Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Can we offer this Ukranian solider a scholarship?
Comments
-
PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
-
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on -
The message has been known since Vietnam then Afghanistan 1 and 2
Gulf War 1 in fact should have been the tell of all tells
The "world community" will let a super power fuck with a country but never win
This really is a both sides do it situation. One starts some shit and the other arms the place where the shit started and both burn munitions and civilians before the rebuild
Your last sentence is correct
And Zelensky is a piece of shit and a coward willing to hide behind the deaths of his civilians
When is he up for re election? -
He's got a year
The next Ukrainian presidential election shall be held, per the Constitution of Ukraine, on the last Sunday of March[1] of the fifth year of the incumbent President's term of office, in Spring 2024.
https://nytimes.com/2022/02/21/opinion/ukraine-russia-zelensky-putin.html
KYIV, Ukraine — It’s not hard to guess what President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine must be craving right now: one normal day.
The comic-turned-president surely never imagined the job would be quite so intense. First, he got tangled up in the impeachment of Donald Trump. Then he had to deal with the Covid pandemic. And now he’s facing the prospect of a full-scale invasion by Russia.
Russia, of course, has been waging a war in eastern Ukraine since 2014. But now the threat is total: Up to 190,000 Russian troops have amassed near Ukraine’s borders and in separatist regions, and an invasion, bringing devastation and disaster, could come at any time. It’s a gravely serious situation. And Mr. Zelensky, a comedian for most of his life, is in over his head.
Yet the truth is more prosaic. Mr. Zelensky, the showman and performer, has been unmasked by reality. And it has revealed him to be dispiritingly mediocre.
After his nearly three years in office, it’s clear what the problem is: Mr. Zelensky’s tendency to treat everything like a show. Gestures, for him, are more important than consequences. Strategic objectives are sacrificed for short-term benefits. The words he uses don’t matter, as long as they are entertaining. And when the reviews are bad, he stops listening and surrounds himself with fans.
https://aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/5/pandora-papers-no-re-election-for-ukraines-comedian-president
Kyiv, Ukraine – Alla Butsko hoped that the comedian whose routines and television series made her laugh for years would also make her proud as Ukraine’s first corruption-free president.
In 2019, the 62-year-old retired librarian cast her ballot for Volodymyr Zelenskyy, head of the District 95 comic troupe, in Ukraine’s most unusual presidential election.
Zelenskyy said at the time that his total political inexperience would help him uproot the country’s omnipresent corruption.
But more than two years in office yielded no results, Butsko believed.
Zelenskyy’s ratings have tanked, while his anti-corruption measures were mostly cosmetic and failed to land anyone notorious in jail, she told Al Jazeera.
On Monday, on her son’s laptop, she watched Offshore 95, a video by Slidstvo.info, a group of Ukraine’s leading investigative reporters, that “finally opened her eyes”.
“I was duped, we all were duped. I’m not voting for him again,” she said.
he findings were based on the Pandora Papers, a trove of millions of documents from 14 offshore service providers leaked to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and its partners, including Slidstvo.info.
The story detailed how Zelenskyy and his partners launched a network of offshore companies in the British Virgin Islands, Belize and Cyprus.
The companies date back to at least 2012, the year District 95 went big in Ukraine with regular shows on a television channel owned by Ihor Kolomoisky, a Ukrainian oligarch sanctioned in the US and the European Union for alleged multibillion fraud, the report claimed.
Zelenskyy’s business partners include Ivan Bakanov, current head of the SBU, Ukraine’s main intelligence agency that often investigates corruption cases, and presidential aide Serhiy Shefir, who administers the offshore companies but shares the profits with Zelenskyy’s wife, the report claims.
At the time of publication, Al Jazeera’s requests for comment from those accused in the leaks were unanswered.
He's got a lot of company in that off shore mess
Some named Biden -
Gonna take a wild preemptive conspiracy theory leap and say that election will be postponed.RaceBannon said:He's got a year
-
Bro you're just running up the score with that oneBob_C said:
Gonna take a wild preemptive conspiracy theory leap and say that election will be postponed.RaceBannon said:He's got a year
-
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
-
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order. -
Again, fuck the New World Order and anyone who supports it.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
-
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared -
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight. -
The first thing Biden did was ruin American energy independence
Imagine cheering for that
Trump told NATO to pay their own way
He would not have left billions of dollars of equipment and Americans behind to die in Afghanistan
Biden did but wants to support Ukraine for some reason
If only there were dots to connect on say, a lap top
Well son of a bitch -
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
-
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction. -
Lapdog gonna lapdog.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
If holding your ruling class accountable for being fucking morons is wrong, I don't want to be right.
Learn the difference, lap dog.
@PostGameOrangeSlices
-
Calling people idiots and using this argument is why you had such a rough startPostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
Not that there is anything wrong with calling people idiots, it just sets the tone for the wave of replies
The Putin card is just embarrassing -
@PostGameOrangeSlicesRaceBannon said:
Calling people idiots and using this argument is why you had such a rough startPostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
Not that there is anything wrong with calling people idiots, it just sets the tone for the wave of replies
The Putin card is just embarrassing
-
Putin is a murderer that came up violently and will throw you out of a window if you cross him.RaceBannon said:
Calling people idiots and using this argument is why you had such a rough startPostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
Not that there is anything wrong with calling people idiots, it just sets the tone for the wave of replies
The Putin card is just embarrassing
He was heavily involved in the Grozny clusterfuck, and also invaded Georgia in 2008 to take two provinces.
He has been probing for years to see with what he can get away with. He thinks the world works the way it did in the past where you can take land from your neighbors. It doesn't.
No one forced him to do this. It's not a good or accurate take. He wants to play Risk. -
As mello would say - OKPostGameOrangeSlices said:
Putin is a murderer that came up violently and will throw you out of a window if you cross him.RaceBannon said:
Calling people idiots and using this argument is why you had such a rough startPostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
Not that there is anything wrong with calling people idiots, it just sets the tone for the wave of replies
The Putin card is just embarrassing
He was heavily involved in the Grozny clusterfuck, and also invaded Georgia in 2008 to take two provinces.
He has been probing for years to see with what he can get away with. He thinks the world works the way it did in the past where you can take land from your neighbors. It doesn't.
No one forced him to do this. It's not a good or accurate take. He wants to play Risk.
I don't believe that I have supported Putin. XI in China is a real piece of shit too. Quite common really
So what -
@PostGameOrangeSlices is the propaganda arm of Karine Jean-Pierre.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Putin is a murderer that came up violently and will throw you out of a window if you cross him.RaceBannon said:
Calling people idiots and using this argument is why you had such a rough startPostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
Not that there is anything wrong with calling people idiots, it just sets the tone for the wave of replies
The Putin card is just embarrassing
He was heavily involved in the Grozny clusterfuck, and also invaded Georgia in 2008 to take two provinces.
He has been probing for years to see with what he can get away with. He thinks the world works the way it did in the past where you can take land from your neighbors. It doesn't.
No one forced him to do this. It's not a good or accurate take. He wants to play Risk.
-
And you are the propaganda arm for the Kremlinpawz said:
@PostGameOrangeSlices is the propaganda arm of Karine Jean-Pierre.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Putin is a murderer that came up violently and will throw you out of a window if you cross him.RaceBannon said:
Calling people idiots and using this argument is why you had such a rough startPostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
Not that there is anything wrong with calling people idiots, it just sets the tone for the wave of replies
The Putin card is just embarrassing
He was heavily involved in the Grozny clusterfuck, and also invaded Georgia in 2008 to take two provinces.
He has been probing for years to see with what he can get away with. He thinks the world works the way it did in the past where you can take land from your neighbors. It doesn't.
No one forced him to do this. It's not a good or accurate take. He wants to play Risk. -
Not you. PawzRaceBannon said:
As mello would say - OKPostGameOrangeSlices said:
Putin is a murderer that came up violently and will throw you out of a window if you cross him.RaceBannon said:
Calling people idiots and using this argument is why you had such a rough startPostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
Not that there is anything wrong with calling people idiots, it just sets the tone for the wave of replies
The Putin card is just embarrassing
He was heavily involved in the Grozny clusterfuck, and also invaded Georgia in 2008 to take two provinces.
He has been probing for years to see with what he can get away with. He thinks the world works the way it did in the past where you can take land from your neighbors. It doesn't.
No one forced him to do this. It's not a good or accurate take. He wants to play Risk.
I don't believe that I have supported Putin. XI in China is a real piece of shit too. Quite common really
So what -
It's not about Putin, you dumb motherfucker. No matter how many times you say it, it's not.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
Putin just happens to be the foe of the money-laundering enabler of the most corrupt fucking administration in US history along with the other corrupt politicians posing for photo ops with a dwarf tuff guy.
Get out of your own binary way for a change.
-
Yes, it is. He invaded. He has invaded other countries in the past. His ill disciplined troops routinely rape and torture civilians.PurpleThrobber said:
It's not about Putin, you dumb motherfucker. No matter how many times you say it, it's not.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
The excuse making for Putin is unbelievable -
Exactly this.PurpleThrobber said:
It's not about Putin, you dumb motherfucker. No matter how many times you say it, it's not.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
He just happens to be the foe of the enabler of the most corrupt fucking administration in US history and the other corrupt politicians posing for photo ops with a dwarf tuff guy.
But since the propaganda won't land with the critically minded, the next step is unsubstantiated slander.
Get in line @PostGameOrangeSlices -
The edited version is better but the same flavor.pawz said:
Exactly this.PurpleThrobber said:
It's not about Putin, you dumb motherfucker. No matter how many times you say it, it's not.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
He just happens to be the foe of the enabler of the most corrupt fucking administration in US history and the other corrupt politicians posing for photo ops with a dwarf tuff guy.
But since the propaganda won't land with the critically minded, the next step is unsubstantiated slander.
Get in line @PostGameOrangeSlices
CASES!!!!
-
You should go help the Dazzler with his Russian state narrative homework.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Yes, it is. He invaded. He has invaded other countries in the past. His ill disciplined troops routinely rape and torture civilians.PurpleThrobber said:
It's not about Putin, you dumb motherfucker. No matter how many times you say it, it's not.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
The excuse making for Putin is unbelievable -
Didn't you makes some claim about the moral high road earlier in this thread?PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Yes, it is. He invaded. He has invaded other countries in the past. His ill disciplined troops routinely rape and torture civilians.PurpleThrobber said:
It's not about Putin, you dumb motherfucker. No matter how many times you say it, it's not.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
The excuse making for Putin is unbelievable
Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria think your moral authority is saintly. Or something.
-
It’s obvious PGOS has a narrative and he’s not going to waiver. Anyone who thinks Putin is going to pull off anything more than what he’s attempting to do right now is an idiot. That’s all propaganda BS.
-
Putin is directly annexing territory. The US is not.pawz said:
Didn't you makes some claim about the moral high road earlier in this thread?PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Yes, it is. He invaded. He has invaded other countries in the past. His ill disciplined troops routinely rape and torture civilians.PurpleThrobber said:
It's not about Putin, you dumb motherfucker. No matter how many times you say it, it's not.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Stop apologizing for Putin.pawz said:
Also first, right and impeached asking questions about that shit hole we just dropped $100B into.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Trump was still throwing around money at things like Afghanistan. He wasnt exactly an isolationist.RaceBannon said:
That's why the cronies were desperate to get rid of Trump or any American president that puts America firstPostGameOrangeSlices said:
It's already here. US and its cronies run the world. Better to live here than say...RussiaPurpleThrobber said:
Fuck the New World Order.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The discussion on this topic has definitely been better the longer the thread has gone on.RoadTrip said:PGOS, I think your head and intentions are in the right place regarding this conflict and I understand your distrust of Russia. I can't speak for the others here but I don't believe anyone supports Russia or their war with Ukraine. I don't trust our? own government or any European member of NATO either. If they were so concerned about Russian advancement beyond Ukraine, then they should be all in against Russia instead of relying upon our? tax dollars. We? seem to care a whole lot more about Ukrainian borders than our own. We? are ignoring our own people and the problems at home at the expense of a criminally corrupt Zelensky and his government.
Like I said earlier, show me a non corrupt country...it just doesnt exist. I get your guy's distrust of Nato, the US, and especially Biden.
The being said, I do think the powers that be are making an example out of Russia, and at the same time sending a clear message to China. That message is that wars over territory are a thing of the past, this is the New World Order, fuck around and find out.
At the same time, Russia has and is still committing horrific war crimes. And its not just one offs here and there like Tiger Force in Vietnam, it's systemic and everywhere they touch tortured and killed civilians pay the price.
If Ukraine wants to fight and die, I say let them. You guys seem to agree, its the specifics of US backing we disagree on
That's the point of all this. Fuck NWO, fuck global corporatism. Fuck Davos. Fuck fuck fuck. And fuck anyone who supports that bullshit.
We don't want any fucking New World Order.
That was the campaign - elect Biden so the world respects us again!!!!
Fuck that. Better to be feared
He was first and right on China, now even the Dems are on his page there.
He was also first and right on NATO needing to pull their weight.
War against Russia was always the plan. If not in Syria, then in Ukraine.
Not now, not then was there a good reason for it. Hence why the West, errr NWO, had to provoke it into being.
Then they sold you the idea Putin is literally Hitler. They didn't expect you to ask questions, and they were right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.[1] The title refers to consent of the governed, and derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent" used by Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922).[2] The book was honored with the Orwell Award.
A 2002 revision takes account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. A 2009 interview with the authors notes the effects of the internet on the propaganda model.[3]
Background
Origins
Chomsky credits the origin of the book to the impetus of Alex Carey, the Australian social psychologist, to whom Herman and Chomsky dedicated the book.[4] The book was greatly inspired by Herman's earlier financial research. Since Herman's contribution to the book was so important, Chomsky insisted on putting Herman's name in front of his name, contrary to the pair’s habit of alphabetic listing. Herman and Chomsky were close friends for fifty years.[5]
.....
Propaganda model of communication
Main article: Propaganda model
The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.
The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to impact reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
Size, ownership, and profit orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
The advertising license to do business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority."[11] Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
Sourcing mass media news: Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[12][clarification needed]
Flak and the enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[12]
Anti-communism/war on terror: Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "war on terror" as the major social control mechanism.[13][clarification needed]
The Propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations
The propaganda model describes the major pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.[14] To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. As the model scales upward, it pans to the larger organizations who are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments.
The first level displays the public domain in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information[15] as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.
The excuse making for Putin is unbelievable
Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria think your moral authority is saintly. Or something.
This point was already discussed and I have already given my views on the other conflicts.
NO ONE has addressed this:
His ill disciplined troops routinely rape and torture civilians.
Continue to ignore it. Because there is NO excuse for it.
