T Nation

Info Wars "Deplatformed" What Say Ye?


#41

That wasn’t you first? Mr. America is a republic not a democracy.

That is an answer looking for a question.


#42

This has gotten downright funny! That bit back there about journalistic integrity! Hahhaaaaaa wow!

I haven’t heard much edification of the All Mighty 4th Estate since oh, maybe election night 2016, and that awkward morning after.


#43

That’s a fantastic vision for society. Do you have any ideas for how the news should be vetted for the next few generations while we wait for your utopia to take shape? In other words, how do we suffer all of those foolish peons who currently get to choose their sources of information AND cast their votes?

What do you think should be done?


#44

When there were only 3 players in national news. If it wasn’t CBS, NBC, or ABC, it didn’t exist outside of the short reach of television broadcasting technology of the time.


#45

Are people from CNN, Fox News actual journalist? They spread conspiracy theories and lie to the public all the time.


#46

Lol, that’s unreal. I will say, the only time I listened to him was on Joe Rogan’s podcast and he blew my mind. AJ would make a kind of far out comment and Joe would be like, " whoa, whoa whoa, you can’t just say that and move on." He would basically fact check him and AJ was right quite often and his memory was unreal. .

Besides that podcast, I don’t really care for his kind of “news.”


#47

You’re right in the desire for integrity to be the prime focus of news, but unfortunately, that’s not how the business of journalism works, to the detriment of everyone on earth except those who own the media.

I have a bachelor’s in print journalism and my education was based on the recent, traditional model of attempting to limit bias and give balanced coverage to all major sides (my main professor was an older gentleman who had stellar journalistic ethics and, I believe, was committed to honest reporting.)

In my journalism education, I got a peek behind the curtain. I believe I can honestly say that mass communication and mass media are used as propaganda and perception shaping. While we know corrupt governments propagandize, it’s hard for many Americans to acknowledge our government and, just as importantly, private corporations are heavily involved in perception shaping.

To whit: only SIX corporations own more than 90 percent of all the world’s media sources - websites, TV stations, ad agencies, newspapers, etc. Those six corporations decide what the earth’s population becomes informed about. They also decide what we DON’T learn about. They decide the slant and tone of their coverage, they decide the presentation timing and order; in short, because corporations bought up nearly all media outlets, they have a near-monopoly on what we peasants know and, if they have their way, what we think about and thus what we choose to do. While that might sound extreme, I’m honestly not overstating the case; we can only take actions based on what we know. Of this, those who own the corporate-run media are very well aware.


#48

By definition, what I described is not utopian.

Reform public education. I would bet even you would not think that emphasizing civics more would be utopian.


#49

The thing is, Jones and others do not actually go out and gather much news. What we have are a lot of commentators and aggregates. It costs money to send a news team to the Middle East. Some dude with a pod cast is not doing that.


#50

Nice to see you posting here Alex.


#51

At the same time, we want it that way. Just look at reality shows, they are scripted and edited but people watch them as though it’s a documentary. People prefer a simple narrative (reality shows follow a simple narrative) because the real world is more complex and somehow less believable than fiction. People watch news analysts to get a nice explanation for things and they never ask, “wow, why is it I agree with everything this person is telling me?”


#52

“What we have are a lot of commentators and aggregates. It costs money to send a news team to the Middle East. Some dude with a pod cast is not doing that.”

That’s a good point. MUCH of what’s now believed to be journalism is opinion.

Journalism used to broadly be categorized as reporting or opinion (editorial.) The line’s become blurred, causing many people to believe that commentary - telling one’s opinion about events - is journalism. Uh no, no it’s not. Reporting what’s going on is the heart of journalism. As you said, that requires money, and too little of it happens.


#53

Want to hear something even scarier? News shows like the MacNeil/Lehrer News Hour are COMPLETELY SCRIPTED and REHEARSED. Yes, for real. Those three trusted journalists are actors. They rehearse their supposed stance on each story the day before shooting, practicing not only their lines but the emotions, intonations, and emotional reactions they’ll appear to have to each other. Everything from seeming compassion to disagreement with each other’s opinions is complete acting.


#54

I haven’t watched that in years. Isn’t one dead?

I think the news learned from Geraldo Rivera and the Capone vault.


#55

I’ve not kept up with that show either. It’s the example whereby I learned the falsity of trusted news shows and journalists.


#56

Keeping up with the Joneses.


#57

Except I reckon we can’t do that any more on mainstream media.

By the way, to the original post, I think the private corporations are attacking speech with which they disagree, setting a very dangerous precedent. Nazi Germany began by taking over media and deciding who was allowed a public voice.

Yes, this is seemingly different because private corporations at one time were distinct from the government. However, with unlimited campaign contributions becoming federal law thanks to SCOTUS decisions, the lines between private corporations, the policies they want implemented, and the politicians they fund are very, very faint.


#58

I don’t think anyone has mentioned the biggest issue here. Youtube, facebook, etc. claim to be a neutral platform to prevent being legally liable for content. Like how if a terrorist uses a phone to plan a bombing, you can’t sue the phone company. They don’t regulate content. Up to this point all these big social media companies have claimed the same thing. But it is increasingly clear that they aren’t neutral. If they go down the path of pushing and restricting very particular content, eventually they become content providers and legally responsible. I think the big question is at what point can they no longer hide behind the neutral platform claim for legal liability?


#59

Jones is being sued by some of the Sandy Hook families. Maybe these sites are being preemptive.

Can they hide behind it now? Have they been tested by someone who can afford the legal team to go against them?


#60

They’ve been regulating content for years and years.

Probably since their inceptions, or close to it