Muppet version of Windmills of my Mind popped into my head when reading that comment. Thank you…
Rolando
11 months ago
I love how mainstream media is properly portrayed as these bs pushers who parrot out whatever they find trending online. They’re positively allergic to fact-checking. I honestly believe fake news should be punished by law. Of course, it’s a rought draft of an idea that’d need polishing. “Lie, lie. Something will remain.” That’s an infamous quote, in my country. They know that, even if it’s publicly debunked, false information repeated often and loudly enough will still stick in the minds of many as if it were true. P.S.: Yes, I know it could be interpreted in other ways. But you… Read more »
Mainstream is anything big enough to be considered a main source of media. So, of course I consider one of the biggest networks in your country, mainstream.
That is, assuming you’re in the US. I don’t know how much presence they have in other countries.
They have literally 0 presence in my country. But to me fox news is a far right propaganda media, not what I would call mainstream. But in a fucked up country like the usa, maybe fascist media promoting conspiracy theories are mainstream tbh.
If Fox News has zero presence where you’re from, how do you know just how “far right” Fox news actually is? In point of fact, they’ve drifted further and further to the left ever since the end of the Obama administration, to the point where both right wingers like myself and left wingers don’t trust them.
Holy crap. I know there is a tendency on the right to distort right wing things as “left wing” so they can get away with starting to go so far right they hit fascism (which a lot if Alt right also call a left wing ideology). But fox news drifting left? That’s glorious that’s so blatant I have to applaud you.
Fox News is absolutely mainstream. It’s the media with the highest viewership in the US, by a huge margin. It’s as much as CNN and MSNBC combined. (It used to be more than the two combined, by the way.) Anyway. Media regulation is pretty complicated: sure, we all want journalists to not spread news that they know to be fake. However, how do yuo determine that the journalist knew the news to be fake? And what do you say about journalists who say “this is fake news” – and then cite the news? That’s also a problem by itself –… Read more »
I didnt know things were so bad in the us. How can that many ppl watch trash tv lying all the time when you can check it easily. I guess that’s how you get trump as president.
also media regulation isnt really that hard: lot of countries have institutions that controls media and dont allow fake news & hate speech on tv (but allows swearing tho)
Media regulation is expressly forbidden in the US by the US Constitution. The First Amendment expressly forbids government restriction of ANY form of speech.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
Except the media is legally regulated. The rights of the media end where the rights of individuals start. This is why we have laws against slander and libel. There are also privacy laws. There are all sorts of FCC regulations that restrict what can be broadcast and restrict the frequencies that are available for broadcast media. For example, it would be illegal for me to broadcast that Richard II Weatherfield is a danger to children because he is secretly a member of a religious sect that worships the toenails of toddlers. (unless of course that’s true, then I’d be protected… Read more »
Actually it isn’t illegal for you to broadcast that, true or not. Illegal means the government fines you or puts you in jail for violating the law. Laws governing libel and slander are about how the civil cases are handled, but damages must still be present and proven in order to have a case.
Hate speech is protected by the 1A.
Whether a specific death threat would be protected depends on whether it met the legal definition of a “true threat.”
Only true threats aren’t protected.
It’s amazing how bad it is here. Fox sold that the media is lying because they do it so much, and wanted to create a distrust in the news. Both you and Dick seem to believe that. That’s a shame. Real sources of journalism are identifiable however. They don’t present commentary as news, they quote their sources, they have editorial review, and most importantly, they don’t get successfully sued for billions of dollars (with a dozen lawsuits still pending) because they sold lies about elections being stolen. You can find out more about judging a journalistic source here: https://library.piercecollege.edu/c.php?g=598055&p=4140227
Part of the viewership of Fox News being so high compared to other mainstream media, is that Fox is literally the only media outlet right wing enough for most conservatives in the U.S. While that sounds kind of crazy, it’s also worth noting, that a large number of progressives aren’t willing to get their news from most mainstream media because it is TOO right wing (even though it’s still not Fox News) and so we get our news from other often less nominally reputable sources, such as tik tok. It’s literally so hard to find an even remotely unbiased source… Read more »
Where are you from? The problems the US have with mass media, are present in a lot of other countries as well. The names change, but the roles and bs styles repeat themselves awfully often.
Oh, we sure have media problems in france but our far right tv would almost look left winged compared to fox news.
They are full of shit but not even remotely close from foxnews. (And before someone asks: we dont have far left tv in france, just from center left to far right)
any news network that has ever had to defend one of their employees by having his lawyer say ‘no sane person would take what he says seriously’ is not worth my attention
Partially agree. The problem is that there’s money in fake news, conspiracy theories and he said/she said “news”. Because it’s not news – it’s entertainment. But most media want the money/viewership so they take that road. Unless they are non-profit, but that usually means state-owned media and their journalistic freedoms have been under pressure even in Western countries as a fascist mindset is growing even among those opposed to fascism (it’s hard not to turn into what you fight). Then there are a few independent non-profit (or profit-not-caring) news, but their viewer-/readership is low. Still, if the choice is between… Read more »
The problem with that is, that “law” is what the currently ruling people decide it is. There’d be nothing stopping them from deciding that fake news are any news they do not like, anything criticising them, or revealing scandals or corruption, or values they disagree with, etc.
Do you trust any government to only crack down on the actual fake news? I don’t, at all.
No. But neither do I trust individuals – who are generally driven by greed – to do the right thing either. The government in a democracy is at least somewhat responsible for its actions – more than the billionaire running the “news” or the quack peddling conspiracy theories and fake news to drum up sales for their t-shirts, magic stones or fake “medicine”.
No. You’re not describing a problem with my idea in its principles. You’re describing corruption, which is an inherent risk in ANY stucture run by humans. Discarding an idea, simply because of that risk, is as absurd as saying “it’s not perfect, and it can fail, so we should dismiss it.” It ignores the simple fact, nothing will ever be ideal. It’s at least better than nothing. Better than letting fake news run rampant like they do now, when the ONLY time they get properly challenged and punished is when a political enemy of the one spreading them wants to… Read more »
Crestlinger
11 months ago
Him taking a day off is probably the worst thing that can be done to them. That or the previously mentioned product support idea.
24
My mind is calm…my body in the other hand…
Muppet version of Windmills of my Mind popped into my head when reading that comment. Thank you…
I love how mainstream media is properly portrayed as these bs pushers who parrot out whatever they find trending online. They’re positively allergic to fact-checking. I honestly believe fake news should be punished by law. Of course, it’s a rought draft of an idea that’d need polishing. “Lie, lie. Something will remain.” That’s an infamous quote, in my country. They know that, even if it’s publicly debunked, false information repeated often and loudly enough will still stick in the minds of many as if it were true. P.S.: Yes, I know it could be interpreted in other ways. But you… Read more »
I guess we dont have the same mainstream media, unless you consider fox news as mainstream.
Mainstream is anything big enough to be considered a main source of media. So, of course I consider one of the biggest networks in your country, mainstream.
That is, assuming you’re in the US. I don’t know how much presence they have in other countries.
They have literally 0 presence in my country. But to me fox news is a far right propaganda media, not what I would call mainstream. But in a fucked up country like the usa, maybe fascist media promoting conspiracy theories are mainstream tbh.
If Fox News has zero presence where you’re from, how do you know just how “far right” Fox news actually is? In point of fact, they’ve drifted further and further to the left ever since the end of the Obama administration, to the point where both right wingers like myself and left wingers don’t trust them.
Good lord, thanks for identifying who we need to watch out for…
THe fact that you think Fox News drifted towards the left says everything about where you get your news from.
You think Fox news is heading left wing?
Holy crap. I know there is a tendency on the right to distort right wing things as “left wing” so they can get away with starting to go so far right they hit fascism (which a lot if Alt right also call a left wing ideology). But fox news drifting left? That’s glorious that’s so blatant I have to applaud you.
Oh and sparky? Left wingers never trusted Fox.
Because i have something called the internet, and also a brain. Things you probably miss anyway
Fox News is absolutely mainstream. It’s the media with the highest viewership in the US, by a huge margin. It’s as much as CNN and MSNBC combined. (It used to be more than the two combined, by the way.) Anyway. Media regulation is pretty complicated: sure, we all want journalists to not spread news that they know to be fake. However, how do yuo determine that the journalist knew the news to be fake? And what do you say about journalists who say “this is fake news” – and then cite the news? That’s also a problem by itself –… Read more »
I didnt know things were so bad in the us. How can that many ppl watch trash tv lying all the time when you can check it easily. I guess that’s how you get trump as president.
also media regulation isnt really that hard: lot of countries have institutions that controls media and dont allow fake news & hate speech on tv (but allows swearing tho)
Media regulation is expressly forbidden in the US by the US Constitution. The First Amendment expressly forbids government restriction of ANY form of speech.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
Except the media is legally regulated. The rights of the media end where the rights of individuals start. This is why we have laws against slander and libel. There are also privacy laws. There are all sorts of FCC regulations that restrict what can be broadcast and restrict the frequencies that are available for broadcast media. For example, it would be illegal for me to broadcast that Richard II Weatherfield is a danger to children because he is secretly a member of a religious sect that worships the toenails of toddlers. (unless of course that’s true, then I’d be protected… Read more »
Cable companies aren’t subject to broadcast regulation.
Actually it isn’t illegal for you to broadcast that, true or not. Illegal means the government fines you or puts you in jail for violating the law. Laws governing libel and slander are about how the civil cases are handled, but damages must still be present and proven in order to have a case.
So the first amendment protects diffamation, hate speech, incinting violence, death threats,inciting racial riots, etc.? Yeah im not sure it does.
Hate speech is protected by the 1A.
Whether a specific death threat would be protected depends on whether it met the legal definition of a “true threat.”
Only true threats aren’t protected.
Great. You’re able to copy and paste the 1A.
Now do the 200+ years of case law…
You’re gonna need more room.
It’s amazing how bad it is here. Fox sold that the media is lying because they do it so much, and wanted to create a distrust in the news. Both you and Dick seem to believe that. That’s a shame. Real sources of journalism are identifiable however. They don’t present commentary as news, they quote their sources, they have editorial review, and most importantly, they don’t get successfully sued for billions of dollars (with a dozen lawsuits still pending) because they sold lies about elections being stolen. You can find out more about judging a journalistic source here: https://library.piercecollege.edu/c.php?g=598055&p=4140227
Part of the viewership of Fox News being so high compared to other mainstream media, is that Fox is literally the only media outlet right wing enough for most conservatives in the U.S. While that sounds kind of crazy, it’s also worth noting, that a large number of progressives aren’t willing to get their news from most mainstream media because it is TOO right wing (even though it’s still not Fox News) and so we get our news from other often less nominally reputable sources, such as tik tok. It’s literally so hard to find an even remotely unbiased source… Read more »
well, CNN and MSNBC are lying too, yet are you denouncing or believing their claims?
The day they get to the level of o news give me a call. Tucker carlson alone is worse than all far right media in my own country.
Where are you from? The problems the US have with mass media, are present in a lot of other countries as well. The names change, but the roles and bs styles repeat themselves awfully often.
Oh, we sure have media problems in france but our far right tv would almost look left winged compared to fox news.
They are full of shit but not even remotely close from foxnews. (And before someone asks: we dont have far left tv in france, just from center left to far right)
Is that you Monsieur Safior? I have to ask because your attitude reminds me a bit of him.
any news network that has ever had to defend one of their employees by having his lawyer say ‘no sane person would take what he says seriously’ is not worth my attention
Partially agree. The problem is that there’s money in fake news, conspiracy theories and he said/she said “news”. Because it’s not news – it’s entertainment. But most media want the money/viewership so they take that road. Unless they are non-profit, but that usually means state-owned media and their journalistic freedoms have been under pressure even in Western countries as a fascist mindset is growing even among those opposed to fascism (it’s hard not to turn into what you fight). Then there are a few independent non-profit (or profit-not-caring) news, but their viewer-/readership is low. Still, if the choice is between… Read more »
The problem with that is, that “law” is what the currently ruling people decide it is. There’d be nothing stopping them from deciding that fake news are any news they do not like, anything criticising them, or revealing scandals or corruption, or values they disagree with, etc.
Do you trust any government to only crack down on the actual fake news? I don’t, at all.
No. But neither do I trust individuals – who are generally driven by greed – to do the right thing either. The government in a democracy is at least somewhat responsible for its actions – more than the billionaire running the “news” or the quack peddling conspiracy theories and fake news to drum up sales for their t-shirts, magic stones or fake “medicine”.
I’d love a better choice though.
No. You’re not describing a problem with my idea in its principles. You’re describing corruption, which is an inherent risk in ANY stucture run by humans. Discarding an idea, simply because of that risk, is as absurd as saying “it’s not perfect, and it can fail, so we should dismiss it.” It ignores the simple fact, nothing will ever be ideal. It’s at least better than nothing. Better than letting fake news run rampant like they do now, when the ONLY time they get properly challenged and punished is when a political enemy of the one spreading them wants to… Read more »
Him taking a day off is probably the worst thing that can be done to them. That or the previously mentioned product support idea.