• Hey, guys! FreeOnes Tube is up and running - see for yourself!
  • FreeOnes Now Listing Male and Trans Performers! More info here!

14 Propaganda Techniques Fox "News" Uses to Brainwash Americans

Is this why FNC is the most watched cable news network in America?


:dunno:






:rofl2:
 
MSNBC's Ed Schultz: "To Say Something About Food Stamps Is Not About White Folks, It's About Black Folks"

EdSchultzII525.jpg


http://www.talk1200.com/pages/jeffk...-Not-About-White-Folks-It-s-About-Black-Folks

Schultz is not a reporter...he's a commentator like Hannity and O'Reilly.:2 cents:


I agree with your premise, however, other news outlets don't seem to have such a problem with their editing to purposely provoke a reaction

^^^Just more evidence of how big a joke they actually are. They don't even try...(Why should they when you consider their audience?).

Who could seriously take those goofs serious in light of those so called 'gaffes'?
 
how is it that you cannot raise a single critique about one station without people firing off reactionary justifications?


"Hey a new study shows that Big Macs are the leading cause of testicular cancer"

responses...
"Fuck you! Whoppers taste like shit and once raped my daughter!"
"Big Macs are nutritious, this wacko study should examine Wendy's sea salt fries. THOSE are atrocious"
"Lets face it, fast food isn't good for you, but I'm sure all of them give you cancer"


we've turned these ideologies into religions, where we block out all views / facts that would discredit our gods

right to be prayin',
....has lost all its meaning
turn our opinions,
....into religion
we're killing each other...
 
It's largely because of O'Reilly himself. His numbers (ratings) are enormous.

He's a good entertainer....especially if his audience isn't inclined to hold him to a fact or think for themselves....
 

Juliuscaesar

Closed Account
He's a good entertainer....especially if his audience isn't inclined to hold him to a fact or think for themselves....




So his audience doesn't "think for themselves"? In what way do they not "think for themselves"?:rolleyes:
 
MSNBC's Mika: If Rich White Men Don't Contribute More We Will See "Class Warfare"

78323_5_.jpg




http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/blog/id.7360/blog_detail.asp

She's not a reporter either. She's a contributing commentator of former GOPer congressman Joe Scarborough's MSNBC show.

That's interesting....MSNBC actually employs a GOPer with his own show.

Is there the opposite of one of those at Faux (which employs a former Demo in his or her own show)?:rolleyes:

So his audience doesn't "think for themselves"? In what way do they not "think for themselves"?:rolleyes:

Well, I don't have empirical data supporting this 'Doc' but the anecdotal evidence suggests this to be true considering his audience continues to return in droves after some of his misleading stunts and truth debacles in the past.

What would you call it?
 

Juliuscaesar

Closed Account
He tried that with me earlier. It's so ridiculous it's comical.

Apparently O'Reilly viewers not thinking for themselves is not too ridiculous...sheesh... Exactly WHICH post specifically did I try whatever you're talking about with you?? (After you replied to my post to begin with no less...)
 
Apparently O'Reilly viewers not thinking for themselves is not too ridiculous...sheesh... Exactly WHICH post specifically did I try whatever you're talking about with you?? (After you replied to my post to begin with no less...)

http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=5830090&postcount=10

I don't know how many times I can say something, be called a liar and keep dealing with it. Your posts are trollish. To say EVERY viewer is a mindless imbecile is outrageous. You have no proof of this claim.
 
http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=5830090&postcount=10

I don't know how many times I can say something, be called a liar and keep dealing with it. Your posts are trollish. To say EVERY viewer is a mindless imbecile is outrageous. You have no proof of this claim.

:cool: It ain't working...

:dunno: Sounds to me like you bought the scam hook, line, sinker and they're asking for their rod back.

The whole point of their existence and scam to hook so called conservatives (and others) is the silly notion that the so called 'mainstream media" (a phrase conveniently coined by the right in this campaign) is overwhelmingly liberal and biased. Therefore, they are the alternative.

"Mission Accomplished" and you didn't even feel it...:1orglaugh

Nothing in this posts refers to O'Reilly.

PS...If you're going to try a bait someone into what you're attempting to do...it would at least make sense for you not to do this;

"What are you smokin' today, son?"

"likes of a bi-polar-like poster like you"

"Considering all the "reality" rubbish they play on those networks I'm sure Hot Mega eats it all up with a spoon."<<<trolling

Now where exactly did I call you anything, troll your posts, flame you by name etc., etc., etc.,.......???

Nice try...give it a rest. You're going to lose.
 
so, should we surmise that people are okay with folks lying to them, so long as its what they want to hear, correct?

I just want to be sure I understand everyone's position
 
I don't believe 'liberals' have a leg to stand on when they complain about FOX and talk radio, when many of them engage in the same tactics of vitriolic, simplistic rhetoric.

For one thing, Chris Matthews or Chris Wallace ARE NOT liberals. They are political hacks and suck-ups to power. They are insulated with this beltway complacency and have no desire to advance "leftist" (for the people) objectives. If you watch their programs, they have tons of 'right-wing' people on there, gladly advancing their talking points.... "Morning Joe" is in no shape or form "liberal", btw - it doesn't vary much from "FOX and Friends" when it comes to obnoxious, self-righteous talking points.

They're not. Just calling bullshit when we see it.
I'd agree with you if I ever heard one of you just acknowledge that FOX shouldn't engage in manipulating perspectives.

Along with the opening sentence here, so-called "leftist" counter-parts to MSM (Olberman, Colmes, Ed Shultz, etc) are bombastic, unobjective clowns. The main argument against Talk Radio and 'right-wing' pundits isn't WHAT they believe, but how they distort the discourse. If Shultz and Randi Rhodes engage in the same disingenuous tactics, they aren't any better (or serve the public any better) than the same 'machine' they are warring against.

The PROBLEM with mainstream, 24-7 information media is how they distort and form opinions FOR their audience, leaving no time to interpret and understand issues fully. They START with a conclusion, then work backward to find evidence that supports their original thesis.....that isn't 'news' or information, that is propaganda

What is most distressing in this thread isn't that we have people with differing ideologies (I don't agree with Trident on most things, but that isn't a problem) - the problem is that NONE OF US are really raising a concern that NONE OF US are being served by the airwaves we own....for the very purpose of staying informed as citizens. The only thing the airwaves are being used for is to continually advertise and influence us for other people's agendas......
 
so, should we surmise that people are okay with folks lying to them, so long as its what they want to hear, correct?

I just want to be sure I understand everyone's position

:yesyes:vvvv

They (and those they entertain) have invested years creating the living myth that media is overtly biased using anecdotes and isolated incidents to the effect that it becomes their ubiquitous cover in practicing it.

What happens from this? Whenever Faux is caught spinning, ginning or outright misleading...their audience falls back on the criticism of mainstream media...They WANT the debate over 'news' to digress into the your spin versus our spin.

Point being is they (their audience) don't even want Faux in many cases to give them the straight dope...they expect Faux to create a cover or at minimum a spin.
 
Top