Yes, there should be something similar to laws in the UK that have standards for non-biased report.
The problem is that it's impossible to pull off in the U.S. without people claiming their free speech is being violated. A station known for propaganda will raise hell to prevent standards from being adopted, as will their supporters. Also, factual reporting doesn't make money, sensationalism does; so rich business owners would use their influence in government to allow for sensationalism to continue, whether they care about current events or not.
I agree that anyone claiming to be a news outlet should be held to the standards of just reporting news in an unbiased way. You can still have separate outlets that discuss news, as long as they don't call themselves a news outlet.
@vivify saidHow bout Twitter suspending Kanye West for being an anti-semite? It is a huge question , raising its ugly head again. It is speech, freely stated in the land of the Free, which takes it place as Numero Uno in the Constitution . Well, should he be free to speak it or not? This is not an obvious Fire! in a crowded theater scenario.
Yes, there should be something similar to laws in the UK that have standards for non-biased report.
The problem is that it's impossible to pull off in the U.S. without people claiming their free speech is being violated. A station known for propaganda will raise hell to prevent standards from being adopted, as will their supporters. Also, factual reporting doesn't make m ...[text shortened]... still have separate outlets that discuss news, as long as they don't call themselves a news outlet.
09 Oct 22
@averagejoe1 saidHow many times do you need free speech explained? Free speech prevents the government from punishing the expression of ideas, not Twitter.
How bout Twitter suspending Kanye West for being an anti-semite? It is a huge question , raising its ugly head again. It is speech, freely stated in the land of the Free, which takes it place as Numero Uno in the Constitution . Well, should he be free to speak it or not? This is not an obvious Fire! in a crowded theater scenario.
09 Oct 22
@jj-adams saidNo, no standards, that's a cover for censorship. Much better would be decoupling the media from the state. In the UK you have the BBC, in Aus the ABC, in NZ we're in a bad way with the state meddling. The NZhorsefacekuntprimeminister gave 50 000 000 to the media at the beginning of the CV drama, how does that effect 'standards'. And that's the tip of the iceberg, media has been receiving millions ever since for the goobermint PSAs, how does that effect 'standards'.
Mass media never really has been held to one, but don't you think it's time that news sources were required to just state the facts without adding their two cents on which way to go?
09 Oct 22
@jj-adams saidMass media and news are not the same thing. I assume by news you refer to CNN, Fox, MSNBC and the like. While they claim to report news, they are not legally defined as news.
Mass media never really has been held to one, but don't you think it's time that news sources were required to just state the facts without adding their two cents on which way to go?
They DO get called out on it occasionally, and taken to court. But the problem there is that the "news" programs make the argument in front of judges and juries that they are not news at all, but instead they are entertainment and no reasonable person would take them seriously.
Local news and your local news paper are the answer. Please support them. Buy a subscription. Limit news intake to sources that do not exclusively rely on advertising and click-bait in order to make money. Those websites are not news.
10 Oct 22
@jj-adams saidDo you mean like the news media calling the referendum vote in Ukraine provinces a sham instead of an alleged sham? You know it is propaganda when opinions are stated as facts.
Mass media never really has been held to one, but don't you think it's time that news sources were required to just state the facts without adding their two cents on which way to go?
@metal-brain saidIt was a sham, as I explained to you in another thread. Nothing alleged about it.
Do you mean like the news media calling the referendum vote in Ukraine provinces a sham instead of an alleged sham? You know it is propaganda when opinions are stated as facts.
10 Oct 22
@averagejoe1 saidKanye Wesr was surey banned because he’s a stupid fukking kunt. Nothing to do with Semitism at all.
How bout Twitter suspending Kanye West for being an anti-semite? It is a huge question , raising its ugly head again. It is speech, freely stated in the land of the Free, which takes it place as Numero Uno in the Constitution . Well, should he be free to speak it or not? This is not an obvious Fire! in a crowded theater scenario.
Well, that’s why I’d have him dragged out and shot anyways.
On the larger issue. You have no idea what “free speech” is about.
You think it’s the right to say anything, anytime you want.
It is not. It’s about being able to criticise the government without persecution.
10 Oct 22
@shavixmir saidYou didn't provide any proof. You just said that kind of majority vote was impossible. That is an allegation without evidence. Is your news media going to go there and ask the people in those breakaway provinces how they voted and why? For example, not all people in those breakaway provinces are ethnic Russians. Why don't they ask Ukrainians who are not ethnic Russians how they voted and why? Is the propaganda news media afraid they will answer something like "we need stability and an end to this chaos so it just made sense to accept the occupation"?
It was a sham, as I explained to you in another thread. Nothing alleged about it.
Maybe they will say they didn't vote to become a Russian province, but until someone goes there to ask you have no proof it was a sham. There were international observers of that vote so the west is calling those international observers corrupt, yet they don't provide a list of the names of those international observers. They just cherry pick a few that may be biased and ignore the others as if that is proof.
@metal-brain saidWe did see the soldiers going door to door with the election forms and 98% in any election is always a lie but when it claims you’ve agreed to hand your country over to a regime like Putin’s it’s a ridiculous whopping dumbass lie.
You didn't provide any proof. You just said that kind of majority vote was impossible. That is an allegation without evidence. Is your news media going to go there and ask the people in those breakaway provinces how they voted and why? For example, not all people in those breakaway provinces are ethnic Russians. Why don't they ask Ukrainians who are not ethnic Russians ho ...[text shortened]... observers. They just cherry pick a few that may be biased and ignore the others as if that is proof.
You halfwit, he knows we know he’s lying and he knows we know he knows we know, it’s another of his sick little steroid fuelled jokes.
