Sinclair's Soldiers in Trump's War on Media

It’s more than facebook. It’s CAPITALISM. People have to always preface any criticism of it by saying “there is nothing at all wrong with capitalism, but...” But no, the actual ECONOMIC SYSTEM and the incentives and constraints it exerts on institutions and organizations is responsible for what is happening. It selects for the current types of organizations and outcomes by its very nature. You see, both our news and our social networks are driven by a profit motive and face market competition . Thus they are forced to adapt to changing circumstancss in certain ways: Act 1. Journalism was disrupted by the Internet, and survived by adopting the FOX News model of locking in an audience and being biased, showing one part of the story. MSNBC explicitly did it, while CNN jumped the shark after the Malaysian Airlines flight, realizing it can lock in audience. One sided clickbait outrage articles are the norm. There is some attempt to have journalistic integrity and policy focus at Vox and NowThis, but then you also have MotherJones, OccupyDemocrats, DailyKos and more on the left. You have all kinds of independent podcasts like TYT network, Kyle Kulinski, David Pakman, Majority Report, etc. And similarly for the conservatives, libertarians, etc. We are divided also because giant corporations like Sinclair Television bought up all the local stations and outlets, resulting in this: [VIDEO] No really, watch it. It’s black mirror level, and you can see the capitalism at work here. Top do

The linked source is a Sinclair News outlet. They are probably the worst media conglomerate in America honestly. Their news is constant fear and I view anything by them as poisonous information because it is just as likely meant to mislead as it is to inform. Sure, KOMO publishes some real news. They also publish lies and wildly misleading stuff. [VIDEO] [LINK]

Conjecture, but backed up by the experiences I had with Journalism classes in college, part of my major: Such pieces are typically written by a high-ranking individual within the publication, but they wish to deflect the backlash that can come from writing such a piece, so the "staff" name is used to shield the writer from criticism. It's mostly Must-Run content: Content that a funding source or otherwise powerful position within the organization has deemed must be printed. Must-Run content is commonly used to burn or otherwise redirect vitriol, or more often establish a common message among many publications. Such things are also used to push local news outlets to [tow a line]( [VIDEO] ) by their parent organizations (such as Sinclair Media group) In the case of staff revolting, it's used to shield the individuals. In the case of a single high ranking individual, it's used to shield the individual by forcing the group to take the hit. The practice is common enough it is [regularly a topic of discussion in citation styles]( [LINK] ).

I think that most systems are flawed and, given enough time, will be corrupted and ruined. That has happened with (to my knowledge) every communist nation out there, from USSR to Cuba. Similarly, that has already happened with the capitalist US: corporate interests over those of people, and the interests of the rich over everyone else; at times, it's something like the plot right out of a Deus Ex game: [VIDEO] . Honestly, the same is also probably happening with the more socialist leaning EU, at least based on how many stories about corruption and bribes one hears on the news in my country, not even thinking about the same on a grander scale. I don't really have any solutions to offer or ideologies to push and i'm not sure whether individuals being politically active is (always) even that effective, just look at Russia and how many people there are in prisons, or how polarized everything is in US with identity politics. All i can say for sure is that humans and human nature are the common denominator in every single one of those systems, in which the reality eventually differs from the theory behind them.

It doesn't need to be a secret. If you have a megaphone that everyone hears all the time, you will simply have more influence than people who whisper quietly. 6 companies dominate the media [1] which together make up at least 90% of all media [2]. Note that this isn't limited to just news. [1] [LINK] [2] [LINK] Also, you might find this video either amusing or alarming [VIDEO]

Reminds me of this viral video of different US media outlets saying the exact same thing. It made me think whether the claim that US intelligence agencies placing an insider was true or not. [VIDEO]

It's almost like people no longer trust the mainstream news outlets and its not tough to see why: [VIDEO]

Which democracy? The US is barely democratic. To be truly democratic in my book, the people need to rule. Voting on one of 2 evils every few years while having "your representatives" raped by lobbyists 24/7 is not people ruling: it's a facade for a system in which money rules. Pieces like this merely serve as a pretext for your fake-democracy to get more powers to sensor the, in this case, "social" media. [VIDEO]

> In one small consolation, in both cases Americans had more trust in local news. This trust in "local" news is often misplaced given how many local news outlets - television stations or newspapers - have been subsumed by larger interests. For anyone who hasn't seen it, the Deadspin video of dozens of local news anchors reading the same editorial content handed down by Sinclair Broadcast Group is striking: [VIDEO] [LINK] There is an awful lot of really, really good stuff put out by local newspapers and TV stations but people ought to be thoughtful about their use of any media.

Max Headroom goes mainstream. This tech will save the Murdochs, Sinclairs, every purveyor of infotainment, so much money . No more salaries for anchors. No more huge payouts to settle (sexual) harassment and descrimination lawsuits. Agitprop like this will be automated, turnkey, ubiquitous: Sinclair's Local News Anchors all Read Same Script [VIDEO] So much potential. These are exciting times for trolls and grifters.

How much computing power is required to duplicate current news anchors and feed them a script? The format is already perfected. [VIDEO] [Sinclair Broadcast controversy]

To provide a bit of context, this article is about Timothy Burke. His most famous work is the compilation video of news anchors on Sinclair-owned local news stations reading the same script about how media bias is "extremely dangerous to our democracy".[1] He is also known for breaking the infamous Manti Te'o fake girlfriend story.[2] Additionally, he is noted for having a complicated computing setup to monitor, archive, and disseminate videos from dozens of live sources simultaneously. Some of these details appeared in a profile by the New York Times [3] and also appear in this article. Burke often shares short clips of offbeat moments from sports and news channels. The article states that he has recently shared behind-the-scenes clips of Tucker Carlson on his former Fox show; it appears likely that this raid was related to determining the origin of those clips. [1] [VIDEO] [2] [LINK] [3] [LINK]

The point is his fetish is in the show's content! Although, still, a few exceptions aside doesn't invalidate your point. TV being a single group effort is much better than thousands of individual voices, what could possibly go wrong with that: [VIDEO]

"More alarming, some media companies publish the same fake stories without checking facts first"[1] [1] [VIDEO]

Voting - First-pass-the-post fails mathematically once two majority parties come to power, no third party can win, and if both parties are subverted (into one hidden party with a hidden agenda) democracy then fails. We are seeing a perfect example of this with regards to Harris/Trump. Trump closely aligns with Fascism, Harris policies closely align with Marxism/Communism. You only have a choice between the two, is that even a choice? Protest - Has always relied on the inherent threat of violence and leaders being responsive to the groups involved. It has been shown in the last 20 years that the threat of violence no longer works, and leaders have learned to be no longer responsive at all once they have been elected so long as they don't commit any crimes or scandals that would force removal of them from their positions. Additionally, when protests occur, surveillance of any protest guarantees government retaliation moving forward for all individuals involved. Surveillance is never by itself, there is always government harassment associated with it that are often impossible to prove. Any protester has likely seen the telltale signs of this, and it never ends. (i.e. mail goes missing, both sending and receiving, communications/cell phone calls become unreliable in ways ou can't know a message was sent, internet services may throw weird errors on a continual basis, email/submissions dropped silently (i.e. job applications/resumes, or other high importance items like taxes). Crim

What do you consider "the news" Skimming the Infotainment dopamine sites for fun but not for news. There has never been a news site and probably won't ever be in my opinion. Not newspapers, radio, television, scrawling on cave walls. Everyone has multiple agendas, hidden agendas and some more obvious. Somewhat off topic from your question I enjoy when people make a mashup of all the "news" sites repeating the exact narratives they were given verbatim whilst playing circus music. Example [1] [1] - [VIDEO] [video][2 mins][warning: does not contain circus music]

I'm not sure you can trust local news stations, either, especially when they're all owned by the same company. For example, [VIDEO]

Your "local" news is regularly contractually obligrated to run segments written by a right wing company: [VIDEO] "This is dangerous to democracy"

a sincere question; how is >A "review website" which is all that, but with fake reviews that promote one brand over the others… a chain of such websites that link to each other to boost PageRank scores… which are then cross-linked with a huge number of social media bots…" functionally different than a majority of news outlets in the US parroting the exact same story, verbatim? This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. [VIDEO] * please note, i am glibly linking that youtube video as a completely transparent example of what i am talking about. There are many (many) more examples. don't read into the content of the video so much, and just think about the implications.

First off, Trump skyrocketed to political fame with his nonsense claims about Obama's citizenship. The slide started in the 80's when Reagan killed off the 'fairness doctrine' which meant news outlets could present completely one-sided coverage of an issue. Couple that with massive consolidation of newspapers and TV news stations where all the programming is heavily coordinated and groups like Sinclair started pushing identically worded "false news" narratives across all their stations: [VIDEO]