View previous topic | View next topic

Anyone following the Bilderberg Meeting 2012?

Page 20 of 25
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 19, 20, 21 ... 23, 24, 25  Next

PDR
915146.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 6:54 am Reply with quote

Erm...

In my experience (which is not universal or even representative, being based solely on the 800-900 americans I've actually met socially) I would suggest that in excess of 90% of americans are fully aware of precisely what Fox News is - it's even a standing joke on The Simpsons (which ironically is owned by Fox)...

PDR

 
Neotenic
915164.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 7:58 am Reply with quote

Quote:
I find this slightly arbitrary maybe in the argument, it can clearly be seen how few people control the entirety of what people see on TV...


I think we should just pause for a moment to bask in the glorious assertation that facts are arbitrary in the argument.

So much for truth, eh?

At least twice on this thread you repeated the lie (because that's what it is, even if it was grounded in ignorance) that four companies controlled US media.

Other websites, as both I and you found, make it six - but I've been able to think of at least two more that fall outside that circle.

Fundamentally, sir, you are an intellectual butterfly. You alight on a subject just long enough to watch a two-minute video, copy & past the URL and the video description onto this forum and make a couple of dingbat pronouncements off the back of it. You may stick with the cause for a little while, but then it's on to the next, leaving any number of questions hanging.

How many different arguments have you introduced in this thread alone? And how many have stood up to even cursory examination? If you actually bothered to stick with a subject and see it through, perhaps you might get a clearer understanding of it.

I think I do have one important question that I hope you will deign to answer - what is your primary news source?

I can't be alone in having difficulty believeing that you are just stumbling upon this seemingly infinite procession of neat little two-minute videos as you wander through the corridors of Youtube - so which website/forum/blog/Facebook group is it that points you at them? I can't also be alone in noticing the preponderance of David Icke quotes that seem to pepper the videos and text. This is a bad sign, if you ask me.

Quote:
These scared, fearful, mis-informed people, then vote every four years for the person willing to protect them from the monsters who hate the freedom that Americans have, and their open un-biased news on tv.


This is a quite breathtakingly patronising view of the American populace at large. I can't say I've met anywhere near as many Americans as PDR, but of those that I have, virtually none give any credence at all to Fox News.

And - once again - we can use the evidence you supply against your own argument.

Sure, that Grauniad article does indeed say that a 'majority' of Americans believe Fox News - but later in the article, the Nielsen ratings show that only 3 million Americans were watching, figures which broadly match the latest stats.

Three million Americans watching Fox, out of a total of more than 300 million Americans. That's 1%. Perhaps the extent of the media's influence is somewhat overstated.

 
joeontheland
915233.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 11:19 am Reply with quote

I don't have the energy right now to explain something to someone who lives in a conceptual reality, more interested in what he can con himself and others to believe as truth when it is cloudy and arbitrary to say the least.

Class that as a win, or whatever your ego requires to make itself feel ok.

Most of what you said is garbage and I will come back later and explain in detail why.

 
Jenny
915237.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 11:29 am Reply with quote

If Joeontheland is British, he can be forgiven for overlooking PBS, but it really is a most important network.

I declare a bias here, as I send them money every month, on the grounds that when I lived in the UK I paid money for my TV licence, and I think public broadcasting is a good thing that should be supported. Certainly over here it is the nearest thing you get to lack of bias, especially in a right-wing direction (though of course the right-wingers claim it to be biased in a left-wing direction).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Broadcasting_Service

 
Neotenic
915247.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 12:59 pm Reply with quote

Quote:
I don't have the energy right now to explain something to someone who lives in a conceptual reality, more interested in what he can con himself and others to believe as truth when it is cloudy and arbitrary to say the least.


I suppose actually explaining things does take a bit more energy than just copying and pasting.

But, even so, I'm not entirely sure what a 'conceptual reality' is, or indeed how it differs from 'reality'. And, indeed, what the difference is between what I believe and what I apparently 'con myself' to believe.

I certainly think that if I am guilty of this (whatever it is), then you are equally guilty. Or if you're not, you might want to ask yourself why you think you're so special. Or, maybe, why you are conning yourself to believe that you are.

And hiding behind some post-modern 'what is truth, anyway?' claptrap is just more intellectual cowardice, whichever way you want to look at it. Sure, pinning down precisely what is 'true' can be quite tricky, but it's pretty easy to show with only a rudimentary amout of effort that which is palpably absurd - like the video of the wee girlie and her bizarre presidential family tree. Or that more than four companies 'own' the news.

I shall wait with baited breath while you recharge enough to respond 'in detail', because it is this detail which has been sadly absent thus far.

 
Spud McLaren
915256.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 1:44 pm Reply with quote

Neotenic wrote:
But, even so, I'm not entirely sure what a 'conceptual reality' is, or indeed how it differs from 'reality'.
I was wondering that too, as only reality is reality. A conceptual reality isn't reality, so perhaps a conceptual universe might be a better term?

 
CB27
915268.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:36 pm Reply with quote

exnihilo wrote:
I had a delightful evening out last night, with Michelin star dining, and thought I'd come back to address a few things on this thread today but I realise that life is too short for this.

(Disclaimer, this view may change within as little as an hour.)

I think you're right, this guy is an obvious troll, the only "interesting" think in this whole thread for me has been exploring the concept of why people are related to one another, which is not exactly shocking.

 
Spud McLaren
915269.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:39 pm Reply with quote

Try telling that to Paula Yates. Oh, wait, you can't.

 
PDR
915287.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 4:49 pm Reply with quote

joeontheland wrote:

Most of what you said is garbage and I will come back later and explain in detail why.


Right - I'm settled in my chair and have a large tub of popcorn to hand, so can you get on with it please?

PDR

 
Arcane
915294.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 5:24 pm Reply with quote

exnihilo wrote:
I had a delightful evening out last night, with Michelin star dining, and thought I'd come back to address a few things on this thread today but I realise that life is too short for this.

(Disclaimer, this view may change within as little as an hour.)


Well put it in QI lists (What are you eating). Never Mind the topic, let's talk food, I've never known anyone who went to a Michelin star restaurant. /off topic/

 
suze
915308.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 5:50 pm Reply with quote

Well you don't have Michelin stars in Australia, so that's not especially surprising!

According to Gordon Ramsay, the Australian hat system is approximately one level more generous than the Michelin system. So a one hat Australian restaurant probably wouldn't get a Michelin star, but a two hat restaurant might perhaps get one star. (If we're thinking solely about the food.)

I know that I've been to one restaurant which has a Michelin star (one of Gary Rhodes's), and I've been to one in LA which has had a Michelin star, but I think didn't have it at the time I visited.

I'm not entirely sure that I'd even want to go to one of the restaurants in the gastronomic stratosphere with three stars.

 
Arcane
915311.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 5:53 pm Reply with quote

You'd have to talk to your bank manager first.

 
Spud McLaren
915313.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 5:58 pm Reply with quote

Some 15 years ago a friend of mine was invited to Le Manoir aux Quat'Saisons (2 star). There were six people around the table. Having heard his description of the toadying service, I definitely would not like to eat there (that's not the only or even the main reason, though*); I should feel quite uncomfortable. He seemed to have enjoyed it, though.

* the bill for the six of them was 1200. What it would be now, I have no idea.

 
exnihilo
915316.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 6:04 pm Reply with quote

suze wrote:
I'm not entirely sure that I'd even want to go to one of the restaurants in the gastronomic stratosphere with three stars.


I was highly skeptical bout the Fat Duck, thinking it all a bit gimmicky and tacky, but it was utterly superb and I'd recommend it unreservedly to anyone.

 
'yorz
915318.  Fri Jun 08, 2012 6:09 pm Reply with quote

Price-wise way out of my league. Would take quite a few paper rounds. Not worth it.

 

Page 20 of 25
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 19, 20, 21 ... 23, 24, 25  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group