Russia Today host who criticised Kremlin sent to Crimea | smh.com.au
editorial ...she has her opinion . i happen to agree with it. but sent to the gulags? They still do this? It would be hilarious if it wasn't so serious.
i saw footage this morning by one of our ABC reporters (australian broadcasting commission) who reported that Russian troops were going over the border and into Ukraine military sites and shouting out how their wives were whores. Now to us it's just a flash in the pan, but to see Russian snipers on hills just outside and this provocation it makes you wonder what he hell is going on . Russia is playing nasty buggers.
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
-
fuzzywuzzy
- Posts: 6596
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
fuzzywuzzy;1449585 wrote: Russia Today host who criticised Kremlin sent to Crimea | smh.com.au
editorial ...she has her opinion . i happen to agree with it. but sent to the gulags? They still do this? It would be hilarious if it wasn't so serious.
It would be great if the Ruskies could send her to a gulag. There she could see first hand the true nature of her employer.
Alas, she is an American.
Miss Martin however told the Telegraph: "I am not going to Crimea despite the statement RT has made."
The Telegraph
editorial ...she has her opinion . i happen to agree with it. but sent to the gulags? They still do this? It would be hilarious if it wasn't so serious.
It would be great if the Ruskies could send her to a gulag. There she could see first hand the true nature of her employer.
Alas, she is an American.
Miss Martin however told the Telegraph: "I am not going to Crimea despite the statement RT has made."
The Telegraph
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
She had the black vote all locked up.
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
fuzzywuzzy;1449585 wrote: Russia Today host who criticised Kremlin sent to Crimea | smh.com.au
editorial ...she has her opinion . i happen to agree with it. but sent to the gulags? They still do this? It would be hilarious if it wasn't so serious.
i saw footage this morning by one of our ABC reporters (australian broadcasting commission) who reported that Russian troops were going over the border and into Ukraine military sites and shouting out how their wives were whores. Now to us it's just a flash in the pan, but to see Russian snipers on hills just outside and this provocation it makes you wonder what he hell is going on . Russia is playing nasty buggers.
Crimea is in the Ukraine, where a large number of Pro-Russian trouble-makers are giving the Ukraine gummint a lot of grief. Sounds like she was being offered a front row seat in the coming showdown.
editorial ...she has her opinion . i happen to agree with it. but sent to the gulags? They still do this? It would be hilarious if it wasn't so serious.
i saw footage this morning by one of our ABC reporters (australian broadcasting commission) who reported that Russian troops were going over the border and into Ukraine military sites and shouting out how their wives were whores. Now to us it's just a flash in the pan, but to see Russian snipers on hills just outside and this provocation it makes you wonder what he hell is going on . Russia is playing nasty buggers.
Crimea is in the Ukraine, where a large number of Pro-Russian trouble-makers are giving the Ukraine gummint a lot of grief. Sounds like she was being offered a front row seat in the coming showdown.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
tude dog;1449591 wrote: It would be great if the Ruskies could send her to a gulag. There she could see first hand the true nature of her employer.
Alas, she is an American.
The Telegraph
Come off it tude the american media is not exactly noted for it's unbiased commentary how many tv hosts got fired in america for daring to criticise the iraqui war etc etc and how many are scared to speak out in case they get fired. Total Corporate control of the media is just a variation on state control. Guantanamo is just another version of a gulag except for foreign nationals.
Alas, she is an American.
The Telegraph
Come off it tude the american media is not exactly noted for it's unbiased commentary how many tv hosts got fired in america for daring to criticise the iraqui war etc etc and how many are scared to speak out in case they get fired. Total Corporate control of the media is just a variation on state control. Guantanamo is just another version of a gulag except for foreign nationals.
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
gmc;1449701 wrote: Come off it tude the american media is not exactly noted for it's unbiased commentary
There are many commentators. They get paid to comment. Seems Ms Martin was a paid to read the news and not criticize her employer, the Russian government.
gmc;1449701 wrote: how many tv hosts got fired in america for daring to criticise the iraqui war etc etc and how many are scared to speak out in case they get fired.
I dunno. You have any numbers on that?
gmc;1449701 wrote: Total Corporate control of the media is just a variation on state control.
I am not sure what Total Corporate control of the media means.
gmc;1449701 wrote: Guantanamo is just another version of a gulag except for foreign nationals.
Guantanamo houses those who actually take up arms, not political activists.
There are many commentators. They get paid to comment. Seems Ms Martin was a paid to read the news and not criticize her employer, the Russian government.
gmc;1449701 wrote: how many tv hosts got fired in america for daring to criticise the iraqui war etc etc and how many are scared to speak out in case they get fired.
I dunno. You have any numbers on that?
gmc;1449701 wrote: Total Corporate control of the media is just a variation on state control.
I am not sure what Total Corporate control of the media means.
gmc;1449701 wrote: Guantanamo is just another version of a gulag except for foreign nationals.
Guantanamo houses those who actually take up arms, not political activists.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
She had the black vote all locked up.
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
There are many commentators. They get paid to comment. Seems Ms Martin was a paid to read the news and not criticize her employer, the Russian government.
Moot point. Russia today is more akin to the bbc or euronews than a state operated broadcasting organisation.
I dunno. You have any numbers on that?
Phil Donahue, Peter Arnett. That took two minutes for me to find.
I am not sure what Total Corporate control of the media means.
When you have media owned by corporations that only put forward their point of view and do not 0ffer balanced analysis
11. The Media Can Legally Lie – Top 25 of 2005
During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so. After the appeal verdict WTVT general manager Bob Linger commented, “It’s vindication for WTVT, and we’re very pleased¦ It’s the case we’ve been making for two years. She never had a legal claim.
Guantanamo houses those who actually take up arms, not political activists.
How do you know that? Have you seen a transcript of the trials?
Moot point. Russia today is more akin to the bbc or euronews than a state operated broadcasting organisation.
I dunno. You have any numbers on that?
Phil Donahue, Peter Arnett. That took two minutes for me to find.
I am not sure what Total Corporate control of the media means.
When you have media owned by corporations that only put forward their point of view and do not 0ffer balanced analysis
11. The Media Can Legally Lie – Top 25 of 2005
During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so. After the appeal verdict WTVT general manager Bob Linger commented, “It’s vindication for WTVT, and we’re very pleased¦ It’s the case we’ve been making for two years. She never had a legal claim.
Guantanamo houses those who actually take up arms, not political activists.
How do you know that? Have you seen a transcript of the trials?
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.
Blimey !!!!!!
That is some screwed up logic, that is taking Free Speech to a new level.
Blimey !!!!!!
That is some screwed up logic, that is taking Free Speech to a new level.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
gmc;1449751 wrote: Moot point. Russia today is more akin to the bbc or euronews than a state operated broadcasting organisation
I'll take your word on that. We here do have National Public Radio, but I wouldn't be so harsh on them.
gmc;1449751 wrote: Phil Donahue,
How tragic. When was that? Been a while.
Did waste some time doing the Google thing, Found no evil intent. Management didn't want him. Nothing I could pin the tail on.
I do remember the guy, kinda liked him.
gmc;1449751 wrote: Peter Arnett. That took two minutes for me to find.
Seems to be a theme here.
How long ago was that?
Anyway, I'd also fire his arse,
gmc;1449751 wrote: When you have media owned by corporations that only put forward their point of view and do not balanced analysis
In a free society, that is where the consumer is King. At one time here we suffered the Fairness Doctrine
11. The Media Can Legally Lie – Top 25 of 2005
Humm, not really.
It was fun to read this, and I may have missed something, but fun is fun.
Here is a partial of the decision
District Court of Appeal of Florida,Second District.
NEW WORLD COMMUNICATIONS OF TAMPA, INC., d/b/a WTVT-TV, Appellant, v. Jane AKRE, Appellee.
No.‚2D01-529.
-- February 14, 2003
The FCC has never published its news distortion policy as a regulation with definitive elements and defenses. ‚ Instead, the FCC has developed the policy through the adjudicatory process in decisions resolving challenges to broadcasters' licenses. ‚ The policy's roots can be traced to 1949 when the FCC first expressed its concern regarding deceptive news in very general terms stating that “[a] licensee would be abusing his position as a public trustee of these important means of mass communications were he to withhold from expression over his facilities relevant news of facts concerning a controversy or to slant or distort the news. ‚ See Chad Raphael, The FCC's Broadcast News Distortion Rules: ‰Regulation by Drooping Eyelid, 6 Comm. L. & Policy 485, 494 (2001) (quoting Editorializing by Broadcast Licensees, 13 F.C.C. 1246, 1246 (1949)).
The policy did not begin to take shape, however, until 1969 when the FCC was called upon to investigate complaints regarding news distortion. ‚ Raphael at 494. ‚ Notably, the FCC did not take the initiative to investigate these complaints, but rather acted only after Congress referred complaints it had received to the FCC. In a series of opinions issued in licensing proceedings between 1969 and 1973, the FCC stated that when considering the status of a broadcaster's license, it would take into consideration proven instances of “deliberate news distortion, also called “intentional falsification of the news or “rigging or slanting the news. ‚In re CBS Program “Hunger in America, 20 F.C.C.2d 143, 150-51 (1969). ‚ This series of FCC opinions has come to be known as the FCC's news distortion policy.
Checking my reply, I remembered there is civil action, eg. slander/liable
Seems we have something in common, in that we seek other sources of news and analysis, but I would shy away from
PROJECT CENSORDED
How do you know that? Have you seen a transcript of the trials?
You got something better, please give it up.
[edit
Wonder now just where you pulled the Donahue and Arnet examples from?
You never mentioned.
I'll take your word on that. We here do have National Public Radio, but I wouldn't be so harsh on them.
gmc;1449751 wrote: Phil Donahue,
How tragic. When was that? Been a while.
Did waste some time doing the Google thing, Found no evil intent. Management didn't want him. Nothing I could pin the tail on.
I do remember the guy, kinda liked him.
gmc;1449751 wrote: Peter Arnett. That took two minutes for me to find.
Seems to be a theme here.
How long ago was that?
Anyway, I'd also fire his arse,
gmc;1449751 wrote: When you have media owned by corporations that only put forward their point of view and do not balanced analysis
In a free society, that is where the consumer is King. At one time here we suffered the Fairness Doctrine
11. The Media Can Legally Lie – Top 25 of 2005
Humm, not really.
It was fun to read this, and I may have missed something, but fun is fun.
Here is a partial of the decision
District Court of Appeal of Florida,Second District.
NEW WORLD COMMUNICATIONS OF TAMPA, INC., d/b/a WTVT-TV, Appellant, v. Jane AKRE, Appellee.
No.‚2D01-529.
-- February 14, 2003
The FCC has never published its news distortion policy as a regulation with definitive elements and defenses. ‚ Instead, the FCC has developed the policy through the adjudicatory process in decisions resolving challenges to broadcasters' licenses. ‚ The policy's roots can be traced to 1949 when the FCC first expressed its concern regarding deceptive news in very general terms stating that “[a] licensee would be abusing his position as a public trustee of these important means of mass communications were he to withhold from expression over his facilities relevant news of facts concerning a controversy or to slant or distort the news. ‚ See Chad Raphael, The FCC's Broadcast News Distortion Rules: ‰Regulation by Drooping Eyelid, 6 Comm. L. & Policy 485, 494 (2001) (quoting Editorializing by Broadcast Licensees, 13 F.C.C. 1246, 1246 (1949)).
The policy did not begin to take shape, however, until 1969 when the FCC was called upon to investigate complaints regarding news distortion. ‚ Raphael at 494. ‚ Notably, the FCC did not take the initiative to investigate these complaints, but rather acted only after Congress referred complaints it had received to the FCC. In a series of opinions issued in licensing proceedings between 1969 and 1973, the FCC stated that when considering the status of a broadcaster's license, it would take into consideration proven instances of “deliberate news distortion, also called “intentional falsification of the news or “rigging or slanting the news. ‚In re CBS Program “Hunger in America, 20 F.C.C.2d 143, 150-51 (1969). ‚ This series of FCC opinions has come to be known as the FCC's news distortion policy.
Checking my reply, I remembered there is civil action, eg. slander/liable
Seems we have something in common, in that we seek other sources of news and analysis, but I would shy away from
PROJECT CENSORDED
How do you know that? Have you seen a transcript of the trials?
You got something better, please give it up.
[edit
Wonder now just where you pulled the Donahue and Arnet examples from?
You never mentioned.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
She had the black vote all locked up.
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
Bruv;1449767 wrote: During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.
Blimey !!!!!!
That is some screwed up logic, that is taking Free Speech to a new level.
Problem is, who is the arbiter of TRUTH?
Because the FCC's news distortion policy is not a “law, rule, or regulation under section 448.102, Akre has failed to state a claim under the whistle-blower's statute. ‚ Accordingly, we reverse the judgment in her favor and remand for entry of a judgment in favor of WTVT.
We have laws, nice to see a court respect them.
Blimey !!!!!!
That is some screwed up logic, that is taking Free Speech to a new level.
Problem is, who is the arbiter of TRUTH?
Because the FCC's news distortion policy is not a “law, rule, or regulation under section 448.102, Akre has failed to state a claim under the whistle-blower's statute. ‚ Accordingly, we reverse the judgment in her favor and remand for entry of a judgment in favor of WTVT.
We have laws, nice to see a court respect them.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
She had the black vote all locked up.
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
tude dog;1449777 wrote: Problem is, who is the arbiter of TRUTH?
We have laws, nice to see a court respect them.
Re: The arbiter of truth.
Not big corporations, whether they be the likes of Monsanto, or whoever is funding the so called News media ?
When Government and Big business get into bed together..................everybody looses, everything has a price, by this particular American example even truth and honour.
Some things are far too valueable to entrust to the market economy.
We have laws, nice to see a court respect them.
Re: The arbiter of truth.
Not big corporations, whether they be the likes of Monsanto, or whoever is funding the so called News media ?
When Government and Big business get into bed together..................everybody looses, everything has a price, by this particular American example even truth and honour.
Some things are far too valueable to entrust to the market economy.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
Bruv;1449779 wrote: Re: The arbiter of truth.
Not big corporations, whether they be the likes of Monsanto, or whoever is funding the so called News media ?
When Government and Big business get into bed together..................everybody looses, everything has a price, by this particular American example even truth and honour.
Some things are far too valueable to entrust to the market economy.
So who is the arbiter, if not the people?
Not big corporations, whether they be the likes of Monsanto, or whoever is funding the so called News media ?
When Government and Big business get into bed together..................everybody looses, everything has a price, by this particular American example even truth and honour.
Some things are far too valueable to entrust to the market economy.
So who is the arbiter, if not the people?
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
She had the black vote all locked up.
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
posted by tude dog
How tragic. When was that? Been a while.
Did waste some time doing the Google thing, Found no evil intent. Management didn't want him. Nothing I could pin the tail on.
I do remember the guy, kinda liked him
Pulitzer prize winning journalist with top rated show sacked because his boss didn't like him asking questions. You think that's a good thing?
Seems to be a theme here.
How long ago was that?
Anyway, I'd also fire his arse,
Round about the same time I think. So you would fire anyone who challenges your point of view? No problem with that unless you happen to control the news media on which people rely for information. Then it's wrong imo. You object to too much government control why do you think corporations are any better and can be trusted?
When corporations can buy and control government and your access to news reports and information and their interests and the governments become one and the same you don't live in a free country any more
Wonder now just where you pulled the Donahue and Arnet examples from?
Google search news anchors fired for questioning iraq war. I have never actually seen either of them in action, I tend not to watch too many american news channels (I would be surprised if you watched british ones very often) except occasional browsing not least because the frequency of the adverts is very irritating.
You got something better, please give it up.
What more do you need. have they been put on trial or do you really believe your government has got it right.
Problem is, who is the arbiter of TRUTH?
Easy one that. You are, You don't need experts to tell you what to think, but you need all the information so you can decide for yourself. If an organisation can alter scientific reports and documentaries it disagrees with the last thing that shopuld happen is they be allowed to do it with impunity. That's why so many governments and companies hate the internet and want to censor it it's something they can't control.
Some things are too valuable to trust to the market economy, any good capitalist should know that, and monopolies and cartels will destroy a free market capitalist economy quicker than anything else can.
How tragic. When was that? Been a while.
Did waste some time doing the Google thing, Found no evil intent. Management didn't want him. Nothing I could pin the tail on.
I do remember the guy, kinda liked him
Pulitzer prize winning journalist with top rated show sacked because his boss didn't like him asking questions. You think that's a good thing?
Seems to be a theme here.
How long ago was that?
Anyway, I'd also fire his arse,
Round about the same time I think. So you would fire anyone who challenges your point of view? No problem with that unless you happen to control the news media on which people rely for information. Then it's wrong imo. You object to too much government control why do you think corporations are any better and can be trusted?
When corporations can buy and control government and your access to news reports and information and their interests and the governments become one and the same you don't live in a free country any more
Wonder now just where you pulled the Donahue and Arnet examples from?
Google search news anchors fired for questioning iraq war. I have never actually seen either of them in action, I tend not to watch too many american news channels (I would be surprised if you watched british ones very often) except occasional browsing not least because the frequency of the adverts is very irritating.
You got something better, please give it up.
What more do you need. have they been put on trial or do you really believe your government has got it right.
Problem is, who is the arbiter of TRUTH?
Easy one that. You are, You don't need experts to tell you what to think, but you need all the information so you can decide for yourself. If an organisation can alter scientific reports and documentaries it disagrees with the last thing that shopuld happen is they be allowed to do it with impunity. That's why so many governments and companies hate the internet and want to censor it it's something they can't control.
Some things are too valuable to trust to the market economy, any good capitalist should know that, and monopolies and cartels will destroy a free market capitalist economy quicker than anything else can.
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
tude dog;1449781 wrote: So who is the arbiter, if not the people?
I trust the people if and when they are given the full facts from an unbiased source.
It doesn't matter how that is achieved, I would prefer to maintain the integrity of the news source with an external independant body with industry agreed standards.
I believe that is roughly what we have in the UK.
The US system according to what I have seen here, is to blast the public with bias from every angle by whoever has the wherewithal to pay for the printing press/TV station and let the people decide who is right.
Thats OK until the balance tips into the mighty corporations favour, what happens when the biggest corporation controls all media ?
I trust the people if and when they are given the full facts from an unbiased source.
It doesn't matter how that is achieved, I would prefer to maintain the integrity of the news source with an external independant body with industry agreed standards.
I believe that is roughly what we have in the UK.
The US system according to what I have seen here, is to blast the public with bias from every angle by whoever has the wherewithal to pay for the printing press/TV station and let the people decide who is right.
Thats OK until the balance tips into the mighty corporations favour, what happens when the biggest corporation controls all media ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
Bruv;1449786 wrote: I trust the people if and when they are given the full facts from an unbiased source.
And where is that, unbiased source ???
Bruv;1449786 wrote: It doesn't matter how that is achieved
I see that as an open door.
Bruv;1449786 wrote: I would prefer to maintain the integrity of the news source with an external independant body with industry agreed standards.
That is exactly what I, or in my opinion, any freedom loving person would oppose.
Bruv;1449786 wrote: I believe that is roughly what we have in the UK.
I'll let that dog lay,
Bruv;1449786 wrote: The US system according to what I have seen here, is to blast the public with bias from every angle by whoever has the wherewithal to pay for the printing press/TV station and let the people decide who is right.
Thats OK until the balance tips into the mighty corporations favour, what happens when the biggest corporation controls all media ?
And where is that, unbiased source ???
Bruv;1449786 wrote: It doesn't matter how that is achieved
I see that as an open door.
Bruv;1449786 wrote: I would prefer to maintain the integrity of the news source with an external independant body with industry agreed standards.
That is exactly what I, or in my opinion, any freedom loving person would oppose.
Bruv;1449786 wrote: I believe that is roughly what we have in the UK.
I'll let that dog lay,
Bruv;1449786 wrote: The US system according to what I have seen here, is to blast the public with bias from every angle by whoever has the wherewithal to pay for the printing press/TV station and let the people decide who is right.
Thats OK until the balance tips into the mighty corporations favour, what happens when the biggest corporation controls all media ?
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
She had the black vote all locked up.
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
Your replies confirm you are The King of the Obscure Oneliner, best you get back to Fox News for some factual reporting of whats happening in Guantanamo Bay.(Irony)
Let me first tell you about the owner of that 'News' source......Rupert Murdoch
He owns the world famous and respected Times Newspaper as well as the now extinct News of the World
The biggest circulation English language paper in the world up to the time he chose to close it down within weeks of a Phone Hacking scandal being headline news around the world.
Part of the Murdock stable of publications is the popular Sun Newspaper that gave the world Page Three a Registered trade mark of News International.......owned by.....you guessed it the extremely rich Mr Murdoch.
Yeah let market forces give us our unbiased news
Let me first tell you about the owner of that 'News' source......Rupert Murdoch
He owns the world famous and respected Times Newspaper as well as the now extinct News of the World
The biggest circulation English language paper in the world up to the time he chose to close it down within weeks of a Phone Hacking scandal being headline news around the world.
Part of the Murdock stable of publications is the popular Sun Newspaper that gave the world Page Three a Registered trade mark of News International.......owned by.....you guessed it the extremely rich Mr Murdoch.
Yeah let market forces give us our unbiased news
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
It's too late to complain. The revolution is over. We lost.
Suck it up, and get in line.
Suck it up, and get in line.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
Bruv;1449789 wrote: Your replies confirm you are The King of the Obscure Oneliner, best you get back to Fox News for some factual reporting of whats happening in Guantanamo Bay.(Irony)
Let me first tell you about the owner of that 'News' source......Rupert Murdoch
He owns the world famous and respected Times Newspaper as well as the now extinct News of the World
The biggest circulation English language paper in the world up to the time he chose to close it down within weeks of a Phone Hacking scandal being headline news around the world.
Part of the Murdock stable of publications is the popular Sun Newspaper that gave the world Page Three a Registered trade mark of News International.......owned by.....you guessed it the extremely rich Mr Murdoch.
Yeah let market forces give us our unbiased news
You forget it was his good friend maggie thatcher that let him get is mitts on the lions share of satellite television. The only reason sky news is relatively good is because it faces competition that would make any bias obvious. Thank goodness for the phone hacking scandal at least it has delayed the privatisation of the bbc for a little while..
posted by larsmac
It's too late to complain. The revolution is over. We lost.
Suck it up, and get in line.
It's not lost you just have to keep fighting the same battles over and over again.
Let me first tell you about the owner of that 'News' source......Rupert Murdoch
He owns the world famous and respected Times Newspaper as well as the now extinct News of the World
The biggest circulation English language paper in the world up to the time he chose to close it down within weeks of a Phone Hacking scandal being headline news around the world.
Part of the Murdock stable of publications is the popular Sun Newspaper that gave the world Page Three a Registered trade mark of News International.......owned by.....you guessed it the extremely rich Mr Murdoch.
Yeah let market forces give us our unbiased news
You forget it was his good friend maggie thatcher that let him get is mitts on the lions share of satellite television. The only reason sky news is relatively good is because it faces competition that would make any bias obvious. Thank goodness for the phone hacking scandal at least it has delayed the privatisation of the bbc for a little while..
posted by larsmac
It's too late to complain. The revolution is over. We lost.
Suck it up, and get in line.
It's not lost you just have to keep fighting the same battles over and over again.
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
gmc;1449801 wrote:
posted by larsmac
It's too late to complain. The revolution is over. We lost.
Suck it up, and get in line.
It's not lost you just have to keep fighting the same battles over and over again.
Truth.
[sigh]
posted by larsmac
It's too late to complain. The revolution is over. We lost.
Suck it up, and get in line.
It's not lost you just have to keep fighting the same battles over and over again.
Truth.
[sigh]
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
gmc;1449801 wrote: You forget it was his good friend maggie thatcher that let him get is mitts on the lions share of satellite television
I didn't forget ........I didn't want to overload middle America's brain......Mr Tude
I didn't forget ........I didn't want to overload middle America's brain......Mr Tude
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
Bruv;1449803 wrote: I didn't forget ........I didn't want to overload middle America's brain......Mr Tude
Methinks you are unkind, why should he have heard about obscure british tv channels? It's only recently I have been watching cnn and the likes on any kind of a regular basis. I hate to think what our media would be like if he had managed the same takeover here.We're not actually in a position to be too smug, we had the same kind of codswallop dished up.
Sometimes it seems the more things change the more they stay the same
Spitting Image Every Bomb You Drop Complete - YouTube
Spitting Image - My God Is Bigger Than Your God - YouTube
Methinks you are unkind, why should he have heard about obscure british tv channels? It's only recently I have been watching cnn and the likes on any kind of a regular basis. I hate to think what our media would be like if he had managed the same takeover here.We're not actually in a position to be too smug, we had the same kind of codswallop dished up.
Sometimes it seems the more things change the more they stay the same
Spitting Image Every Bomb You Drop Complete - YouTube
Spitting Image - My God Is Bigger Than Your God - YouTube
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
gmc;1449816 wrote: Methinks you are unkind...............
Well yes a bit, but not any unkinder than dismissing serious points with trite smart arse oneliners.....surely.
I wonder why Spitting Image is not around these days, is it that we are too sophisticated for it or are the TV companies too scared ?
Well yes a bit, but not any unkinder than dismissing serious points with trite smart arse oneliners.....surely.
I wonder why Spitting Image is not around these days, is it that we are too sophisticated for it or are the TV companies too scared ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
Bruv;1449819 wrote: Well yes a bit, but not any unkinder than dismissing serious points with trite smart arse oneliners.....surely.
I wonder why Spitting Image is not around these days, is it that we are too sophisticated for it or are the TV companies too scared ?
I thought a bit of humour was appropriate. Middle america might live in it's own odd little world but then so do we. It's good to come across someone with forcefully expressed but somewhat alien perspectives I suspect he probably thinks us rather odd as well.
Heard fluck and law being interviewed on radio 2 , basically they stopped because they felt they were getting a bit stale. They also reckoned nowadays they would not get produced for fear of offending too many people. Imagine what they would do with fundamentalist christians, islamists and pedophile priests. Politicians can't really object to satire for fear of the laughter increasing, the original series were screamingly funny because they were so true. It's amazing how much of the stuff is still relevant today.
I wonder why Spitting Image is not around these days, is it that we are too sophisticated for it or are the TV companies too scared ?
I thought a bit of humour was appropriate. Middle america might live in it's own odd little world but then so do we. It's good to come across someone with forcefully expressed but somewhat alien perspectives I suspect he probably thinks us rather odd as well.
Heard fluck and law being interviewed on radio 2 , basically they stopped because they felt they were getting a bit stale. They also reckoned nowadays they would not get produced for fear of offending too many people. Imagine what they would do with fundamentalist christians, islamists and pedophile priests. Politicians can't really object to satire for fear of the laughter increasing, the original series were screamingly funny because they were so true. It's amazing how much of the stuff is still relevant today.
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
gmc;1449837 wrote: They also reckoned nowadays they would not get produced for fear of offending too many people.................... Imagine what they would do with fundamentalist christians, islamists and pedophile priests.........It's amazing how much of the stuff is still relevant today.
That was my point nobody will put it out for fear of offending.
How the world has changed...............that is why we need the lampoon, to deflate the pompous.
That was my point nobody will put it out for fear of offending.
How the world has changed...............that is why we need the lampoon, to deflate the pompous.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
Bruv;1449844 wrote: That was my point nobody will put it out for fear of offending.
How the world has changed...............that is why we need the lampoon, to deflate the pompous.
Maybe subtlety is the answer
Political sculptor creates novelty sex toy that allows you to stick it to Vladimir Putin - Europe - World - The Independent
How the world has changed...............that is why we need the lampoon, to deflate the pompous.
Maybe subtlety is the answer
Political sculptor creates novelty sex toy that allows you to stick it to Vladimir Putin - Europe - World - The Independent
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
Bruv;1449789 wrote: Your replies confirm you are The King of the Obscure Oneliner, best you get back to Fox News for some factual reporting of whats happening in Guantanamo Bay.(Irony)
And I thought it is GOOD TO BE KING! :yh_rotfl
I dunno how many court cases, links I must supply you won't read?
Bruv;1449789 wrote: Let me first tell you about the owner of that 'News' source......Rupert Murdoch
He owns the world famous and respected Times Newspaper as well as the now extinct News of the World
The biggest circulation English language paper in the world up to the time he chose to close it down within weeks of a Phone Hacking scandal being headline news around the world.
Part of the Murdock stable of publications is the popular Sun Newspaper that gave the world Page Three a Registered trade mark of News International.......owned by.....you guessed it the extremely rich Mr Murdoch.
I could give a rats azz about News of the World. The other examples you point out don't concern me at all.
Bruv;1449789 wrote: Yeah let market forces give us our unbiased news
Looking for unbiased news??:-2
Better luck looking for a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.
Can't talk of yours, but my nation was born of biased news.
And I thought it is GOOD TO BE KING! :yh_rotfl
I dunno how many court cases, links I must supply you won't read?
Bruv;1449789 wrote: Let me first tell you about the owner of that 'News' source......Rupert Murdoch
He owns the world famous and respected Times Newspaper as well as the now extinct News of the World
The biggest circulation English language paper in the world up to the time he chose to close it down within weeks of a Phone Hacking scandal being headline news around the world.
Part of the Murdock stable of publications is the popular Sun Newspaper that gave the world Page Three a Registered trade mark of News International.......owned by.....you guessed it the extremely rich Mr Murdoch.
I could give a rats azz about News of the World. The other examples you point out don't concern me at all.
Bruv;1449789 wrote: Yeah let market forces give us our unbiased news
Looking for unbiased news??:-2
Better luck looking for a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.
Can't talk of yours, but my nation was born of biased news.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
She had the black vote all locked up.
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
gmc;1449891 wrote: Maybe subtlety is the answer
Political sculptor creates novelty sex toy that allows you to stick it to Vladimir Putin - Europe - World - The Independent
What's so subtle about a butt plug?
Political sculptor creates novelty sex toy that allows you to stick it to Vladimir Putin - Europe - World - The Independent
What's so subtle about a butt plug?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
tude dog;1449895 wrote: And I thought it is GOOD TO BE KING! :yh_rotfl
Not when you are a self imposed King
I dunno how many court cases, links I must supply you won't read?
You looking over my shoulder?
Read them, where you wanting me to itemise my reply?
Or maybe unreserved agreement?
I could give a rats azz about News of the World. The other examples you point out don't concern me at all.
You think you live in a bubble?
The same man has his dirty fingers in your media........I thought it polite and a gentlemanly thing to forewarn you.
Looking for unbiased news??:-2
Better luck looking for a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.
Can't talk of yours, but my nation was born of biased news.
No such thing as unbiased news, news is.......news.
I want it reported by professional journalists......yes even the professional journalists will have some bias, that's why an independant media is better for democracy than an armed population.
Your nation thrives on half truth and euphemisms......they have educated you well.
Not when you are a self imposed King
I dunno how many court cases, links I must supply you won't read?
You looking over my shoulder?
Read them, where you wanting me to itemise my reply?
Or maybe unreserved agreement?
I could give a rats azz about News of the World. The other examples you point out don't concern me at all.
You think you live in a bubble?
The same man has his dirty fingers in your media........I thought it polite and a gentlemanly thing to forewarn you.
Looking for unbiased news??:-2
Better luck looking for a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.
Can't talk of yours, but my nation was born of biased news.
No such thing as unbiased news, news is.......news.
I want it reported by professional journalists......yes even the professional journalists will have some bias, that's why an independant media is better for democracy than an armed population.
Your nation thrives on half truth and euphemisms......they have educated you well.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
Bruv;1449906 wrote: Not when you are a self imposed King
You looking over my shoulder?
uh yea! And everybody else. That is why I am here. For your own good.
[QUOTE=Bruv;1449906]Read them, where you wanting me to itemise my reply?
Or maybe unreserved agreement?
OK, whatever.:-2
Bruv;1449906 wrote: You think you live in a bubble?
The same man has his dirty fingers in your media........I thought it polite and a gentlemanly thing to forewarn you.
No such thing as unbiased news, news is.......news.
I want it reported by professional journalists......yes even the professional journalists will have some bias, that's why an independant media is better for democracy than an armed population.
Your nation thrives on half truth and euphemisms......they have educated you well.
Vast generations, supported by
NOTHING
You looking over my shoulder?
uh yea! And everybody else. That is why I am here. For your own good.
[QUOTE=Bruv;1449906]Read them, where you wanting me to itemise my reply?
Or maybe unreserved agreement?
OK, whatever.:-2
Bruv;1449906 wrote: You think you live in a bubble?
The same man has his dirty fingers in your media........I thought it polite and a gentlemanly thing to forewarn you.
No such thing as unbiased news, news is.......news.
I want it reported by professional journalists......yes even the professional journalists will have some bias, that's why an independant media is better for democracy than an armed population.
Your nation thrives on half truth and euphemisms......they have educated you well.
Vast generations, supported by
NOTHING
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
She had the black vote all locked up.
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
No answer to that.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
So sent to the Crimea? ummm okay
Go figure,
Some kid, Abby Martin employee of RT throws a hissy fit.
Considering her background, not shocked.
IMO, she should have been fired. That girl was offered an opportunity of a lifetime, which she declined.
So what you ask?
Recently Sharyl Attkisson Quit her job with CBS.
Between the two, doesn't take me long to consider the more valuable.
Oh, BTW, before now, never had any idea of either of them.
Fortunately here we are long past the monopoly of the three major sources of TV news here.
Some kid, Abby Martin employee of RT throws a hissy fit.
Considering her background, not shocked.
IMO, she should have been fired. That girl was offered an opportunity of a lifetime, which she declined.
So what you ask?
Recently Sharyl Attkisson Quit her job with CBS.
Between the two, doesn't take me long to consider the more valuable.
Oh, BTW, before now, never had any idea of either of them.
Fortunately here we are long past the monopoly of the three major sources of TV news here.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
She had the black vote all locked up.