Please log in to view images

« prev   random   next »

3
0

Reporters trying to censor the government, not the other way around

By Patrick follow Patrick   2020 Apr 6, 8:40am 338 views   22 comments   watch   nsfw   quote   share    


https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/04/03/coronavirus-trump-hope-white-house-journalists-reporters-column/5106844002/

This helps explains NBC reporter Peter Alexander’s now infamous clash with President Trump over the efficacy of a drug meant to treat malaria for which the president expressed hope that it might (not will, but might) be able to treat the coronavirus as well. ...

Reporters, who routinely publish worst-case estimates about the impact of coronavirus, took a firm stand against the president’s hopeful point of view, led by Alexander, who took particular umbrage.

“Is it possible — it possible that your impulse to put a positive spin on things may be giving Americans a false sense of hope, and misrepresenting the preparedness right now?” Alexander asked. ...

After the president again, even-handedly, said the drug might work and it might not, Alexander’s pessimism peaked.

“Nearly 200 dead. What do you say to Americans who are scared, though? I guess, nearly 200 dead; 14,000 who are sick; millions, as you witness, who are scared right now. What do you say to Americans who are watching you right now who are scared?”

To which the president in his usual subtle style replied, “You’re a terrible reporter.”


And Trump is right about that.

As the president’s approval goes up, several prominent columnists and talking heads have called for the televised briefings to come down. Don’t show the briefings live, cried MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, along with the Washington Post’s Margaret Sullivan and Karen Tumulty. In WW II, the government censored reporters. Now, these reporters want to censor the government.

NBC’s Chuck Todd sunk to a new low when he asked Joe Biden on “Meet the Press” if Biden thought there was “blood on the president’s hands considering the slow response.” He caught himself mid-sentence and added, “or is that too harsh a criticism?”


Lol, a little glimmer of self-awareness among reporters? That must be stamped out! Clearly Chuck Todd is RACIST.
1   Fortwaynemobile   ignore (3)   2020 Apr 6, 11:21am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

They don’t want America to recover.
2   FuckTheMainstreamMedia   ignore (6)   2020 Apr 6, 11:52am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

The media is being exposed for being the lying deceivers they are. Honestly don’t know how these jerks live with themselves. Jim Acosta and the other hags asking loaded questions are miserable terrible human beings.
3   WookieMan   ignore (4)   2020 Apr 6, 11:55am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Fortwaynemobile says
They don’t want America to recover.

I actually don't agree. I think they just need to sell ads. If the bullshit they're pushing sells ads, they make money. Plain and simple. Journalism is the biggest hoax of all time... not that I'd want government media solely either. Media is almost 90% negative. Even with Obama to an extent because he played nice with them, so they weren't as harsh.

Media HAS to sell negativity to get $$$. Some may actually not want America to recover, but they all end up broke with that scenario. I think we're going to start seeing a shift here shortly with the media on the CV-19 topic.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm starting to think based off the coverage I've seen this is a tryout for Cuomo and Pritzker to oust Biden at the convention, hence the delay of the Dem convention. This virus really isn't that bad. I'm still convinced that patient #1 in the US was here since December. Most/many people have been exposed for months probably or at least the last 45 days. I'm not certain there's a dramatic round 2 to this virus.
4   richwicks   ignore (0)   2020 Apr 6, 12:02pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

CovfefeButDeadly says
The media is being exposed for being the lying deceivers they are. Honestly don’t know how these jerks live with themselves.


They sleep on a pile of cash.

I don't understand why Americans can't realize the obvious, their "news media" is just propaganda. It's been this way for DECADES. You shouldn't spend your time listening to them. All they do is lie to you. How many more years do they have to continue this before you realize it?



They are absolutely BRAZEN about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIX6xn72cGk

They will never, NEVER stop lying to you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBgViIGLo-w

Don't think this is just a mistake on their part or incompetence, or they're stupid. They aren't. They are in on it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5YgJx8VGRA

That's the 2005 White House correspondents dinner. The people in the audience, those are "journalists".

There are literally thousands of examples of the propagandists just making up BS to mislead their listeners. Stop asking them to stop lying, they never will. That's their job.
5   HeadSet   ignore (3)   2020 Apr 6, 2:11pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

I think they just need to sell ads. If the bullshit they're pushing sells ads, they make money.

If it were all about ratings and ads, wouldn't they be eager to televise the President's briefings? After all, those briefings get better viewership that CNN news shows.
6   HEYYOU   ignore (50)   2020 Apr 6, 2:27pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

WookieMan says
I think they just need to sell ads. If the bullshit they're pushing sells ads, they make money. Plain and simple. Journalism is the biggest hoax of all time



Please stop posting anything that resembles facts.
55 years ago another old codger said, It's not about the facts it's about the money sensationalism can create.
7   richwicks   ignore (0)   2020 Apr 6, 3:09pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

HeadSet says
I think they just need to sell ads. If the bullshit they're pushing sells ads, they make money.

If it were all about ratings and ads, wouldn't they be eager to televise the President's briefings? After all, those briefings get better viewership that CNN news shows.


Oh no, that's not how they make their money. Look at who advertises through them. Pharmaceutical companies and defense contractors.

Ever been annoyed by some stupid commercial advertising a drug, where they don't even describe what the drug is supposed to treat? Those are bribes. They aren't designed to sell the drug, they are payoffs to the propaganda ministry, which you think is a news station. When an advertisement comes up for ADM or Monsanto or Lockheed Martin, do you think they are actually advertising a product to sell? Again, this is a legal way of doing a payoff.

Our propaganda ministry will NEVER go away, because it's not supported by free market economics. They get their money from the government, who in turn puts a gun to our head and demands taxes. It's Izvestia and Pravda brought through a time machine from 1985.

If the job of the media was to just get advertising revenue that's easy - just tell the truth. Everybody knows who Julian Assange is because he did just that. Same with Edward Snowden - but if you do that, your bribery money dries up. Just ask any independent citizen journalist on youtube. There used to be plenty of them, but most have been silenced while corporate "news" media is constantly recommended, and why there are now blue check marks, and prop or not.

I'd think US citizens would be more cynical, by now.
9   willywonka   ignore (6)   2020 Apr 6, 3:35pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

richwicks says
They sleep on a pile of cash
Does anyone think the news anchors actually know what really happened in a story they are "reporting" on? They are the equivalent of actors, paid to appear credible and trustworthy, but reading from a teleprompter, without any clue about the veracity of the underlying story. Local news constantly uses stock footage, which is basically fraud. You can have fun on Patnet by posting a link from a "real"news story along with your own hopefully humorous photo. This is not that different from the average imbecilic MSM technique. But they know that the average viewer will connect the bogus footage to the "story." Posters on Patnet can lampoon this effect.
10   covid_shmovid   ignore (5)   2020 Apr 6, 3:37pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

willywonka says
They are the equivalent of actors, paid to appear credible and trustworthy, but reading from a teleprompter, without any clue about the veracity of the underlying story.


Fucking bimbos.
11   willywonka   ignore (6)   2020 Apr 6, 3:53pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

TEOTWAWKI says
Fucking bimbos.
That is too charitable. I have to believe the many are knowing participants in fraud.
12   FuckTheMainstreamMedia   ignore (6)   2020 Apr 6, 4:07pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

WookieMan says
Fortwaynemobile says
They don’t want America to recover.

I actually don't agree. I think they just need to sell ads. If the bullshit they're pushing sells ads, they make money. Plain and simple. Journalism is the biggest hoax of all time... not that I'd want government media solely either. Media is almost 90% negative. Even with Obama to an extent because he played nice with them, so they weren't as harsh.

Media HAS to sell negativity to get $$$. Some may actually not want America to recover, but they all end up broke with that scenario. I think we're going to start seeing a shift here shortly with the media on the CV-19 topic.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm starting to think based off the coverage I've seen this is a tryout for Cuomo and Pritzker to oust Biden at the convention, hence the delay of the Dem convention. This virus really isn't that bad. I'm still convinced that pa...


Somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% of Journalists voted for Hildebeast. The press is miserably left leaning:

https://www.mrc.org/special-reports/liberal-mediaevery-poll-shows-journalists-are-more-liberal-american-public-—-and

Put another way, Marcus and I working together could put together a balanced publication and agree to disagree often enough that there wouldn’t even be many squabbles.

Marcus, Tim, and 7 Democrats and myself would not put together a fair piece of journalism. Not even close. In fact, I’d probably be completely squelched with every piece I write edited to oblivion.

There’s more going on than just money, and it’s a big part of why many news organizations are financially failing.
13   richwicks   ignore (0)   2020 Apr 6, 4:57pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

CovfefeButDeadly says
There’s more going on than just money, and it’s a big part of why many news organizations are financially failing.


Oh, they are just feeding you false hope. These organizations aren't going away. They are not dependent on advertisements or even circulation to stay in business. They are paid to produce propaganda as much as they are paid to keep their mouth shut.

They are the vaulted "reliable sources", and they'll stay that way. It won't be long before all these articles are written by computer programs, and not people at all.

Try to find a "reliable source" that points out the Bush administration actively lied us into the Iraq War, or one that points out that the excuse of "preventing a humanitarian crisis" in LIbya to bomb it, left it in civil war with slavery markets - the very definition of a humanitarian crisis. None of them question the official government narrative even when everybody knows they are false.
14   NoCoupForYou   ignore (4)   2020 Apr 6, 6:09pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

richwicks says
Oh, they are just feeding you false hope. These organizations aren't going away. They are not dependent on advertisements or even circulation to stay in business. They are paid to produce propaganda as much as they are paid to keep their mouth shut.


That was almost 20 years ago, when Youtube and Facebook were dreams and MySpace was the bleeding edge of the internet.

Now bullshit can't last 24 hours (if that long) before it's called out across Social Media and Youtube Streamers.

The only thing in the way are the Gatekeepers, which is only possibly because the firms involved are too big to give a shit and don't worry about cash to reign in their bias (Google-Youtube) or not expected to make profits yet (Twitter). One good recession will kick most asses, however.

Eventually, there will be a Business-oriented platform where they really want to make money. It will likely be outside Silicon Valley and probably in Mumbai or Tel Aviv.

The secret would be for Bitchute or somebody to kick off the Nazis and Whackos for a year or two, because all the Stormfags and Decoder Wierdos run to them the moment they open, normies go and check it out and are instantly greeted with
"HANG THE NIGS AND GAS THE KIKES!"
"ILLUMINATTI JESUIT WORKING WITH GREY ALIENS TO SPREAD COVID19 AND ZIONISM PROVEN!!!"
"E Michael Jones and Varg discuss the Jewish Question"
"Analyzing Trump's Coronavirus Conference using the power of Reverse Speech"

... and never go back.

RT already sells raw footage via Ruptly to narrate over and discuss without worrying about AP/ABC/CNN bitching about what is fair use or not.

The Legacy Media hates PewDiePie, Ryan's World, etc. because it's eating their lunch thanks to the rock bottom cost of producing and transmitting quality media. It's only the transmission system that is the issue.

Internet 2.0, the distributed internet, will pretty much end the role of Gatekeepers, anyway.
15   Patrick   ignore (1)   2020 Apr 6, 6:20pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

richwicks says
HeadSet says
I think they just need to sell ads. If the bullshit they're pushing sells ads, they make money.

If it were all about ratings and ads, wouldn't they be eager to televise the President's briefings? After all, those briefings get better viewership that CNN news shows.


Oh no, that's not how they make their money. Look at who advertises through them. Pharmaceutical companies and defense contractors.


Hell, they don't need to make money at all.

Look at the Washington Post, owned by the richest man in the world, a guy who contracts server farms to the CIA.

The media which remains after Google and Facebook took all their revenue is not legitimate journalism at all. What remains is owned and operated as propaganda, nothing else. They don't even need to sell ads.
16   richwicks   ignore (0)   2020 Apr 6, 8:09pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Patrick says
Hell, they don't need to make money at all.


They won't do it unless they make money.

Patrick says
Look at the Washington Post, owned by the richest man in the world, a guy who contracts server farms to the CIA.


You must realize he's making money by owning the Washintong Post when he's producing propaganda in favor of the intelligence agencies. That's our real government. From Operation Ajax to CoIntel Pro and beyond. Bezos is intelligence. How do you think he managed to secure a deal for the Post Office to deliver packages at a loss? How do you figure he secured a contract to have ALL intelligence data stores on private computers?

Patrick says
The media which remains after Google and Facebook took all their revenue is not legitimate journalism at all. What remains is owned and operated as propaganda, nothing else. They don't even need to sell ads.


They don't survive by selling ads. An advertisement is just there as a way to send money. Who sits through an ad anymore? How effective can they be?
17   Patrick   ignore (1)   2020 Apr 6, 10:56pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

richwicks says
Patrick says
Hell, they don't need to make money at all.


They won't do it unless they make money.


Bet they will do it without making money -- directly.

The goal of the Washington Post is to manipulate public opinions with half-truths and spin to keep the goods coming in from China no matter what it does to American workers.
19   richwicks   ignore (0)   2020 Apr 7, 7:00pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Booger says


I have a question - do you believe the United States doesn't do similar things? I know Israel certainly does.
20   Patrick   ignore (1)   2020 Apr 7, 7:48pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Booger says


To see a higher res version, right click on the image and view image in a new tab.
21   Patrick   ignore (1)   2020 Apr 7, 10:13pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Wow, the press is literally, actually trying to censor Trump:

https://reason.com/2020/04/07/fcc-rejects-petition-to-censor-broadcasts-of-president-trumps-coronavirus-press-conferences-and-other-speech/

FCC Rejects Petition to Censor Broadcasts of President Trump's Coronavirus Press Conferences (and Other Speech)

From a letter released yesterday by the General Counsel of the FCC:

Free Press has filed … an emergency petition requesting an investigation into broadcasters that have aired the President of the United States' statements and press conferences regarding the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) and related commentary by other on-air personalities. The Petition claims that the President and various commentators have made false statements regarding COVID-19, which Commission licensees have broadcast to the public, and which allegedly have caused or will cause substantial public harm. Free Press asks the Commission, under its section 309 public interest authority and its rules prohibiting broadcast hoaxes, to investigate these broadcasts and adopt emergency enforcement guidance "recommending that broadcasters prominently disclose when information they air is false or scientifically suspect."

We deny Free Press's petition. For the reasons explained below, the Petition misconstrues the Commission's rules and seeks remedies that would dangerously curtail the freedom of the press embodied in the First Amendment.
22   Patrick   ignore (1)   2020 Apr 8, 12:35pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      



Trump is right.

The media is trying to censor the president, not the other way around.

Strange times.

about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions