• pingveno@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Once upon a time that would have been a simple answer, given the concentrated ownership of news that could reach any one person. But now with the Internet, there is less and less control by any one group. Certainly the age of the rich effectively controlling the media is over.

      • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        But now with the Internet, there is less and less control by any one group. Certainly the age of the rich effectively controlling the media is over.

        Pr teams have successfully learned how to use social media, and social media giants promote views that are beneficial to them like fascism while suppressing left wing content.

        I dont think the internet existing makes us a democracy, the parasocial nature of a lot of internet content actually makes it so people are more able to sell their propaganda.

        • pingveno@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is plenty of media that exists outside of media giants. Case in point, there is a local blogger here in Portland, OR that runs bikeportland.org to cover bikes and related subjects. His blog posts and discussions on them are a major part of the local discourse around infrastructure in Portland. He’s not rich, but he exercises influence.

          • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Okay, but you do see how thats pretty boutique compared to the local news channels, let alone the giants, right?

            Small things are allowed to exist that oppose the dominant ideology until they meaningfully threaten it.

            • pingveno@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Any grassroots media is going to be “boutique”. That doesn’t make it not influential, especially when considered as a whole.

              • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                If independent media, as a whole, got too influential to the point that it was threatening the system, it would be targeted. We’ve seen this play out over and over again under capitalism. You literally just have to look to history to see this.

                • pingveno@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Targeted with what? At least in the US, there has been a build up of case law over the past century and a half or so that provides vigorous protections of freedom of speech. The Red Scare is remembered as a scar on the US’s past, not to be repeated. Yes, there are still people with a vigorous taste for censorship, but there’s vigorous pushback against them.

                  • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    At least in the US, there has been a build up of case law over the past century and a half or so that provides vigorous protections of freedom of speech. The Red Scare is remembered as a scar on the US’s past, not to be repeated.

                    This is funny because we are currently going through a red scare.

      • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        If the bourgeoisie decide elections through lobbying and media it isnt a democracy in a meaningful sense.

          • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            They don’t exactly decide, they influence the decision.

            “The didn’t do that, they just did something that will predictably result in that”

            • UnrepententProcrastinator@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              It doesn’t work perfectly and humanity pushes back over time. The issue is the pace of technology is too fast for our ability to push back. I’m hopeful our good side will win but I’m afraid it will take deaths by the millions again for people to wake up and fight back against the real enemies among us.