Commercial media ignore news

[LWT]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...g-8376436.html

Some Italians going to court because they have dodged 400 million euro. Even though I doubt very much that the italian court will be able to punish people with money, at least its media could have spread the news. That is, if they hadn't been commercial media, depending on advertisement money.

This is just one incident in a too long list in which news has been censored for the sake of commercial interests. However, it is first case I know about, that clearly shows how even big companies can be censored.

It would be a good thing if all countries had state financed media, so there would be at least some reliable source of information.

[Thorn777]

I think state financed media is equally bad considering the state of our states. I think Germany has an interesting model in that it demands a mandory fee from every household that goes straight towards the channels, and thus channels are not dependent on tax-money, hence the grants of politicians. In Germany the problem though is, that politicians also sit on the boards of the channels and the overarching comittee's. That needs to go as well.

[Vítor Gaspar]

I think state financed media is equally bad considering the state of our states. I think Germany has an interesting model in that it demands a mandory fee from every household that goes straight towards the channels, and thus channels are not dependent on tax-money, hence the grants of politicians. In Germany the problem though is, that politicians also sit on the boards of the channels and the overarching comittee's. That needs to go as well.

That is just exactly the situation in Portugal. Then some geniuses - this wasn't an order from the EU or the IMF - in the government decided RTP (Portugal's state television, akin to BBC) had to go because it was a "burden" for the State.

Some Angolans, directly related to Dos Santos, not a shady, bloody and genocidal dictator at all (but that somehow everyone in Europe tolerates, especially in Lisbon) tried to buy it. In fact they pressured the government and all.

If it wasn't for the junior party in the coalition and we could have what is perhaps our most impartial source of news in the hands of an African dictator.

Ah, the joys of being a bankrupt country and having created countless atrocities throughout our former colonial empire...

PSD will somehow find a way to put their friends in RTP while blaming the "welfare state" for the lack of sustainability in the company, despite it actually having a superavit.

Nothing new though. This whole "re-foundation" of the Portuguese State, as the government so proudly announces, is nothing more than a scheme to pass the mechanisms that once belonged to the states to private owners, so we have our own Russian oligarchy in here - or shall I say, Angolan oligarchy, PSD learns a lot with Angola.

I'm not being racist here, but even the very own Prime-Minister is married with a black Angolan-born woman. Add to that the fact Dos Santos family is buying everything all over Portugal, and Angola almost forced Portugal to get into a "war" with Guinea-Bissau (I guess after someone called Paulo Portas from Germany, something of the sort "you know, everyone is kind of paying attention to you guys, why don't you drop it and stop pretending you still have some weight in the world?" and, someone in Brazil told him something as well like "you know, we rule over the Portuguese Commonwealth. So you stay quiet, you do nothing, and we deal with everything. And never mind those Angolans. We also take care of them. Attaboy!", the subject was suddenly left off to die), and I'm pretty sure this country will get even worse.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Bit ironic your source is commercial media. Mind you, British commercial media, not Berlusconi owned Italian commercial media.

[King Gambrinus]

Bit ironic your source is commercial media. Mind you, British commercial media, not Berlusconi owned Italian commercial media.

I always thought The Independent was just some Russian guy's plaything.

[LWT]

Bit ironic your source is commercial media. Mind you, British commercial media, not Berlusconi owned Italian commercial media.

Well, I don't see why British media would censor Italian news. The point is that most italians won't be reading it. It is just sad that they depend on foreign newspapers for their national news.

This is, by the way, just one example. There are examples that are less obvious, but can still be seen by people living in another country, like the censorship on news about the environment in the US.

[Col. Tartleton]

Well, I don't see why British media would censor Italian news. The point is that most italians won't be reading it. It is just sad that they depend on foreign newspapers for their national news

Italy isn't a legitimate country. It's a slimy but not particularly brutal fascist state.

It's kind of like Russia.

This is, by the way, just one example. There are examples that are less obvious, but can still be seen by people living in another country, like the censorship on news about the environment in the US.

What censorship? What about the environment? We know all about the recent global cooling and the growth of the arctic and antarctic ice caps. Or that we still have as much forest as ever? Or that our air and water is probably cleaner than any time in our history since before industrialism began?

What is your news saying about us? Are they saying it's getting warmer or something? That the forests are being destroyed? That the water and the air is poisoned?

Or do you mean the political environment? In that case we're misinformed, but I wouldn't say censored. The truth exists, it's just lost in translation and scrambled by unnecessary partisan debates.

[LWT]

Italy isn't a legitimate country. It's a slimy but not particularly brutal fascist state.

It's kind of like Russia.

Well, it is a democracy and, even though the right-winged Berlusconi was in power for ages, it is not as capitalist as Russia. Also, the example in Italy was actually my second reason the start this thread. I couldn't post the article about censorhip in local Dutch newspapers as it was written in dutch.

What censorship? What about the environment? We know all about the recent global cooling and the growth of the arctic and antarctic ice caps. Or that we still have as much forest as ever? Or that our air and water is probably cleaner than any time in our history since before industrialism began?

What is your news saying about us? Are they saying it's getting warmer or something? That the forests are being destroyed? That the water and the air is poisoned?

I'm not sure what you are saying ... I know too many americans still don't know this, so that's why I came up with it.

Or do you mean the political environment? In that case we're misinformed, but I wouldn't say censored. The truth exists, it's just lost in translation and scrambled by unnecessary partisan debates.

Haha. No, I didn't mean the political environment. Though I would hardly call a country with only two parties a democracy, so in that sense one might argue it is censored.

[Col. Tartleton]

Well, it is a democracy and, even though the right-winged Berlusconi was in power for ages, it is not as capitalist as Russia. Also, the example in Italy was actually my second reason the start this thread. I couldn't post the article about censorhip in local Dutch newspapers as it was written in dutch.

And because of censorship...

I'm not sure what you are saying ... I know too many americans still don't know this, so that's why I came up with it.

Don't know what? What are you alluding to about the environment?

Haha. No, I didn't mean the political environment. Though I would hardly call a country with only two parties a democracy, so in that sense one might argue it is censored.

They aren't really parties, they're coalitions. There are several parties in each party. There are several different groups in the Republican and Democratic parties which in a parliamentary system would be different parties. It's part of the process.

There's a center-right wing coalition and a center-left coalition. If you can't get into the broad mainstream parties you're probably a radical with almost no support.

[Kanaric]

sometimes foreign commercial media can be better i guess lol

[Father Jack]

The Independent is owned by Alexander Lebedev, a former KGB agent and a critic of Putin. But the newspaper is relatively centrist (perhaps more centre left) when it comes to political bias and I would say it tends to be far less partisan than many other British newspapers.

[removeduser_487563287433]

With no suggestion of editorial pressure. Unlike Berlusconi's media arms.

[Ne Obliviscaris]

If your looking for unbiased, in the UK the BBC is the closest thing your going to get. Frankly with Cameron all but rejecting Leveson we have nowhere to stand on press ethics.

[Kanaric]

If your looking for unbiased, in the UK the BBC is the closest thing your going to get. Frankly with Cameron all but rejecting Leveson we have nowhere to stand on press ethics.

Government media is the closest you get to unbiased? Regardless if they are unbiased or not that seems a silly notion.

[LWT]

Government media is the closest you get to unbiased? Regardless if they are unbiased or not that seems a silly notion.

Why is it a silly notion if they are unbiased?

I think a newspaper should not be a company, but should instead make money by recieving a subsidy. This way, they are free to write whatever they want to write.

[magpie]

The trouble with state run media financed by the public, Is that the politicians insist on interfering with it one way or another.
As they control the purse strings I doubt that news reporting or topic,s are not influenced by said politician,s.
After a while the services just become another cosy bed for public servants working towards a good pension and severance package.

[LWT]

In the netherlands, we've got a system in which the available money and time are divided according to the number of members the public broadcasting stations have. This is a good and democratic system, in my opinion.

Though it is indeed true that politicians try to gain influence on it. The right winged party VVD (party for freedom and democracy) finally has been able to change the good system. But I guess the programs will still be made by the same people, so maybe it there won't be a too big difference.

[Thorn777]

In the netherlands, we've got a system in which the available money and time are divided according to the number of members the public broadcasting stations have. This is a good and democratic system, in my opinion.

Though it is indeed true that politicians try to gain influence on it. The right winged party VVD (party for freedom and democracy) finally has been able to change the good system. But I guess the programs will still be made by the same people, so maybe it there won't be a too big difference.

I grew up in Holland, I am 31 years old, and I've seen a once relatively fine public broadcasting system rendered to the utter crap it is today.

You might think its still OK. Specially when watching RTL etc I can imagine you get that idea. Sure, they still do the obscure culture stuff and thats good, but on many srs levels its crap. I mean they tried NOS news with underlying techno-beats for christ sake, nvm the propaganda is just the same, and then that neo-liberal Jort Kelder educating in all srsns the Dutch population how the crisis came about in a 6 part docu - on the VPRO ffs.

No I remember the 80's and 90's, and it wasnt like that. At least they tried back then.

[The Dude]

No I remember the 80's and 90's, and it wasnt like that. At least they tried back then.

Lol you were born in 1980 or 1981, so you don't remember squat. Might be you remember things from 1995 and onward, but no elementary school child or one in early high is concerned with political bias in the media.

[Thorn777]

Lol you were born in 1980 or 1981, so you don't remember squat. Might be you remember things from 1995 and onward, but no elementary school child or one in early high is concerned with political bias in the media.

Just because you didnt? Thats a weird thing to think that everybody must be like you. There where people crowned emperor at 14.

I come from a very political family. My parents and most acquaintances where leftists. I always liked being around grown ups and listening to them when they discussed around a couple of beers etc. My grandfather was a young east-prussian aristocrat and member of the SPD before WW2, fled to France to not be killed, and as he came back had it with elites and wouldnt dare making claims to the family estate. He became a mailman for the rest of his life, and he was a happy man who build and owned two houses and raised 5 children on his salary(imagine a mailman today, I have a ZZP'er friend making a couple of Euros an hour), that talked with his grandchildren about subjects when making walks...

And when I watched TV I did watch American Ninja 5 etc, but I certainly could get what srs programs where talking about. I didnt like it back then either all to often, like what went on with Russia and that Jelzin fellow, how apartheid was a hot issue, how thatcher went nuts with poll-taxes, how Reagan went on giving his apologies for Iran-contra, or how Serbia was demonized(also as I had a half-yugo friend back then who went up the walls in that period and I been to Croatia prior to the war, etc etc),and seeing them Ethiopian kids starve and hearing facts like every some seconds a child dies of water shortage srsly got me thinking why the this is....

Thinking back indeed that the quality hasnt changed all that much. I think I learned more(though Jort Kelder and VPRO just would not be possible). I had an upbringing towards thinking critically it seems, and I always had a very analytical mind teachers said, while I sucked at maths and spelling. So I dont blame you didnt. Thats just the way things go. I am astounished by the comprehension skills of grown ups or late teens on this board though.