We need to stop the age of misinformation

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
M

mizzou

Diamond Member
Jan 2, 2008
9,734
54
91
It's one thing to have joe-schmoe spat off horrible facts and assumptions. It's a complete other thing to have news agencies manipulate facts and situations, just to try to "create" more interest to fuel advertisement interest.

Misinformation is self-perpetuating, in my opinion. Those who want to believe themselves, will find their own facts to support their answers. We don't need the assistance of well organized news agencies to facilitate this fallacy.

Here is something where I have NO facts...I believe the majority of people in the USA are well-informed or at least won't make a decision without sound factual information.

There is a loud vocal minority who is taking control of our media, and it needs to stop.

But alas.... $ is now speech, isn't it? Didn't the supreme court just allow unlimited campaign donations because $$$ was equated to free speech? :(

Was there EVER a gilded age of free and open thought?? Or was this also a facade?
 
John Connor

John Connor

Lifer
Nov 30, 2012
22,757
618
121
I see lots of misinformation from damn near all the media! They will protect that Kenyan bastard to the grave!
 
gevorg

gevorg

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2004
5,070
1
0
mizzou said:
But alas.... $ is now speech, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Yes!

media_consolidation.jpg


6companiesownallofourme.jpg
 
J

jhu

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
11,918
9
81
mizzou said:
Was there EVER a gilded age of free and open thought?? Or was this also a facade?
Click to expand...

It's a continuum. Our country (and most other 1st world countries) are about as free and open as we'll get for now. On the other end is North Korea. Every country is between these two poles.
 
JamesV

JamesV

Platinum Member
Jul 9, 2011
2,002
2
76
mizzou said:
<snip>...I believe the majority of people in the USA are well-informed or at least won't make a decision without sound factual information.<snip>
Click to expand...

Until I entered the Army, I lived a harsh life. Lived with whoever gave me a spot on their floor. Stole light bulbs from apartment buildings to put in the houses I stayed in. Dumpster dived for food and aluminum and copper to sell. Lived in a car that barely ran and had no brakes.

And there were many like me. That section of society, which Republicans call the 47% 'freeloaders' (paraphrasing), really only care for things that make life better, and the broader world views are something out of their reach.

But, before I became that person, I was a straight A student with a low-middle class upbringing. I was smart, but hid it. And after (luckily) I once again was able to think of the greater good.

Point of my TLDR; you are wrong.

The 47% don't watch Fox or MSNBC. Their entire information catalog is from commercials if they have TV, but more likely from what they have been told by people they come in contact with. Most only DL movies and TV off a neighbors Wi-Fi these days.

And even if you are not poor, especially in the older (60+) demographic (I'm a caregiver now); no matter what is said, their opinions from 30+ years ago hold more weight than common sense can overcome.

No. Most Americans live in the tiny bubble they inhabit, and have no use for facts. What they hear or think is true.
 
shortylickens

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,287
17,080
136
Well, I dont trust the internet.
I dont trust TV.
I dont trust newspapers (anymore).

College textbooks are fucking hella expensive. But a good source of info.
Still need something reliable for current events.
 
U

unokitty

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2012
3,346
1
0
mizzou said:
... Misinformation is self-perpetuating, in my opinion. Those who want to believe themselves, will find their own facts to support their answers. We don't need the assistance of well organized news agencies to facilitate this fallacy....
Click to expand...

1984-drones-274.jpg


If you like your misinformation, you can keep your misinformation.

And oh, for pointing this out you can expect to an IRS audit.

As the President says, "Elections have consequences."

Uno
 
M

mrjminer

Platinum Member
Dec 2, 2005
2,739
16
76
It is almost impossible to get reliable information from the media. If they aren't lying, they're framing it to give a great misrepresentation of events, a lot of the time.

If you can't even trust 60 minutes anymore, you know it's fucked.
 
mmntech

mmntech

Lifer
Sep 20, 2007
17,501
12
0
mizzou said:
But didn't we only have about 6 relevant tv companies then too though? Most of us didn't have cable back then and tuned into Fox or CBS or PBS etc.
Click to expand...

Back then a lot of those stations were independent affiliates. They got to use the branding and got access to the programming, but were largely responsible for their own news gathering. You also still had quite a few independent channels on UHF and terrestrial radio.

Then the big boys began consolidating. Affiliates were brought under the corporate umbrella, and independents were all bought up. Broadcasting is in a weird flux since the internet came a long and made it easy for anybody to grab people's attention. Which is why I believe these broadcasters did start trying to monopolize.

Of course, media is still very reflective of its audience. Since it's ad driven, they will only air what gets the most eyeballs. That's sensationalist yellow journalism and fluff stories, peppered with militant political correctness and blind patriotism. That's what the people want.
 
B

bradley

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2000
3,671
2
81
mizzou said:
But didn't we only have about 6 relevant tv companies then too though? Most of us didn't have cable back then and tuned into Fox or CBS or PBS etc.
Click to expand...

Go back and watch Youtube videos of what represented news in the early 1980s, with the additional benefit of hindsight. Now watch today's evening news. I'm hoping you see a difference? and you can thank Ronald Reagan, Kim Kardassian and Justin Bieber.
 
D

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
mizzou said:
We need to stop the age of misinformation

It's one thing to have joe-schmoe spat off horrible facts and assumptions. It's a complete other thing to have news agencies manipulate facts and situations, just to try to "create" more interest to fuel advertisement interest.

Misinformation is self-perpetuating, in my opinion. Those who want to believe themselves, will find their own facts to support their answers. We don't need the assistance of well organized news agencies to facilitate this fallacy.

Here is something where I have NO facts...I believe the majority of people in the USA are well-informed or at least won't make a decision without sound factual information.

There is a loud vocal minority who is taking control of our media, and it needs to stop.

But alas.... $ is now speech, isn't it? Didn't the supreme court just allow unlimited campaign donations because $$$ was equated to free speech? :(

Was there EVER a gilded age of free and open thought?? Or was this also a facade?
Click to expand...

Seems like a P&N rant.

Anyway when will join the Revolution?
 
M

mrjminer

Platinum Member
Dec 2, 2005
2,739
16
76
dmcowen674 said:
Seems like a P&N rant.

Anyway when will join the Revolution?
Click to expand...

Someone tried to address this issue in P&N recently. He chose the Cliven Bundy topic to bring it up, though, so most people who posted just ignored the underlying question.
 
G

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
21,855
6,237
136
Orignal Earl said:
I believe a huge part of it started with this, when it became legal for the news to lie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre


http://www.projectcensored.org/11-the-media-can-legally-lie/
Click to expand...

That was an interesting read, and I wasn't aware of any of it.
It never occurred to me that the FCC would have a rule about the news being accurate or truthful. While an excellent idea on the surface, it's seems to me it would be entirely unenforceable in anything but the most egregious cases.

News in the US is fundamentally entertainment, and the entire system revolves around ad revenue. Because of that, every news source has an agenda of not bitting the hand that feeds them.
 
KeithP

KeithP

Diamond Member
Jun 15, 2000
5,664
201
106
poofyhairguy

poofyhairguy

Lifer
Nov 20, 2005
14,612
318
126
The problem is that there is a no single good aggregation point of news items, like the old network news programs back in the day. This lack of a common zeitgeist prevents the nation from having a consistent platform of ideas needed in a mature political dialogue. Instead our news consumption is driven by a topic myopia that many people EMBRACE, via targeted cable channels and political blogs, and the idea of cooperation in politics is impossible because the sides aren't even talking about the same issues.
 
B

bradley

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2000
3,671
2
81
Media?

1941: Local Radio Ownership Rule, National TV Ownership Rule enacted. A broadcaster cannot own television stations that reach more than 35% of the nation's homes. A+

1946: Dual Television Network Rule enacted, prohibiting a major network from buying another major network. A+

1964: Local TV Multiple Ownership Rule enacted, prohibiting a broadcaster from owning more than one television station in the same market, unless there are at least eight stations in the market. A+

1970: Radio/TV Cross-Ownership Restriction enacted, prohibiting a broadcaster from owning a radio station and a television station in the same market. A+

1975: Newspaper/Broadcast Cross-Ownership Prohibition enacted. Bans ownership of both a newspaper and a television station in the same market. A+

1981: Reagan Administration deregulation under the leadership of FCC Chairman Mark Fowler. Deregulatory moves, some made by Congress, others by the FCC included extending television licenses to five years from three in 1981. The number of television stations any single entity could own grew from seven in 1981 to 12 in 1985. (Museum of Television and Radio) F

1987: "Fairness Doctrine" eliminated. At its founding the FCC viewed the stations to which it granted licenses as "public trustee" &#8212; and required that they made every reasonable attempt to cover contrasting points of views. The Commission also required that stations perform public service in reporting on crucial issues in their communities. Soon after he became FCC Chairman under President Reagan, Michael Fowler stated his desire to do away with the Fairness Doctrine. His position was backed by a 1987 D.C. Circuit Court decision, Meredith Corp. v. FCC, which ruled that the doctrine was not mandated by Congress and the FCC no longer had to enforce it. (Full history of the Fairness Doctrine) F

1996: President Clinton signs the Telecommunications Act of 1996. It is generally regarded as the most important legislation regulating media ownership in over a decade. The radio industry experiences unprecedented consolidation after the 40-station ownership cap is lifted. Clear Channel Communications owns 1200 stations, in all 50 states, reaching, according to their Web site, more than 110 million listeners every week. Viacom's Infinity radio network holds more than 180 radio stations in 41 markets. Its holdings are concentrated in the 50 largest radio markets in the United States. In 1999 Infinity owned and operated six of the nation&#8217;s Top 10 radio stations. F

Pretty simple where all the arrows are pointed, right?

The one for the economy is even easier, it involves: lack of transparency, checks and balances, genuine competition and fairness. Oops.
 
Orignal Earl

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
Greenman said:
That was an interesting read, and I wasn't aware of any of it.
It never occurred to me that the FCC would have a rule about the news being accurate or truthful. While an excellent idea on the surface, it's seems to me it would be entirely unenforceable in anything but the most egregious cases.

News in the US is fundamentally entertainment, and the entire system revolves around ad revenue. Because of that, every news source has an agenda of not bitting the hand that feeds them.
Click to expand...

Now add in a huge distrust and adversity to any foreign sources of news (even if they still require the news to be honest), and divide what you got into left and right categories and all you got is a mess
See P&N for examples
;)
 
ImpulsE69

ImpulsE69

Lifer
Jan 8, 2010
14,946
1,077
126
and to top much of it off, it is bedazzled by sensationalism to garner viewers and clicks.
 
P

pcslookout

Lifer
Mar 18, 2007
11,959
157
106
There at least 10 stories on the anandtech front forum page that are untrue can you spot them.

Oh and I already know which one someone is going to post in this thread. Can't trick me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom