the_bloke Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Could you give a specific example of a recent mainstream media lie, so I know in what context you're talking about it? Link, copy and paste will do. Depends what you consider a lie doesn't it; a) conjecture of something that is yet to happen, then doesn't happen b) drawing a conclusion based on little facts, which is then proved wrong c) blatantly stating fact A when it is actually fact B, and A is a falsehood a) Is very common, but one would hope the reader can determine the desires of the journalist is not a fact. e.g. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10120746/Why-Ed-Miliband-is-going-to-be-the-next-Prime-Minister.html b) Is the sort of thing that can happen when breaking news happens, and facts are few and far between but some sort of journalistic input needs to happen in order to fill in the gaps until more information is available. Look at the Paris attacks for example. A Syrian passport was found on the body of one of attackers, which led to all sorts of speculation about the origin of the attacker. For a while, the idea that one of the attackers was a recent refugee was being given as facts and was causing political waves. It was later discovered that the passport was a fake. c) This, in my opinion, is the only true form of lying in the press. This is the sort of thing that requires newspapers to print apologies or lands them in court on libel charges. Example: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/dec/08/sun-apologises-over-misleading-six-days-to-terror-story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apelike Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 I think, in the UK, that while we should take the threat extremely seriously it is important to have a sense of perspective. We invest massive sums of cash in surveillance and we know MI5 do a great job breaking up planned attacks. We have a low number of successful attacks. No we don't know that, all we know is what we are told and that sometimes its far from the truth. Just like the security information that was banded about before the Iraq war most of it could be utter tripe and we would not know until someone blows the whistle. Just because we have a low number of successful attacks does not mean that its because the security services have stopped others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solomon1 Posted December 21, 2015 Author Share Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) Just because we have a low number of successful attacks does not mean that its because the security services have stopped others Indeed It might simply be That the risk of attack is low Edited December 21, 2015 by Solomon1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 No we don't know that, all we know is what we are told and that sometimes its far from the truth. Just like the security information that was banded about before the Iraq war most of it could be utter tripe and we would not know until someone blows the whistle. Just because we have a low number of successful attacks does not mean that its because the security services have stopped others. Well the evidence is the attacks have not happened. Either they are being prevented, or as you say they are not being planned anyway. Either way what is the risk to you or me? One in several tens of millions or even less each year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quik Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Well the evidence is the attacks have not happened. Either they are being prevented, or as you say they are not being planned anyway. Either way what is the risk to you or me? One in several tens of millions or even less each year? The odds of me being a victim of FGM or domestic violence are zero, it doesn't make it the case that they should not be tackled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 The odds of me being a victim of FGM or domestic violence are zero, it doesn't make it the case that they should not be tackled. I'm not saying they shouldn't be tackled. Nobody would argue that we shouldn't gather intelligence and then act appropriately. The response should be proportionate to the risk. That includes the response from security services and police. As far as I can see they are doing a good job of protecting us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apelike Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Well the evidence is the attacks have not happened. Either they are being prevented, or as you say they are not being planned anyway. Either way what is the risk to you or me? The risk is, that as individuals we lose the freedoms that WII soldiers allegedly fought and died for. We saw how quickly anti-terrorist laws were ushered in after the Iraq war and how easily those laws once in place were abused and still are. Just the threat of terrorism means that government can pass laws that would not have been allowed before. The truth is governments are frightened of their own people and the freedoms they have and the terrorist "tag" helps them curtail that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagel Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Evenin All It has recently come to my attention That there is a LOT of bull crap out there being pedalled by the media In order to whip a frenzy of fear So that our government has free reign to commit atrocities With public consent..... Just FYI "Most of the terrorist activity in the US in recent years has come not from Muslims, but from radical Christianists, white supremacists and far-right militia groups" http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/10-worst-terror-attacks-extreme-christians-and-far-right-white-men So just bear this in mind people - do your own research! And use alternative media from the mainstream. Love As Always Sol WAKE UP SHEEPLE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apelike Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 As far as I can see they are doing a good job of protecting us. Smoke and mirrors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) http://www.mediaite.com/tv/fox-formally-apologizes-for-claiming-muslims-have-taken-over-european-cities/ Another interesting article here: http://www.islamophobiawatch.co.uk/yasmin-qureshi-mp-media-publishing-complete-lies-about-muslims/ I was thinking more along the lines of domestic media. Do you have any specific examples of a lie being told in UK news? (Fox News is a given, it's worrying that they're allowed to broadcast some of the stuff they do, but most people in the UK don't watch Fox News). With regards to your links, the first is fairly old news now, the second one is simply somebody claiming that the media is lying about Muslims, there's no examples given. Edited December 21, 2015 by RootsBooster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now