Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 109

Thread: Random mediatic thoughts

  1. #1

    Random mediatic thoughts

    At the same time the current iteration of the Republican party is crumbling, so might Fox News.

    Interesting times.

    http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politi...yn-kelly-trump
    Signature too big and pornographic. Next offense will be a ban.

 

  • #2
    Without Ailes, and with the elder Murdoch stepping back, Fox News may look very different in a few short years. I think if the chips are down, Hannity gets jettisoned and Kelly wins out. Her contract is up next year though, so things could get really interesting.
    We've always been at war with Eastasia.
    If other people's pain didn't amuse me, I wouldn't be a GM. -barsoomcore

  • #3
    Fake viral news out performed real news on Facebook toward the end of the election. https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilver...dGd#.mm00qQ7E7

    sub-buzz-441-1479332078-1.jpg

    A writer of fake viral news regrets helping Trump move into the White House. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-me/?tid=sm_tw

    My sites were picked up by Trump supporters all the time. I think Trump is in the White House because of me. His followers don’t fact-check anything — they’ll post everything, believe anything. His campaign manager posted my story about a protester getting paid $3,500 as fact. Like, I made that up. I posted a fake ad on Craigslist.
    Signature too big and pornographic. Next offense will be a ban.

  • #4
    So how do we fix the problem of people intentionally creating fake news? How do we differentiate (legally speaking) the difference between The Onion, and opportunists like the guy above? Facebook can limit them, that's a start (and they've begun doing that, dragging their feet the whole time), but what other things can we do?

    And while right now, it may be a "Trump supporter" kind of problem, but there's no reason to think this lack of critical thinking doesn't cross the aisle, so its not, IMO, a Left/Right problem.
    We've always been at war with Eastasia.
    If other people's pain didn't amuse me, I wouldn't be a GM. -barsoomcore

  • #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Kid Charlemagne View Post
    So how do we fix the problem of people intentionally creating fake news? How do we differentiate (legally speaking) the difference between The Onion, and opportunists like the guy above? Facebook can limit them, that's a start (and they've begun doing that, dragging their feet the whole time), but what other things can we do?

    And while right now, it may be a "Trump supporter" kind of problem, but there's no reason to think this lack of critical thinking doesn't cross the aisle, so its not, IMO, a Left/Right problem.
    Working up stream might be a good place to start. Teaching kids to think more critically about what they read on the net, teaching them sophism so they can recognize them and teaching them to check sources and to verify if a story is picked up by other news sources. Also explain to them what is conspirationist thought and how to recognize it. Intellectual self-defense in other words.

    After that, the return of something similar, but modernized, of the Fairness Doctrine might be necessary.
    Signature too big and pornographic. Next offense will be a ban.

  • #6
    Of superheroes and fascism. http://www.npr.org/sections/monkeyse...m_content=2043

    Superheroes are democratic ideals.

    They exist to express what's noblest about us: selflessness, sacrifice, a commitment to protect those who need protection, and to empower the powerless.

    Superheroes are fascist ideals.

    They exist to symbolize the notion that might equals right, that a select few should dictate the fate of the world, and that the status quo is to be protected at all costs.

    Both of these things are true, and inextricably bound up with one another — but they weren't always.

    Both Captain America and Wonder Woman were created expressly to fight the Nazi threat. Literally, to fight it — to punch it right in its dumb Ratzi face.When he debuted in 1938, Superman was, briefly, a progressive icon. He sprang, after all, from the minds of two Jewish kids in Cleveland warily watching the rise of Hitler in Europe. In his first year of life, they sent their "Champion of the Oppressed" (his very first nickname, years before "Man of Steel") after corrupt Senators, war-mongering foreign leaders, weapons merchants, and crooked stockbrokers. He purposefully razed a slum to force the city government to provide better low-income housing. (He also launched one-man crusades against slot machines, reckless drivers, and cheating college football teams, which ... yeah. Guy kept busy.)

    Batman, on the other hand, spent much of his first year protecting only his city's wealthy elite from murder plots, jewel thieves and extortion. (Also werewolves and madmen with Napoleon complexes piloting death-blimps. Comics, guys!) It took him a while to turn his attention to the kind of petty crime that afflicted the common citizen — the arrival of Robin the Boy Wonder helped him focus.

    But with the advent of World War II, Superman, Batman and other costumed heroes found themselves conscripted alongside Captain America. Not to fight the Axis themselves, mind you, but to root out stateside saboteurs and urge readers to plant Victory gardens and buy war bonds.

    In the process, the visual iconography of superheroes — which, comics being comics, is 50% of the formula, remember — melded with that of patriotic imagery. This continued for decades after the war, as once-progressive heroes like Superman came to symbolize bedrock Eisenhower-era American values — the American Way — in addition to notions of Truth and Justice.

    The Wertham Era

    It wasn't intended, but it was there. People noticed.Yet there was always something about superheroes, and Superman in particular. He'd helped inspire the country to defeat fascism, but he looked like he did — the kind of idealized male musculature the Nazis fetishized — and he possessed "powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men." What's more, he used said powers and abilities against those comparatively weak and frail mortal men, if they stepped out of line. He also came from an advanced planet peopled by a — and here's a pesky phrase that kept cropping up in Superman comics — "super-race."

    One person in particular: Dr. Fredric Wertham, who in his 1954 anti-comics screed Seduction of the Innocent, noted that Superman's whole schtick was hurting criminals without getting hurt himself, and dubbed him an "un-American fascist" symbol. It hit a nerve.

    Wertham's crusade changed the industry completely, effectively ending crime and horror comics and shuttering many comics publishers, but the changes to superhero comics — and their fascist overtones — proved more subtle. Suddenly Superman's powers didn't derive from his "super-race" genetics, but from science: the rays of Earth's yellow sun, to be specific. But Batman, who'd been deputized by Gotham's Police Department as early as 1941, grew even chummier with the cops; most stories now began with an urgent plea for help from a worrisomely hapless Commissioner Gordon.

    The Marvel Era

    Wertham's concerns about the fascistic elements in superhero comics were about themes and implications, not actual text. Because at the time, kids were the primary audience for comics, which presented stark, simple morality plays — light versus darkness, good versus evil. More abstract qualities like characterization, psychology and any overtly political context simply never showed up in a given comic.

    That changed when Stan Lee and Jack Kirby introduced the Fantastic Four in 1961 and, especially, when Lee and Ditko created Spider-Man in 1962. The men recognized that a demographic shift was underway — older teenagers and adults were now buying comics. So Lee, Ditko and Kirby created a roster of heroes whose troubled lives reflected those of their readership: conflicted, quarrelsome and deeply insecure.

    And with the words "With great power comes great responsibility" (Amazing Fantasy#15, August 1962), Lee introduced a concept that greatly mitigated, for Spider-Man at any rate, the fascism baked-in to the superhero genre: sacrifice.

    Previously, superheroes had paid lip-service to the notion of selflessness. The altruism they exhibited was reflexive and unquestioned, a part of the narrative infrastructure as essential to the genre as colored underpants. This was because that altruism hadn't needed to be questioned, as superhero stories were still simple stories to reassure children that good always triumphed over evil.

    The fact that their tremendous powers and abilities shielded superheroes — often literally — from experiencing any lasting harm also served to undermine their status as truly heroic.

    Lee and his co-creators cut against that tendency by showing Peter Parker really suffering — before, during and after his decision to be Spider-Man. Soon, Marvel comics teemed with mopey, hot-headed, angst-ridden heroes whose powers and abilities only served to complicate their lives, and deepen their baseline misery.
    It took DC heroes like Superman and Batman a while to catch on to this trend, but when they did, they doubled down on it. Superman entered an era in which he lost and gained his powers with metronomic regularity, and Batman became a tortured obsessive.

    Super-Fascism As Plot Point

    In the 1980s and afterward, as superhero comics shed their child readership and turned in on themselves to cater exclusively to teens and adults, the dawning of the "grim-and-gritty" era meant that the fascism latent in the superhero genre became one of its chief storylines. In books like Watchmen, The Dark Knight Returns, Kingdom Come, Empire, Civil War and many others, creators explicitly grappled with how heroes exert their will when their penchant for benign intervention becomes ... less-than-benign. In monthly comics and one-shot tales set in alternative universes, scores of superheroes became dictators (often for "the greater good") and crushed any insurrection that would upset their status quo.

    Today, fascism has more potential tools in its arsenal than ever, and the cinematic superhero glut we now find ourselves in reflects that: again and again, these movies offer symbolic, dark-mirror reflections of the surveillance state.Both this year's Batman v. Superman and Captain America: Civil War revolve around a non-powered billionaire attempting to rein in a rogue superhuman, and both engage in the by-now inevitable chin-stroking about freedom and government control.

    A Changing Superhero Landscape

    Although conceived in a progressive spirit, the superhero genre's central narrative has always been one of defending the status quo through overpowering might; in the vast majority of those cases, the one doing all that defending and overpowering is a straight white male. (This is just one of the reasons that the superhero genre, which has a knack for distilling American culture to its essence, can get a little on-the-nose, sometimes.)

    More often than not, the straight white male in question has a square jaw and killer abs and holds vast amount of power but chooses not to use it to subjugate others, simply because he's a Good Person.

    Which is to say: historically, the genre's organizing principle is that the only thing keeping fascism from happening is that straight white dudes are chill.
    But slowly, incrementally, as comics (and movies, and tv shows, and games, t-shirts and coffee mugs) start to fill up with more characters like Ms. Marvel (a Pakistani-American teenage girl from Jersey City), the visual iconography of superheroes, and what those superheroes mean to the culture, will force the genre to do something it has historically resisted.

    It will change.

    And once superheroes look different, and once the world on the comics page more closely resembles the world off of it, you will still be able to discern the low but steady drumbeat of fascism that the genre has never been able to escape.

    But it will grow lower, and less steady.
    Last edited by Yablo; November 17th, 2016 at 09:44 PM.
    Signature too big and pornographic. Next offense will be a ban.

  • #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Kid Charlemagne View Post
    So how do we fix the problem of people intentionally creating fake news? How do we differentiate (legally speaking) the difference between The Onion, and opportunists like the guy above? Facebook can limit them, that's a start (and they've begun doing that, dragging their feet the whole time), but what other things can we do?

    And while right now, it may be a "Trump supporter" kind of problem, but there's no reason to think this lack of critical thinking doesn't cross the aisle, so its not, IMO, a Left/Right problem.
    We as a culture seem to value being 'right' (and I don't mean being conservative) rather than fact finding and search for a more accurate answer. We freely embrace confirmation bias.

  • #8
    %0 correct Scarbonac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    It is a Mystery.
    Oratio
    4,696

    Ignore User
    Oh, that cocksucker Wertham.
    "1 out of 3 Trump supporters is as stupid as the other 2"

  • #9
    Analysis of the Facebook feed of traditional news outlets and hyperpartisans ones. Not surprisingly, 40% of the news hyperpartisan right-wing sites posted was false when the traditional news outlets only posted real news (at least during the period examined). The fascinating part is that false news was shared vastly more often than real news. Long, but interesting read. https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilver...pages-analysis

    I wonder who would be stupid enough to read news posted by Occupy Democrates and Right Wing News in the frist place?
    Signature too big and pornographic. Next offense will be a ban.

  • #10
    The most interesting part is that a lot of these false news site were from teenagers outside the US who made some nice money thanks to ad revenue for people visiting these sites.

  • #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Mustrum_Ridcully View Post
    The most interesting part is that a lot of these false news site were from teenagers outside the US who made some nice money thanks to ad revenue for people visiting these sites.
    Foreigners stealing good American jobs! https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...6504&tid=ss_tw
    Signature too big and pornographic. Next offense will be a ban.

  • #12
    "Liberal" CNN's pro Trump bias? Or is it a capitalist enterprise with a pro-cash bias and thus favor ratings?

    In extraordinary exchanges, aides to Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush openly accused Mr. Zucker of enabling Mr. Trump and undermining their candidates in the Republican primary, heckling from their seats as Mr. Zucker spoke on a panel in a hotel ballroom.

    “You showed hours upon hours of unfiltered, unscrutinized coverage of Trump!” shouted Todd Harris, a top adviser for Mr. Rubio. A Washington Post reporter, Karen Tumulty, prompted applause when she pressed Mr. Zucker on why he allowed Trump surrogates to spread falsehoods on his network.[...]

    Since Election Day, Mr. Trump has singled out CNN for criticism, posting on Twitter that the network had “total (100%) support of Hillary Clinton” and chastising Mr. Zucker during a private meeting with television executives at Trump Tower. Yet media commentators have accused CNN of giving preferential treatment to Mr. Trump to lift ratings. The network is on track this year to collect $1 billion in profit.

    “CNN helped make him by carrying every speech he made in the primary season,” Larry King, the former CNN anchor and a friend of Mr. Trump, said in an interview. “It was almost like the other guys didn’t exist.”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/01/bu...=tw-share&_r=0
    Signature too big and pornographic. Next offense will be a ban.

  • #13
    Breitbart's war on Kellogg's. Cause nothings says left-wingers like a transnational corporation. This is reminds me of other people who saw conspiracies that involved world bankers, communists and Jews. Good thing Breitbart doesn't try to appeal to those people.

    The right-wing news site Breitbart has declared “#WAR” on Kellogg’s, calling for a boycott of the cereal company’s products after they decided to cease advertisingon the site.

    On Tuesday, the Kellogg Company pulled their adverts from the site, saying that it wasn’t “aligned with our values”. Recent inflammatory stories include “Birth Control Makes Women Unattractive And Crazy”; “Data: Young Muslims In The West Are A Ticking Time-Bomb” and “Would You Rather Your Child Had Feminism Or Cancer?”.

    “We regularly work with our media-buying partners to ensure our ads do not appear on sites that aren’t aligned with our values as a company,” Kris Charles, a spokeswoman for Kellogg’s, told Bloomberg. “We recently reviewed the list of sites where our ads can be placed and decided to discontinue advertising on Breitbart.com. We are working to remove our ads from that site.”

    Other companies have pulled ads from the site, including Allstate, Nest, EarthLink, Warby Parker, SoFi and the investment group Vanguard. Many did not realise they were advertising on Breitbart because their campaigns are run through automated systems which distribute ads across a large network of sites.

    In response to Kellogg’s statement, Breitbart published a furious attack on the cereal company on Wednesday saying that the move represents “an escalation in the war by leftist companies ... against conservative customers”. Editor-in-chief Alexander Marlow called for a boycott of the company’s products, saying: “For Kellogg’s, an American brand, to blacklist Breitbart News in order to placate left-wing totalitarians is a disgraceful act of cowardice.”

    Breitbart News, founded in 2007 by conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart, rose swiftly to prominence in the last year as it became what its former chairman Stephen Bannon – now senior advisor to the president-elect – called “the platform for the alt-right”, a far-right political movement with links to white supremacist organizations.
    Signature too big and pornographic. Next offense will be a ban.

  • #14
    Signature too big and pornographic. Next offense will be a ban.

  • #15
    That's Wacist! Mistwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Province
    Los Angeles, CA
    Oratio
    26,408

    Ignore User
    The Senate is so much more fun with Yablo on ignore.

    As an expectant dad though, you still have my support (and sympathy for upcoming lost sleep) for that.
    I like hats.

  • Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast

    Tags for this Thread

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •