Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 134
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    38,626

    news vs propaganda

    So I wanted to start a somewhat open thread on news and propaganda. I had opened up a thread about this north korean video and their take on u.s. politics and policy, and just western society in general, and it was just amazing to see how people so easily could identify it as propoganda (even tho everything they said was technically true), yet they for some reason have a hard time identifying these very same tactics used by our mass media machine. Not really trying to go in any specific direction, but just want to see people's opinions on this topic, or even any offshoot of this topic.

    This is a link of the north korean video I had posted. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGxbOVscHPs

    How do you differentiate between news and propaganda? At what point is news propaganda?

    Also, did you guys know we used to have an actual propaganda committee as a part of our gov't, but since propaganda developed such a negative connotation they then changed its name to "public relations." Also, there are particular industries designed to create and sell wars to the public of the u.s., such as rand corp (in the past), and people like Edward Bernaisse.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    100,639
    News is a form of communication aimed at educating the public and allowing them to make up their own opinion, no matter what that opinion ultimately is.

    Propaganda is a form of communication aimed at reprogramming the mind and (usually) un-educating the public and influencing them to form an opinion of the person presenting.

    Propaganda is not necessarily a bad thing, as you pointed out many companies have "propaganda" departments in order to get people to choice a Ford or a Chevy. The problem with them, and why they gained such notoriety, is because they were used to convince people to do things that were not only counter to their own good but to the good of others.

    Ceteris paribus, propaganda is harmless because people can make up their own minds but if it is drilled into people's minds enough things that are not true can be construed as facts in anyone's mind.
    Let's get embedded tweets working again!

    https://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sh...5#post33780085

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    38,626
    nice post. Good point about companies using it as a selling technique. I guess the problem lies in "when is that line crossed"

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    7,964
    outstanding.

    I often take umbridge with this tactic in advertising in general.many products now appeal to negative emotions to punish consaumers for non compliance.
    look at the outdated phone you have...YOU SUCK!,Your frineds and kids are embarrassed to be seen with you!.
    Look at your jacked up grill!!! no wonder your unhappy! youd have a better job, a better girl a better life if youd just give us 7000 to put caps across those disgusting things, you should be ashamed of yourself!
    I mean come on,its offensive to me the depths that weve sunk to top try to get a message across or sell a product.

    In regards to news, ill run through this once more. The MSM exists and always has based on veiwership and revenue from sponsors. the idea that they are LEFT leaning is silly.They followed stories that had the potential to generate sales.
    they did not focus on RT ideological stories becasue they were ratings losers.people are interested in things that touch thier lives.stories of general Rt philosophy are narrow in scope as the entire ideology is focused on individual responsibility and as such tends to have a more limited range of appeal.conversely left leaning stories are ones of populism,of things that affect a majority of voters.telling the story of how bank of America was caught with their hand in the cookie jar is going to attract every person who does buisness with B of A and there are a whole lot of them. Conservative and R law makers were just caught in the tide of scandal more often becasue as we all know Rs are more closely tied to big buisness issues. IT WAS NOT PERSONAL AND THERE WAS NO AGENDA OTHER THEN SELLING COMMERCIALS.

    Then along comes rupert murdoch and he with great skill saw a niche that wasnt being serviced in the far RT ideological constituency, the problem was that stories that were non partisan diluted his ability to increasse and maintain a share of the market, so to galvanize people in defense of their efforts they concotted the whole lame stream ,left leaning,pinko, commie, socilaist,liberal news empire trying to "sell" a view of amercia, which ironically is what THEY DO ALL DAY, just on the other side of things.
    NBC,ABC,CNN,CBS all are reputable and honest news agencies and always have been.the notion that they are biased is absurd.they may have a "leaning" but that 'leaning" doesnt prevent them from honest reporting of events, and it certainly doesnt give way to the stream of nonsense conjecture, speculation, rumor mongering and flat out lies that fox news does as a standard buissness practice.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    10,400
    So all the media, except FOX, is unbiased. Fox is totally biased against the Democrats.

    Some of the media may, not does, but may, may mind you, just remotely possibly may have a tendency to lean to the left; but Fox totally and unquestionably is right leaning make no mistake about it.

    Got it. It is so clear to me now.

    Now if someone can explain why Rush, Hannity, Beck have so many listeners and Air America was a total failure, my re-education will be complete.

    Anyone have any graphs, charts, studies, papers whatever on a president's approval rating during the months immediately after re-election and the month of his inauguration? I wonder if those approval ratings are abnormally high. Hmmmm. Food for thought.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    7,964
    Quote Originally Posted by jomota View Post
    So all the media, except FOX, is unbiased. Fox is totally biased against the Democrats.

    Some of the media may, not does, but may, may mind you, just remotely possibly may have a tendency to lean to the left; but Fox totally and unquestionably is right leaning make no mistake about it.

    Got it. It is so clear to me now.

    Now if someone can explain why Rush, Hannity, Beck have so many listeners and Air America was a total failure, my re-education will be complete.

    Anyone have any graphs, charts, studies, papers whatever on a president's approval rating during the months immediately after re-election and the month of his inauguration? I wonder if those approval ratings are abnormally high. Hmmmm. Food for thought.
    I can understand how upsetting that idea might seem to you but Im afraid it is 100% acurate.i watch fox news daily.there isnt a story they air that somehow doesnt end with how it is all Obamas fault.literally, they start out discussing something that is going on and by the end of the piece theyve tied it back to the demopcrats.EVERY.SINGLE.STORY.its kinda funny,but on another level its scary.

    Rush,hannity and beck.....listeners...? compared to what bro? radio disney?

    heres an article that might clarify that vast audience of which you speak


    How many listeners does Rush Limbaugh have? Well, in the press there are only two numbers you'll ever see -- 20 million or 15 million. Those are large numbers, so that is why Limbaugh is taken seriously and is believed to be influential.

    I've got news for you -- those numbers are a total fabrication. They're made up out of whole cloth. You want to know where the 20 million number came from? It was first printed in Billboard magazine back in 1993. Here is the quote:

    "Limbaugh's show is now heard on 610 stations and reaches approximately 20 million listeners, according to [Kit] Carson."

    So who is Kit Carson? A guy known as Rush Limbaugh's "chief of staff." In other words, Rush's team simply made up the 20 million number and everyone believed it. He has never, ever presented any evidence to that effect.

    The 15 million number comes from Michael Harrison of Talkers magazine. He is considered the leading expert on the talk radio industry. He is a good man and fights hard for his industry. You want to know where he came up with the number? Pretty much pulled it out of the sky. When Tommy Christopher of AOL News (at the time, he is now with Mediate) asked him how he arrived at the figure, here is what Harrison said:

    They are only our thumbnail estimates based upon our contacts in the field, tracking of Arbitron estimates and understanding of the business. We make no claims as to "scientific" accuracy... [T]hey are not "ratings" per se.

    I love that -- they are not ratings, per se. In other words, those are not his ratings at all! Harrison might have well said, "We took blind guesses and added 5 million, divided by four, multiplied by 12 and then sprinkled some fairy dust on it."

    There are no national numbers for Rush's radio audience.

    And it gets worse. Until 2007 radio had the worst rating system ever invented. I know, I worked in the industry, and we all knew the numbers were total nonsense. They measured ratings by giving people "diaries." They would keep these diaries for three months and all along they were supposed to be recording what they listened to on the radio every fifteen minutes. What a joke. Most people would fill out the diary at the end and scribble down what they thought they remembered.

    So, under that system, big names do much better. You might not remember that you were listening to DJ Ralph McClusky on 106.7FM, but everyone remembered Howard and Rush. The bigger your name (and hype), the more people wrote you down whether they actually listened to you or not. They also wrote down they listened to you more often -- another huge advantage. And does anyone believe that people actually remembered what they were listening to at 2:15PM two and a half months ago?

    Then in 2007, radio started switching over to something called Portable People Meters. This did not rely on human memory. It's a device that picks up the radio signal wherever you are and records the station you're actually listening to. So, what happened? It turns out people were listening to a lot more music than they realized and a lot less talk. So, the sports stations, the hot talk and the conservative talk stations were all hurt.

    Last year, Crain's New York Business reported that Rush Limbaugh's ratings were down 33 percent. The portable people meters have been expanding to different markets throughout these years (they didn't just replace all of the diaries instantly in 2007, it's taken a while). So, it's unclear how much Rush was hurt by the more accurate readings last year and how much people just stopped listening to him.

    But one thing is for sure -- he's hurt, dog! That's why we see the unprecedented apology from him on Sandra Fluke. When this controversy first broke, I predicted on our show that more advertisers would drop him (at the time, only two had). Advertisers are much more likely to drop a controversial guy if his numbers are already down. They'll ride it out if he's still delivering the goods. This is the same thing that happened to Imus. His ratings were miserable already, so advertisers didn't have enough incentive to stick with him when trouble arose.

    So, Rush is in big trouble now as more and more advertisers peel off. He's in a tail spin. Why else would you triple down on the "****" comments from Wednesday to Friday and then issue an apology on Saturday? He has over-reached (in his offensive comments) and undelivered (in his ratings). That's a lethal combo.

    But Rush can easily prove me wrong. So, I'm issuing a challenge to him -- show us your ratings. He won't do it because he's embarrassed by them. He has never produced evidence of his ratings and he certainly won't do it now. In fact, I'll make a Mitt Romney like wager. I'll give him $10,000 if he can show us his 20 million listeners.

    He claims that 20 million is daily listeners, so that'll be the standard we use. I laugh and laugh as I write that down. Some articles write it is a weekly number, some say monthly. There is no way he can prove even 15 million listeners weekly. I'd be shocked if he can show that kind of monthly number. And is it unique listeners or are they counting the same guys who tune in every day?

    Rush's audience is a myth. He is a paper tiger. Do some people listen to him? Of course. Is it anywhere near the hype? Not remotely. Talk radio is a dying business. I wouldn't be surprised if his daily listeners didn't even reach a million. I wouldn't be surprised if we have more online viewers on The Young Turks (which are100 percent Google verifiable) than he has radio listeners.

    Rush is a sad, old man that a couple of other sad, old men listen to. His days are numbered. Rush, it definitely wasn't nice knowing you. Tick tock, tick tock.

    even taking the inacurate made up 20 million number,that represents less then 10% of the US population.meanwhile the major networks have a highly supportable 25 million viewers on an daily basis.none of which matters ,lady gaga and justin beiber have stupid numbers of followers on twitter and people watch porn star kim kardahian going to the mall and arguing with her sisters...doesnt mean anything.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    3,301
    Steph is there anything you can't do or haven't done?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    indianpolis - north side
    Posts
    10,089
    Quote Originally Posted by jomota View Post
    So all the media, except FOX, is unbiased. Fox is totally biased against the Democrats.
    Fox News is propaganda, or if you wish a more delicate term, entertainment. So is MSNBC and Current, I think that's the one]. The present a view of the news that is skewed one way or the other. If you keep that in mind, there is nothing wrong with watching them. But if you believe for a moment they are 'fair and balanced'. to use the Fox term, you are out of your mind. or deliberately misleading yourself.

    Continue to blame the main street media or drive by media or what ever the current phrase is if it pleases you. This is a free country and if you want to pretend that Fox is an actual news station, that is OK with me. Just don't be surprised when your candidates continue to lose elections. Refusal to see the truth doesn't keep it from being truth. Remember, Romney made that mistake the last election. He refused to see the truth of the polls his people made. This refusal to see reality will only speed up the GOP slide into irrelevance.

    Personally I hope you and those who agree with you continue to see Fox news as the fountain of truth. And follow the Pied Pipers that are Rush, Hannity, et al straight to the river. The GOP refusing to make the changes it needs to make will only make the Democrats job easier.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    indianpolis - north side
    Posts
    10,089
    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7 View Post
    . . . Rush is a sad, old man that a couple of other sad, old men listen to. His days are numbered. Rush, it definitely wasn't nice knowing you. Tick tock, tick tock.

    even taking the inacurate made up 20 million number,that represents less then 10% of the US population.meanwhile the major networks have a highly supportable 25 million viewers on an daily basis.none of which matters ,lady gaga and justin beiber have stupid numbers of followers on twitter and people watch porn star kim kardahian going to the mall and arguing with her sisters...doesnt mean anything.
    Rush's numbers have one very important meaning. It means Rush gets a $250M, think that's the number, contract. It means all those ditto heads buying his magazine, his T-shirts, his mugs, his 24/7 access, all that stuff. And it means all that coin goes directly into Rush's pocketbook. Rush may [or may no] be sliding into irrelevance, but he has made a boatload of money.

    Plus with a little bit of luck, the GOP may listen to him for another couple of elections. A certified Ditto Head is just the candidate the GOP need to run in the next election, IMHO at least.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    7,964
    @ sota
    Hmmm?
    how your comment applies to the discussion at hand is above my head my friend,but as it seems to be a recurring theme in your dialogue when addressing me let me try to clarify.
    I am experienced in avaition maintenance ,the military and buisness as in my life I have spent a significant time doing each.
    Ive spent a great deal of time reading(you should try it, its fun!) on matters of psychology,addiction,abnormal pychology,philosophy,and political science.when a topic interets me, I try to learn as much as I can before i form an opinion.I dont seek out lines of thought that mirror knee jerk assessments I have made based on the monologues of news entertainers speaking to a narrow audience.
    I think where you are struggling is in that I didnt grow up with an Iphone attached to my hand and an endless stream of nonsensical crap playing in an loop through earphones. I dont facebook,or twitter,or youtube.I have yet to hear gundam style outside of maybe a 5 second passing annoiance,and i do my best to avoid following the ebbs and flows of public opinions which change with the seasons.
    I dont really get what it is you would have expected from me...15 years of swilling Mountain dew and playing halo?
    If Ive misled you or anyone else your welcome to present some other account in regards to the topics I discuss.
    Just recently, we had the plaestinian/israeli debate thread.My knowledge on the subject was limited.i presented what I fealt I could assert as facts and then read what others had to say.when it appeared to me i was "in over my head" I had a cathartic thought...maybe i can FIND OUT!(Amazing right?! how do i do it?!)
    I spent a whole week (daunting, I know) reading what i could find from all sources regadless of political leanings.I read muslim accounts, jewish accounts, roman accounts, christian accounts and as I read a picture formed, now Im afraid that picture was effected by my limited ability to comprehend stuff, but it was the best I could do.
    for instance, did you know that the concept of messianic saviourdom(the NEED for Christ to come) was based on the fact King david waged war on the 12 tribes of israel in an effort to reunite them? having succeeded he was told by God having blood on his hands made him unworthy to lead Israel.this meant to the jewish people that they were ALL unworthy and in need of being "saved".
    Did you know that the age old notion of jews being greedy or stingy was started by the emperor Caligula who became enraged when the jews wouldnt build idols of worship in his likeness after he proclaimed himself a God?
    Did you know that Mohamed himself was a jew,and that islam was intended to reunite christians and jews back under the worshiping of the abrahamic god of the old testament,and that Muslims prayed towards Jurusalem until the jewish scholars rejected the "new" interpretation of the same teachings?
    see, i didnt.If you did...great.
    I find your sacrcasm childish.
    no one is born knowing anything,and what we learn in life is in no way a reflection of our character,only our efforts.If you are offended by my desire to learn more today then i knew yesterday I cant help you with that,Instead i would just recommend to you to endeavor for the same ,as the narrow minded life views youve expressed in these pages exposes you as a rather privileged and spoiled child who has spent every moment of your young life far closer to the top of the socio economic ladder then the bottom and believes that he is there by virtue of his efforts and not at all based on luck.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    10,400
    So all the stats regarding Rush's popularity are wron and just made up. All those sponsors spending millions of dollars are doing so based on made up, inaccurate numbers. And the company's advertising executives haven't been able to figure that out.

    Got it.

    But Fox's declining viewership is absolutely true. No mistake about that. Got it.

    But what about Air America going off the air???? That must have been based on wrong rating info too. I bet they had millions of viewers that they didn't know about because of a faulty rating system. How's that for irony????

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    born and raised on the south side of Chicago.
    Posts
    15,245
    Quote Originally Posted by jomota View Post
    So all the media, except FOX, is unbiased. Fox is totally biased against the Democrats.

    Some of the media may, not does, but may, may mind you, just remotely possibly may have a tendency to lean to the left; but Fox totally and unquestionably is right leaning make no mistake about it.

    Got it. It is so clear to me now.

    Now if someone can explain why Rush, Hannity, Beck have so many listeners and Air America was a total failure, my re-education will be complete.

    Anyone have any graphs, charts, studies, papers whatever on a president's approval rating during the months immediately after re-election and the month of his inauguration? I wonder if those approval ratings are abnormally high. Hmmmm. Food for thought.
    Talk radio listeners are majority men, who don't mind blow hards yelling about crap. True liberals don't like the equivalent because they still value journalistic integrity. MSNBC will never be as popular as Fox because a good % of their target audience will always prefer their new come from more unbiased sources (Newshour, Morning edition, All things Considered, BBC, Many Newspapers).

    As far as everything else. Fox is in fact the worst when it comes to the misrepresentation of the news. MSNBC is a close second... what separates them is there is not the same level of synergy with news parts of their broadcasts and their opinion people. Rachel Maddow is not just the liberal Hannity or Beck...But I certainly wouldn't call her a journalist either.

    Quote Originally Posted by MrPoon
    man with hair like fire can destroy souls with a twitch of his thighs.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    10,400
    Again my re-education continues.

    Conservative Republicans are incorrect and uninformed and they don't know what to watch, listen to or read. All their "sources" are biased and misleading.

    Liberal Democrats are always correct in their thinking, and their sources are knowing, caring, factual and unbiased.

    Yes, it's much clearer now.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    11,375
    Guys like Rush, Hannity and Beck have been the undoing of the Republican party. Those guys have become its face.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    born and raised on the south side of Chicago.
    Posts
    15,245
    Quote Originally Posted by jomota View Post
    Again my re-education continues.

    Conservative Republicans are incorrect and uninformed and they don't know what to watch, listen to or read. All their "sources" are biased and misleading.

    Liberal Democrats are always correct in their thinking, and their sources are knowing, caring, factual and unbiased.

    Yes, it's much clearer now.
    You want to take what I said and run it to an absurd length... go ahead. But it's not that funny and it doesn't add much to the conversation. Perhaps you can answer if you think that Rush, Hannity, and Beck do their due diligence as journalists? Do you suggest that a large proportion of conservatives don't tend to get their news from such media outlets as those people and Fox news? Do you deny that liberals tend to seek out news sources like the ones I mentioned? Do you not think that fact is part of the reason why MSNBC is not that much of a power house given the liberal Conservative split in this country? Do you think it helps explain why something like Air America was a doomed project?

    I'm happy to hear your viewpoint.

    Quote Originally Posted by MrPoon
    man with hair like fire can destroy souls with a twitch of his thighs.

Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •