Kinda funny that Russia Today and AlJazzera are turning out to be two of the better news channels.

BankofAmericanMortgageFraud.gov is available.

Hey, I heard that "Brian Moynilhan Sucks," and "Bank of America stole my money" show some interesting search results.

Ironic that this also shows how much money they have to waste. Maybe by the end of the week they'll buy every combination of words there are..??

>> ^vaporlock:

Kinda funny that Russia Today and AlJazzera are turning out to be two of the better news channels.
1 hit peace with no relevance whatsoever on a company that has a name of that country's biggest opposition is hardly considered to be a quality news source.

I wasn't specifically talking about this segment, but... most corporate news sources wouldn't have even touched this topic. I admit it was done in the typical sloppy way that most news topics are covered.
>> ^mxxcon:

>> ^vaporlock:
Kinda funny that Russia Today and AlJazzera are turning out to be two of the better news channels.
1 hit peace with no relevance whatsoever on a company that has a name of that country's biggest opposition is hardly considered to be a quality news source.

I hope BOA crumbles to its fucking knees.

On the contrary, I think Russia's conflict with the US puts them in a better position to understand and critique American corruption. They have no patriotic blinders to cloud their view, no nationalism to justify censoring harsh critiques and they've suffered more against the American propaganda machine than most other countries in the world. We still, to this day, have a fictionalized, fairy tale understanding of the former Soviet Union. Google Edward Bernays.

http://videosift.com/video/Edward-Bernays-and-the-Art-of-Public-Manipulation



>> ^mxxcon:

1 hit peace with no relevance whatsoever on a company that has a name of that country's biggest opposition is hardly considered to be a quality news source.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

On the contrary, I think Russia's conflict with the US puts them in a better position to understand and critique American corruption. They have no patriotic blinders to cloud their view, no nationalism to justify censoring harsh critiques and they've suffered more against the American propaganda machine more than any other country in the world. We still, to this day, have an fictionalized, fairy tale understanding of the former Soviet Union. Google Edward Bernays.
http://videosift.com/video/Edward-Bernays-and-the-Art-of-Public-Ma
nipulation

>> ^mxxcon:
1 hit peace with no relevance whatsoever on a company that has a name of that country's biggest opposition is hardly considered to be a quality news source.

while true, "Russia Today", a tv channel sponsored by Russia's gov't is hardly an objective source of information.
Their own description is "RT sets out to present the Russian point of view on events in Russia and its 'near abroad' and give the viewers an opportunity to get acquainted with Russian views on world and domestic events." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_%28TV_network%29
So most of their content is presented with a pro-Russia spin. And in this case they couldn't pass up an opportunity to dump on a bank with "America" in its name.

If you prefer your news with pro-America spin, then why did you even bother to watch this? There are plenty of attractive American news professionals trained to comfort and entertain you. A more soothing narrative is only a click a way. If you turn it up loud enough, you should be safe from foreign perspectives.

http://www.foxnews.com/
http://www.cnn.com/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/
http://www.cbsnews.com/
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/index

@dystopianfuturetoday, I'm with @mxxcon on this one, RT isn't really out to debunk American propaganda, so much as promote stories that cast America in a negative light. We're not really a big target, so they mostly just elevate AP wire stories and add in a little derision.

That's different from how our propaganda networks work, where utterly fake stories get planted anonymously in 3rd tier blogs, and then wind their way up the media food chain until it's the front-page story on the New York Times, and the lead story on the evening news.

And all of them, every single one, are designed to make sure that no consensus against the status quo ever forms.

RT only sounds like propaganda busting because they unambiguously say "America's status quo sucks." But the criticisms themselves are always based on a fairly tame liberal or conservative complaint, not something really original or deeply insightful.

Man, she is a bloody annoying host/anchor/whatever she is.

Just obnoxious.

Yeah, at $10 a pop, 100s of domain names is gonna set BOA back $1,000s!

What kind of bank has enough money to throw 4-digits around on PR?>> ^Drax:

Ironic that this also shows how much money they have to waste. Maybe by the end of the week they'll buy every combination of words there are..??

Gotcha. Just.. where you say PR I say utterly useless use of money.

"JEFFRY.. get to my office immediatly!"

"Sir?"

"Buy every potentially damaging domain name you can think of.. we'll not have people creating damaging websites on the internet!".

".....sir??"

"Are those ears on your head, Jeffry??!"

"But.. we'd have to buy literally millions of combinations o-.."

"JUST BUY THEM!!"

"RIGHT AWAY SIR!"

It's not the over all cost, it's the complete waste of money this attempt is. 'OMG, BOASucks.com is taken.. there goes THAT idea..". ..and perhaps I wouldn't be so critical if it didn't involve -our- money.

I'd like to see people get worked up into a lather over the BBC or CBC...

@NetRunner, All media is propaganda, because every media source comes from a unique regional, economic, cultural and political perspective. Bias is perspective, and there is nothing wrong with perspective, so long as it is presented in an honest straight forward manner, and we know where that perspective is coming from. I think a larger diversity of media perspectives would be a positive.

I don't think RT's sole purpose in reporting is to make us look bad. We are the most powerful and deadly force on the planet. Our actions negatively impact people outside our borders just as much (if not more) as they impact those of us within. Russia has a stake in our actions and vested interest in highlighting our problems.

I do think that they would be better served with a less derisive, more professional tone.

To me, it is a great joke that they are buying names. What a worthless gesture. Sure it might only cost them thousands now, but lets look at something?

26 letters
10 numerals
1 hyphen (i do not know what other characters readily appear in urls)

Yay base 37!

At 8 characters long we are looking at 3,512,479,453,921 different names (or maybe that is 9 characters). Yes, that number gets considerably smaller when you have to include BOA in there, or something that represents them. However, how far can you go? The people that will go to whatever site that does exist, and not going there because it is a nice simple URL, they are going there to find out who or how this company is fucking.

@dystopianfuturetoday, sounds like we're mostly in agreement to me.

I think RT has an editorial bias that encourages stories that cast America in a negative light. I don't really think reporting a story about how American banks are engaged in creepy tactics to try to blunt negative press is somehow the product of a uniquely Russian culture.

Maybe my impression of RT's bias isn't really a bias in RT's editorial decisions, but in the editorial decisions of the people who post their clips on Videosift. They've all been highlighting some form of corruption in the US, and every one I've watched has just been an echo of something the right or left has been complaining about (and it's almost always welcomed with a comment of "wow, RT is the only good media outlet anymore!").

The same thing happens with Al Jazeera, though Al Jazeera focuses more on how our pointless wars are killing lots of innocent people.

As for our own media operations, I just grow more and more cynical about it as each day passes. There's still signal, but people have to work to hear it, and most don't bother. The long run goal seems to be to erase the idea of objective truth from our collective consciousness. That way when someone speaks actual truth, they just bring in an opposing "view", and then the truth can just be passed off as one more person's opinion.