I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a chapter from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Can you put together a coherent post for once?
MSNBC and CNN put bias ahead of profit. The ratings bear that out.
I am well aware of manufacturing consent for wars or calling the President a traitor. News is cheap so it turns a profit regardless.
You can't deny what I wrote so you respond with the usual gibberish
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a piece from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Are you one advocating for state-funded media?
nice gotcha attempt
Gotcha attempt? Hardly. There is a progressive argument for state-funded journalism. Repeated mention of profit-driven media as a problem brought the question to mind.
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a chapter from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Can you put together a coherent post for once?
MSNBC and CNN put bias ahead of profit. The ratings bear that out.
I am well aware of manufacturing consent for wars or calling the President a traitor. News is cheap so it turns a profit regardless.
You can't deny what I wrote so you respond with the usual gibberish
I think Fox is biased just as much to the right and CNN/MSNBC are to the left. But the in the demographic that watches cable news, there's just way more right of center folks, hence way higher viewership for Fox. Same is true for talk radio.
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a piece from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Are you one advocating for state-funded media?
nice gotcha attempt
Gotcha attempt? Hardly. There is a progressive argument for state-funded journalism. Repeated mention of profit-driven media as a problem brought the question to mind.
Alright then. Of course news outlets need to pay their bills. But there was a longstanding understanding between media companies and the public that in exchange for use of the public airwaves, they actually had to do some good. Taibbi talks about this quite a bit. Now that idea almost seems like a joke.
Advertising introduces a particular sort of bias, so outlets like Democracy Now and The Nation survive on donations and subscriptions. They operate at a much smaller scale, obviously.
I think NPR does a pretty good job, but people like Chomsky have said that NPR is among the most rigid in limiting discussion into "acceptable discourse" and pretending like other ideas don't exist. I'm not really sure what to make of that because I just listen to NPR in the car and don't study it.
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a chapter from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Can you put together a coherent post for once?
MSNBC and CNN put bias ahead of profit. The ratings bear that out.
I am well aware of manufacturing consent for wars or calling the President a traitor. News is cheap so it turns a profit regardless.
You can't deny what I wrote so you respond with the usual gibberish
Is it possible for you to actually engage on something without being a little bitch?
And I'm talking about Manufacturing Consent. As in, the book. I'm sure you've heard of it.
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a chapter from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Can you put together a coherent post for once?
MSNBC and CNN put bias ahead of profit. The ratings bear that out.
I am well aware of manufacturing consent for wars or calling the President a traitor. News is cheap so it turns a profit regardless.
You can't deny what I wrote so you respond with the usual gibberish
I think Fox is biased just as much to the right and CNN/MSNBC are to the left. But the in the demographic that watches cable news, there's just way more right of center folks, hence way higher viewership for Fox. Same is true for talk radio.
And so if your motivation was money you would........
this isn't hard
And it is my point
CNN and MSNBC put bias ahead of profit on the Trump coverage
Sounds like right of center folks are better informed
They didn't waste two years watching about how Trump was going to be impeached or indicted or both
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a chapter from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Can you put together a coherent post for once?
MSNBC and CNN put bias ahead of profit. The ratings bear that out.
I am well aware of manufacturing consent for wars or calling the President a traitor. News is cheap so it turns a profit regardless.
You can't deny what I wrote so you respond with the usual gibberish
Is it possible for you to actually engage on something without being a little bitch?
And I'm talking about Manufacturing Consent. As in, the book. I'm sure you've heard of it.
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a chapter from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Can you put together a coherent post for once?
MSNBC and CNN put bias ahead of profit. The ratings bear that out.
I am well aware of manufacturing consent for wars or calling the President a traitor. News is cheap so it turns a profit regardless.
You can't deny what I wrote so you respond with the usual gibberish
Is it possible for you to actually engage on something without being a little bitch?
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a chapter from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Can you put together a coherent post for once?
MSNBC and CNN put bias ahead of profit. The ratings bear that out.
I am well aware of manufacturing consent for wars or calling the President a traitor. News is cheap so it turns a profit regardless.
You can't deny what I wrote so you respond with the usual gibberish
Is it possible for you to actually engage on something without being a little bitch?
And I'm talking about Manufacturing Consent. As in, the book. I'm sure you've heard of it.
So it isn't possible for you
Got it
If I didn't know what I was talking about but I felt like I had to be involved in the conversation because I never leave this message board, I'd be doing what you're doing now
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a piece from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Are you one advocating for state-funded media?
nice gotcha attempt
Gotcha attempt? Hardly. There is a progressive argument for state-funded journalism. Repeated mention of profit-driven media as a problem brought the question to mind.
Alright then. Of course news outlets need to pay their bills. But there was a longstanding understanding understanding between media companies and the public that in exchange for use of the public airwaves, they actually had to do some good. Taibbi talks about this quite a bit. Now that idea almost seems like a joke.
Advertising introduces a particular sort of bias, so outlets like Democracy Now and The Nation survive on donations and subscriptions. They operate at a much smaller scale, obviously.
I think NPR does a pretty good job, but people like Chomsky have said that NPR is among the most rigid in limiting discussion into "acceptable discourse" and pretending like other ideas don't exist. I'm not really sure what to make of that because I just listen to NPR in the car and don't study it.
That's why the over the air Big Four aren't as insane as their cable outlets. Close though.
Why is the Military Intelligence Complex the training ground for news experts on panel shows?
That's a pretty big conflict right there
Brennen was praised for wink wink knowing the real deal in his infamous the indictments are coming this week video
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a chapter from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Can you put together a coherent post for once?
MSNBC and CNN put bias ahead of profit. The ratings bear that out.
I am well aware of manufacturing consent for wars or calling the President a traitor. News is cheap so it turns a profit regardless.
You can't deny what I wrote so you respond with the usual gibberish
Is it possible for you to actually engage on something without being a little bitch?
And I'm talking about Manufacturing Consent. As in, the book. I'm sure you've heard of it.
So it isn't possible for you
Got it
If I didn't know what I was talking about but I felt like I had to be involved in the conversation because I never leave this message board, I'd be doing what you're doing now
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a piece from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Are you one advocating for state-funded media?
nice gotcha attempt
Gotcha attempt? Hardly. There is a progressive argument for state-funded journalism. Repeated mention of profit-driven media as a problem brought the question to mind.
Alright then. Of course news outlets need to pay their bills. But there was a longstanding understanding understanding between media companies and the public that in exchange for use of the public airwaves, they actually had to do some good. Taibbi talks about this quite a bit. Now that idea almost seems like a joke.
Advertising introduces a particular sort of bias, so outlets like Democracy Now and The Nation survive on donations and subscriptions. They operate at a much smaller scale, obviously.
I think NPR does a pretty good job, but people like Chomsky have said that NPR is among the most rigid in limiting discussion into "acceptable discourse" and pretending like other ideas don't exist. I'm not really sure what to make of that because I just listen to NPR in the car and don't study it.
That's why the over the air Big Four aren't as insane as their cable outlets. Close though.
Why is the Military Intelligence Complex the training ground for news experts on panel shows?
That's a pretty big conflict right there
Brennen was praised for wink wink knowing the real deal in his infamous the indictments are coming this week video
He's just another hack
CNN and MSNBC will never catch Fox because they'll never beat Fox out for olds who sit at home all day watching cable TV. I haven't even had cable for like 2 years.
As far as military experts on television, I don't think we disagree. The trotting out of "retired" generals who later turned out to be on the Pentagon payroll to pimp the Invasion of Iraq was shameful. If you're trying to get me to defend cable news, we're going to be here for awhile. Same thing if you're trying to get me to defend Brennan.
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a piece from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Are you one advocating for state-funded media?
nice gotcha attempt
Gotcha attempt? Hardly. There is a progressive argument for state-funded journalism. Repeated mention of profit-driven media as a problem brought the question to mind.
Alright then. Of course news outlets need to pay their bills. But there was a longstanding understanding between media companies and the public that in exchange for use of the public airwaves, they actually had to do some good. Taibbi talks about this quite a bit. Now that idea almost seems like a joke.
Advertising introduces a particular sort of bias, so outlets like Democracy Now and The Nation survive on donations and subscriptions. They operate at a much smaller scale, obviously.
I think NPR does a pretty good job, but people like Chomsky have said that NPR is among the most rigid in limiting discussion into "acceptable discourse" and pretending like other ideas don't exist. I'm not really sure what to make of that because I just listen to NPR in the car and don't study it.
The NPR part I agree with, but probably further than you or Chomsky would go. NPR does a good job of covering "the news." You & Noam likely want NPR to cover more radical progressivism (which local affiliates and syndicators do more of). NPR also does little to cover conservative interests.
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a piece from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Are you one advocating for state-funded media?
nice gotcha attempt
Gotcha attempt? Hardly. There is a progressive argument for state-funded journalism. Repeated mention of profit-driven media as a problem brought the question to mind.
Alright then. Of course news outlets need to pay their bills. But there was a longstanding understanding understanding between media companies and the public that in exchange for use of the public airwaves, they actually had to do some good. Taibbi talks about this quite a bit. Now that idea almost seems like a joke.
Advertising introduces a particular sort of bias, so outlets like Democracy Now and The Nation survive on donations and subscriptions. They operate at a much smaller scale, obviously.
I think NPR does a pretty good job, but people like Chomsky have said that NPR is among the most rigid in limiting discussion into "acceptable discourse" and pretending like other ideas don't exist. I'm not really sure what to make of that because I just listen to NPR in the car and don't study it.
That's why the over the air Big Four aren't as insane as their cable outlets. Close though.
Why is the Military Intelligence Complex the training ground for news experts on panel shows?
That's a pretty big conflict right there
Brennen was praised for wink wink knowing the real deal in his infamous the indictments are coming this week video
He's just another hack
CNN and MSNBC will never catch Fox because they'll never beat Fox out for olds who sit at home all day watching cable TV. I haven't even had cable for like 2 years.
As far as military experts on television, I don't think we disagree. The trotting out of "retired" generals who later turned out to be on the Pentagon payroll to pimp the Invasion of Iraq was shameful. If you're trying to get me to defend cable news, we're going to be here for awhile. Same thing if you're trying to get me to defend Brennan.
That's not why they won't beat out FOX. Most boomers are liberal
Yes we agree on some stuff. It happens when you stop stereotyping everyone and lobbing out bad takes and actually discuss an issue
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a piece from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Are you one advocating for state-funded media?
nice gotcha attempt
Gotcha attempt? Hardly. There is a progressive argument for state-funded journalism. Repeated mention of profit-driven media as a problem brought the question to mind.
Alright then. Of course news outlets need to pay their bills. But there was a longstanding understanding between media companies and the public that in exchange for use of the public airwaves, they actually had to do some good. Taibbi talks about this quite a bit. Now that idea almost seems like a joke.
Advertising introduces a particular sort of bias, so outlets like Democracy Now and The Nation survive on donations and subscriptions. They operate at a much smaller scale, obviously.
I think NPR does a pretty good job, but people like Chomsky have said that NPR is among the most rigid in limiting discussion into "acceptable discourse" and pretending like other ideas don't exist. I'm not really sure what to make of that because I just listen to NPR in the car and don't study it.
The NPR part I agree with, but probably further than you or Chomsky would go. NPR does a good job of covering "the news." You & Noam likely want NPR to cover more radical progressivism (which local affiliates and syndicators do more of). NPR also does little to cover conservative interests.
Not sure where you're going with the rest of it.
NPR needs to go. It's what you get when the crazies run the insane asylums.
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a chapter from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Can you put together a coherent post for once?
MSNBC and CNN put bias ahead of profit. The ratings bear that out.
I am well aware of manufacturing consent for wars or calling the President a traitor. News is cheap so it turns a profit regardless.
You can't deny what I wrote so you respond with the usual gibberish
I think Fox is biased just as much to the right and CNN/MSNBC are to the left. But the in the demographic that watches cable news, there's just way more right of center folks, hence way higher viewership for Fox. Same is true for talk radio.
And so if your motivation was money you would........
this isn't hard
And it is my point
CNN and MSNBC put bias ahead of profit on the Trump coverage
Sounds like right of center folks are better informed
They didn't waste two years watching about how Trump was going to be impeached or indicted or both
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a piece from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Are you one advocating for state-funded media?
nice gotcha attempt
Gotcha attempt? Hardly. There is a progressive argument for state-funded journalism. Repeated mention of profit-driven media as a problem brought the question to mind.
Alright then. Of course news outlets need to pay their bills. But there was a longstanding understanding between media companies and the public that in exchange for use of the public airwaves, they actually had to do some good. Taibbi talks about this quite a bit. Now that idea almost seems like a joke.
Advertising introduces a particular sort of bias, so outlets like Democracy Now and The Nation survive on donations and subscriptions. They operate at a much smaller scale, obviously.
I think NPR does a pretty good job, but people like Chomsky have said that NPR is among the most rigid in limiting discussion into "acceptable discourse" and pretending like other ideas don't exist. I'm not really sure what to make of that because I just listen to NPR in the car and don't study it.
The NPR part I agree with, but probably further than you or Chomsky would go. NPR does a good job of covering "the news." You & Noam likely want NPR to cover more radical progressivism (which local affiliates and syndicators do more of). NPR also does little to cover conservative interests.
Not sure where you're going with the rest of it.
NPR needs to go. It's what you get when the crazies run the insane asylums.
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
If you don't think profit-driven news is a major problem and was a major factor in the way this was covered, you truly can't be saved.
Not that you care because you have zero credibility or self-awareness, but there's some irony in you denying this after upvoting the op, which is a chapter from a book intended to be a follow-up to Manufacturing Consent
Can you put together a coherent post for once?
MSNBC and CNN put bias ahead of profit. The ratings bear that out.
I am well aware of manufacturing consent for wars or calling the President a traitor. News is cheap so it turns a profit regardless.
You can't deny what I wrote so you respond with the usual gibberish
I think Fox is biased just as much to the right and CNN/MSNBC are to the left. But the in the demographic that watches cable news, there's just way more right of center folks, hence way higher viewership for Fox. Same is true for talk radio.
Well that and the fact that the liberals have about 5 or 6 outlets that cater to their biases while the Right has one.
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
And you don't care that Fox was anti Obama? Turns out there's a lot of conservative dicksuckers who want the message that liberals are coming for all that is right in America. And that's what Fox sells very well.
Obama fucked up healthcare so bad no one is able to make a decent push for anything new for like 10 years after the ACA. What a fucking disaster. He can suck it.
Republicans had complete control of all three houses for two years. It's clear they have no solution to health Care other than to keep the current shitty system in place.
#aclockworkshill #rightontim #HondoBros #lapdog
@Pitchfork51 you can't besmirtch Obamacare without the chief lapdog nibbling at your balls.
As always its special to watch Hondofaggot move the goalposts after hearing for years how great Obamacare would be. The totally predictable failure it is
I have blasted Obamacare since the start. But at least in honest ways. I'm sorry I didn't jump on the death panel scare. Or how Obamacare would crater the economy. Or all the other bullshit lies you believed.
Really Obamacare kept in place the shitty medical insurance tied to employment system. But at least gave some transparency to buying on the internet to make it easier for people to be insured. And insurance rate growth slowed. But you kept your doctor so fuck off.
I read it yesterday. I've also listened to his pod with Sam Harris. He's definitely not team #MAGA.
While I will continue to disagree with many here on "attempted coups" , I would agree that many in the media got way out ahead of evidence being collected and have a shit ton of egg on the face.
I think it's more a symptom of profit-driven media than of any political agenda, although obviously there is some of that. He's talked about it in other places. The New Yorker infamously wouldn't even allow sales people on their editorial floor. Now tv news networks brag about being the most watched.
You would
If it was profit driven CNN and MSNBC would be like Fox who kicks their ass
They were anti Trump all the time because of their political views. They hired hacks like Brennan and the rest to echo that view day and night
They deserve all the shame and mockery they get. From wherever it comes
And you don't care that Fox was anti Obama? Turns out there's a lot of conservative dicksuckers who want the message that liberals are coming for all that is right in America. And that's what Fox sells very well.
Obama fucked up healthcare so bad no one is able to make a decent push for anything new for like 10 years after the ACA. What a fucking disaster. He can suck it.
Republicans had complete control of all three houses for two years. It's clear they have no solution to health Care other than to keep the current shitty system in place.
#aclockworkshill #rightontim #HondoBros #lapdog
@Pitchfork51 you can't besmirtch Obamacare without the chief lapdog nibbling at your balls.
As always its special to watch Hondofaggot move the goalposts after hearing for years how great Obamacare would be. The totally predictable failure it is
I have blasted Obamacare since the start. But at least in honest ways. I'm sorry I didn't jump on the death panel scare. Or how Obamacare would crater the economy. Or all the other bullshit lies you believed.
Really Obamacare kept in place the shitty medical insurance tied to employment system. But at least gave some transparency to buying on the internet to make it easier for people to be insured. And insurance rate growth slowed. But you kept your doctor so fuck off.
Why so angry? Sure sounds like you're defending Obamacare
Comments
MSNBC and CNN put bias ahead of profit. The ratings bear that out.
I am well aware of manufacturing consent for wars or calling the President a traitor. News is cheap so it turns a profit regardless.
You can't deny what I wrote so you respond with the usual gibberish
Advertising introduces a particular sort of bias, so outlets like Democracy Now and The Nation survive on donations and subscriptions. They operate at a much smaller scale, obviously.
I think NPR does a pretty good job, but people like Chomsky have said that NPR is among the most rigid in limiting discussion into "acceptable discourse" and pretending like other ideas don't exist. I'm not really sure what to make of that because I just listen to NPR in the car and don't study it.
And I'm talking about Manufacturing Consent. As in, the book. I'm sure you've heard of it.
this isn't hard
And it is my point
CNN and MSNBC put bias ahead of profit on the Trump coverage
Sounds like right of center folks are better informed
They didn't waste two years watching about how Trump was going to be impeached or indicted or both
Got it
Can you not disappear like a fart in the wind?
Why is the Military Intelligence Complex the training ground for news experts on panel shows?
That's a pretty big conflict right there
Brennen was praised for wink wink knowing the real deal in his infamous the indictments are coming this week video
He's just another hack
YBE
As far as military experts on television, I don't think we disagree. The trotting out of "retired" generals who later turned out to be on the Pentagon payroll to pimp the Invasion of Iraq was shameful. If you're trying to get me to defend cable news, we're going to be here for awhile. Same thing if you're trying to get me to defend Brennan.
Not sure where you're going with the rest of it.
That's not why they won't beat out FOX. Most boomers are liberal
Yes we agree on some stuff. It happens when you stop stereotyping everyone and lobbing out bad takes and actually discuss an issue
They didn't waste two years watching about how Trump was going to be impeached or indicted or both
Really Obamacare kept in place the shitty medical insurance tied to employment system. But at least gave some transparency to buying on the internet to make it easier for people to be insured. And insurance rate growth slowed. But you kept your doctor so fuck off.
A lot
Doesn't sound at all like you're blasting it
At all