Log in

View Full Version : Manipulation of Society



Rasta_Hibs
25-10-2012, 01:37 PM
Recently I have been thinking that the general public are being made fools off by the messages and information that is broadcast through to them by the mainstream media.

I think I’ll probably add to this thread later with more thoughts but I’ll start it off and I was just looking for other opinions, people to pick holes in what I’m saying or not. Basically just to discuss life/society in general and how we may be effected by what we see through the media.

1) - The television - It occurred to me that a large section of the public gain their knowledge about pretty much everything in life from the broadcasts from the television. It’s such a wide topic but I’ll try to put my views across as clearly and well-constructed as I can.

Reality TV - Aimed at the most impressionable members of society 18-20's. Programs such as Towie, Brother, Towie, Made in Chelsea you get the kind of programs I mean. I think these programs do not promote a positive message but instead give a message of consumerism , hedonism, sleeping about, gossip, lacks any real substance of any kind. To cut it down I think these programs can lead to young people to lower the expectations they have in life. They promote a drunken life style also where being dumb acting dumb is classed as being cool and essentially going to get you places, such as the cast of the show. In real life this drunken, foolish existence brings nothing but trouble and young people will never reach full potential in life using these ‘Celebs’ as role Models.

The News – More and more I find that the news on the mainstream is only telling us part of a story, either lying to its audience or not investigating real issues/ stories. Examples of this range from the most recent one of Jimmy Saville. The cover up and over 20 years in show business not one investigation into the abuse. But what is the message the general public get from the media? It is Jimmy is a good eccentric guy, charity worker, Sir Jimmy and the rest. You know they built him up at the time when he was abusing people. It’s pretty obvious that the BBC / Mainstream media knew this was going on but done nothing except promote a false image of JS that helped him carry on with his abuse.

Climate change – Now that studies have shown that climate change or the earth temperature has not risen for 16 years. The evidence for this was there all along. What was the general message from the Media? Its man-made, earth is heating up etc. etc. Next thing we know we have more carbon taxes, rules and regulations, government bodies costing millions telling us all about man made climate change when in fact for the last 16 years this has been false.

Iraq – All the main stream media promoted the weapons of mass destruction being the reason along with 9/11 for the war in Iraq when clearly this was not the real reason behind it. This message being used to get the general public to back this war and no oppose it.

Muslims – The general message is a negative one on the telly, you can tell by the way some people talk that they have negative opinions about the Muslim religion. Where do they get these? Mostly from the telly. Same applies to black people and the negative stereo types promoted on the television.

Banks – The banks that were caught rigging the Libor rates that effect millions of peoples finances but this is not a story until the truth had to come out. Not to mention the fact that the banks are behaving terribly but where is the news story’s really focusing on the frauds that these companies commit.

Obama was given the Nobile peace prize whilst at war in two countries. The EU is then given it when it’s the cause of violence over Europe. Just manipulation of people to back an agenda.

This applies to most main stream media.

I know I have kind of skimmed across this but I wanted to get the post out and see what people think of the general idea of what I am saying?

The_Exile
25-10-2012, 01:58 PM
My initial reaction is that you seem a bit too bright to be from Tranent :agree:

Good points though, I agree about television, hardly watch any these days it's so dire, and the human race are easily led, a single or small group of people can and are intelligent, but on the whole, we're a stupid people, suprised we didn't nuke ourselves to oblivion in the 60's.

Rasta_Hibs
25-10-2012, 02:42 PM
My initial reaction is that you seem a bit too bright to be from Tranent :agree:

Good points though, I agree about television, hardly watch any these days it's so dire, and the human race are easily led, a single or small group of people can and are intelligent, but on the whole, we're a stupid people, suprised we didn't nuke ourselves to oblivion in the 60's.

Haha mon the big T!

In addition:

Religion – I do not see why these beliefs should cause so much trouble in the world. For me it’s should be simple. If we can all agree that everyone is a free person on the earth and can express themselves in any way they choose that doesn’t harm others then it should not be of concern to anyone what other peoples religions are or if they believe in God or not. If all the world’s religions are teachings with a message of love within their meaning then surely all the world’s religions follow one God, which is love for one another. Even if your mind doesn’t agree with the concept of religion or God but you have love in your heart then that should be enough for anyone’s standards?

In my opinion the problem is not with the religions or not having a religion but the problems lie with some of the people who teach and follow them. From to religious extremists, sick evil peado priests, bigots or whatever, they are disgracing the name of the chosen religion / way of life they claim to represent. If we can agree that God or Love is the true meaning of life then surely the fighting between people over different religions and ways of life will end?

My point is if religion is a message of love then why don’t the leaders of each religion tell us that all religions are ok and everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. Instead the people get the current message of my religion or race rules over yours? In my mind whether it is intentional or not, this situation brings about a classic case of divide and conquer the people.

RyeSloan
25-10-2012, 10:26 PM
Where did you get the climate change information from?

Twa Cairpets
25-10-2012, 10:32 PM
Where did you get the climate change information from?

I'm guessing it was the daily mail story that was incorrect in its reporting, and which has a specific refutation issued about it by the met office. Sadly, it went viral amongst climate change deniers, none of whom apparently saw fit to check the original source (also a met office report)mwhich said nothing of the sort.

The_Exile
26-10-2012, 09:14 AM
Climate change is so obviously man made it's painful to listen to someone fumble around trying to deny it. The "oh but the Earth's climate naturally changes, it's not man made" argument is the most obvious of this nonsense, yes, yes it does, but over hundreds of thousands of years, not over 50 or 60 years.

Pretty Boy
26-10-2012, 09:18 AM
Climate change is so obviously man made it's painful to listen to someone fumble around trying to deny it. The "oh but the Earth's climate naturally changes, it's not man made" argument is the most obvious of this nonsense, yes, yes it does, but over hundreds of thousands of years, not over 50 or 60 years.

Even if climate change is occuring naturally and I don't for a minute believe man isn't having some impact, it always amazes me that people seem so offended about being asked to lead a cleaner and less wasteful life.

Population growth is such that making changes is going to be essential anyway as natural supplies becoming increasingly depleted yet there is higher demand for them.

Geo_1875
26-10-2012, 09:44 AM
Even if climate change is occuring naturally and I don't for a minute believe man isn't having some impact, it always amazes me that people seem so offended about being asked to lead a cleaner and less wasteful life.

Population growth is such that making changes is going to be essential anyway as natural supplies becoming increasingly depleted yet there is higher demand for them.

How about we lead cleaner less wasteful lives and introduce effective population control.

Gatecrasher
26-10-2012, 10:07 AM
Even if climate change is occuring naturally and I don't for a minute believe man isn't having some impact, it always amazes me that people seem so offended about being asked to lead a cleaner and less wasteful life.

Population growth is such that making changes is going to be essential anyway as natural supplies becoming increasingly depleted yet there is higher demand for them.

I'm not a beliver of the climate change thing but I agree who wants to breath in pollution and have rubbish eveywhere? not me. We should at least be trying to be a bit cleaner :agree:

RyeSloan
26-10-2012, 11:57 AM
How about we lead cleaner less wasteful lives and introduce effective population control.


No need, poulation growth is already under control...it's a natural by product of a wealthier world. Raising peoples living standards and health care provision has a direct impact on birth rates, to the point where the repalcement rate is lower than required to maintain population numbers (a strong argument for continued immigration but that's another story!). There is quite strong evidence of that across the developed and almost developed world and most models now predict a turning point in terms of world population relatively soon.

RyeSloan
26-10-2012, 12:00 PM
I'm guessing it was the daily mail story that was incorrect in its reporting, and which has a specific refutation issued about it by the met office. Sadly, it went viral amongst climate change deniers, none of whom apparently saw fit to check the original source (also a met office report)mwhich said nothing of the sort.

Thanks...was wondering where it came from as it was clearly inaccurate!

I think it's clear to see that the worlds climate is changing at a rate not evidenced before...is that man made or not who really cares. I think it's time we moved away from that argument and started looking at effective measures to combat it. Sadly politicians in the UK simply saw it as a way of taxing people more in the short term while paying lip service to the issue in the long term.

Rasta_Hibs
26-10-2012, 12:14 PM
Thanks...was wondering where it came from as it was clearly inaccurate!

I think it's clear to see that the worlds climate is changing at a rate not evidenced before...is that man made or not who really cares. I think it's time we moved away from that argument and started looking at effective measures to combat it. Sadly politicians in the UK simply saw it as a way of taxing people more in the short term while paying lip service to the issue in the long term.

Im not an expert on climate change obviously. But i still think the message of man made climate change was over used as a tool to get people to accept more taxes and regulations.

Im all for living cleaner and not polluting the atmosphere.

I took my information from the press release that seemed to be crediable and backed up with a graph that indicated that had been no increase of the tempreture on earth for the last 16 years. I also understand there is a weath of information for and against the idea of man made climate change.

ONe thing that struck me was the thought that we in Scotland on the grand scheme of things are a tiny percentage of the polution put into the atmosphere. I mean if the developing world coutries or the large super powers such as USA and China are thumping out so much polution into the atosmphere that it makes Scotland's contribution to it seem irrelevent. Then why are we bombared with these messages, are they not directed at the wrong people?

Geo_1875
26-10-2012, 01:28 PM
Because "we" believe in unilateralism in all things.

Rasta_Hibs
26-10-2012, 01:37 PM
Because "we" believe in unilateralism in all things.

What do you mean exactly?

A single minded process or solution to global warming?

Twa Cairpets
26-10-2012, 10:33 PM
Im not an expert on climate change obviously. But i still think the message of man made climate change was over used as a tool to get people to accept more taxes and regulations.

Im all for living cleaner and not polluting the atmosphere.

I took my information from the press release that seemed to be crediable and backed up with a graph that indicated that had been no increase of the tempreture on earth for the last 16 years. I also understand there is a weath of information for and against the idea of man made climate change.

ONe thing that struck me was the thought that we in Scotland on the grand scheme of things are a tiny percentage of the polution put into the atmosphere. I mean if the developing world coutries or the large super powers such as USA and China are thumping out so much polution into the atosmphere that it makes Scotland's contribution to it seem irrelevent. Then why are we bombared with these messages, are they not directed at the wrong people?

If you have a spare 6 minutes, this is a really good piece on the Mail on sundays article and the inaccuracies it contains:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qbn1rCZz1ow&feature=plcp

Speedy
27-10-2012, 10:37 PM
While I agree with the main point you are making I'm not sure about some of your examples.

I'd also tend to say that mainstream media will publish whatever will bring them the most money.

Big Ed
28-10-2012, 10:20 AM
People are very slowly beginning to come to the conclusion that those in power, those who make the decisions at all our major institutions, are more than simply incompetent, they are corrupt: Politicians, Newspapers, Police, Church, BBC, FTSE 100 companies: the very things that are meant to keep our society on an even keel.

I think there was a time when we used to hold all of these institutions in a relatively high regard: now we see that they are tainted by the same kind of moral disregard as some kind of imagined Banana Republic.

An egregious culture condoned by those who benefit from its conseqences: and there is **** all you can do about it.

Beefster
28-10-2012, 02:04 PM
While I agree with the main point you are making I'm not sure about some of your examples.

I'd also tend to say that mainstream media will publish whatever will bring them the most money.

The mainstream media will publish anything the Press Association provides them with (in a bid to make money by employing the minimum number of journalists).

Hibrandenburg
29-10-2012, 05:44 AM
That Colonel Saunders and his wee beady eyes!

wpj
29-10-2012, 12:43 PM
Makes you crave it fortnightly