1
M
member 3289
Guest
There are common ways of saying everything.
Conspiratards gonna conspiratard.
Conspiratards gonna conspiratard.
It's not just Fox News -- its All Big Media controlled by "They".
Check out my thread i made awhile ago -- pretty extensive...of course many vids have been pulled by Youtube.
Open Your Mind: Exposing the Illusion that is Media
Listen "VERY" carefully to what Mika says -- also look into who Mika's poppa pump was:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEeiVgdHIYk
I
Who runs the music Industry?
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0lPD1odbfw
Check out my thread i made awhile ago -- pretty extensive...of course many vids have been pulled by Youtube.
Open Your Mind: Exposing the Illusion that is Media
Listen "VERY" carefully to what Mika says -- also look into who Mika's poppa pump was:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEeiVgdHIYk
I
Who runs the music Industry?
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0lPD1odbfw
Last edited:
Title says Fox News but not only are none of the examples in the video in the OP from the Fox News cable network, but some of those clips are from ABC and CBS as well.
But to address the point of the video, I remember seeing it a little while back. It initially struck me as sinister but then I realized it was just Sinclair exercising top-down editorial control over the stations they own. The editorial department always shapes the content within any media outlet.
But to address the point of the video, I remember seeing it a little while back. It initially struck me as sinister but then I realized it was just Sinclair exercising top-down editorial control over the stations they own. The editorial department always shapes the content within any media outlet.
1
1372
Guest
1
1031
Guest
I'd be curious to learn when this began. I mean, how long has the ownership and chief representation of NYT and CNN been so dominated by this demographic. Obviously one is older than the other. Is it only these two outlets (my guess is no but it's only a guess) so overwhelmingly represented by one group of people at the top?It's not just Fox News -- its All Big Media controlled by "They".
Check out my thread i made awhile ago -- pretty extensive...of course many vids have been pulled by Youtube.
Open Your Mind: Exposing the Illusion that is Media
Listen "VERY" carefully to what Mika says -- also look into who Mika's poppa pump was:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEeiVgdHIYk
I
Who runs the music Industry?
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0lPD1odbfw
Jews have had a disproportionate amount of control over the media for a long time. It's not much different from their control over Hollywood. That's been the case for at least several decades.
Whether they targeted the news business just because they thought it would be a profitable business to get into or because they wanted a way to manipulate world affairs is the question, and not one I have an answer to.
1
1031
Guest
But I'm curious when it started, not with Hollywood, but with major, widely trusted, media outlets.
Can we get an info graphic of what percentage of people trust the news? I don't kniw what country you live in, but here in the US very few people trust the media, amd rightfully so.
1
1031
Guest
Well my question is about the past so my assumption (and I admit it could be wrong) is that the further back we go, the more likely people were to be trustful of major media outlets. Nonetheless, all I was trying to do was clarify that I'm asking about big media organizations.
Lolzy’s
Dunno. And it's worth noting that there are plenty of news outlets owned and run by Gentiles so it's not a monopoly.
Your assumption is correct. For instance, here's one infographic that shows the percentage of Americans who expressed a "great deal" or "fair amount" of trust in the media since 1997 to the present:
I'm sure that if you continued to push that back into earlier decades that you'd see the number rise even higher.
However, with that said, I think that people today largely say they don't trust the media but in practice they trust the media much more than they say they do (or perhaps more than they THINK they do). For instance, just look at how often people on Internet forums either post threads about a news story they read, or post articles to illustrate something they're saying or to support a point they're making.
It happens all day everyday. Why is everyone constantly posting news articles if they have no trust in our news organizations?
It seems clear to me that, even though people constantly complain about the trustworthiness of the media, in reality they still tend to accept that erroneous reporting is the exception rather than the rule, and that most journalists are doing their best to get the story right.
At a certain point in time journalism existed, you are correct. Now it is all about grandstanding and reporting your opinion, as opposed to facts. It is a clear violation of ethics, but journalist ethics apparently doesn't have a police force.
85% of media is liberal, from what I understand. So if you lean in that direction or are hard left, those are the outlets you will source for your information, amd post. On the flip side, if you are cinservative, you will be posting sources from those outlets. News has to come from somewhere, as none of us are investigators with ties to government (maybe some, but few). You choose the outlet you see most credible, amd watch. Some you believe, some you dont. Many smell the bullshit and can make a judgement on facts. Most however just drink up what they want to believe.
1
1031
Guest
I don't know if there are plenty of msm outlets run by gentiles, maybe there are but I am simply unaware of it.Dunno. And it's worth noting that there are plenty of news outlets owned and run by Gentiles so it's not a monopoly.
Your assumption is correct. For instance, here's one infographic that shows the percentage of Americans who expressed a "great deal" or "fair amount" of trust in the media since 1997 to the present:
I'm sure that if you continued to push that back into earlier decades that you'd see the number rise even higher.
However, with that said, I think that people today largely say they don't trust the media but in practice they trust the media much more than they say they do (or perhaps more than they THINK they do). For instance, just look at how often people on Internet forums either post threads about a news story they read, or post articles to illustrate something they're saying or to support a point they're making.
It happens all day everyday. Why is everyone constantly posting news articles if they have no trust in our news organizations?
It seems clear to me that, even though people constantly complain about the trustworthiness of the media, in reality they still tend to accept that erroneous reporting is the exception rather than the rule, and that most journalists are doing their best to get the story right.
The two examples
@ENOCK has posted certainly don't support your view it's not a monopoly, at the very least, it does not look coincidental.Good points all ways around regarding the public's inconsistency. My guess is that even if we don't buy what they're selling, it gets sold to us regardless. I'm in Canada at the moment but American media influence is inescapable here (and not for the better). There's no doubt in my mind that it shapes people's attitudes.
Sometimes it does, sometimes it dies not. In 2016 it certainly did not. Here we are almost 2 years into the trump presidency and 93% of his coverage is negative, despite accomplishments and promises kept. The average citizen I'd imagine sees through the bullshit.I don't know if there are plenty of msm outlets run by gentiles, maybe there are but I am simply unaware of it.
The two examples
Good points all ways around regarding the public's inconsistency. My guess is that even if we don't buy what they're selling, it gets sold to us regardless. I'm in Canada at the moment but American media influence is inescapable here (and not for the better). There's no doubt in my mind that it shapes people's attitudes.
I believe that the greatest influence in terms of an outlet's political bias lies in the stories they choose to cover. For instance, I know for a little while CNN was doing what felt like wall-to-wall Stormy Daniels coverage. Obviously they were doing that because they hate Trump. But that doesn't mean that the coverage was actually INACCURATE, it only means that the selection of news stories on the network was unbalanced.
Yes, sometimes news outlets do make honest mistakes and get things wrong (which is usually later retracted and corrected). And yes, on occasion reporters or editors will intentionally put misleading information out there (but I really think this is pretty rare).
Another thing to keep in mind is that a great deal of news is not political.
"Conor McGregor defeats Eddie Alvarez, claims lightweight title"
What does this news story have to do with being liberal or conservative? Nothing at all.
"Mission: Impossible - Fallout breaks record with highest-grossing opening weekend in franchise history"
Again, that has nothing to do with politics.
Last edited:
First off, I'd say to always be a little skeptical of Internet-generated infographics like that, as they are quite often bullshit.I don't know if there are plenty of msm outlets run by gentiles, maybe there are but I am simply unaware of it.
The two examples
Second, here's an interesting article I found that directly tackles this question:
Rick Sanchez says Jews control the media. Is that true?
I'm sure it shapes people's attitudes, but then again, it's the events of our world. How can it NOT shape people's attitudes?
Take 9/11 for instance. Even the most bland, balanced, objective, just-the-facts-ma'am coverage of that event is going to shape people's attitudes.
That's not to say, of course, that news outlets never intentionally seek to do this. I'm just saying that even if they didn't, the shaping of attitudes is inevitable.
Can we get an info graphic on cnn's news coverage of any sporting event, or all combined, compared to stormy daniels? Throw in all superb bowls throughout history. I'm game.
I don't have that info handy.
But this goes back to what I've said before, and that's that you should never rely on any single news outlet for all your news, because if you do you will undoubtedly end up with an unbalanced view of world events.
As I've mentioned more than once, I watch a lot of Fox News. But I also watch CNN and even MSNBC on occasion, and that really does help to provide a more balanced, well-rounded picture.
I also use a news app (SmartNews, it's great) that aggregates articles from many different sources.
I've concluded that some degree of bias is probably inevitable, but since I do have access to so many different news resources I don't worry about it too much. What I am much more concerned about is the news that is presented to me being factually accurate, at least to the best of the reporter's knowledge at that time. When I read a news article, or watch a news story on television, I need to be confident that the information being provided is correct.
1
1031
Guest
Good article, it's from 2010 but relevant as my question pertained specifically to the past. It's non-conclusive but only because it offers a number of perspectives.
Yes they are the events of our world but are they really?
This is what you wrote in another post:
I think you're on to something much bigger with that observation.
Yeah, it's a little old. I doubt there's been some crazy Jewish wave that's swept through the news business in the last 8 years, though.
One thing to note is how it talks about various figures being rumored to be Jewish, but without substantiating evidence. It's very possible that the infographics posted earlier are the result of these rumors.
I can't say for sure, nor am I interested enough to try to fact-check them. But I'm just sayin'.
Well they are at least SOME of the events of our world.
It's certainly true that a lot of stuff just doesn't get reported, for one reason or another. Right now the US involved militarily in Yemen and it's barely being reported by the cable outlets when it probably should be a big story that's getting a lot more airtime.