What's actually being censored: misinformation or the truth?

[mr_engineer]

10 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

These two media-niches meet different needs for different kinds of people. 

The mainstream caters to people who want to be told what to believe, whereas the alt-media caters to people who have an open mind to thinking about things differently. And in a way that's potentially more beneficial to themselves. 

[Consept]

1 minute ago, mr_engineer said:

Yeah, which is why when they fail to be unbiased, they don't have to answer for that. That's what I meant. But, if the mainstream claims to be 'unbiased', they should have to answer for that! And they should openly admit to their failures to do their job of 'being unbiased'. 

They do specifically have to answer for it, they can and do get sued quite often if they report any factually wrong information, defame people etc. They are held to a much higher level of scrutiny than alternative, as in its not even close. 

3 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

If you ask people who consume alt-media whether alt-media is purely unbiased, they probably won't say 'yes'. But, if you ask people who consume mainstream-media whether it's purely unbiased or whether it's 'objective' enough for them, they probably will say 'yes'. 

People who consume alt-media are usually much more radical and ideolgical than mainstream viewers, usually they are in an echo chamber because that is the nature of social media, hence the rise of things like qanon and incel culture. If you ask these groups whether alt-media is biased, I can bet you whatever you want theyll tell you its not biased or at least whatever they consume is not and it is the absolute truth, I know this from first hand experience. 

7 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

These two media-niches meet different needs for different kinds of people. 

Yes the people that consume alt-media's needs are hearing what they want to hear from their favourite alt-media sources 

10 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

They can definitely be partisan and for their favorite political parties. And, if you're dipping your finger in the pie of politics, that is essentially what you're doing. You're being the mouthpiece of that party. 

Your claim was that mainstream is a mouth piece for the government, CNN was definitely not a mouth piece for Trumps government so what youre saying doesnt really work.  

Do you ever concede a point btw? just need to check otherwise this is completely pointless

[mr_engineer]

2 minutes ago, Consept said:

They do specifically have to answer for it, they can and do get sued quite often if they report any factually wrong information, defame people etc. They are held to a much higher level of scrutiny than alternative, as in its not even close. 

They don't have to answer for lying by omission, though. 

The alt-media talks about what they omitted. 

2 minutes ago, Consept said:

People who consume alt-media are usually much more radical and ideolgical than mainstream viewers, usually they are in an echo chamber because that is the nature of social media, hence the rise of things like qanon and incel culture. If you ask these groups whether alt-media is biased, I can bet you whatever you want theyll tell you its not biased or at least whatever they consume is not and it is the absolute truth, I know this from first hand experience. 

Correction - if you ask the smarter people consuming alt-media, they'll say 'It is biased, but it tells me what I need to watch out for from the mainstream'. 

3 minutes ago, Consept said:

Your claim was that mainstream is a mouth piece for the government, CNN was definitely not a mouth piece for Trumps government so what youre saying doesnt really work.  

They are a mouthpiece for Biden's government. 

[Consept]

1 minute ago, mr_engineer said:

Correction - if you ask the smarter people consuming alt-media, they'll say 'It is biased, but it tells me what I need to watch out for from the mainstream'. 

What percentage of people consuming alt-media would you class as 'smarter'? 

2 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

The alt-media talks about what they omitted. 

Ive never seen alt-media talk about something that they didnt talk about, that literally makes no sense. Ben Shapiro isnt going to talk about things he doesnt want brought up about palestine for example. Just on a practical level they cant cover everything and then the things they dont dont cover they say that they didnt cover lol 

[mr_engineer]

1 minute ago, Consept said:

What percentage of people consuming alt-media would you class as 'smarter'? 

This, I don't know. 

My point with the 'smarter people' is that they'll be more intellectually honest with their reasons for consuming it. 

2 minutes ago, Consept said:

Ive never seen alt-media talk about something that they didnt talk about, that literally makes no sense. Ben Shapiro isnt going to talk about things he doesnt want brought up about palestine for example. Just on a practical level they cant cover everything and then the things they dont dont cover they say that they didnt cover lol 

*The alt-media talks about what the mainstream omitted. 

[Danioover9000]

@Leo Gura @mr_engineer  Sorry, but Leo's kinda right here. If you are a website owner yourself, you have to establish guidelines and rules of behavior and how you engage with writing your posts and threads about other users or other happenings in the world. Drug sourcing here is a rule breaker because it's illegal and can kill your website, and so does graphic pornography, so naturally you censor those images or texts. Nothing personal, we live in a society.

59 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

1) Most mainstream news does not censor anyone. Who does CNN censor?

2) If you're talking about giant social media platforms, they have a duty and responsibility to moderate hate speech, abuse, and exploitation of their platforms. As do all smaller alt-platforms. They are just smaller.

If you run a website, you have a duty and responsibility to block people from using your website for illegal and dangerous things. No matter how small your website is. You can't just sit back and allow people to use your website to plan terrorist attacks, for example.

 

[mr_engineer]

4 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Leo Gura @mr_engineer  Sorry, but Leo's kinda right here. If you are a website owner yourself, you have to establish guidelines and rules of behavior and how you engage with writing your posts and threads about other users or other happenings in the world. Drug sourcing here is a rule breaker because it's illegal and can kill your website, and so does graphic pornography, so naturally you censor those images or texts. Nothing personal, we live in a society.

 

Maybe you should also have integrity in how you implement those guidelines and rules, right?! Or you're going to practically interpret them in the language of whoever pays you off and you're going to censor all dissent?! 

It's interesting how these abuses of censorship always seem to have a PC justification. And then you have people telling you why there is censorship. Thank you for telling me what I already knew. My question is - why is it being abused?! 

[Consept]

2 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

This, I don't know. 

My point with the 'smarter people' is that they'll be more intellectually honest with their reasons for consuming it. 

I understand your point, but what im saying is that its more likely that some 'smart' people are engaging with alt-media in a healthy way, but I'm sure you can see that most people are not engaging with it in this way. Your point is focusing on the best case scenario to justify something, but this can be used to justify literally anything, 'smart' people wouldnt need any laws because they would make the right decision for example but most people do need laws. 

6 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

*The alt-media talks about what the mainstream omitted. 

The alt-media talks about what the mainstream said that doesnt agree with their point of view, if they agreed they wouldnt cover it. This can be necessary to give different point of views but its not done from a perspective of keeping the mainstream honest and accountable, its usually done to further whatever view theyve got. Flat earth people will probably claim the mainstream omits information about flat earth 

[mr_engineer]

1 minute ago, Consept said:

I understand your point, but what im saying is that its more likely that some 'smart' people are engaging with alt-media in a healthy way, but I'm sure you can see that most people are not engaging with it in this way. Your point is focusing on the best case scenario to justify something, but this can be used to justify literally anything, 'smart' people wouldnt need any laws because they would make the right decision for example but most people do need laws. 

A lot of alt-sources aren't political. (Some are, and I agree with you on the toxicity of those sources) That's a huge appeal for a lot of common people. They may not be able to articulate it in an intellectually honest way. 

4 minutes ago, Consept said:

The alt-media talks about what the mainstream said that doesnt agree with their point of view, if they agreed they wouldnt cover it. This can be necessary to give different point of views but its not done from a perspective of keeping the mainstream honest and accountable, its usually done to further whatever view theyve got. Flat earth people will probably claim the mainstream omits information about flat earth 

Whatever the agenda of the alt-media may be, the reason people listen is that the bigger alt-media have data to back their claims. Some have credentials, but are censored by the mainstream cuz it didn't fit the mainstream's agenda. 

The 'fact-checkers' will, of course, deny this data. But, who pays them?! The mainstream! 

[mr_engineer]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

No mainstream media sources claims to be absolute truth. This is a silly smear against them.

@Leo Gura 

The 'fact-checkers' are on a huge crusade to prove their 'absolute truth' to people. 'We have the facts, that somehow just fit with our agenda, all the claims that don't fit with them just happen to be false'. 

[Consept]

Just now, mr_engineer said:

@Leo Gura 

The 'fact-checkers' are on a huge crusade to prove their 'absolute truth' to people. 'We have the facts, that somehow just fit with our agenda, all the claims that don't fit with them just happen to be false'. 

Can you give an example of something that was fact checked and proved wrong which wasnt actually wrong and was paid off by the mainstream to say that it was wrong?

[mr_engineer]

1 minute ago, Consept said:

Can you give an example of something that was fact checked and proved wrong which wasnt actually wrong and was paid off by the mainstream to say that it was wrong?

Sure! 

The New World Order was called a 'conspiracy-theory' and fact-checkers claimed that it's false. This was 'about 2 years ago', as the site says. 

https://thelogicalindian.com/fact-check/new-world-order-one-government-agenda-21-2030-un-22501

But then, we have a world government forming right now!! This happened in 2022. 

https://www.worldgovernmentsummit.org/home 

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, mr_engineer said:

The mainstream lies by omission.

All media has limited time and screen real-estate. They can only cover so much. Alt-media omits more stuff than mainstream media.

You are falling into the trap of double-standards.

Quote

They do not cover the big protests in Europe. This takes away the voices of people whose lives have been destroyed by the government-measures.

US media doesn't cover European and world events much because most Americans tune out and don't care about it.

All media is a business that must cater to people's desires and willingness to watch & listen.

- - - - -

The bottom line is that you're gaslighting us with your own biases and lack of understanding of media.

Edited November 26, 2022 by Leo Gura

[mr_engineer]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

All media has limited time and screen real-estate. They can only cover so much. Alt-media omits more stuff than mainstream media.

You are falling into the trap of double-standards.

The job of the alt-media is to say what the mainstream-media isn't saying. It's not to 'be unbiased' and 'give all the facts'. These expectations only get placed on the mouthpieces of the governments. 

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

US media doesn't cover European and world events much because most Americans tune out and don't care about it.

Why isn't the US-media interviewing people whose lives have been destroyed by lockdowns? Why was there so much repression of the Canadian truckers?!

Why do people have to go outside the Parliament and honk their horns so that people have to listen?! And then they get crushed violently. 

In a true democracy, the media represents the people and holds the government accountable. Not the other way around. 

Edited November 26, 2022 by mr_engineer

[Consept]

4 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

Sure! 

The New World Order was called a 'conspiracy-theory' and fact-checkers claimed that it's false. This was 'about 2 years ago', as the site says. 

https://thelogicalindian.com/fact-check/new-world-order-one-government-agenda-21-2030-un-22501

But then, we have a world government forming right now!! This happened in 2022. 

https://www.worldgovernmentsummit.org/home 

The first link disproves a social media (alt-media) post that claims it has hard evidence and website for the objectives the UN is claiming for the a new world order. But first of all that website was proved not to be linked to the UN, it was a one page website with no links working, it also wouldnt make sense for them to put that out if that was their intention. So it is literally provably false. 

The other link for the World government summit makes no claims to do what was in this nwo manifesto, theyre more talking about sustainability and things like that. 

If you are a smart person you can clearly see this, I dont see how you can read that first link and not see that the facebook post was nonsense. This actually makes more of a point that fact checking is needed. 

[mr_engineer]

@Consept I mean, sure, you can mince words and stuff. But, ultimately, the sustainability-talk is to restrict people's access to resources like power, fuel, space, etc. 

[Consept]

Just now, mr_engineer said:

@Consept I mean, sure, you can mince words and stuff. But, ultimately, the sustainability-talk is to restrict people's access to resources like power, fuel, space, etc. 

No i asked for something that was proved wrong and then turned out to be right, you are essentially presenting a facebook post that talks about depopulating the earth from the UN. That post was definitely false, the UN didnt put out a manifesto talking about depopulating the earth if you want to take something else theyve said and make that claim then you can but its not proof of anything its just your speculation. 

Ill ask again have you got something that was proved wrong by fact checkers that you can prove they were wrong about and it was some government agenda? 

[Danioover9000]

@mr_engineer

2 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

The job of the alt-media is to say what the mainstream-media isn't saying. It's not to 'be unbiased' and 'give all the facts'. These expectations only get placed on the mouthpieces of the governments. 

Why isn't the US-media interviewing people whose lives have been destroyed by lockdowns? Why was there so much repression of the Canadian truckers?!

Why do people have to go outside the Parliament and honk their horns so that people have to listen?! And then they get crushed violently. 

   Because this is your worldview and bias and double standard. You are too strongly identified, ideologically, and indoctrinated by Alt-right media and alternative media. You are basically a talking piece for those mind viruses, in a narrative, political and ideological warfare, a pawn/stone in a game of Chinese Go/Shodan/Baduk, yet you lack the necessary level of stage of development, cognitive and moral development, ego development and personality typing, state of consciousness, life experience and other lines and areas of development to appreciate how your mind is coopted, and is distorting reality, deleting challenging information and labelling them as misinformation from your POV, to obfuscate and suit your survival bias as an EGO, to serve under whatever collective ego you are brought up and raised up on.

   So, until you check out, study and practice Sadguru's inner engineering program, you are nowhere able to break free from the matrix, from MAYA, Mr. Anderson.!

[Consept]

3 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@mr_engineer

   Because this is your worldview and bias and double standard. You are too strongly identified, ideologically, and indoctrinated by Alt-right media and alternative media. You are basically a talking piece for those mind viruses, in a narrative, political and ideological warfare, a pawn/stone in a game of Chinese Go/Shodan/Baduk, yet you lack the necessary level of stage of development, cognitive and moral development, ego development and personality typing, state of consciousness, life experience and other lines and areas of development to appreciate how your mind is coopted, and is distorting reality, deleting challenging information and labelling them as misinformation from your POV, to obfuscate and suit your survival bias as an EGO, to serve under whatever collective ego you are brought up and raised up on.

   So, until you check out, study and practice Sadguru's inner engineering program, you are nowhere able to break free from the matrix, from MAYA, Mr. Anderson.!

BASED

[mr_engineer]

@Consept My point is that this idea that governments are going to come together and form a world-government with values of 'sustainability' - this idea itself was said to be 'false'. And now, it's happening. 

The fact-checkers claimed a whole bunch of stuff. I only need one counter-example to show you a reason you should doubt what they're saying.