RE: How 'Free' is the media?

RE: How 'Free' is the media? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Lucylastic -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/16/2015 4:04:17 PM)
You have never posted a media link that isnt in the right wing fundy folder. You wouldnt know *free" media if it chewed half your nose off

mnottertail -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/17/2015 7:17:04 AM)
But of course there is a liberal bias to media, it is where the facts are. Man does not govern by hallucination alone, unless he is a nutsucker.

thompsonx -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/17/2015 8:31:13 AM)
Veterans Day is an official United States public holiday, observed annually on November 11, that honors military veterans, that is, persons who served in the United States Armed Forces. That would be your opinion. An Act (52 Stat. 351; 5 U. S. Code, Sec. 87a) approved May 13, 1938, made the 11th of November in each year a legal holiday—a day to be dedicated to the cause of world peace and to be thereafter celebrated and known as "Armistice Day." Armistice Day was primarily a day set aside to honor veterans of World War I, IF Cuba was part of the U. S., then those uniforms would look like U. S. uniforms would look like standard issue U. S. military uniforms. I can only assume you were trying to be facetious. I can only assume you have no clue as to the origin of armistice/veterans day or how it has morphed. A little reading could disabuse you of your ignorance.

Lucylastic -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/17/2015 8:35:19 AM)
dont encourage more ignorance to be spouted hon, pleaseeeeee Someone told me the other day that veterans day was thought of before WW1 Fucking ignorant asswipes

MrRodgers -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/19/2015 9:50:19 AM)
Businesses probably stepped in and told the govt. 'Hey we have to narrow this down, we can't be paying the suckers for yet another day off.' It worked too. Even at IBM they didn't pay me for 'Veterans Day' (you had to ask for a 'personal' day, so if you were early enough, you got off and of course at IBM...you got paid, same as MLK birthday) and most retailers are open for great 'Veteran's Day Sales.' So.....? So hey, it's the 'American Way'...yet another profit-center.

CreativeDominant -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/19/2015 1:27:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Veterans Day is an official United States public holiday, observed annually on November 11, that honors military veterans, that is, persons who served in the United States Armed Forces. That would be your opinion. An Act (52 Stat. 351; 5 U. S. Code, Sec. 87a) approved May 13, 1938, made the 11th of November in each year a legal holiday—a day to be dedicated to the cause of world peace and to be thereafter celebrated and known as "Armistice Day." Armistice Day was primarily a day set aside to honor veterans of World War I, IF Cuba was part of the U. S., then those uniforms would look like U. S. uniforms would look like standard issue U. S. military uniforms. I can only assume you were trying to be facetious. I can only assume you have no clue as to the origin of armistice/veterans day or how it has morphed. A little reading could disabuse you of your ignorance. Actually, a little further reading would have disabused you of YOUR ignorance: *An Act (52 Stat. 351; 5 U. S. Code, Sec. 87a) approved May 13, 1938, made the 11th of November in each year a legal holiday—a day to be dedicated to the cause of world peace and to be thereafter celebrated and known as "Armistice Day."* Here's the part you must not have read: Armistice Day was primarily a day set aside to honor veterans of World War I, ((hmm, I wasn't wrong)) but in 1954, after World War II had required the greatest mobilization of soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen in the Nation’s history; after American forces had fought aggression in Korea, the 83rd Congress, at the urging of the veterans service organizations, amended the Act of 1938 by striking out the word "Armistice" and inserting in its place the word "Veterans."With the approval of this legislation (Public Law 380) on June 1, 1954, November 11th became a day to honor American veterans of all wars. Later that same year, on October 8th, President Dwight D. Eisenhower issued the first "Veterans Day Proclamation" which stated: "In order to insure proper and widespread observance of this anniversary, all veterans, all veterans' organizations, and the entire citizenry will wish to join hands in the common purpose. Toward this end, I am designating the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs as Chairman of a Veterans Day National Committee, which shall include such other persons as the Chairman may select, and which will coordinate at the national level necessary planning for the observance. I am also requesting the heads of all departments and agencies of the Executive branch of the Government to assist the National Committee in every way possible." On that same day, President Eisenhower sent a letter to the Honorable Harvey V. Higley, Administrator of Veterans' Affairs (VA), designating him as Chairman of the Veterans Day National Committee. In 1958, the White House advised VA's General Counsel that the 1954 designation of the VA Administrator as Chairman of the Veterans Day National Committee applied to all subsequent VA Administrators. Since March 1989 when VA was elevated to a cabinet level department, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs has served as the committee's chairman. The Uniform Holiday Bill (Public Law 90-363 (82 Stat. 250)) was signed on June 28, 1968, and was intended to ensure three-day weekends for Federal employees by celebrating four national holidays on Mondays: Washington's Birthday, Memorial Day, Veterans Day, and Columbus Day. It was thought that these extended weekends would encourage travel, recreational and cultural activities and stimulate greater industrial and commercial production. Many states did not agree with this decision and continued to celebrate the holidays on their original dates. The first Veterans Day under the new law was observed with much confusion on October 25, 1971. It was quite apparent that the commemoration of this day was a matter of historic and patriotic significance to a great number of our citizens, and so on September 20th, 1975, President Gerald R. Ford signed Public Law 94-97 (89 Stat. 479), which returned the annual observance of Veterans Day to its original date of November 11, beginning in 1978. This action supported the desires of the overwhelming majority of state legislatures, all major veterans service organizations and the American people. Veterans Day continues to be observed on November 11, regardless of what day of the week on which it falls. The restoration of the observance of Veterans Day to November 11 not only preserves the historical significance of the date, but helps focus attention on the important purpose of Veterans Day: A celebration to honor America's veterans for their patriotism, love of country, and willingness to serve and sacrifice for the common good. Not just my opinion, this comes from the Office of Veterans Affairs. http://www.va.gov/opa/vetsday/vetdayhistory.asp

thompsonx -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/19/2015 2:26:54 PM)
ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant ORIGINAL: thompsonx Veterans Day is an official United States public holiday, observed annually on November 11, that honors military veterans, that is, persons who served in the United States Armed Forces. That would be your opinion. An Act (52 Stat. 351; 5 U. S. Code, Sec. 87a) approved May 13, 1938, made the 11th of November in each year a legal holiday—a day to be dedicated to the cause of world peace and to be thereafter celebrated and known as "Armistice Day." Armistice Day was primarily a day set aside to honor veterans of World War I, IF Cuba was part of the U. S., then those uniforms would look like U. S. uniforms would look like standard issue U. S. military uniforms. I can only assume you were trying to be facetious. I can only assume you have no clue as to the origin of armistice/veterans day or how it has morphed. A little reading could disabuse you of your ignorance. Actually, a little further reading would have disabused you of YOUR ignorance: Not just my opinion, this comes from the Office of Veterans Affairs. I can only assume you have no clue as to the origin of armistice/veterans day or how it has morphed. Obviously you have no clue what the words "origin" and "morphed" mean. A little reading could disabuse you of your ignorance.

CreativeDominant -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/19/2015 5:27:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant ORIGINAL: thompsonx Veterans Day is an official United States public holiday, observed annually on November 11, that honors military veterans, that is, persons who served in the United States Armed Forces. That would be your opinion. An Act (52 Stat. 351; 5 U. S. Code, Sec. 87a) approved May 13, 1938, made the 11th of November in each year a legal holiday—a day to be dedicated to the cause of world peace and to be thereafter celebrated and known as "Armistice Day." Armistice Day was primarily a day set aside to honor veterans of World War I, IF Cuba was part of the U. S., then those uniforms would look like U. S. uniforms would look like standard issue U. S. military uniforms. I can only assume you were trying to be facetious. I can only assume you have no clue as to the origin of armistice/veterans day or how it has morphed. A little reading could disabuse you of your ignorance. Actually, a little further reading would have disabused you of YOUR ignorance: Not just my opinion, this comes from the Office of Veterans Affairs. I can only assume you have no clue as to the origin of armistice/veterans day or how it has morphed. Obviously you have no clue what the words "origin" and "morphed" mean. A little reading could disabuse you of your ignorance. Repeating the same argument you made earlier doesn't make it any more valid. If you've got something that contradicts the Office of Veterans Affairs, other than the partial post of their description, bring it forth.

vincentML -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/21/2015 9:12:17 AM)
duplicate post

vincentML -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/21/2015 9:14:32 AM)
quote: The same could be said for the popular view of MSF, but the reality is somewhat different. MSF was allowing non-Taliban patients to be discharged against medical advice in order to free beds for wounded Taliban fighters, and failed to display on the roof of its facility any of the three internationally recognized symbols that would have allowed it to be recognized as a hospital from the air. There seems to be nothing in the MSF report to suggest. In fact the report says that wounded fighters from both sides were being treated. In reply to Kirata

vincentML -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/21/2015 9:28:24 AM)
quote: Does the media serve its purpose to print all the news regardless of how that news affects stakeholders, who might be media owners, governments, politicians, or journalists themselves? There is really nothing new here. The history of print journalism in the US shows that media have always been either ideologically biased or willing to print anything for the sake of commercial gain. Newspapers played a big role in instigating the war against Spain in 1898. In W's Iraq criminal misadventure reporters were "imbedded" with fighting units. There are some cases where the actions committed in our name are so egregious that even partisan media cannot ignore them. Otherwise, they are lapdogs.

CreativeDominant -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/21/2015 5:52:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant ORIGINAL: thompsonx Veterans Day is an official United States public holiday, observed annually on November 11, that honors military veterans, that is, persons who served in the United States Armed Forces. That would be your opinion. An Act (52 Stat. 351; 5 U. S. Code, Sec. 87a) approved May 13, 1938, made the 11th of November in each year a legal holiday—a day to be dedicated to the cause of world peace and to be thereafter celebrated and known as "Armistice Day." Armistice Day was primarily a day set aside to honor veterans of World War I, IF Cuba was part of the U. S., then those uniforms would look like U. S. uniforms would look like standard issue U. S. military uniforms. I can only assume you were trying to be facetious. I can only assume you have no clue as to the origin of armistice/veterans day or how it has morphed. A little reading could disabuse you of your ignorance. Actually, a little further reading would have disabused you of YOUR ignorance: Not just my opinion, this comes from the Office of Veterans Affairs. I can only assume you have no clue as to the origin of armistice/veterans day or how it has morphed. Obviously you have no clue what the words "origin" and "morphed" mean. A little reading could disabuse you of your ignorance. Wctually, I did have an idea of the origin of Veterans Day. As for Armistice Day morphing into Veterans Day, in what way does that explain your inane comment about Cuban soldiers being North American soldiers? Can you point out how your original comment to that effect is covered by either Veterans Day recognizing AMERICAN...U.S.of A....soldiers or Armistice Day celebrating World Peace? Or could you just not stand the fact that a liberal journalist got caught in his own mistake? And corrected it himself?

tweakabelle -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/21/2015 9:34:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: Does the media serve its purpose to print all the news regardless of how that news affects stakeholders, who might be media owners, governments, politicians, or journalists themselves? There is really nothing new here. The history of print journalism in the US shows that media have always been either ideologically biased or willing to print anything for the sake of commercial gain. Newspapers played a big role in instigating the war against Spain in 1898. In W's Iraq criminal misadventure reporters were "imbedded" with fighting units. There are some cases where the actions committed in our name are so egregious that even partisan media cannot ignore them. Otherwise, they are lapdogs. Nice to see you again VincentML! Glen Greenwald, who always has something interesting to report on, has a new site called the intercept - https://theintercept.com/ Greenwald's CV includes breaking the NSA spying story and interviews/support for Edward Snowdon, as well as collaborating with wikileaks on various scoops/stories. Greenwald says he is attempting to produce a new kind of journalism tho' he is hazy on the details. What is clear is that the site pursues stories that the servile mass media declines to touch or fails to report fully and fearlessly. It will interesting to see how the site develops and if Greenwald is successful in creating a commercially sustainable platform that is truly independent fearless and dedicated to publishing the truth. Currently The Intercept site features an in-depth analysis of Obama's drone wars in Pakistan/Afghanistan, Yemen and other places. It comes as no surprise to discover that, according to The Intercept's account, the facts of the drone wars are very different to the official account, which is swallowed whole and regurgitated faithfully by a spineless American mass media.

wittynamehere -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/21/2015 9:40:54 PM)
Good writeup, OP. I like an Immortal Technique rap song called "Fourth Branch", it's about the out of control media.

CreativeDominant -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/22/2015 12:21:10 AM)
Currently The Intercept site features an in-depth analysis of Obama's drone wars in Pakistan/Afghanistan, Yemen and other places. It comes as no surprise to discover that, according to The Intercept's account, the facts of the drone wars are very different to the official account, which is swallowed whole and regurgitated faithfully by a spineless American mass media. quote: You forgot; felching lapdogs

vincentML -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/22/2015 8:04:43 AM)
quote: Greenwald says he is attempting to produce a new kind of journalism tho' he is hazy on the details. What is clear is that the site pursues stories that the servile mass media declines to touch or fails to report fully and fearlessly. It will interesting to see how the site develops and if Greenwald is successful in creating a commercially sustainable platform that is truly independent fearless and dedicated to publishing the truth. Thank you for the greeting, Tweakabelle. Also, thank you for the link. Of course, I used to read Greenwald in The Guardian. The financial sustainability of the Intercept will be an issue. Perhaps Glenn has a godfather with deep pockets and he will not have to beg for reader contributions like Counterpunch and ICH , which you gave me awhile back. However, America has a HUGH disinterested class of media consumers as well as many who are only interested in media that validate their own set-in-stone ideologies. The internet was always hailed as an alternative that would balance the myopic MSM. I remain skeptical however. Bloggers seem to need the MSM for amplification of their views, so on occasion they are seen briefly on TV news and opinion programs. Bestes . . .

tweakabelle -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/23/2015 2:39:31 AM)
Greenwald has financial backing from one of those dot.com billionaires, I forget which one. So it's likely that The Intercept will be around for a while. I hope so. Greenwald has a few things to say about CNN after it suspended a journalist for the crime of expressing an opinion in today's Intercept. He examines how the notion of 'journalistic objectivity" is used to censor the media, and to punish those who dare to speak out of line, despite it being their job to do precisely that: https://theintercept.com/2015/11/20/cnns-punishment-of-refugee-defending-journalist-highlights-media-abdication/

MrRodgers -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/24/2015 1:53:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: Greenwald says he is attempting to produce a new kind of journalism tho' he is hazy on the details. What is clear is that the site pursues stories that the servile mass media declines to touch or fails to report fully and fearlessly. It will interesting to see how the site develops and if Greenwald is successful in creating a commercially sustainable platform that is truly independent fearless and dedicated to publishing the truth. Thank you for the greeting, Tweakabelle. Also, thank you for the link. Of course, I used to read Greenwald in The Guardian. The financial sustainability of the Intercept will be an issue. Perhaps Glenn has a godfather with deep pockets and he will not have to beg for reader contributions like Counterpunch and ICH , which you gave me awhile back. However, America has a HUGH disinterested class of media consumers as well as many who are only interested in media that validate their own set-in-stone ideologies. The internet was always hailed as an alternative that would balance the myopic MSM. I remain skeptical however. Bloggers seem to need the MSM for amplification of their views, so on occasion they are seen briefly on TV news and opinion programs. Bestes . . . Depending on who you read outside the MSM, either 5 or 6 giant media/entertainment/broadcast companies...own 90% of western and close to that in world information...the MSM. HERE That link is only a taste of the problem and what is omitted and as important as anything, is that News Corp. which owns Fox, the Wall street journal, Barrons weekly, the London times, far Eastern Economic review, the New York Post, and hundreds of other large and small city and community newspapers, magazines, and internet properties, [it] also owns Reuters and the AP. The last two almost completely dominate the various news 'releases' that the few broadcasts outlets report on nightly news. Almost everything we get there begins with "AP reports...or Reuters reports" and so on. They report what they are told to report. Plus the MSM will not report what they are told...not to report. Even others are getting in on the act as two reporting broadcasts journalists, one from Al Jazeera and one from BBC, resigned over being told not to report western involvement in the Libyan 'civil' war that wasn't a civil war...at all. They were told to lie. Once again, relying upon MSM, Greenwald's start-up is backed by billionaire eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, according to Reuters' Mark Hosenball.

bounty44 -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/25/2015 7:47:17 AM)
seems about right... quote: Look around. Children fighting in schools, college campuses awash in indoctrination, police being reviled by anarchists, and a president who couldn't care less because he revels in the chaos. Our planet is besieged by terrorists, overrun with refugees, drowning in debt and heading for a nuclear Armageddon with a nuclear Iran. America used to be the leader that kept world order, or at least, assisted in the process. No more! The plain, simple truth is the American people bought a smile and a calm demeanor, coupled with high-minded rhetoric, and put a radical, European-style socialist into the White House. He promised to remake America, and the press never asked just what was his idea of a New America. A week before the 2008 election, Charlie Rose had Tom Brokaw on his show and asked him: What do we know about Barack Obama? What books does he read? Who are his heroes? He also said, "We know so little about the man." Brokaw agreed and repeated the same mantra. Yet, when Katie Couric asked Sarah Palin what newspapers she read, the planet came to a halt. The press is the print arm of the Democratic Party, and we are all the lesser for it. Alan Miller East Allen Township http://www.mcall.com/opinion/letters/mc-america-decline-president-chaos-miller-20151111-story.html

CreativeDominant -> RE: How 'Free' is the media? (11/25/2015 7:55:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle Greenwald has financial backing from one of those dot.com billionaires, I forget which one. So it's likely that The Intercept will be around for a while. I hope so. Greenwald has a few things to say about CNN after it suspended a journalist for the crime of expressing an opinion in today's Intercept. He examines how the notion of 'journalistic objectivity" is used to censor the media, and to punish those who dare to speak out of line, despite it being their job to do precisely that: https://theintercept.com/2015/11/20/cnns-punishment-of-refugee-defending-journalist-highlights-media-abdication/ If the journalist expressed his opinion within a factual news story, he should be reprimanded. When I took Journalism in college as part of my English credits, a news story was just that...the news. The "who, what, when, where, and why" of an incident. No editorializing by calling the perpetrators "thugs" or conversely "underprivileged youths" or by identifying the victims as "wealthy" or "privileged", etc. That kind of opinionating was left for editorials or opinion pieces.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625