Robot
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@Tastyfrzz I watched a bit of that only because I wondered what the Serpent (a late-Mediaeval invention) sounds like, but it was soon obvious I would not know.
The speech? Like the images; just incoherent, incomprehensible rambling of a level one would not expect of major politicians...
The speech? Like the images; just incoherent, incomprehensible rambling of a level one would not expect of major politicians...
I've been told that once upon a time, news was just that news. It appears all news now has to have a commentary on every story, even if the commentary is slanted or just plainly incorrect. I have to say, during the last election period, I noticed so many of the commentaries were slanted in one direction. And for that reason, I'd like to see more accountability for the news.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
I do not know the full truth in all this, nor do I know American law, but as a general point of law does the president of the United States of America have the authority to demand legal action against news organisations broadcasting what he does not want heard?
I'd very surprised, and alarmed for the USA, if such demands are allowed.
Oh, the previous use of the word Truth as title was as Pravda, that of the USSR's State-run newspaper.
(I realise many broadcasters in America are commercial, with few public-service and no State ones - and I take it the FCC has regulatory powers somewhat like those of "Ofcom" in the UK? The latter keeps broadcasters to their obligation to separate clearly facts from opinions, report facts and quotes as objectively, accurately and fairly as possible, and to ensure fair dealings with all sides in debates of views.)
I'd very surprised, and alarmed for the USA, if such demands are allowed.
Oh, the previous use of the word Truth as title was as Pravda, that of the USSR's State-run newspaper.
(I realise many broadcasters in America are commercial, with few public-service and no State ones - and I take it the FCC has regulatory powers somewhat like those of "Ofcom" in the UK? The latter keeps broadcasters to their obligation to separate clearly facts from opinions, report facts and quotes as objectively, accurately and fairly as possible, and to ensure fair dealings with all sides in debates of views.)
ArishMell · 70-79, M
I do not know if he has made such a decision, and I can't believe the Constitution, Law, Congress and Judiciary - let alone existing broadcasters and the American public - would allow it anyway, but.....
President Trump already owns his very own "social"-media.
He calls it, Truth [-Social].
The Russian, direct translation of Truth is Pravda.
Pravda was the title of the official, government-run, national newspaper in the USSR.....
President Trump already owns his very own "social"-media.
He calls it, Truth [-Social].
The Russian, direct translation of Truth is Pravda.
Pravda was the title of the official, government-run, national newspaper in the USSR.....
DeWayfarer · 61-69, M
@ArishMell Problem is on the short term he can do pretty much what he wants without the congressional approval, unless it's objected as unconstitutional.
That takes time. And has been fought by the Trump administration.
Many of his executive orders are in the process of being tried. So during the wait the executive order is the law.
That takes time. And has been fought by the Trump administration.
Many of his executive orders are in the process of being tried. So during the wait the executive order is the law.
AbbeyRhode · F
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
ChipmunkErnie · 70-79, M
HELL NO!
DownTheStreet · 56-60, M
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@DeWayfarer I have just read the Forbes article you cite - thank you for the reference.
I was nearly caught out by that irritating habit that news web-sites have, of placing big interruptions in the report. It was only your mention of so many organisations that led me to serach further down the page
It is careful. It quotes Trump's attacks on the media but does not accuse him of saying he will turn them off.
It does quote his belief that they will end by "declining ratings".
Just after that line is the break that caught me, but returning I then found where he stoops to calling their reporting "illegal". How he can even believe that, baffles me, but I assume this is just propaganda rather than any attempt at legal and constitutional reality.
We also learn he has made the White House Press department accept only those who support him.
I also found where his administration has even effectively shut down the Voice Of America, designed primarily for overseas listeners and regarded as trustworthy - at least giving an honest account of US policy and views. At one time some nations were so terrified of the likes of the VOA and BBC that they would try to "jam" the broadcasts. It would seem they could now save electricity on the VOA's frequency.
I was nearly caught out by that irritating habit that news web-sites have, of placing big interruptions in the report. It was only your mention of so many organisations that led me to serach further down the page
It is careful. It quotes Trump's attacks on the media but does not accuse him of saying he will turn them off.
It does quote his belief that they will end by "declining ratings".
Just after that line is the break that caught me, but returning I then found where he stoops to calling their reporting "illegal". How he can even believe that, baffles me, but I assume this is just propaganda rather than any attempt at legal and constitutional reality.
We also learn he has made the White House Press department accept only those who support him.
I also found where his administration has even effectively shut down the Voice Of America, designed primarily for overseas listeners and regarded as trustworthy - at least giving an honest account of US policy and views. At one time some nations were so terrified of the likes of the VOA and BBC that they would try to "jam" the broadcasts. It would seem they could now save electricity on the VOA's frequency.
DeWayfarer · 61-69, M
@ArishMell oh it's more than just the statements of his.
Trump has literally removed the random order of questions by various news agencies in press conferences.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/pentagon-removes-major-media-outlets-nbc-news-dedicated-workstations-p-rcna190276
Notice there's two more news organizations. NPR and Politico (a Internet News organization).
Trump has literally removed the random order of questions by various news agencies in press conferences.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/pentagon-removes-major-media-outlets-nbc-news-dedicated-workstations-p-rcna190276
Pentagon removes major media outlets, including NBC News, from dedicated workstations in new 'rotation program'
NBC News, The New York Times, NPR and Politico must vacate their office spaces in two weeks for other news organizations — including at least one that did not request to be added.
NBC News, The New York Times, NPR and Politico must vacate their office spaces in two weeks for other news organizations — including at least one that did not request to be added.
Notice there's two more news organizations. NPR and Politico (a Internet News organization).
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@DeWayfarer Dangerous moves....
carpediem · 61-69, M
He didn't do that, so the question is ridiculous on its face.
MissingLink · 51-55, M
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
