Archaic News Outlets Mouthpiece Of Govt Over Snowden

[Geoist]

The Edward Snowden leaks have revealed a U.S. corporate media system at war with independent journalism. Many of the same outlets—especially TV news—that missed the Wall Street meltdown and cheer-led the Iraq invasion have come to resemble state-controlled media outlets in their near-total identification with the government as it pursues the now 30-year-old whistleblower.

While an independent journalism system would be dissecting the impacts of NSA surveillance on privacy rights, and separating fact from fiction, U.S. news networks have obsessed on questions like: How much damage has Snowden caused? How can he be brought to justice?

Snowden Coverage: If US Mass Media Were State-Controlled, Would They Look Any Different?

While Americans squabble over whether Fox News or MSNBC is more biased, we completely ignore how corporate media in general has come to resemble state-run media. Thank God for the internet and independent journalists.

 

[ocean515]

The Edward Snowden leaks have revealed a U.S. corporate media system at war with independent journalism. Many of the same outlets—especially TV news—that missed the Wall Street meltdown and cheer-led the Iraq invasion have come to resemble state-controlled media outlets in their near-total identification with the government as it pursues the now 30-year-old whistleblower.

While an independent journalism system would be dissecting the impacts of NSA surveillance on privacy rights, and separating fact from fiction, U.S. news networks have obsessed on questions like: How much damage has Snowden caused? How can he be brought to justice?

Snowden Coverage: If US Mass Media Were State-Controlled, Would They Look Any Different?

While Americans squabble over whether Fox News or MSNBC is more biased, we completely ignore how corporate media in general has come to resemble state-run media. Thank God for the internet and independent journalists.

The problem with internet "news sources" and independent journalists, is that they rarely are.

Commondreams is a Progressive organization with an agenda, and a desire to promote their political and ideological cause.

With such a foundation, it can hardly be claimed as a source of unfiltered news.

 

[Geoist]

The problem with internet "news sources" and independent journalists, is that they rarely are.

And the problem with corporate "news sources" is that they rarely are.

Commondreams is a Progressive organization with an agenda, and a desire to promote their political and ideological cause. With such a foundation, it can hardly be claimed as a source of unfiltered news.

Never said all internet sites are independent or qualify as "news." But there are far more independent sites than there are independent corporate news.

 

[ocean515]

And the problem with corporate "news sources" is that they rarely are.



Never said all internet sites are independent or qualify as "news." But there are far more independent sites than there are independent corporate news.

Indeed there are many more internet sites offering their take on events than there are corporate sites.

Don't you think the same slant is possible from these "independent" sites and with the "corporate" ones?

The article you posted came from Commonsense.org, a known Progressive site with a mission to spread a Progressive agenda.

How can that be considered "independent"?

 

[Geoist]

Indeed there are many more internet sites offering their take on events than there are corporate sites.

Don't you think the same slant is possible from these "independent" sites and with the "corporate" ones?

The article you posted came from Commonsense.org, a known Progressive site with a mission to spread a Progressive agenda.

How can that be considered "independent"?

An organization could be independent and still have a general ideological leaning. Unlike Fox News, Common Dreams does not deny their leanings. No journalist could ever completely disconnect him/herself from their views. The problem arises when "news" sources get too close to governments and corporations. That is when independence is lost.

 

[head of joaquin]

|Capitalism is a bitch, isn't it?

 

[Geoist]

|Capitalism is a bitch, isn't it?

I am pro-freed market, anti-capitalist.
Charles Johnson on Free-Market Anti-Capitalism - Forbes

The internet is a pretty good example of a freed market at work.

 

[instagramsci]

I am pro-freed market, anti-capitalist.
Charles Johnson on Free-Market Anti-Capitalism - Forbes

The internet is a pretty good example of a freed market at work.

Please tell me you aren't referring to bitcoins

 

[Geoist]

Please tell me you aren't referring to bitcoins

No one is coerced into using bitcoin.

 

[nota bene]

An organization could be independent and still have a general ideological leaning. Unlike Fox News, Common Dreams does not deny their leanings. No journalist could ever completely disconnect him/herself from their views. The problem arises when "news" sources get too close to governments and corporations. That is when independence is lost.

What's so great about the Internet is access to so many sources...so that you can read up at both Fox News and Common Dreams.

 

[head of joaquin]

I am pro-freed market, anti-capitalist.
Charles Johnson on Free-Market Anti-Capitalism - Forbes

The internet is a pretty good example of a freed market at work.

So are large international media corporations. So much for your free market rhetoric.

Capitalists want capitalism for everybody but themselves.

 

[head of joaquin]

No one is coerced into using bitcoin.

We have anti-fiat currency liftoff!

Scratch a libertarian and you always get to the gold standard or some simulacrum thereof.

 

[Geoist]

So are large international media corporations. So much for your free market rhetoric. Capitalists want capitalism for everybody but themselves.

We have capitalism. But we don't have a free market. Read the article to understand the difference.

 

[Geoist]

We have anti-fiat currency liftoff!

Scratch a libertarian and you always get to the gold standard or some simulacrum thereof.

I do not support the gold standard and I am not necessarily anti-fiat currency. Notice that I am a LEFT libertarian. :roll:

 

[Geoist]

What's so great about the Internet is access to so many sources...so that you can read up at both Fox News and Common Dreams.

Unfortunately, some choose to only stick with the sites/sources that agree with their views.

 

[tererun]

While Americans squabble over whether Fox News or MSNBC is more biased, we completely ignore how corporate media in general has come to resemble state-run media. Thank God for the internet and independent journalists.

One of the bigger problems is that the government has made efforts to define what sources are considered news and therefor considered protected by the first amendment. The internet may have many crappy sites on it, but we really do not want the government declaring what news sources classify as news sources. It is not a slipperly slope to abuse of power, it is actually giving them the power to abuse and silence media they do not like.

 

[Fisher]

Independent "journalists" can hardly write a story not intending it to be turned into click bait. Most of the "news" sites on the web are nothing but aggregaters and replicators from other reputable sources.

 

[Guy Incognito]

I do not support the gold standard and I am not necessarily anti-fiat currency. Notice that I am a LEFT libertarian. :roll:

I doubt too many leftists would want you. Don't forget that they cannot abide private ownership of the means of production.

 

[Mr. Invisible]

The Edward Snowden leaks have revealed a U.S. corporate media system at war with independent journalism. Many of the same outlets—especially TV news—that missed the Wall Street meltdown and cheer-led the Iraq invasion have come to resemble state-controlled media outlets in their near-total identification with the government as it pursues the now 30-year-old whistleblower.

While an independent journalism system would be dissecting the impacts of NSA surveillance on privacy rights, and separating fact from fiction, U.S. news networks have obsessed on questions like: How much damage has Snowden caused? How can he be brought to justice?

Snowden Coverage: If US Mass Media Were State-Controlled, Would They Look Any Different?

While Americans squabble over whether Fox News or MSNBC is more biased, we completely ignore how corporate media in general has come to resemble state-run media. Thank God for the internet and independent journalists.

Virtually every channel is owned by a handful of corporations, thus we only get to choose from corporate media.

These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America - Business Insider

Who Owns What on Television? - Neatorama

 

[Mr. Invisible]

Indeed there are many more internet sites offering their take on events than there are corporate sites.

Don't you think the same slant is possible from these "independent" sites and with the "corporate" ones?

The article you posted came from Commonsense.org, a known Progressive site with a mission to spread a Progressive agenda.

How can that be considered "independent"?

One can still be independent and have a lean. What matters is that they openly acknowledge their leanings, so that one can take that into account when reading news/articles from that source or those sources.