The mainstream media does everything it can to portray BLM in a positive light. They can't [i]not[/i] report on the riots, as much as BLM would want them not to (you know, the way they barely report on all of the recent wikileaks). However, their narrative has always been that cops and white people are bad.
Social media is what has been shaping people's minds in a different way because that's where you actually see things like the recently released body cams and cell phone videos that the mainstream media would never show.
You're completely off-base here, unless you're trolling. If so, then well done. Otherwise, continue following the mainstream media's narrative in that it's white people's fault that a black guy got shot by another black guy while protesting and rioting over a black cop shooting a black guy. -blam!-ing white people, right?
English
-
Edited by The Cellar Door: 9/26/2016 2:01:57 PM[quote]The mainstream media does everything it can to portray BLM in a positive light. They can't [i]not[/i] report on the riots, as much as BLM would want them not to (you know, the way they barely report on all of the recent wikileaks). However, their narrative has always been that cops and white people are bad.[/quote] That's why everyone here feels pretty much the same, and uses the same line of rhetoric, correct? They thought of that all on themselves, and were not shown anything to make them think this? They all teamed up and said, "we're going to argue the exact same point?"
-
[quote]That's why everyone here feels pretty much the same, and uses the same line of rhetoric, correct? They thought of that all on themselves, and were not shown anything to make them think this? They all teamed up and said, "we're going to argue the exact same point?"[/quote] No, my second point is why. Please read my entire reply. People are starting to see beyond the bullshit of the mainstream media.
-
I read the entire thing and what I've said still stands. Social media is mainstream media if you didn't already know this.
-
That would be incorrect. Mainstream media is very different from social media in that social media is considered an alternative form of media. Otherwise, why the distinction? It would all just be called "media". Nothing more and nothing less. Also, what makes you think that "everyone here" represents the majority of people's opinion in the country?
-
Edited by The Cellar Door: 9/26/2016 5:37:56 PM[quote] Also, what makes you think that "everyone here" represents the majority of people's opinion in the country?[/quote] It doesn't, it represents a very small amount of people who get their information from the feeding tube that is the counter-culture media on the Internet. Point being, a feeding tub is still a feeding tube regardless of whether or not you call it "social" or "mainstream." Also, they are quite the same. How many people do you think have a Facebook? How many do you think watch the news every night?
-
Did you see the recent poll that about 6% of Americans trust news outlets? If the news is pushing out this agenda that BLM is bad, then you are referring to that 6% of people "buying into" that message. Again, you'll find this "rhetoric" in social media far more than you would in the news. Many people have Facebook, obviously. That alone doesn't define it as mainstream. Look up any article on the differences between mainstream media and social media. You'll realize that you are vastly in the minority in believing they are the same thing. Now, getting back to this rhetoric you speak of. If what you say is true, why does the mainstream media tell us to hold judgment on terrorist attacks (God forbid you even use that word) yet they jump to conclusions immediately regarding these shootings? This is what incites violence, telling us there was injustice before evidence such as body cams and video footage is released. It really is surprising to me how backwards you have this.
-
Edited by The Cellar Door: 9/26/2016 6:33:22 PM[quote]Did you see the recent poll that about 6% of Americans trust news outlets? If the news is pushing out this agenda that BLM is bad, then you are referring to that 6% of people "buying into" that message. Again, you'll find this "rhetoric" in social media far more than you would in the news. Many people have Facebook, obviously. That alone doesn't define it as mainstream. Look up any article on the differences between mainstream media and social media. You'll realize that you are vastly in the minority in believing they are the same thing. [/quote] Oh, you mean the "this is not propaganda" propaganda. [quote] Now, getting back to this rhetoric you speak of. If what you say is true, why does the mainstream media tell us to hold judgment on terrorist attacks (God forbid you even use that word) yet they jump to conclusions immediately regarding these shootings? This is what incites violence, telling us there was injustice before evidence such as body cams and video footage is released. [/quote] A little ironic how you make the 6% statement and then assert that the mainstream media incites these violent acts, no? Either way, flashing the honesty card is the easiest way to deceive. CNN will report that a terroristic event has possible Islamic ties and then show someone saying the "we shouldn't jump to conclusions" meme to retain credibility. The "anti-establishment" rhetoric is very powerful amongst younger people, and social media is the most efficient way of utilizing that rhetoric, as news outlets typically represent "establishment." To think that social media cannot be used to spin certain world views in the manner that televised news outlets do, is absolutely foolish, and is exactly what anyone who wishes to use social media for this purpose wants you to think. All media works the same, you accomplish nothing but creating a veil of ignorance by separating them into arbitrary categories.
-
[quote]Oh, you mean the "this is not propaganda" propaganda.[/quote] So Gallup polls are propaganda now? Interesting. [quote]A little ironic how you make the 6% statement and then assert that the mainstream media incites these violent acts, no?[/quote] Fair point but it works both ways. We're at an impasse on this one. [quote]Either way, flashing the honesty card is the easiest way to deceive. CNN will report that a terroristic event has possible Islamic ties and then show someone saying the "we shouldn't jump to conclusions" meme to retain credibility.[/quote] Rarely does CNN immediately say that an obvious terrorist attack has anything to do with terrorism. They have a tough time opening up to that even after ISIS takes credit. Also, not all responses to things are "memes". Why does the younger generation say that now? [quote]The "anti-establishment" rhetoric is very powerful amongst younger people, and social media is the most efficient way of utilizing that rhetoric, as news outlets typically represent "establishment." To think that social media cannot be used to spin certain world views in the manner that televised news outlets do, is absolutely foolish, and is exactly what anyone who wishes to use social media for this purpose wants you to think.[/spoiler] I don't disagree with this. I'm fully aware of the powerful effects of social media on how people view things. However, this too works both ways. So with social media reflecting many different sides and mainstream media reflecting one specific agenda, I think it's obvious who's winning the propoganda war. Also, when I say mainstream media, I'm not just referring to news outlets. In addition to CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc., networks like HBO, Comedy Central, and even ESPN all push a specific agenda. Young people trust "news" from people like Bill Maher and John Oliver over anything else. Those guys are propaganda machines despite the fact that they're comedians. My wife's cousin, who just finished college, told me that he only gets his news from The Daily Show and he was serious. I said to him, "you realize that isn't news, right?". His response was one of legitimate confusion. [quote]All media works the same, you accomplish nothing but creating a veil of ignorance by separating them into arbitrary categories.[/quote] There is some truth to this but I don't think that the distinction between the two is arbitrary. Such are opinions.