When the primary means of distributing information to a nation’s citizens during a time of war becomes dominated by enemy sympathizers determined to use their media to “educated the citizens against this or any war” then it is broken.
It is a tool to spread defeatism, division and despair.
That is what we have in our traditional media at this time.
Disagree all you wish and attempt to draw non relevant parallels as your heart desires.
That you continue to trust this media that we currently have and not see it as needing to figure some way to police itself of betrayers and idiots, before the situation devolves so far as to demand policing from outside forces, says much about you.
I assume you are in agreement with our current media practice of using exaggeration, manipulation and selective reporting in order to achieve the agenda of assisting our enemy in defeating us.
While that practice is not all encompassing and completely uniform in application, it is ubiquitous enough to be sufficient for indictment of the industry and current policy within that industry.
“When the primary means of distributing information to a nation’s citizens during a time of war becomes dominated by enemy sympathizers determined to use their media to “educated the citizens against this or any war” then it is broken.”
Sorry, but a ‘free press’ can end up printing what you really didn’t want it to. i’m not agreeing with their reportage, but you can’t have a free press when its suits. Its either all or nothing.
“Disagree all you wish and attempt to draw non relevant parallels as your heart desires.”
Quite what this is referring to I dont know, so if you can illuminate your comment I would be most appreciative.
“That you continue to trust this media that we currently have and not see it as needing to figure some way to police itself of betrayers and idiots, before the situation devolves so far as to demand policing from outside forces, says much about you. I assume you are in agreement with our current media practice of using exaggeration, manipulation and selective reporting in order to achieve the agenda of assisting our enemy in defeating us.”
Do I trust the media ‘we’ have? I dont think I said if I did or didn’t, and to be honest, I dont know. Its not about trust, its about getting the facts you want from the report and doing away with any bias or editorial slant.
You assume to much, and your rush to find a conclusion that would tarnish my points has left gaps in your argument. You can therefore ‘assume’ that if you’re dumb enough not to be able to seperate fact from polemic, and reason from hyperbole, then I feel bad for you.
You in essence have just tried to call me a traitor, and I think my response has been mild considering what I would have done had you been my neighbour...