Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!

I Hate The Media

Reaver4kReaver4k Trainee in training
Yes I hate the media, WHY? Well becuase they always like to learn to one side of an agrument, some times they really like to be one sided(FOX NEWS, CNN, CBC) Well if you ask me, I AM FUCKING SICK OF IT and FUCK THEM. Why Cant they just give the basic facts about somthing and don't bother with leaning to one side and let me my self decide if its good or bad.

If they actly do that I mite just watch them if I actly cared about the world around me, becuse I don't(The world is depressing and when I know whats going on I get depressed and start cutting my self). See but they wont, becuase they mite be get ratings and we all need good ratings to we can sell airtime for comerials!!!1!one!!

As you can see. The world does not like freethinkers like me. ANother reason why I do not fit in.

Comments

  • CurZCurZ Resident Hippy
    :laugh:
  • CurZCurZ Resident Hippy
    Let me reiterate:

    [img]http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/4857/arnoldha4xk.gif[/img]
  • Yeah cry me a fuckin reaver


    [IMG]http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y27/JediTrilobite/Serenity%20Trailer/TrailerImg17.jpg[/IMG]
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    What did they do to you this time?
  • Random ChaosRandom Chaos Actually Carefully-selected Order in disguise
  • ArethusaArethusa Universal Cathode
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by The Cabl3 Guy [/i]
    [B]Yeah cry me a fuckin reaver[/B][/QUOTE]
    Why did you avoid the much more obvious pun?
  • [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Biggles [/i]
    [B]What did they do to you this time? [/B][/QUOTE] Me or him?
  • croxiscroxis I am the walrus
    There is no such thing as unbiased news, nor will there ever be.
  • FreejackFreejack Jake the Not-so-Wise
    Ok, this is how I look at it, the media is a business, and being a business it has to target a certain market segment. To retain that segment, it must provide the information in the way the segment wants (left vs right, print vs televised). As more media outlets have become available, specificly the internet, the broadcast media have seen a narrowing their market segments, driving them further from a generalized position.

    Do I think this is a good thing, no, not really. But it is a necessary evil that to have an independent media, that it is run as a business. The alternative is government supported media, and that is far too dangerous a path to follow.

    That said, media bias is far from a new thing. Take a look at the newpapers from the turn of the century. I'd be willing to bet there is more integrety in the media today due to the vast quantities available, than there was 100 years ago.

    Jake
  • croxiscroxis I am the walrus
    Also the best reporters know that they have thier own personal biases, especally with complex subjects. This is why i'm teaching my students to read for such biases.
  • E.TE.T Quote-o-matic
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Freejack [/i]
    [B]independent media, that it is run as a business.[/B][/QUOTE]Media run by money isn't anymore independent. Money doesn't have any moral or ethics so when making more money is target everything else becomes secondary.
    Like in that consumer right fraud/illegal law here in Finland, most distorting and treacherous information was told by big commercial medias which had that free/unregulated capital behind them.
  • [url]http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2004/10/06/no-longer-obeying-orders/[/url]
  • Entilz_ahEntilz_ah Earthforce Officer
    I very seldom post anything....but you continually brag about being a "free-thinker" while sounding exactly like every other self proclaimed "free-thinker" I have ever heard speak. Quit whining and get in line with all the other sheep.
  • AnlaShokAnlaShok Democrat From Hell
    Let's see... Republican administration = big tax breaks for large corporations and the owners of those corporations.

    News media are all owned by large corporations.

    CBS, NBC, ABC, etc., all owned by Big Business, who profit by shaping our opinions to favor those politicians who then screw us.

    And it's very hard to change it, even IF the people who were in a position to do so were so inclined.
  • [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AnlaShok [/i]
    [B]Let's see... Republican administration = big tax breaks for large corporations and the owners of those corporations.

    News media are all owned by large corporations.

    CBS, NBC, ABC, etc., all owned by Big Business, who profit by shaping our opinions to favor those politicians who then screw us.

    And it's very hard to change it, even IF the people who were in a position to do so were so inclined. [/B][/QUOTE] Vote for me!

    Canavan 2020 ;0
  • Reaver4kReaver4k Trainee in training
    [quote]I very seldom post anything....but you continually brag about being a "free-thinker" while sounding exactly like every other self proclaimed "free-thinker" I have ever heard speak. Quit whining and get in line with all the other sheep.[/quote]

    Baaaaa Baaaaaa I am a sheep, Baaaa baaaa

    and Goto hell you Repubican sheep

    [quote]What did they do to you this time?[/quote]

    Pissed me off and made me want to kill my self for being Leaches.
  • croxiscroxis I am the walrus
    Calling people names is not a sign of maturity last i checked.
  • Entilz_ahEntilz_ah Earthforce Officer
    Once again you show your inability to actually think in an acceptably free manner. As I have stated already you are just like every other "free-thinker." You are convinced because I do not agree with your "free-thinking" style that I am a Republican when I am closer to a Libertarian. I believe we should stick to the core elements of the constitution that our founding fathers so elloquently and intelligently put to words.
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    Reaver, the [url=http://forums.firstones.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=66]forum rules[/url] say no flaming. I suggest you (and everyone else) follow them.
  • FreejackFreejack Jake the Not-so-Wise
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by E.T [/i]
    [B]Media run by money isn't anymore independent. Money doesn't have any moral or ethics so when making more money is target everything else becomes secondary.
    Like in that consumer right fraud/illegal law here in Finland, most distorting and treacherous information was told by big commercial medias which had that free/unregulated capital behind them. [/B][/QUOTE]

    The problem is, there is no way to have a independent media without running it as a business. It takes lots of money to support a fully connected media outlet and that money has to come from somewhere, of which there are only two sources, the readership/viewship or the government.

    Jake
  • AnlaShokAnlaShok Democrat From Hell
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Freejack [/i]
    [B]The problem is, there is no way to have a independent media without running it as a business. It takes lots of money to support a fully connected media outlet and that money has to come from somewhere, of which there are only two sources, the readership/viewship or the government.

    Jake [/B][/QUOTE]

    How about this: If you own a large media outlet, you may own no other business? Seperate GE from NBC and you may see some slightly less biased coverage. I think that having huge corporate conglomerates owning the media that reports on them is a [i] definite[/i] conflict of interest. Throw in the politics and vast sums of money at stake, and it is even more so.
  • FreejackFreejack Jake the Not-so-Wise
    That may have some effect, but it would be limited. Many of the largest news outlets are parts of media only companies, CNN is part of Turner Broadcasting, CBS is part of Viacom, Time magazine is part of AOL/TimeWarner. The same goes for many newspapers and radio outlets (KnightRidder, Clear Channel communications). Following the your same logic, a better solution may be to limit the number of outlets a company can own, but I imagine that would be difficult to police and in the end, would more than likely create a larger number of small, even more biased outlets, rather than large, mainstream news sources.

    Jake
  • SanfamSanfam I like clocks.
    Well, the rules regarding network and news outlet ownership were maintained quite successfully until recent years saw the demise of such regulations. I would not mind a small number of vastly different news sources, and I imagine a good deal of them would settle to a comfortable middle-ground as they typically do.
  • leTS DO FORGET CENSORSHIP TOO i MEAN ITS PRETTY DRIDUCLIUES WHEN YOU CAN CENSORED FROM A FOURM?1
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    Forums are not journalistic establishments.
  • croxiscroxis I am the walrus
    I thinks hes drunk
  • Well before evryone torches each other I just want to add most poeple in the media are ether selling a book or tying to start their own show, they try to fill their own pockets by getting people to watch their time slot. they are just talking heads trying to make a living and always have that in your back of your mind when listing or watching them.
  • E.TE.T Quote-o-matic
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Freejack [/i]
    [B]would more than likely create a larger number of small, even more biased outlets, rather than large, mainstream news sources.[/B][/QUOTE]
    Read this:
    [url]http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0407.turner.html[/url]
  • TyvarTyvar Next best thing to a St. Bernard
    Actually in the early history of the United States, the media was exactly what Psi-killer described, there were numerous small outlets all with an obvious political, bent, however I think that was a positive thing.

    Today we have messed up news, in that the reporters have one bias, the big companies have another, and they often clash. In the middle of all this we have people believing that there is this big impartial source of information, when due to human nature, there can not be such a thing.

    I think returning to the smaller obviously biased information outlets of the past is a positive thing, becaue it will encourage more skeptiscism towards the information we are getting, from all sides of the spectrum.
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    That's pretty much the approach I take by using google news. Take, for example, something about Taiwan/China relations. I can read the top story from google news, then also from google news quickly and easily get to an article from chinese sources and an article from taiwanese sources. They're all biased, but by reading all of them I can get an idea of the various opinions around.
Sign In or Register to comment.