Attacks on the Media Are a Threat To Democracy, Justin Trudeau Says (www.cbc.ca)
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told a press freedom event in Paris Sunday that one of the bulwarks protecting democratic governments from being undermined is also an institution under stress -- a free-thinking, robust media. From a report: "If a democracy is to function you need an educated populace, and you need to have an informed populace, ready to make judicious decisions about who to grant power to and when to take it away," Trudeau said. "When citizens cannot have rigorous analysis of the exercise of the power that is in their name and they have granted, the rest of the foundation of our democracies start to erode at the same time as cynicism arises." The press freedom advocacy organization Reporters Without Borders has developed a six-page international declaration on information and democracy to establish basic principles for the "common good of mankind." The organization hosted a small event on the sidelines of the Paris Peace Forum late Sunday afternoon where five presidents and prime ministers, including Trudeau, offered endorsements for this declaration. The Paris Peace Forum, intended to be an annual gathering of political, business and civil society leaders to explore peaceful solutions to the world's problems, was hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron to coincide with this weekend's events marking the centenary of the armistice agreement that ended the First World War.
Trudeau, addressing the audience at the press freedom event without a prepared text, also talked about the risk if too many citizens become too cynical about public institutions. "Attacks on the media are not just about getting your preferred political candidate elected," he said. "They're about increasing the level of cynicism that citizens have toward all authorities, toward all of the institutions that are there to protect us as citizens." Citizens are feeling "very real anxiety," Trudeau said, because their jobs are transforming as globalization increases competition around the world. When that anxiety is exacerbated, it undermines trust in institutions and increases cynicism. "One of the bulwarks against that, and one of the institutions that is most under stress right now, is a free-thinking, independent, rigorous, robust, respected media," the prime minister said.
Trudeau, addressing the audience at the press freedom event without a prepared text, also talked about the risk if too many citizens become too cynical about public institutions. "Attacks on the media are not just about getting your preferred political candidate elected," he said. "They're about increasing the level of cynicism that citizens have toward all authorities, toward all of the institutions that are there to protect us as citizens." Citizens are feeling "very real anxiety," Trudeau said, because their jobs are transforming as globalization increases competition around the world. When that anxiety is exacerbated, it undermines trust in institutions and increases cynicism. "One of the bulwarks against that, and one of the institutions that is most under stress right now, is a free-thinking, independent, rigorous, robust, respected media," the prime minister said.
The worst attacks are the ones you can't see. The vast majority of our news come via Reuters or AP. If you had an insider on the desk there, you could put a slight spin to a thousand stories - much more effective than the partisan ranting we associate with false news.
xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
Subscriber funded media, more or less without ads? Minimizes dependency on single copy (or single article) sales, and minimizes the risk of not being able to criticize major advertisers. Also, a culture of investigativeness, correctness, high ethical standards and keeping opinions to the editorial page is useful.
Strong independent (important) public service media, with independently secured funding, is quite important too.
We have had some reform of public service financing in Sweden (a friend and colleague of mine is the member of parliament that drafted the proposal) with even more focus on stable financial independence (in this case, a fixed tax going directly to the TV / radio, bypassing the budget process) and on making it impossible for any administration to directly have any bit of influence on either public service leadership or content.
saying [media organisation] is an enemy of the people/country/whatever.
Trump says that it's the fake new media (not just "the media") that is the enemy of the people, and generally lets the public decide for the themselves which entities are fake news. I agree that fake news is tearing the country apart, but the debate is about who is fake news, which isn't really being had in the public sphere because of all the hysteria.
Trial by facts and evidence should what the media has to deal with.
Agreed, and if a media outlet has shown time and time again that it's fake then we should feel free to call it so and ignore it.
Rather than encouraging a robust public debate it holds a gun to the head of any free speech that does not conform to the views of power
You mean like with all the conservatives being deplatformed?
Notable users of this tactic to to destroy opposition include Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and the Nazis
And later they didn't need to implement such tactics (at least against the media) because they gained control over all the outlets. I'll go out and protest with you if Trump starts taking over media outlets, until then it's all just talk and fear-mongering on both sides.
And that's not even factoring in that he's a politician and therefore an inveterate liar by definition.
"They're about increasing the level of cynicism that citizens have toward all authorities, toward all of the institutions that are there to protect us as citizens."
I think you just validated his point quite nicely!
> Like, you're on board with reducing the ability for the media to provide strong advice to voters, etc?
Yes. Propaganda outlets provide advice. Journalism is suppose to inform. The media is now a full bore propaganda machine and our democracy is being poisoned by it.
Oh wait. Wait. The media attacks Trump. Sorry I guess they're the good guys again. Let the neiliberalusatuon continue.
If you are still maintaining that the video was not doctored then you are lying and trying to gaslight us. You are quite simply dishonest.
Thanks for demonstrating just how dishonest the media is. Either you were fooled by their phony narrative, or you are lying yourself. The video was not sped up. It was not doctored. Here's the lefty BuzzFeed:
"There's no evidence that the video was deliberately sped up -- but the change in format, from a high-quality video to a low-quality GIF, turns the question of whether it was "doctored" into a semantic debate."
"Watson, however, categorically denies doctoring the video. He told BuzzFeed News that the video was "not edited - it's just zoomed in." He also explained that he took the original footage directly from a GIF posted to the Twitter account of the website the Daily Wire.
"Fact is, Daily Wire put up a gif, I download a gif, zoomed in saved it again as an mt2 file - then converted it to an mp4," Watson said over direct message. "Digitally it's gonna look a tiny bit different after processing and zooming in, but I did not in any way deliberately 'speed up' or 'distort' the video. That's just horse shit.""
Acosta lied when he said he did not put his hands on the intern. Why isn't the media talking about that, instead of trying to reframe the narrative?
You lied when you said Acosta was banned for asking tough questions. He was banned for not giving up the mic and physically preventing a young, female intern from retrieving the mic.
Why don't you and the rest of the "reputable" media acknowledge that Acosta was out of line for refusing to allow the next reporter to ask questions, and acting like he has a right to ask as many questions as he wants?
What is offensive to some isnt offensive to others. Just because you dont like it doesnt mean it is illegal or fake. Policing offensive speech is a very slippery slope that I really dont want to see become any more than it is. Political correctness is a start towards inhibition of a questioning nature, which is necessary for people to maintain in a democratic government.
There is a fine line between speaking truth to power and disrespect to an institution. When it comes to Acosta and press credentials, his platform being denied is a joke. His platform is CNN and every facet of mass media that enables. He has no right to try to take the WH presser away from the president because that is the president's platform, not CNN's. The president can call a presser and discuss whatever comes to his mind, and the media cannot stop it. They can stop attending as that is their choice.
Your link confirms that the video is misleading by virtue of the timing being screwed up.
No it doesn't. It only talks about compression artifacts and having fewer frames. While that may give the appearance of movement being faster, there's no evidence it was deliberately sped up, and that wasn't the point of the video.
So even if we accept that the change was the result of the format shift (which seems unlikely because it's uneven, most of it is at the correct speed except for the moment when his arm comes down)
That's your own fantasy. Again, from lefty BuzzFeed: "There's no evidence that the video was deliberately sped up"
that still leaves the fact that the result is misleading and was used to make a false allegation.
No, it was CNN that lied. Rather than admit that, you and the rest of the lying media are trying to reframe the narrative.
Here's the true sequence of events:
Sarah Sanders: "President Trump believes in a free press and expects and welcomes tough questions of him and his Administration. We will, however, never tolerate a reporter placing his hands on a young woman just trying to do her job as a White House intern..."
CNN producer Allie Malloy: "This is a complete lie. The woman grabbed Jim's arm repeatedly. He never once touched her. In fact at one point @Acosta tells her politely "pardon me, mam" as she's yanking on his arm."
Paul Joseph Watson: ""He never once touched her." That is a complete lie. He clearly did. Is whatever you're paid by CNN really worth making a total fool out of yourself for the world to see?"
And he posts the video in question. Then you clowns turn it into a "doctored" video conspiracy theory instead of acknowledging what the story was really about: CNN lying and Acosta being a douche that refused to give up the mic after asking several questions and having them answered, including using his arm to block the young intern from retaking the mic. He only gives up the mic after Trump looks like he's signaling to security to haul his ass out of there. It's the White House Press Conference, not the "Jim Acosta Show".
Anybody can watch the full exchange and see what happened.
Was he an asshole? Yes.
Did he disrupt the press conference? Yes.
Did he touch the young woman? Yes.
Did he whine like a bitch after he got punished for all the above? Yes.
Is he a real journalist seeking truth to inform the public or a partisan hack? *giggle*