Skip to main content

Cracks in America's "Berlin Wall?"

 I was pleased to learn how easy it is to block the trolls who are trying to sabotage  They put soft-core porn pictures on the site in an attempt to discourage parler from 'taking off' or achieving 'critical mass.' Or it could be individual cranks with no political agenda. How could I ever know?

All you have to do is go to the upper right hand corner of the troll's post and click the down arrow. Then some options come up. One of them is "Block @poster'sName." 

Why do you have to do this? Why doesn't do it automatically? I suppose Parler is trying to live up to their free-speech ideals.

I hope viewers don't get discouraged by these trolls, because it would be great if some of the new alternatives to the Main Stream Media survive and thrive. I don't really understand how to make the best use of these alternatives. And which ones will be my favorites, eventually?

But there is something about this cracking of the MSM monopoly that is redolent of 1988-1991 in the old Soviet bloc in central Europe. Who removed the first brick from the Berlin Wall, metaphorically speaking?

I wish I knew of a good book to read about the disintegration of the Soviet era. Were any written? Or were leftist professors, publishers, authors, and movie scriptwriters too busy sulking?

The leftist intellectuals in the West must have been disillusioned, but they found a way to return to power. And we today must tear the 'Berlin Wall' down, all over again.



Yankeeflyer said…
Tweet me out the door !
Anonymous said…
Do we really need another social media megaphone which promotes conspiracy theories, misinformation, disinformation, lies, exaggerations, etc., like most of the social media sites do - including MSM? The country was a much less divisive place before the proliferation of these sites. People actually thought for themselves without the constant intrusive notifications from these mind benders.

Chris, in your list, you didn't mention censorship or leak-tight echo chambers. It is because of these two things that "conspiracy" theories become almost automatic. How can anyone believe anything when the MSM presents only one side?
Jim and Gayle said…
Not sure what your definition of MSM is. I assume it's just one of the right-wing conjuring words like socialism and means anything organization that doesn't promote their agenda. To be clear we haven't had cable TV in over a decade and don't have over the air TV now.

If I come across a story or piece of information I'm interested in I check other sources for accuracy. Those sources don't include Fox, Sean, Tucker, Rush, OANN, The Blaze, etc.

On Twitter, I follow numerous credible journalists and scientists among others but I don't take much at face value from one source.

I have no plan for joining Parler and that's based on the people I've seen announcing that they are moving over there like, Mark Levin, Dan Bongino(sp), Devin Nunes, etc. In almost every case they are proven purveyors of lies and, in general, disinformation.

The massive spread of disinformation is destroying this country and from what I've seen on FB or Twitter is that without exception the information that has been removed is transparently false.

Here is a link to some information on Parler. Hopefully, they aren't "MSM" by your definition.
Jim & Gayle, how is the layman supposed to "check" anything? The layman can't literally get their hands on direct, first hand, physical evidence.

It really comes down to who are they going to trust. I don't trust any of the propaganda sources.

Ideally, an adversarial presentation of each side's best argument is necessary to try to establish the truth.

The MSM has only given ONE side, for decades. The educational system, Hollywood, the law schools, and even theological schools have been part of the Leftist establishment for decades.

I have not done a good job of addressing your well-written comment point by point. But I am flattered that you would take the time and effort on my blog.
Anonymous said…
I, like Jim and Gayle, don't have cable and don't watch OTA programs. Most all of the news sources nowadays are propaganda sources to some degree. However, there are numerous non-partisan fact-checking sites which really try to expose the propaganda and present the truth. Look them up. Check them out. Compare one against the other and settle in with one which tells the truth. And good for you for not trusting the propaganda sources. Amen to that.

The unfortunate social media censorship exists because non-partisan fact checkers told the truth (verified with facts) about lies perpetrated by organizations and politicians during the recent campaign.

Jim and Gayle said…
If you are operating from the point of view that there are no sources that can be trusted then you've given up and the rest is hopeless. I don't happen to share that belief.

By your logic, you can't trust any information from any source. How would you form an opinion or operate in that environment? Give and head to the cave and lock the door.

My entire working life required, to some extent, trying to determine fact from lies. I don't believe that you can always tell when someone is lying but I believe in objective facts and believe that there are some sources of news that are trying to provide that as fairly as possible. Unfortunately, there are a significant number of sources currently and almost exclusively on the right that are intentionally spreading disinformation at a breakneck pace. I'm not sure how we will resolve that or if it can be resolved.

While I don't spend much time on this site it's an interesting attempt to evaluate bias.

Yankeeflyer said…
I believe in the Weather Channel.
Yankeeflyer, I don't pay much attention to the Weather Channel, so I forgot if that is one of those weather outlets that says "45% chance of rain today."

What does that mean? A 45% chance of a sprinkle or two, or 1" of rain?
Yankeeflyer said…
It means 55% chance of golf today or no chance of politics.