Tags for this video have been changed from 'chomsky, democracy now, propaganda' to 'chomsky, democracy now, propaganda, press, manufacturing consent, press freedom' - edited by Eklek

Oh Bob, how I envy you. The world must be such a nice place if you can view it only in black or white. Binary thinking must be easy on the synapses.
Here's one thing I don't understand, though. Maybe you can help me out.
Why do you hate liberty so much?
I mean, you're an american, right? Land of the free, home of the brave?
Home of the Liberty Bell? The country whose most famous landmark is called the "Statue of Liberty".
Why so much hate the most american thing? I always wanted to asked somebody who's so obviously republican as you.
Here's something I found on Wikipedia:
"Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property."

Hmmm... generally supporting following ideas:
- free and fair elections (voter id laws and voting fraud prevention)
- civil rights (Dude! Don't tread on me!)
- freedom of the press (concern about lamestream media and "liberal bias" in the media)
- freedom of religion (for example the freedom of teaching children creationism)
- free trade (capitalism yay!)
- private property (for some reason the name "Ron Jeremy" came to mind but I think I got the name wrong)

I can understand a dislike for equality (come on, slaves are super useful) but not for liberty. Not if you're a true american.

Shouldn't you call yourself a liberal? Is it just a weird closet you're in?

It isn't but they always try to do something. Interestingly in America the press are pretty much immune to the bullshit Glenn and his colleagues have had to go through. Example, the Guardian was visited by I wanna say MI5, some british cunts. Anyways they came in and told them to destroy everything they had from Snowden, and watched them do it too. They took grinders and magnets or whatever to the computers destroying their harddrives with all the information. Information that is in the Guardians places in America, it's just sitting in New York. The brits ain't care, they want that stuff to be stopped too and they asked Obama I'm sure but in America we fought for that shit and they leave the press pretty much alone.

The British cunts have done this before too, they of course held Glenns partner at the airport and confiscated his many electronical things just being dicks. The BBC has itself been raided before by the Rozzers (???) for some stupid shit.

Look I hate on America a LOT, there's tons of shit I don't like that this country does but we seem to have gotten Press Freedom right. That wasn't an accident that was fucking fought for Hard and Long. Now the press and it's ideological and indoctrination bullshit is another story. But whenever there's been leakers in this country they've had a paper or some news outlet they could go to and those news places would tell the story. They LOVE looking like they're left wing but they don't really do any of the day to day real shit, because they're funded by corporations.

100 Photos of Ai Weiwei for Press Freedom has been added as a related post - related requested by enoch on that post.

>> ^RFlagg:

Attitudes like this is perhaps part of the reason the US is down at number 20 in the Press Freedom Index... but I agree, we need more context, what did she say after that and how did the crowd react to it. If this is more or less the full context...then wow, she may be worse than I thought, and I thought she was pretty bad.


Since it's from Media Matters I would think the context would give you the same impression. They almost never fuck-up (especially when it comes down to evaporating a long comment into it's distilled meaning), when they do fuck-up it's a "look-up" fact that is wrong.

Anyway, I think Ann Coulter is best described as being Ayn Rand's and Dick Cheney's love child with Marilyn Manson's makeup people. Every-time I see her talk(s), it eventually feels like I'm looking at the event horizon for a black hole.

Attitudes like this is perhaps part of the reason the US is down at number 20 in the Press Freedom Index... but I agree, we need more context, what did she say after that and how did the crowd react to it. If this is more or less the full context...then wow, she may be worse than I thought, and I thought she was pretty bad.

>> ^EDD:

Nah. While hypocritical and somewhat bad-PR, this is nowhere near as ironic as US State Department's official announcement of US hosting World Press Freedom Day 2011: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2010/12/152465.htm


Love it. That is irony as well. But you've got to admit that the leaker squealing about the leak ranks up with the best in irony.

Nah. While hypocritical and somewhat bad-PR, this is nowhere near as ironic as US State Department's official announcement of US hosting World Press Freedom Day 2011: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2010/12/152465.htm

Oh, this State Department Press Release is just epic. EPIC!, I say.

The United States is pleased to announce that it will host UNESCO’s World Press Freedom Day event in 2011, from May 1 - May 3 in Washington, D.C. UNESCO is the only UN agency with the mandate to promote freedom of expression and its corollary, freedom of the press.

The theme for next year’s commemoration will be 21st Century Media: New Frontiers, New Barriers. The United States places technology and innovation at the forefront of its diplomatic and development efforts. New media has empowered citizens around the world to report on their circumstances, express opinions on world events, and exchange information in environments sometimes hostile to such exercises of individuals’ right to freedom of expression. At the same time, we are concerned about the determination of some governments to censor and silence individuals, and to restrict the free flow of information. We mark events such as World Press Freedom Day in the context of our enduring commitment to support and expand press freedom and the free flow of information in this digital age. (...)

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

FTR, Assange hasn't been accused of anything like rape. I think it's important to get this message out: http://twitter.com/#!/dag1/status/10461299813126144

>> ^ambassdor:

Is Wikileaks a big enough inconvenience for someone to have Julian Assange whacked? Tho the rape accusations do sound like they could be conspiracy to shut him up and only just saw that video of the Canadian official 'jokingly' say he should be assasinated. And this might be a crap comparison, but just for devil's advocate sake, if someone was to leak private information about my personal feelings about another for 'freedom's sake', which would result in more conflict as a result, as opposed to not revealing anything, and just having to put up with an animosity, then surely, the latter would be the lesser of two evils? For the main part, I do think it is a good platform for press freedom, but if (perhaps reckless) freedom of information causes the loss of human life, sounds like one step forward, two steps back.

Is Wikileaks a big enough inconvenience for someone to have Julian Assange whacked? Tho the rape accusations do sound like they could be conspiracy to shut him up and only just saw that video of the Canadian official 'jokingly' say he should be assasinated. And this might be a crap comparison, but just for devil's advocate sake, if someone was to leak private information about my personal feelings about another for 'freedom's sake', which would result in more conflict as a result, as opposed to not revealing anything, and just having to put up with an animosity, then surely, the latter would be the lesser of two evils? For the main part, I do think it is a good platform for press freedom, but if (perhaps reckless) freedom of information causes the loss of human life, sounds like one step forward, two steps back.

Sorry, I can't equate justifiable military operations with cowards hiding among civilians.

War is always tragic and shows the worst of humanity, and to be quite honest, I do believe that Jewish people are more humane than Muslims. Can you imagine the situation if Arab states decided to take Israel?

Knowing what I know about Jewish people and Muslim people, I can't demonize Israel.

Israel is governed democratically, has freedom of the press, freedom of expression and actively participates in the advancement of civilization through scientific research and innovation. I can't say as much for many Muslim states. Call me ignorant if you wish, but it's that's the way I interpret the facts.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Whos-to-blame-for-the-Russian-Georgian-conflict

I'd trust TRN over normal media in the US. So now it isn't a sole source anymore, is it?

>> ^chilaxe:
>> ^Irishman:
>> ^chilaxe:
That's fine to sift propaganda, but let us know in the description that it's not real news.

I agree entirely, and I look forward to America mainstream news reports about Iraq, Iran, Israel and Palestine being labelled as such.

Yeah, that's fair to question any media source, but mainstream intellectualism draws a line between sources controlled by their government and sources that are allowed to criticize their government.
If Russia ranks 144th out of 169 countries in the World Press Freedom Index, it wouldn't be wise to use its media as your sole source of information on any issue.

>> ^Irishman:
>> ^chilaxe:
That's fine to sift propaganda, but let us know in the description that it's not real news.

I agree entirely, and I look forward to America mainstream news reports about Iraq, Iran, Israel and Palestine being labelled as such.


Yeah, that's fair to question any media source, but mainstream intellectualism draws a line between sources controlled by their government and sources that are allowed to criticize their government.

If Russia ranks 144th out of 169 countries in the World Press Freedom Index, it wouldn't be wise to use its media as your sole source of information on any issue.

>> ^Aemaeth:
>> ^BicycleRepairMan:
QM: There is nothing wrong with biased press, there's press freedom, which means any channel can have a bias. The bad thing about FOX is not that they are biased, but that they are deceitful, they LIE and DISTORT to to present their bias, and then they tell people that they are NOT biased, which is the biggest lie of them all.
MSNBC is clearly liberal compared to FOX, but I've yet to see them intentionally lie and distort the facts to further their bias, and maybe I've missed it, but its certainly not a daily event like it is on FOX

I disagree. Biased makes it quite difficult to present subjective journalism. I'm sure if we looked we could find as much material that showed how MSNBC had smudged the truth a little bit. It's all dribble. The more we watch biased media, the harder it is to realize when our preconceptions are wrong.


Do you have any recommendation for unbiased news?