This stings more tbh because local news is a part of my nostalgia. It just felt a lot more relatable because it concerns news happening in your own backyard, but it's all fake too, and in the giant economic zone that is the US what little regional culture there is in many places has largely vanished. Even in the parts of the country with deeper roots regional culture is vanishing.
Local news outlets have always been corrupt of course, just like their national and international counterparts, just on a smaller scale. But regardless, real, actual local news, rather than this homogenized slop, desperately needs to make a comeback, because there's so much more that regular people can influence locally than nationally.
I no longer watch MSM, but when I catch someone else looking at it I've noticed a lot of what gets passed off as "local news" is just advertising for local businesses masquerading as news.
All local news is good for is the weather report and sports scores. Anyone who relies on the MSM for information--and especially commentary--on current events gets what he deserves: lies and groupthink. Watching it is good only for comparison to independent freelancers with some credibility, and they are in short supply.
I think the proliferation of at-home entertainment greatly accelerated the destruction of regional culture. There is so much atomization inherent in people sequestering themselves away to watch Netflix and play videos games all day. How does that not annihilate any sense of neighborhood or community? How many people today have no idea who lives across the hall or across the street? And it starts so young now that we have multiple generations of people never knew anything else.
How do you defend your culture in the face of such atomization? Look at the peoples who don’t have the “benefit” of such hedonist escapism. They still have the capacity to project positive cultural force. All they have to do is resist the siren call of modern media, and their cultural dominance is assured. So many in the west paint these “backward savages” as stupid - and they frequently are - but they have evolved a strategy that will see them through. So who is the true retard?
All true and there is natural globalization and hyper-socialization from technology (Uncle Ted was right) but I think a lot of it can be firewalled through stronger force of law. Most people get their news fed to them from BigTech trending headlines, cable giants, newspapers (even if indirectly), and local tv. They get culture from trending videos, social media, and TV. All of this could be regulated through legislation if we had the will to do so. Make mass media local again. Enforce true free speech online. Forbid companies from complying with foreign laws. Restructure all mass communications to eliminate the fourth estate.
Part of the problem is that most "independent" media is just commentary, rather than investigative journalism, so even though everyone hates the MSM, most indie media just comments on whatever the MSM puts out anyways. And the few people doing actual indie journalism get dismissed as "crackpots" by optics cucks chasing "respectability" and access because when you actually do your own investigating, you end up finding a lot of "conspiracy theories" aka the radical notion that the government does stuff it's not supposed to do and then lies about it.
Looks like 6 years. Pertaining to Sinclair Broadcast Group. AP article here: https://archive.ph/Ug5GB
The anchors give no specific examples. Sinclair, whose corporate leadership leans right, uses terminology familiar to Trump and his criticisms of “fake news.” In the message, the anchors say they “work very hard to seek the truth and strive to be fair, balanced and factual.”
Timothy Burke, a video editor at Deadspin, said he read a CNN story last month about the script being sent to local stations and contacted a media monitoring service to collect examples of the statement being read on the air. After receiving more than 50, he fashioned them into a video that shows anchors reading different portions of the text, either simultaneously or one after the other.
This has been making the rounds since the middle of 21, and possibly further back than that. Not to excuse them, but they're all affiliate stations from two companies, both owned by the same people, the Sinclaire broadcast group.
It could be on account of these 15 Billionaires who collectively own America's News Media Companies: Carlos Slim Helu - The New York Times, Warren Buffett - regional daily papers, Peter Thiel, Viktor Vekselberg - Gawker, Rupert Murdoch and Michael Bloomberg are longtime media moguls who made their fortunes in the news business. Others, like Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, bought publications as a side investment after building a substantial fortune in another industry.
Billionaires own part or all of several of America's influential national newspapers, including The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and the New York Times , Comcast CEO Brian Roberts and Liberty Media Chairman John Malone, own or control cable TV networks, Michael Bloomberg - Bloomberg LP and Bloomberg Media, Rupert Murdoch - News Corp, Donald and Samuel "Si" Newhouse - Advance Publications, Cox Family - Atlanta Journal-Constitution, John Henry - The Boston Globe, Sheldon Adelson - The Las Vegas Review-Journal, Morningstar CEO Joe Mansueto,Mortimer Zuckerman - US News & World Report, New York Daily News Michael Bloomberg, the richest billionaire in the media business, Barbey family - Village Voice, Stanley Hubbard – Hubbard Broadcasting, Patrick Soon-Shiong - pharmaceutical billionaire, Tribune Publishing Co.
As far as I know, even this info is outdated, as Newscorp and a huge part of the Fox networks are now owned by Disney, so it got consolidated even more than this.
It's worth pointing out that Fox News and Sports were spun off to the Murdoch group so it's not owned by DisneyNewsCorp.
IMO if you're looking at consolidation the more important suspects are the global news agencies, owned by people like the Rothschilds, where all the other papers get their stories from.
My guess is that the head office, wherever it is, puts out a memo to affiliate stations dictating the topics, the opinions on those topics, and "recommends" the language to be used.
The same sort of montage has been used to illustrate exactly the same thing from alleged political "opposition" outlets like CNN, MSNBC, and the former Big Three networks.
Ron Burgundy would not bend the knee to Sinclair Broadcast Group. If he's going to read hackneyed political pablum on air then it's going to be HIS pablum, by gum.
This stings more tbh because local news is a part of my nostalgia. It just felt a lot more relatable because it concerns news happening in your own backyard, but it's all fake too, and in the giant economic zone that is the US what little regional culture there is in many places has largely vanished. Even in the parts of the country with deeper roots regional culture is vanishing.
Local news outlets have always been corrupt of course, just like their national and international counterparts, just on a smaller scale. But regardless, real, actual local news, rather than this homogenized slop, desperately needs to make a comeback, because there's so much more that regular people can influence locally than nationally.
I no longer watch MSM, but when I catch someone else looking at it I've noticed a lot of what gets passed off as "local news" is just advertising for local businesses masquerading as news.
Once you see it, you can't unsee it.
i'd genuinely prefer that over whatever globohomo current thing slop they want me to care about
All local news is good for is the weather report and sports scores. Anyone who relies on the MSM for information--and especially commentary--on current events gets what he deserves: lies and groupthink. Watching it is good only for comparison to independent freelancers with some credibility, and they are in short supply.
I think the proliferation of at-home entertainment greatly accelerated the destruction of regional culture. There is so much atomization inherent in people sequestering themselves away to watch Netflix and play videos games all day. How does that not annihilate any sense of neighborhood or community? How many people today have no idea who lives across the hall or across the street? And it starts so young now that we have multiple generations of people never knew anything else.
How do you defend your culture in the face of such atomization? Look at the peoples who don’t have the “benefit” of such hedonist escapism. They still have the capacity to project positive cultural force. All they have to do is resist the siren call of modern media, and their cultural dominance is assured. So many in the west paint these “backward savages” as stupid - and they frequently are - but they have evolved a strategy that will see them through. So who is the true retard?
All true and there is natural globalization and hyper-socialization from technology (Uncle Ted was right) but I think a lot of it can be firewalled through stronger force of law. Most people get their news fed to them from BigTech trending headlines, cable giants, newspapers (even if indirectly), and local tv. They get culture from trending videos, social media, and TV. All of this could be regulated through legislation if we had the will to do so. Make mass media local again. Enforce true free speech online. Forbid companies from complying with foreign laws. Restructure all mass communications to eliminate the fourth estate.
Part of the problem is that most "independent" media is just commentary, rather than investigative journalism, so even though everyone hates the MSM, most indie media just comments on whatever the MSM puts out anyways. And the few people doing actual indie journalism get dismissed as "crackpots" by optics cucks chasing "respectability" and access because when you actually do your own investigating, you end up finding a lot of "conspiracy theories" aka the radical notion that the government does stuff it's not supposed to do and then lies about it.
Plenty of these. This "dangerous to our democracy" one, a bunch of stuff about Trump, Ron Paul, and some more I sadly forget.
Not that it isn't still true, but this video is at least 4 years old by now.
Looks like 6 years. Pertaining to Sinclair Broadcast Group. AP article here: https://archive.ph/Ug5GB
I suspected as much. I'm sure it's common practice across all MSM "news" sewer pipes.
This has been making the rounds since the middle of 21, and possibly further back than that. Not to excuse them, but they're all affiliate stations from two companies, both owned by the same people, the Sinclaire broadcast group.
It could be on account of these 15 Billionaires who collectively own America's News Media Companies: Carlos Slim Helu - The New York Times, Warren Buffett - regional daily papers, Peter Thiel, Viktor Vekselberg - Gawker, Rupert Murdoch and Michael Bloomberg are longtime media moguls who made their fortunes in the news business. Others, like Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, bought publications as a side investment after building a substantial fortune in another industry.
Billionaires own part or all of several of America's influential national newspapers, including The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and the New York Times , Comcast CEO Brian Roberts and Liberty Media Chairman John Malone, own or control cable TV networks, Michael Bloomberg - Bloomberg LP and Bloomberg Media, Rupert Murdoch - News Corp, Donald and Samuel "Si" Newhouse - Advance Publications, Cox Family - Atlanta Journal-Constitution, John Henry - The Boston Globe, Sheldon Adelson - The Las Vegas Review-Journal, Morningstar CEO Joe Mansueto,Mortimer Zuckerman - US News & World Report, New York Daily News Michael Bloomberg, the richest billionaire in the media business, Barbey family - Village Voice, Stanley Hubbard – Hubbard Broadcasting, Patrick Soon-Shiong - pharmaceutical billionaire, Tribune Publishing Co.
As far as I know, even this info is outdated, as Newscorp and a huge part of the Fox networks are now owned by Disney, so it got consolidated even more than this.
It's worth pointing out that Fox News and Sports were spun off to the Murdoch group so it's not owned by DisneyNewsCorp.
IMO if you're looking at consolidation the more important suspects are the global news agencies, owned by people like the Rothschilds, where all the other papers get their stories from.
Hearst was an amateur and "Citizen Kane" was a fairy tale compared to the current state of the "news" media.
It's the same "prep burger" from the same mockingbird bird approved company.
My guess is that the head office, wherever it is, puts out a memo to affiliate stations dictating the topics, the opinions on those topics, and "recommends" the language to be used.
The same sort of montage has been used to illustrate exactly the same thing from alleged political "opposition" outlets like CNN, MSNBC, and the former Big Three networks.
I saw this a while back. Some people still don’t see it
Ron Burgundy would not bend the knee to Sinclair Broadcast Group. If he's going to read hackneyed political pablum on air then it's going to be HIS pablum, by gum.