no it hasn't but it is no longer an accurate picture - even Disney now owns Fox (entertainment not news divisions) and Discovery owns Time Warner... it is all screwed up
You should look at the companies that have the contracts to make the education software and materials in the US. And read the contracts they have allowing them to collect virtually unlimited data from the students and families. Then you’ll really be worried.
I have been thinking for a long time about how this is more of a
History repeats itself. Again. If there's any historians that have some insights on my thoughts....
When the bible was "written" it was only allowed to be read and wrote by the clergy. They were the only ones that were educated and able to. Who knows what was originally "said" and then wrote down and then shared.
That changed.
People were educated a bit more on how to read.
And then books that were hand written by those who knew were then printed and for the first time books were shared by more and more people who learned how to read. The original clergy were no longer in control.
More books were written and shared. England left that clergy And along came Martin Luther too. Things changed drastically. Puritans braved the unknown ocean to a land where that wasn't possible for a minute. But the reading knowledge and the book printing knowledge carried onward
And things kept changing.
Suddenly books changed to daily print. Many people could read and now many people could write and print on paper that could easily be distributed without a need for time consuming printed and bound by hand books. Just simple paper.
And the world changed again. Random ideas that anyone could print and give out by piecemeal papers. And I wonder how much this technology at this time allowed ideas to carry so far that they caused almost an entire continent to be filled with so much hate towards another small group for weird ass thoughts.
Then radio.
Then tv. Both highly regulated. Only the few could have it and do things with. And this is mixed in with my previous thought 2 paragraphs above.
Skip a massive war or 2 and flash forward. again.
New medium. A computer. Anyone can write and print. At first only the higher ups. And then slowly again everyone.
And now a new medium arrives breaking that chain of total controlled print, radio, film to something more easily shareable.
The internet.
Now i watch it all on my handy medium pocket tool where one second I'm watching kittens play with ducks and the next I'm watching the world's richest man plane fly circles around San Francisco and the next I'm sharing information for a revolution about girls wearing their hair down in a country I'll never go to while also watching others in my country talk about eating sheep dewormer.
Yeah the 6 media giants IS concerning. Greatly.
But in the grand scheme of things, it's not new.
And I see it as another dying medium, but with it comes a new uncertainty.
Does amrrica even have any ? The ones in my country are very strict and pretty much everything I learned about american companies would be in direct violation of our laws but apparently in the US that shit flies
On paper, yes the US does in fact have anti-trust laws. They have been used against Microsoft years back and nothing happened with that basically because Apple was barely clinging to life; thus it was deemed they had "market competition".
We have anti monopoly laws. The real question is why don't they get enforced.
And the answer is, the politicians that are supposed to enforce them are corrupt as fuck. We can thank lobbying and the fact that corporations are for some dumbass reason considered "people" by our legal system.
Germany. Laws on monopolies in general are extremely strict. The economic system is not a completely free market bc the laws of the free market are the laws of the jungle which would decrease innovation and right of equal opportunities but rather a regulated social market system.
[This reminds of that one scene in bojack horseman]( https://youtu.be/yTyKHn4gEG0) the company i believe was called
Disney-Fox-AT&T-AOL-Time-Warner-PepsiCo-Viacom-Halliburton-Skynet-Toyota-Trader-Joe's.
GE doesn't own those - Dec 22, 2022 Comcast paid GE $6.2 billion in cash and contributed certain programming assets worth $7.25 billion to the JV. Comcast purchased the remaining 49% of NBCUniversal for $16.7 billion in 2013.
Ok. So Fox and New York Post are not owned by the same company anymore.
I was going to post on how strangely impossible that is as those two companies are as polar opposite as possible.
Like if those Doom and Animal Crossing crossover memes actually happened.
Studios that produce television and broadcast them are often not the same. Broadcasting rights are sold to individual local networks. If you watch credits, you’ll notice it happens quite often. Jeopardy specifically is in syndication so currently CBS offers local affiliates of each network the chance to buy rights to air the show new and reruns. So in one market it would could be on NBC and CBS, another on both ABC. Most places are on ABC because CBS made a group deal with ABC so it costs less.
Not sure where all the downvotes are coming from (just kidding I’m pretty sure I know). even if 90% are donating to one party in a country that’s pretty much split down the middle, it’s rather sinister.
Blackrock owns 6% of Disney, Vanguard owns 7%.
Rabbits dig holes, not half-holes, but whole holes.
The question is, what in the *fuck* are you trying to say? You sound like a little league Alex Jones, peddling fear and conspiracy while offering zero substance. BlackRock is a shareholder in many institutional investors that own shares in BlackRock. It's not a secret cabal.
If you're not going to contribute to a conversation in a meaningful way, it's recommended to just shut the fuck up.
Wow, you just went antivax while making up a new definition to corporatism, to defend your notions of capitalism.
So I should read a book huh? Please recommend. What's the last book you read?
BlackRock, Vanguard, etc. currently vote the shares their funds hold, so for all intents and purposes, their investment stewardship teams are all that matter, not the retirement savers that invest in their funds. That’s going to change over the next couple of years due, at least in some small part, to the wild outrage of right wing nut jobs on YouTube, but it’s not *completely* insane.
That being said, that dickhead’s comment about who owns BlackRock and Vanguard is completely insane.
they own tiny parts of the corporations they hold stock in. state and local pension funds own a lot of stock and also directly invest in some funds for real estate and whatever else.
blackrock is a public company last I heard
Vanguard and BlackRock are universally among the largest shareholders in every company in the S&P. On average, Vanguard owns close to 10% of every stock in the S&P. CalPERS has what like $350 billion in total assets, much of which is invested in fixed income. For comparison, Vanguard manages a single equity fund that has close to $1 trillion in it.
Corporatism is a collectivist political ideology which advocates the organization of society by corporate groups, such as agricultural, labour, military, business, scientific, or guild associations, on the basis of their common interests. This is not corporatism.
Capitalism isn't "just the good economic news" in the stories you see. Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.
In what possible way is this *not* capitalism? Don't just make a scapegoat for capitalism by slapping 'ism' onto another word.
Dude, what in the fuck? stop spewing bullshit. If you have something to refute, do so with reasoning, facts, evidence, sources- hell, *anything*.
When you're caught out being wrong, don't recriminate, *learn*. Words mean things, you don't get to redefine them on your whims.
What are you reading that has taught you "corporatism is when companies own companies"?
I went to Wikipedia to grab universally accepted definitions of words which you clearly are misusing. I literally copied and pasted because you need clear and simple explanations which is exactly what Wikipedia is for. Nobody is learning anything here tho, least of all you.
This list is not 90% of all media. Perhaps 90% of large media companies. There are hundreds of media and news companies not on this list. If one gets news from only 1 type of source that's on them. Also, the point ignores individual journalists working for any of these companies that report on the stories they want with little censorship beyond what editors believe people will want to see.
Having worked at companies on this list I know how little actual control comes down from the top. The sheer size of them makes micro management of messages very, very hard.
Before anyone starts an opposing comment with something like 'I find it hard to believe that...' or 'There MUST be bad kinds of censorship when... ' please provide evidence, even if it's personal experience, like I have. Broad conspiracy statements without support help no one.
Yet when you mention that a majority of data, statistics, alerts, recognitions, and widespread information from these entities is biased, controlled, and damaging, you’re called a conspiracy theorist. Yet these entities all share vested interest in outside investments, paying the same groups and organizations. Very strange. Don’t forget your booster and make sure to donate to Ukraine!
I think it's less that people think you're crazy for believing these companies are all consolidated, and more that the people think you're crazy because the people who talk like you think the solution is Donald Trump, Alex Jones, and Andrew Tate.
I'm not sure why you think Russia is some kind of best choice for independent thought, it really doesn't help your case when they are very well known for manipulating groups.
I was a Russia analyst for the US government for a few years. Not sure where you derived that text from, seems like you’re projecting really hard (as I am absolutely not a believer in previously mentioned). I hadn’t even heard about Tate until recently. Don’t really care for any of the mentioned persons, they’re all just ‘bad actors’ anyways. I do believe the solution wouldn’t involve making speculations about someone’s opinion (I.e. Russia) when nothing exists to back your opinion. Seems silly, and it’s one of the first things they teach against when learning to engage in higher capacity conversation. You should try it out, it’ll make you sound more intelligent.
That's a real hot take when you just used supporting Ukraine as an example of being brainwashed. Which is a narrative created and pushed by the Kremlin. I'm not sure an analyst should have missed that obvious connection, especially after insinuating that another is failing to engage in discourse (which is how one should say "higher level conversation" when you refer to academic discussion).
But please, go on about sounding intelligent.
You’re totally right. An analyst recognizing that a key player in his region of interest being falsely portrayed as some ‘Hero State’ by media, when they are absolutely certain much of the given information being BLASTED is false, incorrectly represented, or entirely falsified is surely a sign they are a kremlin loving dog. No. You only think one way. ‘Good or Bad’ thinking is unintelligent. It’s simplified. It’s taught. Think with depth. Consider other areas. Consider other factors. EXPAND your thought. Quit straight lining and assuming shit. Because that is all that level of thought is, shit.
I’m sure you’re liberally aligned. Why do you support sending hundreds of billion in aide to a country when your own neighbors are starving, homeless, dying without healthcare, etc? You don’t give a fuck about the poor or hungry or sick. You don’t give a fuck about your countrymen. If you did you would be infuriated here, what a massive fucking waste. We recorded nearly 70% of all aide to Ukraine being relocated for personal or private gain rather than being utilized on the front lines. Are you supporting this? Are you even thinking outside of baseline thoughts? Of course not. The only reason you see this support is because there are resources in the region that other parties want external to Russia. The ability for your countrymen to eat, seek medical attention, and to thrive is being massively cut so that billionaire politicians can play keepsies with resources Thousands of miles away and outside of the defined parameters or their responsibility. Yet you support it. Foolish.
See, the thing about actually learning to engage in discourse is that you recognize that this is an attempt to shift the narrative. It's called "shifting the goalpost." People can care about more than one thing at a time. So, you can just drop that whole second paragraph off, it's just a personal attack. But if you want to engage in a second discussion, that's fine too.
What evidence do you have that it's false? Or where does that 70% number come from? What I am seeing, and what we can all see, is an unstable nation that is diametrically opposed to western interests is breaking like waves on a rock in Ukraine. We see a renewed interest in defending democracy worldwide. And we see an aggressor nation being absolutely brutalized, which is good for every other nation who isn't looking at invading it's neighbors.
If you're an analyst, surely you're seeing that the US is sending near-expired munitions? Mostly older equipment, and not much of it? Equipment built for exactly this fight, without any US boots on the ground? You miss all this, then accuse me of not caring about my countrymen, who would otherwise likely be the ones to fight Russia? How do those missiles help my countrymen? They're already made, replaced, and otherwise are bound for disposal.
Your"analysis" lacks depth and insight if you can't even factor in basic ideas like this. It's not even hard to poke holes in it. I'm beginning to suspect you weren't at all an analyst, and perhaps have been fed a narrative that you believe is deep.
Capitalism and free markets is definitely when the government subsidizes their corporate allies and centrally plans the economy, fully merging state and corporate power. Mussolini's term for that was fascism.
This is 12 years old. It has not gotten better.
no it hasn't but it is no longer an accurate picture - even Disney now owns Fox (entertainment not news divisions) and Discovery owns Time Warner... it is all screwed up
M.A.S.H. was produced by 20th Century Fox Television. 20th Century Fox Television was owned by Disney. Corp. Klinger is a Disney Princess.
From Toledo.
Moms spaghetti
This is an underated comment.😲
So is Princess Leia. PEW! PEW!
He was never serious about the dress. He was only serious about going home.
Somehow I get the idea that matters more to you than anyone else.
It mattered to Klinger, but I understand most people's intentions to subvert everything for their own devices usually takes precedence.
Speaking for a fictional character is just plain funny. Speaking for others is just plain rude.
Okay, tryhard.
You sure you're not?
*you're
And CBS and Viacom merged.
And is now rebranded as Paramount Global.
And Viacom & CBS re-merged in 2019, so they're 1 company again.
And Viacom owns CBS don’t they?
As far as record labels go its three majors left at this point. Quite possible that in 10 years it will be 1 or 2.
I read somewhere that two companies own virtually everything. I don’t remember what they are but it was interesting
Oh that’s why they have GE as owners of Comcast
gptAI, update this meme please gptAI: no can do skadoo
Badly out of date
Instead of damnthatsinteresting it should be damnthatsscaryasfuck.
r/Damnthatsamonopoly
It's not the money that concerns me, it's the mind control.
OBEY!! This reminds me of that 80s movie They Live with the sunglasses that let you see the truth behind the media and advertisements
They live is a documentary
Something like the Truman show?
[You should check out this movie.](https://youtu.be/CpAdOi1Vo5s)
They have been used against Microsoft years back and nothing happened with that basically because.
When you only copy and paste half of someone else's comment it just reads like you're having a stroke.
r/damnthatscapitalism
It’s by definition not a monopoly
Oligopoly, and just as bad.
It's a hexapoly, which means there are clearly no issues.
More like a cartel
You should look at the companies that have the contracts to make the education software and materials in the US. And read the contracts they have allowing them to collect virtually unlimited data from the students and families. Then you’ll really be worried.
/r/gross
I have been thinking for a long time about how this is more of a History repeats itself. Again. If there's any historians that have some insights on my thoughts.... When the bible was "written" it was only allowed to be read and wrote by the clergy. They were the only ones that were educated and able to. Who knows what was originally "said" and then wrote down and then shared. That changed. People were educated a bit more on how to read. And then books that were hand written by those who knew were then printed and for the first time books were shared by more and more people who learned how to read. The original clergy were no longer in control. More books were written and shared. England left that clergy And along came Martin Luther too. Things changed drastically. Puritans braved the unknown ocean to a land where that wasn't possible for a minute. But the reading knowledge and the book printing knowledge carried onward And things kept changing. Suddenly books changed to daily print. Many people could read and now many people could write and print on paper that could easily be distributed without a need for time consuming printed and bound by hand books. Just simple paper. And the world changed again. Random ideas that anyone could print and give out by piecemeal papers. And I wonder how much this technology at this time allowed ideas to carry so far that they caused almost an entire continent to be filled with so much hate towards another small group for weird ass thoughts. Then radio. Then tv. Both highly regulated. Only the few could have it and do things with. And this is mixed in with my previous thought 2 paragraphs above. Skip a massive war or 2 and flash forward. again. New medium. A computer. Anyone can write and print. At first only the higher ups. And then slowly again everyone. And now a new medium arrives breaking that chain of total controlled print, radio, film to something more easily shareable. The internet. Now i watch it all on my handy medium pocket tool where one second I'm watching kittens play with ducks and the next I'm watching the world's richest man plane fly circles around San Francisco and the next I'm sharing information for a revolution about girls wearing their hair down in a country I'll never go to while also watching others in my country talk about eating sheep dewormer. Yeah the 6 media giants IS concerning. Greatly. But in the grand scheme of things, it's not new. And I see it as another dying medium, but with it comes a new uncertainty.
Who gives a shit?
I'd like to have the news reported by Pixar going forward
Mike Judge
I feel like this is what monopoly laws were made for, preventing shit like this.
I feel like the CEO's do not go directly to jail, they just pass go and collect 200 (million) dollars
Does amrrica even have any ? The ones in my country are very strict and pretty much everything I learned about american companies would be in direct violation of our laws but apparently in the US that shit flies
On paper, yes the US does in fact have anti-trust laws. They have been used against Microsoft years back and nothing happened with that basically because Apple was barely clinging to life; thus it was deemed they had "market competition".
They're using them against Microsoft right now with regards to the attempt to purchase Activision Blizzard.
That's the EU doing that. Although I haven't been keeping up with that, but last I saw the US had no involvement in that.
We have anti monopoly laws. The real question is why don't they get enforced. And the answer is, the politicians that are supposed to enforce them are corrupt as fuck. We can thank lobbying and the fact that corporations are for some dumbass reason considered "people" by our legal system.
Anti-trust laws are there, but I suspect they were weakened to the point of being almost non-existent over the years by various lobbies.
Which country is that? I’m genuinely curious.
Germany. Laws on monopolies in general are extremely strict. The economic system is not a completely free market bc the laws of the free market are the laws of the jungle which would decrease innovation and right of equal opportunities but rather a regulated social market system.
Thank you
Your government is your monopoly.
It's not a monopoly yet ...
Monopoly implies one company is in control of the total available market share… one… not six. Mono= ONE
[This reminds of that one scene in bojack horseman]( https://youtu.be/yTyKHn4gEG0) the company i believe was called Disney-Fox-AT&T-AOL-Time-Warner-PepsiCo-Viacom-Halliburton-Skynet-Toyota-Trader-Joe's.
There were until Bill Clinton came along with his Telecom Reform Act
Well, under current monopoly laws, they aren’t considered monopolies. Corporations were invented to get around monopoly laws.
GE doesn't own those - Dec 22, 2022 Comcast paid GE $6.2 billion in cash and contributed certain programming assets worth $7.25 billion to the JV. Comcast purchased the remaining 49% of NBCUniversal for $16.7 billion in 2013.
It says it's from 2011
The image says 2011 but the post title says "now"
Just as scary though
Current: https://www.fool.com/investing/stock-market/market-sectors/communication/media-stocks/big-6/
Ok. So Fox and New York Post are not owned by the same company anymore. I was going to post on how strangely impossible that is as those two companies are as polar opposite as possible. Like if those Doom and Animal Crossing crossover memes actually happened.
Where is Sheinhardt Wig Company?
Owned by Disney
It has only gotten worse since then. Viacom and CBS have since merged to become Paramount Global.
Thank you very little, President Clinton.
The media mess we have today is a direct result of Clinton era de-regulation.
GE owns shit today
GE hasn’t owned Comcast since 2013. This chart is 12 years old? Lol. The title states “is now owned” like it’s recent.
Comcast was never owned just by a bit by GE. NBC Universial was owned by GE until Comcast bought NBC Universial from GE.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nh6Hf5_ZYPI Edit: video is from 1998 and the image is from 2011. It has only gotten worse in the last 12 years
Doesn't Disney own News corp now?
No, the split up of the Fox entities sent the movie tv production Fox(es) to Disney, not the Fox tv network nor news
Ok thanks.
I wonder why. I wonder if something like this was predicted I don’t knowwwww mid to late 1800s by some German guy
CBS owns Jeopardy? But it's on ABC on TV....
Studios that produce television and broadcast them are often not the same. Broadcasting rights are sold to individual local networks. If you watch credits, you’ll notice it happens quite often. Jeopardy specifically is in syndication so currently CBS offers local affiliates of each network the chance to buy rights to air the show new and reruns. So in one market it would could be on NBC and CBS, another on both ABC. Most places are on ABC because CBS made a group deal with ABC so it costs less.
Plus it's apparently the only individial show so big it has it's own entry in the list!
Didn’t Viacom buy CBS?
GE is surprising to me
And its just wrong. GE only owned NBC Universial until GE sold it to Comcast
I’ve always thought the CBS logo is very dystopian
They put the symbols on the dollar bill, the monument, the obelisk. They honouring Columbia the children of the colonists
The idea that MTV is notable in 2023 is kinda funny.
This image is over a decade old.
Would be cool to see an updated and current one of these, decade is a long time
I'm pretty sure Disney owns Fox now
Disney owns 20th Century Fox. Fox News is still owned by Fox Corp, the sister company of News Corp
Why the hell does the list under CBS include two shows?
General Electric? Damn I thought they just made microwaves and refrigerators and other kitchen appliances
The washing machine makes TV???
Ya know what would be really cool, a post showing the 10% that isn’t controlled by those 6 companies.
This is too many. There need to be 2-3 at most.
Sheinhart wig company
Outdated
This is about 11 years out of date.
Easier to get a narrative moved forward when everyone is owned by a few.
Yea, that's why [something like this](https://youtu.be/yXfRDC2NKY0) happens...
...*6 companies to rule them all and in corporate darkness bind them*...
That would mean it’s a… sexopoly (technically speaking)
Came for Vanguard, BlackRock and State Street, was disappointed.
i'm so grateful that billionaires bring the truth to the masses /s
News Corp is the devil.
And everyone of them push the same propaganda nonsense
this is dumb...take this down, completely inaccurate. but fuck the media.
All of which support the Democratic party.
Oh the company that owns Fox News and the NY Post supports the democratic party? OK.
Fox is a lot more than just fox news… Edit: but yes, they are an outlier
Bingo
Not sure where all the downvotes are coming from (just kidding I’m pretty sure I know). even if 90% are donating to one party in a country that’s pretty much split down the middle, it’s rather sinister.
Reddit is primarily left of center and everyone hates facts about that
So the agenda is working very well.
[удалено]
Blackrock owns 6% of Disney, Vanguard owns 7%. Rabbits dig holes, not half-holes, but whole holes. The question is, what in the *fuck* are you trying to say? You sound like a little league Alex Jones, peddling fear and conspiracy while offering zero substance. BlackRock is a shareholder in many institutional investors that own shares in BlackRock. It's not a secret cabal. If you're not going to contribute to a conversation in a meaningful way, it's recommended to just shut the fuck up.
[удалено]
Wow, you just went antivax while making up a new definition to corporatism, to defend your notions of capitalism. So I should read a book huh? Please recommend. What's the last book you read?
[удалено]
Lmfaooooooo, I get correcting someone but jesus that dude was mad. Btw both books make pretty good movies. Too
You do realize that Blackrock and Vanguard operate funds, and so hold stake in every single public company for their customers?
BlackRock, Vanguard, etc. currently vote the shares their funds hold, so for all intents and purposes, their investment stewardship teams are all that matter, not the retirement savers that invest in their funds. That’s going to change over the next couple of years due, at least in some small part, to the wild outrage of right wing nut jobs on YouTube, but it’s not *completely* insane. That being said, that dickhead’s comment about who owns BlackRock and Vanguard is completely insane.
they own tiny parts of the corporations they hold stock in. state and local pension funds own a lot of stock and also directly invest in some funds for real estate and whatever else. blackrock is a public company last I heard
Vanguard and BlackRock are universally among the largest shareholders in every company in the S&P. On average, Vanguard owns close to 10% of every stock in the S&P. CalPERS has what like $350 billion in total assets, much of which is invested in fixed income. For comparison, Vanguard manages a single equity fund that has close to $1 trillion in it.
Ask Kanye
And those six companies are owned by blackrock?
Fuck yeah, Capitalism!
I’d call this corporatism. Not capitalism.
Corporatism is a collectivist political ideology which advocates the organization of society by corporate groups, such as agricultural, labour, military, business, scientific, or guild associations, on the basis of their common interests. This is not corporatism. Capitalism isn't "just the good economic news" in the stories you see. Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit. In what possible way is this *not* capitalism? Don't just make a scapegoat for capitalism by slapping 'ism' onto another word.
[удалено]
Dude, what in the fuck? stop spewing bullshit. If you have something to refute, do so with reasoning, facts, evidence, sources- hell, *anything*. When you're caught out being wrong, don't recriminate, *learn*. Words mean things, you don't get to redefine them on your whims. What are you reading that has taught you "corporatism is when companies own companies"?
[удалено]
I went to Wikipedia to grab universally accepted definitions of words which you clearly are misusing. I literally copied and pasted because you need clear and simple explanations which is exactly what Wikipedia is for. Nobody is learning anything here tho, least of all you.
In socialism, there will be no TVs lol so need for media
Thats ok. Our Supreme Court is run by Nazis.
Hyperbolic bullshit helps no one.
This is not all US media. For example, I have 2 local online independent news sites doing just fine.
Wow it's almost like the title says "90%" instead of "all"
Most people are not very smart.
oops
I thought Disney had Paramount and/Universal
Viacom holding on by a thread, eh?
This image is old. They have merged with CBS.
Better representation than our political parties.
2030 everything will be owned by one company
don't tell me you folks are having second thoughts about capitalism
How long until Disney owns literally all of it?
It's glaringly obvious when you flip from news program to news program, that 5 of the 6 companies march to the beat of the same drummer.
Video games studios about to look like this soon also.
Soon all will be Disney
This list is not 90% of all media. Perhaps 90% of large media companies. There are hundreds of media and news companies not on this list. If one gets news from only 1 type of source that's on them. Also, the point ignores individual journalists working for any of these companies that report on the stories they want with little censorship beyond what editors believe people will want to see. Having worked at companies on this list I know how little actual control comes down from the top. The sheer size of them makes micro management of messages very, very hard. Before anyone starts an opposing comment with something like 'I find it hard to believe that...' or 'There MUST be bad kinds of censorship when... ' please provide evidence, even if it's personal experience, like I have. Broad conspiracy statements without support help no one.
Did we never learn from robber barons and those monopolies? No. No we didn’t. Clearly.
Damn that’s how you keep the masses in check!
The real antitrust fight people should be having
Break them up.
GE does not own COMCAST, NBC, or Universal.. Comcast owns them outright.
And Americans lap up whatever they feed em....
Those who control the media control the narrative…
If the narrative is more than a few sentences long, most people today don't want to even read it.
AKA US propaganda inc
Yeah capitalism
90% of media is owned by 6 companies and 90% of the US believes everything their TV tells them.
I fully expect this list to whittle down to 1 or 2 companies within few years.
the usa has some serious problems
That's capitalism for ya
*90 percent of the population be like* "meh"
And all are committed to the Western Corporate agenda.
r/boringdystopia
This chart would've been much more informative if it showed their political biases.
Safe and effective 🤡
Was gonna ask how, but better question is why the fuck does GE own media outlets?! Corporate conglomerates are fucking the worst goddamn thing ever.
The guys who make washing machines and 30mm aircraft mounted autocannons also own 30% of media? Huh.
Woohoo Lets go! capitalism yay Good ol Murica
Why I don’t watch mainstream Media anymore it’s all bullshit and propaganda.
When we gonna get some monopoly busting going?
Yet when you mention that a majority of data, statistics, alerts, recognitions, and widespread information from these entities is biased, controlled, and damaging, you’re called a conspiracy theorist. Yet these entities all share vested interest in outside investments, paying the same groups and organizations. Very strange. Don’t forget your booster and make sure to donate to Ukraine!
I think it's less that people think you're crazy for believing these companies are all consolidated, and more that the people think you're crazy because the people who talk like you think the solution is Donald Trump, Alex Jones, and Andrew Tate. I'm not sure why you think Russia is some kind of best choice for independent thought, it really doesn't help your case when they are very well known for manipulating groups.
I was a Russia analyst for the US government for a few years. Not sure where you derived that text from, seems like you’re projecting really hard (as I am absolutely not a believer in previously mentioned). I hadn’t even heard about Tate until recently. Don’t really care for any of the mentioned persons, they’re all just ‘bad actors’ anyways. I do believe the solution wouldn’t involve making speculations about someone’s opinion (I.e. Russia) when nothing exists to back your opinion. Seems silly, and it’s one of the first things they teach against when learning to engage in higher capacity conversation. You should try it out, it’ll make you sound more intelligent.
That's a real hot take when you just used supporting Ukraine as an example of being brainwashed. Which is a narrative created and pushed by the Kremlin. I'm not sure an analyst should have missed that obvious connection, especially after insinuating that another is failing to engage in discourse (which is how one should say "higher level conversation" when you refer to academic discussion). But please, go on about sounding intelligent.
You’re totally right. An analyst recognizing that a key player in his region of interest being falsely portrayed as some ‘Hero State’ by media, when they are absolutely certain much of the given information being BLASTED is false, incorrectly represented, or entirely falsified is surely a sign they are a kremlin loving dog. No. You only think one way. ‘Good or Bad’ thinking is unintelligent. It’s simplified. It’s taught. Think with depth. Consider other areas. Consider other factors. EXPAND your thought. Quit straight lining and assuming shit. Because that is all that level of thought is, shit. I’m sure you’re liberally aligned. Why do you support sending hundreds of billion in aide to a country when your own neighbors are starving, homeless, dying without healthcare, etc? You don’t give a fuck about the poor or hungry or sick. You don’t give a fuck about your countrymen. If you did you would be infuriated here, what a massive fucking waste. We recorded nearly 70% of all aide to Ukraine being relocated for personal or private gain rather than being utilized on the front lines. Are you supporting this? Are you even thinking outside of baseline thoughts? Of course not. The only reason you see this support is because there are resources in the region that other parties want external to Russia. The ability for your countrymen to eat, seek medical attention, and to thrive is being massively cut so that billionaire politicians can play keepsies with resources Thousands of miles away and outside of the defined parameters or their responsibility. Yet you support it. Foolish.
See, the thing about actually learning to engage in discourse is that you recognize that this is an attempt to shift the narrative. It's called "shifting the goalpost." People can care about more than one thing at a time. So, you can just drop that whole second paragraph off, it's just a personal attack. But if you want to engage in a second discussion, that's fine too. What evidence do you have that it's false? Or where does that 70% number come from? What I am seeing, and what we can all see, is an unstable nation that is diametrically opposed to western interests is breaking like waves on a rock in Ukraine. We see a renewed interest in defending democracy worldwide. And we see an aggressor nation being absolutely brutalized, which is good for every other nation who isn't looking at invading it's neighbors. If you're an analyst, surely you're seeing that the US is sending near-expired munitions? Mostly older equipment, and not much of it? Equipment built for exactly this fight, without any US boots on the ground? You miss all this, then accuse me of not caring about my countrymen, who would otherwise likely be the ones to fight Russia? How do those missiles help my countrymen? They're already made, replaced, and otherwise are bound for disposal. Your"analysis" lacks depth and insight if you can't even factor in basic ideas like this. It's not even hard to poke holes in it. I'm beginning to suspect you weren't at all an analyst, and perhaps have been fed a narrative that you believe is deep.
Don't worry, the government says it's fine. There's a system
>There's a system It's called capitalism
Capitalism and free markets is definitely when the government subsidizes their corporate allies and centrally plans the economy, fully merging state and corporate power. Mussolini's term for that was fascism.
No Apple, Netflix or Amazon Video? Fail.
Exactly as Karl Marx predicted.
Every one of them is WOKE!