ewsieg Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 People have bashed the media in this country before we were our own country. That said, the media has not been great the last 20 years and there are a multitude of reasons for that (Internet, the need to be the first to report, proliferation of media sources that cater to one side, loss of local journalist, etc). I feel like Chuck and Pfife are responding less on what i'm trying to say, and more on what they infer my likely "MAGA" thoughts they perceive I have. I'm just saying it's a concern. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 1 hour ago, ewsieg said: People have bashed the media in this country before we were our own country. That said, the media has not been great the last 20 years and there are a multitude of reasons for that (Internet, the need to be the first to report, proliferation of media sources that cater to one side, loss of local journalist, etc). I feel like Chuck and Pfife are responding less on what i'm trying to say, and more on what they infer my likely "MAGA" thoughts they perceive I have. I'm just saying it's a concern. Lol at you claiming you bashing the media is an inference. And also doing it while inferring about me and Chas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ronz Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 15 hours ago, oblong said: I will claim right now to have done more reading on the JFK assassination than anyone here but even I cannot grasp at the impact of it because to me he was always the guy who got shot. What?!?!?! 😉 😁 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 16 hours ago, oblong said: I think that the sentiment is in that ballpark. 9/11 to now is like the Iranian Hostage crisis was in 2011. Younger people would be more familiar with the aftermath of the invasion and response to 9/11, all 20 years of it, than the event itself. And for people like my son who is 23 9/11 has always been there. In that situation you can’t fullly appreciate the shock of it. I will claim right now to have done more reading on the JFK assassination than anyone here but even I cannot grasp at the impact of it because to me he was always the guy who got shot. That was the first thing I learned about him. I didn’t know him as the candidate and living and breathing leader giving press conferences who suddenly was gone. the shock of the US being attacked on our soil go that degree is not there for people who lived in a world where that event always existed. In my lifetime I think the JFK assassination and the Vietnam War had the biggest impact on the national psyche. And maybe JFK the most. Before Dallas there was a kind of confidence/optimism the we were in control of events - of the future. That ended that day and we've never gotten it back to anywhere near the level it was in that era. Then Vietnam shattered the last illusions that good intentions were all you needed to get good results. Maybe I'm an exception - but I didn't feel the same kind of psychic shift after 9/11. There were a lot of changes made in our lives after it - so there was huge practical impact - but I've never felt the US was particularly a different place psychologically after 9/11 beyond that it was a place living with a lot more security measures. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewsieg Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 9 hours ago, pfife said: Lol at you claiming you bashing the media is an inference. And also doing it while inferring about me and Chas. I'm not sure what you're saying with the first part. Are you saying people don't bash the media, or at least didn't in the past and it's only the last 30 years of the GOP bashing media? As for the second part, I simply posted something that showed something that I think is concerning, that young people are turning to influencers to get their news off of a platform owned by China. I honestly thought that concern wouldn't be based on political lines. Chuck called out the poll, but before I could even respond it expanded to some Heartland poll which I had to look up to see it's being used to indicate the 2020 election had voter fraud. I wasn't trying to even discuss that. Rather you felt I inferred something about you and Chuck, I simply said I felt like you saw something I posted and immediately went into 'response' mode. Oblong made several good posts, one of which would give credence why you might see numbers like the poll in the article I posted, yet those were allowed to flow through. Guess I will only infer why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smr-nj Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 5 hours ago, gehringer_2 said: In my lifetime I think the JFK assassination and the Vietnam War had the biggest impact on the national psyche. And maybe JFK the most. Before Dallas there was a kind of confidence/optimism the we were in control of events - of the future. That ended that day and we've never gotten it back to anywhere near the level it was in that era. Then Vietnam shattered the last illusions that good intentions were all you needed to get good results. Maybe I'm an exception - but I didn't feel the same kind of psychic shift after 9/11. There were a lot of changes made in our lives after it - so there was huge practical impact - but I've never felt the US was particularly a different place psychologically after 9/11 beyond that it was a place living with a lot more security measures. While I mostly agree with the beginning of your answer, (i.e. JFK, Viet Nam eras), maybe because I am in close physical proximity to the 9/11 NYC attacks that day, and for awhile bunch of days/months going forward… including memorials for people, in towns that I lived in that died in the attacks, or at jobs in the city, that when I was commuting more than a few of these people were on the trains that ran from the northern part of Jersey and into Hoboken, and then eventually into the World Trade Center* (* For transparency sake, the train I took was from North Jersey into Hoboken; I then switched to the PATH train that went to 23rd St., as opposed to the PATH train that went through to the World Trade Center). It therefore did have a pretty huge psychological impact on me. The practical impact - less so…. But both enduring. 22 years later, and I still have a preference for getting into the west side of lower Manhattan by the George Washington Bridge going down the W. Side Highway as opposed to going further on the east side in New Jersey and taking the Lincoln tunnel into Manhattan. And why ? because I absolutely hate that ride’s Manhattan view once the towers were down and the ground is still smoldering. I went down to Jersey City to deliver some supplies for all the emergency workers who are working down there and crossing over the Hudson every day you bring them bags and bags of shampoo and soaps and toothbrushes and towels, and socks and gloves and eyedrops, anything you can think of. I needed to drop them off and you just look up at that skyline. It would weaken my knees and make me want to pass out in the beginning. Now, of course, everything is rebuilt over there, but I still hate that ride and will prefer to start way uptown in Jersey and take the George Washington to hit Matt Manhattan . I don’t know that I’ll ever change that. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 our issues post 9/11 became so much bigger. I recall a few days before Bush went on TV to defend a policy about embryonic stem cell research. It was a’ national nighttime address to the nation. That seems like such small potatoes now. Wouldn’t even register with most people today. Hindsight for sure but the 90s were fun and they ended on that day. How much of an impact did spending on the wars have on our economy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 (edited) 1 hour ago, oblong said: our issues post 9/11 became so much bigger. I recall a few days before Bush went on TV to defend a policy about embryonic stem cell research. It was a’ national nighttime address to the nation. That seems like such small potatoes now. Wouldn’t even register with most people today. Hindsight for sure but the 90s were fun and they ended on that day. How much of an impact did spending on the wars have on our economy? In 2000 US military spending had fallen to 3% of GDP and it probably wasn't going to stay there anyway. By 2009 it was up to 5% but fell back to 4% under Obama which is probably about the rough equilibrium value though we are again a bit below it. So maybe 1% of GDP for 3-4 yrs tops - which is close to the 1 trillion rough number you often hear quoted. In retrospect it *might* yet turn out to have some lasting + impact in Iraq, hard to see any at all in Afghanistan and I wouldn't venture a guess at how the costs divided between the two. Unless Trump gets re-elected I would guess we will end up spending as much for Ukraine in the end- that's a war which is burning through material in a way Iraq and Afghanistan didn't. I don't think we increased the size of the armed forces in any big way under Bush and given the asymmetry of the opponent we didn't build out any expensive new weapons systems expressly for those conflicts. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS?locations=US Edited January 3 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 9 hours ago, ewsieg said: I'm not sure what you're saying with the first part. Are you saying people don't bash the media, or at least didn't in the past and it's only the last 30 years of the GOP bashing media? As for the second part, I simply posted something that showed something that I think is concerning, that young people are turning to influencers to get their news off of a platform owned by China. I honestly thought that concern wouldn't be based on political lines. Chuck called out the poll, but before I could even respond it expanded to some Heartland poll which I had to look up to see it's being used to indicate the 2020 election had voter fraud. I wasn't trying to even discuss that. Rather you felt I inferred something about you and Chuck, I simply said I felt like you saw something I posted and immediately went into 'response' mode. Oblong made several good posts, one of which would give credence why you might see numbers like the poll in the article I posted, yet those were allowed to flow through. Guess I will only infer why. I'll let you decide if you want other people to trust the folks you've bashed for years on this forum. It's definitely a you question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 (edited) 23 hours ago, ewsieg said: I don't always dig for the full source on an article/poll unless there is a dispute about it. As for Heartland, I'm still not sure what that is unless they are a part of this JL Partners polling group. JL Partners seems to me like the kind of outfit that would simply make things up, or at least cook the books, to reach the conclusion they and their constituents want to put across. Releasing poll results without internals does nothing to dissuade from that idea. Citing that as proof of concept makes it seem like anything after that is coming out of your ear. Eric. Edited January 3 by chasfh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewsieg Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 32 minutes ago, chasfh said: JL Partners seems to me like the kind of outfit that would simply make things up, or at least cook the books, to reach the conclusion they and their constituents want to put across. Releasing poll results without internals does nothing to dissuade from that idea. Citing that as proof of concept makes it seem like anything after that is coming out of your ear. Eric. I have no clue how legitimate JL Partners is so I'm not going to say the poll is worthless. Even from legitimate polling groups I tend to hang an asterisk on their findings if i'm reading it in an article. My 1-2 minute search for published results netted nothing, not sure if that was because they never published it or simply because they are such a small org. Regardless, I read news articles daily from sources I would assume even Pfife would approve off as legitimate sources that cite poll numbers and the poll provider, but not always linking directly back to them. Granted, often they are from major polling organizations where you can easily find that poll if you want to dig into it. To try and redirect to what I hoped to do by posting this article, do you think there is any concern in our young people getting their news from influencers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 It's not new, nor is it specific to young people. Many old people get their news from fox news influencers and many gen x get their news from influencers like Joe Rogan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 old people get their news from facebook memes and chain emails from outfits like freedom patriotz for jeezus dot net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 (edited) 21 minutes ago, pfife said: It's not new, nor is it specific to young people. Many old people get their news from fox news influencers and many gen x get their news from influencers like Joe Rogan True. It would be hard to make a serious journalistic argument that TikTok is any less valuable as a news source than most AM radio or cable 'news' programming. It would be hard to top the basic ignorance of most of what they are talking about of 90% of the talking heads in US media. The imperative to cover everything practically before it even happens leads to a kind of complete 'know-nothing' level of reporting anyway. It might as well be a teenager with an iphone. An example struck me this AM when the SO has a network news report going about the Earthquakes in Japan and there was a very breathless report about the potential for a 4ft Tsunami. So yes - this could possibly be a fairly damaging event or a total nothing burger depending on the whether it's happening at low or high tide. But a know-nothing blow-dried on scene reporter doesn't have even enough basic knowledge of the ocean or time to have checked out that very basic fact that would have actually informed what he was talking about. Almost none-of it is worth listening to. Edited January 3 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 To expand on this as it's something I was thinking about last night.... there are far more ignorant people out there than I realized. That's what social media has taught us. I belong to a lot space related facebook groups and a big challenge they face are deniers. When you snoop around you'd be shocked how many people think the moon landings were fake. They still exist. Given the # of people that worked on Apollo (400,000 when you count contractors), faking the moon landing would be a bigger achievement than the landing. There's people who think the earth is flat. I've seen the pages where it's discussed. These idiots become influencers and with the fancy lighting and microphones and backdrops they appear more legitimate than before and gullible people are more prone to believe them. After all there they are with a fancy background and graphics... looks just like CNN or MSNBC doesn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gilmore Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 Pogo had it right. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smr-nj Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 3 hours ago, Dan Gilmore said: Pogo had it right. Soooooo true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 When your defense is a pivot to whataboutism with Hamas.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motor City Sonics Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 And Jimmy Kimmel is not on the list. For those of you just tuning in, the Jimmy Kimmel/Aaron Rodgers feud was raised to a new level with Rodgers claiming Jimmy Kimmel would be on the Epstein list. He has since apologized. I think Kimmel should sue him for $1 billion dollars for such a horrible accusation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 8 minutes ago, Motor City Sonics said: And Jimmy Kimmel is not on the list. For those of you just tuning in, the Jimmy Kimmel/Aaron Rodgers feud was raised to a new level with Rodgers claiming Jimmy Kimmel would be on the Epstein list. He has since apologized. I think Kimmel should sue him for $1 billion dollars for such a horrible accusation. at a minimum, Rogers needs to pay a price in shame for that sort of crap. He's already skated through life with BS facemask calls and untimed downs against the Lions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 and what's shameful about that list is we are talking about rape. Rape of young girls. By high powered men. Systematic. They turn it into cheap punchlines. Someone on twitter pointed out that in spite of what we know, the only person in jail is a woman. Granted, she deserves every punishment possible given to her and probably more. That NPA agreement signed in 2007 by Acosta on behalf of the US government needs to be dealt with and investigated. But who investigates? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 this goes along with the earlier discussion about young people and beliefs based on the internet. It's not real but could be. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edman85 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 1 hour ago, Motor City Sonics said: And Jimmy Kimmel is not on the list. For those of you just tuning in, the Jimmy Kimmel/Aaron Rodgers feud was raised to a new level with Rodgers claiming Jimmy Kimmel would be on the Epstein list. He has since apologized. I think Kimmel should sue him for $1 billion dollars for such a horrible accusation. I hope the end result is McAfee going away. Dude is trash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motor City Sonics Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 29 minutes ago, Edman85 said: I hope the end result is McAfee going away. Dude is trash. But he's a punter that wears muscle shirts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motor City Sonics Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 1 hour ago, romad1 said: at a minimum, Rogers needs to pay a price in shame for that sort of crap. He's already skated through life with BS facemask calls and untimed downs against the Lions. He accused him of raping underage girls. That goes being trading barbs. I don't think the apology is enough. I do think Kimmel needs to sue him. I just threw out a billion dollars because I hate Aaron Rodgers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.