4 ms·
NPR is one of the worst propaganda outlets. It insulates it's listeners from opposing viewpoints to a degree that I think is unhealthy, I'm often in awe of the
by jakeogh 10y ago
NPR is one of the worst propaganda outlets. It insulates it's listeners from opposing viewpoints to a degree that I think is unhealthy, I'm often in awe of the sophistication of it. When they have a opposition expert on, it's very rarely someone I consider credible. They misrepresent the viewpoint of the opposition, and it's hard to believe it's not deliberate. I watched them (along with the rest of the MSM to be fair) lead their flocks to war many times now. Like FOX, xNBC, CNN (worse than even NPR) they represent the global government faction. Each plays it's part, but it's not really different. Government should not be funding the media at all.
http://fair.org/extra/psyops-in-the-newsroom/ http://fair.org/extra/psyops-in-the-newsroom/
- gvd 10y agoI disagree. Government can fund media, without you immediately thinking of Russia. Being Dutch originally, I would refer you to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_public_broadcasting_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_public_broadcasting_syst... Note that this is not a closed system where there is no private news/tv. Also, look at DW (Deutsche Welle) and BBC. Whatever your opinion, these still provide much better information than whatever you can get in the US (well, you can actually get BBC/DW). I would love to hear a better approach.
- jakeogh 10y agoMoney _is_ influence. How about letting the media stand on it's own legs? Why should NPR be special? Even their name is a dishonest appeal to authority. It's not random that they have show titles like "Talk of the Nation". As far as I know, NYT does not receive public funding, but I think this window is instructive on how the "elite" media views themselves: http://i.imgur.com/VUdcIou.jpg http://i.imgur.com/VUdcIou.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CIMxvS-WEAER49I.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CIMxvS-WEAER49I.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CINJUoqUwAEkSip.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CINJUoqUwAEkSip.jpg Fortunately most of them are going down in flames and it's only going to get better as people have access to more unfiltered information.
- gvd 10y agoThat's exactly why you need public media. Not everybody can afford NYT
- jakeogh 10y agoWe should fund NYT too by your logic.
- gvd 10y agoNo
- jakeogh 10y agoWho gets to decide NPR should get funding and not NYT? I'll tell you, it's whoever is in power. I'm guessing you dont like Trump and the conservative wing of the Republican party, do you want him/them making that decision? Amazons best seller list has a book about the truth deciders at the top right now.
- masonic 10y agoBut PBS/NPR are "public" only in the sense they are publicly funded. They aren't balanced in any way, nor do they invite public participation. What would you consider to be the "conservative" equivalent of the following?: - To The Contrary - Latino USA - Frontline (political topics) - Democracy Now! - Charlie Rose - Tavis Smiley - John Lewis - Get in the Way
- DrScump 10y agoSome context for the latter two photos would be helpful.