|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: How can we regulate the news media | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
xongsmith Member Posts: 2578 From: massachusetts US Joined: Member Rating: 6.8
|
Marc9000 writes:
The details of the Benghazi Attack were far more thoroughly covered by Fox News than by any other network...... I think you misspelled "corrupted"....- xongsmith, 5.7d
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
NoNukes writes: I'm not going to bother with this. You don't listen to NPR, yet you've already made up your mind about what is covered there without having done so. marc9000 writes: The same way you do with Ventura. The same way most people do who put down Fox News without ever watching/listening to it. I read the Ventura article and I have watched Fox News. I haven't commented on Fox News without having watched it. On the other hand, commenting without listening is exactly what you did regarding NPR.
So my earlier point that that discussion isn't properly taking place still stands. No your comment does not stand. It's simply uninformed. The discussion is out there. You choose not to hear it.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
veterans of the Vietnam War are still TO THIS DAY being used. I was one of the baby killers. I was the embodiment of evil walking through LAX in uniform. I saw the body parts, the blood, the drugs, the vacant stares, the walking dead. I went to too many funerals; carried too many coffins, all before I was 21. Then I heard the lies on body counts, the cove up of atrocities, the "We are winning" montra from Westmoreland. Then there was Tet ... then there was Cambodia. When Nixon expanded the war it was too much. He ripped the heart out of the nation. There was nothing left to do but take to the streets. This wasn't some media hyped charade of liberal politics. It was disgust. That my country, my government, my president could so deceive and bleed the people for so long. I still have my purple ribbon from Vietnam Vets Against the War. I earned the right to bitch. After all these decades it still hurts. I cry.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Could you elaborate? Not necessarily a lot of long, drawn out c/p's or links, just a summary in your own words? Are you kidding me? Have you heard of "fighting words doctrine", "clear and present danger", Supreme Court decisions on obscenity, campaign finance, time, manner and place restrictions on speech, ""imminent lawless action", The Pentagon Papers. The Sedition Act of 1918. Are you seriously questioning this issue or just seeing what sticks?Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Not content, but an unpredictable, quick profit. A profit that would be considered unpredictable based on content.
As many people feel that the rationale behind the second amendment is basic and well understood. It was that way for the first 3/4, maybe the first 4/5 of the nations history Complete revisionist nonsense. For all but the last few years, the second amendment was interpreted as not applying to state regulation of guns at all, and as being limited to weapons that were suitable for use by the Militia. In fact none of the bill of rights applied to state legislatures prior to the late 19th century despite the passage of the 14th Amendment in the mid 1860s. And of course beside the point.
Is it really necessary to go into detail about how much communication and advertising have changed in the past 50 years? We have government regulation of advertising despite the fact that such regulations affect speech. But generally speaking the response to bad speech is more speech except in a few circumstances.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
The 1970 news media hated Richard Nixon. If you want to believe that college students, in their vast stores of teenage knowledge and experience, thought they knew better than Nixon did about foreign policy all by themselves How old are you?Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4
|
[condensed into one message to avoid frantic cut-ins before I'm finished]
MESSAGE 58
AZPaul3 writes: Bullshit. I was at Iowa protesting, overturning cars, burning flags just like thousands of others from sea to shining sea. I believe it, I believe it.
It was not the media. It was the fucking war. (but the war was not in Iowa)
Pull your head out of your ass. Two dirty words and seven green dots. An evolutionist forum exclusive! _______________________ MESSAGE 59
Dr Adequate writes: marc9000 writes: I don’t completely agree with it, but other networks all do similar things to prominent Republicans, Quayle and Gingrich come to mind. Examples? Ah yes, examples are good things!
quote: and
quote: http://www.usnews.com/...t-gingrichs-medicare-comments-again "An editorial campaign" with the help of a willing and able news media. Enough of the public was mislead to the extent that Gingrich never really had a chance at public office again. Now for Quayle;
quote: and
quote: http://godfatherpolitics.com/...im-like-media-did-dan-quayle
But it's not valid. If Fox News have a duty to boost Birthers, then they would also have had a duty to boost 9/11 Truthers. They had their suspicions, and no-one else in the media was taking it seriously ... so why didn't Fox News step up? The Constitution directly states its requirement that the president be a natural born citizen. If there’s any question at all that he's not, (in Obama’s case, there are several) a thorough non-partisan investigation should be expected by anyone with any respect of the constitution. If 90% of the news media, and 100% of it’s liberal followers scoff at that investigation in a certain case, it could be an indication that there is a serious problem with news media free reign. ________________________ MESSAGE 62
NoNukes writes: I read the Ventura article and I have watched Fox News. I haven't commented on Fox News without having watched it. On the other hand, commenting without listening is exactly what you did regarding NPR. NPR is part of the news media. That's all I needed to know - that it's not a source where restrictions to the news media could be discussed without the news media present, and influential. It's not going to show discussions against itself while excluding itself from those discussions.
marc9000 writes: So my earlier point that that discussion isn't properly taking place still stands. No your comment does not stand. You would have to re-read, (or read for the first time) a certain part of my message 31, you'd find that it does. Here it is again;
quote: and your response in message 41 was;
quote: I've made up my mind that a news organization isn't going to allow those who may be hostile to it to have discussions about restrictions to it without having at least some input of the discussion. And you can't prove me wrong.
It's simply uninformed. The discussion is out there. You choose not to hear it. The discussion about how to improve news media responsibility, without the news media having an active role in the discussion, isn't out there, at least not in anything you or anyone else in this thread has shown.____________________________ MESSAGE 63
AZPaul3 writes: I was one of the baby killers. I was the embodiment of evil walking through LAX in uniform. I saw the body parts, the blood, the drugs, the vacant stares, the walking dead. I went to too many funerals; carried too many coffins, all before I was 21. I admire and respect your service to our country, but the soldiers in the war between the states, WW1, and WW2, and other wars also had a tough time.
Then I heard the lies on body counts, the cove up of atrocities, the "We are winning" montra from Westmoreland. All wars have those.
Then there was Tet ... then there was Cambodia. When Nixon expanded the war it was too much. He ripped the heart out of the nation. There was nothing left to do but take to the streets. There was something left to do, to understand that the President may have had intelligence reports and a thorough understanding of history and warfare that were far more detailed than the Democrat loving press was telling college students.
quote: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=2009022815565...
This wasn't some media hyped charade of liberal politics. It really was, the news media hated Nixon, and loved the Democrats in congress, who were more interested in losing the war than anything else. The Nixon administration taking the loss helped them ease the pain of the inept former Democrat president Johnson to accomplish anything concerning Vietnam. The news media’s top priority wasn’t to make sure college students had access to good, unbiased news reporting.
It was disgust. That my country, my government, my president could so deceive and bleed the people for so long. Second only to today's 16 trillion dollar debt. Wonder why college students aren't rioting today, it's going to take them a lot longer than the Vietnam war to deal with the Obama administrations debt alone. Maybe the news media isn't making it clear enough?
I still have my purple ribbon from Vietnam Vets Against the War. I earned the right to bitch. After all these decades it still hurts. I cry. And I respect that. But do you think you had it harder than... the U.S soldiers at the South Pacific island of Guadalcanal in 1942? I'm thankful that they, and their relatives and friends back home had something better to do than take it to the streets. ____________________________ MESSAGE 64
NoNukes writes: Are you kidding me? Have you heard of "fighting words doctrine", "clear and present danger", Supreme Court decisions on obscenity, campaign finance, time, manner and place restrictions on speech, ""imminent lawless action", The Pentagon Papers. The Sedition Act of 1918. Are you seriously questioning this issue or just seeing what sticks? What I haven't heard of is any case at all where the news media was found guilty of any of these things, and paid any penalty (monetary or otherwise) for violating them. So now I'll ask you for an example, just ONE. From a small town newspaper to the big national networks, one example of a violation, along with the amount/description of the penalty. A legitimate website that documents what the violation was, and what the penalty to the news organization was. I honestly hope you can, I'd like to check to see if this law is always applied evenly throughout the time of its inception to today. I'd also admit that I learned something, something that you liberals never seem to do when I supply you with an example that you asked for.__________________________ MESSAGE 65
NoNukes writes: marc9000 writes: Not content, but an unpredictable, quick profit. A profit that would be considered unpredictable based on content. No, based on an unusual event, an event that earlier sensationalism could have contributed to causing.
In fact none of the bill of rights applied to state legislatures prior to the late 19th century Not even the first amendment?_________________ MESSAGE 66
NoNukes writes: How old are you? I'm 58, in October of 70 I turned 16. So at the time of the Kent State shootings I was 15, but I already had my first vehicle bought, paid for with my own money, and fixed up with my own hands and ready to drive. So while I was fixing them up, one of my many opponents here — can't remember who - was overturning them and burning flags. I registered for the draft in 72 at age 18, and ended up not having to go, but I would have, if called. I wouldn’t have liked it, but I wasn’t the type of person to claim to know more than the U.S. president who was a generation older than me. I'm thankful that many Vietnam vets, and most all WW2 soldiers thinking was similar to mine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2284 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.8
|
wouldn’t have liked it, but I wasn’t the type of person to claim to know more than the U.S. president
So we won't hear anything critical of Obama and his policies from you? After all he is the president and obviously has more information and understanding of the situation than you do.It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds soon I discovered that this rock thing was true Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world And so there was only one thing I could do Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
I've made up my mind that a news organization isn't going to allow those who may be hostile to it to have discussions about restrictions to it without having at least some input of the discussion. Seriously. Why would I or anyone else even care about that question? The original question was whether media even discusses whether news coverage ought to include sensational details that might ultimately be harmful. If your rebuttal is that there is never such a discussion in the media without an opposing view point being aired, that's not a question of even the least bit interest to me.
The Constitution directly states its requirement that the president be a natural born citizen. If there’s any question at all that he's not, (in Obama’s case, there are several) There is no serious question about this. In fact there never was. But by now, this is so much of a settled issue that we can use the question to identify an agenda. The fact that you think there is yet a serious question about whether Obama was born in Hawaii says something about you and nothing at all about the president's bona fides.
NoNukes writes: In fact none of the bill of rights applied to state legislatures prior to the late 19th century marc9000 writes: Not even the first amendment? No, not even the first amendment applied to the states during most of the nineteenth century. During the nineteenth century, we had state churches despite the Establishment Clause. In some cases, the state church was the Anglican church. Prior to the civil war there was the burning of books by southern state governments with impunity. Freedom of speech was first applied to states by the Supreme Court in a 1925 case. Even now there are portions of the bill of rights that are not applied to the states. (Fifth amendment right to indictment by grand jury and the right to a jury trial in civil trials in state courts)
No, based on an unusual event, an event that earlier sensationalism could have contributed to causing. In other words, the tax would be applied due to the content of the coverage including sensationalism. That's a content based restriction of news coverage by the government. No thanks.
There was something left to do, to understand that the President may have had intelligence reports and a thorough understanding of history and warfare that were far more detailed than the Democrat loving press was telling college students The question was whether the student's believed they had a valid opinion about the war in Viet Nam that Nixon was wrong. Nothing you've presented suggest that either the student's did not have that opinion, or that it was the liberal media that caused the student's to have that impression. One might also note that Viet Nam essential destroyed LBJ and his prospects for election. Anti- Viet Nam sentiment wasn't just about the media hating Republicans. Further, I think the weight of history suggests that the US involvement in Viet Nam was a mistake. Nothing worth 59000 American lives was accomplished. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024