While I absolutely agree that the media is partially responsible for inspiring these shooters with their salacious coverage, I shudder at the suggestion that journalists be told what they can report on and how they can report it. That sounds a little too "behind the iron curtain" for my taste. It's a long shot, and I know it, but what's really lacking is any sense of decency by the public. The media wouldn't air the gory details on a loop if the public didn't sit transfixed to their screens, lapping up every lurid minute of it. And there's no way to legislate decency. It has been tried. The media can only report on information they have available to them, so if the police refuse to release the manifestos, they would stay in an evidence box where they belong. I realize that sometimes they get released directly to a news outlet, but in the cases where they're not...
In any case, I don't think this issue can be pinned on one cause, as much as people (including media outlets) are fond of doing. It's not ONLY a gun control issue, or a mental health issue, or a media issue. They are all contributing factors, but as @carolkean pointed out, people break laws! No matter what laws get passed to try to rein in the bloodbath, someone will go out and do it anyway. What's broken is the society that keeps producing people whose hatred or illness or whatever delusions they live with tell them that this is the only way to be heard.
I do fervently wish that we could go back to the days when journalistic integrity was the norm, and not the exception. Give us the news without any spin. Sadly, I think those days are long gone and no elected nut-ball can legislate them back.
Maybe maybe not. The reality is that there needs to be some kind of Common Sense laws on Amelia. And plenty of other countries have that and there's no issues. In Europe the media isn't allowed to lie. There are laws on the books to keep them injective. I don't know about you but I don't really give a shit about the Free Press in terms of letting the media say whatever they want just because you feel bad for them. Free Press wasn't created because the founding fathers felt sympathetic to multi-billionaire is being able to lie. It was created to keep the people informed. If it's not doing that job than it needs to be changed
I could say the same thing
While I absolutely agree that guns is partially responsible for these shooters I shudder at the suggestion that guns be taken out of the hands of innocent people
That sounds a little too "behind the iron curtain" for my taste. It's a long sho
what's really lacking is any sense of decency by the public. Mass shooters wouldnt shoot ppl if the public didn't glorify it
lapping up every lurid minute of it. And there's no way to legislate decency. It has been tried.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Who determines in Europe what is a lie and what is the truth. It is only the people that hold the power.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Express determine it. It's not that hard. Left Linder than right wing as a like that support corruption like to up the skate things and make it seem harder than it is. But it's really not.
Reality is fairly easy to see when there is bias. And when a network intentionally misleads people. As CNN admitted to doing. For example. See you in admitting to Millis leading people would be an example of the time that it could be enforced
but it's really not that difficult. Experts are fairly good at it. And they do it all the time for other Industries. For example there are laws against false advertising. Well who determines if an advertisement is false? The experts do. And they do a fuck good job of it
a certain building codes and buildings have to adhere to a certain safety standard. Well who determines if the building is safe? The experts. And there's never been an example of those experts getting it wrong.
Fire safety. The experts determine it again.
restaurants are required to go through food safety inspections and make sure that they're clean. Who determines if they're cleaned? The experts it investigate.
the reality is that there's never really been a good example of when these things are bad. And even if they don't do the perfect job they're still far better than if they hadn't done
the rhetoric and talking points against these kinds of sayings is not motivated by any kind of factual basis. It's motivated by talking points created by people who do not want to be regulated. Usually billionaires that don't want regulations and so they create talking points to scare Ordinary People.
But the reality is it perfectly works fine. The experts in the agency is assigned to it do a good job of determining those
Anti-regulation talking points are typically misleading at best and outright false at worst. And they're never found coming from any other source than billionaires. Whether it's billionaires themselves or super Pacs funded by billionaires that's where all of the anti-regulation talking points originate
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Ever hear of pay offs.. It's a corrupt world out there.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit