First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Post Reply making the media accountable.
Posted 4 days ago


*joker claps* impeccable usage of logical fallacies. you wield them expertly, as if you've never encountered folks who point out blatant illogic before.
46637 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 4 days ago


Ah yes, one of your key phrases "logical fallacies." One of your favorite responses, right up there with "its simple physics" and "crematory math." Even though I don't think you understand a single one of them. Must be that Harvard education you have?
Posted 4 days ago , edited 4 days ago
You forgot the stoichiometry branch of chemistry that will show you that there was a laughably short amount of BTUs to have done what we saw to those buildings, if one is only considering the jet fuel that almost completely burnt up in ~20 minutes time.

But please, go on about how small amounts of wood and paper will help a fire reach 1800C

LOL

Nice try, but fuck....is there an ignore feature on this forum? Reading the stuff you post is a waste of my time it is so ignorant.
46637 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 4 days ago
Funny, I'm sure 99% of the forum goers would say the exact same thing about you. I pray for an ignore feature.
18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 3 days ago

TheOriginalStraynge wrote:

The media doesn't report the news. They create the news. They created Donald Trump and then freaked out after he won lol. Now that is ironic isn't it. Maybe they should have thought about that earlier? They will never be held accountable because of the broad freedoms on speech. They can get away with inciting violence, creating tensions and outright lying to sell a few papers. The whole media should be flushed away. Plus their grammar really sucks these days. You'd think a major news site could use spell check or at least have a freaking proof reader.

Still, who would report the news if they were gone? Facebook? Lmao. I shudder every time I see someone reading their news from Facebook. It's beyond laughable that so many people believe everything they read.....of course that's also true of biased news stories but there's still a very big difference between bias and fake.

I don't really care much for the press but I DO care for their freedom of speech. That's also ironic that I hate the way they create news cycles at times while vehemently defending their rights to do so.


'freedom of speech is for people not businesses! The Media is a Business and is required to live by some of the same standards.


example: When consumers see or hear an advertisement, whether it’s on the Internet, radio or television, or anywhere else, federal law says that ad must be truthful, not misleading, and, when appropriate, backed by scientific evidence. The Federal Trade Commission enforces these truth-in-advertising laws, and it applies the same standards no matter where an ad appears – in newspapers and magazines, online, in the mail, or on billboards or buses. The FTC looks especially closely at advertising claims that can affect consumers’ health or their pocketbooks – claims about food, over-the-counter drugs, dietary supplements, alcohol, and tobacco and on conduct related to high-tech products and the Internet. The FTC also monitors and writes reports about ad industry practices regarding the marketing of alcohol and tobacco.
When the FTC finds a case of fraud perpetrated on consumers, the agency files actions in federal district court for immediate and permanent orders to stop scams; prevent fraudsters from perpetrating scams in the future; freeze their assets; and get compensation for victims. News reporting should be also under the same regulations and standards
16739 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 3 days ago , edited 3 days ago

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:



'freedom of speech is for people not businesses! The Media is a Business and is required to live by some of the same standards.

example: When consumers see or hear an advertisement, whether it’s on the Internet, radio or television, or anywhere else, federal law says that ad must be truthful, not misleading, and, when appropriate, backed by scientific evidence. The Federal Trade Commission enforces these truth-in-advertising laws, and it applies the same standards no matter where an ad appears – in newspapers and magazines, online, in the mail, or on billboards or buses. The FTC looks especially closely at advertising claims that can affect consumers’ health or their pocketbooks – claims about food, over-the-counter drugs, dietary supplements, alcohol, and tobacco and on conduct related to high-tech products and the Internet. The FTC also monitors and writes reports about ad industry practices regarding the marketing of alcohol and tobacco.
When the FTC finds a case of fraud perpetrated on consumers, the agency files actions in federal district court for immediate and permanent orders to stop scams; prevent fraudsters from perpetrating scams in the future; freeze their assets; and get compensation for victims. News reporting should be also under the same regulations and standards


My question is should something be done about it?

Propaganda is now legal to use on US citizens. All bets are off, thanks Obama

Several news outlets reported that the 2013 NDAA overturned a 64-year ban on the domestic dissemination of propaganda (described as "public diplomacy information") produced for foreign audiences, effectively eliminating the distinction between foreign and domestic audiences.[42][43][44][45] The social news media site BuzzFeed for example quoted an unnamed source saying the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 would allow “U.S. propaganda intended to influence foreign audiences to be used on the domestic population.”[44]

https://www.google.com/#q=propaganda+legal+in+us
18029 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 3 days ago
Over here we have the press complaints commission which is an independent organisation that deals with complaints and where it sees fit they hand out fines and make wrongdoers formally apologise. There's still a lot of garbage but it's usually easy to spot the scaremongering, and exaggeration.
qwueri 
16410 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Online
Posted 3 days ago , edited 3 days ago

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


'freedom of speech is for people not businesses! The Media is a Business and is required to live by some of the same standards.


example: When consumers see or hear an advertisement, whether it’s on the Internet, radio or television, or anywhere else, federal law says that ad must be truthful, not misleading, and, when appropriate, backed by scientific evidence. The Federal Trade Commission enforces these truth-in-advertising laws, and it applies the same standards no matter where an ad appears – in newspapers and magazines, online, in the mail, or on billboards or buses. The FTC looks especially closely at advertising claims that can affect consumers’ health or their pocketbooks – claims about food, over-the-counter drugs, dietary supplements, alcohol, and tobacco and on conduct related to high-tech products and the Internet. The FTC also monitors and writes reports about ad industry practices regarding the marketing of alcohol and tobacco.
When the FTC finds a case of fraud perpetrated on consumers, the agency files actions in federal district court for immediate and permanent orders to stop scams; prevent fraudsters from perpetrating scams in the future; freeze their assets; and get compensation for victims. News reporting should be also under the same regulations and standards.


Except freedom of speech is specifically included for the press under the first amendment.

Anyone that feels they were directly targeted and harmed by a false story can sue for libel and other damages. For example, Hulk Hogan versus Gawker: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollea_v._Gawker


Rujikin wrote:

Propaganda is now legal to use on US citizens. All bets are off, thanks Obama

Several news outlets reported that the 2013 NDAA overturned a 64-year ban on the domestic dissemination of propaganda (described as "public diplomacy information") produced for foreign audiences, effectively eliminating the distinction between foreign and domestic audiences.[42][43][44][45] The social news media site BuzzFeed for example quoted an unnamed source saying the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 would allow “U.S. propaganda intended to influence foreign audiences to be used on the domestic population.”[44]

https://www.google.com/#q=propaganda+legal+in+us


This law?


(Sec. 1078) Revises provisions of the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 authorizing the Secretary of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors to provide for the preparation and dissemination of information intended for foreign audiences abroad about the United States, including about its people and policies, through press, publications, radio, motion pictures, the Internet, and other information media, including social media, and through information centers and instructors. Authorizes the Secretary and the Board to make available in the United States motion pictures, films, video, audio, and other materials disseminated abroad pursuant to such Act, the United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994, the Radio Broadcasting to Cuba Act, or the Television Broadcasting to Cuba Act. Amends the Foreign Relations Authorization Act of Fiscal Years 1986 and 1987 to remove statutory limitations on the ability of the Board and the State Department to provide information about their activities to the media, the public, or Congress.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/house-bill/4310

The big question is, how clearly is that information marked as produced by a government agency.
7401 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
48 / M / New England, USA
Offline
Posted 3 days ago
We can't stop people from saying what they want, it's a Constitutional Right...but we can in fact punish them if what is said as slanderous, defamatory or hateful...or in many cases just plain lies. The problem doesn't lie in the system itself as it stands, just in the penalties for abusing it.

When Tom Selleck sued the Enquirer years ago for claiming he was gay he put it all in perspective. He said that at the time the most he sue them for was $4 Million dollars. The sales of the issue on the shelf exceeded a $30 Million dollar profit. so for telling the lie they earned themselves a $26 Million dollar profit. Punishments must be made real. In that case it should've cost them their entire $30 Million profit PLUS the $4 Million out of their own pocket. That way it actually WOULD be an actual punishment not just less of a profit.
41641 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 2 days ago , edited 2 days ago
don't forget kiddies
wikileaks, aka julian assface's playhouse of potential falsehood, counts as a media platform
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.