huskerfan2000
Banned
No, I didn't. I was commenting on a specific portion of the post. Posters do this all the time, you are not new to this, so why the act now?
Let's talk about Islamophobia
- Thread starter zoogs
- Start date
BigRedBuster
Active member
Cause the original comment about ARs post included the comment about the polls as though he though there was some type of dictatorship in the US that is banning people from expressing their opinions in polls.
huskerfan2000
Banned
A fair amount, but I'm not an expert. For one thing, though, the nazis eliminated freedom of the press and took control of all modes of communication, censoring any message that wasn't in line with their propaganda.
No one in the US has done that, establishment or otherwise, except maybe Trump.
huskerfan2000
Banned
Funny, because I only hear good things about Obama and Hillary in the mainstream media, with constant attacks on Trump. The mainstream is all about telling people who to vote for!
As long as there's a non-mainstream media, which you probably think is Fox or Breibart, then it's silly to compare the "establishment" to the Nazis.
My sense is you don't read or listen to much media, though, if you believe no one else says bad things about Obama and Hillary.
Last edited by a moderator:
huskerfan2000
Banned
Ok this is getting rather boring, and I don't want to get a vacation again for responding to too many posts (yes that happened).
yes, I know some sites say bad things about those two, but I would bet money a large portions of Americans usually watch one of the 3 major networks for news.
EDIT: This seems to agree with what I said..
http://www.tvinsider.com/article/62572/most-watched-tv-networks-2015/
Last edited by a moderator:
Mierin
Donor
It doesn't back up or contradict what you said. This is viewership, not news watching. Do people still go to ABC, NBC, and CBS in high numbers for news? Back when I still had TV I watched CNN. I never watched those channels unless I wanted the Omaha news.
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRedBuster
Active member
I don't expect my news outlet's to specifically say "good" or "bad" things about anyone. I want them to tell me the news.
The problem with so many Americans is that they don't think they are getting the "correct" information unless some dude or dudette is ranting on TV about how XYZ politician is destroying America.
It's a severe problem when so many people in the "media" make millions of dollars doing absolutely nothing other than figure out more and more ways to make you mad. The madder you are, the more money they make.
Last edited by a moderator:
zoogs
New member
There is plenty of mainstream criticism of Obama -- and Hillary -- and Bernie. If you aren't familiar with them, you haven't been looking. I think subscribers to the idea of a mainstream media poltergeist don't really want to look, either. That would contradict their worldview subscription that holds that fringe ideas and fringe candidates are being suppressed for being right, rather than for being terrible.
It's stunning that there so many pro-Trump outlets, really. But it's a free country.
It's stunning that there so many pro-Trump outlets, really. But it's a free country.
Danny Bateman
Donor
I can't really think of too many. Certainly Breitbart sold their soul to him. But outside of that? Fox News, maybe? They resisted him for a long time with the Megan Kelly spat. Outside of that, it's mostly just anti-Hillary stuff in the right wing zeitgeist, not necessarily pro-Trump. The fact that he and his supporters are now ubiquitous on social media inflates this perception of "pro-Trump."
I think a broader indictment of the media at large was trying to cover Trump's more outrageous moments in a way akin to "How does this affect the race? Does this help or hurt him? What was the thinking or strategy that went into this?" This legitimized what he said, and normalized the current iteration of Trump.
In my opinion, they should've called a spade a spade and excoriated him for moment's like mocking the disabled and "Mexicans are rapists and murderers." You've start to see them not let him off the hook since locking up the nomination, with Curiel and the Star of David thing. This is good. The media should be both objective and critical of candidates if the situation calls for it.
Clinton is getting pummeled in the media today, rightfully so. The same should've been the case for Trump from the beginning.
Landlord
Banned
You can't be expected to be taken seriously with comments like this, especially when half of the programming content on Fox News is just constant criticism of democrat party leaders.
huskerfan2000
Banned
I don't consider Fox to be mainstream.. I consider ABC, NBC and CBS to be mainstream. That might not be what others consider to be mainstream, but that is what I consider mainstream. I am older and remember when that was the only channels available.
Fox, I would bet comes in after those 3.. same with CNN, MSNBC and the others. I would also bet one of those 3 stations above have to most watched evening news.
EDIT: and I don't care what you take serious!
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRedBuster
Active member
I get so sick of the "main stream media" constant comments.
Anymore, Fox is a "main stream media". The only reason people don't include them is because they are the ones that came up with the idiotic term in the first place (marketing) to buffalo people into thinking THEY are telling the truth and those people over there aren't because they are "main stream media".
BS.....
Anymore, Fox is a "main stream media". The only reason people don't include them is because they are the ones that came up with the idiotic term in the first place (marketing) to buffalo people into thinking THEY are telling the truth and those people over there aren't because they are "main stream media".
BS.....
Last edited by a moderator: