/anarcho/ - Anarchism Board

>>4289

What parameters are we going to use to establish credibility?

>>4290

Damn good question anon.
I think we should start with a few simple questions like "Is the content purely promotional" "Has the source of the content been known to make biased content?" "IS the content/creator getting to the truth, or is it trying to form a false narrative"

>>4292
If the answer is yes, yes, or trying to display a false narrative then it isn't credible.

So, ive made a list of some new sources deemed untrustworthy.

Fox news
Cnn
Usa Today
The Guardian
The daily mail uk
Vice

The list is expanding, these just seem to be the major ones i can tell are overtly biased. Like all media take what you see with the utmost skepticism.

>>4482
BBC

>>4482
You're doing it backwards. You should assume that EVERY news source is untrustworthy and make a list of the ones you find reliable.

>>4482

vice? what's wrong with vice? other than being victims of hipsterfag fashion sense i mean.

i hadn't really noticed much in the way of a heavy political slant one way or the other there really. i mean yeah they're basically a statist oriented publication but not really fanatically so.

and they tend to cover a lot of stories that i find to be fairly interesting subject material. and they seem better than most at not slapping value judgments on everything

then again i'm not really a regular reader/viewer. so maybe i'm missing the really shitty parts.

at least they're not slate or salon.com or worse

>>4489
The problem with vice is the people who own it like 21st Century Fox, Time Warner, The Walt Disney Company, Hearst Corporation, and Rogers Communications.

Im sorry to tell you that Vice news is just corporate media aimed at millennial viewers, which kinda sucks because i like alot of there stuff, i guess im just their demographic.

Also, don't trust RT

>>4485
Im trying to do that too.
So far i've only found one, and thats Democracy now, and they only reason they are trustworthy is because they aren't owned by multi-billionaire corporations.

http://vimeo.com/110726594

http://www.submedia.tv/
^
these guys are good too.

>>4496

well the only problem i see here is that if you only trust sources which have a particular set of ideological credentials then that leaves anarchists in a pretty piss poor shape looking for outlets that produce news on non-anarchist or just not particularly anarchist topics.

on the other hand if you decide to trust X news outlet based on their credentials alone then you still put yourself in a situation where you can be lied to.

which is fine. everybody has their own way of looking at everything and that really is for the better.

but personally i think the most important thing is to examine everything critically. for example i listen to the news on NPR in the mornings for pretty much no other reasons than 1. they run more news in the morning than any of the other stations i receive and 2. i get good reception from the npr station.

but do i just swallow everything they tell me? fuck no. when someone on "on-point" starts trying to make the case that nuclear power is the only viable replacement for fossil fuels i check their facts. when someone on foxnews starts going on about how the only way to increase investment in the economy is to lower taxes on the wealthy because supposedly they're the only possible source of investment. i check their facts.

so yeah admittedly i end up reading news articles from pretty much every news source that's been listed so far. but i also check their sources, i check their sources sources. i read an article once on salon.com which had quoted "facts" that i had to trace back through 5 other websites in order to find the original source. and the original source was in complete opposition to the salon.com article. so yeah i guess i actually do try to avoid salon.com because that's just ridiculously sloppy and obviously biased journalism. honestly i wouldn't even call it journalism. it's more like demagoguery

i forgot what i was talking about. nevermind

>>4509
Yeah, I listen to NPR quite a bit myself. The point is to examine everything critically. If the US media start talking about Russia or Israel, just know that everything they say is either deliberately designed to shape public opinion, or a secondary chump just passing along someone else propagandized to him. (Tom Ashbrook, I'm looking at you)

But even the most mainstream sources can have the occasional loose cannon who starts critically examine capitalism or the state. Salon occasionally has great anti-capitalist or anti-statist pieces, even though it's borderline tabloid.

>>4512

tom ashbrook is a perfect example of everything i hate about your average liberal progressive. i've actually heard him cut guests off when they weren't repeating the party line well enough to suit him. he directs every discussion with an iron fist.

>>4525
>liberal progressive.

Can someone tell me what a progressive actually is?n I mean, it always seems like one of those terms you can't really be against because who is against progress? I mean really, what the fuck is a progressive really?

Here's a pretty scathing anti-war piece for the mainstream.

http://www.salon.com/2014/11/09/you_dont_protect_my_freedom_our_childish_insistence_on_calling_soldiers_heroes_deadens_real_democracy/

>Americans, especially those who oppose war, should do everything they can to discourage young, poor and working-class men and women from joining the military. Part of the campaign against enlistment requires removing the glory of the “hero” label from those who do enlist.

>Wars that are not heroic have no real heroes, except for the people who oppose those wars. Far from being the heroes of recent wars, American troops are among their victims.

>>4532
Social conservatives are literally against social progress. They think we should be living by the exact same cultural ethics that Jesus did. Or at least that's what they think, really they just want to be living the way we did ~100 years ago, they don't have any sense of how their perceptions of how things "have always been" only goes back a few generations.

So a progressive is someone who thinks that ethics and culture can be improved, not that there is a gold standard that we've deviated from.

>>4532

oh really? you can't be against "progress". like eminent domain, bulldozing peoples homes down to add 4 more lanes to an interstate those people never use anyway, outlawing the way people heat their homes in the winter stuff liek that? you really think no one can be against that?

>>4536>So a progressive is someone who thinks that ethics and culture can be improved, not that there is a gold standard that we've deviated from.

improved from what to what? ethics and culture are about as subjective a thing as there ever was. and when you say improved you're clearly not talking about improving your own ethics or culture. you're obviously talking about other people not conforming to whatever it is you want.

>>4537
>you're obviously talking about other people not conforming to whatever it is you want.

Well, yeah. I think that a culture that, say, kills and eats its children is a bad culture. That culture needs to be improved. Granted this is my subjective opinion, based on my subjective ethics of nonviolence and social equality.

And I assume you are here because you support society progressing towards your subjective social ethic of anarchism?

>>4543

"And I assume you are here because you support society progressing towards your subjective social ethic of anarchism?"

no i harbour no illusions that society in general will ever adopt anarchism. and no i don't even really want them too. as ignorant as the average person is of the dominant philosophy of democracy i really don't want to see them bring the ignorant in to anarchism in the same way.

i think anarchism is perfectly viable as an autonomous community or interconnected group of communities and spaces separate from the larger society and culture.

i mean there are still "uncontacted" tribes in the amazon. there are still travellers and tinkers and gypsies in britain, all over europe, america, and the world i guess. italy's economy is basically run and managed by various criminal organizations that function completely outside the reach of the italian government.

i don't think anarchists need the rest of society at all. we can organize ourselves and set and achieve our own goals on our own.

i'm just here to enjoy the company of other anarchists and watch the dogfights brah.

>>4536
Not even a few generations or ~100 years.

Conservatives think the golden age of America was in the 1950s: all the jobs in the iron industry and anything else because Europe was in shambles and needed stuff resulted in an economic boom.

That's when McCarthy's witch hunt was happening. That's when women were obedient to the men.

Why do you think every Christmas they play songs from the 50s? To somehow bring back a feeling of the "good ole days".

Democracy now 11/19/2014 (Or for everyone else in the world 19/11/2014)

http://new1.fjcdn.com/comments/This+dude+has+been+my+skype+picture+for+months+_04691ff1f65984c9714da1214bafe756.png

http://www.democracynow.org/shows/2014/11/21

Democracy now 11/21/2014

INSURRECTO-RIOTOSIS

INSURRECTO-RIOTOSIS

http://vimeo.com/112578998

Why is it that all the racists come out of the wood work in immigration videos?

Here's some of the new sources I use:

commondreams.org
democracynow.org
wsws.org (Trotsky cunts)


These are just "left" news sources.

I personally prefer anarchist news for anarchism.

anarchistnews.org
a-infos.ca
crimethinc
etc

Let me know if you want the full list.

>>6821
Oh and vice did a episode in my country twice. Both the times it was blown out of proportion. Though, it's still a different perspective from the mainstream capitalists and less manipulative.

>>6822
All media now seems to be somewhat sensationalist, that the only way you get some people to watch it sadly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRMKy-ndGEc

Insight into the current political situation in the UK in regards to the 2015 election and the current ruling parties.

>>7083
I'm not a racial supremacist, but

>“Islam must die”

is an opinion shared by Anarchists too, no?

>>7054
This made me all warm and fuzzy inside.
Especially the ending.
Goddamn that was a good news report.

>>7091
Yes, let one fascist group kill another fascist group. It's a victory for us.