Did you know there was a huge demonstration on Wall Street?

[helgaleena]

Blackout: CNN, Fox, and MSNBC Ignore Thousands Of US Day Of Rage Protesters

Just as much of the protesting in Wisconsin didn't get media coverage, so also is the
'Day of Rage' being obfuscated. Corporations are not people and need to have less freedom than people, and also it would be nice if they operated for the benefit of people instead of the corporations, at least part of the time.

Oh, also it is still in progress.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/09/wall-st-protesters-say-theyre-settled-in/

 

[EagleCowboy]

Yep. Been following it since I can't go. This has been planned for some time now. Funny how the media blackout is over a PEACEFUL AND LAWFUL demonstration. AND MSNBC purposely uses the word "invasion" to make the whole thing sound sinister and illegal, but there's just one small problem with that. It's PUBLIC property. HOW can a US citizen invade property that you, me, everyone owns?? We're talking the SIDEWALKS here!! How can one invade the sidewalks??

For those of you who are convinced that censorship doesn't exist in America--
see how well it's working!!
The government has been caught with BOTH hands in the cookie jar!! Again.

The government doesn't want you to know. What else are they holding back from you that you need to know? What are you gonna do about it??

 

[Calboner]

For those of you who are convinced that censorship doesn't exist in America--
see how well it's working!!

The government doesn't want you to know. What else are they holding back from you that you need to know?

How is the neglect of a story by the news media "censorship"?

Do you seriously believe that news companies neglect a story because "the government doesn't want you to know" about it? You think that the major newspapers and news broadcasting companies take their orders from "the government"?

They neglect a story when they judge that they can't make money out of it. Simple as that. No censorship, no government control needed.

 

[B_nyvin]

Do you seriously believe that news companies neglect a story because "the government doesn't want you to know" about it? You think that the major newspapers and news broadcasting companies take their orders from "the government"?

Well there are 4 large corporations that own pretty much all mainstream media in the US, so it's reasonable to believe that certain censorship does take place.

Although the "day of rage" is being covered by media, just not really on a national level quite yet.

 

[Zayne]

It is also possible that this event has been staged by the GOP to discredit the current administration's handling of the economy.

 

[vince]

It's on Al Jazeera.

 

[helgaleena]

Calboner, censorship does not have to be government-sponsored. In this case it's corporate-sponsored. Other times it's religion-sponsored. But yes, it's getting censored like whoah.

 

[Calboner]

Calboner, censorship does not have to be government-sponsored. In this case it's corporate-sponsored. Other times it's religion-sponsored. But yes, it's getting censored like whoah.

Explain to me whose expression is being censored. Whose attempt to report this event was thwarted? Whose utterances were silenced?

The fact that some people don't get the publicity that they want does not constitute censorship.

 

[erratic]

I would like to say it better than this guy, but I can't.

Big money controls media. Big money controls government. This is true of just about every country in the world. When big money and democracy butt heads, democracy loses just about every time. There doesn't need to be any X Files-ish conspiracy. It's just a bunch of rich oligarchs making sure they get what they want, and media coverage of people protesting the over-representation of rich American media-conglomerate-owning oligarchs in American politics is definitely not what they want.

 

[D_Steve_Sphincter]

Explain to me whose expression is being censored. Whose attempt to report this event was thwarted? Whose utterances were silenced?

The fact that some people don't get the publicity that they want does not constitute censorship.

Exactly! US Day of Rage simply wasn't that successful. The people involved didn't make the splash they wanted to. They should just deal with it instead of spinning up ludicrous conspiracy theories about a 'media blackout'.

 

[Klingsor]

I would like to say it better than this guy, but I can't.

Big money controls media. Big money controls government. This is true of just about every country in the world. When big money and democracy butt heads, democracy loses just about every time. There doesn't need to be any X Files-ish conspiracy. It's just a bunch of rich oligarchs making sure they get what they want, and media coverage of people protesting the over-representation of rich American media-conglomerate-owning oligarchs in American politics is definitely not what they want.

If they're that much in control, I'm not sure they're all that concerned about some piss-ant demonstration. It's not like the "over-representation of rich American media-conglomerate-owning oligarchs in American politics" is some big secret they're trying to keep hushed up. You hear about it all the time. People complain about it all the time. Sometimes, they even protest against it.

But on the whole, it doesn't change anything. And the oligarchs know it. So why should they worry?

 

[eurotop40]

Having lived for a while in NYC I realize that the US is not so free and not so informed as its people feel. Being isolated has some advantages and some disadvantages. So any type of information is filtered and very little is known about the world that does not please the media.

 

[helgaleena]

Having lived for a while in NYC I realize that the US is not so free and not so informed as its people feel. Being isolated has some advantages and some disadvantages. So any type of information is filtered and very little is known about the world that does not please the media.

I have to agree, from my own experience with media inside and outside the USA.
How apropos on Talk Like a Pirate Day.

 

[spoon]

I would like to say it better than this guy, but I can't.

Big money controls media. Big money controls government. This is true of just about every country in the world. When big money and democracy butt heads, democracy loses just about every time. There doesn't need to be any X Files-ish conspiracy. It's just a bunch of rich oligarchs making sure they get what they want, and media coverage of people protesting the over-representation of rich American media-conglomerate-owning oligarchs in American politics is definitely not what they want.

i've always loved george carlin.

 

[D_Rod Staffinbone]

Explain to me whose expression is being censored. Whose attempt to report this event was thwarted? Whose utterances were silenced?

The fact that some people don't get the publicity that they want does not constitute censorship.

are you really serious?


every non-newsworthy rant by a tea partier who "won't be attending"
an obama speech to congress is front page news, every antic of charlie
sheen or lindsey lohan distracts the mindless idiots that consume
the garbage the media spews forth. "censorship" is not required when
there is enough drivel out there to keep people entertained long enough
to take their eye off the ball.

 

[Calboner]

are you really serious?


every non-newsworthy rant by a tea partier who "won't be attending"
an obama speech to congress is front page news, every antic of charlie
sheen or lindsey lohan distracts the mindless idiots that consume
the garbage the media spews forth. "censorship" is not required when
there is enough drivel out there to keep people entertained long enough
to take their eye off the ball.

You have not answered any of my questions or rebutted any of my arguments, nor has anyone else.

 

[dude_007]

How is the belief that the news is being censored any more ridiculous than Obama wants a socialist America?

 

[D_Rod Staffinbone]

You have not answered any of my questions or rebutted any of my arguments, nor has anyone else.

this from wikipedia, and no, i did not submit the entry (but then, i suspect, you aren't one to trust any sources of information other than mainstream sources, which tell you not to trust non-mainstream sources, such as wikipedia)

"Political censorship exists when a government attempts to conceal, distort, or falsify information that its citizens receive by suppressing or crowding out political news that the public might receive through news outlets. In the absence of unflattering but objective information, people will be unable to dissent with the government or political party in charge. It is also the suppression of views that are contrary to those of the government in power. The government often has the power of the army and the secret police, to enforce the compliance of journalists with the will of the government to extol the story that the government wants people to believe, at times even with bribery, ruin of careers, imprisonment, and even assassination.
The word censorship comes from the Latin word censor, the job of two Romans whose duty was to supervise public behaviour and morals, hence 'censoring' the way people acted."

most experts agree that "suppression" of newsworthy events does constitute censorship. for instance china's lack of coverage of tiananmen square to it's citizens in 1989, and israel's slanted or blacked out coverage to israelis of the ongoing israeli-palestinian conflict. you think those examples are different than not covering the wall street protests? think again.


we only know what they tell us.

 

[Calboner]

this from wikipedia, and no, i did not submit the entry (but then, i suspect, you aren't one to trust any sources of information other than mainstream sources, which tell you not to trust non-mainstream sources, such as wikipedia)

"Political censorship exists when a government attempts to conceal, distort, or falsify information that its citizens receive by suppressing or crowding out political news that the public might receive through news outlets. In the absence of unflattering but objective information, people will be unable to dissent with the government or political party in charge. It is also the suppression of views that are contrary to those of the government in power. The government often has the power of the army and the secret police, to enforce the compliance of journalists with the will of the government to extol the story that the government wants people to believe, at times even with bribery, ruin of careers, imprisonment, and even assassination.
The word censorship comes from the Latin word censor, the job of two Romans whose duty was to supervise public behaviour and morals, hence 'censoring' the way people acted."

most experts agree that "suppression" of newsworthy events does constitute censorship. for instance china's lack of coverage of tiananmen square to it's citizens in 1989, and israel's slanted or blacked out coverage to israelis of the ongoing israeli-palestinian conflict. you think those examples are different than not covering the wall street protests? think again.


we only know what they tell us.

Nobody has yet given the slightest reason to believe that the government bears the slightest responsibility for the supposed neglect of this story (which, by the way, I have lately noticed being reported all over the place).

All that anyone has shown to have occurred is that a political demonstration has not attracted the news coverage that some deem it to deserve. To call that "censorship" is hysterical claptrap. Those who insist on applying that word to this occurrence are not only contributing to the supply of bullshit, obscurantism, confusion, and intellectual dishonesty in the world; they are also bringing discredit upon their own political position. Any political claim that has any merit whatever can be made in truthful language. If you can't do without misrepresentation, your claim is worthless.

 

[dandelion]

i expect the news services found out about it by reading it here on lpsg