5 ms·
I hear this theory a lot. And it's not paranoid, but it's also not fruitful without substantiation. You need to develop your theory and gather some evidence. H
by alexandercrohde 9y ago
I hear this theory a lot. And it's not paranoid, but it's also not fruitful without substantiation.
You need to develop your theory and gather some evidence. How is the government controlling media? Which media? Why are there no whistleblowers? What's your evidence? Obviously the US government isn't censoring the internet.
In the meantime, I fear you're actually making people more skeptical of you by jumping to conclusions
- mistermann 9y ago> And those that do peek behind the curtains, brand them conspiracy theorists. Well that didn't take long. Oh good lord, you talk as if this is the first time you've heard such a theory. Everything you ask for has been well discussed and proof of varying degrees provided, as I imagine you well know. The parent comment to mine seems to have been granted an interesting status, it now loads as collapsed under all browsers, including incognito.
- alexandercrohde 9y agoThis frustrates me, because I think your behavior makes people trust government MORE. Because you're inarticulate, don't link to any articles, and also unfriendly, it pushes people in the neutral zone away from your cause. If you think there's objective proof of widespread government manipulation of newspapers, then link to the wikipedia article. If you acknowledge a neutral set of intellectual and informed judges (wikipedia) find it absurd, then don't go around saying it's "proven."
- mistermann 9y agoThis comment is excellent (except for the proven slip-up), but you probably knew that.
- icebraining 9y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent