Challenging the big bad media monster

Gregor Samsa

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Our government are not centre right. All of the parties are left wing. Somebody like Bernie Sanders would be labled far-right in Ireland.

None of this statement is accurate.

Richard Hillman

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

None of this statement is accurate.

If somebody copy and pasted Bernie Sanders tax plan and introduced it to Ireland, they would be called a far right Neo-Liberal.

https://www.bernietax.com/

The media in Ireland, who seem to politically illiterate, have been jizzing themselves over Joe Biden, who would be far more to the right than Fine Gael.

I remember Obama was making a speech a few years ago about social promotion. How he wants to allow a system of how working class People can promote themselves to become middle class. If Leo Varadkar made that exact same speech, he'd be called a snob. People will be screaming "what's wrong with being working class".

Jeremy Corbyn was another one. Jeremy Corbyns policies were basically proposing Ireland. Increased welfare spending, a softly-softly justice system, nationalised railways, huge health service spending. The welfare system probably still wouldn't have been as a generous as ours under Corbyns. If he shaved off the beard, put on a South Dublin accent and called himself John O'Corbawn, he would be called Right wing.

Even his proposed tax system was 45% for those over 80k and 50% for those over 125k. In Ireland its 40% over 35k plus USC, Plus PRSI. Corbyn was proposing a slightly less punitive system than ours.

I don't think people actually look into the policies of their international left wing hero's and measure them against out own.

Gregor Samsa

You’re mixing up the social, class and political spectra from three different countries there, and coming out with a conclusion that doesn’t apply to any of them.

You’re claiming Bernie Sanders is “far right” because he’s further right - under completely different, economic, social and class circumstances - in some policies than parties here you’ve arbitrarily defined as left wing, because you’ve compared them to parties elsewhere that are to the right of them on a different scale. You’ve got no baseline for any of your comparisons - you keep shifting it just to suit where in the spectrum you want to place a party or an individual.

We’re talking about Ireland here. Stick with the political spectrum here.

Junkyard Tom

People keep conflating 'left wing' with 'liberal'. Left wing economically would be, in a very general sense, making the economy work for broader society and 'the left' would make the argument that if people are economically secure, and happy with their lot, then you have fewer problems downstream with manifestations of inequality.

Chips Lovell

TP_CM wrote: »

Or am I missing something?

Quite a bit I'd say. First of all, you refer to the media as if its some sort of homogenous blob, whereas the reality is that is vast eco-system that's home to varying levels of quality and all sorts of viewpoints.

Secondly, the media is a market. And gaps in markets rarely exist for very long. If there is money to be made from a particular approach, someone's going to try it. That means that what you're looking for is either a.) not as in demand as you think it is or b.) (and much more likely) already out there.

Thirdly, you seem to think that it's the media leading the public around the nose, but it's really the other way around. The great lesson from the information age is that we thought that people would be better informed than they have ever been, but the reality is that most people tend to seek out what they want to hear which, for the most part, is media that confirms their existing beliefs and prejudices.

The market for sober, relatively non-dogmatic reporting and analysis, which will occasionally robustly challenge your opinions is very, very small. Also, it probably goes without saying, but you'll almost always have to pay for it. Free content is free for a reason.

TP_CM

Chips Lovell wrote: »

Thirdly, you seem to think that it's the media leading the public around the nose, but it's really the other way around. The great lesson from the information age is that we thought that people would be better informed than they have ever been, but the reality is that most people tend to seek out what they want to hear which, for the most part, is media that confirms their existing beliefs and prejudices.

Do you not think there is quite a lot that people need to seek out but which they aren't? I think I have less faith in people than you do, which is why I would prefer to see more balanced reporting in mainstream media, as opposed to all these fragments lying around with different agendas. I just don't believe that people are as good at seeking out alternative views on Trump, or Covid, or the Iraqi war, or whatever else. I feel the vast majority check RTE, BBC, Guardian, maybe Washington Post and the NYT. Not one of them was balanced in my opinion. They pushed fear with Covid, and Biden for President.

Chips Lovell

Quite the opposite. I think what I was (politely) trying to say is that you have a greater (and touching) more degree of faith in people than I do. You think that if the media most people consume improves, then they'll be better informed. I think think that if the media most people consume changes, they'll simply shift to other media that tells them what they want to hear.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It did:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/07/united-arab-emirates-to-relax-islamic-laws-on-personal-freedoms

Wasn't aware the Guardian are part of the Irish media?

rossie1977

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Our government are not centre right. All of the parties are left wing. Somebody like Bernie Sanders would be labled far-right in Ireland.

Ireland has the lowest corporate taxes in developed world, among the bottom 1/3 in payroll taxes, among lowest social welfare spending in Europe per gdp.

Not to mention successive FF and FG government have sought to continually cut public services especially outside the main urban areas. Hospital services, post offices, police stations, fire stations have been either shut or massively reduced in size past decade. Social welfare rate remain where they were a decade ago too. Our spending is only growing in that area because our population continues to get older and pension age (which btw FF and FG attempt to push back..)

Then we come onto social conservatism. A blasphemy law was introduced with a 100k fine.

FG introduced a draconian prostitution law during their term.

And vast majority of FG TDs questioned admitted to being anti abortion despite one of the biggest medical scandals to ever happen in this country https://www.irishtimes.com/news/abortion-views-of-some-fine-gael-tds-have-shifted-1.552427

For your earlier question why the 1/3 who voted against abortion and gay marriage don't have media dedicated to them you are incorrect because they do. Local radio stations appeal to this demographic, vast majority of that group voting against were over 65 years old.

rossie1977

TP_CM wrote: »

Years ago, our favourite TV or radio programme would get our attention, and we begrudgingly sat through whatever advertisements as a trade-off and the world worked fine. Now we have so much control and choice about what we consume on the web, things have changed. To get our attention, headlines need to be scarier and more emotive than those on rival media pages.

The media companies have therefore become a bit unbalanced, to put it lightly. Instead of providing us with scientific research which puts our minds at ease regarding covid, for example, we are shown coffins and crowded hospitals and Tubridy having a freak attack about how to wash his hands. Instead of showing us how old and senile Biden is, we're shown nothing but compilations of Trump gaffes. The most recent headlines appear to show America celebrating Biden's win, despite the fact that very close to 50% of people wanted Trump back in office.

Tubridy and late late is a talkshow. Its meant as light hearted relief not serious scientific discussion. This is the same show that has allowed guests on drunk, made fun of boyzone and sniggered through a review of 'The lovers guide' like we were watching 12 year old kids discussing topic..

Biden is only 3 years older than Trump and if he is senile that doesn't say much for Trump considering he wiped the floor with Trump in two 90 minute debates!!

Trump lost. Its irrelevant how many votes he got. Hillary got more votes than Trump in 2016 and you guys told everyone for 4 years to 'suck it up'

They have also somehow made it uncool to challenge what they're publishing. If you think Trump getting elected isn't actually a big deal, or Biden is senile, or Boris is quite an intelligent PERSON

What?

The media has been wall to wall trump since elected so clearly they view it as a big deal.

Biden being senile is horse****.

And I am sure Johnson is intelligent but yet continues to act the fool and make stupid decisions. How many had to die in the UK before his ridiculous 'herd immunity' theory was done away with.

or with Covid, why not just protect the old, vulnerable and anyone who wants protection from Covid? You will be cut down and ostracized in social circles.

How? How exactly would you just protect the old and vulnerable, please explain. Let's just take hospitals and care-homes alone, look at all the health and care workers that would be infected who would then pass it on.

Doesn't it feel a bit like Catholicism in Ireland in the 1940s and 50s? "If you sing from the same hymn sheet as us, you're fine, but if you don't, you will suffer the wrath"?.

Are you seriously comparing the Catholic Church and the scientific community here because it feels like you are.

This isn't a thread to speak of individual events because they have their own threads and they've been done to death.

But how do we ensure we don't get wrapped up in this very "selective" media which is getting published? Wouldn't it be nice to have a single "opposition" media company, akin to an opposition party in government, whose job is to challenge the other side and the agenda they're pushing. Biden is great? Here are 5 good things Trump has done over the last 4 years. Covid is dangerous? Here is a discussion with 5 top scientists who have data to say otherwise. Boris is a clown? Take a look at these things he has achieved.

Watch the BBC kiss Johnsons ass nightly or FOX News Trump love in or read the Daily Mail then. Problem solved.

I am not a conspiracy theorist, or tin foil hat man, but I am struggling to have any confidence in what I know these days. It's getting harder and harder to drill down to the information which is just information and not biased towards one idea or another. I'm also finding it difficult to chat to people who are wrapped up in it all. It's such a dramatic fantasy at this stage. It's like trying to join a conversation about a tv soap opera. Or am I missing something?

Sounds to me like you are.

I bet you consume alot of right wing bordering on far right viewpoints online.

Biker79

rossie1977 wrote: »

I bet you consume a lot of right-wing bordering on far-right viewpoints online.

What's wrong with right-wing? Its been the default state of humanity for the vast majority of human history. Its still the default state for most of the planet.

Its leftism that's an aberration, in historical terms, whether you like it or not.

On the media - each of the MSM outlets has announced Biden as the winner, but the election is being contested so it means there is legally no official winner yet. Yet they are behaving like it's over. Why is that?

An impartial MSM would report this accurately.

Dyr

440Hertz wrote: »

You’re conflating social media with the traditional media and also the US and UK have been exposed to giant public relations / political communication machines, driven by political parties and very powerful lobbyists in a way we don’t really see to anything like the same extent in Ireland.

You're fundamentally wrong, Political parties do not control the mainstream media, its more the opposite. The rise of the spin doctor in the 90s was an acknowledgement that politicians now play by the rules that the press decide. Up until recently, the press kept politicians in check and dictated what they would not put forward.

What we've recently seen though is mainstream polticians and media in lockstep but losing a large section of the public. The rise of Trump was a result of this, he broke every single rule that the media set for politicians, not only that, in his own hamfisted, bellicose fasion, he traduced them at every turn and yet still attained the highest office on earth. The mainstream media abandoned all pretence of integrity to go after him over the last four years so at least their true nature is now out in the open

The real worry for me is that once the highest level of influence we had was national media so there was some level of diversity between nations at least but now we have three social media giants who act as a highly biased supranational media while being allowed to pretend that they're merely platforms. Twitter, in particular, has gone full 1984 with its "fact checking"

And dont get me started on our homegrown press.

maccored

the media is by nature going to be manipulated. theres no law saying they arent allowed to hoodwink people.

People on the other hand, should learn to cop on and be more conscientious in making sure the information they believe is based in actual fact. to much believing what 'the media' tell you, without at least double checking it.

TP_CM

rossie1977 wrote: »

Are you seriously comparing the Catholic Church and the scientific community here because it feels like you are.

I am comparing the grip which the Catholic Church had on its followers in the 1940s and 50s with the grip the mainstream media has on its followers today. I am comparing the emotion, the trust, the hidden agenda, the ostracizing of non-believers, and ultimately the danger of one mainstream institution having that much control over people who seem clueless about its weaknesses. They will even defend it quite emotionally against someone who is asking a mere question. Doesn't that ring a bell?

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I'm not going to debate the examples I gave on Covid/Biden's senility. There are plenty of threads dealing with those points. This thread is dealing with the weakness in the media we consume, and my own belief that it is making an impact on decisions in society. Some are saying society is stronger than the media, but my personal view is that if RTE/Irish Times/Independent wanted to get Sinn Fein, for example, elected, they could do it with relative ease through headlines and editing alone (and what's more scary, is that if they get more clicks they might well just do that). People are just taking the news for granted. Anyone who does look behind the curtain for the full picture is not seen to be open minded, or inquisitive. They are seen to be tin foil hat people, conspiracy theorists which isn't right.

maccored

TP_CM wrote: »

....but my personal view is that if RTE/Irish Times/Independent wanted to get Sinn Fein, for example, elected, they could do it with relative ease through headlines and editing alone (and what's more scary, is that if they get more clicks they might well just do that).

Many papers (Im looking at you The Indo family) have went out of their way to demonify the likes of SF, so if it works one direction, it'll work the other. People still vote for FF so I can only assume it was some paper or some radio/tv show somewhere telling people FF were all right. Y

ou are happy then to see it working one way (demonising parties) rather than the other (promoting the same kind of parties) - is basically what you're saying?

Have you considered that some people (like myself) try to get their information from multiple sources, but still come to the conclusion that Trump absolutely had to go and that covid is worth being fearful of

rossie1977

TP_CM wrote: »

I am comparing the grip which the Catholic Church had on its followers in the 1940s and 50s with the grip the mainstream media has on its followers today. I am comparing the emotion, the trust, the hidden agenda, the ostracizing of non-believers, and ultimately the danger of one mainstream institution having that much control over people who seem clueless about its weaknesses. They will even defend it quite emotionally against someone who is asking a mere question. Doesn't that ring a bell?

No it doesn't. The Catholic Church controlled everything in this country. They ran the schools, they ran the community centres. They covered up decades of abuse, they took children away from their mothers. They were largely responsible for banning media they didn't like, ban on contraception and keeping homosexuality criminalised for as long as it was.

In what way is RTÉ doing something similar? You can choose to watch or ignore. You certainly couldn't ignore the Catholic Church in this country if you grew up anytime between 1930 and 1989.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I'm not going to debate the examples I gave on Covid/Biden's senility. There are plenty of threads dealing with those points.

Both are extreme viewpoints mostly propagated by the far right especially online. No serious media is going to run those stories.

This thread is dealing with the weakness in the media we consume, and my own belief that it is making an impact on decisions in society. Some are saying society is stronger than the media, but my personal view is that if RTE/Irish Times/Independent wanted to get Sinn Fein, for example, elected, they could do it with relative ease through headlines and editing alone (and what's more scary, is that if they get more clicks they might well just do that). People are just taking the news for granted. Anyone who does look behind the curtain for the full picture is not seen to be open minded, or inquisitive. They are seen to be tin foil hat people, conspiracy theorists which isn't right.

Interestingly SF themselves have a complete opposite viewpoint https://www.thejournal.ie/sinn-fein-pearse-doherty-media-2843876-Jun2016/

TP_CM

mariaalice wrote: »

Its the belief that there is some sort of media conspiracy to suppresses certain views is nonsense.

I would agree. But if there is money behind their reasoning it's not so hard to believe. But hypothetically, I don't think the media would necessarily want to suppress opinions that Covid isn't that big of a deal for young people not at risk, for example, but I am saying that perhaps they realised that more advertisement revenue would be generated by publishing stories of the 10% (or whatever) of people who were badly affected as opposed to stories about the 90% (or whatever) of people who barely had any symptoms at all. So where would that leave us? Living in a state of fear. Not necessarily led by a conspiracy, but by the ultimate business goal to make money.

TP_CM

rossie1977 wrote: »

No it doesn't. The Catholic Church controlled everything in this country. They ran the schools, they ran the community centres. They covered up decades of abuse, they took children away from their mothers. They were largely responsible for banning media they didn't like, ban on contraception and keeping homosexuality criminalised for as long as it was.

In what way is RTÉ doing something similar? You can choose to watch or ignore. You certainly couldn't ignore the Catholic Church in this country if you grew up anytime between 1930 and 1989.

[/url]

I will certainly agree with you there. The Catholic Church was worse. There is no doubt, and I don't think I said the two were exactly the same. One just reminded me of the other.

Tomorrow I will be chatting to my family. They have been watching the news on the presidency election. And they have posted countless photos/videos of Biden and they have gotten completely wrapped up in the whole election coverage. They basically think Biden is a God, and Trump is the Devil. They won't allow a single bad thing to be said of Biden or Kamala. I might mention that Biden has stumbled over a few of his words a few times, or that Kamala is a bit of a political weather vane when it comes to policy and they will firstly think I'm pro-Trump, which I'm not, and secondly think I'm a conspiracy theorist, which I'm not. There are no aliens, or people getting together to purposely control our minds, there's no intention or bad will. There is simply advertisement money taking priority over good and balanced journalism and the long term effects it has.

TP_CM

Deleted User wrote: »

Have you considered that some people (like myself) try to get their information from multiple sources, but still come to the conclusion that Trump absolutely had to go and that covid is worth being fearful of

Yes, because I am one of them. Have you ever gotten your information from different sources and ultimately been disappointed with what the mainstream media has portrayed?

TP_CM

TP_CM wrote: »

Yes, because I am one of them. Have you ever gotten your information from different sources and ultimately been disappointed with what the mainstream media has portrayed?

I can't because I disagree with your concept of the mainstream media.

Where does the MSM end and different sources begin?

Dyr

maccored wrote: »

the media is by nature going to be manipulated. theres no law saying they arent allowed to hoodwink people.

People on the other hand, should learn to cop on and be more conscientious in making sure the information they believe is based in actual fact. to much believing what 'the media' tell you, without at least double checking it.

The problem is that for most of our lives the media would spin and be selective but they wouldnt be outrightly duplicitious or completely ignore a story because it didnt suit their agenda. There are no reliable sources to double check anymore.

Dyr

rossie1977 wrote: »

In what way is RTÉ doing something similar? You can choose to watch or ignore. You certainly couldn't ignore the Catholic Church in this country if you grew up anytime between 1930 and 1989.

RTE refused to report on the fact that young psychopatic girl whos now in a mens prison is actually a man.

Just like the Catholic Churchs influence, there are certain topics which will not be given coverage.

Wanderer78

TP_CM wrote:

But how do we ensure we don't get wrapped up in this very "selective" media which is getting published? Wouldn't it be nice to have a single "opposition" media company, akin to an opposition party in government, whose job is to challenge the other side and the agenda they're pushing. Biden is great? Here are 5 good things Trump has done over the last 4 years. Covid is dangerous? Here is a discussion with 5 top scientists who have data to say otherwise. Boris is a clown? Take a look at these things he has achieved.

You're bang on, who the fcuk would think trump is a 'man of the people', or borris has anything going on upstairs of any intelligence, or that covid is just a bad flu!

paw patrol

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd take "single illusion" any day of the week. I barely take in anything rte out out if I'm being honest. The daily news on Rte fairly drab at best. Whenever I do have a look it's clear to me that they're reporting all sorts of view points. Dr Martin Feeley on Claire Byrne live comes to mind. Regardless this obsession with the "main stream media" is ridiculous. There are literally thousands of media outlets in Ireland alone representing thousands of points of view. Branch out. Main stream media has become a buzz word to represent anything someone disagrees with.

interesting you mention Dr Feeley and he has been used as an example of RTEs balance in covid reporting esp regarding government restrictions.
It's a fair point until you realise it took almost 6 months of covid restrictions (march to sept) to get anybody with Dr. Feeleys viewpoint on RTE.
6 months later...is not balance.

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

You’re making it out like their media representation is being actively denied to them. This isn’t the case.

If there’s such a large market for these views, why hasn’t it been filled? Why haven’t the Irish Catholic and Alive! - who do cater to some of these viewpoints- got massive circulation numbers?

you are mistaking religious views for opinions on Abortion and other social things. Many non religious will have such a view.
I voted No to the repeal 8th Amendment, I've no desire to read Alive or the the Irish catholic (if they are still about) , it's weird that you would think along the lines that only catholics would hold such views.

TP_CM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

You're bang on, who the fcuk would think trump is a 'man of the people', or borris has anything going on upstairs of any intelligence, or that covid is just a bad flu!

Well unfortunately the majority of people did. Trump elected in 2016, Boris in 2019. And if you want to find people who think Covid is a bad flu, check out the pubs in the run up to Christmas, I think you'll find one or two.

Wanderer78

TP_CM wrote: »

Well unfortunately the majority of people did. Trump elected in 2016, Boris in 2019. And if you want to find people who think Covid is a bad flu, check out the pubs in the run up to Christmas, I think you'll find one or two.

you d be surprised what people do when theyre fueled with anger, frustration and fear, this is what brought us to trump and brexit, and yes, load humans up with highly addictive substances that causes us to ditch inhibitions, and expect sh1t to happen

TP_CM

Deleted User wrote: »

I can't because I disagree with your concept of the mainstream media.

Where does the MSM end and different sources begin?

I don't think it's defined, but I think it can be seen. For me, there are the main newspapers and sites which people go to for news and they all appear to have the same kind of reporting and views, albeit with varying degrees of actual detail.

Here is an example of what I'm talking about today - China and Russia are delaying congratulating Biden on a win:

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2020/1109/1176891-us-election-reaction/

Check out the photo of the foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin they have used. Also, don't you think that it implies they're being anti democratic, pro-Trump? Sort of leaves the reader thinking that there will be additional tension there over the next few years when interacting with Biden. We better stay tuned and click on more stories.

In actual fact, looking at the Kremlin's historical congratulatory messages on their website, it seems that they always wait until an official announcement has been made by the American authorities. They waited until Trump was officially announced, and the same with Obama. So how many RTE's readers realised this today? It's nothing more than basic protocol. If they started congratulating candidates before their own country has announced it, it would be pretty disrespectful to the election process. And aside from anything, what do they gain by doing that?

Funnily enough, the very site I'm using to highlight this is in some ways the answer to my problem. With Boards.ie, there might be a lot of codswallop but in fairness when you read through a few pages you will inevitably find insights and links to different perspectives and information.

Wanderer78

TP_CM wrote: »

I don't think it's defined, but I think it can be seen. For me, there are the main newspapers and sites which people go to for news and they all appear to have the same kind of reporting and views, albeit with varying degrees of actual detail.

Here is an example of what I'm talking about today - China and Russia are delaying congratulating Biden on a win:

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2020/1109/1176891-us-election-reaction/

Check out the photo of the foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin they have used. Also, don't you think that it implies they're being anti democratic, pro-Trump? Sort of leaves the reader thinking that there will be additional tension there over the next few years when interacting with Biden. We better stay tuned and click on more stories.

In actual fact, looking at the Kremlin's historical congratulatory messages on their website, it seems that they always wait until an official announcement has been made by the American authorities. They waited until Trump was officially announced, and the same with Obama. So how many RTE's readers realised this today? It's nothing more than basic protocol. If they started congratulating candidates before their own country has announced it, it would be pretty disrespectful to the election process. And aside from anything, what do they gain by doing that?

trump is a classic narcissist, i.e. his ego is so fragile, he may in fact never concede, but the world must move on, hence why the republicans pushed bush out into the limelight, to move on from their defeat

TP_CM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

trump is a classic narcissist, i.e. his ego is so fragile, he may in fact never concede, but the world must move on, hence why the republicans pushed bush out into the limelight, to move on from their defeat

I think there is due process with an election which might not rely on the president conceding. I think the votes are counted, election officials make an announcement and eventually the department of foreign affairs sends out a communication. Who knows what Trump will do. With his track record, he could announce a win, defeat, and a court case all in the one day.