Spaceman Spiff Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 What is it and how do you define it? At what point does it cross the line from reporting and becoming "fear mongering?" Is it sheer laziness to blast something as "fear mongering" when its something claimed against your side that you don't like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 You should let me do this wrong thing so you don't get hurt. That is fear mongering IMO. When you use fear of consequence as an excuse to bend the rules or act wrongly. The best examples of fear mongering is fascism. Pinochet was supported by much of the government out of fear of what Allende might do. In that case their fear allowed something worse than what they feared. US examples are democrats telling old people they would starve if republicans were put in office, and republicans telling people that they would die if they elected democrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 That's a really good question. I would think that it has something to do with the dragnet line. If it's "just the facts, ma'am" then I don't think it can fall into the fear mongering line. I think where it applies most is when hyperbole is used, when stretches are connected, and when commentary is used to heighten the facts or make connections that the reporter may believe to be true, but doesn't have the facts to support. The other way to do it is via pure volume. One fact based article about the dangers of nuclear waste is informative, but if you suddenly see twenty in a month the cumulative effect of all those articles are going to chip away at the back of your mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Spiff Posted January 19, 2009 Author Share Posted January 19, 2009 You should let me do this wrong thing so you don't get hurt. That is fear mongering IMO. When you use fear of consequence as an excuse to bend the rules. Yeah, but whats wrong with pointing out the down side of your opponents plans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Yeah, but whats wrong with pointing out the down side of your opponents plans? You aren't pointing out the downside at all, you're BSing people and telling them some horror is going to come to pass which has no basis in reality. Claiming that US cities would be nuked if people voted for democrats is nonsense. As is claiming that old people would be cut off and left in misery is not likely by any stretch of the imagination a realistic outcome of supporting republicans. Take the economy for example. McCain wanted to tax health insurance to sever the link between employer and health insurance. Some like it more hated it. Had Obama said "if you support McCain americans would all be left to die in the streets because no hospital would even consider helping them once McCain succeeding in cutting off their insurance" that would have been fear mongering. It's not about what is real it is about playing on the fears of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMat184 Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 CNN's slogan is: CNN =s politics Well Fox News is launching a new one I heard: Fox News =s Fear Mongering So I'd have to say that is my answer - Fox News is fear mongering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 It's not about what is real it is about playing on the fears of people. That is it in a nutshell. Distorting or leaving out facts to play on peoples fears and insecurities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 More important word to describe... Terrorist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.