Legacy media

[daxwc]

Legacy media, once the trusted source for news, is dead. Trump Derangement Syndrome; where bias often overshadowed objective reporting, has put the final nail in its coffin. This is simply the latest chapter in a long decline that began during the Vietnam War, when the media's credibility first came into question. Since then, it’s been on a downward death spiral, with trust eroding as sensationalism and agendas replaced journalism's foundational principles.

It no longer matters who wins the election.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CiZSXxdYsA

[Trev]

I got so fed up with shouting at it and turning it off, I gave up on MSM 20 years ago.
You can lie to some of the people some of the time, but you cant lie to all the people all of the time.

[daxwc]

Well, Trev, at least you don’t have to deal with state-run propaganda machines like the BBC and CBC. Imagine paying taxes to fund an institution you may not agree with or even use, while it gets to decide what counts as “information” and what doesn’t. The public is expected to accept these “truths” without question, as though a government approved narrative is the only one worth hearing.

History has shown that whenever governments take control of information, it rarely works out for the people in the long run. What starts as “guiding public opinion” often ends in limiting freedoms, stifling dissent, and paving the way for oppression. Information should be free and open, not filtered through the lens of a state agenda.

[daxwc]

In theory, models like the CBC and BBC are supposed to operate independently of government control, but the reality is more complicated. Despite claims of autonomy, a feedback loop often develops between these broadcasters and the state, aligning narratives and perspectives over time. Since the government holds the purse strings, funding decisions does influence editorial choices, making true independence impossible to maintain. When one political party pushes to cut funding, downsize, or even abolish these institutions, it leads to “political boot-licking” as these organizations work to appease those in power to secure their survival. This relationship creates an environment where institutions originally meant to inform objectively become tools that reinforce government agendas, subtly manipulating the very public they’re meant to serve.

[Tarsier79]

Don't worry. Soon you will live in a cashless society. The government will be able to freeze your funds if they don't like your views or you don't drink the cool-aid. Freedoms are slowly being dissolved a little at a time so no-one notices, and no-one is upset enough to do anything about it.

[thx4]

This relationship creates an environment where institutions originally meant to inform objectively become tools that reinforce government agendas, subtly manipulating the very public they’re meant to serve.

Pas tout à fait, pour être bien informé il faut payer, le reste c'est de la propagande...

Not quite, to be well informed you have to pay, the rest is propaganda...

Pourquoi il faudrait s'inquiéter ? le monde est parfait, tout arrive à point, rien ne se passe sans une bonne raison, et cette bonne raison implique un choix que tu crois être le bon, tu ne feras rien d'autre, et tu auras l'illusion d'agir.
Que tu choisisses un camp de soumis ou d'insoumis, ne changera rien, la machine ne sait pas où elle va, elle va sans but.
Dangereux celui qui prétend connaitre la bonne voix, et clame haut et fort ce qu'il faudrait faire, je lui conseille de fermer sa gueule.

Why should we worry? The world is perfect, everything happens just in time, nothing happens without a good reason, and this good reason implies a choice that you believe to be the right one, you'll do nothing else, and you'll have the illusion of acting.
It doesn't matter whether you choose the submissive or the insubordinate camp, the machine doesn't know where it's going, it's going aimlessly.
Dangerous is the one who claims to know the right voice, and loudly proclaims what should be done, I advise him to shut his mouth.

[daxwc]

T79 as Canadian, I’ve already seen firsthand how financial systems can be used to suppress dissent, especially with the trucker protests over COVID mandates. During those protests, the government took the unprecedented step of freezing the bank accounts of people who had donated to the cause; even those who had contributed as little as $20. Some weren’t even on the front lines of the protest but were still punished financially for simply supporting it.

This incident really highlighted how a cashless society could be used as a tool for control. Without cash, everyone is reliant on digital systems that banks and governments can freeze or restrict at any time. With these kinds of powers, it’s possible to pressure people into compliance by threatening their financial stability. There was people that had to leave the country.

Seeing this play out here in Canada has made me more aware of how slowly and subtly freedoms can erode over time. It wasn’t long ago that this level of control over personal finances would have seemed unthinkable, but now it’s a reality people are already dealing with. The gradual shift toward a cashless society only makes it easier for governments to wield this kind of power—and that’s definitely something to be cautious about.

[thx4]

@daxwc, je préfère nettement vivre maintenant qu'il y a 5000 ans.
Ce n'est pas un peu de liquide qui va changer grand-chose, c'est une vue romantique de la liberté...
En venant au monde tu es cuit, en vieillissant tu t'en rends compte...
La vitesse de propagation de l'information nous sature d'actualités en tous genres.
En 1789 la révolution nous à permis de nous émanciper et de couper la tête de notre roi.
Il n'y a aucune raison de croire que nous aurions perdu la force de nous battre, j'ai une totale confiance en l'humanité, aussi bien pour s'autodétruire que pour survivre. 🙂

@daxwc, I'd much rather live now than 5000 years ago.
It's not a bit of cash that's going to change much, it's a romantic view of freedom...
When you're born you're cooked, as you get older you realize it...
The speed with which information spreads saturates us with news of all kinds.
In 1789, the revolution allowed us to emancipate ourselves and cut off our king's head.
There's no reason to believe that we would have lost the strength to fight, I have total confidence in humanity, both to self-destruct and to survive. 🙂

[daxwc]

One way to guard against potential ‘jackboot’ tactics is by diversifying where we hold our assets. Having multiple bank accounts with different institutions or even considering one in another country can create security if one account is ever frozen or restricted. Or maybe holding Bitcoin in a hard wallet and have strategies with multiple exists. The same goes for investments: keeping stock assets spread across various brokers and regions provides a safety net.

Humanity’s strength lies in our ability to adapt and survive. But history has shown that adaptation alone isn’t enough; we still have to actively defend our freedoms, even as we adjust to a rapidly changing world. The shift to a cashless, digital society might be inevitable, but that doesn’t mean we’re without options. Part of preserving our freedoms means thinking ahead and finding ways to stay resilient and flexible.

This isn’t just about adapting though; it’s about actively safeguarding our ability to make choices and maintain autonomy. Freedom is something we have to protect by being proactive, staying vigilant, and ensuring that we always have options. By thinking ahead and refusing to rely on any one system, we can maintain a degree of freedom and resilience no matter how much the landscape changes.

It is just an opinion. I get it, some people crave submission, oppression and happily coddled by a nanny state that slowly morphs into an authoritarian bootjacking government. 8)

[daxwc]

https://youtu.be/Xl4VMD6lADg?si=KFkP3N4Hg9TRZpYT

[daxwc]

This wasn’t about politics.

Here's what I'm getting at: Common sense should've told you that COVID came from a lab a 4 miles from the outbreak, not some wet market from a bat that came 1,200 miles away. Yet somehow, through pressure and “official” stories with “real science”, they got people to believe it. Governments did that through intimidation, gas lighting, censorship and bootjacking their populace.

Could the same thing be happening in science and physics today? How much of what we are told is real, and how much is just narrative? At some point, you’ve got to ask: where does common sense fit in against all the so-called “consensus”? The biggest example is climate change; not that the climate isn’t changing but that the narratives and agendas worked through it. Funny how we're supposed to trust every “expert” blindly, like they’ve cornered the market on truth.

Perpetual motion is impossible. Why? When we spin around on a rotating earth? Why when we know so little about the universe and energy. Why isn’t it just stated at this time it doesn’t seem possible but the quest continues.

[Robinhood46]

You have to bare in mind Daxwc, that for lots of people the wet market was an excellent explanation, for no other reason that they are vegan, vegetarian or anti other people eating animals they don't eat. It had nothing to do with the information allowing them to come to that conclusion, just that that being the conclusion was really good for their cause.
It's all the same stuff going on with our brains that allowed us to believe witches and the earth was flat. We are too lazy intellectually to double and triple check everything, we are told. If it sounds plausible, that's good enough. What causes the problems is that we don't want to acknowledge a feedback loop that affects how we evaluate the validity of information (bias).
I think we are going to be doing it forever, we aren't very good at learning from other people's mistakes, we convince ourselves, we aren't stupid enough to make them. We think they did it because they were stupid, not because they were intelligent humans with the same human defaults.

[daxwc]

You make some good points Robinhood to consider.

We weren’t born free. We will never be free. The freedoms we have our ancestors fought for; keeping them demands a fight. Expanding those freedoms? That takes even more resolve. True freedom isn’t handed out neatly; it comes at a cost, and often that cost is lesser freedoms need to be trespassed on.

For example: Take freedom of speech. If we genuinely want it, that means accepting that others will say things that offend, upset, or even hurt us. Those who grew up in big families already know how to handle this in fighting, disagreeing, and still getting along. Single children, though, often miss out on learning these skills and as adults lean toward silencing others rather than facing ideas they don’t like. But here’s the truth: freedom isn’t about creating comfort; it’s about enduring discomfort and letting people speak their minds, no matter how much it stings. Freedom is tough, and if we want it, we better be ready to face its rough edges. In the battle truth will prevail with active participation.

[daxwc]

If we could all speak openly, as individuals, bypassing governments, censorship, and hidden agendas, imagine the impact. Talking to each other like family, directly and honestly which would cut through the noise and distrust. No segments, no walls between us, just real conversations with real people. When people connect freely, understanding deepens, and the world would be far better off than a fragmented, censored landscape divided by agendas. People all over the earth just want the same thing; live their best life and have children. Their true wants are mostly all the same.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQUXuQ6Zd9w

Somebody seems in control of it all. It isn't me and it isn't you.

[Robinhood46]

What i find extremely, and i don't use that word lightly, worrying, is how you can get in serious trouble for what someone thinks you said. Irrespective of what you actually said, or actually meant to say.
We see it here on this site, all the time. It isn't the same problem, obviously, because nobody gets in trouble, but it is the same mechanisms involved.
You explain the mechanism that is going around an axle in your head, and i tell you it's a load of crap and it wont work. The truth is i don't actually know what the mechanism is, only a mechanism i can think of that covers your explanation. We've all had it happen to us, we explain something and we are told that, something that has nothing to do with what we are explaining, will fail, and miserably too. It's only when we actually show a real build, or a simulation, if a simulation is possible, that we actually know what we are talking about.

Now imagine how that goes down if we do the same thing with debates like transgender, racism, climate change, vaccinations, and all the other topics that you can get in trouble for. You end up having your career ruined, and in some cases, going to prison, because something you said "could" be perceived to mean something.
It is the sort of behaviour you would expect of us when we were still fighting each other with sticks and stones.