August 16, 2011
– Comments (14)
Zerohedge has the find here:
The Daily ShowGet More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook
The media is afraid of Liberty. They don't understand it. They know the advantages they have with the current regime. They don't trust YOU with making your own decisions.
"13th Floor In A Hotel" syndrome comes from Fear.
Thanks for posting... I've posted this everywhere as well, but could not bring myself to write a blog about it without spewing out an emotional rant. It makes me so angry, though strangely I'm laughing.
I wonder if it's as extreme as rfaramir says or if it's one of these self-fulfilling prophecies that's unfortunate but not quite sinister. The Media shows what people want to see. People don't want freedom. People don't want freedom because media tells them not to want to freedom.... thinking out loud here, but could be a chicken and egg thing.
The massive conflict of interest in which major media is owned by corps that profit off status quo doesn't exactly help my unfortunate but not sinister argument...
While I don't think Ron Paul meets my ideology, I give him credit for his sincerity. Having Jon Stewart on his side doesn't hurt either.
abitare, welcome to yesterday:) http://caps.fool.com/Blogs/does-the-media-choose-the/629722
Franky, you're giving too much credit, or benefit of the doubt. There is a concerted EFFORT TO IGNORE AND RIDICULE Ron Paul that has nothing to do with entertainment. These are news organizations. When they are telling the results of a major presidential candidacy event and willfully ignore the second place finisher, who was nearly statistically a first-place tie, while mentioning candidates who finished third, fourth, fifth, and sixth with FAR FEWER votes, wehave a problem.
awallejr, curious what part of Ron Paul's ideology you don't like. It's interesting to watch how many Democrats and Republicans are recognizing the beauty of Ron Paul's message! People label him as "isolationist" because he does NOT want to be involved in foreign conflict! Since when does avoiding war equal "isolationism"? It's crazy. Then they want to try to corner him into social stances of selling heroin and being pro-life, when technically he is all about freedom to choose---he merely wants the decisions to be left up to individual adults, or raised to state issues at the highest, rather than having federal government act like mommy to everybody.
Keep spreading the word on RP everybody. If nothing else, it will expose the media and their corporate owners for what they are.
#3) On August 16, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Frankydontfailme (85.42) wrote:
I wonder if it's as extreme as rfaramir says or if it's one of these self-fulfilling prophecies that's unfortunate but not quite sinister.
Here are two more articles that came out recently on this topic:
As someone who watched the 2007-08 media operation to silence Ron Paul and his supporters, I attest that this is no "coincedence" or simply audience driven. The mainstream is under explicit orders to deny our voice to the greater public.
David in Qatar
As the footsteps of liberty grow louder, so will the wrath of ridicule. Funny stuff indeed.
Out of curiousity, do you believe the marching orders are sent from the heads of these media outlets (Murdoch, Turner, Immelt) or do you think it involves a more broad control group?
I always try to think of a non-conspiracy theory leaning explanation first, but don't necessarily think you guys are wrong on this one. Just because it's a conspiracy theory doesn't make it wrong.
Anyways, curious what others think on this issue.
While it may be a conspiracy, it doesn't have to be to still be a real phenomenon.
The oldstream media is very statist. They would much rather have a statist Republican (if they can't have their statist Messiah) than a Liberty-loving Republican. Even the somewhat balanced Fox network is pro-state in many ways (not all of their talking heads, kudos to the Judge!). And the news editors watch the other networks like a hawk. If they see the others getting away with not mentioning Paul, they will continue to do so themselves, until an uproar happens that they have to notice.
Maybe the link will work this time!
In the meantime check out this video kdakota posted on one of my threads:
Even the somewhat balanced Fox network
Seriously? Fox is to the right and CNN is to the left. Neither are "balanced."
Cafferty went up in my book...
I was arguing with my co-worker about the media's lack of coverage of Ron Paul. He A) ignored the question and brought up his opinion that Ron Paul was crazy B) said that the media shouldn't even cover the Iowa straw poll (true but irrelevant to the point), and C) said that the media doesn't cover Ron Paul because he's unelectable!
Unelectable! How can someone be electable when the media doesn't cover him? Circular logic much? And my co-worker is a Harvard Scientist with a PHD. Starting to piss me off.
Franky, see my blog from a few days ago where I break it down...it's just like you say:
Ignore, ridicule, lie, use this new media catchphrase "unelectable."
I have friends that say the same thing, and some are highly educated, yet regurgitating media. It's frightening how much power mainstream media has ont he collective conscious.
Mark Twain said something about "never let school get in the way of education." Well, most of these Harvard and Princeton grads put their schools ABOVE education...they got the Ivy League Lobotomy and are incapable of critical independent thinking!
Love this post and video. It is strange.