Do you trust the mainstream media?

Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
32,615
Trump has down nothing to lower unemployment.
His tax chnanges are too soon to have much on employment, and they will only result in increases shareholder wealth. They might actually increase unemployment, since employee wages are tax deductible there is less incentive to reduxe taxes through staff.

His trade wars are actively making companies lay off at. Alabama expect to loose 20,000 workers in the car industry.


Immigration has no real impact on employment.since demand and supply are balanced equilibrium. In fact shortages of unskilled workers are making some companies struggle. Farmers in particular are struggling, with many bankruptcies.


His attack on solar power has cost $2.5bn in lost bussiness

Apart from that Trump hasn't actually done much because he is so incompetent. The only things he has.done has increased unemployment.

The fact that unemployment is low is entirely due to the sound economic policies of the Obama administration.
 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
47,382
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
Here or in the US?

For the US it wouldn't difficult to find out, certainly there is a lot of noise about trying to stop Trump trying to stop people migrating.

For the UK, yes. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ion-of-eu-nationals-to-britain-falls-by-75000

In my view it stands to reason that when you have less competition from international economic migration your own population fares better and you reduce your own unemployment.

Anyway i'm off for some dinner :)
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Aug 2006
Posts
10,034
Location
ChCh, NZ
No. I'm not interested in the news or any media any more. Part through the rise (and ease of getting) of good quality TV available for streaming, and part of me tired of having to listen to the constant and relentless leftist drumbeat. I even used to be sympathetic to their cause, but now it's becoming militant (or last I took notice anyway) and tiresome.

I did notice some CNN in the gym the other day. It amazes me that they STILL have an anchor babbling some nonsense or another, with a Picture-in-Picture of an interviewee babbling nonsense back. Nothing has changed for 20 years since I last watched it daily.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,554
Trump has down nothing to lower unemployment.
His tax chnanges are too soon to have much on employment, and they will only result in increases shareholder wealth. They might actually increase unemployment, since employee wages are tax deductible there is less incentive to reduxe taxes through staff.

His trade wars are actively making companies lay off at. Alabama expect to loose 20,000 workers in the car industry.


Immigration has no real impact on employment.since demand and supply are balanced equilibrium. In fact shortages of unskilled workers are making some companies struggle. Farmers in particular are struggling, with many bankruptcies.


His attack on solar power has cost $2.5bn in lost bussiness

Apart from that Trump hasn't actually done much because he is so incompetent. The only things he has.done has increased unemployment.

The fact that unemployment is low is entirely due to the sound economic policies of the Obama administration.

So the TL-DR version is.....

anything bad that happens during Trumps presidency is his fault, anything good that happens is due to the previous administration......

And yet people wonder why Trump was elected and why he may yet get a second term.. .

Ironically given the thread title you are mirroring exactly some of the dogmatic rubbish that leaves certain press outlets rendered unreliable and untrusted.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
3 Oct 2006
Posts
8,537
Out of curiosity, what other outlets do you use?

I bet I can guess....

well lets get the elephant in the room out of the way first of all, I haven't really had anything to do with infowars for years (though some of the Alex Jones compliation vids of him having breakdowns are quite funny), used to watch a lot when I was 16 but Alex Jones' approach seems to be to report everything and hope some of it sticks, even a stopped clock is right twice per day right? But I do smile when I see things like the MSM reporting on weather manipulation in 2018 when Alex was reporting on it in 2005 and prior but being called a lunatic for doing so.

so, used at various times and in no particular order, these are some of the media sources/commentators that I use as sources of information:

Daily Mail
Independent
Guardian
Metro
RT
TYT
Daily Wire (Ben Shapiro)
Rebel Media
Steven Crowder
Owen Jones
LBC radio
twitter
Sargon of Akkad
The Rubin Report
Stefan Molyneux
The Academic Agent
AT magazine
PQ magazine
AB magazine
Rogan Experience

The thing that bugs me most about the MSM (and note, I do use some sources of MSM) is how article titles are pure click bait followed by a paragraph or two which typically purports to be 'news' but is actually opinion (and pretty hyperbolic opinion at that) followed up by the actual facts halfway down the page which most people never seem to get to and usually contradicts the opinion presented in those first few paragraphs.

I really like the long form interviews which seem to be flavour of the month at the moment as you are able to explore philosophical and political ideas more thoroughly than you can when BBC talking head no.235702 is trying to corral 4 people who appear to hate each other whilst simultaneously attempting to cajole a misstatement out of someone because it sells stories all in the space of 5 minutes because we need to go to the weather because people can't see it out their window.
I also like, in particular, the attempts that People like Dave Rubin and Joe Rogan make to reach out and involve people that maybe don't share their opinion without seeking to completely lambaste and deride them. I really like this kind of Lockean approach to knowledge that says 'I think I'm right but I'm willing to hear the reason (not necessarily the feelings) behind your opinion to help strengthen mine, or ultimately incorporate knowledge which I had not previously considered (even to the point where my opinion may change as happened to Dave Rubin).

I really like the idea that now so many people are connected we can share events as they happen, often far quicker than the MSM can. Yes you need to apply more of your own critical thinking and not just accept everything that everyone says as gospel truth (ie Alex Jones Nibiru 2012 the aliens are coming...:o:rolleyes:) but I do believe that the panoply of 'media' coverage we enjoy today is something worth keeping (and fighting for) even if I might disagree with some of the places others chose to get their information. Laws like Article 13 are a direct assault on the media of the commons by what remains of the hegemony of the Mainstream.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Nov 2009
Posts
4,387
Location
Baa
I'd be interested to know how many mainstream media advocates in here know of Carl Benjamin, Ben Shapiro, Steven Crowder. Even Jordan B Perterson, Milo Yiannopoulos or Katie Hopkins.....

I expect so. That's why they're mainstream media advocates. :p
 
Soldato
Joined
9 Jun 2005
Posts
4,694
Location
Wiltshire
I'm not going to convince you ^^^^ and that's just fine, trying is just running round in circles denying the truth and asking for other proof when it disagrees with you.
You have yet to make a case at all.
-----------

@asim18

Right. As i said before, an example is Assad, he is a secularist, Damascus is full of Christians, Moderate Muslims of all sects and even some Jews, there are some, quite a lot of 'Traditional?' Muslims who don't like Christians or Jews or even different factions of their own kind.

Well thats up for debate....

"Despite claiming to be a secular state, the 2012 constitution also states in Article 3 that the President must be a Muslim, and that the majority of laws will based on Islam. Despite being prevalent in the constitution, Syria is seen as a secular state without having its laws based on Islam"

 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
47,382
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
Christopher Hitchens proudly described himself as a Marxist and that should tell you all you need to know about his politics.

Are you a Marxist Johno please? what is it with the hard left always putting forward the hard left as the righteous authority? the guy was a dangerous idiot.
Its why, those ideas, that the middle east is now a total basket case and the rest of us have to deal with the fallout.

I expect so. That's why they're mainstream media advocates. :p

Good comeback :D but the point is the other side of the coin doesn't exist for conformists, socialists are by nature conformists.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
9 Jun 2005
Posts
4,694
Location
Wiltshire
Christopher Hitchens proudly described himself as a Marxist and that should tell you all you need to know about his politics.

Are you a Marxist Johno please? what is it with the hard left always putting forward the hard left as the righteous authority? the guy was a dangerous idiot.
Its why, those ideas, that the middle east is now a total basket case and the rest of us have to deal with the fallout.



Good comeback :D but the point is the other side of the coin doesn't exist for conformists, socialists are by nature conformists.

So you have no rebuttal then? Just ad hominem, pfft.

Hitchens knowledge of the middle east was second to none. (Iraq especially)

The middle east has always been a "basket case" if you want to put it like that, removal of psychopathic dictators is a good thing believe it or not, I don't tow the line that they need "strong men" in power, what an understatement that is as well, I prefer the term "fascist tyrant".... and no, im not on the "hard left" or a marxist.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Oct 2006
Posts
8,537
So you have no rebuttal then? Just ad hominem, pfft.

Hitchens knowledge of the middle east was second to none. (Iraq especially)

The middle east has always been a "basket case" if you want to put it like that, removal of psychopathic dictators is a good thing believe it or not, I don't tow the line that they need "strong men" in power, what an understatement that is as well, I prefer the term "fascist tyrant".... and no, im not on the "hard left" or a marxist.

I think his brother would be his fiercest critic and easily as educated.
 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
47,382
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
So you have no rebuttal then? Just ad hominem, pfft.

Hitchens knowledge of the middle east was second to none. (Iraq especially)

The middle east has always been a "basket case" if you want to put it like that, removal of psychopathic dictators is a good thing believe it or not, I don't tow the line that they need "strong men" in power, what an understatement that is as well, I prefer the term "fascist tyrant".... and no, im not on the "hard left" or a marxist.

Well you behave like one pushing forward far left reasoning as if its the only truth.

I never said any of these dictators are / were nice but some factions amongst their populations are far worse and since we are unwilling to commit ourselves to governing those regions with our own peace persuasion methods its simply pragmatic to leave those who know what they are doing in place.

After seeing the effects of removing Hussain and Gaddafi the west will leave Assad to it and like it.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Nov 2013
Posts
4,294
well lets get the elephant in the room out of the way first of all, I haven't really had anything to do with infowars for years (though some of the Alex Jones compliation vids of him having breakdowns are quite funny), used to watch a lot when I was 16 but Alex Jones' approach seems to be to report everything and hope some of it sticks, even a stopped clock is right twice per day right? But I do smile when I see things like the MSM reporting on weather manipulation in 2018 when Alex was reporting on it in 2005 and prior but being called a lunatic for doing so.

Alex Jones "reported" on weather manipulation in 2005 because, in that same year, the Congress killed the H.R. 2995 (his insane ramblings start from a grain of truth). This is where we differ, Vincent. When you get a piece of information, you have a tendency to determine its validity based on your preconceived ideas. In this case, you believe Alex Jones is a bit of a nutjob but sometimes he is right about certain things so when you read a recent article about weather manipulation you snickered under your mustache, "Aha, the MSM fails yet again!!". It took about 30 seconds of googling and skim reading to get to the truth and I looked into it because your "Alex Jones was right all along" claim tickled my critical thinking senses. I don't let my personal bias (which I am aware of by the way) cloud my judgment.

so, used at various times and in no particular order, these are some of the media sources/commentators that I use as sources of information:

Daily Mail
Independent
Guardian
Metro
RT
TYT
Daily Wire (Ben Shapiro)
Rebel Media
Steven Crowder
Owen Jones
LBC radio
twitter
Sargon of Akkad
The Rubin Report
Stefan Molyneux
The Academic Agent
AT magazine
PQ magazine
AB magazine
Rogan Experience

The thing that bugs me most about the MSM (and note, I do use some sources of MSM) is how article titles are pure click bait followed by a paragraph or two which typically purports to be 'news' but is actually opinion (and pretty hyperbolic opinion at that) followed up by the actual facts halfway down the page which most people never seem to get to and usually contradicts the opinion presented in those first few paragraphs.

I really like the long form interviews which seem to be flavour of the month at the moment as you are able to explore philosophical and political ideas more thoroughly than you can when BBC talking head no.235702 is trying to corral 4 people who appear to hate each other whilst simultaneously attempting to cajole a misstatement out of someone because it sells stories all in the space of 5 minutes because we need to go to the weather because people can't see it out their window.
I also like, in particular, the attempts that People like Dave Rubin and Joe Rogan make to reach out and involve people that maybe don't share their opinion without seeking to completely lambaste and deride them. I really like this kind of Lockean approach to knowledge that says 'I think I'm right but I'm willing to hear the reason (not necessarily the feelings) behind your opinion to help strengthen mine, or ultimately incorporate knowledge which I had not previously considered (even to the point where my opinion may change as happened to Dave Rubin).

I really like the idea that now so many people are connected we can share events as they happen, often far quicker than the MSM can. Yes you need to apply more of your own critical thinking and not just accept everything that everyone says as gospel truth (ie Alex Jones Nibiru 2012 the aliens are coming...:o:rolleyes:) but I do believe that the panoply of 'media' coverage we enjoy today is something worth keeping (and fighting for) even if I might disagree with some of the places others chose to get their information. Laws like Article 13 are a direct assault on the media of the commons by what remains of the hegemony of the Mainstream.

So basically your only sources of news reporting are MSM (the Independent and the Guardian). The rest.. tabloids, Russian propaganda and various opinion platforms. In fact, the majority of your sources of information are opinion platforms and most of these platforms preach the gospel of the "MSM bias". Therefore, you read/listen to these people because they confirm your ideas.

Don't get me wrong, it is a fact that journalists, in general, lean to the left but the reasons why they do so are quite simple and they have nothing to do with bias. In the US, the current right wing is dominated by a populist/nationalist movement. The ideas that they put forward are often rejected by educated people, particularly educated young people. The majority of journalists have gone through higher forms of education so it's only natural for them to lean to the left. It's not just journalists, scholarly elites orient left, irrespective of academic affiliation. And education isn't the only element that has an influence on political views, this study found that low-effort thought promotes political conservatism4. Your conclusion that Alex Jones was right all along is a perfect example of low-effort thought.

In conclusion, good luck with reading/listening to opinion pieces, I'm sure you will enjoy having your views confirmed repeatedly. I am however skeptical that your approach (which by the way is not Lockean) will bear fruit in the form of knowledge.
 
Caporegime
Joined
8 Sep 2005
Posts
29,917
Location
Norrbotten, Sweden.
Mr sargon of akad released a video earlier of them at the trump protests in London and tbh he came across as a bit of a douche bag.

a lot of his unrehearsed stuff is very snide, patronising and condescending. Boasting about "I don't care"

Bait worthy stuff goading people to "hit him" and people very childishly and disrespectful to random people, but he doesn't care.

It's a million miles from his YouTube series where I thi k he comes across intelligent and we'll thought out.

I still thinks he right on a ton of issues but he's got this weird side to him I don't rate.
 
Back
Top Bottom