you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Think about this faulty reasoning for a second. News media have one primary aim: make money while reporting the news. It's not part of the thought process, nor would it be acceptable by the editor, to report something only because of the color of the skin of the person, unless of course the assessment is of racism. It makes absolutely no sense. The news isn't constructed with people of color vs. "whites" in any country. It doesn't work, it's not important, and it's not part of the news. Moreover, the 1% is partially diverse, as is the 99%. It's a non-issue. Follow the money, not the color of a person's skin.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Media outlets regularly forgo the profit motive in order to push propaganda. The fact you position yourself as anti-elite without knowing the basics of media is hilarious. You're somehow operating on a level below even liberal-zionist obfuscators like Chomsky lol.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I didn't say that financial profit and propaganda were disconnected. Seems you're trying too hard to find a fault in the argument. Sinclair and Fox News and websites listed at /s/ShitpostNews often post racist material in order to appeal to their racist base. In the case of the Olympics, the main stream news about Biles is unrelated to the color of her skin, as it would also be unrelated to the color of a 'white' person's skin.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Only a libtard is unable to see the extremely strange condescending and fetishising tones of the media in regards to her, precisely because you view black people the same way that they do: as if they're disabled children unable to fend for themselves that need endless coddling.

There's a reason the conservatards talk about you guys having a 'bigotry of low expectations' with black people, you view them in a much more dehumanising manner than any white supremacist does.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Did I or they fetishize any athlete because she or he was a person of a colour? No

Is any of this condescending? No

Does anyone on the so-called "left" see blacks as if they were disable children? No.

Does anyone on the so-called "left" see blacks as unable to defend themselves? No.

Does anyone on the so-called "left" think blacks need endless coddling? No.

Does anyone on the so-called "left" claim that I have "bigotry of low expectations"? No.

Does anyone on the so-called "left" view [blacks] in a much more dehumanising manner than any white supremacist does? No.

Are you in the KKK or a similar white supremacist group? Are these standard views in /s/DebateAltRight? How many people do you know who insist on applying arguments about skin color to the news coverage of athletes? Do you get your news from any of the websites at /s/ShitpostNews?

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

What views?

Zero, only you talk about skin colour because you lack the necessary brain activity to understand what race is

No

[–]shilldetector 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

News media have one primary aim: make money while reporting the news.

Do you honestly think Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post to make money? He bought it for power and influence, which is what the modern day media is all about. It's owned by oligarchs that made their money elsewhere that want to push an agenda.

He who controls the media/internet controls America. Controls the world really, at least those parts of the world not under direct control of regimes which heavily regulate the media and internet. It's basically China, arguably Russia, a few outliers like North Korea, and the rest is controlled by international Jewry, at least the rest of what matters. This control isnt top down like say China. It is basically controlled by an assortment of Jews who are generally like minded in their belief that the most important thing after their own personal wealth and power is doing what's "good for the Jews". They sometimes loosely coordinate with each other, but for the most part they simply inherently know what "good for the Jews" means(and if for some reason they don't they will be frequently reminded by others). While they sometimes have disagreements on strategy, the end goal is the same.

It's unknown what role Israel plays in coordinating any of this. I suspect it plays a large role given the total subservience of US politicians to it and the reason for this subservience(extremely wealthy and influential politically active Jews in the US).

This doesn't imply some worldwide conspiracy by all or even most Jews. Most Jews probably have an implicit bias, and as their wealth and power grows they are pressured by ethnic peers to be part of the team, so the implicit bias becomes increasingly explicit with many of them. There are surprisingly few exceptions, Ron Unz being a notable example of one.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

He bought it for power and influence

And what's the purpose of this? Part of it is obviously financial profit (as it fits a portfolio of investments that are much more profitable together).

Does this related to activities of other powerful people, some of whom are Jewish? Certainly.

While you're looking disinforamtion and propaganda, have a look at websites at /s/ShitpostNews