4 ms·

This goes on all over western media not only the bbc.

by chvid 1y ago

somename9 1y ago
[flagged]
- ThrowawayTestr 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - defrost 1y ago
    You're not the only one ... https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly3zr8p46eo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly3zr8p46eo https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-15/nsw-antisemitism-crime-people-of-interest-police-pearl/105052576 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-15/nsw-antisemitism-crim... Fake terror plots became criminal currency for a while in Australia.
  - k4rli 1y ago
    Which part was antisemitic and which part was the conspiracy? The ownership is factual.
    - defrost 1y ago
      What are the 'facts' about ownership "all over western media"?
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
    I can see how it’s read that way but people really do seem to forget that billionaires buy media companies as an investment. It’s not a strictly financial investment, either; they get to shape public opinion with them. How many people know that Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post? How many people know that MSNBC is owned by Comcast? How many people know that Fox News, The Wall Street Journal, and The New York Post are all owned by Rupert Murdoch? How many UK citizens know that he also owns Sky News and The Times of London? How many people have heard the name Rupert Murdoch? (Everybody knows Elon Musk owns Twitter. Why do people say he bought an election again? How did that happen?) They have a point and it is not anti-Semitic. The people who own the means to shape public opinion are exclusively in the billionaire class.
    - dlubarov 1y ago
      Why would Bezos / Washington Post be an example of pro-Israel bias?
      - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
        Well, it's not. It's an example of a billionaire-owned media company.
- mondojesus 1y ago
  It could be because your comment is too vague, personally I don't understand what you mean. Who are the ownership/leadership of media companies?
  - leereeves 1y ago
    I saw this in a comment here recently and thought it was informative about this topic: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2008-dec-19-oe-stein19-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2008-dec-19-oe-stein...
    - defrost 1y ago
      The thread topic is News media, not Hollywood. Global news media is dominated by Rupert Murdoch (not Jewish) and while the second tier lesser Murdochs are mostly rich billionaires not many are Jewish. eg: Arthur Sulzberger Jr. (recent chair of The New York Times company) is neither Jewish by birth—according to traditional Jewish law—nor by choice. (He was raised Episcopalian, his mother’s faith.)
      - leereeves 1y ago
        News media isn't separate from Hollywood. Disney owns ABC. Paramount Global owns CBS. CNN is owned by Warner Bros Discovery. NBC Universal owns NBC, MSNBC, and Telemundo; they also own Universal Pictures. All the major US news networks are owned by companies that also own Hollywood studios, except for Fox, which sold its studio to Disney recently. Murdoch (owner of Fox, Sky, NY Post, and WSJ, among others) gets a lot of (negative) attention as a dissenting voice, but I'd hardly say he dominates news media. And couldn't you find a better second example than someone who is only technically not Jewish, because his father is Jewish, not his mother? His father, grandfather, and great-grandfather (all Jewish) previously ran the NY Times.
tclover 1y ago
Western propaganda lies not only about this, corruption in the EU reaches incredible proportions, censorship, violations of freedom of speech, but Putin is always to blame.
- bigyabai 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - owebmaster 1y ago
    the one that insults the other first loses the argument.
    - bigyabai 1y ago
      Quite the opposite. The last person to present credible evidence is often the only person telling the truth. If you can forever prove the West wrong, don't keep us waiting.
      - owebmaster 1y ago
        could be but you brought no new information besides a low level personal insult so the person you insulted added more to the discussion than you
        bigyabai 1y ago
        [flagged]
        owebmaster 1y ago
        > Because they didn't, their original comment stands as logical fallacy, ad-hominem. I do not want to make the same mistake as you, turning discussions into personal attacks (aka ad-hominem), but you were the only one using ad-hominem in this discussion, if you felt attacked because OP said that western leaders use Putin as a scapegoat, I think that is totally on you.

This goes on all over western media not only the bbc.

by chvid 1y ago

This goes on all over western media not only the bbc.

somename9 1y ago

[flagged]

ThrowawayTestr 1y ago
[flagged]
- defrost 1y ago
  You're not the only one ... https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly3zr8p46eo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly3zr8p46eo https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-15/nsw-antisemitism-crime-people-of-interest-police-pearl/105052576 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-15/nsw-antisemitism-crim... Fake terror plots became criminal currency for a while in Australia.
- k4rli 1y ago
  Which part was antisemitic and which part was the conspiracy? The ownership is factual.
  - defrost 1y ago
    What are the 'facts' about ownership "all over western media"?
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
  I can see how it’s read that way but people really do seem to forget that billionaires buy media companies as an investment. It’s not a strictly financial investment, either; they get to shape public opinion with them. How many people know that Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post? How many people know that MSNBC is owned by Comcast? How many people know that Fox News, The Wall Street Journal, and The New York Post are all owned by Rupert Murdoch? How many UK citizens know that he also owns Sky News and The Times of London? How many people have heard the name Rupert Murdoch? (Everybody knows Elon Musk owns Twitter. Why do people say he bought an election again? How did that happen?) They have a point and it is not anti-Semitic. The people who own the means to shape public opinion are exclusively in the billionaire class.
  - dlubarov 1y ago
    Why would Bezos / Washington Post be an example of pro-Israel bias?
    - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
      Well, it's not. It's an example of a billionaire-owned media company.
mondojesus 1y ago
It could be because your comment is too vague, personally I don't understand what you mean. Who are the ownership/leadership of media companies?
- leereeves 1y ago
  I saw this in a comment here recently and thought it was informative about this topic: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2008-dec-19-oe-stein19-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2008-dec-19-oe-stein...
  - defrost 1y ago
    The thread topic is News media, not Hollywood. Global news media is dominated by Rupert Murdoch (not Jewish) and while the second tier lesser Murdochs are mostly rich billionaires not many are Jewish. eg: Arthur Sulzberger Jr. (recent chair of The New York Times company) is neither Jewish by birth—according to traditional Jewish law—nor by choice. (He was raised Episcopalian, his mother’s faith.)
    - leereeves 1y ago
      News media isn't separate from Hollywood. Disney owns ABC. Paramount Global owns CBS. CNN is owned by Warner Bros Discovery. NBC Universal owns NBC, MSNBC, and Telemundo; they also own Universal Pictures. All the major US news networks are owned by companies that also own Hollywood studios, except for Fox, which sold its studio to Disney recently. Murdoch (owner of Fox, Sky, NY Post, and WSJ, among others) gets a lot of (negative) attention as a dissenting voice, but I'd hardly say he dominates news media. And couldn't you find a better second example than someone who is only technically not Jewish, because his father is Jewish, not his mother? His father, grandfather, and great-grandfather (all Jewish) previously ran the NY Times.

tclover 1y ago

Western propaganda lies not only about this, corruption in the EU reaches incredible proportions, censorship, violations of freedom of speech, but Putin is always to blame.

bigyabai 1y ago
[flagged]
- owebmaster 1y ago
  the one that insults the other first loses the argument.
  - bigyabai 1y ago
    Quite the opposite. The last person to present credible evidence is often the only person telling the truth. If you can forever prove the West wrong, don't keep us waiting.
    - owebmaster 1y ago
      could be but you brought no new information besides a low level personal insult so the person you insulted added more to the discussion than you
      - bigyabai 1y ago
        [flagged]
        owebmaster 1y ago
        > Because they didn't, their original comment stands as logical fallacy, ad-hominem. I do not want to make the same mistake as you, turning discussions into personal attacks (aka ad-hominem), but you were the only one using ad-hominem in this discussion, if you felt attacked because OP said that western leaders use Putin as a scapegoat, I think that is totally on you.