You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: AntiFa Is Supported By Mainstream Media Apologists Who Edit Headlines On Request - Otherwise Known As CNN
I understand some people are marginalised and pissed off about the state of the world. They have a right to protest and there are always some within that who want to be violent. Being a moron isn't crime but being a thug is and they should be called out. What I don't understand is why the mainstream media are apologising for these groups and their tactics. Are they seeing them as useful idiots?
"Are they seeing them as useful idiots?"
This is the most logical explanation. Those who own and operate the media corporations may be using them to direct the trend of society.
The other explanation is the only way they can maintain any profits whatsoever is pandering to ideologues that don't want unbiased reporting.
They may both be true.
I don't see the profit in it. I can't imagine the anarcho-communist sympathisers of our society being cashed up. Anyone with money would realise the agenda here is anti-capitalist and a direct threat to said money.
It's got to be about influence and control. If you take the view of mainstream media being a propaganda outlet then it makes a bit more sense but doing that puts me in the realm of the conspiracy theorist :)
I can only imagine those pulling the real levers of power at the top are using this as a cultural tool to achieve whatever their ends are: social degradation, globalism, riots, whatever.
Those at the bottom who think they are at the top, ie CNN producers, I think they often legitimately feel they are just pandering to the highest ratings and that they are an entertainment business now with no need to be remotely credible.
See the project veritas videos on this for more.
I've seen project vertitas. Mind blowing stuff. I get the feeling that we might need to rely on that type of guerrilla-journalism and whistle-blowers to get the truth out about this kind of stuff if things keep going the way they are. Thankfully we have the internet to disseminate or we'd really be screwed.
I know what you mean. I'm not sure how we can incentivize that type of reporting though. I get the sense it's not very profitable and probably very risky!
Indeed. There has to be demand from people who want the truth of things, and it doesn't seem to be there at the moment. The mainstream are more interested in entertainment (bread and circuses).
Once upon a time journalism was a noble career that attracted good people who wanted to get to the bottom of things and serve the public. These days those people are confined to making indie documentaries and scraping by on shoestring budgets. But they do exist. Maybe Steemit could be an avenue for both funding and promoting their work in time. Here they should be immune from the "Fake News" crackdown on anyone deviating from the narrative (which is only just starting).
I certainly find the inability to delete and edit other's post by mods to be one of the main advantages of Steemit. The closest we get to censorship is flag-hiding posts.