(R) Elector - "Why I Will Not Cast My Electoral Vote for Donald Trump"

[Sheik Yerbouti]

".........In October, President Obama complained that we need a “curating function” to deal with the “wild-wild-west-of-information flow.” ............................ "

link?

 

[vi edit]

link?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-decries-wild-west-media-landscape-214642552.html

It's funny because he hit on the same point as I did in my "false news thread" about the three channels being the only news you used to have.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

link?

http://nypost.com/2016/12/04/the-war-on-fake-news-is-all-about-censoring-real-news/

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-decries-wild-west-media-landscape-214642552.html

It's funny because he hit on the same point as I did in my "false news thread" about the three channels being the only news you used to have.

and his premise behind that statement

President Barack Obama on Thursday decried America's "wild, wild west" media environment for allowing conspiracy theorists a broad platform and destroying a common basis for debate.

is 100% accurate.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

http://nypost.com/2016/12/04/the-war-on-fake-news-is-all-about-censoring-real-news/

zero sense of irony linking the nyp to this, huh?

 

[imported_tajmahal]

and his premise behind that statement

is 100% accurate.

Totalitarian much? Authoritarian leftists always think they need to "help" the peons take the correct path.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Totalitarian much? Authoritarian leftists always think they need to "help" the peons take the correct path.

nope, I just don't think FAKE bullshit news should be disseminated as factual, call me nutty for that.
hyperbole much?

 

[zinfamous]

Remember when you and Eski told me that I was wrong to get out of the market? God damn I wish I had listened. I am down so bad right now. I sold mid 17s and we are now in the 19s. I just cannot make a right move. Every independent move I ever made I got slaughtered on. It looks like history is repeating itself yet again. I feel like robbing a bank....

here's what I do:

watch shit tank, just keep buying more shares.

It's pretty solid (so far, anyway).

Again, works much better when you don't have to actually live off of those savings while they are tanking.

 

[momeNt]

Only in Nazi Germany, Russia, North Korea, China do you see "curated" news. Tabloids is what makes pioneers in the free world like England and the USA great. People will learn for themselves how to adjust their skepticism to this new "source" of information in facebook feeds and twitter. I'm sure the first printed tabloid caused a real panic throughout, but we got through that. Please put your curators away Obama.

 

[zinfamous]

Totalitarian much? Authoritarian leftists always think they need to "help" the peons take the correct path.

what are you blathering about? And Alex Jones and his ilk isn't the authoritarian helping you to discover your assumed truth?

He's just "a nice guy like you," right?

Your shit just smells worse than most. The problem is that you assume it smells like roses not only because you want it to, but because you seek out only those people that confirm with you that it does.

You are part of the "all news is wrong and all news is right--when I say it is" crowd that has propelled this nation into a disinformation hole of uneducated twatwaffles that seek only the validation of their peers and facebook "friends" when establishing their worldviews. This kind of poisonous information gathering was what you learned about as early as the 3rd grade. WTF happened to your sense of self-respect and critical thinking?

 

[zinfamous]

Only in Nazi Germany, Russia, North Korea, China do you see "curated" news. Tabloids is what makes pioneers in the free world like England and the USA great. People will learn for themselves how to adjust their skepticism to this new "source" of information in facebook feeds and twitter. I'm sure the first printed tabloid caused a real panic throughout, but we got through that. Please put your curators away Obama.

It's all fun and games until some redneck like OrroORoroROOs travels from NC up to DC to shoot up some people all because of some "freedom-based tabloid news" right?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I'd need to look through all the other posts and links to see if this one had been referenced yet:

Greta van Susteren on "Fake News" in LA Times

Now . . . I could post the text of my letter-response to the TIMES -- probably too long to print, or even dredging up controversial topics. I'll hold on that until I'm sure that they won't publish even an abridgment.

I agree with her major thought, that we should have a "free press" and protect the first amendment. But she ends the piece by saying something like "It's all our own fault," or "we have met the enemy and he is Us."

As a clue to what I'm getting at, I find her thought there as missing something very important. For instance, to examine Eisenhower's warning and farewell speech of 1961, he avoided mentioning one very important half of the "Military Industrial Complex," but I know he wasn't stupid. But he earns my deep regard simply for what he DID say. Van Susteren, on the other hand, is as clueless about a major fact and an important topic of scholarly concern as the people gullible to "fake news."

There are several major flaws -- or just singular flaws -- in van Susteren's argument.

I leave others -- temporarily -- to pick them out. Then I'll return here to see if there's a thought-provoking discussion about it.

 

[repoman0]

Speaking for myself. Yes, yes i do.

I always wondered who reads the tabloids at the grocery store checkout. Should have known I could find them right here on AT P&N.

 

[momeNt]

It's all fun and games until some redneck like OrroORoroROOs travels from NC up to DC to shoot up some people all because of some "freedom-based tabloid news" right?

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I believe in the freedom of the internet and free speech. Politicizing Pizzagate in order to have government internet moderation is ridiculous and quite frankly a scary thought that it is even being considered.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

I'd need to look through all the other posts and links to see if this one had been referenced yet:

Greta van Susteren on "Fake News" in LA Times

Now . . . I could post the text of my letter-response to the TIMES -- probably too long to print, or even dredging up controversial topics. I'll hold on that until I'm sure that they won't publish even an abridgment.

I agree with her major thought, that we should have a "free press" and protect the first amendment. But she ends the piece by saying something like "It's all our own fault," or "we have met the enemy and he is Us."

As a clue to what I'm getting at, I find her thought there as missing something very important. For instance, to examine Eisenhower's warning and farewell speech of 1961, he avoided mentioning one very important half of the "Military Industrial Complex," but I know he wasn't stupid. But he earns my deep regard simply for what he DID say. Van Susteren, on the other hand, is as clueless about a major fact and an important topic of scholarly concern as the people gullible to "fake news."

There are several major flaws -- or just singular flaws -- in van Susteren's argument.

I leave others -- temporarily -- to pick them out. Then I'll return here to see if there's a thought-provoking discussion about it.

I like the part of President Eisenhower's speech warning and farewell speech where "he included a few sentences about risks posed by a scientific-technological elite. " and "“Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields… ,” Eisenhower warned. “Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity.”
We see the reasons for his warnings almost every day in the press.
https://www.aaas.org/news/after-50-...st-scientific-elite-still-cause-consternation

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I like the part of President Eisenhower's speech warning and farewell speech where "he included a few sentences about risks posed by a scientific-technological elite. " and "“Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields… ,” Eisenhower warned. “Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity.”
We see the reasons for his warnings almost every day in the press.
https://www.aaas.org/news/after-50-years-eisenhower’s-warnings-against-scientific-elite-still-cause-consternation

Well, I'd wait until I hear more about the woman I always had suspected of getting punched in the mouth during her earlier life. But I only think you're taking a detour there. I don't dismiss the thought you offered. He was speaking about the special-interests of a defense establishment with "unwarranted influence, sought or unsought" if I properly remember the words. What he didn't say outright was a major pillar that fits under the "M-I-C" -- "Strategic Minerals." He was "looking over his shoulder," no less than Helms seemed to in his memoir entitled with that phrase.

I only offered it as a distant analog to van Susteren's collective blame-laying -- we're all responsible, so nobody in particular is responsible. That isn't the sentiment I attach to Ike's words. It is only that I argue a major omission he'd made in describing the "problem."

So let's see which dogs will pop in to tear up the journalist.

 

[zinfamous]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I believe in the freedom of the internet and free speech. Politicizing Pizzagate in order to have government internet moderation is ridiculous and quite frankly a scary thought that it is even being considered.

"politicizing" pizzagate?

How was this ever anything other than political?

Are you being serious now?

where do you think I suggested having the government moderate the internet? Are you confusing what I said about enforcing actual libel laws (you know--that thing Trump kinda promised to do--of course, he planned to "make them stronger!") with some evil liberal plot to hand the internet over to the government?

(also a weird suggestion--it's kinda like telling the government to stay out of your medicare, but whatever)

 

[momeNt]

"politicizing" pizzagate?

How was this ever anything other than political?

Are you being serious now?

where do you think I suggested having the government moderate the internet? Are you confusing what I said about enforcing actual libel laws (you know--that thing Trump kinda promised to do--of course, he planned to "make them stronger!") with some evil liberal plot to hand the internet over to the government?

(also a weird suggestion--it's kinda like telling the government to stay out of your medicare, but whatever)

How would you propose to enforce libel laws over the internet? Please do tell.

 

[zinfamous]

How would you propose to enforce libel laws over the internet? Please do tell.

So you want to ensure that the difference between "printed on paper" and "published online" is enshrined (you know, orginalist horseshit) in order to protect and create, completely, an avenue of discourse that completely legalizes all cases of libel?

Is this a "well, that sounds too hard so maybe we shouldn't do it!" suggestion? I'm actually curious if that is what you are getting at. I honestly don't know if such protections are so stark to protect the internet fake media vs the real, established media.

Is that the case?

Also, do you think that should actually be the case? At what point do you think this becomes a problem? 2, 3, several dozen internet retards arming themselves and acting upon "personal investigations" because of fake news stories they read on the internet? Is that how you propose we conduct ourselves in this republic?

It used to be that we relied upon an established field of journalists that were guided by ethics. And you know what--we still have that. It is only half of this country has decided that truth simply doesn't fucking matter it it upsets their "feels."

 

[Commodus]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I believe in the freedom of the internet and free speech. Politicizing Pizzagate in order to have government internet moderation is ridiculous and quite frankly a scary thought that it is even being considered.

I don't think that's what Obama or anyone else here is asking for. However, if you knowingly publish fake or wildly inaccurate news without clear signs that it's parody, satire or otherwise not to be taken seriously, that's bad. We've seen a few people here (primarily conservatives, like it or not) who've unironically linked fake or heavily biased news -- as in the kind that makes Fox News look neutral. If they're gullible enough to take Breitbart, Wordpress blogs or questionable YouTube videos at face value, what hope does the country at large have at detecting shaky or bogus reporting?

Ideally, government stays out of this as much as possible and there's pressure on search engines, social networks and advertisers to discourage this... say, doing more to kick fake news out of search results, and to deny ad dollars to hatemongers. I don't like government censorship unless there are threats to someone's physical well-being, but I'm all in favor of companies saying that fake or shoddy news doesn't have a place in their world.

 

[Victorian Gray]

It's like you cock up a new term for every concept that suddenly displeases you, and you have to find new ways to explain away the uncomfortable assault of truths arrayed against your discredited world view.

Fascinating.

Look up the word Lügenpresse. It has a very interesting history.

 

[momeNt]

So you want to ensure that the difference between "printed on paper" and "published online" is enshrined (you know, orginalist horseshit) in order to protect and create, completely, an avenue of discourse that completely legalizes all cases of libel?

Is this a "well, that sounds too hard so maybe we shouldn't do it!" suggestion? I'm actually curious if that is what you are getting at. I honestly don't know if such protections are so stark to protect the internet fake media vs the real, established media.

Is that the case?

Also, do you think that should actually be the case? At what point do you think this becomes a problem? 2, 3, several dozen internet retards arming themselves and acting upon "personal investigations" because of fake news stories they read on the internet? Is that how you propose we conduct ourselves in this republic?

It used to be that we relied upon an established field of journalists that were guided by ethics. And you know what--we still have that. It is only half of this country has decided that truth simply doesn't fucking matter it it upsets their "feels."

Why aren't tabloids sued or shut down?

 

[jackstar7]

Why aren't tabloids sued or shut down?

Sounds like something you should investigate.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Why aren't tabloids sued or shut down?

They get sued plenty of times and they don't shut down because people buy and read them. Next time you are in the checkout at Walmart just take a look at what is lining the magazine racks around you.

 

[fskimospy]

Why aren't tabloids sued or shut down?

Tabloids are frequently sued. Regardless, they tend to be about public figures, unlike, say, a pizza place owner.