Media Reform:

#26
#26
Rasputin_Vol said:
One of the very first things they need to do is clamp down on "anonymous sources" or "those close to" or "those that have knowledge of" type stories.
Click to expand...

That's all clickbait, Ras.

I agree with you on principle, but you and I both know it's not going to stop. As long as people's views are being upheld by said "sources" it will continue and probably get worse.
 
#27
#27
Rasputin_Vol said:
Russians??
Click to expand...
Yep. If I had more time I'd type out a few pages from the book. Fascinating stuff. One quick statistic from research done on their activies in 2016 - they reached 126M people on FB, posted 10.4M tweets, uploaded more than 1,000 videos to YouTube, and connected with more than 20M users on Instragram in 2016. Again, this is according to a retired U.S. Army General. It's worth noting that he's been critical of both Trump and Obama in the book. Doesn't sound like he has an axe to grind... just trying to help readers identify modern day "Battlegrouds"
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlackCreekVol
#28
#28
Vol_from_86 said:
Yep. If I had more time I'd type out a few pages from the book. Fascinating stuff. One quick statistic from research done on their activies in 2016 - they reached 126M people on FB, posted 10.4M tweets, uploaded more than 1,000 videos to YouTube, and connected with more than 20M users on Instragram in 2016. Again, this is according to a retired U.S. Army General. It's worth noting that he's been critical of both Trump and Obama in the book. Doesn't sound like he has an axe to grind... just trying to help readers identify modern day "Battlegrouds"
Click to expand...
One more. "Of 1,107 videos created by the IRA (Russians) since September 2015, an overwhelming 1,063 of them were related to BLM and police brutality."

They make these videos and get them circulating in our society to divide us against ourselves. They also identify extremist stories on social media and create "click farms" to popularize the message. Facebook, Twitter and "smart" news apps put stories in front of you that generate the most activity (views, likes, and comments). It's a easy system to exploit if your goal is to divide a society.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlackCreekVol and Rickyvol77
#29
#29
LouderVol said:
And there is a right to be a CFM? I work in architecture and am mostly thru getting my license, I understand. But there should not be levels or tiers of rights.
Click to expand...
The CFM certification is a choice that is encouraged, but not required. I was a CFM for several years but after the ASFPM began circulating emails attacking the President, I chose to not renew my ASFPM membership and therefore lost my CFM certification. I decided that I'd built up enough of a reputation that I didn't need it. Doesn't seem to have cost me anything yet.
 
#31
#31
MontyPython said:
This. Our government or some independent agency really can't regulate - or really, reduce - stupidity and/or gullibility.
Click to expand...
Well, most of these governing boards for medical, engineering and surveying ethics are not government related or an outside entity, but are made up collectively of the members of that profession. They decide amongst themselves what the proper ethics and behavior should be.

MontyPython said:
If someone's stupid enough to believe in Q Anon, for example, no amount of logic would ever suffice to convince them otherwise.
Click to expand...
As a doctor or an engineer, for example, they have codes and ethics amongst their members that their priority is to serve the public and do what is in the best welfare of the public. A media outlet or reporter intentionally throwing out false info to take advantage of an ignorant public is no different than a doctor or engineer taking advantage of the general public's ignorance of science for their own gain.

MontyPython said:
Lawyers, doctors and engineers DO something. Reporters just REPORT something, often with a slant of view dependent on alot - such as their employer. And just as we see here, a picture's worth a 1,000 words.
Click to expand...

No, we have far too many examples of reporters creating stories out of thin air under the protection of "unnamed sources" or "those close to". If there was a self-regulating body of journalistic ethics, they would never allow that to happen.
 
#32
#32
Vol_from_86 said:
Yep. If I had more time I'd type out a few pages from the book. Fascinating stuff. One quick statistic from research done on their activies in 2016 - they reached 126M people on FB, posted 10.4M tweets, uploaded more than 1,000 videos to YouTube, and connected with more than 20M users on Instragram in 2016. Again, this is according to a retired U.S. Army General. It's worth noting that he's been critical of both Trump and Obama in the book. Doesn't sound like he has an axe to grind... just trying to help readers identify modern day "Battlegrouds"
Click to expand...
Lets say all of that is true. You're telling me that Russian bots "reaching" (not sure to what extent reaching means) 126M people and 10.4M tweets was enough to influence an election between a billionaire celebrity and a former first lady with $1 billion war chest?

If that is really what you believe, then why didn't these guys that spent $100 million in these senate races just use social media and save tens of millions instead of pumping the airwaves?
 
#33
#33
Rasputin_Vol said:
Well, most of these governing boards for medical, engineering and surveying ethics are not government related or an outside entity, but are made up collectively of the members of that profession. They decide amongst themselves what the proper ethics and behavior should be.
Click to expand...
They also aren't referenced in the constitution. If someone wants to start a reg board there's absolutely nothing stopping them. Getting the govt involved in what is allowed from the press is a terrible idea
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol, McDad and hog88
#34
#34
Vol_from_86 said:
Yep. If I had more time I'd type out a few pages from the book. Fascinating stuff. One quick statistic from research done on their activies in 2016 - they reached 126M people on FB, posted 10.4M tweets, uploaded more than 1,000 videos to YouTube, and connected with more than 20M users on Instragram in 2016. Again, this is according to a retired U.S. Army General. It's worth noting that he's been critical of both Trump and Obama in the book. Doesn't sound like he has an axe to grind... just trying to help readers identify modern day "Battlegrouds"
Click to expand...
I guess that is a good question... when you say "reached", what does that mean? Is it a pop-up or banner ad? Is it someone just sending out a random tweet or retweeting something that someone else posted? Is it an actual political ad?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#35
#35
utvolpj said:
They also aren't referenced in the constitution. If someone wants to start a reg board there's absolutely nothing stopping them. Getting the govt involved in what is allowed from the press is a terrible idea
Click to expand...
I see what you're saying on that.

I agreed with the sentiment of the OP, but can see the danger in having the govt being a governing body on what is or is not journalism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#36
#36
Vol_from_86 said:
One more. "Of 1,107 videos created by the IRA (Russians) since September 2015, an overwhelming 1,063 of them were related to BLM and police brutality."

They make these videos and get them circulating in our society to divide us against ourselves. They also identify extremist stories on social media and create "click farms" to popularize the message. Facebook, Twitter and "smart" news apps put stories in front of you that generate the most activity (views, likes, and comments). It's a easy system to exploit if your goal is to divide a society.
Click to expand...

Now look, that has more George Soros fingerprints on it than Russian bots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dovervolz
#37
#37
utvolpj said:
It's called research. It's not hard to figure out who is reliable and who pushes crap. Problem is people want their echo chamber full of confirmation. This will not fix that one bit. It will just add more regulation and govt controls
Click to expand...
Maybe gov’t controls are what we need in this instance? Our world changed with the internet. It’s not the same as it was when the constitution was written. I think you and I both know that expecting people to simply “do their research” isn’t a viable solution. We’re going to fool around and allow extremists and foreign enemies drive us into another civil war if we allow this to continue. People have already died and businesses/jobs have been destroyed because of misinformation and conspiracy theories being reported as truth.

Humans are easily deceived. We have been this way since creation. Don’t you think Adam and Eve would’ve like to have know that the serpent wasn’t a “certified” reporter of information?

Or... or maybe the gov’t doesn’t need to be involved. Maybe a group of reputable reporters get together and form their own governing body. Reporters who meet the standard get a cute little watermark to put on their social media profile pic. 🤷🏻‍♂️
 
Last edited by a moderator:
#39
#39
Vol_from_86 said:
Maybe gov’t controls are what we need in this instance?
Click to expand...
Yeah I didn't get any further than this. The answer to the question is never more government. The constitution is fine and addressed the issues

Start your regulatory board today and get people to sign up. Don't encourage the govt to decide what is valid reporting
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol and McDad
#40
#40
There is no market for a news outlet that only reports factual stories. If there were such a market, someone would be serving it and making money. There are huge markets for news outlets that pander to folks personal politics and those markets are well served.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad and hog88
#41
#41
utvolpj said:
Yeah I didn't get any further than this. The answer to the question is never more government. The constitution is fine and addressed the issues

Start your regulatory board today and get people to sign up. Don't encourage the govt to decide what is valid reporting
Click to expand...

I think you’re wrong. Have a nice day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#42
#42
Rasputin_Vol said:
Well, most of these governing boards for medical, engineering and surveying ethics are not government related or an outside entity, but are made up collectively of the members of that profession. They decide amongst themselves what the proper ethics and behavior should be.


As a doctor or an engineer, for example, they have codes and ethics amongst their members that their priority is to serve the public and do what is in the best welfare of the public. A media outlet or reporter intentionally throwing out false info to take advantage of an ignorant public is no different than a doctor or engineer taking advantage of the general public's ignorance of science for their own gain.



No, we have far too many examples of reporters creating stories out of thin air under the protection of "unnamed sources" or "those close to". If there was a self-regulating body of journalistic ethics, they would never allow that to happen.
Click to expand...

You make good points.

Here's the crux of the problem IMO: Who is the ultimate arbitrator of the "Truth"?

Media biggie WaPO says Trump has lied over 20,000 times since taking office. Trump would probably throw the exact same allegation right back at WaPO. Who's right? Who would decide this for a governing body of media outlets which, btw, are by and large liberal bastions to begin with?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bpalmer28
#43
#43
Vol_from_86 said:
Agreed. People don't seems to understand the significance and impact that misinformation is having in America. We're making it too easy for Russians and others against our democracy to divide our society. If people don't think the Russians are involved in sowing misinformation and have been since 2015, read the first chapter of retired U.S. Army General H.R. McMaster's book Battlegrounds. It'll open your eyes.
Click to expand...

I don't think much of individuals who spread misinformation produced by Russian intelligence. They call themselves patriots while betraying our country by serving our enemy.
 
#44
#44
Danl said:
There is no market for a news outlet that only reports factual stories. If there were such a market, someone would be serving it and making money. There are huge markets for news outlets that pander to folks personal politics and those markets are well served.
Click to expand...

I think AP mostly does this. There once was AP and UPI. Now only one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ohhbother
#47
#47
Vol Main said:
I don't think much of individuals who spread misinformation produced by Russian intelligence. They call themselves patriots while betraying our country by serving our enemy.
Click to expand...

Me either. But how do we discern misinformation from what’s real? It’s becoming increasingly difficult to identify B.S.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#50
#50
Vol_from_86 said:
Maybe gov’t controls are what we need in this instance? Our world changed with the internet. It’s not the same as it was when the constitution was written. I think you and I both know that expecting people to simply “do their research” isn’t a viable solution. We’re going to fool around and allow extremists and foreign enemies drive us into another civil war if we allow this to continue. People have already died and businesses/jobs have been destroyed because of misinformation and conspiracy theories being reported as truth.

Humans are easily deceived. We have been this way since creation. Don’t you think Adam and Eve would’ve like to have know that the serpent wasn’t a “certified” reporter of information?

Or... or maybe the gov’t doesn’t need to be involved. Maybe a group of reputable reporters get together and form their own governing body. Reporters who meet the standard get a cute little watermark to put on their social media profile pic. 🤷🏻‍♂️
Click to expand...
Lawyers and reporters are exactly the same. They aren't really interested in truth. They are interested in what gets them paid.

Watching part of the hearings today, I am becoming more and more convinced that we have the most corrupt government on the planet. Trump exposed it all, but unfortunately the media is on the side of those most corrupt. Trump is the ONLY one that doesn't fit the mold and EVERYBODY wanted him gone. It is a pathetic statement. I'm starting to come around to Ras' previous statements about burning it down now and getting it over with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top