The Death Of Democracy?

[Heyo]

They also tried to hide info from us.
And we didn't have easy access to alternative
sources, eg, Wikileaks, Drudge Report.

Yes, but with many papers owned by many diverse people there was always the risk that one picked up a story some would like to hide. Now, with all the media owned by oligarchs, a black out is much easier.

The new media still aren't so trustworthy
that we need not vet info using other sources.

True. But we had to do that with the old media also who had the occasional canard. And we now know better who to trust in online media by their track record.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes, but with many papers owned by many diverse people there was always the risk that one picked up a story some would like to hide. Now, with all the media owned by oligarchs, a black out is much easier.

Which oligarchs own all the media?

True. But we had to do that with the old media also who had the occasional canard. And we now know better who to trust in online media by their track record.

I still prefer today's sources to the very limited old ones.
Government had more control over them back then.
How, you ask?
Electronic media depended upon government permission
for their frequency bands. Newspapers are capital intensive
businesses, & have assets that government can threaten.
Nowadays, internet start-ups are immune to those threats.

 

[Heyo]

Which oligarchs own all the media?

Murdoc, Disney, Bezos and a few other. The point is that the mainstream media will never go against the system.

I still prefer today's sources to the very limited old ones.
Government had more control over them back then.
How, you ask?
Electronic media depended upon government permission
for their frequency bands. Newspapers are capital intensive
businesses, & have assets that government can threaten.
Nowadays, internet start-ups are immune to those threats.

I'm with you on that. I also like many easy to access media better. But I also see the danger of people not as sceptical as you and me and the emergence of bubbles that leads to biased perceptions of reality.

 

[Revoltingest]

Murdoc, Disney, Bezos and a few other. The point is that the mainstream media will never go against the system.

And they control diverse sources like The Drudge Report, Mother Jones, etc?
Nah.
So when the mainstream media don't cover some issue,
or if they spin it, we have alternatives to shed some light.

I'm with you on that. I also like many easy to access media better. But I also see the danger of people not as sceptical as you and me and the emergence of bubbles that leads to biased perceptions of reality.

People with no skepticism have always been with us.
And of course the older media were subject to coercive
influences too.
Remember the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal? Mainstreams knew,
but had an arrangement to keep presidential dalliances quiet.
But impudent upstart Matt Drudge has no such agreement.

Once covered, the old sources eventually aired the scandal.
But NPR (a old school government created source)
conveniently didn't cover it until after Clinton's re-election.
I say we're better off now.

 

[PureX]

It's not that there are not enough alternative sources of information. It's that there are too many of them, and they are too difficult to find, and to difficult to vet. And very few of us have the time or the inclination to do all that work to find out what's really going on. And the oligarchs know this. So they don't have to own every outlet to control the "story". They just have to own the ones that most people use. And they do. Then WE create enough confusion on line to make the truth very difficult to find, all on our own. Because the truth is that half of us prefer lies that feed our ego over the truth, anyway.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

They also tried to hide info from us.

Could you please offer a couple of examples?

 

[Revoltingest]

Could you please offer a couple of examples?

I gave one already, ie, the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal.
They also knew of Kennedy's dalliances.
And while those things are of questionable significance,
the news media nonetheless decided that we shouldn't
get to know of them.
Of meatier things.....
Whistleblowers get more attention these days. I speculate
that this is cuz they have better access to the public now.
Which ones were suppressed on the old days? I don't know.
Perhaps this isn't knowable, since they were quashed.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's not that there are not enough alternative sources of information. It's that there are too many of them, and they are too difficult to find, and to difficult to vet. And very few of us have the time or the inclination to do all that work to find out what's really going on. And the oligarchs know this. So they don't have to own every outlet to control the "story". They just have to own the ones that most people use. And they do. Then WE create enough confusion on line to make the truth very difficult to find, all on our own. Because the truth is that half of us prefer lies that feed our ego over the truth, anyway.

Vetting is possible, & even worthwhile for things of great significance.
Without an unregulated internet, how else would I know of our several
wrongful attacks upon Iran? Those were secret when they happened,
so their discovery was largely unnoticed in the news media. But sources
like Wikipedia do cover old news, & are more accessible than Britannica.
I credit the internet with alerting me to the 1953 CIA coup, & the Iraq-Iran
proxy war.

 

[PureX]

Vetting is possible, & even worthwhile for things of great significance.

Of great significance to whom? Most people are struggling just to stay solvent. What they care about are their families, and how to pay the ever increasing bills on a never increasing paycheck. They have neither the time nor the inclination to chase around the internet trying to figure out who is lying to them about what when everyone is lying to them all the time, about nearly everything. In fact, if they are chasing anything on line it'll be the pack of lies that'll make them feel better about themselves and their predicament. The lies that'll make them think it's all someone else's fault, never theirs. The lies that make them think they still have a chance to be a big 'winner' in a game that is so thoroughly rigged to make sure they lose. Is it really any wonder that creating and selling fake news is so profitable? Not only the liars pay for it, but the lied to pay for it, too. Because they want the lies.

This is how bad things have gotten.

Without an unregulated internet, how else would I know of our several wrongful attacks upon Iran? Those were secret when they happened, so their discovery was largely unnoticed in the news media. But sources like Wikipedia do cover old news, & are more accessible than Britannica. I credit the internet with alerting me to the 1953 CIA coup, & the Iraq-Iran proxy war.

But you have the luxury of having the time, the ability, and the inclination to seek out that information, and to couple it with other information to create a bigger picture. Most people don't have those luxuries. And the oligarchs that control "the story of reality" know it. They know it because they are the cause of that lack of luxury among the masses. And they actively seek to make sure that it stays that way.

They don't care about you, or what you know. They've got you on their side, already. You're already a "kapo" in their giant labor camp. It's not you they're worried about. It's the rest of the general population realizing just how totally subjugated and screwed they really are, and rising up.

 

[Revoltingest]

Of great significance to whom?

That is for each of us to decide.

Most people are struggling just to stay solvent. What they care about are their families, and how to pay the ever increasing bills on a never increasing paycheck. They have neither the time nor the inclination to chase around the internet trying to figure out who is lying to them about what when everyone is lying to them all the time, about nearly everything. In fact, if they are chasing anything on line it'll be the pack of lies that'll make them feel better about themselves and their predicament. The lies that'll make them think it's all someone else's fault, never theirs. The lies that make them think they still have a chance to be a big 'winner' in a game that is so thoroughly rigged to make sure they lose. Is it really any wonder that creating and selling fake news is so profitable? Not only the liars pay for it, but the lied to pay for it, too. Because they want the lies.

This is how bad things have gotten.
But you have the luxury of having the time, the ability, and the inclination to seek out that information, and to couple it with other information to create a bigger picture. Most people don't have those luxuries. And the oligarchs that control "the story of reality" know it. They know it because they are the cause of that lack of luxury among the masses. And they actively seek to make sure that it stays that way.

They don't care about you, or what you know. They've got you on their side, already. You're already a "kapo" in their giant labor camp. It's not you they're worried about. It's the rest of the general population realizing just how totally subjugated and screwed they really are, and rising up.

Wow....your perspective is such a downer.
I'm naturally more of an optimist.

 

[PureX]

I'm naturally more of an optimist.

Sure. You can afford to be.

 

[Revoltingest]

Sure. You can afford to be.

Anyone can afford to be an optimist.
It costs nothing.
But the price of pessimism is heavy indeed.

 

[PureX]

Anyone can afford to be an optimist.
It costs nothing.
But the price of pessimism is heavy indeed.

So is the price of optimism when it's shown to be unrealistic. Then it becomes soul-crushing. Which is why so many of us would chase after and believe in lies to avoid that inevitability.

 

[Revoltingest]

So is the price of optimism when it's shown to be unrealistic.

You've not shown it to be thus.
So I'll stick with it.
Doom & gloom gets one nowhere anyway.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Doom & gloom gets one nowhere anyway.

True.

I think pessimism is the logical thing, but that optimism is the healthy thing.

Just what I think.

 

[Revoltingest]

True.

I think pessimism is the logical thing, but that optimism is the healthy thing.

Just what I think.

Me usual...
Hope for the best.
Plan for the worst.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I gave one already, ie, the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal.

Given ...

In the days of yore we had media that tried to inform the public.

They also tried to hide info from us.

Are you saying that the media tried to hide information on the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal?

 

[Revoltingest]

Given ...

​

Are you saying that the media tried to hide information on the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal?

Yes.
Some media that is.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Yes.
Some media that is.

Given the level of detail that is known about that scandal, I am curious - and afraid - to ask what the next level of detail below that would be that the media was hiding from us.

 

[Shadow Link]