Why is liberal media like NowThis and huffington post or buzzfeed allowed to spread propaganda...

Why is liberal media like NowThis and huffington post or buzzfeed allowed to spread propaganda. They purposely distort facts and leave out important bits. And sometimes out right be incorrect without using common sense to make propaganda. Why aren't they shut down.

Other urls found in this thread:

foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14/u-s-repeals-propaganda-ban-spreads-government-made-news-to-americans/
techdirt.com/articles/20130715/11210223804/anti-propaganda-ban-repealed-freeing-state-dept-to-direct-its-broadcasting-arm-american-citizens.shtml
archive.is/YjNDb
youtube.com/watch?v=s03nXScHbBU
youtube.com/watch?v=w7EvBxRYNME
youtube.com/watch?v=5rqdtZlec0s
businessinsider.com/ndaa-legalizes-propaganda-2012-5?IR=T
yle.fi/uutiset/media_groups_slam_tax_officials_over_panama_papers_pressure/8853564
yle.fi/uutiset/yle_panama_papers_reveal_finnish_lawyers_businessmen_behind_shell_companies_in_tax_havens/8854099
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>Why arent they shut down

F I R S T A M E N D M E N T

And Fox News, Drudge Report and etc aren't also part of this?

foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14/u-s-repeals-propaganda-ban-spreads-government-made-news-to-americans/

They give a story usually without bias and only tLk using facts. Not opinions. Unless it's a socio-Economic basis

Thanks for the copy and paste user

When I take over the world, the FCC broadcasting laws will be amended so that anything that is not strictly factual cannot be called "news" and must be clearly called out as such.

Failing to do so, or lying on air, will be grounds for having your broadcasting license pulled.

There is no benefit, none, to allowing megacorps to lie on the air.

Obama made government propaganda aimed towards our citizens legal.

>better link
>techdirt.com/articles/20130715/11210223804/anti-propaganda-ban-repealed-freeing-state-dept-to-direct-its-broadcasting-arm-american-citizens.shtml

Freedom isnt free.

Read first amendment, pls.

>HURR DURR FREEDOM OF SPEECH

Yeah, there's a little more to it than that. Not saying I agree with it, but media outlets are legally allowed to spread their own suggestions/interpretations of the truth (AKA lies) and are protected in doing so by the Constitution.

Dam Russians with the self awareness calling their own media propaganda

Muh Fox News

Fair and Balanced

Fox is very much biased, just in the other direction.

People just don't identify bias properly when it aligns with their own biases.

The amendments aren't literal.
There is no freedom of speech
If there was I could say "nigger nigger, dindu nuffin, all niggers should be killed" and get away with it
That's not how it works in America. Our founding fathers weren't being literal when they wrote the constitution. They were being suggestive. There is no true freedom of speech on America. So no. Propaganda isn't protected by the constitution.

Non shit link
archive.is/YjNDb

I like how all of those channels aren't even talking about Milwaukee dispite a full blown race war being about to explode.

This is why our law is fucked up. You can lie out the ass and be just fine, but show a boob on TV or say one of seven words and you get smacked with the full force of the law.

Our priorities are fucked up.

>socio-economic biases. Social biased.
When it comes down to things that aren't of opinions fox is direct and fact based. Also reporters on fox have there facts usually and know what there talking about instead of making a 2 minute Internet clip

Dindus shooting dindus. There's no narrative to push.

Liberal channels are waiting for the police to do their job and shoot down dindu's so they can bitch and whine about it and say "hurr dirr mean police brutal"

>yfw Fox News is the first one to go down to this law

>direct and fact based
JUST

youtube.com/watch?v=s03nXScHbBU

ProTip: If you have to carry on about how "fair and balanced" you are, you probably are not all that fair and balanced.

lugenpresse

Nice vid clips from the 90's where hurr durr liberals thought they won. This is a thread for American posters only. Not for irrelevant canadian libtards to go on about "muh Trudeau, muh open arms to terrorists"

>tfw y'all cowards don't even smoke crack was his magnum opus yet he is ashamed and now tries to obscure it behind similarly ridiculous self portraits with fake album names, never considering that he is forgiven for his crack days

...

Your country is a joke.
Lol get out. Your entire media outlet is different than our own.

Ok pedro

;)

>Pedro
Mexican name.
You don't even understand common names of people based on countries in our continent.
Exactly my point of you pee brain Brit-aborigines retards Nig nogging out

>your evidence doesn't meet my arbitrary standards even though they clearly show fox news lying

Have some more - there's plenty.

youtube.com/watch?v=w7EvBxRYNME

youtube.com/watch?v=5rqdtZlec0s

>tfw y'all cowards don't even smoke crack was his magnum opus
ive actually listened to it and its a terrible album, he should stick to making funny self portraits because he is fairly good at it

sure thing, democrat

The amendments are literal in the sense that their relevance corresponds to the time at which they were conceived. I don't think that I need to tell you that times have changed in 240 years. The concept of freedom of speech is taken and run with, for lack of a better term, in correlation with the freedom of press, which 240 years ago meant the printing press - now, it means the internet, newspapers, mainstream media, etc. I don't agree that news outlets should be able to flat out lie, it's just that the laws and rights currently in existence protect them in doing so. At the same time, I shouldn't have to face consequences for speaking.

*republican

0.04 RUS has been deposited into your account. Thank you for working with #CorrectTheRecord!

Your right, 240 years ago. Therefore no need for them if we are not living in their time and now have a different context. Because mostly applied today our constitution is up for interpretation by liberals. They literally hand pick out whatever they don't like from it. They'll hold onto the first amendment if it makes them happy and throw out anything they don't like

What kind of nancy newfag are you?

>I was just pretending to be retarded

Sure bro

Enjoy the stay

;)

>If there was I could say "nigger nigger, dindu nuffin, all niggers should be killed" and get away with it
the reason you can't say that is the "should be killed" not "nigger nigger". your crime would be inciting violence, not hate speech

desu senpai basically all US news networks would go down.
Despite fox news leaning more towards my own political views I still think they are a retarded network with an aversion to factual news arguments. CNN, MSNBC, ABC are all horseshit propaganda platforms that have gone from twisting the truth to outright lies.
Huffpost, Buzzfeed and Vice are not even worth mentioning in the same sentence as the word news.

>that's the joke

The newfag who's been here longer than you
>2 years
Nice straw man argument. Did you put your special snowflake straws into it too.

Because liberal is just another face the globalists use to better deceive the goyim.

And to be fair, nobody is saying that they shouldn't be allowed to publish whatever claptrap they want.

They just shouldn't be allowed to call it news. This is deceptive.

We will shut down. The day is coming.

>2 years

Top kek

Try 10 years cunt
You're low quality mate, I need some better mental stimulation before I'm off to be productive today

;)

Yeah user, Fox is absolute garbage. Why are you so intent on convincing other anons of that? Anyone who's watched it can see it's just another flavor of biased propaganda to contrast with that of MSNBC/CNN.

The FCC doesn't control cable networks though
The only control OTA broadcasts from basic networks like CBS, ABC, NBC(non msnbc),FOX etc.

Those organizations don't have to report news as it is because they're news entertainment, i.e. they can lie since it's not meant to be taken as fact -- or something like that.

The problem is that there's not exactly an easy way to solve the issue in question. Stricter enforcement of libel laws? Maybe, but when media can repackage truth to shape their own narrative, it's not very hard to pull the, "Oh, that's not libel or slander, that's just a misinterpretation of the truth, my bad," card. If laws aren't the issue, then they go after the Constitution, which affects the general populace as a whole. This would cause mass civil unrest, and I think the government knows that. Luckily for them, through liberal brainwashing, they have just about enough people in favor of them who would justify any changes made to the Constitution, regardless of degree, because, "Oh, it's for the greater good."

Years is a credibility argument. Years don't account for experience nor does it account for knowledge. 10 years still primitive. Years of experience is an argument primates use to make themselves feel like kings

BECAUSE IT"S NOT ILLEAGLE THAT WHY YOU FUCKING KEK!!!!

foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14/u-s-repeals-propaganda-ban-spreads-government-made-news-to-americans/

Does the first amendment cover outright lies and slander?

Legitimately curious here, because if it does, it seems like you could use this shit to get out of all sorts of trouble.

>Mr. Obama, why did you lie about selling hundreds of millions of dollars worth of nuclear and chemical weapons to Saudi Arabia?
Obama: F I R S T A M E N D M E N T

You're the one that brought out numbers like it was a pissing contest

Are you a woman by chance?

If it did, then no lawsuits regarding libel/slander would be filed or awarded.

So, no, it doesn't.

Legality doesn't equal morality or ethics.
It's legal in Muslim countries to behead your wife because you don't like her. Doesn't mean it's right.
Propaganda and lies in the us might now be illegal but they should be

Then why don't we see the media get it's ass sued to oblivion more often in the states?

They're too big

The media corporations need to be broken the fuck up

It's not as easy as saying he said/she said,;you have to prove damages n shieeet.

IIRC, Huffington Post follows measures to classify itself as parody like The Onion so they're perfectly within the law publishing false information

CNN on the other hand has a wrecking ball coming if Trump somehow gets elected

Literally the first one to bring up newfag.
Pissing cotnest made by you friend.
Also gender doesn't account for knowledge. Are you Muslim by any chance. Do you think women's opinions account for half of yours.

Stop being slid, you two.

Oh hey, that killed the thread, what do you know

I called you a newfag because of your taking something literally

Also gender does come in to play when it's obvious that you are a woman, because then I know your arguments are built from a place of emotion even if you claim rationality.. as if its not obvious to begin with ;)

Not muslim, fuck those sand niggers, fuck kikes too. Women shouldnt be able to vote btw ;)

I just came in to comment on viper fampai

Loses all credibility. Why you don't belong in here.
Also not a women

I fought against 4 k*rd in highschool and won
Eventually all the retards in class realised that you can't just act like a retard and expect to be treated nice, so they started stfu. At that point i was 13 years old. Suddenly one of the retards starts crying because he has to sit next to me. The teacher asks why and to her horror she finds out i have been mentally bullying the entire class. If anyone wants to start shit with me i ask about their divorced parents, or their lack of intelligence, or whatever else i can find out about them. Nobody dares standing up or do shit to me.

Credibility? We're throwing ahit at each other as anonymous strangers on opposite sides of the globe. this is why you are a newfag. Because you are a retard that takes this shit seriously.

>I dont belong here
Top kek faggot

Wow you are up yourself
So when you get beaten in a debate here, do you start sliding the thread or just mass spam reports?

Literally busts yourself out of making logical fallacies. Your arguments are invalid
Your why pol can't have serious intelligent political discussions

The New York Times reports on Reality.

You just hate hearing the truth cuck

you first

I will kill everyone in this thread. I will fucking beat up everyone of you

As if Breitbart etc. aren't doing it too.

Never said they weren't. But there not
Site where anyone can post any report. Same as here

because America is a bolshevik oligarchy

>implying propaganda is illegal in america

businessinsider.com/ndaa-legalizes-propaganda-2012-5?IR=T

dont question your masters you worthless tax cattle

We have one media paid by tax and lot of people claim it's "leftist propaganda" which often is true but I was glad it existed when it was talking about the Panama papers honestly, and when this happened: yle.fi/uutiset/media_groups_slam_tax_officials_over_panama_papers_pressure/8853564
yle.fi/uutiset/yle_panama_papers_reveal_finnish_lawyers_businessmen_behind_shell_companies_in_tax_havens/8854099

This is the major problem with these discussions.

You have fallen for the intellectual trap laid for you.

You can clearly see and complain about the biases of other networks, but leap to defend the network that caters to your mindset.

To anyone with an objective sense, Fox is incredibly biased. It is just as biased as MSNBC or CNN just in the other direction. This is intended. Fox is controlled opposition.

The whole goal is divide people along these artificial lines so you identify the other side as your enemy and see your side as an ally, not realizing Fox is brainwashing you and controlling your narrative in cooperation with the other networks brainwashing and controlling their viewers.

Until you realize this and stop watching any of the major networks there can be no progress.

It's hard to have free speech when your opinion is someone else's opinion.

Save it for the brown people m8