What is your opinion of the news media?

by minimus 491 Replies latest social current

  • bohm
    bohm

    Simon: That is a critique of Obama that I can agree with.

    It is kind of difficult. After 9/11 Afghanistan had to go, but then Iraq also got invaded. I happen to think that a very good case could be made for invading Iraq in 2003 (not involving WMDs), but the instability showed just how unpredictable the removal of a cruel regime could be.

    Then came the Arab Spring, Libya collapses, Syria is not looking good and using WMDs in the battlefield and what do you do?

    Looking at what happened, harsher action against ISIS early on would IMO have been a good idea (though ISIS was still fairly fringe at the beginning of the conflict), but from what I can read Pentagon did not have a clear idea about what would happen if you supported some given faction in the conflict (rebels or Assad).

  • littlerockguy
    littlerockguy

    The media was the public relations arm to the Obama administration and everybody knows it.

    For decades the media, even though media heads attended them, never mentioned the existence the Bilderberg meetings with powerful movers and shakes of the world, rulers of other countries, media heads, government elites and powerful corporate CEOS. If the media's job was to keep the public informed why did they fail so miserably in this aspect. Who are they really working for.

    LRG

  • Simon
    Simon
    After 9/11 Afghanistan had to go

    Nope, because they didn't do it.

    but then Iraq also got invaded.

    Even worse.

    I happen to think that a very good case could be made for invading Iraq in 2003 (not involving WMDs), but the instability showed just how unpredictable the removal of a cruel regime could be.

    It was never a good idea and there was never a good case for it (I said so at the time) but especially with zero "aftermath" planning.

    Then came the Arab Spring, Libya collapses, Syria is not looking good and using WMDs in the battlefield and what do you do?

    Clinton + Obama made Libya collapse and allowed the weapons to be taken, now used in Syria. Weapons that Clinton + Obama delivered.

    Looking at what happened, harsher action against ISIS early on would IMO have been a good idea (though ISIS was still fairly fringe at the beginning of the conflict), but from what I can read Pentagon did not have a clear idea about what would happen if you supported some given faction in the conflict (rebels or Assad).

    So based on what we know now ... should we be allowing these groups to enter freely? to extend their influence in the west? To teach their hate in local mosques and madrasa's? To march our streets, wave their flags and chant their stupid jihad call to arms?

    Why can't we learn something for once and make some simple, sensible choices? Instead of having to wait until everything goes to shit and then try and make up for it be endlessly bombing and drone-striking ...

  • kpop
    kpop

    Very good point littlerockguy. What everyone needs to ask is why Obama repealed the Smith-Mundt act of 1948? Well the reason should be obvious because the Smith-Mundt act was also known as the anit-Propaganda act which prevented the media from becoming the arm of the government as what happened in Nazi Germany with Goebells. We see what happened in the USA because Obama used the media as the arm to try and get Hillary elected which is why he repealed it in 2013. So when people talk about the USA government turning into a big Banana Republic under Obama, they are right.

  • freemindfade
    freemindfade

    Anyone that denies that CNN became the extreme arm of the Clinton, Inc is not in touch with reality.

  • bohm
    bohm

    Simon:

    Re. the travel thing with Trump.

    A problem with the media is IMO that they run in news cycles where a few stories are "selected" and then dominate. Usually, these are "easy" stories that are quick to explain and relate to & does not require sending journalists to expensive places: "Trump promised not to go on vacation, is now on his third vacation" is one such story; you got pictures of Trump playing golf, Obama playing golf and every random pundit is an expert.

    These "holiday" stories WAS a feature of the Obama presidency in his first term, I can remember that and you can find them if you google... Trump has a ton of angry tweets about it where he promises not to play golf if he is president. Bush, for his part, also got flack because he happened to be more often on "holiday" than Clinton or something

    I don't know if there is a media study somewhere comparing how many such stories there was to Bush, Obama and Trump (it is likely too early), but IMO it is just what we can expect. Trump made it a bit harder for himself because his "holiday" stories also contain the angle he promised not to play golf (and here he is...), where he playes golf (at his own private club, thereby earning himself money), that he (so far) has a relatively high-security budget bc of Melania and the many travels and his son rammed up a 90'000 hotel bill on a promotional tour for a Trump hotel. <--- each of these add extra spice and give a pundit something extra to talk about.

    I don't know if we can agree on these conclusions:

    Every president has some "he travels too much" stories

    + Trumps stories have extra glitter (Extra cost, Eric Trumps promotional tour, on private resort earning Trump org. money, promised not to play golf)

    = Trump will get more stories than usual.

    IMO this is actually good news for Trump since these travel stories are going to be forgotten in 3 months.

  • LoveUniHateExams
    LoveUniHateExams

    I don't understand the question. You are asking if the first round of sanctions (begun early march) failed to stop the Russian annexation (begun February and planned long before that)? - no, I never mentioned anything specifically about sanctions. My point was that Obama and NATO obviously didn't want Putin to annex Crimea but Obama and NATO were completely powerless in that situation because Putin wanted Crimea and he got it.

    Since someone said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, perhaps a change in the way the US deals with Russia is in order? Just a thought.

  • Spoletta
    Spoletta

    You people are ignoring the fact that during his eight years in office, Obama faced a constant barrage of unfavorable commentary from right wing media, along with fact based complaints from the MSM. You yourselves provide a litany of information on how bad Obama was. Did it come to you in a dream? Obviously you rely on some source for your information. You choose to believe what fits your world view, and disparage the rest.

    I just watched a segment on coal country presented by PBS. A young man with only a high school education, was sitting in his trailer with two infant children, smoking a cigarette, hadn't worked for a long time. On public assistance and ACA and convinced that Trump was going to give him a well paying job. No spin on the story, just facts. He was white. I guarantee that if he had been black, and in the inner city, Fox would have skewered him as a leech, and many of you would have wholeheartedly agreed. And please don't deny it (note, I said some, not all).

    It's simply a bald faced lie that Trump is being treated unfairly. He is getting the coverage he has earned.

    The more fact based reporting exposes the lies of anyone, the better off we are.

    I have principles, and they include the belief that you don't trust a liar. Obama and Clinton have absolutely nothing to do with what's going on now. If you think we are in a mess now because of Obama, you can't criticize him without placing as much blame on Bush, which I see none of the Republicans acknowledging.

    Simon, you present yourself as a dispassionate observer of facts that prove your point. The truth is, you're just as opinionated as the rest of us. It's just that you're a master of turning around whatever is said to you. You are a superb debater, and I say that as a compliment.

    I find many on this site that seem to share my viewpoint. I'll have to be satisfied with that. And that's a fact.

  • bohm
    bohm

    Simon: Well, I disagree with you on Afghanistan because at the time this was where Bin Laden was located and Al Queda had it's headquartered. They even got a choice: Hand over Bin Laden or face the consequences. They choose the consequences.

    I must admit I didn't study the Libya conflict closely, so I am not very familiar with the story. From what I know, the story is about how weapons for Libyan rebels made it to Syria?

    Can we agree that getting rid of Ghadaffi was a good thing?

    Re. ISIS, no, I support vetting of refugees and very harsh punishment for western sympathizers who travel to Syria. I think per default a person who travel to Syria understands he will participate in warcrimes and crimes against humanity and his prison sentence should reflect that.

    As I understand the situation, there is little evidence ISIS is sending terrorists to the west to perform acts of terror, because ISIS is still focused on the Kaliphat (I might be wrong). If you got evidence to the contrary I would be interested in seeing it. (I did my reading on ISIS 6 months - 1 year ago and things might have changed).

  • freemindfade
    freemindfade

    I have a question, take anything or everything Trump has done and is doing, if Hillary had won and was doing the exact same things, would the news be dominated top to bottom with MSM complaining about her existence?

    If the MSM is unbiased the answer should be, Yes, but we all know that is not true.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit