Once again America sucks worst(after all the rest)

HeXp£Øi±

HeXp£Øi±

Well-Known Member
I was absolutely flabbergasted to find out this week that the Brits don't even have freedom of the press! Seriously, i had no idea. Wouldn't the basis for a democracy be freedom of the press? If not, how can the people ever really know just what they're voting for?

I hope i haven't passed this discussion over in another thread. Now i begin to laugh and cry at the same time whenever i hear Brits bitching about America(r).
 
Hex, America is the only nation to guarantee it's citizens many or most of the liberties we take for granted. Go take a look & see how many have working constitutions. How few guaranteee free speech. Religion. Gun ownership. The right of the individual over the state, It's why we're GREAT!!! Since 1900 (subsequent to the century of America becoming a superpower) democratic governments rose from less then 20 to over 120. Coincidence? I think not.
 
ummm..........
Jamaica placing 21 out of 166 countries surveyed for the 2003 world press freedom rankings by an international media watchdog group. Jamaica scored 3.3 points (0 being the best and 100 the worst), putting the country ahead of developed countries like the United States, Britain, France, Italy, Spain and Australia in the global press freedom rankings just issued by the Paris-based Reporters Without Borders
The United States, which is often used as the benchmark for press freedom, received 6 points and was ranked 31st for commitment to press freedom at home. But the US dropped to 135th, or 41 points when ranked for its behaviour beyond its borders, notably in Iraq which it now occupies, following the ouster of Saddam Hussein.
Jamaica tied with Hungary and South Africa for the 21st place. France placed 26th; Britain 27th; Spain 42nd; Australia 50th and Italy, at 53rd, is the worst country in Europe regarding press freedom.
Click to expand...
"Wealth and press freedom don't always go together," said Reporters Without Borders. "As in 2002, the ranking shows that a country's respect for press freedom is not solely linked to its economic development. The top 50 include countries that are among the poorest in the world, such as Benin (29th position), Timor-Leste (30th) and Madagascar (46th).
"Conversely, the 50 countries that respect press freedom least include such rich nations as Bahrain (117th) and Singapore (144th)," the media body added.
Click to expand...
:alienhuh:

source

great in theory maybe...not necessarily in practise...

and the "greatness" you speak of is maybe in the eye of the beholder, no?
 
The Brits do have freedom of press except in the rare case that this conflicts with the views of the royal family. The royal family is not democraticly elected and doesn't have much power. They're a tradition and a symbol and for this reason the press isn't allowed to soil them for profit without their consent; much like someone isn't allowed to burn a symbolic American flag in the United States. People still hear plenty about the prime minister and I believe the BBC is much less biased than any news source in the states, that's where I get my news.
 
Freedom of press is a relative thing. It only means that the media owners are free to publish whatever appeases their financial interests...
 
BBC and Reuters are within the most credible sources around the world, according to the opinion of several journalists I know...
 
Both are heavily biased. In the same vein as CNN. Probably not as likely to change questions at primary debates but still heavily biased.
 
even just an average joe watching and using his brain could figure out that they're a lot LESS biased than the american network news.
 
To me, the medias are all biased in that they are money making businesses like everything else. They play with just as much spin and flash as they feel will draw key demographic groups to patronize their sponsors. Those that are not for profit, like state media, are in a worse position because they can ill afford to say anything too hypercritical of their budget controlling masters. Even the few publications that I enjoy and consider to be neutral are partially afflicted profit motivated machines... but I just don't see a way around it. I cannot name a single not for profit/non corporate newsmaking entity. I trust biased entities that confess to it wholeheartedly more than the ones that claim to not have any... for they are the ones with horsebliners on.
 
freako104 said:
didnt they pass a law that doesnt allow flag burnign?
Click to expand...
I don't think that was possible to ban such an act... but the way some states got around it was to make it a mere 1$ fine to beat the crap out of the person who does it.
 
unclehobart said:
To me, the medias are all biased in that they are money making businesses like everything else. They play with just as much spin and flash as they feel will draw key demographic groups to patronize their sponsors. Those that are not for profit, like state media, are in a worse position because they can ill afford to say anything too hypercritical of their budget controlling masters. Even the few publications that I enjoy and consider to be neutral are partially afflicted profit motivated machines... but I just don't see a way around it. I cannot name a single not for profit/non corporate newsmaking entity. I trust biased entities that confess to it wholeheartedly more than the ones that claim to not have any... for they are the ones with horsebliners on.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Well put. :D
 
AlladinSane said:
BBC and Reuters are within the most credible sources around the world, according to the opinion of several journalists I know...
Click to expand...

:D

Granted they are covert in there bias. Just like cnn the tactics they use are schrewd. Here's an example that i've used before.

After commenting on a story concerning the violence in the middle east they'll throw this on the end,
"Today marks the day two years ago when a 13 year old Palestinian boy throwing rocks was killed by Israeli solders."
When in fact every day marks a day that both Palestinians and Israelis were killed from fighting!
It's extremely difficult to excape bias in the media. Infact the only media outlet that i would put my name on as being unbiased would be C-span yet i don't think many would even count them as a news outlet since they offer no opinions whatsoever. The fact is unless you do your due diligence it's nearly impossible to know when your taking in the garbage. You'll never see it if all you stick to is the 5 oclock news or rely soley upon the television outlets.
 
Hasn't the there just been a ban on media filming and broadcasting the return of dead soldiers from Iraq in the US? :confused:


As for freedom of the press in the UK.......it's about as free as anywhere, those with money and influence have no trouble controlling it :shrug:
 
Oz said:
As for freedom of the press in the UK.......it's about as free as anywhere, those with money and influence have no trouble controlling it :shrug:
Click to expand...


I really don't see how you can possibly say that with a straight face. The socalled "prince" has ordered the media not to report a story and they haven't. I heard a gentlemen on msnbc state that he couldn't talk about it for fear of governmental action and i even heard Jay Leno apologizing for making cracks about the story. Why? Because he was afraid that his show would literally be taken off the air in the UK. This is freedom of the press? I'm sorry but nothing like this could happen in the United States.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top