News War and fake news on this site (2975 views, 341 replies)
guru
I'm curious, is it propaganda and fake news because it's right wing or is it right wing and hence propaganda and fake news?
Or, is it maybe propaganda and fake news simply because you disagree with what's being said?
Those who seek to censor the free flow of ideas most often do so because they can not find agreement in what's being said.
If you have doubts about the veracity of this statement just look at any video regarding conservative speakers who are continually shouted down in efforts to make any free flow of ideologies or discussion impossible to take place.
member
this person made this account 1 min before they posted this.so there comment don't mean sh*t to me if they have to hide on a fake account are have a friend to do there talking for them.
senior guru
If the OP has felt the need to set up a new account to post their opinion anonymously - I don't blame them! Some of the responses says it all!
The moment anything is said about the news section the freedom of speech brigade come out aggressively (illiterately) swinging.
I think it's pretty obvious to most, that posting YouTube rants by extremists and self-confessed propagandists is NOT news. Posting 5/10/20-year-old articles in the guise of 'news' is NOT news.
Posting anti-science because of 'big pharma' is NOT news.
Whether you agree with the article posted is irrelevant.
Whether you click the link to read/watch is irrelevant.
What should matter, and what is visible to every visitor to the site, registered or not, is the comments under them, and how the comments of some cast a dark shadow over the whole site.
Between the news section becoming a haven for extremism and the forum/chat becoming Gods playground, it is enough to scare away any prospective user from signing-up.
@DemandingFemale There's a news section here. If you read the articles, you will see that the people posting Liberal news often call peple morons, and idiots. This is not the case as much with conservatives. You don't have to take my word for it...you can go look now. News from 5 years ago is STILL news...if it is still happening. When Palestine bombs Israel...it is a CONTINUATION of that news. It is stll relevant. Roe V Wade is still news. And will be...maybe forever. Dr Evil put a News site here, I imagine, because he wanted one. If the news doesn't suit you...post your own, or move along. New viewrs do NOT have to read it...but maybe they want to! If they do want to, they can decide what they like and dislike. We should not be doing that for them. Conservative news is being banned all accros the media. Is it going to happen here too?
@bondojoe Thanks for proving my point so eloquently, Joe.
I said nothing about left or right.
@DemandingFemale Well tell me know..Which way do you lean..it sure SOUNDED left! "Posting anti-science because of 'big pharma' is NOT news."... " forum/chat becoming Gods playground" I think we know where you stand..and you didn't have to come out and SAY Liberal...you just used innuendos.
@bondojoe I've never publicly announced my political or religious views, and I don't plan on doing that now.
It's immaterial to me whats someones leaning or beliefs are. I'm not here to delve into the inner workings of peoples psyche, nor did I sign up to a movie site to change the world one YouTube video or sermon at a time.
@DemandingFemale then your free to leave said movie site, there are ton out there. But I call bs on your other comment, you DON't have to look, there are plenty of times I don't. I know it's there but If I'm not in the mood I tune it out. I suggest you hold your own actions to a higher level, and just don't look.
@bondojoe Even if that would be the case, would that change anything? An opinion was stated. One that you consider a dissenting one. If you don't respect it and give it the appropriate weight, how do you expect your opinion to be respected as such?
@JudgeDredd My opinion does not have to be respected. It does not NEED to be respected. I am either right, or I am wrong. The same applies to everyone. Maybe I don't understand your point.
@bondojoe No you didn't actually. And I was drafting an explanation which I just deleted for being too long. The point is that DemandingFemale made a specific point about extremists and self-confessed propagandists. You chose to defend the conservatives as if this was a direct attack. In the process you unwittingly equated extremists and propagandists with conservatives and went on to defend them as one and the same. Did you rush in your reply or was this intentional?
@JudgeDredd If you read her INITIAL statement, she reffered to " forum/chat becoming Gods playground" You won't find that phrase there now, because she has removed it. You CAN see that I called her on it. Read my post RIGHT after hers. I think everyone can agree that " forum/chat becoming Gods playground" is a reference to conservatives SHE is the one that equated Conservatives, and extremeists. I'm sure that Dr. Evil can tell us what was deleted. What was there , and now is not. When I apologized to her afterwards, I was talking about her second post.
@bondojoe What are you talking about? The phrase is still there:
"Between the news section becoming a haven for extremism and the forum/chat becoming Gods playground, it is enough to scare away any prospective user from signing-up."
How can you even attribute that reference to conservatives? My first reaction was that was a reference to AnhedonianNightmare. (Sorry AN 
)
@JudgeDredd OK...It's still there. And we know who it refers to. She might as well have used his name. Do you think she was talking about Liberals. Are they known for their love of God?
@bondojoe Cmon man. Are we gonna argue now which political side loves God more or less?
@bondojoe What I know is that AN will come over and lecture both of us on the topic. And beat us both to submission 
@AnhedoniaNightmare I don't know if they hate it but certainly do not recognise religion as a concept. They only wanted one way of handling the masses. Their way.
@JudgeDredd Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.
Karl Marx
@AnhedoniaNightmare Reading it now in front of me, I cant say that I find any fault in this particular train of thought. He makes a good point as religion has always been about hope, mercy and morality.
@JudgeDredd ...which he labels a narcotic.
The first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religion.
Karl Marx
@AnhedoniaNightmare LOL !!!!!! He obviously wasn't a Narcotics user. Had he been so his statement would have been:
The first requisite for the happiness of the people is recreational Drugs.
@JudgeDredd What?
ROFL.
The funny thing is Marx hated Marxists and said flat out that he is NOT a Marxist. They had perverted his intentions.
@AnhedoniaNightmare Wow and here I always thought of Marx as a doofus! At least on those above points I mostly find agreement in what he said :>P
@mrkim56 Glad it pleased you.
ROFL
...even if atheism is bonkers. Sooner or later you will become an agnostic. I got hope you get that far as at least that is logical.
@AnhedoniaNightmare Meh, like mentioned previously I view agnostics as wishy-washy fence sitters too timid to make a call on the matter.
Call me what you please but timid will never be a reasonable moniker :>P
@mrkim56 Most scientists claim agnosticism or Christianity. The agnostics say there is no conclusive evidence but they might someday find it. They know that DNA replication is mechanistic not random. Clearly a machine requires an engineer.
@AnhedoniaNightmare If an intelligently engineered machine requires an engineer so does the engineer.
This can go on ad infinitum/ad nauseum forever.
Best to just accept there will always be differences of opinion and let it go at that ;>)
@mrkim56 Why does it matter where YAHWEH came from? Before the Universe exists, there is no time.
The funny thing is some astrophysicists are so bothered by the infinite regression of the Big Bang that they then claim a dying universe seeded this universe's Big Bang.
In other words, they disbelieve in an eternal Yahweh but believe in multiple infinite collapsing universes!
@AnhedoniaNightmare Damn it, I am NOT goin down this path again here!
You feel as you do and I feel differently, simple as that so please cut this crap out, it benefits no one.
@mrkim56 ??? ROFL
Wait...I get ruthlessly trolled about my faith in Christianity for a MONTH, but should I ask a question, then I must stop???
@AnhedoniaNightmare You didn get ruthlessly trolled. What you got mostly was others opinions you didn agree with which when processed through your christian agenda filter was surmised to BE trolling, which is hardly the same thing.
Some people on both sides of the issue will always go on attack mode though doing so is both unnecessary and socially in poor taste.
But, this is the interwebs man, get used to its harshness or stay off your keeboard.
It's your only sure fire defense :>)
@mrkim56 Baloney.
You folks mocked me for writing so many reviews and were irritated at my status. I can watch chat and see the name calling.
You folks don't want Christians here or new people. You want us to kowtow to you.
ROFL
@AnhedoniaNightmare Opinion(s) duly noted.
In the words of Emerson, Lake and Palmer: Rejoice glory's ours, our young men have not died in vain. The tapes have recorded their names.
Peace out bro :>)
@bondojoe And again accusing me of editing my posts LOL, even after our exchange earlier. Tsk tsk, Joe.
@DemandingFemale I know...I'm sorry. I keep looking at it...and can't see it! I think it's the Mandella sydrome! LOL!
@JudgeDredd It was my understanding too as well. He was the only one that came to mind when she said it.
@AnhedoniaNightmare Well, Bondo once told me, after a masterful grilling on the meaning of Truth in the News, that Truth can be found only in religion. A very good proposition which succeeded in his intention to divert my attention from the argument at hand.
@JudgeDredd See I disagree. In fact early theologians looked to the Greeks and Romans far before Jesus Christ in their search for truth.
@AnhedoniaNightmare Yeah but that's different. The Ancient Greeks and Romans were really advanced in their understanding of philosophy and science. Its not as if the paganist religions offered any truth through sacrifice.
@JudgeDredd Seneca is openly an atheist yet praised by early Christian theologians.
@AnhedoniaNightmare Being an atheist or not should not be a consideration when one talks about philosophy
@JudgeDredd Well...it's clearly illogical.
For example, in 4.6 billion years, based on probability theory there is ZERO chance a 150 amino acid formed into a protein. And then how would it replicate? Thus if atheism were true then life on Earth is impossible.
@AnhedoniaNightmare No its not. Life on Earth predates religion. For religion to exist it requires a belief system. A belief system is only possible when there are believers. For believers to exist, there must be life of earth.
@JudgeDredd The atheist belief that no outside Supreme Being created life is absurd as by random chance a single 150 amino acid randomly formed a protein, the odds are 10 ^119 power. 4.6 billion years allows for a probability of 10^48 power.
As you can see, atheism is illogical.
@JudgeDredd OMG LOL no it isn't, hahaha that is ludicrous. Nice attempt to try to scare the owner. LOL first off any news moves on, it doesn't stay. And it's good that they see it, then they will know news is part of this site from the get go. And not be whiney.
@sunshinedaydreams I apologise, but this thread has become enormous and I cannot track my comment to which you reply. As such I cannot offer any constructive point of discussion. If you wish, could you indicate which comment you replied to?
@JudgeDredd Oh gosh I honestly don't feel like scrolling through all the silliness to find it. And I don't want to misquote you. If I stumble upon it, I will let you know :)
@3UN01A No, it's still there. I think people are looking at the wrong post or something.
@rickgrimesrocks My bad. I was reading the wrong post but glad to know my memory was on point lol these threads are hard to follow and keep up with since the replies and all are a cluster* Thank you for letting me know xx
@bondojoe Exactly. I believe that as well - everyone is entitled to their opinion and beliefs. As someone who believes in God, I would never attack someone who does not or has a different faith/belief then I , as it goes against my own beliefs to do so. I try my best to avoid those "debates" or arguments but support hose who wish to engage in them as it's their right to do so.
@bondojoe Just for the record, I have never 'attacked' anyone for their beliefs. I have also never questioned their faith.
I might question their behaviour when they preach one thing and act out in another, but that is the extent of my interest when discussing religion on TM.
This is an international site, with members from all over the world.
Including several different Christian denominations, Muslim, Sikh, Jewish, Secular, Agnostic, Atheist, Jedi...
Why should ANY of them be subjected to a constant barrage of New Testament when discussing a movie or playing a simple forum game? Or victimized in the form of propaganda filled news articles?
@DemandingFemale I don't see a "barrage". Since about 70 % of Amricans are still Christian... you're going to see a high amount of Christian news from them. The rest of the world is about 31.6 percent Christian. Muslims are about 23 percent of the global population. But they don't get a lot of international internet...so we won't be hearing from a lot of them. As for the "Barrage'...you can see why there would be more Christian news. And I consider it a good thing, being a Christian. Would you prefer more Muslim news? Anyone can ignore the news, or block it. You included. If you want to be a part of the news, you can also post whatever you like. As everyone does. This Christian hating is WAY out of hand. No one is perfect. The Idea is to STRIVE to be perfect. Christianity teaches that. What happens on the News section is called Freedom. We still believe in that in America.
@bondojoe Again... You jump on the defensive having not understood what I typed.
Nowhere did I say "barrage of news". You ranted about something that wasn't even said.
@DemandingFemale "Why should ANY of them be subjected to a constant barrage of New Testament " New Testament WHAT? The NEWS was about the New Testament . Christians. Nothing more than Semantics. Same diference. We can ask others opinions...if you like.
@DemandingFemale In addition...I did not say "Barrage of News". I simply said Barrage.
@bondojoe "I don't see a "barrage". Since about 70 % of Amricans are still Christian... you're going to see a high amount of Christian news from them."
"As for the "Barrage'...you can see why there would be more Christian news."
"Would you prefer more Muslim news?"
"Anyone can ignore the news"
Your whole post was about the NEWS. So, yes, you took what I said and turned the whole thing about the news section.
@DemandingFemale Your comment..." Or victimized in the form of propaganda filled news articles?"...I guess it WAS about the news.
@bondojoe Couln give 2sh*tz whether a person is a believer or not, everyone gets to make that choice individually no matter how anyone else thinks.
What always acts as a bur under my saddle is being preached to. If I wanted that there's ample enough churches of various disciplines to get that any time I desire it.
Tell me you'll pray for me or keep me in your prayers, no probs, we need all the positive energy we can get and that's how I view it.
But when one starts quoting scripture as a means of showing anyone "the way/righteous path" I'm not gonna take that too well as that's the same as saying I'm some poor misguided soul that "just doesn't get it".
@mrkim56 Okay. Now flip that. Imagine a Christian said they didn't want hear anything about atheism.
Does that sound reasonable in a forum full of international people???
@bondojoe In my opinion, she wasn't attacking conservatives but talking about AN. Honestly I think even believers and conservatives both get tired of hearing his sh*t.
@rickgrimesrocks He is prolific. But as this is a site that I HOPE is dedicated to freedom..that is his right. No one has to engage him.
@bondojoe I guess prolific is one word to describe him lol. You're right, if that is how he wants to be that is his choice and he's free to make it. I'm going to try and not engage him anymore myself. That's good advice.
@rickgrimesrocks I'm 'technically' on the same side he is... and you're right. I need a break sometimes too. There's a difference between conversing with someone, and getting beat to death with words.
@rickgrimesrocks nobody is hearing anything, they are reading it, and it is their choice to do so.
@rickgrimesrocks :)LOL it was less about anything YOU personally said, and more about the fact that all this nonsense is nonsense. People need take responsibility for their own actions and not look.
@JudgeDredd No, it's because we know the same cast of characters. They have made their fascism well known in the past. So no, Bondo is not jumping to any conclusions.
@DemandingFemale his comment was eloquent, there is NOTHING in any of these comments that is rude, or mean. Not sure what your seeing, or again just making stuff up to suit a narrative. We are just posting facts as we see them. It's called opinion, but to you, it's what evil mean words. But then again so what if they were?
@sunshinedaydreams Who is making stuff up to suit a narrative?
I've been accused of editing/deleting my posts - more than once.
Been told I'm liberal.
Been accused of attacking people because of their faith, and of being a god hater.
Had smartarse comments about posting Simmon videos and diet advice instead.
Been told that if I don't like it - leave.
Had my posts butchered to fit the narrative of whomever replied.
That I think fraud is ok (no fking idea wtf that came from, but okay)
And that I think it's fine when 'your ganged up on'... Wtf are you doing now? LOL
It isn't my fault if you fail to understand the words put before you.
@bondojoe --hah hah i just read that Fox news channel is one of the most popular channels on t.v.I was amazed. is there a more liberal site or news show that is also very popular?CNN?CBS?BBC?Could we balance out the news?umm?
@DemandingFemale "The moment anything is said about the news section the freedom of speech brigade come out aggressively (illiterately) swinging."
It's exhausting being right all the time. I wish, just sometimes, people would prove me wrong.
@DemandingFemale You have just become one of my favourite members in here. Thank you for your honesty and for standing up for your opinion. And I am truly sincere here.
BTW, I agree with your points.
@JudgeDredd I don't see a problem with "freedom of speech" and news of all kinds,example,i found very little news about NotreDame burning down,that's one of the oldest structures in Europe.--surviving way past my bad spelling.HOW DID IT GET BURNT after all that time?clumsy restoration?
@clarachan1355 I have no idea to be honest with you. I haven't revisited the story since. At the time I was arguing against the news proclaiming arson as the cause, since the investigation had only just begun. I have no information on whether it was concluded or not and what were the official results. As for the frequency or selection of the news, that is entirely dependent on each member and their willingness to share their news.
@DemandingFemale WOW lol seriously???? That is ridiculous. You have a problem for people fighting for our constitution, yet you think fraud is ok. And you think it's oh so fine when we are ganged up on, hypocrisy girl. Come on.
@sunshinedaydreams Huh?
"yet you think fraud is ok" eh?
Who are 'we'?
I will repost what I said up there^
"I said nothing about left or right."
There is plenty of BS being posted by all you.
@DemandingFemale and ps to US it's an haven for extremism, but you don't see us b**ching to remove it. Nope you would NEVER see it come from us. EVER. So maybe take a look at who the extremists are, the real ones.
senior master
master
guru
Can't understand anyone gettin triggered by Jesus ... unless you're talkin about Jesus that's mowin your back yard while ogglin your sunbathing 16yr old daughter 
senior guru
... This "feature" enforces the impression that this site shares such radical opinions. Thankfully, most inhabitants of this world do not share such politcal opinions.
Always, always censor and or stop the news, even though all viewpoints can be expressed, one expression must dominate. Contention and competition for simply the right to have a viewpoint or comment exposed seems to be inherently indigestible.
Then, when the argument begins to crumble the inevitable socially reprehensible commentary pivot occurs, couched in tones of defense of the weak and innocent. Shadows, the pale of Mordor, a blight upon the site.
Nope, unconvincing. The news is the news, all sites are equally biased most actually print/host some factual information. For the interested and discerning reader/viewer it is an exercise in choice and filtering to evaluate content. Telling people what they can read and what they cannot plays well in a totalitarian state or Facebook; Enjoy a bit of freedom and debate generously, frequently and openly.
senior master
@rattaka 
Welcome aboard to two-movies!
There is an option at the top right of this site to "Hide News" = problem solved.
I personally do not care what other people believe, their views, opinion be it religious or political, are theirs and IMHO even if I do not agree with them , I do support their rights to have them.
If I don't want to read something, I just do not. It's a choice we all have. To respond , ignore or engage and argue or debate.
What matters to me is how people treat others knowing their differences.
Also, those who do preach, preach , preach yet never walk the talk are usually ones I do not care to interact with. That's also a choice we have on here. There's the Block feature as well if you do not like or feel you can't tolerate what someone posts, you don't have too if you utilize Block or mentally ignore.
Censoring is not the solution IMHO and I've always been against that. There are a few things on here that I don't like such as religious fanatics that preach one thing good then on the other hand are spewing nothing but insults and hate. I just ignore it like all toxic nonsense.
...
Read more
senior guru
admin
@Dr.Evil Most forums seem to have that kind of policy anyway as standard, because it usually helps cut down on spam/troll/bot accounts being made, and thus makes the site more secure as a result.
In addition to that I do know that many online forums also disable some forum functionality to new authenticated user accounts until that user has met certain specific conditions, e.g. not being able to comment within a live news section until they've posted/replied in certain sections of the general forum a specific number of times.
So in Two-Movies case, by all means disable all commenting across the site for unauthenticated accounts, but if possible, perhaps we could also say no posting in/commenting on the live news section until an authenticated user has earned a certain number of points/forum rank, e.g. 'Contributor'.
That way the live news section still remains available, albeit read-only, to the user until they've proven that they aren't just a random account set up on the spur of the moment to whine and complain about something that triggers them personally.
@Dr.Evil I think new members must confirm their email right away before they can even login. Lots of sites do that and for good reason.
I forget how TM works or if y'all already do that but if not, it's something to consider as well a 24-72 hour wait after new member is signed up with a confirmed email right away, before being able to comment or be active. It would help prevent spammers and make it more difficult for the trolls + alt accounts to join? maybe?
@Dr.Evil For news, that's a good idea (for any members with less than a certain number of up votes accumulated in general posts around the forum).
Up votes might as well be used
for something constructive and helping to regulate who posts in the News section might be one way.
God
"rattaka (14h)
Hello,
sadly, it has come to my attention that this site's news feature has been taken over more and more by right wing propaganda and fake news" What Bullsh*t. Where are you, rattacka?... "User is banned permanently."
God
It looks like their might be War with Iran. Should we IGNORE that too, until the bombs start falling on us?
master
It is my opinion that the majority of the news posted from BOTH SIDES makes the news section here look like a trashy tabloid news rack at the grocery store. That said, everybody has the right to post what they wish as long as it agrees with the TOS. Keep it, get rid of it, it's all the same to me. I do read some of the news posted here and I do ignore some of the news posted here. I'm of the opinion that if you don't like it, then don't read it. If you don't want to see it, then use the "hide news" feature, that's why it's there.
@rickgrimesrocks My only worry is that these kind of posts (again from BOTH SIDES) is going to attract more fanatics and only make the situation worse.
@bondojoe Most of the posts that I'm talking about are opinion pieces and therefore can't really be true or false.
Even if a post is true, a lot of times the headline is designed to be antagonizing to the other side.
So regarding drawing fanatics to the site, I guess it doesn't matter whether the post is true. Just my opinion, of course.
@rickgrimesrocks If the 'block the news' feature isn't enough, then the only solution is to remove the news entirely, because one opinion, or article can't be favored over another.
admin
senior guru
once the news section is gone, they'll start complaining about the forums. after that, it will be the chat or even the reviews themselves. it's a long, weary road when you can't just tell some people to f*ck off and stay off without having to make a case for it.
@uunboundd It's all about people that want only one point of view. Their own. Free speech is only for those that agree with them. They play a subtle game, with increments of pressure, and innuendo, instead of straight talk. A form of social coercion. They probably sit at the feet of Dale Carnegie. I've always disliked people that think they have an advantage in intelligence, and use it to try and manipulate others. It's an evil persona.
@uunboundd Exactly this.
Moving the news section to another site, or even removing it full stop, is NOT an appropriate solution.
Instead it's a compromise, it would be nothing more than a temporary appeasement to a minority of people who would seek to disrupt/censor/prohibit any and all forms of discussion on this site that don't fit within the scope of their own personal beliefs/opinions.
The news section on here is already an optional part of this site, there's even a clearly posted link to hide that section, so nobody is forced to interact with that section of this site, let alone view it, if they choose not to.
And yet, despite this, and the suggestions made earlier, we're now talking about moving/removing the news section, thus essentially allowing a few childish individuals to dictate what the rest of us in this community can and cannot do here on this site, all because their delicate underdeveloped sensibilities are far too easily triggered by some simple, honest, to-the-point, discussion...
...
Read more
@Lurkio I agree with most of what you said, but I think part of the problem is that the discussion on these posts isn't "simple, honest, to-the-point". It often devolves into name calling and nastiness towards each other, on both sides of the fence. It's just human nature, I guess.
@Dr.Evil I don't even see the need for this conversation. The news is there. Use it, or ignore it. People are complaining because the news isn't what THEY like! As for newcomers..they too can ignore it. Block it. Why would you remove a section of your platform because a handful of people don't get their own way? It's the ultimate in political correctness. We see what that has done to the world.
@Dr.Evil I don't think news should be removed all together. Maybe just the politics section? That is where the most nastiness, arguments and insults start. It's also where the most tabloid like posts are. But it is probably also the most popular section so Idk. I don't know what the solution is or if we need a solution at all. I will defer to your superior knowledge on this one Doc.
master
My take on this is slightly different. To a new person wishing to join this site, the first impression from the news section is not the best. And that's an understatement. The news section simply doesn't carry any real news. All the items posted are opinion pieces plagued by hyperbole that either serve the right or the left. Each side is bashing on the other with no regard to the rules of civility or cordiality. Each argument is a battlefield on its own.
The question here that actually matters is: Would any reasonable person mistake this news section for an objective compilation of news, capable to inform the public on what is going on in the world?
The answer is an absolute No. We all get our news elsewhere, so trying to persuade anyone that the real news are posted here and not elsewhere, while every dissenting opinion is dismissed as fake news or an MSM conspiracy, is laughable in the least.
So if the news section doesn't convey the news, but instead conveys the political opinions and agendas of the members posting the news, why exactly are we calling it a News Section? And judging by the resulting purpose, which is none other than to debate and argue about the underlying politics contained within, why don't we call it what it really is?
...
Read more
@JudgeDredd Exactly what I was trying to say but you just say it so much better 
@rickgrimesrocks Thank you. I read your posts with great interest. Its not often that I see someone here tackling an issue from the objective point of view. A rare quality that is.
The problem with the News Section is that people don't seem to be able to distinguish between truth and agenda. The choice is always clouded by personal political ideology.
For me the distinction is simple. If any article opts to evoke public sentiment or emotions like fear, threat, patriotism, pride, righteousness etc, its a telltale sign that the strength of the argument or the evidence presented will not hold up in the court of public opinion.
@JudgeDredd As someone who (attempts) to moderate the news here, I can write with 100% objectivity that ALL sides here contribute equally to the hate speech and blatant opinion pieces.
I have moderated clear TOS violations in the news with members regarding derogatory, inflammatory and hate filled language, and then been vehemently accused of being on "the right" when that suits them, or being on "the left" , when that suits them. I've lost "friends" because I was doing my job, and then been told that I never discipline the "other side" when the very person they've accused me of protecting just unfriended me for the very same reason in reverse!
News is not left in the news section, so the option of hiding it does no good.
It would be brilliant if it were as simple as "hide" to avoid the news, but members drag it all over the site to hash it out all over again in childish and demeaning ways which hurt everyone here. Adults on this site do not take responsibility for their poor choices is reacting to a different opinion, they lash out at the first available target. I'm sick of adults who behave like spoiled children.
...
Read more
@ Your perspective is certainly unique as it originates from within. Its certainly a tough job, at least if you have expectations of normal interactions with other members you consider friends. The problem is that there is no sanctity of friendship when you occupy a position of authority. All your friends consider your position to be their prerogative. A jail out of free card. And they simply cannot understand that a friendship with someone that has authority over their actions requires a stricter test of loyalty. Because the friendship part is considered a negative catalyst, you would have to subject your friend to unequal treatment just to prove to others that equal treatment applies to all.
In respect to the maturity of some members, I admit I have also been dumbfounded. I have also witnessed reactions so childish that would shock my 10 year old niece. Can we regulate it or correct it in any manner or form? I sincerely doubt it. ...
Read more
@JudgeDredd I expected adults to behave as adults and respect a decision.
Childish behind the scenes talk of conspiracies is absurd.
Then to insinute that I stalked another member for "racial" reasons, is beyond ludicrous.
No one here has my unique experience (with the exception of slightly different experience of Doc as the owner/admin) where I come under personal, fabricated attack over issues on a movie site, that regurgitates opinion pieces as news and then feeds it to the members like their last meal ever so that they'll rip each other's throats out and undermine anyone who they perceive as a threat. Ridiculous.
Here's an idea!
Have a vote from the so called political parties and come up with one name from each side to moderate the news.
Let the members self regulate.
All this talk of hidden conspiracies and being one "side" or the other is like fake life to me. ...
Read more
@ Now that is an excellent idea. Have each side declare a champion and let them fight it out with each other. I will provide the pop corn
Seriously though, that's a really good idea. Especially when the responsibility of the decisions will be clearly attributable. Lets see if anyone in their right mind will want to take on this responsibility. Having to deal with his/her fellow members that actually do share the same political ideology for a change. 
@ I was thinking of suggesting something along those lines. It was gonna be that Doc pick one moderator who he thinks will be impartial to handle just the news section. Maybe that or what you suggested would help. It really needs to stop infecting the whole site.
@ I just realised that in conveying my opinion on friendship and authority, an opinion that stems from my own personal experience, I made it appear that you may have been subjective in your treatment as a Moderator. If that was perceived as such, I do apologise. It was never meant in that light. I was referring to a personal friendship I once had with my director, a friendship that pre-existed our employment relationship and which resulted in me being passed over for promotion on 3 distinct occasions, just so he can prove that he is not biased towards me.
@JudgeDredd Not at all.
You've done nothing of the sort.
Those who have know.
My being here vindicates me completely.
I am sorry you've experienced the same in many ways.
@ Very well said Ravenousbird. And here is the kicker:
It would be brilliant if it were as simple as "hide" to avoid the news, but members drag it all over the site to hash it out all over again in childish and demeaning ways which hurt everyone here.
This is the worst part. You can turn off the news and chat, did so day one, but this shows up throughout the site. The gangs of so called adults attempting to bully someone, are especially pathetic.
Good job on a thankless task Ravenousbird.
@Wander It's the truth. I appreciate your taking the time to state what you have experienced.
Thank you for your support. (You will now probably be accused of being my friend or ally, even though we've never spoken). That's how silly this whole thing has gotten.
I don't know where this nonsense of the 1% in the news section runs the site comes from, because it's patently untrue!
I see far more members that aren't there (participating in the news) then are there -- including Enuioa who actually supported the 1%/30 member rule, and who at one time, stated her complete aversion to the news.
Remove it and remove 1% or 30 mmbers?
Nope. Not gonna happen.
When the Muslim hate posts were removed they promised the same thing -- to leave
They are all still here, plus new members.
@JudgeDredd aha, thee hast read thine "The Prince" by Macciavelli (spelling) about what really controls the masses of people;fear.EMOTIONS MOVE PEOPLE--NOT LOGIC OR OBJECTIVE FACTS. We people are still pretty much herds of Simian relatives,living by wants,needs,fear,pain,sex,hate,desire,de light,ambition,testosterone and female hormones-(-except females seem to be punching the glass ceiling with hammers now. I am not sure that is exactly the answer, what the Heck?hah!)
@clarachan1355 Well, that is certainly true. And the public can be influenced as easily, and react as dangerously with one mind and one purpose.
@JudgeDredd I think the TwoMovies news section is better than the major networks, At least here we have input when we see a bunch of bullsh*t.
@Paladin* Does this feature adds to the veracity and accountability of a news story?
@JudgeDredd In CNN's case it is understandable why they do not.
And biased sites and those that heavily exorcise dissenting opinions (WAPO, NyT, The Hill, Slate, MOJO, NPR, etc) exhibit little veracity.
@Paladin* I apologise but I am confused. A news site is supposed to inform the reader on the current state of affairs. Its a reporting medium. It was never intended as a forum of discussion on the news itself. That's why forums, such as the News section here, were created to enable people to express and discuss their opinions in relation to the news. The forum for discussion however cannot be mistaken as the source of the news.
@JudgeDredd Leftist "NEWS" sites are little more than Agitprop Central for the DNC these days.
@Paladin* I am not arguing against that. But if we do go down this path, we should mention the other side of the coin as well. The same will have to apply for the Rightist News sites. Its not something new to have newspapers and news channels supporting a specific side. In the days of old, that role was limited to the State owned news mediums that only conveyed news in support of the ruling government.
The point here is that news that become eschewed by political ideology, are no longer objective news and are nothing more than personal opinions expressed by the journalists reporting them.
Being opinions they are always subjective and not subject to the test of accuracy. They cannot be wrong but at the same time they cannot be right either. As such, arguing and contradicting the veracity of Fake news, with news pieces that are entirely subjective and thus equally fake, becomes a pointless endeavour.
@JudgeDredd i already thought of that but the cringing memory of Bill Maher and Politically Incorrect still lies fresh.
the forum will never be equally matched and the outnumbered will be gleefully set upon without restraint.
admin
News section started as entertainment, celebrity, movie news only. We added politics etc later, users asked about it.
@Dr.Evil Don't get me wrong, I love it. Arguing with people is what I live for. I just don't like arguing about the perception of reality. I prefer reality instead.
@JudgeDredd And reality is what...YOUR version? As Pliate asked Christ.."What is truth?"
@bondojoe you do have to EXPLAIN BULLSHIT and WHY it is bullsh*t.explain the reality. ok,lots of people have never read "reality"and their life experiences have not shown it to them--nor favorite sister/brother/cousin explained "reality" to them.don't laugh.it took me years to understand and i'm 71.
@JudgeDredd We all have reality that is our own. Just because you think yours is right or correct. Nobody else can possibly be. I used to feel that way, when I was brainwashed. Free speech is the ONLY Truth there is.
@sunshinedaydreams Although I understand what you are trying to say, I am not certain that you understand what I am saying. There is only one reality which consists of actions and reactions. The way we interpret and understand that reality consists of our perception of reality. The perception is entirely subjective and as such any attempt to convey it to anyone else is regarded as an opinion, which is equally subjective. An opinion could never be regarded as news because by definition it lacks objectivity.
Your last statement I cannot make sense of. I cannot see the correlation between reality, its perception, free speech and truth. Would you care to elaborate on what I am missing?
senior guru
Part of the problem is the incessant 'us vs them vs us' mentality that spills over to the rest of the site. No where is out of bounds.
I feel like a broken record because I've said this sh*t at least once elsewhere.
How are users supposed to converse with anyone, in a pleasant and fun way, anywhere else on the site once you've seen them calling for the eradication of whole groups of people. Encouraging violence and hatred. Sharing dubious articles written and produced by dubious folk with their own agenda, or crap about sticking bleach up kids arses to cure autism.
Politics and religion polarises communities and makes the whole place an unpleasant place to be, for everyone! And that is the reason both subjects are banned from many other sites that aren't heavily moderated.
Just look at what is happening in the forum right now. Users being followed from thread-to-thread, being downvoted and taunted, even though they are blocked. Men of 'God' trying to derail threads with chapter and verse, questioning peoples morals and intelligence because they happen to enjoy a forum game - whilst also being in the news section calling for a shoot to kill policy on 'invaders' and calling the opposing lefties "mentally disturbed sociopaths and psychopaths" It's absolutely f**king ridiculous.
@DemandingFemale Use report comment feature. It helps us. Today has been banned a lot of trolls.
@Dr.Evil I reported him today. I felt bad for Teeny having her thread set upon with his nonsense.
@Dr.Evil What about the troll that put this nonsense fraud post up? Registered a new account just to post this tripe!
@DemandingFemale It does infect every other part of the site. So does a certain user, like an infection you can't get rid of.
@DemandingFemale Unfortunately as to the term "invaders"this gets used in history cuz the reality in history has real invaders--over and over.peoples' homes,nations,continents get "invaded"by an outside group that wants that land.its not personal, its just real history over and over.would that help to not blame or de-personalize it?no emotions?for example, all thru history,China was "invaded",swarmed by an oytside nation, over and over.look up the history of ancient China,they got it over and over--even Japan during WW2 was horrible to China.I just want to historically explain the concept,and that it happened all thru history.
@DemandingFemale "name calling"is never a positive or rewarding action.it simply means"let's fight verbally,"I try to avoid it.
@clarachan1355 You avoid it so well you've had the police at your door in regards to things you've said online.
Just saying...
admin
I've just checked our stats. News section is about 1% of all our visits. The first place is episodes. 99% of users just don't care about news.
@Dr.Evil That actually makes sense. After all its always the same 30+ members debating on the news section, with 10-15 being the most vocal.
@JudgeDredd From my 1 year + of being a signed up member here and observing ... I believe that 30+ members is the general number for everywhere on this site which includes the forum, film/series comments/reviews etc. It's almost always the same members who are active vs the # of "online members" or total registered.
So where would the site be without these 30+ members who contribute in their own ways? The rest are quiet as in they do not post.
@3UN01A You certainly make a good and valid point. If this is the case and the same individuals that add value to the site are the ones that also condemn it in the perception of the newcomers, then the act is balanced evenly.
In any case, I am neither advocating for the removal of the news section nor the banishment of any members. I am a realist in that department. Regulating people's reactions and opinions is as futile as trying to put a lightning back in the bottle.
@Dr.Evil 1% does not equal 30 members on this site. It equals more than that.
Plus the fact that the members that threatened to leave before, did not.
In addition, from my experience as a moderator, very few loyal members want to be thrust into the limelight of this controversy, so the numbers that are justifiying opinion based features that masquerade as news depending on who's side (or not), are NOT something they fancy to learn the truth about.
End of fictitious support by members that docked up here and ran the site, AND Doc, down in previous posts.
Don't tempt me to post the screen shots.
It's easy to switch sides when you've a bunch of new friends to do your bidding and upvote you.
member
Alright, hold the phone....
Let's say, movies are dead or, seem to have lost all moral and climactic effect. They are mostly tired, worn-out cliches. What's the numbers around Los Angeles produced movies again? Something like 80%+ still? Well California has been known to "swing" politically.
Imho, movies are the news, or at least some form of it now. Consider living in the US or, Canada. Life has become quite dull and monotonous that people will do just about anything non-violent for some form of entertainment. Bias and preference still remain the same, regardless of less ads, and newer ways to view movies and tv shows. People are always looking for ways to "spice" up their relationships, and with the anonymity of the internet, there are ways to view things that shed light or turn the colour of creative material into a complete horror show or nightmare.
XYZ.
@30somethingidiot its called "escape from reality temporarily."I really need that.I like sci-fi often to escape to outer space,other planets,Mars,rockets, flying saucers "invasions"to earth;mostly OLD STUFF before the big push to use " anti police, the police are racist, big business is corrupt, feminist rant films, pro-abortion, anti-military, pro-homosexual films, anti-Christian stuff,"yes, even more.Movies are for ESCAPING THIS HORRIBLE REAL WORLD,leaving yer body,home,state,nation,and believe me we all need to escape reality.it is never kind to us.
God
guru
They don't have to click the news section, so why are they complaining? Hell, there's even an option to hide the news from sight!
guru
Maybe rename the News section?
Subscriber Scoops
The Lowdown
Member Murmur
Subs Small Talk
TwoMovies Two Cents
guru
Hmmm, late to the party as ususal, it's what I get for taking a trip to the country for a day.
As has been well said above me here, the news section can be avoided or not, so "to click or not to click" is an option that still lies with the "clicker".
With that in mind once they decide to enter the fray, following links there or posting their own links or thoughts on what's posted, hell it's all good, so long as some simple rules of social decorum are followed ... which is where the real problems always start.
Once presentations of opinion devolve into name calling or threats there's really no going back from that point, and that sux!
However, what's the alternative? Placing offending parties in time out or outright banning them for repeated violations of TOS policies is really all that can and should be done. Any more than holding the line by using TOS violations as the qualifier is plainly censorship, something I personally abhor!
...
Read more
@mrkim56 Once presentations of opinion devolve into name calling or threats there's really no going back from that point, and that sux!
However, what's the alternative? Placing offending parties in time out or outright banning them for repeated violations of TOS policies is really all that can and should be done. Any more than holding the line by using TOS violations as the qualifier is plainly censorship, something I personally abhor!
Well said, really. Good way to finalize this thread. Maybe it solved the conundrum as the 'initiator' is Kaput.
master
Best advice? There is an option to hide news and chat box etc etc. . Try it, you don't get to see offending articles and comments then.
Similarly if you don't like Alex Jones then don't go on his site, don't like NY times then dont go on their website or buy their newspapers.
It's common sense.
master
Similar forum topics
- CHAT BOX SHOULD BE FOR MEMBERS ON THIS SITE (13 years ago)
- Is it time to ban medical mis-information on this site? (4 years ago)
- How to message a friend on this site (6 years ago)
- A Gentle Reminder of the "No more politics on this site" post. (4 years ago)
- Can I watch movies on this site on my Smart tv somehow? (8 years ago)
- Some (relatively minor but, absolutely aggravating) issues I'm having with this site as of the newes... (6 years ago)
- Trojan on this site (4 years ago)
- No more politics on this site (4 years ago)
- forbidden words/BANNED WORDS, on DOS (3 years ago)
newbie
Hello,
sadly, it has come to my attention that this site's news feature has been taken over more and more by right wing propaganda and fake news. I wouldn't mind having a certain mix in opinions, but it's hard not to see which direction this "news feature" is taking. Therefore i would suggest deactivating this feature completely, since it will only do more harm than good. This "feature" enforces the impression that this site shares such radical opinions. Thankfully, most inhabitants of this world do not share such politcal opinions.
If any of you should feel attacked of offended by this message, you should take a good, hard look into the mirror.