LDC
On est tous des pangolins
The initial camerawork is pretty sloppy. Can't they zoom out properly?
Two fucking awful jokes in the first 2 minutes. I didn't last much beyond that.
The initial camerawork is pretty sloppy. Can't they zoom out properly?
I quickly switched it off at 'even the most intimate of human relations'Two fucking awful jokes in the first 2 minutes. I didn't last much beyond that.
Tbh, I didn't watch it for long. I think I lasted about 2 minutes.Two fucking awful jokes in the first 2 minutes. I didn't last much beyond that.
yeah its been stolen by conspiraloons and brit far rightersAdmittedly I don't keep up with things so much these days, but I wasn't aware that 'mainstream media' had potentially negative connotations these days I've always used it to refer to BBC, Sky, Guardian, Times, Mail, etc. as opposed to say Schnews, Indymedia, even Morning Star as being some sort of 'non mainstream' outlet?
...who invariably use it against any media outlet, great or small, that doesn't buy in to their fuckspuddery.yeah its been stolen by conspiraloons and brit far righters
...who invariably use it against any media outlet, great or small, that doesn't buy in to their fuckspuddery.
Its a term to cover television and popular press surely.
Translation:-Much as the kids like granddad they won't take the same 25 pence spends he gives them every week
Translation:-
Corbyn & the cabinet were rubbish and busted from the start, without the media anywhere near then.
Translation:-
Corbyn & the cabinet were rubbish and busted from the start, without the media anywhere near then.
Its a term to cover television and popular press surely.
Well, that's what we're debating - how different people use "mainstream media" to mean different things.
I can happily say that I don't.well, as a non-conspiraloon, i'll happily say that i view anyone who uses 'mainstream media', and (tbh) 'elites', as a bit of a looper. its a sign. not perhaps as definative as 'sheeple', but its a sign that someone is on that road...
good for you. Many people do though, and it's worth considering which terms are going to make people roll their eyes and switch off, if only so you can communicate more effectively. You don't really need to persuade anyone who knows and understands Chomsky do you? If the common response to a certain term is 'probably a nutter', it's probably best to drop it.
Yeah, and it's valid for me to respond to your post too. Isn't that how discussions work?Sorry, but if one person's going to post what they feel about something as evidence of something, me posting how I feel about it is just as valid.
Well the evidence of this thread is that there are some who see conspiraloon connotations and others who don't. I would suggest that the majority of people don't pay any attention to Icke and truthers and the like.Yeah, and it's valid for me to respond to your post too. Isn't that how discussions work?
The concensus on this thread seems to suggest it's crossing over into conspiracy territory, and my own observations suggest the same. I haven't done any actual quantitive research on the topic though.Is it common?
Well the evidence of this thread is that there are some who see conspiraloon connotations and others who don't. I would suggest that the majority of people don't pay any attention to Icke and truthers and the like.
well, as a non-conspiraloon, i'll happily say that i view anyone who uses 'mainstream media', and (tbh) 'elites', as a bit of a looper. its a sign. not perhaps as definative as 'sheeple', but its a sign that someone is on that road...
They ignore them because they think they're mental. And they'll ignore you too, if you score too highly in the conspiraloon tropes stakes.Many people who don't pay any attention to "Icke and truthers and the like" also think they are mental.
They ignore them because they think they're mental. And they'll ignore you too, if you score too highly in the conspiraloon tropes stakes.