Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 101

Thread: Does Anyone See a Problem With This?......

  1. #21
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2497002]People like HD see this as a partisan issue and they are all too willing to lose a little bit more of our democracy in the name of political idealogy.[/QUOTE]

    The "Let's win one for our team!" attitude of a large slice of hard right voters is hard to take when it involves costs that make the prize itself worth less.

  2. #22
    [QUOTE=JetsCrazey;2497027]I don't think Warfish's "free non-profit press" would work because the established powers would still find a way to reward people, but I do agree that the entire news media is a cancerous problem to this country.[/QUOTE]

    I agree, it's not exactly a well thought out idea frankly, I fully admit that. Call it idealism, that I wish our media (news) was not so inticately tied to profit and ratings. On this limited subject, I have trouble seeing where the market forces and the deep responsabillity and rights we've given our media, can be reconciled into one entity.

    Our media should (in my view) exist to keep our people informed, educated and aware, of all things and all sides of the issues, in an unbiased manner as possible. I do believe they should also be supporting of America if all other things are equal, as it is our country that provides them their rights, but not to the point of non-reporting Americas problems/issues/failings.

    But today, our media is a celebrity driven ratings and profit machine designed to entertain, mislead, and in almost every case to promote a specific viewpoint because either the market says there is profit in it, or because the ownership or editorialship (or both) have a specific bias or agenda to forward.

  3. #23
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2496816]keep swinging and missing..............

    Hard as this may be for you to grasp, this is not a partisan issue. This type of monopoly is harmful to democracy, period. Murdoch is savvy and an excellent business man but what he is doing will have long term effects. Please take off your partisan glasses for ten seconds. It was no better when they approved the Time Warner merger.[/QUOTE]

    I'm just curious as to why this is harmful to democracy?

  4. #24
    [QUOTE=Warfish;2497068]I agree, it's not exactly a well thought out idea frankly, I fully admit that. Call it idealism, that I wish our media (news) was not so inticately tied to profit and ratings. On this limited subject, I have trouble seeing where the market forces and the deep responsabillity and rights we've given our media, can be reconciled into one entity.

    Our media should (in my view) exist to keep our people informed, educated and aware, of all things and all sides of the issues, in an unbiased manner as possible. I do believe they should also be supporting of America if all other things are equal, as it is our country that provides them their rights, but not to the point of non-reporting Americas problems/issues/failings.

    But today, our media is a celebrity driven ratings and profit machine designed to entertain, mislead, and in almost every case to promote a specific viewpoint because either the market says there is profit in it, or because the ownership or editorialship (or both) have a specific bias or agenda to forward.[/QUOTE]


    Worth noting: There are some non-profit newspapers.

    The best is probably the St. Petersburg Times in Florida, which is owned by the Poynter Institute, a media think tank of sorts.

  5. #25
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,959
    I'm gonna surprise people here with what I believe...

    Murdoch's move is in no way harmful. The man has built a media empire by running a profitable business. He is only in the position to buy the paper because other consumers have decided that his other products are worth their money and this in turn has made him flush with cash...to the point where he can buy other papers and media outlets.

    What would Murdoch gain by buying multiple newspapers and having all of them print the same propaganda? I would assume nothing...he would make more profit by having multiple papers printing multiple opinion appealing to a wider range of the market. To boil it down...Murdoch has earned a larger share of the market. Monopolies become harmful when the government becomes involved.


    What do you think, Jets5? Am I becoming more reasonable in my old age? :D

  6. #26
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=Big Blocker;2496797]No doubt about it.

    This is one of the main reasons democracy is at risk here.[/QUOTE]

    Newspapers are dying, so is TV network news. There is presently a supply of news information more vast and from more myriad sources that literally at any point in recorded in history. This monopoly talk is utter nonsense, as is talk about Rupert Murdoch's business moves being a threat to democracy. My God, people, what would you fairies have done if you actually lived in a tolatitarian state?

  7. #27
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan;2497177]I'm gonna surprise people here with what I believe...

    Murdoch's move is in no way harmful. The man has built a media empire by running a profitable business. He is only in the position to buy the paper because other consumers have decided that his other products are worth their money and this in turn has made him flush with cash...to the point where he can buy other papers and media outlets.

    What would Murdoch gain by buying multiple newspapers and having all of them print the same propaganda? I would assume nothing...he would make more profit by having multiple papers printing multiple opinion appealing to a wider range of the market. To boil it down...Murdoch has earned a larger share of the market. Monopolies become harmful when the government becomes involved.


    What do you think, Jets5? Am I becoming more reasonable in my old age? :D[/QUOTE]

    Wow. Just...wow.

  8. #28
    [QUOTE=jets5ever;2497181] This monopoly talk is utter nonsense, as is talk about Rupert Murdoch's business moves being a threat to democracy. My God, people, what would you fairies have done if you actually lived in a tolatitarian state?[/QUOTE]

    And thus, my question.

    How exactly is it harmful to democracy?

  9. #29
    [QUOTE=jets5ever;2497181]Newspapers are dying, so is TV network news. There is presently a supply of news information more vast and from more myriad sources that literally at any point in recorded in history. This monopoly talk is utter nonsense, as is talk about Rupert Murdoch's business moves being a threat to democracy. [B]My God, people, what would you fairies have done if you actually lived in a tolatitarian state?[/[/B]QUOTE]

    The argument that we should not complain because things could always be worse is horribly ignorant.

    You do not have a true democracy unless you have a free media. You do not have a free media when one entity owns a large percentage of media outlets. Why was there an FCC rule regulating the percentage of outlets that can be owned by any one entity?

  10. #30
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan;2497177]I'm gonna surprise people here with what I believe...

    Murdoch's move is in no way harmful. The man has built a media empire by running a profitable business. He is only in the position to buy the paper because other consumers have decided that his other products are worth their money and this in turn has made him flush with cash...to the point where he can buy other papers and media outlets.

    What would Murdoch gain by buying multiple newspapers and having all of them print the same propaganda? I would assume nothing...he would make more profit by having multiple papers printing multiple opinion appealing to a wider range of the market. To boil it down...Murdoch has earned a larger share of the market. Monopolies become harmful when the government becomes involved.


    What do you think, Jets5? Am I becoming more reasonable in my old age? :D[/QUOTE]


    Makes sense to me

  11. #31
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2497237][QUOTE=jets5ever;2497181]Newspapers are dying, so is TV network news. There is presently a supply of news information more vast and from more myriad sources that literally at any point in recorded in history. This monopoly talk is utter nonsense, as is talk about Rupert Murdoch's business moves being a threat to democracy. [B]My God, people, what would you fairies have done if you actually lived in a tolatitarian state?[/[/B]QUOTE]

    The argument that we should not complain because things could always be worse is horribly ignorant.

    You do not have a true democracy unless you have a free media. You do not have a free media when one entity owns a large percentage of media outlets. Why was there an FCC rule regulating the percentage of outlets that can be owned by any one entity?[/QUOTE]

    Rupert Murdoch does not own a large percentage of the media outlets in the US. Not even close.

  12. #32
    [QUOTE=pauliec;2497229]And thus, my question.

    How exactly is it harmful to democracy?[/QUOTE]

    [B]How is it not? [/B]

  13. #33
    [QUOTE=jets5ever;2497181]Newspapers are dying, so is TV network news. There is presently a supply of news information more vast and from more myriad sources that literally at any point in recorded in history. This monopoly talk is utter nonsense, as is talk about Rupert Murdoch's business moves being a threat to democracy. My God, people, what would you fairies have done if you actually lived in a tolatitarian state?[/QUOTE]

    I think people who place their unquestioned faith in big business are the fairies.

    Tinker Belles, to be exact.

  14. #34
    "Hey, everything looks great to me! What's to worry about?"

    [IMG]http://images.buycostumes.com/mgen/merchandiser/27250.jpg[/IMG]

  15. #35
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2497237][QUOTE=jets5ever;2497181]Newspapers are dying, so is TV network news. There is presently a supply of news information more vast and from more myriad sources that literally at any point in recorded in history. This monopoly talk is utter nonsense, as is talk about Rupert Murdoch's business moves being a threat to democracy. [B]My God, people, what would you fairies have done if you actually lived in a tolatitarian state?[/[/B]QUOTE]

    The argument that we should not complain because things could always be worse is horribly ignorant.

    You do not have a true democracy unless you have a free media. You do not have a free media when one entity owns a large percentage of media outlets. Why was there an FCC rule regulating the percentage of outlets that can be owned by any one entity?[/QUOTE]

    That was an insult, not an argument. I have no idea why the FCC would have issued such a rule and don't care. The very existence of an FCC is counter to a truly "free" media, anyway. RM does NOT own a "large" percentage of media outlets and what the hell does "large" even mean? There are quite literally millions of places to get news information that RM has no affiliation with. Grow up, Toonces.

  16. #36
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=Big Blocker;2497285]I think people who place their unquestioned faith in big business are the fairies.

    Tinker Belles, to be exact.[/QUOTE]

    You were an Edwards supporter right? He lost because of the vast MSM consipracy against him, right? You're that guy?

  17. #37
    [QUOTE=jets5ever;2497304]You were an Edwards supporter right? He lost because of the vast MSM consipracy against him, right? You're that guy?[/QUOTE]

    The way the MSM ignored his candidacy was a factor, but hardly the only one.

    I also believe the Identity Politics holding sway over Democratic Primary voters was a bigger factor.

    Anyway, let's make this an ad hominem attack on me rather than a discussion of the issue, right?

  18. #38
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2497245][B]How is it not? [/B][/QUOTE]

    Great debate strategy. Do you teach your students the same? Don't answer questions, just ask one in response. What, the 40 year old virgin your role model?

  19. #39
    Please limit the personal insults. Either discuss the issue without them, or the thread will be locked.

    And Blocker, in the future please resize any huge pictures you wish to post, or they will be deleted.

  20. #40
    [QUOTE=Warfish;2497348]Please limit the personal insults. Either discuss the issue without them, or the thread will be locked.[/QUOTE]

    Ftr, 5ever started it. But then he's a right winger.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us