by ennui2 » Fri 29 Jan 2016, 21:52:42
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', '
')Yup. When folks have to use zerohedge to make a point (always a doomsday point, of course), then you know they're really reaching.
For a long while on my FB page I used to share news links about doom (usually global warming). I was very strict about only sharing MSM links (National Geographic, network or cable news, major newspaper outlets, etc...). Turns out it wasn't that, while the volume was less, it still wasn't hard to find these things rather than, let's say, posting doomer boilerplate screeds from Greer. Because these sources had no obvious doomer axe to grind it was that much harder for anyone to claim bias or shoot the messenger.
Of course, none of my postings ever generated even a single comment from my blue-pill friends-list, so I stopped handing out red-pills.
My feeling is that MSM coverage of a topic reflect actual canaries in the coal-mine, whereas doom sites are all-doom-all-the-time and therefore fall into the "clock is right twice a day" batting-average. It's easy to claim that the MSM wants to push a "feel good about BAU" message, and that may be true overall, but there's still enough variability to allow for honest coverage of these issues.
"If the oil price crosses above the Etp maximum oil price curve within the next month, I will leave the forum." --SumYunGai (9/21/2016)