Seems like every 1 out of 5 comments is some shit about "gay lovers", yet the only source I can find is Fox; and Fox appears to be insinuating without evidence.
Seriously, go read the YouTube comments from any video with Pelosi's bodycam footage and you'll see what I'm talking about.
*Sorry for formatting, I'm new + I'm on mobile.*
# 1.Quality of life index 2022
South Korea is ranked **46** (Bosnia is ranked 45 and Mexico is ranked 47). For comparison, Japan is ranked 16.
# 2.Scratching the surface of K-Pop
121,000,000 million unique accounts tweet support for BTS during the billboard music awards in 2018.
Twitter had 336 million users at the time.
Yet these groups only had 15 million followers.
Even one of the members of the group openly stated I wished we lived in a world where music was listened to honestly.
"Stan culture” is a front for shill accounts and botting activity.
# 3. The TRUTH about K-Pop
>The Maidan massacre trials and investigations have revealed various evidence that four killed and several dozen wounded policemen and at least the absolute majority of 49 killed and 157 wounded Maidan protesters were massacred on February 20, 2014 by snipers in Maidan-controlled buildings and areas. Such evidence includes testimonies of the absolute majority of wounded protesters, several dozens of prosecution witnesses, dozens of defense witnesses, and 14 self-admitted members of Maidan snipers groups.
>The analysis shows cover-up and stonewalling of the investigations and trials by the Maidan governments and the far right. The prosecution denied that there were any snipers in the Maidan-controlled buildings. Not a single person is convicted or under arrest for the massacre of the protesters and the police almost 8 years after one of the most documented mass killings in history.
Does anyone remember this famous viral video?: ["This is extremely dangerous to our democracy"](https://youtube.com/watch?v=_fHfgU8oMSo). A creepy montage of a wide range of local channels repeating the same message, reminiscent of *1984* and other dystopias.
For those who haven't read it (just download free copies online),[ *Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent) by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky (1988, with revisions) is a book which proposed a propaganda model explaining the trends and behaviors of the US mass media system, not just how they are influenced by government but even more how economic and social influences promote this behavior without overt coercion or state censorship. It uses a variety of major historical examples, and later editions preface with discussions of the increasing centralization/consolidation of media companies and their move to the internet. It's an excellent and influential book, and an Orwell Award winner.
##### But about *CONSPIRACY*
A conspiracy is when participants have a secret *plan* or *agreement* to some harmful or illegal purpose[[wiki]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy), such as the [Business Plot (1933)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot) by various corporations and [COINTELPRO](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO) by the FBI.
In *Manufacturing Consent*, the creators explicitly declare that their model does not rely on conspiratorial reasoning: that the propagandist patterns of mass media are all a result of an explicit conspiracy which all the major perpetrators are co-operating with. Instead, they argue that a variety of uncoordinated but systematic external factors create a pressure for media to encourage and discourage certain types of content. They define and justify five main 'filters' that determine the content we see:
- **Size, ownership, and profit orientation of dominant media outlets**: they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors.
- **Advertising**: almost all revenue needed for them to *survive* comes from advertising, so media must cater to advertiser's political and economic desires.
- **Sourcing mass media news**: larger and more aligned media outlets get special access to many routine news sources like government announcements and large organizations in a mutual benefit situation. Other news sources are more expensive and risky to access by nature, and the large routine ones can arbitrarily exclude media publishers they don't like, especially those non-mainstream. This encourages mainstream media to seek those routine sources, creating a bias in what facts they receive.
- **Flak**: legal, social or reputational harassment is expensive and damages advertising revenue. It is often conducted by powerful, private influence groups like think tanks. Even if not explicitly a conspiracy, they often still align incidentally. This threat to media outlets deters reporting certain facts or opinions
- **National enemies**: during the Cold War, anti-communism created a social filter that not only affected communism, but rather anything considered remotely related such as socially-progressive policies, civil rights, and being opposed to the invasion in Vietnam, along with impacts on how news criticized Nicaragua's democratic elections while unanimously legitimizing El Salvador's extreme violent repression and corruption as democratic. After the fall of the USSR, this was replaced with the War on Terror as the major social control mechanism, affecting reporting on the recent conflicts in the Middle East.
(more quick explanation and justification for those who haven't yet read the book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model )
The point of that list being, the mass media organizations, government, think tanks and advertisers all have their own motivations and don't ***require*** a conspiracy or overt government coercion to cause the censorship and propaganda they create. They *individually* have agendas and abuse their power or profit or influence, but the model's creators argue that there is no need to blame a real conspiracy for this behavior. An interesting side effect is that these induce self-censorship and a bias in sources where the writers usually haven't been told not to write about something, it's simply not economically viable and discouraged independently by each large media outlet, leading to an unorganized but systematic system of propaganda that discourages criticism of the state and of major businesses.
What are your thoughts on this? Do you believe it's justified to claim the mass media's biases largely aren't conspiratorial, or would you debate otherwise? Do you think this is comparable to the alt-right concept of "Deep State" or that DS theory implies the hidden shadow conspiracy that this denounces?
Reality Winner was arrested in 2017 for leaking classified information about Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Scott Pelley speaks with Winner in her first television interview since being released earlier this year.
>*"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."* -Aristotle
I believe there is a [disinformation](https://blog.cyberwar.nl/2019/06/twenty-five-ways-to-suppress-truth-the-rules-of-disinformation-h-michael-sweeney-1997-2001/#25rules) campaign on Reddit to push false narratives; specifically on the sub [/r/conspiracy ](reddit.com/r/conspiracy) and the sub [/r/conspiracyNOPOL](reddit.com/r/conspiracyNOPOL). The latter is ironic because that sub was created to get away from the toxic and political "conspiracies" that kept popping up on [/r/conspiracy](reddit.com/r/conspiracy). And [/r/conspiracy](reddit.com/r/conspiracy) itself has effectively become /r/The_Donald.
Anyways, the reason I'm even making this post is to let everyone know that as long as your argument is [logically sound](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies) then I will never remove it (ie: it isn't chock-full of logical fallacies or unfalsifiable information).
It seems like shills on [/r/conspiracy](reddit.com/r/conspiracy) and various other subs [HATE](https://i.imgur.com/MvfUDE2.png) it when you stay on topic and force them to prove their assertions. Uncoincidentally I've been banned from both [/r/conspiracy](reddit.com/r/conspiracy) and [/r/conspiracyNOPOL](reddit.com/r/conspiracyNOPOL).
I want this community to be a place where we can entertain ideas even if we don't believe they are true, then after that we can rationally attempt to prove or disprove said idea.
>There’s one rule on Space Time: It’s never Aliens. But every rule has an exception and this rule is no exception because: It’s never aliens, until it is. So is it aliens yet? And on today’s Space Time we’re going to examine all the best case scenarios for life beyond Earth.
So the guy doing most of the talking is Jeremy Corbell. He, Commander David Fravor and Joe Rogan all had a pretty damning [conversation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eco2s3-0zsQ&t=3987s) on the Rogan podcast a couple years ago.
Think about it, why would you want a bed? Just put the mattress on the floor!
Given, there are a couple of cases where you'd want an actual bed, but those cases are very limited, and an average person should absolutely not buy a bed thus supporting the biggest scam in the history of humanity!
thanks for coming to my ted talk