Author Topic: Trump Will Have Blood On His Hands  (Read 1998 times)

Parsad

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8284
Re: Trump Will Have Blood On His Hands
« Reply #10 on: August 05, 2018, 12:49:22 AM »
Trump already has a lot of blood on his hands, only it is in the Middle East, the same places where Obama got his hands covered, so no one really cares.

I don't dispute that and fully agree.  But irrelevant to the onslaught against the press in the U.S.  Cheers!
No man is a failure who has friends!


cobafdek

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 427
Re: Trump Will Have Blood On His Hands
« Reply #11 on: August 05, 2018, 09:03:10 AM »
> While it's possible that the next nutjob shooter could be a left-wing crazy, the likelihood from the shootings we've witnessed over the last year and a half support the hypothesis that the next tragedy is most likely going to be a journalist or news office.

You could probably reduce school shootings and terrorist incidents in half if journalists made a concerted effort to vastly reduce their coverage and avoid naming perpetrators. And if people just stopped discussing it. The Columbine shooters originally wanted to kill 600 people with bombs and the whole reason was so that people would never forget them. They killed far fewer people but nevertheless we all helped them achieve their goal of not being forgotten.

The rise of terrorism and school shootings is purely a media driven phenomenon. You want to stop it...stop talking about it, stop blaming people and stop giving the issue attention it really doesn't deserve. In this case the best solution is to just ignore the problem.

Yeah, that's the answer for shootings and everything else!  Apathy never led to progress.  Cheers!

Your cognitive dissonance is showing yet again!  It's your impersonation of Cathy Newman to rukawa's Jordan Peterson!

You are literally hallucinating the word "apathy" which is nowhere implied in order to win a debate rukawa wasn't participating in.

People act based on what is on their minds.  What's on their minds is what they pay attention to.  The media (TV/cable news and video games) condition the minds of people by commanding their attention.  When school-shooters become media stars by wall-to-wall coverage, that primes the minds of some vulnerable teen student.  The media have at least as large a responsibility for societal violence as the non-enforcement of gun control laws.  The media had huge responsibility in the shooting of Congressman Scalise, and they have yet to own up to it.  They have enormous responsibility in the physical violence against Trump supporters.  (Why do you think many, perhaps most, Trump supporters are secret supporters and stay under the radar?)

Media coverage of everything, not just violence, is excessive, but it won't stop because their business model and profitability depend on sensationalism, gratuitous Trump-bashing, etc.  They are now doing their utmost to brainwash susceptible people into blaming Trump for any backlash, violent or otherwise, against the press.  They are exploiting "freedom of the press" in the name of their own biases and profits.

I don't know what the solution is regarding media reporting, but at least for school shootings, perhaps the MSM could agree to stop all video reporting (and limit reporting to print and audio only) of the school scene and stop reporting the name and picture of the shooter.


« Last Edit: August 05, 2018, 09:07:07 AM by cobafdek »

Parsad

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8284
Re: Trump Will Have Blood On His Hands
« Reply #12 on: August 05, 2018, 12:00:34 PM »
> While it's possible that the next nutjob shooter could be a left-wing crazy, the likelihood from the shootings we've witnessed over the last year and a half support the hypothesis that the next tragedy is most likely going to be a journalist or news office.

You could probably reduce school shootings and terrorist incidents in half if journalists made a concerted effort to vastly reduce their coverage and avoid naming perpetrators. And if people just stopped discussing it. The Columbine shooters originally wanted to kill 600 people with bombs and the whole reason was so that people would never forget them. They killed far fewer people but nevertheless we all helped them achieve their goal of not being forgotten.

The rise of terrorism and school shootings is purely a media driven phenomenon. You want to stop it...stop talking about it, stop blaming people and stop giving the issue attention it really doesn't deserve. In this case the best solution is to just ignore the problem.

Yeah, that's the answer for shootings and everything else!  Apathy never led to progress.  Cheers!

Your cognitive dissonance is showing yet again!  It's your impersonation of Cathy Newman to rukawa's Jordan Peterson!

You are literally hallucinating the word "apathy" which is nowhere implied in order to win a debate rukawa wasn't participating in.

People act based on what is on their minds.  What's on their minds is what they pay attention to.  The media (TV/cable news and video games) condition the minds of people by commanding their attention.  When school-shooters become media stars by wall-to-wall coverage, that primes the minds of some vulnerable teen student.  The media have at least as large a responsibility for societal violence as the non-enforcement of gun control laws.  The media had huge responsibility in the shooting of Congressman Scalise, and they have yet to own up to it.  They have enormous responsibility in the physical violence against Trump supporters.  (Why do you think many, perhaps most, Trump supporters are secret supporters and stay under the radar?)

Media coverage of everything, not just violence, is excessive, but it won't stop because their business model and profitability depend on sensationalism, gratuitous Trump-bashing, etc.  They are now doing their utmost to brainwash susceptible people into blaming Trump for any backlash, violent or otherwise, against the press.  They are exploiting "freedom of the press" in the name of their own biases and profits.

I don't know what the solution is regarding media reporting, but at least for school shootings, perhaps the MSM could agree to stop all video reporting (and limit reporting to print and audio only) of the school scene and stop reporting the name and picture of the shooter.

Do you even know what cognitive dissonance means, or do you like just throwing it around? 

People act based on what is on their minds.  What's on their minds is what they pay attention to.  The media (TV/cable news and video games) condition the minds of people by commanding their attention.  When school-shooters become media stars by wall-to-wall coverage, that primes the minds of some vulnerable teen student.  The media have at least as large a responsibility for societal violence as the non-enforcement of gun control laws.  The media had huge responsibility in the shooting of Congressman Scalise, and they have yet to own up to it.  They have enormous responsibility in the physical violence against Trump supporters.  (Why do you think many, perhaps most, Trump supporters are secret supporters and stay under the radar?)


Well, you've argued on behalf of my point without even realizing it.

Which do you think had a bigger impact on the Scalise shooting?  Gun laws, liberal agenda or the media.  Which do you think had a bigger impact on the Giffords shooting?  Gun laws, conservative agenda or the media.  I would imagine that the responsibility falls in that order for both shootings. 

That's all my point was implying...that the current rhetoric is going to push some nutjob into taking out a press room or something similar.  And presently, it's coming out of the White House!

And when it comes to the question of what would be the most productive and easiest ways to diminish that risk...well control guns and turn down the rhetoric from whichever side, including the White House.  In this age of digital media, and don't forget the 1st Amendment, do you think it would be possible at all to have the media not report the news...whether it's a shooting or anything else?

Cheers!
No man is a failure who has friends!

Cigarbutt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1282
Re: Trump Will Have Blood On His Hands
« Reply #13 on: August 05, 2018, 05:18:32 PM »
Not intelligent enough here to take the topic in one bite and just want to add some thoughts on the role of the media.

Media want to make money and the populace (or the more instinctive (primitive?) part in all of us) wants to see blood.

In the related suicide contagion effect (ie facilitating or triggering effect of the media on further occurrences, so called Werther effect), there has been convincing evidence that media do have an effect (negative) and change of media reporting can make a significant difference (positive). If interested, look for the Austria study of metro suicide rates and others.

In many places (including my own metropolitan area), through discussions and policy actions, changes have been made to codes of ethics and reporting guidelines.

For mass shootings, similar principles apply whereby often the reports are sensational, include extensive video coverage, romanticize the event and even contribute to idolization of the deranged individual(s). I think that media can do better on this front.

The challenge now though is social media, which I submit, makes it even more important for traditional media to focus on balanced and good quality reporting. For social forums, I guess we'll have to rely on each other to make sure that fake news are just that. :)
« Last Edit: August 05, 2018, 05:21:04 PM by Cigarbutt »

MarkS

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 391
Re: Trump Will Have Blood On His Hands
« Reply #14 on: August 09, 2018, 04:52:49 PM »
According to polls only about 6% of the America public trust the media - slightly above Congress at 4%.  https://
www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trust-in-media_us_57148543e4b06f35cb6fec58
If you click on one of the embedded links, you will see that trust in media has been declining for some time now - long before Trump.  The left accuses Trump of creating the widespread mistrust of the media.  I would submit that the lack of trust in various institutions created the opportunity that Trump seized. 

See also the Edelman Trust Barometer from which the below quote is taken:  https://www.edelman.com/news-awards/2018-edelman-trust-barometer-reveals-record-breaking-drop-trust-in-the-us

"For the first time media is the least trusted institution globally. In 22 of the 28 markets surveyed it is now distrusted. The demise of confidence in the Fourth Estate is driven primarily by a significant drop in trust in platforms, notably search engines and social media. Sixty-three percent of respondents say they do not know how to tell good journalism from rumor or falsehoods or if a piece of news was produced by a respected media organization. The lack of faith in media has also led to an inability to identify the truth (59 percent), trust government leaders (56 percent) and trust business (42 percent)."