I for one do not want the media to tell me the story for the sake of telling the story. Let them present their slanted view. I think your concern is for the people who have no idea how to do research and for them I have no sympathy. I'll let you respond and have the final word because it's obvious we simply disagree and neither one will yield to the other thus the debate has gone into an argument and nothing constructive is coming of it for either of us. You make a good argument, I just disagree
Very thought provoking and eye opening. The funny thing is most people would rather survive in the maze than think about opening their eyes. Very well put together. Thanks for sharing
The fairness doctrine in and of itself is censorship. There is a difference between journalists and people like Rush Limbaugh and Lynn Samuels. It is unreasonable to ask conservative or Liberal talk show hosts to present both sides of a story. They have an audience based on what they program and you cannot dictate to them what they must program. Journalism in this country has died. Journalist students are taught now to be activists with their voices and not to be reporters of the news.
citizenkong- I have not given up. I am simply saying that a fairness doctrine is censorship. There's no real way to argue against that, it's right there. To order media outlets what they must alot time for? seriously? You can't see the obvious backwardness of that line of thinking?
the fairness doctrine absolutely did not help journalism flourish, that is a ridiculous statement. The fairness doctrine limits a journalists ability to present facts. The fairness doctrine gave us o'reilly, hannity, levin, wilkow and the rest. What flourished during the fairness doctrine was propoganda from both sides and the intentional distorting of the facts. You can try all you want, at the end of the day you support censorship. It's that simple, you favor censorship over free thought.
seriously? you're going to tell me that watergate was exposed as a result of the fairness doctrine? That's crap and you know it. As for Vietnam, the coverage was overly one sided to say the least, everybody knows that. You are advocating censorship, you may try to skew the facts and do some fancy dance, but in the end, you favor censorship. Fairness doctrine equals censorship, that's the truth and you may not want to admit it but there's no way around it.
You have cited exactly zero examples. You make these claims with zero evidence provided. Guess what, the cold war ended with no fairness doctrine, I suppose you would say that's a result of no fairness doctrine? That follows YOUR line of thinking, so it MUST hold true, right? What lie? That the media is biased? That's ground breaking news, who knew?
You cited two incidents that occured while the fairness doctrine was in place. That does not equal examples or evidence no matter how much you close your eyes and wish to your conspiracy leaders that it does. Evidence of censorship in the context of the fairness doctrine is simple, I'll explain it again for you, pay attention this time. If the government regulates what the media must publish or program you have censorship. I can't make it any more elementary for you than that. Read a book.......
I was a broadcasting major and I lived through the coverage of Vietnam and Watergate.
You need to pay attention.
How pray tell, if the fairness doctrine was so censoring the media that the coverage of the Vietnam war was allowed to inform the populace that it was an unwinnable war? How was the media allowed to bring down a president during Watergate? After the end of the fairness doctrine coverage of our wars has been highly censored.
You need to read a book and stop listening to talk radio.
Okay, answer this question. It's very simple and you don't even need to elaborate on it unless you just want to. If a member of the media chooses to report the news with a slanted point of view and an obvious bias do you have to watch or listen to them? There are so many alternate media sources now with the advent of the interenet it's crazy. The medias job is not to tell you this is what is happening and that's it. u still have to examine everything surrounding the issue and decide for yourself
Journalism's job IS to tell you what is happening. To tell you the facts and to strive for objectivity.
No wonder you don't get it.
A recent poll said that two thirds of the population does not trust the media. Since the elimination of the fairness doctrine the media has become more and more bias. Money and corporate interests influence the news more than ever..
Where are the Edward R. Murrows or the Walter Kronkites?
This has been flagged as spam show
I've recently felt out the cold fascist
hand of censorship on you-tube!!!
VGsuperstar 2 years ago
698
hymierules 2 years ago
685
Electrorules 2 years ago
676
TOAFN 2 years ago
672
TOAFN 2 years ago
I for one do not want the media to tell me the story for the sake of telling the story. Let them present their slanted view. I think your concern is for the people who have no idea how to do research and for them I have no sympathy. I'll let you respond and have the final word because it's obvious we simply disagree and neither one will yield to the other thus the debate has gone into an argument and nothing constructive is coming of it for either of us. You make a good argument, I just disagree
seekanduwillfind 2 years ago
Everbody can see that youtube is terrorizing this movie.
As well in view counts as in streaming limiting.
TOAFN 2 years ago
616 views.
CensorTube is sooooo damn funny...
TOAFN 2 years ago
553 views. Blatant Censorship.
Shame on you Google.
TOAFN 2 years ago
It ain't about balls, it's about timing.
GaurdDuck 2 years ago
Why the piss is this video so laggy
Noobpatty 2 years ago
Because youtube wants it laggy.
TOAFN 2 years ago
Hahah exactly
Noobpatty 2 years ago
Excellent Job !!!
mickiandalusia 2 years ago
Nice. Appreciate it.
ThePhaedrus83 2 years ago
intelligent!
rare!
Loveparadigm 2 years ago
Thanks!! i Wish for more views but youtube(theytube) doesn't like that.
TOAFN 2 years ago
Great!!
FelixLoop 2 years ago
Very thought provoking and eye opening. The funny thing is most people would rather survive in the maze than think about opening their eyes. Very well put together. Thanks for sharing
GroSource 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice work !!! 5*****
Waynetoven 2 years ago 5
AWESOME!!!!!!!!
great vid Paul
Proshka 2 years ago
Good Job!
soulmate702000 2 years ago 2
Hear Hear!
datafork 2 years ago
Thanks!!!
TOAFN 2 years ago
indeed 5*s
Orwell did his best... but "we" can go...
even further to worse than the worst !!!
yohrdzayr 2 years ago
Awesome 5*****
Livingvibe 2 years ago
This is a very good video.
The newspapers are in trouble. What good is the internet if there are no real journalists in the field reporting the news?
We need a Fairness Doctrine or something similar.
citizenkong 2 years ago
The fairness doctrine in and of itself is censorship. There is a difference between journalists and people like Rush Limbaugh and Lynn Samuels. It is unreasonable to ask conservative or Liberal talk show hosts to present both sides of a story. They have an audience based on what they program and you cannot dictate to them what they must program. Journalism in this country has died. Journalist students are taught now to be activists with their voices and not to be reporters of the news.
seekanduwillfind 2 years ago 4
So you've given up. Step aside then.
citizenkong 2 years ago
citizenkong- I have not given up. I am simply saying that a fairness doctrine is censorship. There's no real way to argue against that, it's right there. To order media outlets what they must alot time for? seriously? You can't see the obvious backwardness of that line of thinking?
seekanduwillfind 2 years ago
When the fairness doctrine was in place journalism flourished.
If you choose to ignore history, so be it.
citizenkong 2 years ago
the fairness doctrine absolutely did not help journalism flourish, that is a ridiculous statement. The fairness doctrine limits a journalists ability to present facts. The fairness doctrine gave us o'reilly, hannity, levin, wilkow and the rest. What flourished during the fairness doctrine was propoganda from both sides and the intentional distorting of the facts. You can try all you want, at the end of the day you support censorship. It's that simple, you favor censorship over free thought.
seekanduwillfind 2 years ago
Watergate was exposed during the fairness doctrine. The war coverage in Vietnam gave us a clearer picture of what was going on than we get now.
You are the one that is being fooled by propaganda.
citizenkong 2 years ago
seriously? you're going to tell me that watergate was exposed as a result of the fairness doctrine? That's crap and you know it. As for Vietnam, the coverage was overly one sided to say the least, everybody knows that. You are advocating censorship, you may try to skew the facts and do some fancy dance, but in the end, you favor censorship. Fairness doctrine equals censorship, that's the truth and you may not want to admit it but there's no way around it.
seekanduwillfind 2 years ago
Pay attention.
I said journalism flourished under the fairness doctrine and I gave you two examples.
Now show me how journalism has improved since Reagan ended it. I say it is now, more than ever, in the hands of big business.
News is now for entertainment, for ratings, for money.
The truth is not a commodity.
You are the one that favors censorship. You are the one that believes the lie.
citizenkong 2 years ago
You have cited exactly zero examples. You make these claims with zero evidence provided. Guess what, the cold war ended with no fairness doctrine, I suppose you would say that's a result of no fairness doctrine? That follows YOUR line of thinking, so it MUST hold true, right? What lie? That the media is biased? That's ground breaking news, who knew?
seekanduwillfind 2 years ago
Media flourished during the fairness doctrine. I cited two examples.
Your argument is that it equals censorship.
You are the one that fails to offer evidence of censorship.
Silly you. The cold war?. . . Stick to the subject. .
Journalism has has suffered since Reagan ended the fairness doctrine. Pay attention.
The truth is not a commodity.
citizenkong 2 years ago
You cited two incidents that occured while the fairness doctrine was in place. That does not equal examples or evidence no matter how much you close your eyes and wish to your conspiracy leaders that it does. Evidence of censorship in the context of the fairness doctrine is simple, I'll explain it again for you, pay attention this time. If the government regulates what the media must publish or program you have censorship. I can't make it any more elementary for you than that. Read a book.......
seekanduwillfind 2 years ago
I was a broadcasting major and I lived through the coverage of Vietnam and Watergate.
You need to pay attention.
How pray tell, if the fairness doctrine was so censoring the media that the coverage of the Vietnam war was allowed to inform the populace that it was an unwinnable war? How was the media allowed to bring down a president during Watergate? After the end of the fairness doctrine coverage of our wars has been highly censored.
You need to read a book and stop listening to talk radio.
citizenkong 2 years ago
Okay, answer this question. It's very simple and you don't even need to elaborate on it unless you just want to. If a member of the media chooses to report the news with a slanted point of view and an obvious bias do you have to watch or listen to them? There are so many alternate media sources now with the advent of the interenet it's crazy. The medias job is not to tell you this is what is happening and that's it. u still have to examine everything surrounding the issue and decide for yourself
seekanduwillfind 2 years ago
Journalism's job IS to tell you what is happening. To tell you the facts and to strive for objectivity.
No wonder you don't get it.
A recent poll said that two thirds of the population does not trust the media. Since the elimination of the fairness doctrine the media has become more and more bias. Money and corporate interests influence the news more than ever..
Where are the Edward R. Murrows or the Walter Kronkites?
Reagan signed away the American media's future.
citizenkong 2 years ago
Very well done. *****
jakoxn 2 years ago
FUCK CENSORSHIP!
silversobe 2 years ago 2
thought provoking -
Dr Ron Paul is actually against anti-trust legislation - would be interesting to think about an alternative
dcolyer 2 years ago
1984 - need i say more...
Mahat70 2 years ago 2
I likes!
aikomellow 2 years ago