Thread: Where do you get your world news?

I just find all those avenues wastes of time, really. Ron Paul's campaign never got off the ground, or it's foot in the door. Funny you'd mention Ron Paul, the time I followed Ron Paul's campaign was a pretty negative time in my life and it provided me with a form of escapist entertainment from the crap I had to deal with at the time. That's all it was. I can admit that now.

Afterall, elections are predetermined and there is absolutely no point in voting in today's corporatized globalist system. You'd honestly have a better chance doing acid and meditating yourself into a parallel reality with Ron Paul as president than going out there wasting your time holding a sign up for him...

Not that me squandering away minutes on here is any different. It's exactly the same, actually. This is admittedly a waste of time, too... At least I don't fool myself when I come here, though.

That's sadly all one succeeds in doing when they write a letter, or hold a sign up for a political candidate-- they delude themselves and take part in other people's dreams for lack of having anything better to do with themselves...

Originally Posted by SolSkye

Whoa there.

I never thought I'd say this but, for once, I actually agree with Half/dreaming on that...

I haven't watched TV, or actively searched out any "news", in over 4 years without having a problem. The stories that happen to pass through the filter I put up, are obviously major enough to sneak through... like the earthquake in China, etc...

Arguably, one actively choosing to keep informed with the endless barrage of ills of the world on a daily basis, would be more of a morbid fascination than anything else. I would say it's a form of escapism from their own lot in life, and most times is wrought from wading in pools of their own stagnation and unproductivity... But, because it's considered "news" by the mainstream they feel themselves able to write it off as something informative...

Could someone tell me what informing yourself with said "news" from mainstream outlets has ever done for bettering you as individuals or a society?

(Please note, that by informing yourselves, I'm not talking about positive news stories like interesting technological advancements, scientific discoveries, or the other positive stories that personally interest you, but rather the unending negative ones that dominate our news and push us into a fear oriented mindsets.)

News is knowledge of what is happening. If you are weak enough to be influenced or driven by the news, be my guest. News do not but me into a fear orieted mindset. A government can completly manipulate those who are scared of the truth. Have you ever read 1984?

Instead of deluding yourself in dreams, rise to power.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

I just find all those avenues wastes of time, really. Ron Paul's campaign never got off the ground, or it's foot in the door. Funny you'd mention Ron Paul, the time I followed Ron Paul's campaign was a pretty negative time in my life and it provided me with a form of escapist entertainment from the crap I had to deal with at the time. That's all it was. I can admit that now.



Afterall, elections are predetermined and there is absolutely no point in voting in today's corporatized globalist system. You'd honestly have a better change of doing acid and meditating yourself into a parallel reality with Ron Paul as president than going out there wasting your time holding a sign up for him...



Not that me squandering away minutes on here is any different. It's exactly the same, actually. This is admittedly a waste of time, too... At least I don't fool myself when I come here, though.



That's sadly all one succeeds in doing when they write a letter, or hold a sign up for a political candidate-- they delude themselves and take part in other people's dreams for lack of having anything better to do with themselves...

Look man, you can drop acid and meditate all you want, but I won't have a clear conscience unless I'm doing my part, however small that may be, to make the world a better place. Apathy never cured anything.

Originally Posted by Dreamworld

News is knowledge of what is happening. If you are weak enough to be influenced or driven by the news, be my guest. News do not but me into a fear orieted mindset. A government can completly manipulate those who are scared of the truth. Have you ever read 1984?

Instead of deluding yourself in dreams, rise to power.

How could you say it doesn't influence you? The simple act of perceiving something presented by someone else influences your senses enough to entertain these different trains of thought of other people's realities that you haven't directly experienced yourself...

Originally Posted by 27

Look man, you can drop acid and meditate all you want, but I won't have a clear conscience unless I'm doing my part, however small that may be, to make the world a better place. Apathy never cured anything.

I'm not apathetic, I just feel your intention and perception is everything so if you are living your life true to your goals, and who or what you are, those opportunities to help naturally draw themselves into your life... I didn't actively search out or ask to play on certain charity events for victims of various natural disasters. It just happens.

The initiative to do anything always starts and ends with you. The media just makes people passive and take one's spark or initiative away until they just sit around and mope about it or take passive instead of active roles...

Originally Posted by SolSkye

How could you say it doesn't influence you? The simple act of perceiving something presented by someone else influences your senses enough to entertain these different trains of thought of other people's realities that you haven't directly experienced yourself...





I'm not apathetic, I just feel your intention and perception is everything so if you are living your life true to your goals, and who or what you are, those opportunities to help naturally draw themselves into your life... I didn't actively search out or ask to play on certain charity events for victims of various natural disasters. It just happens.

The initiative to do anything always starts and ends with you. The media just makes people passive and take one's spark or initiative away until they just sit around and mope about it or take passive instead of active roles...

But I do not go out and experience it.

MTV. Of course...

Dream Views.

Fox News is not a good place to be getting your information from. Here's just one example of why:

Earlier this year they ran a segment on the game Mass Effect for the Xbox360. They claimed that it contained full frontal digital nudity and X-rated sex scenes. Their 'expert' they brought in to talk about the game was a psychologist and an author of a self-help book. She gave incorrect statistics (the largest demographic in consumers of video games is the 18-34 yr old male) and incorrect information on the game. The entirety of her research consisted of asking someone on the set before the segment about the game and being told "it's like porn". That was the extent of her knowledge on the subject, and she's the 'expert'. Journalistic integrity is decidedly absent here.

When confronted by a member of the gaming industry that designed and marketed Mass Effect, she started saying that the game was flat out pornographic, to which he asked her "Have you even played our game?". She gave a condescending laugh and replied "No".

The broadcast in question
G4's Adam Sessler has this to say about it
Cooper Lawrence's book that gamers subsequently trashed with 1 star reviews

This isn't an isolated incident with FOX either. Anything with even a hint sex or violence in it is sensationalized, and when someone is brought on the show to defend the position of what is being attacked, they are hardly ever afforded equal time to refute what is being wrongly stated. The only thing accomplished by the panel that comes on afterwards is a display of how they're out of touch with the culture and technology of their childrens generation. If they had cut that panel out and given the video game representative 2 more minutes to make his case they could have set the record straight and avoided pissing off EA as well as any gamer with access to a TV or the internet.

Originally Posted by Alextanium

Earlier this year they ran a segment on the game Mass Effect for the Xbox360. They claimed that it contained full frontal digital nudity and X-rated sex scenes. Their 'expert' they brought in to talk about the game was a psychologist and an author of a self-help book. She gave incorrect statistics (the largest demographic in consumers of video games is the 18-34 yr old male) and incorrect information on the game. The entirety of her research consisted of asking someone on the set before the segment about the game and being told "it's like porn". That was the extent of her knowledge on the subject, and she's the 'expert'. Journalistic integrity is decidedly absent here.

When confronted by a member of the gaming industry that designed and marketed Mass Effect, she started saying that the game was flat out pornographic, to which he asked her "Have you even played our game?". She gave a condescending laugh and replied "No".

The broadcast in question
G4's Adam Sessler has this to say about it
Cooper Lawrence's book that gamers subsequently trashed with 1 star reviews

This isn't an isolated incident with FOX either. Anything with even a hint sex or violence in it is sensationalized, and when someone is brought on the show to defend the position of what is being attacked, they are hardly ever afforded equal time to refute what is being wrongly stated. The only thing accomplished by the panel that comes on afterwards is a display of how they're out of touch with the culture and technology of their childrens generation. If they had cut that panel out and given the video game representative 2 more minutes to make his case they could have set the record straight and avoided pissing off EA as well as any gamer with access to a TV or the internet.

Was it a news show or a commentary show? There is a huge difference. Commentators are opinionated, but news reporters just report the news, though some do it with a political slant. They should never be opinionated. They should only be informational. Are you saying Fox News had an opinionated news report? I don't see them doing that. Even the commentators usually bring in people to represent the other side, but some people (like Oneironaut) say that those people are usually ridiculous excuses for alternative view expressers. That is definitely the case sometimes. My point is that you cannot take what one commentator says and construe it to be a news report and hold the entire network responsible for it. The network is full of people's opinions, and a lot of them are liberal. What you are talking about sounds like an opinion piece and not an information piece. I have not yet seen Fox news reports like what you are describing.

EDIT: Oh, it was on The Live Desk. That is a commentary show that is more like a news show than the O'Reilly Factor or Hannity and Colmes. Like all of the commentary shows, the news is reported, but in an opinionated way. I didn't even know that lady's name until just then because I never really paid much attention to it. She is always spewing her opinions and biases. Alan Colmes, Geraldo Rivera, and Greta Van Susteren do that too, but they are all liberals. That lady is not anything big on the network, and she probably won't last that long. She publicly admitted that she was misinformed and apologized for going overboard with the description of the game. If you really want to see unbalanced bias, watch Keith Olberman on MSNBC. I don't think he has ever apologized for any of his asinine comments.

Did you notice how there was a guest on the Fox show to correct Cooper Lawrence? He set the record straight. Fox News commentators provide people who represent the other side of the argument, unlike most of the commentators on the other networks. Good luck ever finding Keith Olberman or Dan Abrahms doing that.

Originally Posted by Alextanium

Fox News is not a good place to be getting your information from. Here's just one example of why:

I don't think anybody should ever rely on any one source of news. People should get it from different places, and I think a lot can be learned from watching both liberal and conservative news networks. The biases become more apparent along with the truth.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

What I mean is, if so-called "news" was really meant for you, you would've already known and experienced it first hand without having to "inform" yourself about it.

Anything negative known through second or third party sources is about as useful as rubbernecking as you pass an accident on the highway-- it does no one justice and is more a subconscious way of basking in the glow from your perspective and feeling better for not having to experience the same thing, whether one is consciously aware of that or not.

Well, you can speak for yourself, but I believe the merit is in "knowing," in general - not necessarily for any "purpose" other than simple awareness. Anyone can say "Well yeah, but if you're truly 'aware,' then you already know this or that," but of the truth is, they are not truly aware of the validity of something until it's been confirmed.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

In all honesty, even if you contributed some money to a charity or something that benefited those affected by the typhoon or earthquake, what did the knowledge of those events actually do for you as a person, other than provide you with some water cooler talk at work?

Not everything worth doing has to have some sort of (even though it's subjective anyway) "purpose." Ultimately, your making music doesn't have any "purpose" other than make you happy for your own subjective reasons.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

What did people around the world do to get their news before the internet, newspapers, mass media, etc? In those times, people were arguably no more worse for the wear from not having known about it. In all reality, they probably spent their time doing something more productive, instead.

That's an odd thing to say. Learning about world news is useless because people that lived before us got along without doing it? People before us have been always learning about the world around them, through different means, just as they have always been making music, through different means.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

I would argue, this perverse need of ours in this digital age to keep ourselves informed of the ills of the world is something that holds us back and bring us down as individuals.

Maybe our disagreement stems from your idea that everything in the news is objectively "ill."

Originally Posted by SolSkye

As David Icke said in the video I posted, "The whole of this manipulated society is globally structured to make us fear, to make us have stress, to make us worry about tomorrow, have guilt about yesterday, and forget about now... it brings us into a slow dense vibrational state."

So, basically what you're saying is "ignorance is bliss?" Well that's fine. I'm just not really one that falls in line with that sort of thinking. I would rather choose the willpower to be blissful even with knowledge than to localize my thinking to the smallest possible level of perception, just to keep myself happy.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

I haven't watched TV, or actively searched out any "news", in over 4 years without having a problem. The stories that happen to pass through the filter I put up, are obviously major enough to sneak through... like the earthquake in China, etc...

You seem to grant pardon to stories that you "happen" to learn about through other means, but condemn the idea of a desire to become aware of these same stories. I guess we just don't agree on that.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

Arguably, one actively choosing to keep informed with the endless barrage of ills of the world on a daily basis, would be more of a morbid fascination than anything else. I would say it's a form of escapism from their own lot in life, and most times is wrought from wading in pools of their own stagnation and unproductivity... But, because it's considered "news" by the mainstream they feel themselves able to write it off as something informative...

Again, I feel you're incredibly biased. The "news" you hear about, through hearsay, is given a pardon. The "news" people hear about, through other outlets is some sort of perversion. That is basically saying that "If I choose to believe the sun spins around the Earth, I am good. If I want to read a book that explains how the universe really works, I am an escapist."

Originally Posted by SolSkye

Could someone tell me what informing yourself with said "news" from mainstream outlets has ever done for bettering you as individuals or a society?

(Please note, that by informing yourselves, I'm not talking about positive news stories like interesting technological advancements, scientific discoveries, or the other positive stories that personally interest you, but rather the unending negative ones that dominate our news and push us into a fear oriented mindsets.)

It expands awareness. Period. Nothing more, nothing less. Whether you allow it to "cause you to vibrate at a lower frequency" is up to the observer. You can't discriminate between positive and negative news, if you're going to demonize people that keep themselves informed by following the news. The news is not always bad. The "escapism" you're talking about is flawed, if you're only talking about one portion of the news. This thread is geared toward all of the news.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

I guess it's about, what one does after getting informed...

Has the simple knowledge of any "news" brought about any real changes into your life other than just knowing and whining about an infraction of ones civil liberties?

If it motivates one to better themselves and others that's one thing... if it just causes them to know for the sake of knowing... thats another...

What has "real changes" have awareness of black holes, dark matter, subatomic particles, quantum mechanics, etc. brought into my life? Probably nothing. What "real changes" have awareness of the way our solar system i structured brought about in my life? Not very much. Do I enjoy learning about things of that nature? Yes.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

I just find all those avenues wastes of time, really. Ron Paul's campaign never got off the ground, or it's foot in the door. Funny you'd mention Ron Paul, the time I followed Ron Paul's campaign was a pretty negative time in my life and it provided me with a form of escapist entertainment from the crap I had to deal with at the time. That's all it was. I can admit that now.

Afterall, elections are predetermined and there is absolutely no point in voting in today's corporatized globalist system. You'd honestly have a better chance doing acid and meditating yourself into a parallel reality with Ron Paul as president than going out there wasting your time holding a sign up for him...

Not that me squandering away minutes on here is any different. It's exactly the same, actually. This is admittedly a waste of time, too... At least I don't fool myself when I come here, though.

I think your problem is that you try to subject everyone else to your standard of "meaning." It's arguable that life, in general, has no "meaning." People search for some arbitrary "meaning" in their lives, trying to alienate those that have different standards than they do, choosing not to realize that their own pursuits of meaning are probably no more objectively 'meaningful' than the next mans. So your squandering away minutes here at DV has no "meaning," .....so?

Originally Posted by SolSkye

That's sadly all one succeeds in doing when they write a letter, or hold a sign up for a political candidate-- they delude themselves and take part in other people's dreams for lack of having anything better to do with themselves...

What does one do "better" what themselves that may not seem meaningless to someone else?

Originally Posted by SolSkye

The initiative to do anything always starts and ends with you. The media just makes people passive and take one's spark or initiative away until they just sit around and mope about it or take passive instead of active roles...

How is it that you find out about something to take an active role in, if not for the media? Even if you heard it by word of mouth, you are likely hearing it from someone who got it from the media.

I am aware that the stories that trickle down to my neck of the woods are from mass media, that doesn't change the idea of me not enjoying to hear about them or thinking they do anything to expand our consciousness. Expanding awareness and limiting awareness are really left up to the person to decide which is which.

Burying one's head in the sand could be interpreted by one as pouring their perception outward with mindless mass-media and entertainment... to another burying one's head in the sand would be pouring one's perception inward and building on themselves... which is better? Both and neither. That's for the perceiver to decide.

In any event, some nice points, but I guess we'll ultimately have to agree to disagree... because I don't see this turning into anything other than a flexing of one's opinion of the importance of the inner vs. outer world. I think the inner is most important because I feel that creates the outer.

I'd also like for us to note the extremely questionable coincidence of the worst earthquake in chinese history occurring at the strangely similar timing of everyone in the world subconsciously sending out their negative thoughts and energy about the upcoming olympics and Tibet thing...

Do I think the two are causally linked? Yes... yes I do. I think the world is starting to understand that intention and perception do create the world we live in.

Good Thread.

Usually for me I check out BBC, other things like Money Marketing, Mortgage Strategy and Times Online

I try to get my hands on as many sources of various opinions as I can. I watch fox news very faithfully so I'm well aware of what talking points are beings imbedded into the minds of the backwash but I also watch CNN a little bit, MSNBC, C-SPAN, mostly youtube.

EDIT: To be honest, I should be more open minded when watching Fox, I essentially autmatically not only assume that every statistic is false but automatically jump to why they decided to put that false information up.

The Colbert Report. His satire on major events is hilarious.

On a more serious note, I suppose I check multiple sites. CNN, yahoo, msn. I never really notice a difference in the bias though

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

EDIT: To be honest, I should be more open minded when watching Fox, I essentially autmatically not only assume that every statistic is false but automatically jump to why they decided to put that false information up.

It's not about false statistics. It's about their interpretation. I doubt any news company uses false statistics. They just interpret it differently.

For example, one can say that an astonishing 20% of car accident victims are under 18. But what is hidden is that, indeed, 20% of people who use cars are under 18. So that number is pretty much expected.

There are two people, and two candies. Statistically, each gets one candy. That doesn't mean each really did get a candy.

---

Google is usually my primary source, but I prefer discussion boards - anything that is important enough will be brought up on those.

forum.prisonplanet.com
www.prisonplanet.com
www.infowars.com
American Free Press

What?
World news?
I don't bother much with it.