https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/26/robert-mercer-breitbart-war-on-media-steve-bannon-donald-trump-nigel-farage?CMP=twt_gu (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/26/robert-mercer-breitbart-war-on-media-steve-bannon-donald-trump-nigel-farage?CMP=twt_gu)
Interesting article on the use of big data modelling for political propaganda in addition to how it can be used to impact on human psyche etc.
A bit nerdy in places mind but very interesting / eye opening.
Quote from: imtommygunn on February 26, 2017, 11:23:05 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/26/robert-mercer-breitbart-war-on-media-steve-bannon-donald-trump-nigel-farage?CMP=twt_gu (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/26/robert-mercer-breitbart-war-on-media-steve-bannon-donald-trump-nigel-farage?CMP=twt_gu)
Interesting article on the use of big data modelling for political propaganda in addition to how it can be used to impact on human psyche etc.
A bit nerdy in places mind but very interesting / eye opening.
Very interesting. The thing is, Trump has to deliver. It's ok to stir up emotions but you have to deliver.
The people who voted for him are the poorest. They have the lowest life expectancy, the lowest productivity
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/11/10/american-right-inside-the-sacrifice-zone/
"red states are poorer and have more teen mothers, more divorce, worse health, more obesity, more trauma-related deaths, more low-birth-weight babies, and lower school enrollment. On average, people in red states die five years earlier than people in blue states. Indeed, the gap in life expectancy between Louisiana (75.7) and Connecticut (80.7) is the same as that between the United States and Nicaragua."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ffg31Keox4U
Quote from: seafoid on February 26, 2017, 02:02:16 PM
Quote from: imtommygunn on February 26, 2017, 11:23:05 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/26/robert-mercer-breitbart-war-on-media-steve-bannon-donald-trump-nigel-farage?CMP=twt_gu (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/26/robert-mercer-breitbart-war-on-media-steve-bannon-donald-trump-nigel-farage?CMP=twt_gu)
Interesting article on the use of big data modelling for political propaganda in addition to how it can be used to impact on human psyche etc.
A bit nerdy in places mind but very interesting / eye opening.
Very interesting. The thing is, Trump has to deliver. It's ok to stir up emotions but you have to deliver.
The people who voted for him are the poorest. They have the lowest life expectancy, the lowest productivity
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/11/10/american-right-inside-the-sacrifice-zone/
"red states are poorer and have more teen mothers, more divorce, worse health, more obesity, more trauma-related deaths, more low-birth-weight babies, and lower school enrollment. On average, people in red states die five years earlier than people in blue states. Indeed, the gap in life expectancy between Louisiana (75.7) and Connecticut (80.7) is the same as that between the United States and Nicaragua."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ffg31Keox4U
That's essentially what Janen Ganesh was writing in the FT recently. Trump, and his ilk, have their chance now. But unless they deliver then this will all pass with time. He was urging for patience in the fight back rather than the futility of marching, which for all the hype achieves nothing tangible. Bannon and his buddies now have to prove that life is going to be better for enough of those that voted for them.
One quote
"You can take an existing trending topic, such as fake news, and then weaponise it. You can turn it against the very media that uncovered it. Viewed in a certain light, fake news is a suicide bomb at the heart of our information system. Strapped to the live body of us – the mainstream media.
One of the things that concerns Howard most is the hundreds of thousands of "sleeper" bots they've found. Twitter accounts that have tweeted only once or twice and are now sitting quietly waiting for a trigger: some sort of crisis where they will rise up and come together to drown out all other sources of information."
This is all about algorithms and bots
http://gizmodo.com/ashley-madison-code-shows-more-women-and-more-bots-1727613924
http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/11/11/facebook-twitter-trump-how-internet-changed-election/
Are you sure the people who voted for Trump were the poorest? I thought in the analytics after the election it showed that a majority of those who earned 50 to 100k voted for him.
Yep. More poor voted for Clinton.
http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37922587 (http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37922587)
Quote from: seafoid on February 26, 2017, 02:31:24 PM
http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/11/11/facebook-twitter-trump-how-internet-changed-election/
According to the website Twitter Audit, 4,645,254 of Donald Trump's 11,972,303 Twitter followers—about 39 percent—were bots, compared to 524,141 of Hillary Clinton's 10,696,761, or just 5 percent. Here was another way that Trump triumphed.FECK ME. If true.
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 26, 2017, 11:31:10 PM
Are you sure the people who voted for Trump were the poorest? I thought in the analytics after the election it showed that a majority of those who earned 50 to 100k voted for him.
Would be ignoring most of Seafoids posts on here if you are looking for balance and facts
Quote from: ONeill on February 27, 2017, 12:23:56 AM
Quote from: seafoid on February 26, 2017, 02:31:24 PM
http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/11/11/facebook-twitter-trump-how-internet-changed-election/
According to the website Twitter Audit, 4,645,254 of Donald Trump's 11,972,303 Twitter followers—about 39 percent—were bots, compared to 524,141 of Hillary Clinton's 10,696,761, or just 5 percent. Here was another way that Trump triumphed.
FECK ME. If true.
I wouldn't be too worried about it......it just balances out the overwhelmingly positive coverage the fawning lackeys at CNN and The NY Times gave Hillary during the campaign
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 26, 2017, 11:31:10 PM
Are you sure the people who voted for Trump were the poorest? I thought in the analytics after the election it showed that a majority of those who earned 50 to 100k voted for him.
GOP states have lower average incomes. Maybe the country club Republicans bring the numbers up . Trump basically won the countryside.
US inequality between rich and poor is higher than the 1920s . Such levels of inequality breed political polarisation . Trump uses it to attack the press.
http://voxeu.org/article/political-aftermath-financial-crises-going-extremes
German police quash Breitbart story of mob setting fire to Dortmund church
Country's politicians warn against fake news after Breitbart website said group chanting 'Allahu Akbar' vandalised church on New Year's Eve
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/07/german-police-quash-breitbart-story-of-mob-setting-fire-to-dortmund-church
German media and politicians have warned against an election-year spike in fake news after the rightwing website Breitbart claimed a mob chanting "Allahu Akbar" had set fire to a church in the city of Dortmund on New Year's Eve.
After the report by the US site was widely shared on social media, the city's police clarified that no "extraordinary or spectacular" incidents had marred the festivities.
The local newspaper, Ruhr Nachrichten, said elements of its online reporting on New Year's Eve had been distorted by Breitbart to produce "fake news, hate and propaganda".
Quote from: sid waddell on February 27, 2017, 11:31:56 AM
German police quash Breitbart story of mob setting fire to Dortmund church
Country's politicians warn against fake news after Breitbart website said group chanting 'Allahu Akbar' vandalised church on New Year's Eve
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/07/german-police-quash-breitbart-story-of-mob-setting-fire-to-dortmund-church
German media and politicians have warned against an election-year spike in fake news after the rightwing website Breitbart claimed a mob chanting "Allahu Akbar" had set fire to a church in the city of Dortmund on New Year's Eve.
After the report by the US site was widely shared on social media, the city's police clarified that no "extraordinary or spectacular" incidents had marred the festivities.
The local newspaper, Ruhr Nachrichten, said elements of its online reporting on New Year's Eve had been distorted by Breitbart to produce "fake news, hate and propaganda".
Lügenpresse, indeed!
Wasn't Obama who made great use of Social Media in his first election? Did he create the monster?
Quote from: ONeill on February 27, 2017, 12:23:56 AM
Quote from: seafoid on February 26, 2017, 02:31:24 PM
http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/11/11/facebook-twitter-trump-how-internet-changed-election/
According to the website Twitter Audit, 4,645,254 of Donald Trump's 11,972,303 Twitter followers—about 39 percent—were bots, compared to 524,141 of Hillary Clinton's 10,696,761, or just 5 percent. Here was another way that Trump triumphed.
FECK ME. If true.
Reminds me of Daniel McCrossan in West Tyrone.
http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/election-diary-sdlp-s-mccrossan-silent-about-fake-followers-1-7363895
(http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/election-diary-sdlp-s-mccrossan-silent-about-fake-followers-1-7363895)
Quote from: Denn Forever on February 27, 2017, 12:04:43 PM
Wasn't Obama who made great use of Social Media in his first election? Did he create the monster?
Robert Mercer (part owner of Breitbart) is the one who has most effectively pioneered the harnessing of social media and AI to target propaganda at voters likely to be susceptible to the message. His shadowy influence in the Trump movement has hardly been explored.
If Bannon is the brains behind Trump, Mercer is the money behind Bannon. Mercer, who had previously bankrolled Cruz's campaign, is also the hard-righter who seems first to have spotted the potential of Trump to be the useful idiot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot) to carry the alt-right message. He then who got his minions, Bannon and Conway (also a former Cruz supporter) onto Trump's staff. It might be a very interesting study to analyse the Trump message and the wording of the propaganda since last July and the advent of this threesome.
He's the big-data guru, isn't he - smart way to win an election I guess.
Quote from: Billys Boots on February 27, 2017, 01:23:02 PM
He's the big-data guru, isn't he - smart way to win an election I guess.
Yes. Also a mate of Nigel's, and made a big impact on the Brexit campaign from the shadows (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/26/us-billionaire-mercer-helped-back-brexit). At least according to this fake news outlet.
(And I do mean from the shadows - UKIP never declared this benefit-in-kind funding of the campaign.)
I struggle to watch any news these days - I find it all very sensationalized. I have people in America visiting Ireland and afraid to go North because of the news. I have people in Ireland afraid to visit Florida because of the news. I'm increasingly concerned by the distraction of it all. People are worried about Kerry Gold butter being banned in the state of Wisconsin while genocide is happening in other countries... It's very easy to loose heart in the media
www.hollywoodreporter.com/amp/news/oscars-new-york-times-takes-aim-at-trump-truth-is-hard-ad-980713
Quote from: The Iceman on February 27, 2017, 01:50:23 PM
I struggle to watch any news these days - I find it all very sensationalized. I have people in America visiting Ireland and afraid to go North because of the news. I have people in Ireland afraid to visit Florida because of the news. I'm increasingly concerned by the distraction of it all. People are worried about Kerry Gold butter being banned in the state of Wisconsin while genocide is happening in other countries... It's very easy to loose heart in the media
I very seldom watch the news any more, it's mostly crap and highly editorial. I'm a much happier person for it.
Quote from: The Iceman on February 27, 2017, 01:50:23 PM
I struggle to watch any news these days - I find it all very sensationalized. I have people in America visiting Ireland and afraid to go North because of the news. I have people in Ireland afraid to visit Florida because of the news. I'm increasingly concerned by the distraction of it all. People are worried about Kerry Gold butter being banned in the state of Wisconsin while genocide is happening in other countries... It's very easy to loose heart in the media
I'm not losing heart in the media - I'm losing heart in the people. Particularly the people who ARE smart enough to understand the truth and the weight of propaganda - but who simply don't care because it furthers their agenda. There's always been nonsense out there - but it is getting more traction these days and things are snowballing.
Clearly genocide is clearly more important than having grass fed unsalted butter for your daily coffee - but people are paying less attention now to the world and more attention to themselves.
I've just about raised an eyebrow to a gun massacre or a terrorist attack in the last 24 months. Why is that?
Quote from: Puckoon on February 28, 2017, 12:47:42 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 27, 2017, 01:50:23 PM
I struggle to watch any news these days - I find it all very sensationalized. I have people in America visiting Ireland and afraid to go North because of the news. I have people in Ireland afraid to visit Florida because of the news. I'm increasingly concerned by the distraction of it all. People are worried about Kerry Gold butter being banned in the state of Wisconsin while genocide is happening in other countries... It's very easy to loose heart in the media
I'm not losing heart in the media - I'm losing heart in the people. Particularly the people who ARE smart enough to understand the truth and the weight of propaganda - but who simply don't care because it furthers their agenda. There's always been nonsense out there - but it is getting more traction these days and things are snowballing.
Clearly genocide is clearly more important than having grass fed unsalted butter for your daily coffee - but people are paying less attention now to the world and more attention to themselves.
I've just about raised an eyebrow to a gun massacre or a terrorist attack in the last 24 months. Why is that?
That's the shameful truth.
Fake news is linked to polarisation, inequality and plutocracy
https://www.ft.com/content/4e5af7e4-c88d-11e6-8f29-9445cac8966f
"US inequality has surged to its highest point since the 1920s, before the Great Depression. The nation's top earners take home a higher and higher share of US income, while the average income for the bottom half of US workers has not increased since the 1970s. Increasing inequality harms outcomes for the US economy as a whole: studies show that increased inequality leads to greater political polarisation, decreased economic mobility, a shrinking middle class, poorer education outcomes and more.Worsening inequality would already be difficult to reverse. But under Mr Trump's proposed policies, inequality might get worse before it improves, especially if the boom in capital markets continues and if Mr Trump's proposed tax breaks disproportionately benefit the country's richest as much as analysts predict. Mr Trump's promises to impose tariffs on cheap Chinese imports could also drive up prices for low-income Americans, especially if such policies fail to bring back the volume of jobs he promises."
http://voxeu.org/article/political-aftermath-financial-crises-going-extremes
Mian et al (2012) find that financial crises are followed by fractionalisation and polarisation of parliaments. Related, Bloom et al (2011) demonstrate that policy uncertainty is particularly high after financial crises.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/05/donald-trump-lies-belief-totalitarianism
Trump wants a violent reaction. He wants to be able to tell white Americans his opponents are 'professional anarchists'. It could all go wrong. Trump, Bannon, Farage and the Tory right want to polarise societies
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/12/02/long-division
Polarization in Congress maps onto one measure better than any other: economic inequality. The smaller the gap between rich and poor, the more moderate our politicians; the greater the gap, the greater the disagreement between liberals and conservatives. The greater the disagreement between liberals and conservatives, the less Congress is able to get done; the less Congress gets done, the greater the gap between rich and poor.
Actually, income disparity accords with many other things, as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has found. The greater the income gap, the higher the teenage pregnancy rate (poverty, ignorance, lack of sex education, and opposition to contraceptives are all at play here). The greater the income gap, the more education suffers, the less there is of social mobility, the greater the difficulty of reaching higher education, and the higher the premium put on it.
Quote from: J70 on February 28, 2017, 12:52:42 AM
Quote from: Puckoon on February 28, 2017, 12:47:42 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 27, 2017, 01:50:23 PM
I struggle to watch any news these days - I find it all very sensationalized. I have people in America visiting Ireland and afraid to go North because of the news. I have people in Ireland afraid to visit Florida because of the news. I'm increasingly concerned by the distraction of it all. People are worried about Kerry Gold butter being banned in the state of Wisconsin while genocide is happening in other countries... It's very easy to loose heart in the media
I'm not losing heart in the media - I'm losing heart in the people. Particularly the people who ARE smart enough to understand the truth and the weight of propaganda - but who simply don't care because it furthers their agenda. There's always been nonsense out there - but it is getting more traction these days and things are snowballing.
Clearly genocide is clearly more important than having grass fed unsalted butter for your daily coffee - but people are paying less attention now to the world and more attention to themselves.
I've just about raised an eyebrow to a gun massacre or a terrorist attack in the last 24 months. Why is that?
That's the shameful truth.
The more I read about confirmation bias the more inclined I am to believe it
Quote from: LeoMc on February 28, 2017, 10:49:15 AM
Quote from: J70 on February 28, 2017, 12:52:42 AM
Quote from: Puckoon on February 28, 2017, 12:47:42 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 27, 2017, 01:50:23 PM
I struggle to watch any news these days - I find it all very sensationalized. I have people in America visiting Ireland and afraid to go North because of the news. I have people in Ireland afraid to visit Florida because of the news. I'm increasingly concerned by the distraction of it all. People are worried about Kerry Gold butter being banned in the state of Wisconsin while genocide is happening in other countries... It's very easy to loose heart in the media
I'm not losing heart in the media - I'm losing heart in the people. Particularly the people who ARE smart enough to understand the truth and the weight of propaganda - but who simply don't care because it furthers their agenda. There's always been nonsense out there - but it is getting more traction these days and things are snowballing.
Clearly genocide is clearly more important than having grass fed unsalted butter for your daily coffee - but people are paying less attention now to the world and more attention to themselves.
I've just about raised an eyebrow to a gun massacre or a terrorist attack in the last 24 months. Why is that?
That's the shameful truth.
The more I read about confirmation bias the more inclined I am to believe it
Confirmation bias is groupthink
Quote from: Puckoon on February 28, 2017, 12:47:42 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 27, 2017, 01:50:23 PM
I struggle to watch any news these days - I find it all very sensationalized. I have people in America visiting Ireland and afraid to go North because of the news. I have people in Ireland afraid to visit Florida because of the news. I'm increasingly concerned by the distraction of it all. People are worried about Kerry Gold butter being banned in the state of Wisconsin while genocide is happening in other countries... It's very easy to loose heart in the media
I'm not losing heart in the media - I'm losing heart in the people. Particularly the people who ARE smart enough to understand the truth and the weight of propaganda - but who simply don't care because it furthers their agenda. There's always been nonsense out there - but it is getting more traction these days and things are snowballing.
Clearly genocide is clearly more important than having grass fed unsalted butter for your daily coffee - but people are paying less attention now to the world and more attention to themselves.
I've just about raised an eyebrow to a gun massacre or a terrorist attack in the last 24 months. Why is that?
I think because we are all becoming a little more selfish. Maybe a lot more selfish. Most people (myself included) consider themselves first and not others. How does this impact me right now? What can I get out of this? What would I rather be doing right now? Mum's at the park with their kid taking photos so get likes on facebook instead of enjoying the kids and playing with them. Dad's watching the game or playing video games while their kids are being babysitted by some other electronic device...parents off for the day while their kids are in day care... babies at 10 weeks going in to day care or with a nanny because mummy
has to work.... No more Christmas cards....
There's good people out there - I think we try to be one of them - but we need to try harder. I need to try harder.
I think we're all better off when we turn the news off or at least source our news from a reputable location and do some work to verify it.
If anyone has some real news sites please share - I've yet to see one without bias
The search for impartiality in the news is a fruitless one. Not because it doesn't exist, but because there are so many topics in the world right now that are impossible to report or discuss without being accused of polarizing the conversation.
BBC has been battered by both Israel and Palestine with accusations of bias in reporting Palestinian aggression and agenda, and Israeli response and agenda as an example. Surely if both "sides" in a news situation are accusing a broadcaster of bias, that actually speaks to a lack of bias?
In addition, if a news source is let's say biased against creationism Vs evolution - well given the weight of evidence for evolution Vs the evidence of creation - can that news source be accused of bias? I don't believe so. Insert Global warming, vaccinations, Santa Claus etc in here.
I don't believe that the majority of main stream news is corrupt. Just because the 9 year olds who are being naughty want to make us believe that they didn't smash the vase doesn't mean that the facts arent stating otherwise.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/how-the-hyperpartisan-sausage-is-made?utm_term=.ngQ5pZ50r#.xgVkevkOQ (https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/how-the-hyperpartisan-sausage-is-made?utm_term=.ngQ5pZ50r#.xgVkevkOQ)
QuoteThe search for impartiality in the news is a fruitless one. Not because it doesn't exist, but because there are so many topics in the world right now that are impossible to report or discuss without being accused of polarizing the conversation.
BBC has been battered by both Israel and Palestine with accusations of bias in reporting Palestinian aggression and agenda, and Israeli response and agenda as an example. Surely if both "sides" in a news situation are accusing a broadcaster of bias, that actually speaks to a lack of bias?
In addition, if a news source is let's say biased against creationism Vs evolution - well given the weight of evidence for evolution Vs the evidence of creation - can that news source be accused of bias? I don't believe so. Insert Global warming, vaccinations, Santa Claus etc in here.
I don't believe that the majority of main stream news is corrupt. Just because the 9 year olds who are being naughty want to make us believe that they didn't smash the vase doesn't mean that the facts arent stating otherwise.
Good points Puckoon
In my view now, too much news is not reporting, it is opinionating. And when you have opinions, you have subjectivity. Where you have subjectivity, you have scope for bias, intentional or otherwise.
Whatever happened to factual reporting?
Quote from: Puckoon on February 28, 2017, 01:40:21 PM
The search for impartiality in the news is a fruitless one. Not because it doesn't exist, but because there are so many topics in the world right now that are impossible to report or discuss without being accused of polarizing the conversation.
BBC has been battered by both Israel and Palestine with accusations of bias in reporting Palestinian aggression and agenda, and Israeli response and agenda as an example. Surely if both "sides" in a news situation are accusing a broadcaster of bias, that actually speaks to a lack of bias?
In addition, if a news source is let's say biased against creationism Vs evolution - well given the weight of evidence for evolution Vs the evidence of creation - can that news source be accused of bias? I don't believe so. Insert Global warming, vaccinations, Santa Claus etc in here.
I don't believe that the majority of main stream news is corrupt. Just because the 9 year olds who are being naughty want to make us believe that they didn't smash the vase doesn't mean that the facts arent stating otherwise.
Israel/Palestine has always been polarised, Puckoon, because Israel is a groupthink story.
Climate change is manipulated by people like the Kochs
the new news polarisation is a very different thing.
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 28, 2017, 02:16:25 PM
In my view now, too much news is not reporting, it is opinionating. And when you have opinions, you have subjectivity. Where you have subjectivity, you have scope for bias, intentional or otherwise.
Whatever happened to factual reporting?
Can you throw up a few examples?
Examples of Opinion, or examples of factual reporting?
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 28, 2017, 02:16:25 PM
In my view now, too much news is not reporting, it is opinionating. And when you have opinions, you have subjectivity. Where you have subjectivity, you have scope for bias, intentional or otherwise.
Whatever happened to factual reporting?
Answer :
Google, Facebook, Twitter disintermediated The Press without giving anything back?
I don't understand that post omochain. Are you saying if I google an incident for news, I will get unopinionated, factual reporting?
If so, then yes, I apologise for being over generalistic, but it's true that newspapers, especially, have become the modern day soap box, and all the opinions are presented in just the same way as the 'news'.
If you know what way each news organ leans, Fox, CNN, Independent N&M, the Guardian, Times etc, then you can apply your own filter. But look at tabloid newspapers, especially, and tell me they are reporting 'news'.
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 28, 2017, 02:40:11 PM
Examples of Opinion, or examples of factual reporting?
An example or 2 of what should be factual reporting but is opinion.
Is RTE news for example opinion ?
Quote from: seafoid on February 28, 2017, 03:21:31 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 28, 2017, 02:40:11 PM
Examples of Opinion, or examples of factual reporting?
An example or 2 of what should be factual reporting but is opinion.
Is RTE news for example opinion ?
A lot of times yes. RTE bring on people who suit their agenda. Witness the way they stitch up certain guests or politicians on 'news' or current affairs programs. If you don't tally with what RTE believe is right, you get the hostile interviews.
Look at the newspapers. Filled with opinion pieces dressed up as if they were news.
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 28, 2017, 03:24:03 PM
Quote from: seafoid on February 28, 2017, 03:21:31 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 28, 2017, 02:40:11 PM
Examples of Opinion, or examples of factual reporting?
An example or 2 of what should be factual reporting but is opinion.
Is RTE news for example opinion ?
A lot of times yes. RTE bring on people who suit their agenda. Witness the way they stitch up certain guests or politicians on 'news' or current affairs programs. If you don't tally with what RTE believe is right, you get the hostile interviews.
Look at the newspapers. Filled with opinion pieces dressed up as if they were news.
Most newspapers are divided into news, opinion, lifestyle and sport
Opinion takes a view on the news. But it's not the same.
Left and right wing voters' brains work differently. So opinion pieces will be different between the Telegraph and the Guardian.
But the news won't.
Pretty much all news is skewed seafoid. It may not be out and out opinion but will usually it will contain more facts from whatever argument it leans toward.
That's true. Maybe it's just me, and I'm so annoyed by opinion pieces that I couldn't be arsed looking for 'news'. I'm very skeptical of any link that involves someone, anyone, going off on a rant on what they think. And there seems to be just so much of that, particularly in the print media, but also on the news channels now. It's just hard work having your bullshit meter up all the time. And things like Facebook are worse. PEople see something written down, and they believe it. It drives me mad.
Also, even as news is being reported, depending on the bias of the news organ, the language will be different. Watch the way tabloids will use words like scum, 'terrorist', 'tax dodging' whatever to describe people. So even if they are reporting a news item, they slant their language in such a way as to try and influence how the reader receives the news.
Precisely az. The whole thing really has got quite bad.
The media made brexit happen, they pretty much put trump in and the list will go on for a long time with the crap that gets pushed these days.
Quote from: imtommygunn on February 28, 2017, 03:47:14 PM
Pretty much all news is skewed seafoid. It may not be out and out opinion but will usually it will contain more facts from whatever argument it leans toward.
There are many things that don't make it into the narrative. Everything is framed. But that doesn't mean it's fake. Or worthless.
QuoteAlso, even as news is being reported, depending on the bias of the news organ, the language will be different. Watch the way tabloids will use words like scum, 'terrorist', 'tax dodging' whatever to describe people. So even if they are reporting a news item, they slant their language in such a way as to try and influence how the reader receives the news.
Correct AZ - language is vital in this discussion. Normalization being the ultimate aim of the propogandists
Quote from: seafoid on February 28, 2017, 02:35:15 PM
Quote from: Puckoon on February 28, 2017, 01:40:21 PM
The search for impartiality in the news is a fruitless one. Not because it doesn't exist, but because there are so many topics in the world right now that are impossible to report or discuss without being accused of polarizing the conversation.
BBC has been battered by both Israel and Palestine with accusations of bias in reporting Palestinian aggression and agenda, and Israeli response and agenda as an example. Surely if both "sides" in a news situation are accusing a broadcaster of bias, that actually speaks to a lack of bias?
In addition, if a news source is let's say biased against creationism Vs evolution - well given the weight of evidence for evolution Vs the evidence of creation - can that news source be accused of bias? I don't believe so. Insert Global warming, vaccinations, Santa Claus etc in here.
I don't believe that the majority of main stream news is corrupt. Just because the 9 year olds who are being naughty want to make us believe that they didn't smash the vase doesn't mean that the facts arent stating otherwise.
Israel/Palestine has always been polarised, Puckoon, because Israel is a groupthink story.
Climate change is manipulated by people like the Kochs
the new news polarisation is a very different thing.
I disagree that it is very different. I just used an older and more documented example.
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 28, 2017, 03:19:06 PM
I don't understand that post omochain. Are you saying if I google an incident for news, I will get unopinionated, factual reporting?
If so, then yes, I apologise for being over generalistic, but it's true that newspapers, especially, have become the modern day soap box, and all the opinions are presented in just the same way as the 'news'.
If you know what way each news organ leans, Fox, CNN, Independent N&M, the Guardian, Times etc, then you can apply your own filter. But look at tabloid newspapers, especially, and tell me they are reporting 'news'.
OK , AZ. I will try to elaborate and I apologize in advance... elaborating comes hard to a lazy old man.
Before Google .. the Press/Media had all that advertising revenue coming in. (Google ads sucked that revenue stream dry). When it had money the press/media paid it back by funding robust intelligent investigative reporting that worked hard at keeping the "powers that be" honest. It still exists in the Press / Media but it is weaker now than ever because of the lack of funding and is drowned out by the bloviating in blogs and a lot of the cable news. Sure, there has always been opinion columns but they were in the back of the newspaper and the hard news reporting on the front page. Now cable news and the blogs are chasing ratings and clicks and they increase these by telling their audience what they want to hear so opinion "journalism" is now front page in new age journalism and the facts are hidden at the back of the bus.
Ah OK. I see what you mean. Yes I agree with you :)
Quote from: Puckoon on February 28, 2017, 04:12:35 PM
Quote from: seafoid on February 28, 2017, 02:35:15 PM
Quote from: Puckoon on February 28, 2017, 01:40:21 PM
The search for impartiality in the news is a fruitless one. Not because it doesn't exist, but because there are so many topics in the world right now that are impossible to report or discuss without being accused of polarizing the conversation.
BBC has been battered by both Israel and Palestine with accusations of bias in reporting Palestinian aggression and agenda, and Israeli response and agenda as an example. Surely if both "sides" in a news situation are accusing a broadcaster of bias, that actually speaks to a lack of bias?
In addition, if a news source is let's say biased against creationism Vs evolution - well given the weight of evidence for evolution Vs the evidence of creation - can that news source be accused of bias? I don't believe so. Insert Global warming, vaccinations, Santa Claus etc in here.
I don't believe that the majority of main stream news is corrupt. Just because the 9 year olds who are being naughty want to make us believe that they didn't smash the vase doesn't mean that the facts arent stating otherwise.
Israel/Palestine has always been polarised, Puckoon, because Israel is a groupthink story.
Climate change is manipulated by people like the Kochs
the new news polarisation is a very different thing.
I disagree that it is very different. I just used an older and more documented example.
Maybe it is different in the US
Quote from: omochain on February 28, 2017, 04:29:03 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 28, 2017, 03:19:06 PM
I don't understand that post omochain. Are you saying if I google an incident for news, I will get unopinionated, factual reporting?
If so, then yes, I apologise for being over generalistic, but it's true that newspapers, especially, have become the modern day soap box, and all the opinions are presented in just the same way as the 'news'.
If you know what way each news organ leans, Fox, CNN, Independent N&M, the Guardian, Times etc, then you can apply your own filter. But look at tabloid newspapers, especially, and tell me they are reporting 'news'.
OK , AZ. I will try to elaborate and I apologize in advance... elaborating comes hard to a lazy old man.
Before Google .. the Press/Media had all that advertising revenue coming in. (Google ads sucked that revenue stream dry). When it had money the press/media paid it back by funding robust intelligent investigative reporting that worked hard at keeping the "powers that be" honest. It still exists in the Press / Media but it is weaker now than ever because of the lack of funding and is drowned out by the bloviating in blogs and a lot of the cable news. Sure, there has always been opinion columns but they were in the back of the newspaper and the hard news reporting on the front page. Now cable news and the blogs are chasing ratings and clicks and they increase these by telling their audience what they want to hear so opinion "journalism" is now front page in new age journalism and the facts are hidden at the back of the bus.
Good analysis.
Thank you
Now if I could only get McGeeney to listen to me :'(
Quote from: omochain on February 28, 2017, 04:29:03 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 28, 2017, 03:19:06 PM
I don't understand that post omochain. Are you saying if I google an incident for news, I will get unopinionated, factual reporting?
If so, then yes, I apologise for being over generalistic, but it's true that newspapers, especially, have become the modern day soap box, and all the opinions are presented in just the same way as the 'news'.
If you know what way each news organ leans, Fox, CNN, Independent N&M, the Guardian, Times etc, then you can apply your own filter. But look at tabloid newspapers, especially, and tell me they are reporting 'news'.
OK , AZ. I will try to elaborate and I apologize in advance... elaborating comes hard to a lazy old man.
Before Google .. the Press/Media had all that advertising revenue coming in. (Google ads sucked that revenue stream dry). When it had money the press/media paid it back by funding robust intelligent investigative reporting that worked hard at keeping the "powers that be" honest. It still exists in the Press / Media but it is weaker now than ever because of the lack of funding and is drowned out by the bloviating in blogs and a lot of the cable news. Sure, there has always been opinion columns but they were in the back of the newspaper and the hard news reporting on the front page. Now cable news and the blogs are chasing ratings and clicks and they increase these by telling their audience what they want to hear so opinion "journalism" is now front page in new age journalism and the facts are hidden at the back of the bus.
The established media is and always has been owned by people like Rupert Murdoch and Denis O'Brien. Their only interest is in making money.
http://fermanaghherald.com/2014/04/local-outrage-as-the-sun-backs-fracking-campaign/ (http://fermanaghherald.com/2014/04/local-outrage-as-the-sun-backs-fracking-campaign/).
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2011/09/02/exclusive-regulator-says-murdoch-oil-shale-comp/183862 (http://mediamatters.org/blog/2011/09/02/exclusive-regulator-says-murdoch-oil-shale-comp/183862)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/phone-hacking/9098653/The-Blairs-and-the-Murdochs-a-special-relationship.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/phone-hacking/9098653/The-Blairs-and-the-Murdochs-a-special-relationship.html)
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/12/why-is-the-irish-government-scared-of-billionaire-denis-o-brien.html (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/12/why-is-the-irish-government-scared-of-billionaire-denis-o-brien.html)
Papers have self censorship and may not address issues entirely squarely but it is a long way from the Daily Sport or Weekly World news which is what Breitbart is equivalent to. Readers who want to go deeper into subjects can go for the Phoenix or Private Eye . Trump and Bannon are about lies.
Didn't know where else to post this:
https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/1005/910122-communicorp-outlaws-irish-times-journalists-on-radio/
Not sure what the article in question was but it seems like an extreme move to block journalists from an entire newspaper
Nick Robinson getting caught with manipulation back in the Scottish referendum debates;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_XhTALHQzI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_XhTALHQzI)
Tory Nick up to his work