@newtboy
i agree in theory,but disagree in practice.
as i stated in my comment:discernment.

it appears we approach news and journalism differently.

i do not consume the institution,but rather the individual reporter.which is why i will watch a report by shepard smith from FOX,but ignore anything by tucker carlson or bill o'reilly.

the HUGE mistake you make about hedges,is just that,an assumption.

chris hedges mistake.
is the same mistake that other media personalities have made,such as cenk uynger when he was on MSNBC.

hedges criticized power.
in fact,in the run up to the iraq war hedges was pushing out story after story that was highly critical of the bush administration,and..ironically..was using the very intelligence reports that you mentioned.he was challenged by the new york times editorial board to either cease and desist,or face disciplinary action.

he chose to retain his integrity,and honor his father (great story right there,he always chokes up when telling it) and walked away from a successful career,full of adulation and respect,rather than bow at the foot of the kings throne and kiss the feet of the powerful.

the man has guts,in spades,and i admire him very much.

but if you think my opnion is biased,then let us take phil donahue who was hosting the most popular show on the newly founded MSNBC.

he too,was critical of the bush administration and had guests on that were countering the avalanche of white house narratives flooding the cable news networks.

he was fired,while simultaneously hosting the most popular and highest rated shows on MSNBC.

what i am saying,is exactly what hedges is saying:
criticize power and you will be branded,blacklisted and shunned from the "mainstream media".you will be relegated to the fringe for your defiance to power.

/chuckles..i find it interesting that pretty much everybody uses the term "mainstream media" to epitomize:lazy journalism,propaganda,fake news and yet the media THEY choose to consume..well...thats not mainstream at all.the media THEY choose to consume is top notch journalism.

i am not saying my choices are right,but i do choose them carefully.i do not subscribe to institutions but rather individuals who have proven the test of proper journalistic integrity:chris hedges,matt taibbi,bill moyers,henry giroux,laura poitrus,jeremy scahill,amy goodman,paul jay

you may notice that every one of these people are critical of power,and that..my friend..is the basic premise of the fourth estate.

the washington post,along with the new york times and wall street journal have become rags.just my opinion,feel free to disagree.

Verifiability untrue. Any way you look at it shows Faux is king of biased opinion and conjecture masquerading as news. The others are trying to catch up.
That said, I defy you to show what they reported that was untrue in this last case involving the Trump blackmail material. They reported on a briefing that included charges of blackmail against the president elect( *electorally). That briefing absolutely exists. Where's the lie, Bob, where exactly is the lie?

I agree, SOME media outlets are clearly biased for the dems, just as some are for the republicans.

I listed a number of fake Clinton stories Faux repeated, you addressed none. Where's the witty retort? Cat got your tongue?

I also mentioned Bernie, and Clinton's unfavorability. No wonder you can't understand my arguments, you don't seem to have read them.

So then, Faux is not news media, nor is right wing radio, newspapers, or websites? Glad you've come around.
Yes, most mainstream media got it as wrong as the democrats. They clearly suck ass, just not quite as hard or deep as Faux....not for lack of effort.

re: Internet/totalitarianism/control of information, every single government tries to control information, the media, public opinion, and uses the internet as a tool for that goal (just like tv, radio, print, etc). The internet/access to information in and of itself does not guarantee greater accuracy/truth of that information, and unless the population is educated, respectful, and capable of critical thinking it can easily become little bubbles of echo chambers and a playground for griefers. What good did widespread internet availability do for the last US election? has the internet made americans more free, or more easily monitored and controlled? what good is it for cuba for cubans to have access to world of warcraft, so they can neglect their children who starve to death while they grind up to the next level? has the internet prevented mainstream media from fabricating news / pushing their agendas, or has it given more people a platform for fabricating news, anonymously? yeah, im not saying the internet is all bad, of course there are other very useful applications for it, but its not a magic "improve society" wand.

final thing i want to say, I have several friends who studied in cuba as exchange students in the late 90s, early 00s and yes, they had to make treks to specific places for access but they were able to send emails and such, so this piece is not factually accurate. If the cuban govt was so dead set on stopping people from communicating, im pretty sure they would identify network cables hanging in the middle of the street and easily follow them back to your apartment, not to mention detect wifi networks setup all over their tiny island.

If they think that people are starting to lose interest in the main parties, they will spend the next 4 years highlighting war, terrorism, uncertainty and scarcity so that people are less likely to take any kind of risk. They will also highlight the uncertainty of voting for anyone else - i.e. these third parties are inexperienced, they don't understand, they are weak and/or sympathetic towards our enemy.

It's basically what they've done with Corbyn over here. "They" control the press so they also control the national will.

I think the only way we progress beyond this profit for the few, managed decline for the rest phase is to destroy the stranglehold that the media moguls like Murdoch, Barclays (the brothers, not the bank), etc. have over mainstream media.

They are literally peddling falsehoods and distractions so that people will target anyone other than those responsible.

Obamacare was sold as THE ANSWER. IS HAS FAILED. It isn't the answer.

Clinton Foundation is so freaking great. Just ask the president of Haiti and its people how they got screwed by the Clinton Foundation. Its a scam for them to line their own political pockets.

To believe anything from a Clinton is utterly fullish. History is full of Clinton lies.

Democrats don't back down no matter what.

Loot at Clinton wiki leaks have her dead to right but she is not backing down. Attack the Russians but lets not looks at the emails just blame the Russian. Great miss direction and teh mainstream media goes right along with it.

look Hillary will will win by a land slide (not) and you can cream your pants.

You can pull any website and "look" at premiums but until you actually y go through the process you don't know the number,

That settles it - anti-everything.

"Whereas esjews, like their frequent allies and ideological partners the islamists, seem to be gaining ground and converts every day.

I think you can see where i was coming from with this stuff though. I was being polite, but I'm not stupid and I can read between the lines - he's insulting 'lefties' for pandering to Muslims and giving them special treatment, more or less allowing them to behave as they wish, for fear of offending their religion. I know this argument, i've heard it before.

It's not racist; it's not hate talking. It's fear of the stereotype that the mainstream media love to peddle. Fear the muslims, hate the socialists who protect them! Divisive politics that allows a practically fascist political establishment to maintain the war industry, because if the peons are scared of Muhammad they won't start to ask why we can't have better hospitals and schools, or why between 1 - 5% of people are getting richer whilst everyone else has to have austerity. Why are pension funds in trouble, why will our children be worse off than us, when we are working to depression and exhaustion? Never mind that - fear the immigrants, don't vote for their allies and ideological partners! Vote for Christmas you turkeys!

This guy has my vote - First honest accurate analysis of Brexit and Trumpism I've seen.
Why is this kind of a discussion not all over the traditional media? Is mainstream media so devoid of intelligent analytical skills that they are incapable of doing this kind of thing? or is it that they have for so long been part of the political elitist mentality (on left and right) that they are simply unwilling to present an honest analysis?

Heh, there's so much stuff on the left and right that I never hear a peep about in mainstream media. I'm unfortunate enough to have gotten my email into mailing lists on both sides, and I have to delete mountains of bitching political emails every day (and half of it is begging for donations while demonizing the other side).

Like I said, I have nothing against training.
But with 100 million people having access to arms, even if well trained, I would not count on zero accidents. Just being pedantic. I do agree with you in general.

More power to ya'.

-scheherazade

Yeah, I feel like Bernie's campaign isn't as strong due to people letting the mainstream media tell them that he isn't going to win. Then people start looking at the fact that they don't want a racist, misogynist, arrogant, homophobe, reality-TV celebrity who is also just a straight up 1 percenting rich prick as their president, so they vote for Capitol Hillcake Clinton.

People also forget that Bill Clinton helped deregulate Wall Street (which helped cause the market crash in 2008) and you better bet that Hillcakes is sharing that same bed with Wall Street while Bill takes his Wall Street allowance and sneaks off for a 2am blowjob from a fancy $3k/hr escort.

All of these people are straight up hustler/villains except for good old Bernie.

Add stereo cameras, broadcast it online in VR with controls in my hand to switch between vehicles...then make easily accessible via some mainstream media outlet and I guarantee you I will watch that.

I think it's pretty apparent by the articles below, he's a professional troll. I'm sure fox knows what he is and has him around cus hes good for ratings. Kinda surprised TYT got sucked in. Hmmm maybe they are just as bad as the rest of the media when it comes to checking out who and what they are reporting on OR maybe they know and are doing it for the clicks. That would be disappointing but not surprising.

"It became irresistible to goad people and corner them into conversations about controversial politics because they were so hysterical and easy to anger," McInnes wrote, trying to explain how he had been misquoted as a white supremacist in a news article because of a prank he'd pulled. "Plus, incendiary political statements garnered endless publicity for us, and playing with mainstream media became a fun game."

The full article tells the story i think
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/gavin-mcinnes-interview-im-not-796177

A letter he wrote to gawker long ago on his antics
http://gawker.com/013468/letter-to-gawker-from-gavin-mcinnes

Oh, I am blunt, alright. A lot of people dont like that, because actually they feel attacked since they see those people I criticize in themselves or how they support them with their passiveness. Plus I am very good at figuring out people, analyzing them. Thats what I dont keep silent about either.
It was not an ad hominem attack, because I offered facts (which got ignored with an excuse of ad hominem), and I actually tried to explain why they react how they react.
I havent seen anyone deny anything I said about them. And thats the point. I dont care if hes pissed off now. If hes open and objective he will think about what I said, even check those facts for himself and maybe one day will think that I was right all along. Or not, and hes a lost case, and in that case me being friendly towards his ignorance wouldnt have changed anything. I learned that friendliness (PC) only plays into the hands of these people. I know these people because I was like them once and had friends like them, was part of their "society". It buys them time, it makes them look less despicable than they actually are, it makes people ignore whats really going on. I am sick of sugar coating, newspeak. This has brought us to where we are. Its nothing more than lies. Read 1984 for some insight on how horrible this PC and newspeak already is. Smart people predicted all this. But nobody ever listened to them.

You know, I wasnt much different than these guys here once. I didnt want to believe all this stuff, or only partly. I tried to put it out of my mind with excuses like "stupid conspiracy theorists" or "these are just rare exceptions" or "nobody could have ever predicted it" and used mainstream media sources to make myself feel better if someone told me the harsh reality which I didnt want to accept, and yet knew deep in me that he was right.
I learned from those discussions. They werent pretty, but in the end those guys were absolutely 100% right, even though back then I hated them with a passion for telling me that straight to my face with no friendliness at all, because they saw that I supported this shit.
I didnt lose that passion, but I learned a lot from that.
I am disgusted by my former self when I now think back, how I supported this absolute human scum, how I let them use me as a tool, with their PC ways, lies, corruption and shiny things that are just gold coated turds.

I dont owe anyone an apology, who talks absolute bullshit, lies.
I owed those people an apology for what I said when I was like him. When I spewed out massive ignorance towards them, only to protect myself. And I actually apologized to them later, in the cases where I could still find them.

But yeah, its a waste of time. I said what I wanted to say. Trying to discredit everything or parts of what I said just because I wasnt politically correct, making myself a target for these irrelevant rhetorics (actually excuses) is the problem we have. "OMG he called me a bad thing! He must be a bad person! Nothing he says can be true! OMG! YAY! I CAN JUSTIFY IGNORING HIM NOW!" Do you even see the hypocrisy in that, calling my "attacks" ad hominem? Its funny, the term Whataboutism follows pretty much the same logic "OMG, he exposed my hypocrisy, so what do I do now! Oh right I am sure there is some rhetorical crap I can throw at him to discredit him! No... damn... Well then I simply invent it and call it... Whataboutism!! Yeah!" Thats how it was born. Not even I was that way back then. I thought about what those people said, even if they got really mad at me and called me MUCH worse things than I called people here. I never cared about how they said it. I cared about what they said, even though I didnt realize it back then.
So yeah. Accept it or dont. If facts cant penetrate ignorance, nothing can. Sugar coating it wont change a thing. Ignorant people are ignorant. And now I sounded like MJ in South Park. "Thats ignorant".

As a person who hates what the news has (d)evolved into, I was one of the people described as "knowing almost nothing about Benghazi" in the video.

This remedied that, in a way that makes me increasingly more appreciative of the Vlogbrothers and all of their projects (Crash Course, etc.) and increasingly more disgusted with the mainstream media.

So kudos to them for showing that non-traditional journalism is often better than modern mega-journalism, without even necessarily trying to be journalism. If that makes any sense.

Ok, seriously now, you do actually do have a point here. If the system works and the cop actually does his job the way he's supposed to, you're right.
The problem is that all those asshole cops undermine the believability of the good ones. I want to believe that that the US police forces are the good guys, it's just that too many of you guys (and I do adress you as a cop here) end up displaying despicable behaviour. Maybe those of you who are correct, fair and by the book need to stand up against those who aren't in a more visible fashion. Fraternity among groups like yours is necessary to a certain degree but you need to gain believability as a whole.
You just don't have that.
It's not just people like me, living at the other end of the world, watching YouTube videos. If you watch mainstream media outlets in my country, you will easily get the narrative that something is wrong with US police. It's not just bias.
Your personal opinions aside, many of them we both will never agree on, I think we both would like society to value police officers as a force of good. Right now, that is not the case. This video is just evidence of it.

You make no sense. Most everyone doesn't have to google, everyone knows what sjw is. There's been dozens of videos on here about them, debates here, and in mainstream media, every site from Slashdot to reddit with major debates. 4chans creator quit the board over it making national news.

So don't insult me because you happen to be the only person on the net oblivious.

And you started the personal insults anyhow.