In The Age of Fake News Who Do We Believe?

My Recent Posts

Nobody knows what to believe anymore. We've lost our faith in our mainstream leaders. We no longer trust the government. We think the media is deceiving us. We think the experts are always wrong. We no longer trust any of them.

We believe we are being cynically manipulated for reasons of power, control and wealth.


We think are being lied to and exploited.


So who do we believe?


Some of us turn to the internet and seek out sites that give us a different perspective. We'd rather trust them. But are they giving a true picture or have they just got a different agenda?


Some go with their gut feelings and decide what to believe for themselves. But what real information do they have to base these decisions on?


Some choose to follow a dissenting voice and latch on to everything they say. But can they be trusted? Do they have access to superior information?


But if we do not believe the experts who do we believe? If we think that all the scientists have been bought off by big business where is the information coming from? If we think the politicians are either in it for themselves or in the pocket of the multinationals and wealthy then who can we vote for?


We splinter into tribal groups. We look for simplistic answers.


It seems to me that this makes us ripe for the stories put out by extremist groups and fundamentalist religions. They can paint a nice black and white picture that is very appealing in times of confusion. They seem to make sense. They exaggerate the problems masterfully. They seem to provide the answers. In reality they are cynically exploiting the fears and confusion to create division and hate from which they can profit.


It is not the terrorist leaders who strap on the explosive vests.


It is not the Fascist leaders who blow up mosques.


So what and who do we believe?


opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 4:16am
'Don't follow leaders - watch the parking meters'.
Yes time's running out. Our leaders have been leading us a merry dance. But we put them there.
When the media is controlled by the rich and the two party system selects our candidates for us; when money talks and cynical negative advertising is psychologically directed to inflict damage; when the voices of other choices cannot be heard because they cannot buy the necessary prime time and so are peripheralised - who do we believe? And do we even know they are there? Who can we trust?
Can you really trust the sites you gather your information from? Do you know who controls them? Who funds them? For what purpose?
Are they manipulating you?
Sam Nowaczynski Added Feb 10, 2018 - 4:46am
I don’t think this is the age of fake news.  Since the beginning of media there has been false reporting.  I don’t know how one would even go about measuring if it’s worse today than it was in the past.  I think the only difference is that we’ve given it a snappy name in calling it “Fake News.”
I have a tip for anyone that is upset over fake news, turn the channel or read a different newspaper.  You only have yourself to blame for receiving fake news.  I know what you’re going to say, “we the consumers of the news have no idea what constitutes fake news or real news.”  To that I say bullshit, there is ample evidence that if you get your news from some Podunk website or Facebook it’s likely to have a healthy dose of fake news in it. 
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 10, 2018 - 5:10am
Trust what you already know. There is nothing new under the sun. Most bullshit being pulled today has already been done before somewhere else. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out when someone is presenting an agenda
Stone-Eater Added Feb 10, 2018 - 5:50am
Fake news can be identified when asking the question:
Who profits?
Doug Plumb Added Feb 10, 2018 - 6:03am
Philosophy is the science of bullshit detection because it is all about finding truth. Plato and Aristotle will tell you everything you need to know to differentiate lies from truth. No one should believe fantastic truths that come from known liars. The moon landing is just one example.
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 7:01am
Sam - that is precisely my point. The internet is a mass of fake news and conspiracy theories. But so is the mainstream media - it's a diet of biased news, lies and constructed narratives . It manipulates the public. Is everything fake?
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 7:02am
Burger - unfortunately I think it does. They are very clever. What you already trust has already been fed to you. We become what we believe.
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 7:03am
Stone - where is there ever something that someone doesn't profit from?
It all has an agenda.
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 7:03am
Plato and Aristotle ran an Advertising Agency peddling fake news. 
Leroy Added Feb 10, 2018 - 8:40am
The only thing that has changed is the velocity of information.
All the professions I was taught to look up to--doctors, lawyers, engineers, scientist, law enforcement--have disappointed me at some point.  I've become jaded.  It's nothing new.  Just about everyone I know that has had a serious medical condition has been given incorrect information about their condition.  The most respected engineer in my company at the time, faked data to prove his point.  He justified it because he knew he was right; he just couldn't prove it with the data.  He asked me to sign off on it.  I refused.  He went ahead with his report anyway.  The most honest lawyer I know, upon becoming a judge, used his power to block the sale of property adjoining his.
You learn after a while who can be trusted and who can't and to what degree.  My brother-in-law was the town gossip.  He was a great guy.  I always loved his Canadian sense of humor.  Everything he ever told me had some element of truth about it, but it was rarely the whole truth.  I always paid attention to whatever he told me, but I also weighed it.  There are other people whom I have dealt with that anytime their lips move, I assume they are lying.  Some people, I trust with my life and that of my family.  The point is, we have always had to weigh the source.
"It seems to me that this makes us ripe for the stories put out by extremist groups and fundamentalist religions."
It is not just extremist groups and fundamentalist religions.  These groups are very straightforward with their beliefs.  Consequently, it is easy to discount any nonsense.  It is those with an agenda that are the most insidious ones.  The liberal progressives use any tactics to advance their agenda.  The end justifies the means.  The MSM is the prime example.  Among other things, they push the PC agenda on us.  Anyone who disagrees is a bigot.  There are those who wish to spread communism with their subtle lies.
EXPAT Added Feb 10, 2018 - 9:11am
Mass media is the most powerful tool used by the ruling class to manipulate the masses. It shapes and molds opinions and attitudes and defines what is normal and acceptable. This article looks at the workings of mass media through the theories of its major thinkers, its power structure and the techniques it uses, in order to understand its true role in society.
Programming Through Mass Media
Mass media are media forms designed to reach the largest audience possible. They include television, movies, radio, newspapers, magazines, books, records, video games and the internet. Many studies have been conducted in the past century to measure the effects of mass media on the population in order to discover the best techniques to influence it. From those studies emerged the science of Communications, which is used in marketing, public relations and politics. Mass communication is a necessary tool to ensure the functionality of a large democracy; it is also a necessary tool for a dictatorship. It all depends on its usage.
In the 1958 preface to A Brave New World, Aldous Huxley paints a rather grim portrait of society. He believes it is controlled by an “impersonal force”, a ruling elite, which manipulates the population using various methods.

“Impersonal forces over which we have almost no control seem to be pushing us all in the direction of the Brave New Worldian nightmare; and this impersonal pushing is being consciously accelerated by representatives of commercial and political organizations who have developed a number of new techniques for manipulating, in the interest of some minority, the thoughts and feelings of the masses.”
– Aldous Huxley, Preface to A Brave New World
Dino Manalis Added Feb 10, 2018 - 9:17am
Fake news is simply opinion and should be characterized as such.  The media ought to merely focus on what happens every day without analysis, because some will believe it, others won't.  The media may hold an occasional analysis from all perspectives without a personal or institutional preference, if that's possible.  Fake news is an oxymoron, it's either news or it isn't.
Neil Lock Added Feb 10, 2018 - 9:32am
Opher: A very good question! At the first level, I’d respond:

Trust your own experience.
Trust those who have treated you well in the past.
Trust those who behave honestly and reasonably, and seem to want to treat you well.
Tend to mistrust anyone that obfuscates or over-complicates matters.
Tend to mistrust anyone that parrots someone else’s ideas.
Tend to mistrust anyone who prefers to talk of we rather than of I.
Tend to mistrust anyone you catch out lying, or being dishonest or hypocritical.
Mistrust anyone with any political or religious agenda.
Mistrust anyone that cries “the end is nigh!” or any other such ruse.
Mistrust anyone that says “I’m an expert, trust me.”
Mistrust anyone that says “You’re not an expert, so you must be wrong.”
Mistrust anyone that resorts to specious arguments or to ad hominems.
Mistrust anyone that profits from schemes that rip you off.
Mistrust anyone you think may be trying to sell you something you don’t want.
Mistrust the mainstream media, most of all if government funded.
Mistrust, above all, anyone that denies the existence of truth.

And then, depending on which way you’ve gone initially, it’s either “trust but verify,” or “mistrust, but still be open to evidence that they might not be wrong on this matter.”
EXPAT Added Feb 10, 2018 - 9:35am
There is no "news" anymore. ALL the media are now entertainment. People have their favorite reality show, which has replaced news, and follow it RELIGEOUSLY. Of course, calling it a reality show, is a misnomer, because the media of choice feeds their audience what they want to hear and see, while ignoring any activity that would upset their preconceived world view.
The masses have made themselves asses, by repeating the Google mantra chosen for them, instead of using the available information to REASON. Elections have become entertainment, where the most outrageous candidate, gets to champion their emotional cause. You probably haven't noticed that political babble has replaced movies, plays, National Geographic specials, variety shows, comedy shows, music specials, and all the things that used to enrich our lives.
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 9:36am
Leroy - sadly what you say is true. People all use their tactics to get their own way.
Where has honesty gone? Was it ever honest?
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 9:37am
Expat - sadly I agree with that too. We are being controlled and manipulated.
George N Romey Added Feb 10, 2018 - 9:37am
Fake news is not new. It’s been around for mankind. Learn to question everything and ask does it impact me. Washington DC? Most of what goes on doesn’t impact and certainly doesn’t benefit me. I’m learning the hard way it’s best not to give a s$$t. I’ll never vote in a national election again. What’s the point? Politicians will never worry about someone like me.
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 9:38am
Dino - good point about the oxymoron. But I think it goes beyond just being fake and into the realms of manipulation.
Doug Plumb Added Feb 10, 2018 - 9:40am
Try and prove what they are saying is impossible (ie use the scientific method). We know 9-11 is impossible because buildings cannot collapse that way from fires and ...and ...and..
  We know the moon landings were false because other countries have stated the impossibility of going into space and of landing on the moon. (France thought their moon probe could just sink in moon dust on landing, which means their space people don't think our space people landed anything on the moon).
  They lie using ridiculousness, they are lying to humiliate us and train our minds to believe anything.
  In reality you shouldn't believe anything that they have ever said.
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 9:40am
Neil - that's a lot of mistrust and very little trust - but I'll go along with your analysis. 
Can you trust yourself or your own intuition though? How far have we been indoctrinated? Are we not a product of our culture? Does our own experience taint us?
Doug Plumb Added Feb 10, 2018 - 9:49am
BTW I learned about France and the moon from the NY Times. I went back to buy the paper so I could put it on my wall and they were sold out !!!
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 10:04am
Doug - and the Earth is flat but NASA is refusing to admit it. I learnt that from the Beano.
EXPAT Added Feb 10, 2018 - 10:27am
There used to be 50 news media outlets. When one printed fake news, they were exposed by one of the others.
Now there are 5 outlets, and they all work in collusion.  Some like FOX, pretend to be in opposition, but use the same methods to deceive. The owner of FOX news is Red Rupert Murdock. How does a Socialist, honestly present a right wing point of view?
That is why the Trump camp, does not respect public opinion, and the Democraps think they can manipulate it.
Bill H. Added Feb 10, 2018 - 10:50am
I believe that much of what is termed "Fake News" these days is simply news that we don't want to hear or believe concerning politics. It is not necessarily, and rarely "untrue", but simply uncomfortable to the consumer based on the spin or emphasis applied by the source. We can certainly see how it affects the President.
Most popular sources (CNN, MSNBC, FOX, BBC) rarely report unverified or unfounded material, and if it is not totally verified but originates from what they consider a reliable source or multiple independent sources, they will report it, but almost always indicate that the material is still in the verification process.
We are in a dangerous period whereas our President is threatening the rights of the Free Press and actually having some success via support from his followers. He is also attempting to enhance government control of the media via regulatory methods and elimination of rules that prevent this, such as loosening ownership limits in local TV and rolling back net neutrality. He constantly berates the media, blacklists specific sources, attempts to manipulate the public against the media, condemn satirical or critical comments, threaten the media directly (by changing libel laws), limit media access, and bypass the media and communicate with the public directly via Twitter and rallies. He has also proposed challenging the licences of news sources that he does not approve of.
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 10:58am
Expat - since when has Murdoch been red. He's the most scurrilous purveyor of right-wing propaganda ever.
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 11:00am
Bill - I do think it's more than spin on occasions. They blatantly misinform.
Shutting down or controlling the media is the first move towards tyrannical fascism.
EXPAT Added Feb 10, 2018 - 11:28am
May 18, 2006 @ 06:00 AM 148 2 Free Issues of Forbes
'Red Rupert,' The Pragmatist


Rupert Murdoch arrived in America in 1974 to buy newspapers in San Antonio and to create a national tabloid, and has been here ever since, an increasingly influential political force and media baron (TV, movies, the Internet, etc). Yet to some people, he remains an enigma.
"What's in a Murdoch-Clinton Alliance?" asked a somewhat disingenuous headline in The New York Times of May 11.
The story, strangely situated in the Metro section but datelined Washington, and written by Anne E. Kornblut, explored recent kissy-face time between those apparently sworn political enemies Murdoch and Hillary Clinton, as the most unlikely couple since Mary Matalin and James Carville found romance.
Murdoch would be hosting a fund-raiser for Senator Clinton this summer. Hillary was being polite: "I am very grateful that he thinks I'm doing a good job." One liberal blogger screeched, "The brazenness of this move is almost too much to stomach." Well, maybe, but was it all that much of a surprise?
Perhaps the most astute line in the Kornblut piece took note of Murdoch's "tendency to prize political power over ideology," a polite and elaborate way of saying he isn't quite the raving rightwing ideologue he sometimes appears, nor has he overnight converted to flaming pinko. But he's really a guy who just loves to win.
I went to work for Rupert in the summer of '74 as editor of his new supermarket tabloid National Star, and stayed with him in various jobs for the next nine years. In those days, he was still an Aussie and clearly a power back home, a press lord who cheerfully enjoyed the sport.
Once I asked about how close an Australian newspaper proprietor could get to the prime minister, did they talk frequently, or maintain a stiff and proper distance. "He comes to dinner at the house," Rupert said off-handedly. Although we think of him as a conservative, back then, if memory serves, Murdoch backed a conservative one term and a liberal the next. Depending on the candidate, and conditions, Rupert took turns.
Long before that, while his father Sir Keith, a correspondent who broke the story of murderously incompetent English leadership at Gallipoli, ran the family papers in Adelaide, the son was an Oxford undergraduate known as "Red Rupert."
I was never able to predict his political choices. In 1977, when I edited New York magazine, which Rupert owned along with the New York Post and the Village Voice, he hosted a series of editorial board meetings with the half-dozen mayoral candidates. I suspected Rupert wouldn’t be backing Bella Abzug. But his eventual choice of Ed Koch astonished me. Koch, of course, won.
Some time after I'd left his organization, I wrote a column about Rupert's love of winning. As a tennis player, he beat people with whom he had no business being on the same court. "He hates to lose," said Aussie George Viles, known around the office as "Old Blue Rinse." Rupert was also a fan of thoroughbred racing, and according to Viles, in a big race Murdoch might have a bet placed on every horse in the field. "It doesn’t matter to Rupert about the money so long as he has the winner. He hates to lose."

EXPAT Added Feb 10, 2018 - 11:32am
Rupert chided me for naiveté, and for the column. "You've been listening to Viles too long," he scoffed. But Old Blue Rinse might have had something there.
Which is what I suspect Rupert sees in Hillary. He is a good handicapper and he smells a winner. Just why people at the Times hadn't long ago figured this out, I can't say. Any assiduous reader of the New York Post over the last year or so could read into the paper's stories about Hillary Clinton--their placement, their number, their tone--a political sea change, a shift in coverage. Earlier on, Hillary had been the newspaper’s "Dragon Lady," their pet peeve, their la belle dame sans merci. Then the paper began ripping her then Senate opponent, Republican Jeanine Pirro, and puffing Hills.
Now Red Rupert and Hillary are taking tea and crumpets.
Surely long before Ms. Kornblut wrote her column, top editors of the Times should have drawn conclusions. I am hardly the most astute poll watcher in town. But I sensed something had happened, that Murdoch had made a decision. And that for all his strong backing of Bush through two elections, he knew a loser when he saw one.
And that, once again, he wanted to be on the winning side. So he started wooing Hillary. Now if Roger Ailes' Fox News starts cuddling up, I’ll be sure of it.
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 11:33am
Expat - I can't see any socialist values in there. He just likes to win doesn't he?
EXPAT Added Feb 10, 2018 - 11:35am
Doug Plumb Added Feb 10, 2018 - 3:25pm
re "The owner of FOX news is Red Rupert Murdock. How does a Socialist, honestly present a right wing point of view?"
You have two kinds of opposition, opposition you can control and opposition you cannot. The best way to win a war is to control your opposition.
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 5:56pm
Doug - or annihilate them!
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2018 - 5:58pm
Expat - he just sides with the winning side, doesn't he? But he not red.
TexasLynn Added Feb 10, 2018 - 8:03pm
Neil hit this one out of the park.  It comes down to using past experience to assign how much you can trust or (more easily) distrust a news source as a consumer of information.
The mainstream media has been so biased and disingenuous for so long; it is easy to dismiss them out of hand.
Opher is right that we need to be wary of our own bias.  And being aware of this is the first step in mitigating for it.
It would be torture to watch/listen to the derangement currently spewing from the leftist sources (you leftist can imagine watching Fox News).  I have chosen one leftist source (NPR) and listen to them on a regular basis to get the other side.
Katharine Otto Added Feb 10, 2018 - 8:04pm
I've been reading a lot of history, as well as books written in earlier times.  While I believe authors make a sincere attempt to be truthful, everything they write is filtered through their own, personal lens, and that is colored by the times they live in or the times they write about.  It seems people throughout history put their own spin--or their institutional spin--on information or facts, such as which facts to report and which to ignore.  
I've noticed with news that reporters are often young and inexperienced, and they don't have enough background information even to ask the right questions, much less get satisfactory answers.  MSM or internet news does seem based on some kind of agenda, a sales pitch for a particular point of view, as though having a strong influence on public opinion makes it more true.  I tend to be wary of generalizations, predictions, and anonymous sources.
Lots of people believe they know more than they do, or they believe hearsay, or they hear what they want or expect to hear.  And there are those who have strong opinions on subjects about which they know nothing.  
I've found in my own life that truth changes, or seems to, when I acquire new information.  At this point, I believe everything and nothing, knowing anything is possible, even if it's not always likely.
George N Romey Added Feb 10, 2018 - 11:28pm
With advent of cable news reporters became entertainers and now pundits. No President even Nixon was outright disrespected by the press like Trump. BTW Trump by no means has been the first President to say outrageous or strange things.
EXPAT Added Feb 10, 2018 - 11:53pm
Opher. I am getting tired of providing you with information that any thinking man knows. Your problem is you have created your own world and every body has a label. You are incapable of independent thought, so I will no longer provide information to you.
We all know how it ended – phone hacking, cover-up, corruption and "the humblest day of my life". To many it was just what Rupert Murdoch deserved. Dragging Britain's press into the gutter, showing contempt for the law and contaminating politics and public life had finally caught up with him. The Doctor Evil of global media finally brought to heel. But is that media caricature of Murdoch – and it's one that many people of my vintage and liberal leanings were thoroughly soaked in – right?


I've never met Murdoch – been in the same room a couple of times maybe, but never spoken to him. But having made two programmes about him – one for Radio 4 two years ago at the time of his 80th birthday and one that airs on Sunday night on BBC2 – I'm beginning to think that caricature is most definitely wrong. Actually I'd go further and say that almost everything I thought I knew about Murdoch and what he did is at the very least more complex than it appears, and in some cases just plain wrong. What's more, the Murdoch story tells us as much about Britain and us as it does about him.
I knew Murdoch came from Australia but hadn't appreciated the importance of his background or his father. Sir Keith Murdoch was the biggest name in Australian journalism after exposing the Gallipoli scandal during the first world war. The Murdochs were Australian aristocracy – wealthy and respected – with a pronounced dose of antipathy to the "old country". But the other key thing about Murdoch senior was that, for all his public profile as a national hero (and media baron) when he died, the only thing he actually ended up being able to pass on to his son was one small newspaper – the Adelaide Evening News. And that was one lesson the young Rupert learned from his father – ownership and control were far more important than public profile. And so it has been with Murdoch businesses ever since – own and control or dispose.
I knew Rupert Murdoch had been to Oxford University but I didn't know he was a dyed-in-the-wool socialist. He had a bust of Lenin on his Worcester College mantelpiece and, according to one contemporary, was even close to the Oxford Communist party.
OH MY GOD, a socialist promoting conservative point of view.
opher goodwin Added Feb 11, 2018 - 4:22am
Lynn - I'm glad you keep an eye on a leftish source of information. Though what passes for left in the States is probably more centre over here.
opher goodwin Added Feb 11, 2018 - 4:26am
Katharine - that is totally true. We all swim in our own cultural ponds and are floating in the zeitgeist of our times. Our limited experiences create our own personal perspective. We are nowhere near as independent thinking as we think we are.
If we'd been born in Afghanistan we'd be Muslims and think like Muslims, if in Israel we'd be Jews and think like Jews. If we'd been born in medieval times we'd have that attitude too.
We are products of culture and time.
opher goodwin Added Feb 11, 2018 - 4:27am
George - news is all about viewing figures isn't it? They tailor it for the audience. They are selling it.
opher goodwin Added Feb 11, 2018 - 4:30am
Expat - well I read your previous articles and they did not indicate anything more than a chancer who was a chameleon.
The bust of Lenin and being close to the communists. That was news to me. I've always seen him as a bit of a right-wing fascist.
Stephen Hunter Added Feb 11, 2018 - 7:53am
Could not agree more Opher! To me the biggest danger is people following their pack and only believing what their Spiritual leader tells them to. (for example) 
Tubularsock Added Feb 11, 2018 - 3:51pm
opher, great post.
Tubularsock’s bottom line is ..... considered the source.
There is either plenty of information on the subject or very little.
Where does the information show up, who is promoting it, who is NOT speaking about it and finally what are the vested interests of the sources.
Then stack up your findings and look ...... usually it is clear if you yourself aren’t pushing an agenda.
EVEN your enemy speaks the truth of a situation sometimes!
Be OPEN but Clear.
TexasLynn Added Feb 11, 2018 - 4:46pm
Opher >> I'm glad you keep an eye on a leftish source of information.
Me too.  When the crazies are setting so much of the agenda... it's good to get a read on where they are coming from. :)  I read the Koran for the same reason.
Opher >> Though what passes for left in the States is probably more centre over here.
That goes for people and news, I suspect.  Just this morning I was telling mom "We see how irrational and crazy the left is here in the States, but we really have no idea what crazy is.  Our leftist can't hold a candle to the rest of the world."
I would like to thank WB for my recent education.  I used to suspect you guys (Europeans) were crazy... now I know it’s worse than that; you’re MSNBC crazy! :)
I never thought I'd say this, but thank God for our sane neighbors to the north.  (Oklahoma and Canada) :)
EXPAT Added Feb 11, 2018 - 5:37pm
My point to opher, was that things are not always what they seem. Drawing conclusions based on labels, commentary, perceived motivation and transference, are fools play.
To assume you know what is going on in the world, because your magic couch, brings you Google, and media, makes you a pawn. The Democraps have mastered the art of false dichotomy; i.e. because he loves immigrants he is a caring person.
The world, for that matter a single person is too much for you to understand. But we must understand or admit we are ignorant. The defense is to categorize, that way examples of what we believe can be found within a large group.
The fact that Red Rupert Murdoch, founded FOX news, only shows he is not an ideologue, but an opportunist. Those who find satisfaction on WB, are also opportunists, but only for mental satisfaction, not profit.
Political systems, such as Communism, socialism, Parliamentarianism, Constitutional Republic, all have the same goal: to keep the masses from interfering, with the function of a government that serves the wealthy, and keeps the proletariat paying for it. 
EXPAT Added Feb 11, 2018 - 5:43pm
A side note: I could not find information on Red Rupert on Google. Searches are so controlled, that you only get to consider, what Google is promoting at the moment.
I used Duck Duck Go, to find information.
opher goodwin Added Feb 11, 2018 - 6:19pm
Too true Stephen.
opher goodwin Added Feb 11, 2018 - 6:20pm
Tub - sometimes it is hard to know who the source is. You're the only source I trust Tub!
opher goodwin Added Feb 11, 2018 - 6:21pm
Lynn - you actually think they're sane?
opher goodwin Added Feb 11, 2018 - 6:23pm
Expat - I agree with you. They control us.
TexasLynn Added Feb 11, 2018 - 7:19pm
Opher >> you actually think they're sane? (Okies and Canucks)
Meh... it's all relative.  We can't all be Texans (in locale, spirit and sanity) :)
wsucram15 Added Feb 11, 2018 - 7:36pm
You have to find the news. most of the "real news" occurs right under your noses.
People make news..but you will never hear about that.  Make friends with people everywhere and learn the issues of that area.  Thats the news.
Politics is a show, a really expensive show. the more you tune in the more expensive it is...  Ive never seen anything like the media and the people behind the politicians.
george..thats just sad, you wont get off your ass to vote as a citizen of the US when so many would kill for that privilege.  wow.
Bill H. Added Feb 11, 2018 - 8:19pm
Tube - You hit the nail on the head!
Most MSM media sources report truthful valid information, but spin it to emphasize the points that their audience will feel comfortable with.
FOX has to now spin it to please the President, so their work requires even more reviewing.
Most people just select a news source that tells them exactly what they want to hear, not what they need to hear. 
Doug Plumb Added Feb 11, 2018 - 11:31pm
If I meet someone and I know they have lied to me twice or more, then I just do not believe anything that they say, ever again. Once a liar always a liar applies everywhere. Its universal. Apply a different standard to gov or the media and you know you are a communist.
  I hear of wars, pestilence and disease, but the most unbelievably sad and discouraging thing is to hear what people can be made to believe.When I was sitting in a bar eating breakfast with 20 others, watching 9-11 and hearing that people believed a building collpses like that from an airplane hitting it - I just about went off the fucking wall. I had to get out of there. I was laughed at and called a conspiracy theorist. I asked everyone what they thought of 9-11, they all believed Osama did it. It took me three months to find someone who was on my side. I asked everyone, strangers, friends, co-workers. I was insulted to no end. It costed me good friends. I don't care now, truth is all that matters and I'm a proud holocaust denier too.
  I know what it means to live in a false reality. You can easily make the mistake once, but not twice. Most people have made that mistake, but have not yet learned the price they will pay for it.
opher goodwin Added Feb 12, 2018 - 4:20am
Lynn - that is true. We can't all be Texans. My mum used to say that it takes all sorts to make the world go round.
opher goodwin Added Feb 12, 2018 - 4:21am
Jeanne - Politics sure is Showbiz. That's the problem.
opher goodwin Added Feb 12, 2018 - 4:22am
Tub/Bill - it's the spin that kills - just ask any pilot!
opher goodwin Added Feb 12, 2018 - 4:26am
Doug - do you use communist there as a kind of derogatory swearword?
And you think truth is all that matters and you are a holocaust denier (despite immense evidence), a 9/11 conspiracy theorist and a follower of some Arabic Cult? Wow!!
It's George Orwell all over again!
wsucram15 Added Feb 12, 2018 - 8:01am
Opher..People say that, but I never really understood it until I was inside the Capital Bldg. with both Congressional members and press. It must be insane for members of Congress to be chased around by the press the way they are..but remember they both have jobs to do.
Also try to remember who they are playing those parts for..the public.
Sometimes the press isnt trying to "sell the news", sometimes they just want an honest story.  Problem with that is..WE dont want it. Its boring.
I have a couple of people I know that are staff writers and the average joe stories are fine here and there, but not often.  People want to be dazzled.
It is showiz..and thats how Trump got elected and why his tweets are such a big ordeal.  It pays for the lights.
Stephen Hunter Added Feb 12, 2018 - 8:19am
The problem is that when new information is brought forward, some are just not ready to hear it, as it does not align with their or their pack's view of reality. Therefore they tune in to a source which aligns with their belief. And any rationale thinking individual knows this is a slippery slope. However news is digested with emotion, not with logic in many cases. 
opher goodwin Added Feb 12, 2018 - 8:32am
Jeanne - we are often our world's worst enemy. We are shallow and like to be entertained. But that still doesn't excuse the Press becoming part of Showbiz. They shouldn't be in the business of selling it to us. They should be impartially reporting. News shouldn't be business, should it?
opher goodwin Added Feb 12, 2018 - 8:33am
Stephen - that is how people work. We are all selective. As Paul Simon said 'A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest'.
wsucram15 Added Feb 12, 2018 - 9:26am
Well the argument seems to be, its a business. It used to be one hour of unbiased news in the evening for the corporate takeover of our airwaves....that ended I think in the year I was born 1961.  It was definitely over by 1996 when Fox and CNN televised cable news and the opposition viewpoint as opposed to real news their journalists discovered.
People did not know that and thus..mistrust was born, because cable news is a business.  Now that mainstream media has gotten wind of that, your hometown studios are mostly run by One or two majority owners like Sinclair Broadcasting who very closely regulates what is put out in their media outlets.
So yeah..people, your last vestige of news is journalistic news outlets and there are VERY few of them left.
" I met a girl who sang the blues and I asked her for some happy news and she just smiled and turned away..."
opher goodwin Added Feb 12, 2018 - 9:30am
Jeanne - in the UK we had the BBC which was considered very good and unbiased. But increasingly it has become political. Thatcher used it as a political propaganda tool. In the Miners' strike it was appalling - so biased. It is going the way of the others.
wsucram15 Added Feb 12, 2018 - 9:51am
The BBC is one of the better stations.  But I dont know of any televised news that is unbiased.  Ive been watching it for a bit of late in the hotel room and its pretty bad.
Watch Cspan if you want to see unbiased US news. you will need to understand what is happening but it is literally the House and Senate in session.  Its what I watch if there is something important coming up and even sometimes when there isnt.  They do some sneaky stuff in session.
Its difficult to present unbiased news in the first place...but with corporate pressure, its pretty much impossible.
opher goodwin Added Feb 12, 2018 - 9:54am
Jeanne - are you still in the hotel? I thought you were back home? And how's the wrist?
wsucram15 Added Feb 12, 2018 - 10:06am
I do have newscasters I like...
Joy Reid on the weekends, she is a progressive but a proud , educated black woman with a microphone.   I'd vote for her if she was running for office.  Smart as hell.
My fav though is Katy Tur (young but very fiesty)...and the finance show with Velshi and Rhule (they take few prisoners).
Other than that..I read my news.
Spartacus Added Feb 12, 2018 - 1:04pm
I believe opher . . . that if you pulled your head out of your ass you would both see the world much better.  I understand that inspecting your own colon daily and eating your own feces may seem productive . . . it's not.
Dave Volek Added Feb 12, 2018 - 3:27pm
Oooh! Someone has taken some Nasty pills today!
opher goodwin Added Feb 12, 2018 - 6:26pm
Hey William - have a nice day. All I know is that eating my shit is better than eating your shit.
opher goodwin Added Feb 12, 2018 - 6:27pm
Jeanne - I'm not sure I trust any of them completely. They read what is put in front of them.
Bill H. Added Feb 15, 2018 - 9:50pm
Oph - William has a case of chronic angrywhitemanosis, that appears to be affecting a few other WB users, also.
opher goodwin Added Feb 16, 2018 - 12:50pm
I know Bill - there's a real angry division in society at the moment.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Feb 17, 2018 - 5:18am
"Can you really trust the sites you gather your information from? Do you know who controls them? Who funds them? For what purpose?
Are they manipulating you?"
Therein is where you have a problem if you are uninitiated.  I trust WB, but I am aware that a lot of BS is spewed. I can decipher BS, so can others; thus my truth may be their BS. So we may have to adopt the philosopher who advised to clear all things from your mind to the stage where, "I think, therefore I am." Then move forward with the quest for understanding. But a problem herein was expressed by the 'Dawg--Snoop Dawg--"If you dont know, you wont know."
Glad I clarified the shit.
opher goodwin Added Feb 18, 2018 - 3:55am
Doc - we all think we can decipher BS but we all end up believing the BS that fits the picture we want to hear.