Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
DariusOCR, How do you know that you haven't been brainwashed and just don't know it?
That's a very valid point. I'm not saying that I haven't, but I'm trying to stay impartial, not taking any sides and looking at things from a bit further away. This is also a good question to discuss, how would one know?
I've been reading a certain media news website this morning - which is what inspired this discussion - and I felt how the structure of the articles, and deliberate omission of certain FACTS is stirring me towards supporting the idea that the editor wants me to believe. And it's just so easy to give in and believe whatever they say.
It's simply less complicated, less work to believe whatever you're told by skillfully crafted material, which is why majority of people ARE being brainwashed. Who wants to work when reading an article, right? This is why we need an impartial media news outlet... hell, we need a watchdog on this! In 2214, maybe...
Last edited by DariusOCR; 07-18-2014 at 09:21 PM..
I'm not saying that I haven't, but I'm trying to stay impartial, not taking any side and looking at things from a bit further away. This is also a good question to discuss tho, how would one know?
I've been reading a certain media news website this morning - which is what inspired this discussion - and I felt how the structure of the articles, and deliberate omission of certain FACTS is stirring me towards supporting the idea that the editor wants me to believe. And it's just so easy to give in and believe whatever they say.
It's simply less complicated, less work to believe whatever you're told by skillfully crafted material, which is why majority of people ARE being brainwashed. Who wants to work when reading an article, right? This is why we need an impartial media news outlet... hell, we need a watchdog on this! In 2214, maybe...
We already have a "watch dog," at least as far as the public airwaves are concerned. All the public airwaves are owned by the people and managed by the FCC. Broadcast media is suppose be broadcasting information that is in the best interests of the public, according to their lease agreement.
A simple solution would be to refuse to renew the broadcast license of any news organization that continues to broadcast misinformation, since that clearly is not in the best interests of the public. They still have the freedom to say or publish whatever they want, so there is no violation of the First Amendment, but they will no longer get a public soap box in which to broadcast their propaganda.
That should include all broadcast media, whether on cable or not. Print media is another story altogether. As long as they do not publish anything libelous, there is not much that can be done due to the First Amendment.
There is no impartial news... use your brain... do critical thinking... does it all make sense? does something seem to be left out? why doesn't the reporter ask tougher questions or provide more information? review the facts? ask more questions... Russia is simply nation building in the Ukraine... They armed the rebel separatist group... has the US ever armed a rebel group? Who is right? does someone have to be right? The Ukraine westerner group usurped control of the government during a coup, the separatist didn't agree to the takeover, do they have a right to breakaway from a group that illegally seized power? Does anyone think the Ukraine westerner group didn't have help to usurp power in Ukraine... does anyone think Russia should just sit quietly as other nations meddle in Ukraine politics? Russia took Crimea, is that a surprise? Did you know Crimea and Russia all belong to the same nation before the breakup? Who is right? Who is wrong? And what is it of any your business or mine or anyone elses?
This is the downside to having so many media outlets, including internet news sites and discussion forums: It's very easy to find an outlet that supports and reinforces your own biases. You are then never challenged. You can read the news/opinion site of your choice every hour of the day, fully believing that only your side is right and that their side is wrong. It's led to a lazy way of thinking among many Americans.
If you believe a single word Obama says, you ARE brainwashed.
DariusOCR, How do you know that you haven't been brainwashed and just don't know it?
How do you know that what you think is being brainwashed isn't actually the truth?
It comes down to this:
There are, objectively, things that are true. There are, objectively, things that are false. There are, objectively, events and experiences that cement what is true and false, if you are willing to accept the evidence in front of you.
Once you start with the basics, learning to discern the objectively true from the false, you learn to critically examine EVERY idea and EVERY assertion people make, and you can recognize that which contradicts those things you are know that are, without question, true.
The real issue, at stake, is that people don't attempt deception by telling utterly preposterous lies. They attempt deception by putting ONE falsity into a number of other things that may be true. If you do not object to that one, next round contains TWO falsities in a bunch of truth and you are further calloused to ignoring the false.
Eventually, you cease looking for the concrete and accepting ONLY that which is solidly true, at which time, anyone with a gift of persuasive language can make you think anything.
Most here think I'm extremely abrasive and argumentative. It's because I reject ANYTHING that I don't know to be objectively true, by having put great effort into finding the flaws and not finding any. And, of course, in terms of discussions like this... 1 false assumption in a field of 99 true facts, is still false. I NEVER accept the false for purposes of argument. One must never allow yourself to "drift", as the so-called "middle" does, which has no anchor point and is the most susceptible to manipulation.
You must be highly partisan. In actuality Obama has told the truth four times in the last six years.
Let me guess... It was parts of sentences, where he said the following phrases:
"I don't think..."
"I don't care..."
"I didn't know..."
and
"I want..."
I have never seen Obama say anything, EVER that was objectively true. He goes to great lengths to ensure that whatever he says has some level of falsehood attached to it.
Oh, and the idea that makes me "partisan" is flat out absurd.
The Independent.co.uk is actually one of the better news resources. There are occasionally very well informed and critically thinking commentators there as well.
But be warned, Russia haters will find the news hard to read there, because of all the... you know... truth. Also, very little US propaganda might be unusual for them. Definitely not suitable for kids and 90% of City-Data's audience, but I see a few people here who probably are already there following MH17 news. Great source for this particular case, by the way.
It's actually very sad that most people will choose government funded BBC (let alone all the US-BS media) over Independent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
