It's EVERYTHING to look at the comments....you can tell every single comment is by modern Republicans.
Because they agee with Nixon that the media has too much power.
But they intentionally ignore WHY Nixon feels that way: because the media caught him breaking the law, and he couldn't manipulate them to do his bidding. So the whiny-baby-pee-pants Nixon thinks that THEY were the problem.....and not the fact that, oh, I don't know.....he and his accomplices broke dozens of freaking laws while in office.
Naturally, Trump and Trump fans feel the same way, for the EXACT same reason.
Then they say that they're biased for the Dems....which is utter horsesh(t. I can find story after story after story after story that paints Biden and now Kamala in a bad light. And I'm not just talking about FoxNation....I'm talking about stories everywhere.
Why do Republicans think that "the media" sides with Dems? Simple: they're mad that the media doesn't all act like FoxNews. That's it. THAT is the complaint.
MAGA Republicans in 2024 think that there is no such thing as a centrist, or an American middle. They think if you're not a Republican? Oh, the only other option is to be a far left liberal who votes Dem straight ticket.
Yeah, no.
Re: media matters
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2024 4:30 am
by old salt
a fan wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 1:10 am
Then they say that they're biased for the Dems....which is utter horsesh(t. I can find story after story after story after story that paints Biden and now Kamala in a bad light. And I'm not just talking about FoxNation....I'm talking about stories everywhere.
Why do Republicans think that "the media" sides with Dems? Simple: they're mad that the media doesn't all act like FoxNews. That's it. THAT is the complaint.
MAGA Republicans in 2024 think that there is no such thing as a centrist, or an American middle. They think if you're not a Republican? Oh, the only other option is to be a far left liberal who votes Dem straight ticket.
Yeah, no.
Show us all the MSM stories about Biden's decline -- which was obvious for all to see.
The MSM was complicit in the coverup until Biden face planted in the debate & they couldn't cover it up any longer.
Then they told us he had a cold & it was just one bad night.
Now they're giving Kamala a free ride, letting her flacks walk back all the whacko things she said & advocated for in the past.
They're enthusiastically going along with the Hollywood rebranding of Kamala.
Why not give her the same wire brush treatment they've given Trump for 9 years ?
meanwhile, afan continues to babble about Nixon, Fox News, chicken pox & his parents..
Re: media matters
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2024 6:38 am
by WaffleTwineFaceoff
So the Zuck letter is a nothing burger. Got it. Apologies for taking up bandwidth and musing upon potential implications. Attempts to spark discourse earns a ticket for gaslighting. Firmly held beliefs must never be reassessed as new ideas and information become available. And asking questions and being curious is a firing offense. Beatings will continue until morale improves, all systems normal, and full speed ahead.
I felt it was a remarkable and unsettling letter. Not many opportunities these days to have some of the quiet things being said out loud and publicly by the likes of a Mark Zuckerberg. Maybe I just need to get out more, like the fine folks here!
Re: media matters
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2024 7:28 am
by Typical Lax Dad
Re: media matters
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2024 7:38 am
by Kismet
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 6:38 am
So the Zuck letter is a nothing burger. Got it. Apologies for taking up bandwidth and musing upon potential implications. Attempts to spark discourse earns a ticket for gaslighting. Firmly held beliefs must never be reassessed as new ideas and information become available. And asking questions and being curious is a firing offense. Beatings will continue until morale improves, all systems normal, and full speed ahead.
I felt it was a remarkable and unsettling letter. Not many opportunities these days to have some of the quiet things being said out loud and publicly by the likes of a Mark Zuckerberg. Maybe I just need to get out more, like the fine folks here!
Why the eff would you believe him in this case? He is a self-serving POS demonstrated time after time in any number of situations - He LIED to those parents in the last hearing to their faces and also screwed over all of his initial partners without batting an eye. .
Modern media covers whatever get them eyeballs and audience - one could make the case that this is why they love Orange Fatso so much and can never stop covering the effing moron. Truth, if it provides no audience is irrelevant.
Re: media matters
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2024 8:23 am
by WaffleTwineFaceoff
I think it's called having a think. Do you think I am not questioning agenda, underlying motives, self-serving sociopathic subterfuge, etc.? Just thinking, wondering, asking questions. Many here utilize those very actions here as proof and confirmation bias regarding how they feel about the poster, not the post. I hadn't quite seen anything quite like that letter. Thought discussion here could be interesting. My bad!
Re: media matters
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2024 8:27 am
by Kismet
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 8:23 am
I think it's called having a think. Do you think I am not questioning agenda, underlying motives, self-serving sociopathic subterfuge, etc.? Just thinking, wondering, asking questions. Many here utilize those very actions here as proof and confirmation bias regarding how they feel about the poster, not the post. I hadn't quite seen anything quite like that letter. Thought discussion here could be interesting. My bad!
I don't have to think at all about the POS and anything he has to say. I'm perfectly content and don't have the time to engage in hypothetical conspiracies like you .
Frankly, I'd be more worried about the outsize influence Musk has over the government in any number of key areas.
Re: media matters
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2024 10:38 am
by a fan
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 6:38 am
So the Zuck letter is a nothing burger. Got it. Apologies for taking up bandwidth and musing upon potential implications. Attempts to spark discourse earns a ticket for gaslighting.
Firmly held beliefs must never be reassessed as new ideas and information become available. And asking questions and being curious is a firing offense. Beatings will continue until morale improves, all systems normal, and full speed ahead.
So let me see if I have this straight......you give your opinion and ask a question....I answer your question, as requested....and you're upset because I give you my rational opinion?
You didn't answer MY question, and let's make it specific: when did the media finally gain access to Hunters' laptop.
You want to discuss this, yet you're CLEARLY don't have your facts in order. Having a temper tantrum isn't a response.
Where was this concern over media bias when Sean Hannity literally campaigned for Trump? What would you think if the talking heads of NBC, CBS, and CNN all did that for Kamala? You'd lose your mind, right? Yet when your side does it? You don't even notice, and don't care. If you guys REALLY believed what you were selling? You would have FLIPPED OUT over Hannity showing up on the campaign trail for Trump in 2018. Instead? Crickets.
It's another of a long line of fake complaints from Republicans....you guys want to hear what you want to hear. And if you don't? Oh, well than the media is corrupt. And if you do? Oh, well the media is awesome.
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 6:38 am
I felt it was a remarkable and unsettling letter. Not many opportunities these days to have some of the quiet things being said out loud and publicly by the likes of a Mark Zuckerberg. Maybe I just need to get out more, like the fine folks here!
The libs that you don't care for are trying to break monopolies like Facebook up for many reasons, not the least of which they have too much power......Musk and Trump and Old Salt want MORE monopolies and have said so in public. Vote accordingly.
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 6:38 am
So the Zuck letter is a nothing burger. Got it. Apologies for taking up bandwidth and musing upon potential implications. Attempts to spark discourse earns a ticket for gaslighting. Firmly held beliefs must never be reassessed as new ideas and information become available. And asking questions and being curious is a firing offense. Beatings will continue until morale improves, all systems normal, and full speed ahead.
I felt it was a remarkable and unsettling letter. Not many opportunities these days to have some of the quiet things being said out loud and publicly by the likes of a Mark Zuckerberg. Maybe I just need to get out more, like the fine folks here!
Why the eff would you believe him in this case? He is a self-serving POS demonstrated time after time in any number of situations - He LIED to those parents in the last hearing to their faces and also screwed over all of his initial partners without batting an eye. .
Modern media covers whatever get them eyeballs and audience - one could make the case that this is why they love Orange Fatso so much and can never stop covering the effing moron. Truth, if it provides no audience is irrelevant.
We're the WORSE capitalists in the world here in America. Grown men who don't understand that the media is about MONEY, just like every other corporation.
Re: media matters
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2024 10:51 am
by a fan
old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 4:30 am
Show us all the MSM stories about Biden's decline -- which was obvious for all to see.
Oh you want to talk about Fox New finally? Great news, lets do it.
Now that Biden isn't running, suddenly the MSM at FoxNews isn't running a single story about how Biden isn't fit to have the nuclear codes or to make major daily decisions.
So.....I'm all ears: why is FoxNews covering up Biden's obvious decline that you mentioned?
Have any ideas, Old Salt?
old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 4:30 am.
Now they're giving Kamala a free ride, letting her flacks walk back all the whacko things she said & advocated for in the past.
They're enthusiastically going along with the Hollywood rebranding of Kamala.
Nope. Not only have I seen plenty of stones thrown by the media...we've discussed them here.
Naturally, you're MIA from the conversations, but want to pretend now that you care.
Doesn't matter what the media says or does, you're going to be mad because you're an extremist who demands to have his extremist views reinforced by the media you consume by the bucket.
And if they don't cater to you? You're simply too far gone to understand that YOU are the problem. But have no fear! Your seething anger at "the other team" can be fed continuously by simply clicking your mouse over and over and over.....
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 6:38 am
So the Zuck letter is a nothing burger. Got it. Apologies for taking up bandwidth and musing upon potential implications. Attempts to spark discourse earns a ticket for gaslighting. Firmly held beliefs must never be reassessed as new ideas and information become available. And asking questions and being curious is a firing offense. Beatings will continue until morale improves, all systems normal, and full speed ahead.
I felt it was a remarkable and unsettling letter. Not many opportunities these days to have some of the quiet things being said out loud and publicly by the likes of a Mark Zuckerberg. Maybe I just need to get out more, like the fine folks here!
Why the eff would you believe him in this case? He is a self-serving POS demonstrated time after time in any number of situations - He LIED to those parents in the last hearing to their faces and also screwed over all of his initial partners without batting an eye. .
Modern media covers whatever get them eyeballs and audience - one could make the case that this is why they love Orange Fatso so much and can never stop covering the effing moron. Truth, if it provides no audience is irrelevant.
We're the WORSE capitalists in the world here in America. Grown men who don't understand that the media is about MONEY, just like every other corporation.
That guy favors government controlled media.
Re: media matters
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2024 11:06 am
by a fan
Here's that rotten ol' WaPo, giving Kamala a pass today, Old Salt.
Want help with your excuses as to how this "doesn't count" as criticism of Kamala?
The times demand serious economic ideas. Harris supplies gimmicks.
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 6:38 am
So the Zuck letter is a nothing burger. Got it. Apologies for taking up bandwidth and musing upon potential implications. Attempts to spark discourse earns a ticket for gaslighting. Firmly held beliefs must never be reassessed as new ideas and information become available. And asking questions and being curious is a firing offense. Beatings will continue until morale improves, all systems normal, and full speed ahead.
I felt it was a remarkable and unsettling letter. Not many opportunities these days to have some of the quiet things being said out loud and publicly by the likes of a Mark Zuckerberg. Maybe I just need to get out more, like the fine folks here!
Why the eff would you believe him in this case? He is a self-serving POS demonstrated time after time in any number of situations - He LIED to those parents in the last hearing to their faces and also screwed over all of his initial partners without batting an eye. .
Modern media covers whatever get them eyeballs and audience - one could make the case that this is why they love Orange Fatso so much and can never stop covering the effing moron. Truth, if it provides no audience is irrelevant.
We're the WORSE capitalists in the world here in America. Grown men who don't understand that the media is about MONEY, just like every other corporation.
That guy favors government controlled media.
It's like watching a cartoon show with your kid, and complaining that there aren't any adverts about the new line of Subarus.......if you don't like your media feed, the problem is YOU.
I can't believe I have to explain this but here it is: hey fellas, a media company wants the highest ratings possible. They want your eyes if they can get them. If they can't get your eyes because you're made that they don't hit the Dems enough, YOU are the problem, not them.
Which is why I laughed so hard at claims that the media hated/hates Trump. Sure they do. Because if there's one thing the media hates, it's record viewership.
The lack of self awareness coupled with not understanding how basic businesses functions......coming from Americans with our education and age is inexcusable. Gaslighting.
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 6:38 am
So the Zuck letter is a nothing burger. Got it. Apologies for taking up bandwidth and musing upon potential implications. Attempts to spark discourse earns a ticket for gaslighting. Firmly held beliefs must never be reassessed as new ideas and information become available. And asking questions and being curious is a firing offense. Beatings will continue until morale improves, all systems normal, and full speed ahead.
I felt it was a remarkable and unsettling letter. Not many opportunities these days to have some of the quiet things being said out loud and publicly by the likes of a Mark Zuckerberg. Maybe I just need to get out more, like the fine folks here!
Why the eff would you believe him in this case? He is a self-serving POS demonstrated time after time in any number of situations - He LIED to those parents in the last hearing to their faces and also screwed over all of his initial partners without batting an eye. .
Modern media covers whatever get them eyeballs and audience - one could make the case that this is why they love Orange Fatso so much and can never stop covering the effing moron. Truth, if it provides no audience is irrelevant.
We're the WORSE capitalists in the world here in America. Grown men who don't understand that the media is about MONEY, just like every other corporation.
That guy favors government controlled media.
It's like watching a cartoon show with your kid, and complaining that there aren't any adverts about the new line of Subarus.......if you don't like your media feed, the problem is YOU.
I can't believe I have to explain this but here it is: hey fellas, a media company wants the highest ratings possible. They want your eyes if they can get them. If they can't get your eyes because you're made that they don't hit the Dems enough, YOU are the problem, not them.
Which is why I laughed so hard at claims that the media hated/hates Trump. Sure they do. Because if there's one thing the media hates, it's record viewership.
The lack of self awareness coupled with not understanding how basic businesses functions......coming from Americans with our education and age is inexcusable. Gaslighting.
So in your mind, you find it acceptable that Social Media can pick and chose which 'cookies' to use based on demo of the user? That we agree.
What you miss, is that 'should' only apply to good and services for lack of a better analogy....not hand selected or possibly even paid political bias. That is operating in the 'grey' of political competition NOT capitalistic market share...unless you now want argue that politics should now be deemed equivalent to a 'business' and no longer a constitutional federal republic, where party can now be bought and sold. Sadly, we may be already there, its just 'official.
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 6:38 am
So the Zuck letter is a nothing burger. Got it. Apologies for taking up bandwidth and musing upon potential implications. Attempts to spark discourse earns a ticket for gaslighting. Firmly held beliefs must never be reassessed as new ideas and information become available. And asking questions and being curious is a firing offense. Beatings will continue until morale improves, all systems normal, and full speed ahead.
I felt it was a remarkable and unsettling letter. Not many opportunities these days to have some of the quiet things being said out loud and publicly by the likes of a Mark Zuckerberg. Maybe I just need to get out more, like the fine folks here!
Why the eff would you believe him in this case? He is a self-serving POS demonstrated time after time in any number of situations - He LIED to those parents in the last hearing to their faces and also screwed over all of his initial partners without batting an eye. .
Modern media covers whatever get them eyeballs and audience - one could make the case that this is why they love Orange Fatso so much and can never stop covering the effing moron. Truth, if it provides no audience is irrelevant.
We're the WORSE capitalists in the world here in America. Grown men who don't understand that the media is about MONEY, just like every other corporation.
That guy favors government controlled media.
It's like watching a cartoon show with your kid, and complaining that there aren't any adverts about the new line of Subarus.......if you don't like your media feed, the problem is YOU.
I can't believe I have to explain this but here it is: hey fellas, a media company wants the highest ratings possible. They want your eyes if they can get them. If they can't get your eyes because you're made that they don't hit the Dems enough, YOU are the problem, not them.
Which is why I laughed so hard at claims that the media hated/hates Trump. Sure they do. Because if there's one thing the media hates, it's record viewership.
The lack of self awareness coupled with not understanding how basic businesses functions......coming from Americans with our education and age is inexcusable. Gaslighting.
So in your mind, you find it acceptable that Social Media can pick and chose which 'cookies' to use based on demo of the user? That we agree.
What you miss, is that 'should' only apply to good and services for lack of a better analogy....not hand selected or possibly even paid political bias. That is operating in the 'grey' of political competition NOT capitalistic market share...unless you now want argue that politics should now be deemed equivalent to a 'business' and no longer a constitutional federal republic, where party can now be bought and sold. Sadly, we may be already there, its just 'official.
Can you rephrase this? I don't understand what you're asking....too many pronouns and not enough nouns for me to know how and what you are specifically describing.
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 6:38 am
So the Zuck letter is a nothing burger. Got it. Apologies for taking up bandwidth and musing upon potential implications. Attempts to spark discourse earns a ticket for gaslighting. Firmly held beliefs must never be reassessed as new ideas and information become available. And asking questions and being curious is a firing offense. Beatings will continue until morale improves, all systems normal, and full speed ahead.
I felt it was a remarkable and unsettling letter. Not many opportunities these days to have some of the quiet things being said out loud and publicly by the likes of a Mark Zuckerberg. Maybe I just need to get out more, like the fine folks here!
Why the eff would you believe him in this case? He is a self-serving POS demonstrated time after time in any number of situations - He LIED to those parents in the last hearing to their faces and also screwed over all of his initial partners without batting an eye. .
Modern media covers whatever get them eyeballs and audience - one could make the case that this is why they love Orange Fatso so much and can never stop covering the effing moron. Truth, if it provides no audience is irrelevant.
We're the WORSE capitalists in the world here in America. Grown men who don't understand that the media is about MONEY, just like every other corporation.
That guy favors government controlled media.
It's like watching a cartoon show with your kid, and complaining that there aren't any adverts about the new line of Subarus.......if you don't like your media feed, the problem is YOU.
I can't believe I have to explain this but here it is: hey fellas, a media company wants the highest ratings possible. They want your eyes if they can get them. If they can't get your eyes because you're made that they don't hit the Dems enough, YOU are the problem, not them.
Which is why I laughed so hard at claims that the media hated/hates Trump. Sure they do. Because if there's one thing the media hates, it's record viewership.
The lack of self awareness coupled with not understanding how basic businesses functions......coming from Americans with our education and age is inexcusable. Gaslighting.
So in your mind, you find it acceptable that Social Media can pick and chose which 'cookies' to use based on demo of the user? That we agree.
What you miss, is that 'should' only apply to good and services for lack of a better analogy....not hand selected or possibly even paid political bias. That is operating in the 'grey' of political competition NOT capitalistic market share...unless you now want argue that politics should now be deemed equivalent to a 'business' and no longer a constitutional federal republic, where party can now be bought and sold. Sadly, we may be already there, its just 'official.
Can you rephrase this? I don't understand what you're asking....too many pronouns and not enough nouns for me to know how and what you are specifically describing.
We both agree on the part in Bold, targeted marketing, based on 'paid capitalism ad-marketing', which is algorithmic.
The 'grey' that is prejudicial, is the intentional favoring, backdoor financial aspects of political marketing to influence outcome; think insider trading as a close analogy.
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 6:38 am
So the Zuck letter is a nothing burger. Got it. Apologies for taking up bandwidth and musing upon potential implications. Attempts to spark discourse earns a ticket for gaslighting. Firmly held beliefs must never be reassessed as new ideas and information become available. And asking questions and being curious is a firing offense. Beatings will continue until morale improves, all systems normal, and full speed ahead.
I felt it was a remarkable and unsettling letter. Not many opportunities these days to have some of the quiet things being said out loud and publicly by the likes of a Mark Zuckerberg. Maybe I just need to get out more, like the fine folks here!
Why the eff would you believe him in this case? He is a self-serving POS demonstrated time after time in any number of situations - He LIED to those parents in the last hearing to their faces and also screwed over all of his initial partners without batting an eye. .
Modern media covers whatever get them eyeballs and audience - one could make the case that this is why they love Orange Fatso so much and can never stop covering the effing moron. Truth, if it provides no audience is irrelevant.
We're the WORSE capitalists in the world here in America. Grown men who don't understand that the media is about MONEY, just like every other corporation.
That guy favors government controlled media.
It's like watching a cartoon show with your kid, and complaining that there aren't any adverts about the new line of Subarus.......if you don't like your media feed, the problem is YOU.
I can't believe I have to explain this but here it is: hey fellas, a media company wants the highest ratings possible. They want your eyes if they can get them. If they can't get your eyes because you're made that they don't hit the Dems enough, YOU are the problem, not them.
Which is why I laughed so hard at claims that the media hated/hates Trump. Sure they do. Because if there's one thing the media hates, it's record viewership.
The lack of self awareness coupled with not understanding how basic businesses functions......coming from Americans with our education and age is inexcusable. Gaslighting.
So in your mind, you find it acceptable that Social Media can pick and chose which 'cookies' to use based on demo of the user? That we agree.
What you miss, is that 'should' only apply to good and services for lack of a better analogy....not hand selected or possibly even paid political bias. That is operating in the 'grey' of political competition NOT capitalistic market share...unless you now want argue that politics should now be deemed equivalent to a 'business' and no longer a constitutional federal republic, where party can now be bought and sold. Sadly, we may be already there, its just 'official.
Can you rephrase this? I don't understand what you're asking....too many pronouns and not enough nouns for me to know how and what you are specifically describing.
We both agree on the part in Bold, targeted marketing, based on 'paid capitalism ad-marketing', which is algorithmic.
The 'grey' that is prejudicial, is the intentional favoring, backdoor financial aspects of political marketing to influence outcome; think insider trading as a close analogy.
Again....too many pronouns. Who is doing the "intentional favoring" who is doing the "political marketing". I can guess, but I want to make sure we're talking about the same thing here.
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 6:38 am
So the Zuck letter is a nothing burger. Got it. Apologies for taking up bandwidth and musing upon potential implications. Attempts to spark discourse earns a ticket for gaslighting. Firmly held beliefs must never be reassessed as new ideas and information become available. And asking questions and being curious is a firing offense. Beatings will continue until morale improves, all systems normal, and full speed ahead.
I felt it was a remarkable and unsettling letter. Not many opportunities these days to have some of the quiet things being said out loud and publicly by the likes of a Mark Zuckerberg. Maybe I just need to get out more, like the fine folks here!
Why the eff would you believe him in this case? He is a self-serving POS demonstrated time after time in any number of situations - He LIED to those parents in the last hearing to their faces and also screwed over all of his initial partners without batting an eye. .
Modern media covers whatever get them eyeballs and audience - one could make the case that this is why they love Orange Fatso so much and can never stop covering the effing moron. Truth, if it provides no audience is irrelevant.
We're the WORSE capitalists in the world here in America. Grown men who don't understand that the media is about MONEY, just like every other corporation.
That guy favors government controlled media.
It's like watching a cartoon show with your kid, and complaining that there aren't any adverts about the new line of Subarus.......if you don't like your media feed, the problem is YOU.
I can't believe I have to explain this but here it is: hey fellas, a media company wants the highest ratings possible. They want your eyes if they can get them. If they can't get your eyes because you're made that they don't hit the Dems enough, YOU are the problem, not them.
Which is why I laughed so hard at claims that the media hated/hates Trump. Sure they do. Because if there's one thing the media hates, it's record viewership.
The lack of self awareness coupled with not understanding how basic businesses functions......coming from Americans with our education and age is inexcusable. Gaslighting.
So in your mind, you find it acceptable that Social Media can pick and chose which 'cookies' to use based on demo of the user? That we agree.
What you miss, is that 'should' only apply to good and services for lack of a better analogy....not hand selected or possibly even paid political bias. That is operating in the 'grey' of political competition NOT capitalistic market share...unless you now want argue that politics should now be deemed equivalent to a 'business' and no longer a constitutional federal republic, where party can now be bought and sold. Sadly, we may be already there, its just 'official.
Can you rephrase this? I don't understand what you're asking....too many pronouns and not enough nouns for me to know how and what you are specifically describing.
We both agree on the part in Bold, targeted marketing, based on 'paid capitalism ad-marketing', which is algorithmic.
The 'grey' that is prejudicial, is the intentional favoring, backdoor financial aspects of political marketing to influence outcome; think insider trading as a close analogy.
Again....too many pronouns. Who is doing the "intentional favoring" who is doing the "political marketing". I can guess, but I want to make sure we're talking about the same thing here.
For FB - Zucker and his programmers
Political Marketing from a modicum of undisclosed entities....could be as simple as a phone call to tip the scale.
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 6:38 am
So the Zuck letter is a nothing burger. Got it. Apologies for taking up bandwidth and musing upon potential implications. Attempts to spark discourse earns a ticket for gaslighting. Firmly held beliefs must never be reassessed as new ideas and information become available. And asking questions and being curious is a firing offense. Beatings will continue until morale improves, all systems normal, and full speed ahead.
I felt it was a remarkable and unsettling letter. Not many opportunities these days to have some of the quiet things being said out loud and publicly by the likes of a Mark Zuckerberg. Maybe I just need to get out more, like the fine folks here!
Why the eff would you believe him in this case? He is a self-serving POS demonstrated time after time in any number of situations - He LIED to those parents in the last hearing to their faces and also screwed over all of his initial partners without batting an eye. .
Modern media covers whatever get them eyeballs and audience - one could make the case that this is why they love Orange Fatso so much and can never stop covering the effing moron. Truth, if it provides no audience is irrelevant.
We're the WORSE capitalists in the world here in America. Grown men who don't understand that the media is about MONEY, just like every other corporation.
That guy favors government controlled media.
It's like watching a cartoon show with your kid, and complaining that there aren't any adverts about the new line of Subarus.......if you don't like your media feed, the problem is YOU.
I can't believe I have to explain this but here it is: hey fellas, a media company wants the highest ratings possible. They want your eyes if they can get them. If they can't get your eyes because you're made that they don't hit the Dems enough, YOU are the problem, not them.
Which is why I laughed so hard at claims that the media hated/hates Trump. Sure they do. Because if there's one thing the media hates, it's record viewership.
The lack of self awareness coupled with not understanding how basic businesses functions......coming from Americans with our education and age is inexcusable. Gaslighting.
So in your mind, you find it acceptable that Social Media can pick and chose which 'cookies' to use based on demo of the user? That we agree.
What you miss, is that 'should' only apply to good and services for lack of a better analogy....not hand selected or possibly even paid political bias. That is operating in the 'grey' of political competition NOT capitalistic market share...unless you now want argue that politics should now be deemed equivalent to a 'business' and no longer a constitutional federal republic, where party can now be bought and sold. Sadly, we may be already there, its just 'official.
Can you rephrase this? I don't understand what you're asking....too many pronouns and not enough nouns for me to know how and what you are specifically describing.
We both agree on the part in Bold, targeted marketing, based on 'paid capitalism ad-marketing', which is algorithmic.
The 'grey' that is prejudicial, is the intentional favoring, backdoor financial aspects of political marketing to influence outcome; think insider trading as a close analogy.
Again....too many pronouns. Who is doing the "intentional favoring" who is doing the "political marketing". I can guess, but I want to make sure we're talking about the same thing here.
For FB - Zucker and his programmers
Political Marketing from a modicum of undisclosed entities....could be as simple as a phone call to tip the scale.
Got it, thanks.
So.....you want to get to be able to tell Zucker how to run his business? What about Musk? Does he have to do what you want.
No, we don't agree here. He can do whatever he wants. He's not the problem. The clear and obvious problem is that facebook and twitter are monopolies, and should be broken up. But no one in your former party wants that.....all they want is for Facebook to support their views.
And does this apply to TruthSocial? Do we get to FORCE them to run liberal stuff? No, right?
I don't understand where Americans came up with the idea that they are in charge of what private companies do or don't do in terms of operations.
And again, this ain't new. Politicians in quasi-Democracies all around the world have had direct lines to the press since before Democracy was invented.
It's absurd to think that all media in the 40's-2000's was calling balls and strikes, and simply reporting the truth. People simply get worked up and bent out of shape here in 2024 when they hear anything that runs counter to their views......or worse, don't run the stories they want them to run.
It's like having Dungeons and Dragons fans claiming a conspiracy because CNN and Fox don't run pieces about Dungeons and Dragons. If there was money in it? CNN and Fox would run a story per day if it led to millions of clicks.
And come on, how many times have you heard the adage----if it bleeds, it leads? Should I say there's a conspiracy at every local news station in America to make it sound like their town are far more violent than they really are? Or is this about ratings and money?
When you chase down the money part, then you get why they run what they run. Zuckerberg isn't political...he's about money. Same with Musk....whatever lines his pockets is what he'll do. And he has a REALLY wide road to drive on because he can afford losses.
And btw, why does this discussion about media never ever ever ever included stones throw at FoxNews? To me? That's the tell.....that it's R's whining about not hearing enough TinFoilHat stories about Hunter or voting or Covid to their liking. They have ZERO interest in fairness or truth.
Because if they did? They would have freaked out when Hannity showed up on the campaign stage with Trump. Not only did they not notice...they cheered it on.
old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 4:30 am
Show us all the MSM stories about Biden's decline -- which was obvious for all to see.
Oh you want to talk about Fox New finally? Great news, lets do it.
Now that Biden isn't running, suddenly the MSM at FoxNews isn't running a single story about how Biden isn't fit to have the nuclear codes or to make major daily decisions.
So.....I'm all ears: why is FoxNews covering up Biden's obvious decline that you mentioned?
Have any ideas, Old Salt?
old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 4:30 am.
Now they're giving Kamala a free ride, letting her flacks walk back all the whacko things she said & advocated for in the past.
They're enthusiastically going along with the Hollywood rebranding of Kamala.
Nope. Not only have I seen plenty of stones thrown by the media...we've discussed them here.
Naturally, you're MIA from the conversations, but want to pretend now that you care.
Doesn't matter what the media says or does, you're going to be mad because you're an extremist who demands to have his extremist views reinforced by the media you consume by the bucket.
And if they don't cater to you? You're simply too far gone to understand that YOU are the problem. But have no fear! Your seething anger at "the other team" can be fed continuously by simply clicking your mouse over and over and over.....
FNC is all over Biden, on the few occasions he comes off of vacation & appears in public. They comment daily on his absence, Their opinionators have repeatedly called for him to resign or for Harris & the cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment. They know that part of the deal to get him to drop out of the race was that he'd be allowed to finish his term, so long as he keeps a low profile, so the Dems can get the voters to forget him, so they can run against Trump like he's an incumbent.
Nobody from the MSM is grilling Kamala. She won't talk to them & they parrot all the reversals of her previous statements that they're fed by her unnamed campaign flacks. They're willing dupes in her rebranding makeover. It's all a non-substance Joy-ride. They're lapping it up.
