3 ms·

6 and 14 are the only ones missing on the list, but some could easily argue that 6 is already here in a minor way and 14 was attempted through voter purges in p

by legodt 10y ago

6 and 14 are the only ones missing on the list, but some could easily argue that 6 is already here in a minor way and 14 was attempted through voter purges in potential swing states and the repeated attempts at suppressing votes and/or upholding needlessly cumbersome voter registration rules by both parties (one more aggressively than the other).

yummyfajitas 10y ago
(6) is already here. Read the DNC email links, and how the media was more or less taking directions from the Hillary campaign. (This is probably due more to sympathy than control.)
pg314 10y ago
A constant litany of complaints about unfair and rigged main stream media by the president elect (his latest tweets about the NYT being an example) has convinced a significant portion of the public that the main stream media cannot be trusted. With social media the propaganda can now directly be delivered to the base, so control of the main stream media is no longer needed, except maybe to limit the dissemination of unwanted information to the opposition. For a couple of days I was hopeful that we would witness a more reasonable Trump, but it seems that he seems intent to continue following the fascist playbook. If he follows through on his promise to appoint a special prosecutor for Hillary Clinton, we will know for sure. If you haven't done so already, I would implore everybody to subscribe to the NYT/WaPo or any other reputable newspaper. I did so today, and I'm not even from the US. Digital subscriptions are only a couple of bucks per month. They could use the support. The USA cannot afford to lose the independent media.
- Clubber 10y ago
  NPR is also a good source. The GOP has been trying to defund them since Bush took office in 2000.
  - diyorgasms 10y ago
    For far longer than that actually. Newt Gingrich (the one soon-to-be of the Trump administration) spent the 90s trying to defund public media as House Speaker.
- exstudent2 10y ago
  > A constant litany of complaints about unfair and rigged main stream media by the president elect (his latest tweets about the NYT being an example) has convinced a significant portion of the public that the main stream media cannot be trusted. You have this backwards. Many people voted for Trump because they could see with their own eyes the media bias against him (and read the DNC emails working with the media to block out Sanders). NYT/WaPo are not reputable sources, they are extremely biased and so obviously so that they're working against their own mission out of arrogance.
  - rikkus 10y ago
    Accidentally downvoted. Replying to give it some karma back.
    - maxerickson 10y ago
      Read all the stuff by the username. Click the stuff that says "undown".
      - rikkus 10y ago
        On the mobile app I was using, there was no such thing, sorry. I am sorry, too, as I got downvoted for trying to make up for it by replying.
  - rikkus 10y ago
    Accidentally downvoted. Replying to give it some karma back.
- briandear 10y ago
  Why shouldn't a special prosecutor be appointed? Is not Hilary under investigation for criminal activity? He foundation pay-to-play activities for instance -- highly illegal.
  - cpleppert 10y ago
    >>He foundation pay-to-play activities for instance -- highly illegal Not sure how soliciting charitable donations is pay to play. On the face of it laundering donations through a charitable foundation is pretty stupid and pointless and it seems unclear how donations would drive her to take the risk of doing a quid pro quo when the quid has little personal benefit to her.
  - hsitz 10y ago
    When you say "highly illegal", what sort of legal expertise and/or understanding of this do you have? I'm a lawyer, but don't know much about pay-to-play crimes. My understanding is that it's a pretty goddamn hard crime to prove (need extremely strong link between donation and reward), and that most of what is characterized as pay-to-play is actually legal, just the normal unseemly way politics gets done in our country. I'm no fan of Hillary, but I suspect she and her assistants are well aware of the laws, may have stretched things to limit but careful not to step over. In any case, the bald-faced statement that what she did was "highly illegal" strikes me as suspect. (The situation with email server strikes me as similar.)
    - cpleppert 10y ago
      >>but I suspect she and her assistants are well aware of the laws, may have stretched things to limit but careful not to step over. What actual evidence is there of this? The clintons receive more than enough money through paid speeches and those would be the route you would use if you wanted to set up a quid pro quo. Using a charitable foundation to do this doesn't make sense generally nor in this case. Of course, lobbying and getting on paid boards after a government career is basically a quid pro quo( the presumption is that after you work for the industry you get a cushy career paid by the industry you helped) but that has been totally ignored this election cycle.
ritchiea 10y ago
Government control of media could be on the way, Trump stopped speaking to mainstream press in the last few months of his campaign while also hiring Steve Bannon from Breitbart. Don't be surprised if Breitbart becomes (and perhaps also Fox News) the official media outlet for the Trump administration while traditional news outlets are denied access.
- briandear 10y ago
  Kind of like how Obama's admin locked Fox out of FDA 'sneak preview' press briefings? Or Hillary's sparse and nearly non existent press conference scheduling over the past few years? Maybe those traditional outlets ought to be denied access -- they demonstrated almost historic bias this election.
pdkl95 10y ago
> 6. Controlled Mass Media The best kind of control is when the object being controlled does the controlling themselves voluntarily. In political media, that happened a long time ago when reporters started being more concerned about "access" than reporting facts and asking politicians hard questions. The fear of "losing access" to politicians means unsubstantiated claims are rarely challenged and scandals are ignored or re-framed to not sound as offensive. This process was amplified when CNN (and others) started pretending every story had two sides that needed equal coverage or the story would be "biased". Now any claim can gain legitimacy and unchallenged air time, with the media acting as if their claim is equally probable. So politicians (and anyone else that wants to push propaganda) can now make any claim they want, knowing that it will go unchallenged. Even if someone argues against their propaganda, the media will present the propaganda anyway. (and for a look at where this will evolve into, see HyperNormalisation's description of Putin's (and to some degree, Trump's) strategy of "confuse everybody by generating as many conflicting stories as possible")

by legodt 10y ago

yummyfajitas 10y ago

(6) is already here. Read the DNC email links, and how the media was more or less taking directions from the Hillary campaign. (This is probably due more to sympathy than control.)

pg314 10y ago

A constant litany of complaints about unfair and rigged main stream media by the president elect (his latest tweets about the NYT being an example) has convinced a significant portion of the public that the main stream media cannot be trusted. With social media the propaganda can now directly be delivered to the base, so control of the main stream media is no longer needed, except maybe to limit the dissemination of unwanted information to the opposition. For a couple of days I was hopeful that we would witness a more reasonable Trump, but it seems that he seems intent to continue following the fascist playbook. If he follows through on his promise to appoint a special prosecutor for Hillary Clinton, we will know for sure. If you haven't done so already, I would implore everybody to subscribe to the NYT/WaPo or any other reputable newspaper. I did so today, and I'm not even from the US. Digital subscriptions are only a couple of bucks per month. They could use the support. The USA cannot afford to lose the independent media.

Clubber 10y ago
NPR is also a good source. The GOP has been trying to defund them since Bush took office in 2000.
- diyorgasms 10y ago
  For far longer than that actually. Newt Gingrich (the one soon-to-be of the Trump administration) spent the 90s trying to defund public media as House Speaker.
exstudent2 10y ago
> A constant litany of complaints about unfair and rigged main stream media by the president elect (his latest tweets about the NYT being an example) has convinced a significant portion of the public that the main stream media cannot be trusted. You have this backwards. Many people voted for Trump because they could see with their own eyes the media bias against him (and read the DNC emails working with the media to block out Sanders). NYT/WaPo are not reputable sources, they are extremely biased and so obviously so that they're working against their own mission out of arrogance.
- rikkus 10y ago
  Accidentally downvoted. Replying to give it some karma back.
  - maxerickson 10y ago
    Read all the stuff by the username. Click the stuff that says "undown".
    - rikkus 10y ago
      On the mobile app I was using, there was no such thing, sorry. I am sorry, too, as I got downvoted for trying to make up for it by replying.
- rikkus 10y ago
  Accidentally downvoted. Replying to give it some karma back.
briandear 10y ago
Why shouldn't a special prosecutor be appointed? Is not Hilary under investigation for criminal activity? He foundation pay-to-play activities for instance -- highly illegal.
- cpleppert 10y ago
  >>He foundation pay-to-play activities for instance -- highly illegal Not sure how soliciting charitable donations is pay to play. On the face of it laundering donations through a charitable foundation is pretty stupid and pointless and it seems unclear how donations would drive her to take the risk of doing a quid pro quo when the quid has little personal benefit to her.
- hsitz 10y ago
  When you say "highly illegal", what sort of legal expertise and/or understanding of this do you have? I'm a lawyer, but don't know much about pay-to-play crimes. My understanding is that it's a pretty goddamn hard crime to prove (need extremely strong link between donation and reward), and that most of what is characterized as pay-to-play is actually legal, just the normal unseemly way politics gets done in our country. I'm no fan of Hillary, but I suspect she and her assistants are well aware of the laws, may have stretched things to limit but careful not to step over. In any case, the bald-faced statement that what she did was "highly illegal" strikes me as suspect. (The situation with email server strikes me as similar.)
  - cpleppert 10y ago
    >>but I suspect she and her assistants are well aware of the laws, may have stretched things to limit but careful not to step over. What actual evidence is there of this? The clintons receive more than enough money through paid speeches and those would be the route you would use if you wanted to set up a quid pro quo. Using a charitable foundation to do this doesn't make sense generally nor in this case. Of course, lobbying and getting on paid boards after a government career is basically a quid pro quo( the presumption is that after you work for the industry you get a cushy career paid by the industry you helped) but that has been totally ignored this election cycle.

ritchiea 10y ago

Government control of media could be on the way, Trump stopped speaking to mainstream press in the last few months of his campaign while also hiring Steve Bannon from Breitbart. Don't be surprised if Breitbart becomes (and perhaps also Fox News) the official media outlet for the Trump administration while traditional news outlets are denied access.

briandear 10y ago
Kind of like how Obama's admin locked Fox out of FDA 'sneak preview' press briefings? Or Hillary's sparse and nearly non existent press conference scheduling over the past few years? Maybe those traditional outlets ought to be denied access -- they demonstrated almost historic bias this election.

pdkl95 10y ago

> 6. Controlled Mass Media The best kind of control is when the object being controlled does the controlling themselves voluntarily. In political media, that happened a long time ago when reporters started being more concerned about "access" than reporting facts and asking politicians hard questions. The fear of "losing access" to politicians means unsubstantiated claims are rarely challenged and scandals are ignored or re-framed to not sound as offensive. This process was amplified when CNN (and others) started pretending every story had two sides that needed equal coverage or the story would be "biased". Now any claim can gain legitimacy and unchallenged air time, with the media acting as if their claim is equally probable. So politicians (and anyone else that wants to push propaganda) can now make any claim they want, knowing that it will go unchallenged. Even if someone argues against their propaganda, the media will present the propaganda anyway. (and for a look at where this will evolve into, see HyperNormalisation's description of Putin's (and to some degree, Trump's) strategy of "confuse everybody by generating as many conflicting stories as possible")