted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 12:46 am
by James S Saint
Kriswest wrote:
James S Saint wrote:
Kriswest wrote:Ok so James, how do you suggest stopping it?

I had to think on that for a while. It isn't a trivial issue.

In Sight of SAM.

You are right it is not trivial.
SAM is a good proposal. I work for a company that is slightly like that. You work for the whole, the owners will pay you well and help when you need it. They see the company as a family of sorts.
I see the goal but, not a clear path. I do know it must be grassroots method.

Well as I said the entire way it works is detailed and complicated to explain, but how this relates to the Media is that a part of the SAM structure requires what amounts to a insider's newspaper for the group. The newspaper (or LAN Network) basically spreads the gossip that would be typical of a church or small town anyway, except its business is to know everyone's situation and needs. So it takes a little different mindset, a far more open, intimate, and honest mindset, because everything is "above board". Unlike society, 2/3 of the activities are NOT under see-level. Deception becomes very difficult to get away with or be rewarded by.

And then imagine that the "owner" (although SAM has no owners) runs the corporation strictly in accord to the needs of the employees/members. Such is the way of a not-for-profit organization, or a church (501C, I believe they call it). Everything done; assigning work, schedules, pay rates, everything involved, is organized around the needs of everyone. Of course how to assess those needs gets into some complication and is actually based upon the "Integral of Joy Over Time", IOJOT. It takes a bit of a wizard to learn how to do that, but after some practice, isn't really all that hard.

And would you mind if I take this over to the In Sight of SAM thread for the rest (having less to do with the Media)?

Re: Media

PostPosted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 4:37 pm
by Kriswest
Please do, it is an interesting project.

Re: Media

PostPosted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 6:01 pm
by Mr Reasonable
Kris, of course both sides are guilty. I just figured that since the most current, and the most robust attempt to make elections something that can be bought and sold were the citizens united and the mccutcheon cases that it'd be relevant to point those out. At the current point in time, it's the right that's leading the charge on weakening the process for everyone. No one on the left is in favor of those decisions.

Re: Media

PostPosted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 6:19 pm
by James S Saint
mr reasonable wrote:No one on the left is in favor of those decisions.

The "Left" merely represents the more cowardly lot, always afraid to take the blame for anything. But they very much favor anything that leads toward absolute control for a governing elite over the masses (as long as they are a big part of it).

Re: Media

PostPosted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 6:22 pm
by Mr Reasonable
James I'm not picking a side. I'm just stating that the most relevant and current development in the world of media manipulation for the purposes of skewing democracy was advocated by the right in the supreme court, this year over these 2 cases. It's odd to have a thread about it which denies this reality.

Re: Media

PostPosted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 6:40 pm
by James S Saint
mr reasonable wrote:James I'm not picking a side. I'm just stating that the most relevant and current development in the world of media manipulation for the purposes of skewing democracy was advocated by the right in the supreme court, this year over these 2 cases. It's odd to have a thread about it which denies this reality.

What is "odd" about it is that the media portion of it has been going on since the 1960's and you are just now claiming that suddenly the "Far Right" is initiating it. If anything, the Far Right is perhaps the side with the courage to more openly admit it.

It was a significant part of the "liberal" movement hell bound to convert the USA into a socialist state from a constitutional state. That is why they were referring to the liberals as "pinkos" (associated with Red Communism).

They learned that they have to have "two hands" in order to manipulate better ("what is the sound of one hand clapping?"). Their "two hands" are the conservatives and liberals, or Republicans and Democrats. Neither does anything without being coordinated with the other.

The Libertarians are actually the only constitutional conservatives interested in maintaining the original USA constitutional government and its "democratic-republic" state. But as they asked, "If a tree falls in the forest when no one is watching/listening, does it make a sound?" Or more "down to Earth", "If the media doesn't tell anyone that the Constitutional government has been destroyed, will anyone complain/revolt?"

The biggest concern of the Media is to keep the population preoccupied with pretentious battles and distractions while the laws are being manipulated in closed quarters, "under see-level". That is what the Roman Coliseum and its Gladiators were for.

Re: Media

PostPosted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 8:58 pm
by Mr Reasonable
James I didn't say they initiated it. I said that the citizen's united, and mccutcheon decisions happened this year and are huge milestones in the overall history of this notion that we're discussing about money buying media and tricking people into voting against their own interests because of lies they're told. The right wing advocated, and celebrated these decisions. Those are just facts man. So since we both agree that the concept of diluting democracy through psychologically manipulative advertising is bad, isn't it important to note that the latest and possibly the biggest legal win for those who think otherwise happened this year in those 2 cases?

Find the place where I said that liberals weren't as bad or whatever it is you're saying I'm saying. Because I don't think I said em. I haven't advocated for a liberal or progressive policy in this thread.

I mean when I see a thread about media manipulation and politics and I read it and no one's mentioned those cases I'm like wtf is going on here? I honestly have no idea of what your politics are. So I can't argue against them. I'm just asking, since you seem to know all about the history of these kinds of things, why don't you think that these 2 cases will result in things getting skewed worse than ever? And why don't you see who's responsible for them?

Re: Media

PostPosted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 9:02 pm
by James S Saint
mr reasonable wrote:James I didn't say they initiated it. I said that the citizen's united, and mccutcheon decisions happened this year and are huge milestones in the overall history of it. The right wing advocated, and celebrated these decisions. Those are just facts man. So since we both agree that the concept of diluting democracy through psychologically manipulative advertising is bad, isn't it important to note that the latest and possibly the biggest legal win for those who think otherwise happened this year in those 2 cases?

Find the place where I said that liberals weren't as bad or whatever it is you're saying I'm saying. Because I don't think I said em. I haven't advocated for a liberal or progressive policy in this thread.

I mean when I see a thread about media manipulation and politics and I read it and no one's mentioned those cases I'm like wtf is going on here? I honestly have no idea of what your politics are. So I can't argue against them. I'm just asking, since you seem to know all about the history of these kinds of things, why don't you think that these 2 cases will result in things getting skewed worse than ever? And why don't you see who's responsible for them?

Isn't it obvious that the only issue was your inference that it is "those bad, evil Far Rights" causing this demise of Constitutionalism?

Other than that, yeah we agree.

Re: Media

PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2016 2:58 pm
by Arminius
The people of the media - the "mediots" (from: die "Medioten" - Udo Lindenberg) - should be punished for their sins.

Re: Media

PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2016 4:11 pm
by Mictlantecuhtli
What's not to like about centralized government controlled and influenced propaganda news media?

Re: Media

PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2016 4:31 pm
by Arminius
The super-organisms, especially the huge banks and the huge corporations, are the real governments; so they also control every other politics and - of course - the media. In other words: the modern media is a huge propaganda machine of some super-organisms (which are owned by merely a few men).

Re: Media

PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2016 5:20 pm
by Warlock
Kriswest wrote:Are there counter tools out there to prevent media manipulation other than just plain old common sense?


You can only control yourself, therefore the only counter tool is to be conscious of their manipulation to avoid being manipulated. As for others, well you cannot control them, so at best you can attempt to influence them into becoming aware of the manipulation (i.e. counter-influencing).

This situation isn't a matter of common sense, the methods being used are not widely known or understood by the average person... then again, the "average" person is not all that functionally intelligent.

Re: Media

PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2016 9:55 am
by Kriswest
I would not use the word intelligent,, educated is more apropriate. Not many teach children to question or strive to learn. Most rely on education systems to educate fully. Parents seem to just teach social behaviors now.

Re: Media

PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2016 9:59 am
by James S Saint
Kriswest wrote:Are there counter tools out there to prevent media manipulation other than just plain old common sense?

Hmmm :-k

Re: Media

PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2016 10:59 am
by Kriswest
James S Saint wrote:
Kriswest wrote:Are there counter tools out there to prevent media manipulation other than just plain old common sense?

Hmmm :-k

Yes actual thinking would work but, we would have to get parents to teach that.