Lack of trust + insatiable need for speed = disaster

[thfcsteff]

The media landscape has dramatically changed but the influence that those those traditional media outlets have over government officials who enact policy has not fallen away at the same rate as their viewership and reader figures.

For purpose of discussion, I just want to be sure we have the same definition of 'traditional media' i.e. newspapers (nearing obsoletion sadly), TV and radio.

To clarify my previous point. It’s not actually the experts that are the issue. We should trust the experts. But the mechanism for how their knowledge is shared is deeply flawed. Which is why I would push back on you taking issue with someone listening to the podcast host over a news presenter or journalist. What’s the actual difference between them? They will each take the information provided by the experts and regurgitate it in a way that fits the narrative demanded by their audience or by the paymasters.

A very fair point, however I think we also have to consider two factors here. 1, the assumption that it is knowledge versus opinion which is being shared. 2, the underwriter of said-knowledge/opinion. Journalism as an example...it was once a profession where there were many noble and very honest people whose work was left to speak for itself on its own merits. Sadly (as it appears we both agree) the scope for honest journalism is smaller than ever. It is now a 'conditioning loop' whereby more than ever we get fed what we want to see and read, which includes stories on current affairs. Yes, there is a point at which I'd agree that whether you listen to (say) the BBC or Joe Rogan could simply be a case of suiting your own agenda, however I'd further say that even in finding outlets which suit your agenda, I'd rather have it be one which is still answerable to bodies like OFCOM. The likes of Joe Rogan answer to no-one. I think that's dangerous. I also think the proof of that has been shown. I'd also add that if there is a 'traditional left' as you seem to believe, then they should be smarter at availing themselves of the Rogans of this world as that is (sadly IMO) the main route to political success.

If anything I would say the Podcast landscape is more likely to give the floor to the experts via a long form interview. As well as being more likely to have conversations with people they and their audience disagree with.

I like podcasts as a medium. I like them for perspective. I don't like to rely on them for news above everything else.

Also why I find it strange that the Fauci story this week would be chalked up as yesterdays news by you and MAGA grift conspiracy theories by others.

It was going so well until you had to throw that little dig LOL.
First of all, it is a FACT. It IS yesterday's news. In fact it is more than that.

Because that is a perfect example of how, in the background the scientists and experts are doing fantastic and noble work, but what ends up being projected to the public via politicians, the media and in Faucis case public health officials ranged from misleading and at times outright lies.

However, the example is being hung on one man. One. In your 'quest for truth from public health officials' don't you think it'd be a tiny bit more plausible if there was a full-scale look at ALL parties who were working on covid19 from (say) November 2019? Like the President, Alazar, Refield, Pence, Hahn? Maybe others too? Sorry, the enquiry does not pass the threshold of trust for me with regards to why it is taking place.

If you look at wealth inequality as the example now being discussed here. The focus is entirely on taxation of individuals. From the media, and therefore also the public, there is virtually zero conversation about who controls the monetary supply.

I would agree that should absolutely be part of the conversation.

The Bank of England play a far greater role in wealth inequality than rich people who pay a lower marginal tax rate than the middle and working class. But very very few people understand the lack of control and regulatory power the British Government holds over BofE which similarly exists in most western countries.

As do the corporations who own governments.

Fwiw I put far more thoughts on a regular basic in to this and how it will impact society and peoples lives than as an example Fauci telling lies. That just happened to be a big part of the news cycle this week. The lack of financial litiracy from people taking on debt. The inability to save money for retirement.

Finance is therefore obviously a passion for you. Great stuff. And I absolutely agree with what you say here. Financial literacy, and the way in which people are prevented from gaining it via the system, lack of education and continued wealth inequality perpetrated by large corporations, is a disgrace.

But what really keeps me up at night is that even people who are sensible with their finances are still getting wiped out by decisions made by Central Banks who we as the voters have almost no control over via our elected officials. Something that if the public understood would have near complete alignment from left and right as well.

100% agree with you on this. It is ugly. Almost hopeless in some senses. I think along those lines, watching the manipulation of global economies by government to enrich certain sponsors is alarming. That so few people seem bothered is troubling, albeit I think there is so much being thrown at people that they simply cannot process it. People have, via social media, become junkies for emotional reactions to momentary situations, which takes energy and focus away from important transgressions of rights and liberties.

 

[robp135]

For purpose of discussion, I just want to be sure we have the same definition of 'traditional media' i.e. newspapers (nearing obsoletion sadly), TV and radio.

Yes.

A very fair point, however I think we also have to consider two factors here. 1, the assumption that it is knowledge versus opinion which is being shared. 2, the underwriter of said-knowledge/opinion. Journalism as an example...it was once a profession where there were many noble and very honest people whose work was left to speak for itself on its own merits. Sadly (as it appears we both agree) the scope for honest journalism is smaller than ever. It is now a 'conditioning loop' whereby more than ever we get fed what we want to see and read, which includes stories on current affairs.

I think there are still a lot of wonderful investigative journalists out there. Martyn Ziegler at the times with his uncovering of the FIFA private equity play this week as an example. But I think that suffers from audience capture to an extent as well where people won’t want to pay attention to a story if it goes agains the left and right side.

Yes, there is a point at which I'd agree that whether you listen to (say) the BBC or Joe Rogan could simply be a case of suiting your own agenda, however I'd further say that even in finding outlets which suit your agenda, I'd rather have it be one which is still answerable to bodies like OFCOM. The likes of Joe Rogan answer to no-one. I think that's dangerous. I also think the proof of that has been shown. I'd also add that if there is a 'traditional left' as you seem to believe, then they should be smarter at availing themselves of the Rogans of this world as that is (sadly IMO) the main route to political success.

I like podcasts as a medium. I like them for perspective. I don't like to rely on them for news above everything else.

Havent the BBC faced a ton of issues with OFCOM in recent years due to political bias?

I don’t really agree about the lack of regulation to be honest. For a few reasons. Independent podcasts are not as beholden to a paymaster the way traditional media will be.

I think the audience and advertisers are the ultimate regulator as well Rogan does huge numbers but does not have any mainstream advertisers. As I understand CNN charges more per viewer than Fox News even though Fox gets 2-3x the viewership. Conservative independent media gets a much larger audience than liberal media but the liberal shows get more mainstream advertisers. Look at PSA vs Tucker he is getting 3-4x the views.

It was going so well until you had to throw that little dig LOL.

First of all, it is a FACT. It IS yesterday's news. In fact it is more than that.

However, the example is being hung on one man. One. In your 'quest for truth from public health officials' don't you think it'd be a tiny bit more plausible if there was a full-scale look at ALL parties who were working on covid19 from (say) November 2019? Like the President, Alazar, Refield, Pence, Hahn? Maybe others too? Sorry, the enquiry does not pass the threshold of trust for me with regards to why it is taking place.

I don’t disagree with that but Fauci was also the top boy.

I would agree that should absolutely be part of the conversation. As do the corporations who own governments.

Finance is therefore obviously a passion for you. Great stuff. And I absolutely agree with what you say here. Financial literacy, and the way in which people are prevented from gaining it via the system, lack of education and continued wealth inequality perpetrated by large corporations, is a disgrace.


100% agree with you on this. It is ugly. Almost hopeless in some senses. I think along those lines, watching the manipulation of global economies by government to enrich certain sponsors is alarming. That so few people seem bothered is troubling, albeit I think there is so much being thrown at people that they simply cannot process it. People have, via social media, become junkies for emotional reactions to momentary situations, which takes energy and focus away from important transgressions of rights and liberties.

You are right but I do think we need to seperate the major multi national corporations in the fortune500 from your corps that employ 500-10000 people though. They often get grouped together and that’s not really fair. Group in the major banks with those mega corps as well.

 

[thfcsteff]

Yes.



I think there are still a lot of wonderful investigative journalists out there. Martyn Ziegler at the times with his uncovering of the FIFA private equity play this week as an example. But I think that suffers from audience capture to an extent as well where people won’t want to pay attention to a story if it goes agains the left and right side.





Havent the BBC faced a ton of issues with OFCOM in recent years due to political bias?

I don’t really agree about the lack of regulation to be honest. For a few reasons. Independent podcasts are not as beholden to a paymaster the way traditional media will be.

I think the audience and advertisers are the ultimate regulator as well Rogan does huge numbers but does not have any mainstream advertisers. As I understand CNN charges more per viewer than Fox News even though Fox gets 2-3x the viewership. Conservative independent media gets a much larger audience than liberal media but the liberal shows get more mainstream advertisers. Look at PSA vs Tucker he is getting 3-4x the views.

View attachment 23040
View attachment 23041




I don’t disagree with that but Fauci was also the top boy.




You are right but I do think we need to seperate the major multi national corporations in the fortune500 from your corps that employ 500-10000 people though. They often get grouped together and that’s not really fair. Group in the major banks with those mega corps as well.

A Rogan podcast featuring one of the more dubious members of government...dangerous stuff IMO.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...rfk-jr-drug-regulation?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

[robp135]

A Rogan podcast featuring one of the more dubious members of government...dangerous stuff IMO.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...rfk-jr-drug-regulation?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Not sure why this was your response…My own expiriences with peptides has been great though.