So BBC, while on the cusp of censorship for “defamation of Trump”, still sees it necessary to watch his arse?
These bootlickers man
They all have the same owners. Mainstream media is a compromised asset. Don’t go there for “news” they are all no better than fox these days.
Well, kidnapping implies he will be used for ransom and returned. He was abducted.
Yes, words have meaning. Using the word “kidnapped” injects opinion and emotion into a story.
It’s the job of media to report the facts, not to influence people’s feelings on a story.
News organizations have people’s whose job is to maintain journalistic standards to ensure it’s facts that are reported, not emotional manipulation.
Emotional manipulation is the domain of social media, not something journalists are supposed to do. Don’t worry, social media has algorithms that ensure you’ll get constant emotional manipulation. News media doesn’t need to be doing this if that’s what you’re looking for.
How do you feel about ‘abducted’? I know that journalists use that term frequently when discussing domestic kidnappings, but it has a negative associations. When a pedophilac predator forces a victim to go with them, that appears to be acceptable language - would you say the term can apply to the President’s actions?
I mean, it seems like a reasonable word to use ?
kidnapping noun The unlawful act of capturing and carrying away a person against their will and holding them in false imprisonment.
I know right? The headlines should read something more like “Maduro vacationing in USA for extended holiday”
“US Strike team legally ventured to sovereign country to invite its leader on an all expenses luxury vacation while laying at least 80 known victims down for naps”
Because we have to speak softly, and avoid mentioning anything factually accurate, so the perpetually offended don’t get their precious feefees hurt
Or maybe they could say Maduro was ‘captured’ or ‘seized’ as it was suggested they should do, which is factual.
Someone not conforming to your emotions doesn’t mean they aren’t being factual.
Someone not conforming to your emotions doesn’t mean they aren’t being factual.
So kidnapping it is.
Change “BBC” to “Global Media” and you are closer to the truth.
BBC is propaganda for the Empire.
Maduro was
kidnappedexpropriatedI’m more a fan of “reverse ICEd”
Perhaps “unfreed” could be used instead?
Adultnapped
Rehomed
BBC Has Fallen is Gerard Butlers next movie
BBC bans journalists from telling the truth?
It’s so unprecedented!
/s
BBC is appeasing Trump. The UK is a lost cause. An Irrelevant ex-empire. Just like the US is going to be, once it finally implodes.
Still has the largest navy in Europe so not irrelevant. More relevant if anything with US withdrawal.
Too bad the UK fluffs the US so hard 🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️
We know all their secrets. Who do you think they get to spy on their citizens?
As they say, keep your friends close…
Can it please implode faster?
One part of me hopes so but if/when it does, I doubt something better will emerge - which is terrifying.
I want it to implode enough that the federal government can’t keep hurting its citizens, but not so much that the citizens are worse off than when they were being repressed.
Kinda seems stupid to want it to implode then, no?
so much for that alleged freedom of the press
Abducted, then
Newspeak: “In the 1949 dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four (also published as 1984), by George Orwell, Newspeak is the fictional language of Oceania, a totalitarian superstate. To meet the ideological requirements of Ingsoc (English Socialism) in Oceania, the Party created Newspeak, which is a controlled language of simplified grammar and limited vocabulary designed to reduce a person’s ability to think critically.”
See also: “the officer’s gun discharged” instead of “police shot the man”
The gun discharged, unprovoked
I remember thinking this aspect of the book was far fetched, but holy shit was he spot on. Language really does inform how we think, and controlling that can be very powerful
I always thought Winston’s job, of literally rewriting history, would be an impossible task.
Nowadays? I’m not so sure. When we look at where most of the news comes from in America and follow the money up, you’ve got like 90% of it coming from about a couple dozen people.
Some of those people control LLMs along the way. They control our social media and search engine and what posts and answers and advertisers we see. They control the servers through which most of the internet routes their traffic. They control the certificate authorities that all of our web browsers intrinsically trust. And most of them are friends with each other…or at least keep it cordial.
And they’re patient. They play a long game. Half of them aren’t even middle-aged and are in peak physical health.
Shit even that sounded like a crazy conspiracy theory like 15 years ago, and while I’m being hyperbolic…I’m really not being that hyperbolic.
Not closely related, but back when I was first reading the book, the idea of computer generated songs sounded like “flying future car” delusions, and learning AI in the early 2000’s even confirmed not the impossibility but the crazy limitations of all this.
I have just listened to a podcast last month that mentions how there are songs on Spotify made entirely by AI, and 97% of the people they asked couldn’t tell apart regular songs from the AI generated ones.
On one hand, it’s remarkable. On the other hand, we’re cooked. What’s even more depressing is that many-many, even more worrying things are getting pretty accurate in the book. Maybe not back in 1984, but we’re witnessing the convergence.
Music makes sense though. There is a formula that gets followed to make 99% of the pop songs out there. Pop music is math, and computers are good at that.
Like, I can see AI replacing Ed Sheeran…but Thom Yorke? Completely different product.
I always thought Winston’s job, of literally rewriting history, would be an impossible task.
They already are getting rid of the history of slavery. Banning it from schools, museums, etc.
Exactly. It’s not so much that they even have to rewrite history, just bury it good enough. Make the real stories difficult to find and suck the desire to learn out of kids so they grow up ignorant and easy to control.
Guaranteed there are tons of AI autobiographies being written by “slaves” who miss their mastuh and want to go back to the good life on the plantations, where everything was provided for them. As one example. And definitely tons more in the erotic category.
Oh boy… are you opening the door to concept philosophy? Because that’s a fucking mind bender. First big assumption you need to let go of in this domain: mankind is not on some path of iterative progress where we find ourselves at the most knowledgeable and capable in the present. Rather, we’ve conveniently redefined what progress is in the first place.
The BBC is no longer reputable
It stopped being reputable after the Iraq invasion in 2003. The Blair government stuffed it with loyalist apparatchiks to make sure the government line was never seriously questioned. This has been the case ever since.
September Dossier - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_Dossier
The 45 minute claim lay at the centre of a dispute between Downing Street and the BBC. On 29 May 2003, BBC defence correspondent Andrew Gilligan filed a report for BBC Radio 4’s Today programme in which he stated that an unnamed source – a senior British official – had told him that the September Dossier had been “sexed up”, and that the intelligence agencies were concerned about some “dubious” information contained within it – specifically the claim that Saddam Hussein could deploy weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes of an order to use them.
I’ll allow it, as long as they call it a war crime.
