Media Manipulation

mirwillbeback

Was just thinking the past few days ( following on from the North Korea vs Portugal World Cup final announced on NK TV )

Are we any better - I watched a programme on the shot down Malaysian plane the other night and every thing was done for effect.

The father of a man who died in the incident talking to the camera while his wife lays back in the background, tubes up her nose and the whole picture was crafted for sympathy.

Also, the fact that reporters are arguing with militia who have no problem in shooting people, while daring to retrieve some property from the plane they have been warned off.

Not for a minute suggesting that it didn't happen, but just seems too convenient and polished that it distracts from other issues going on. Fundamentally, I think we should believe only what we experience, leave the rest to the rest.

I know it makes me sound a bit mad, but I am believe we are being fed an agenda to make the world the way others want us to see it.

Deco99

I was going to start a thread like this if one didnt exist already. I'm wondering what News outlet if any do people here believe is least bias. After the airline crash, i've been goin across a few and its amazing the difference.

Regarding Israel - FOX news makes no reference i could see to civilian casualties.
Malaysian Aircraft - Russia Today said the Ukranians had those type of weapons while the "self defense" forces didnt.

It makes me wonder is the stuff we get fed from RTE, BBC where they seem to be critical of Israel and Russia any closer to the truth?

Harold Weiss

Deco99 wrote: »

I was going to start a thread like this if one didnt exist already. I'm wondering what News outlet if any do people here believe is least bias. After the airline crash, i've been goin across a few and its amazing the difference.

Regarding Israel - FOX news makes no reference i could see to civilian casualties.
Malaysian Aircraft - Russia Today said the Ukranians had those type of weapons while the "self defense" forces didnt.

It makes me wonder is the stuff we get fed from RTE, BBC where they seem to be critical of Israel and Russia any closer to the truth?

Unfortunately there aren't really many unbiased sources of news if any at all.

I had hope for The Real News Network when it started out uploading on YT but they have demonstrated left/progressive/liberal bias when I wanted just plain news to let me make up my own mind.

Alphabet networks like RTE, CNN, BBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC have pro-Anglo/American, pro-Israeli bias with Sky/FOX owned by Murdoch being the most obvious case.

RT have a pro-Russia angle. (I'm undecided on their anti/pro Israeli coverage because 1 million Russians have Israeli citizenship)
PressTV have a pro-Iran angle.

There's really nothing out there that doesn't push a narrative and it's pretty sad.

The general rule for me is to never trust a single source of news or commentary on a particular event or subject.

Try to get both sides of the story before making up your mind because all too often we're led by the mainstream to believe in one story and one only.

Anyone that deviates from the narrative ends up on these forums.

j80ezgvc3p92xu

I like stuff such as the Occidental Observer and Information Clearing House for my news, but the latter seems to believe that Putin is a savior to the world's troubles, which of course he is not. RT are good if you are looking for stories about the West in general as the Ruskies really dig up the dirt. Recently ran articles about the Bilderberg group and false flag attacks, topics which get no coverage in the Western media yet affect our lives in a major way. Ireland-wise, most of the major newspapers just spout liberal mush and have an obvious agenda (pro abortion, gay rights ect.) I would not be a fan of the Journal either tbh, also strong liberal slant on their news. Hope that helped.

thehippychippy

I've always found that you can get your news from a any of the above mentioned sources once you read between the lines. All reported news is biased. If it's coming from a reporter who has just witnessed a bombing then his reaction will bias his reporting. If it's his first bombing or he has seen numerous bombings, then his reactions may be different but how he filters the information he is experiencing will bias his reporting.
IMO, any news other then basic fact printed on a page or screen (with no letter head or affiliates) would be as close to unbiased reporting as you could get but even that can be played with by what way you list the info.
eg The information coming in....There was an explosion in Iraq.
Most people would think........ There was a suspected bombing in Iraq.
How you keep people watching news channels, looking at certain news sites and selling your advertisement. ?....... Reports are coming in about a suspected car bombing in an Iraq...... sources inform us that it may be related to ISIS or some other extremist group. In what is probably a busy built up area several deaths and numerous injuries are expected. Now over to our defence correspondent Sean Stag. "Sean, what kind of bomb could this be, what kind of damage could it do and how will it affect an already fragile region?"

Question everything. Even the truth can be a matter of opinion

BlibBlab

Have a look at how the Scottish referendum is covered if you want to see media manipulation. The main papers are bad enough although privately owned, but the BBC is also in on it. Look through the Telegraph or Daily Mail, its wall to wall negativity and scaremongering.

Brown Bomber

BlibBlab wrote: »

Have a look at how the Scottish referendum is covered if you want to see media manipulation. The main papers are bad enough although privately owned, but the BBC is also in on it. Look through the Telegraph or Daily Mail, its wall to wall negativity and scaremongering.

You can see it here, this is a really informative video. It reminds me of a lecture I had wayback when on how RTE were handling the Nice Treaty.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajd4R-9BEIw

BlibBlab

There was a very obvious case with Nick Robinson a few days ago, he got slapped down by Salmond but then cut his actual report saying Salmond didn't answer the question. Can't post links but both videos should be up on youtube. Interesting that a lot of Scots protested the BBC hq to protest against the bias, be interesting to see if people remember how this was reported a year or two down the line, no matter the result. It was a peaceful protest, but the way the rest of the UK media outlets reported it you'd think it was the another March on Rome

Peist2007

BlibBlab wrote: »

Have a look at how the Scottish referendum is covered if you want to see media manipulation. The main papers are bad enough although privately owned, but the BBC is also in on it. Look through the Telegraph or Daily Mail, its wall to wall negativity and scaremongering.

David Cameron was on Sky News making a plea for a no vote. This was immediately followed by a ridiculous skit of Alex Salmond singing the words of "Break Free" by Queen using his recent speeches spliced to match the words of the song. It was actually amost too blatant for words.

Torakx

Reminds me of the propoganda for the Lisbon Treaty. Which tells me if the people on the whole are really upfor breaking away, it is possible they willstick with their votes.
But as the Lisbon Treaty showed, with time and repeated attempts you can make the swing voters change their minds.These are the voters whoshouldn't be allowed tovote at all, mostly because theyare sochangeable, I must presume they do not understand what they are doing at all.

BlibBlab

Torakx wrote: »

Reminds me of the propoganda for the Lisbon Treaty. Which tells me if the people on the whole are really upfor breaking away, it is possible they willstick with their votes.
But as the Lisbon Treaty showed, with time and repeated attempts you can make the swing voters change their minds.These are the voters whoshouldn't be allowed tovote at all, mostly because theyare sochangeable, I must presume they do not understand what they are doing at all.

They should have showed this, let the people know what Cameron and the House of Commons really think of the Scots
youtube.com/watch?v=f8XIeAZEWYM

BlibBlab

To add, here is BBC editor Nick Robinsons outright lie. First is the full clip, second is Robinsons report

youtube.com/watch?v=SUW6-wzGv-8

youtube.com/watch?v=enrdDaf3uss

Torakx

You only have to say this is BBC's, I can already guess there is an outright lie
Regarding Camerons remarks on the oil. I think he was saying it's a stupid questionto ask if England willwant to give Scotland back their oil..
In that respect it is a stupid question and a clever wayof saying "No way", without actually answering the question.