I'm alarmed to see such low figures in South America.
Thanks d*g I was born in Germany.
Imagine being Indian o.o
There is a constant civil war in India. The news just don't report on it in the West. Like literally - if your news don't mention something, it doesn't exist for you. How would you know? Really, how would you know if the heads of the media just decide to not cover some events? Or if they would decide to cover some fake events, presenting them as happening?
>The news just don't report on it in the West. Like literally - if your news don't mention something, it doesn't exist for you. How would you know? Really, how would you know if the heads of the media just decide to not cover some events? Or if they would decide to cover some fake events, presenting them as happening?
In case you haven't noticed, unlike Poccnr, on wect we are allowed to consume independent news sources.
That's why we have free social media.
>independent news sources
It doesn't exist, every news has a sponsor who has agenda, every news source have to make money, to sustain infrastracture and keep journalists afloat, every news source need to track the intrest of audience and decide what is important and will get clicks and what is not.
This dumb myth of "independent news sources" is somewhere deep in the subconsious mind of Westoids, like they uncritically believe there are people who don't eat, who don't need money, who can travel the world like Superman without a plane and have access to world leaders to ask questions in the name of DA TRUTH. And Westoids believe that there are countless of booming organisations somehow sprouting out of nowhere and these superhuman journalists just appear as their employees out of nowhere and there is this constant stream of independent information from these uncorruptable heroes who don't belong to no one but who have legit ideals and values that guide them through their ethereal life not compomised by anything and not motivated by anything else other than those ideals and values.
Independent media means independence from government. Simple as!
And your thesis contains several laughably false propositions:
1) that you need to have some shady sponsor who is influencing editorial policy in the background in order to be opinionated (because lol apparently people do not have own opinions unless someone is paying them)
2) that having an opinion means you aren't independent (lol! it's the exact opposite, opinionless hacks are those who are not independent)
3) that ability of anyone to start its own opinionated propaganda outlet will somehow mask the corruption (lol, lmao)
not necessarily. an alleged sponsor of a media organization can profit solely of the sales and advertisements without playing around much with the core editorial mechanism. this non-considerate of government characteristic might be beneficial to the organization if people tendencies are accordingly. therefore it is not an exigency that every media to be manipulated by an agenda.
Dude, you can't operate in a country and be independent from the government. There will certainly be degree of self-censorship and bootlicking. I remember when Vice was pretending to be independent news media and then they had a big interview with Obama, where all they did was kissing his ass and asking prepared softball questions, it was like USSR interview level, only with jokes and likable shots, everything awkward was removed, it was unnatural as fuck.
But you know why they had to do it? Because if they were critical of him, like a real adversorial interview where they would ask him hard questions, then he wouldn't come to them again, and they probably would be excluded from White House journalists pool
>Dude, you can't operate in a country and be independent from the government.
worrybearest post
>But you know why they had to do it? Because if they were critical of him, like a real adversorial interview where they would ask him hard questions, then he wouldn't come to them again, and they probably would be excluded from White House journalists pool
yeah they also did the same with Trump, right? lol
1) They need shady sponsors to pay journalists money. Are you a kid? You know that people need money? You are a human and you have a stomach, right. You need to constantly put food in there. And you need money to buy that food. Journalists are humans and they get hungry. Journalists have stomachs. Are those logical and truthfull propositions or you object to them?
Some people not just need money for food. they need money to feed their own kids and wifes. Lots of money. And then you have to pay for house! And if you are a journalist - how do you get money? If you journalist agency who wants to have a lot of journalists, how do you pay them? Where do you get the money so that your journalist would work for you? If you don't pay them money, they will leave. Journalists are hungry, they have stomachs, they want yammy-yammy food, they have houses to pay for. Lets think about this a little more - opinions are fine, but who pays them so that they could buy food and place it in their stomachs? How can a journalist turn his opinion into food? Like a journalist has an opinion, wow, great, now what, your stomach hurts and your rent is due. What do you do? You need money, just having opinion doesn't place food in your stomach. You need money to buy food, is that understandable?
>they also did the same with Trump, right? lol
Everyone understood that Trump is outsider, he was not part of the "cathedral", not part of the biggest group of sponsors+academia+media+democraticparty+intelligenceapparatus+thinktank_apparatchiks
This "cathedral" abomination amalgamaton formed by these groups is who decides the narratives and sets the agenda.
So Trump was treated as an abberation, even though his cabinet members were trying to sabotage Trump from within, trying to work for the Cathedral and you can now see these faggot traitors of Trump who testify on January6th hearings, boasting how they were constantly trying to put sticks in the wheels of Trump machine, how they were just agents of the Cathedral and how they were and could be usefull for the Cathedral in the future.
Watch this to understand what i am saying
2) What is even the "opinion" dude, like why do you operate definitions like that in discussion with me. Agenda, its called agenda - some editorial policy on what you are going to allow and what you are not going to allow, what you will cover and what you won't cover, what words you would use to describe actions of some actors and what words would you use to describe similar actions of different actors.
And behind the agenda there are always money. Governmnet actors don't just fucking donate money to news sources too, they often use intermediate stops. Like look at this shit. Government of the foreign country gives money to politician fund and then that fund will give scholarships and grants to people whom they want to be their pets who will tell things that they want to tell. Clinton Foundation recieves millions from Qatar, and then Clinton foundation will give 10000$ to aspiring new students who will become new journalists, but those "journalists" already would know that its nice to eat from the Clinton's hand. They won't bite that hand again - why do you want to bite the hand that feeds you? You want to go hungry, you want stomach crying out of pain because you have no money, and rent is due? Kids come to you and say "Mommy, where is our food? We are hungry!" and brave mother journalists is going to say "Listen kids, i don't give a fuck to your hunger, you understand? Today i asked Chelsey Clinton about Qatar money and they canceled my grant, but atleast i stuck it to the woman! Go sleep, you not eating not today, not tommorow. Da truth is above our hunger!"
Said no journalist woman ever
Not even going to read this long form cope; you are basically just wasting words around the fact that based on your assumption that nobody would be publishing opinionated walls of text without someone paying them for it, and the fact that you are yourself posting opinionated walls of text to deflect, one can only conclude that you're bot projecting and admitting that you yourself are a shill.
Pfff, weak give uper changing topics again and unable to keep up. i didn't claim to be a journalist, you fucking mongoloid, there is a difference between posting online while calling you a retarded NIGGER and claiming to be some above all else journalistic standard bearer serving ideals of independent coverage of news events while getting paid by the foundations and NGOs that actually order you like a fucking monkey boy to do their bidding under the disguise of ethical public service.
