Donald Trump and US politics
" No, not instead of. I'm not sure how much international news you read or are aware of, but places like Canada and the UK have state owned media in addition to public broadcasting + private, multinational, and foreign state media. In fact most places in the world are like this. But for some reason the US has no state media (aside from perhaps NASA TV?). It's a bit of a problem when your voters get all the mainstream news from billionaires, huge multinationals, and foreign governments. The public should have at least a few heavily self-interested news sources (where self = the general public of that country), whose mandate is to serve the nation. There are a variety of ways to do this. It doesn't necessarily imply "propaganda from who's ever in power at the time". You can control it via regulations, charters, acts, mandates, governance, etc. There's a lot of levers you can wiggle. Example: The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has a specific mandate (it's actually quite long) via the Broadcasting Act and is operated with the freedom to act independently from the current government. It has a board of directors responsible to parliament and a president appointed by the governor general. Sometimes they get accused of bias, but there are standards. The CBC president can (and has) commissioned studies to determine any bias, and complaints are investigated by the CBC ombudsman. BBC (UK state media) has a much shorter mandate, so I'll paste it here: the Corporation exists to serve the public interest and to promote its public purposes: sustaining citizenship and civil society, promoting education and learning, stimulating creativity and cultural excellence, representing the UK, its nations, regions and communities, bringing the UK to the world and the world to the UK, helping to deliver to the public the benefit of emerging communications technologies and services, and taking a leading role in the switchover to digital television. Meanwhile in US land major news companies can have a mission statement or motto that says anything but there's no mandate enforceable by law. Ultimately they do whatever the owners want (which recently seems to be the opposite of promoting civil society). Jeff Bezos' Washington Post, Carlos Slim's New York Times, and all the media companies owned by CBS, Time Warner, Viacom, Disney, News Corp, GE, etc, have zero obligation to serve public interest. Never underestimate what the mod community can do for PoE if you sell an offline client.
|
|
|
State media is not much different from corporate media, nowadays. They are the regime mouthpiece, not necessarily serving the public interest. State media is used to cover up government failures and to "prep" the population into certain political beliefs.
Eg. the state media in Germany, Sweden, etc. is doing everything to NOT inform people about the realities on the ground, regarding the recent islamist invasion. The political powers know they fucked up and don't want facts to hurt their parties too much in the next elections. You won't get balanced reporting from state media in such countries. Corporate and state media are two sides of the same coin. Both are highly biased - one is influenced by private money, the other by politicians. The government is a corporation too, it just doesn't deal with money, but "political money". When night falls
She cloaks the world In impenetrable darkness |
|
" You must've missed the other 200-page thread. |
|
" I fully understand what they are and i trust both the BBC and CBC news more then anything in the US. The problem is Trump banned BBC news but will trust fox, breitbart or wall street journal. Hell he thinks info wars is a credible site. Neither side wants real news because they would see how shitty both parties are. |
|
|
Well the BBC is serving UK interest, not US interest. A president barring certain foreign state media from a white house briefing is fine. It's not like he's banning them from operating in the US, like some other countries do to foreign state media.
News is not something that should be exclusively governed by capitalism. Competition for profit and viewers doesn't constrain billionaire owners who are fine with operating the media outlet at a loss, so long as it serves their own agenda. There's no invisible hand achieving the best for your people from news owned by foreign governments or multinationals who have little stake in the success of your people. I wouldn't want only state news though. A mix of everything is best. Never underestimate what the mod community can do for PoE if you sell an offline client.
|
|
" But i like Big Black Cock! |
|
" The important question isn't whether Trump can ban BBC and CBC but would you ban fox news, breitbart or info wars? |
|
" I would let all the major networks in both right and left. When you become president usually half the country doesn't like you. Suck it up and deal with it. The actions of the president are far more important compared to what any one individual thinks. So thats not really the important question. |
|
|
generally when I watch bbc news I end up wanting to shout at my tv at the ridiculously slanted propaganda bullshit that flows out of every diseased orifice of that shitbag news station.
but then you catch a few mins of american news here and there and realise theres an entire other level of idiocy out there thats hard to imagine is even possible to show to human beings. It not only brings a new definition to ridiculously bias, its stunningly stupid, you couldnt even picture an ill educated 12 year old buying some of that crap. I would like to say its enough to restore my faith in bbc news... but its not, fuck bbc news, id wouldnt give it much more credibility than stuff like info wars. Its completely agenda driven propaganda delivered by a brainwashed bunch of echo boxes, its just not offensively moronic like a lot of american news. Its good for straight up face value facts, George Michael died, theres been a tsunami in japan, jk rowling has a new book coming out, cool, I found out some things that are going on in the world. But ultimately its a news station that facilitated the public consent/acceptance for wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria to be waged in a complete vacuum of facts and reality, and is presented to you by people who even now cant see those things for what they were because they are that brainwashed. Its frankly terrifying. I love all you people on the forums, we can disagree but still be friends and respect each other :)
|
|
" But it is, I would control the media like a tyrant. *Sinister laugh* |
|
