The US shadow campaign to "fortify democracy"

Watch
SHallowvale
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#21
Report 3 weeks ago
#21
(Original post by Starship Trooper)
Personally I am a strong advocate of the first amendment and also a big critic of the narrative against 'conspiracy theories' - many of the people writing about the below could have been censored in today's society:

https://www.businessinsider.com/true...racies-2013-12
You pretty much defeat your own argument with this one.
0
reply
Starship Trooper
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#22
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#22
(Original post by SHallowvale)
Seriously? Fox News is one of the most viewed TV networks in the US. They may not be pro-Trump but they're certainly not pro-Biden.

I'm curious as to how you think Trump could have obtained 47% of the vote if you also think that the internet, social media and nearly the entire MSM are left leaning. Clearly these people must be getting their information from somewhere, right?

The link gives a list of newspapers that are printed in major US cities and universities. Most cities and universities are left leaning, so it's not exactly surprising that most of their papers endoursed Biden.
But as you acknowledge they're not pro trump.

A- Thank God people are not solely influenced by the media
B- They get their news from alternative media or from now increasingly censored people like Rush Limbaugh.
0
reply
Starship Trooper
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#23
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#23
(Original post by SHallowvale)
You pretty much defeat your own argument with this one.
Please explain ?
0
reply
SHallowvale
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#24
Report 3 weeks ago
#24
(Original post by Starship Trooper)
But as you acknowledge they're not pro trump.

A- Thank God people are not solely influenced by the media
B- They get their news from alternative media or from now increasingly censored people like Rush Limbaugh.
I don't know if they're pro Trump or not. They're most certainly right wing.

If 47% of people are getting their news from alternative media, then that would basically make alternative media mainstream.

(Original post by Starship Trooper)
Please explain ?
You say, "many of the people writing about the below could have been censored in today's society", and you go on to link people writing about it who are not being censored.
0
reply
Starship Trooper
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#25
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#25
(Original post by SHallowvale)
I don't know if they're pro Trump or not. They're most certainly right wing.

If 47% of people are getting their news from alternative media, then that would basically make alternative media mainstream.


You say, "many of the people writing about the below could have been censored in today's society", and you go on to link people writing about it who are not being censored.
They're establishment right wing. We had s similar problem in the UK with Corbyn. People would say groups like the guardian were pro labour when they actually supported the unpopular lib Dems.

Not quite. They do not enjoy the perks of MSM even if they might have similar reach. Observe Parler getting shut down.

No that really doesn't disprove what I said at all.
0
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#26
Report 3 weeks ago
#26
(Original post by Starship Trooper)
Both of whom have been very lukewarm at best, Fox in particular has long been pretty dismissive of Trump which has been noted.
Lol. Fox's most prominent figures and shows - Hannity, Dobbs, Ingraham, Carlson, Fox and Friends, etc - are slavishly pro-Trump. Now, there are some Fox people like Wallace, Cavuto, Baier, etc who are more similar to a normal, centre-right perspective, but i) they tend to get much less attention, and ii) they're the actual formal "News" division where they're obliged to actually keep to legal standards, whereas the former group tend to be classed as "Opinion" or even "Entertainment".

There are no real left-leaning equivalents of Fox, never mind the likes of Newsmax, OAN, or talk radio. US news media is, for the most part, divided into a significant minority of unrestrainedly partisan pro-Republican outlets, and a majority of somewhat centrist outlets who, even when it's clear their sympathies are with one side, cannot help but descend into the lazy "both sides" horse race style coverage of politics that they're used to.

Now to some extent, this isn't "bias" so much as it is simply reflective of preferences and broader different ways of thinking between the American right and left (it's not that left-wing "outrage media" shows haven't been attempted, they've just never been popular, just as attempts by the right to produce political comedy shows like Colbert or SNL have never really been popular). But it's an asymmetry that exists.
0
reply
SHallowvale
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#27
Report 3 weeks ago
#27
(Original post by Starship Trooper)
They're establishment right wing. We had s similar problem in the UK with Corbyn. People would say groups like the guardian were pro labour when they actually supported the unpopular lib Dems.

Not quite. They do not enjoy the perks of MSM even if they might have similar reach. Observe Parler getting shut down.

No that really doesn't disprove what I said at all.
Perks such as what, being able to reach out to at least 47% of Americans? This idea that the left have a total monopoly on information is false.

Perhaps I misunderstood your point. What was it?
0
reply
Starship Trooper
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#28
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#28
(Original post by anarchism101)
Lol. Fox's most prominent figures and shows - Hannity, Dobbs, Ingraham, Carlson, Fox and Friends, etc - are slavishly pro-Trump. Now, there are some Fox people like Wallace, Cavuto, Baier, etc who are more similar to a normal, centre-right perspective, but i) they tend to get much less attention, and ii) they're the actual formal "News" division where they're obliged to actually keep to legal standards, whereas the former group tend to be classed as "Opinion" or even "Entertainment".

There are no real left-leaning equivalents of Fox, never mind the likes of Newsmax, OAN, or talk radio. US news media is, for the most part, divided into a significant minority of unrestrainedly partisan pro-Republican outlets, and a majority of somewhat centrist outlets who, even when it's clear their sympathies are with one side, cannot help but descend into the lazy "both sides" horse race style coverage of politics that they're used to.

Now to some extent, this isn't "bias" so much as it is simply reflective of preferences and broader different ways of thinking between the American right and left (it's not that left-wing "outrage media" shows haven't been attempted, they've just never been popular, just as attempts by the right to produce political comedy shows like Colbert or SNL have never really been popular). But it's an asymmetry that exists.
Lou Dobbs just got canned and there have been rumours that Tucker could be next. Although they bring in high ratings Fox's liberal donors and Murdoch's more liberal son have been anxious to 'detoxify' Fox at almost all costs.

I largely agree with your second point, the 'system' is unfavourable to genuine leftism as well although it views the Maga crowd as it's primary enemy. The system has been thus far able to easily co-op the left through pawns such as the Squad and Bernie as it knows it can get them to support the neoliberal Biden by pointing at Trump.

It depends if you mean simply the establishment left/ right hasn't been successful. Various figures outside the mainstream have carved out a successful niche for themselves on YouTube and other platforms although edgier ones may get banned .
0
reply
Starship Trooper
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#29
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#29
(Original post by SHallowvale)
Perks such as what, being able to reach out to at least 47% of Americans? This idea that the left have a total monopoly on information is false.

Perhaps I misunderstood your point. What was it?
Google, Twitter and Facebook have a obviously clear monopoly and favoured Biden over Trump.

My point is many people dismiss conspiracies as nonsense and don't mind if they get censored but as my link demonstrates some conspiracies are indeed real.
0
reply
SHallowvale
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#30
Report 3 weeks ago
#30
(Original post by Starship Trooper)
Google, Twitter and Facebook have a obviously clear monopoly and favoured Biden over Trump.

My point is many people dismiss conspiracies as nonsense and don't mind if they get censored but as my link demonstrates some conspiracies are indeed real.
Surely not, though, since US Conservatives were still able to spread information (and misinformation) during the election. Also, to assume that Google, Twitter and Facebook "favoruing Biden" means that these platforms are unusable to Conservatives is wrong. There are millions of right wing Google, Twitter and Facebook users.

Lots of conspiracies are real, sure, but the fact that people talk about them means that they're not getting censored (at least not all of them).
0
reply
Starship Trooper
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#31
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#31
(Original post by SHallowvale)
Surely not, though, since US Conservatives were still able to spread information (and misinformation) during the election. Also, to assume that Google, Twitter and Facebook "favoruing Biden" means that these platforms are unusable to Conservatives is wrong. There are millions of right wing Google, Twitter and Facebook users.

Lots of conspiracies are real, sure, but the fact that people talk about them means that they're not getting censored (at least not all of them).
I have not said that these platforms are unusable for conservatives.

Ok but that's a bit of a crummy argument. I'd rather there be less censorship overall.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Which of these would you use to help with making uni decisions?

Webinars (58)
13.55%
Virtual campus tours/open days (98)
22.9%
Live streaming events (39)
9.11%
Online AMAs/guest lectures (40)
9.35%
A uni comparison tool (98)
22.9%
An in-person event when available (95)
22.2%

Watched Threads

View All