Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

I read something tonight that has me boiling.  A week or 2 ago I read that the government was taking over the Internet.Now I read that youtube is not allowing any conspiracy theories on their site, except those that come from "authoritative" people "they" will select.  What about the Kennedy Assassination videos?  And the people who have researched the crime.  Are they authoritative enough?  This is horrible.  They will brainwash people into believing that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy.  We're on a sinking ship.

Kathy C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/9/17550954/youtube-google-news-initiative-fake-news-conspiracy-theory-context-updates I  should have furnished a link.  This is what I read.

I have been called a conspiracy nut because I linked the death of Karyn Kupcinet to her father, Irv Kupcinet, investigating Ruby.   I did everything I could to shoot down false rumors about her.  And this appeared in the book by Richard Belzer -- "Hit List., chapter 6."  He agreed with me.  OK, I'm obsessed.  The last year of her life she was on methamphetamine.  She suffered hallucinations.  She dealt with major depression.  The pills she was on, Desoxyn, was the same pill given to the late Jean Harris, who killed the Scarsdale Diet Doctor when he stopped prescribing Desoxyn for her; he had found another girlfriend.  She was in withdrawal from that drug and drove a long way to get to his house.  She had a gun and she claimed she carried it because she was going to kill herself in front of this doctor.  Instead he was killed.

I don't like the government taking over the Internet.  You know they're going to say Lee Harvey Oswald did it.  They are going to pick those they deem authorities.  It's Operation Mockingbird.

Kathy C

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Top-down censorship schemes utilizing self-defined and self-serving concepts of “fake news” ascribed to “authoritative sources” who have their own long history publishing fake news is obviously not the answer. Media literacy and critical thinking skills taught in the school system would go much further in blunting the dissemination of deliberately false information. It would also improve the ability of persons to fully participate in a democracy as an informed citizen. But that is the last thing the powers-that-be want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Aren't they making money on that plethora of sources?  Why would they sacrifice tales of the Reptillians and the Greys (Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul, respectively, I think) just to foster approved disinfo?

Edited by David Andrews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yesterday an entity sent me an email about Facebook and their stopping conspiracy theories.  Supposedly, Facebook is not going to bend to the govt's whims.  But I know they're not doing well.  I wrote: "I fear the end of the Internet as we know it.  Who's to say what is a conspiracy theory.  I happen to be a member of a President Kennedy forum.  Now the government is going to try to shove down my throat that Lee Harvey Oswald did it.  He didn't.  I have a right to see what videos I want and what forums I choose to belong to.  What you're fostering is Censorship with a big C.  What happened to First Amendment Rights?"

Kathy Ccleardot.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2018 at 11:29 PM, Jeff Carter said:

Media literacy and critical thinking skills taught in the school system would go much further i

 Of course,  such should start within a family unit. As for the government, I think the system I see here in Holland is much better than that of America's. I grew up where my parents paid for parochial schools and were heavily property-taxed to pay for the schools. Didn't seem fair to me then and still doesn't. My father agreed with the existing principle, when I once brought it up since, he felt that the separation of government and religion was properly maintained by such. At a press conference JFK was asked aboutthe Court decision banning prayers in schools and he suggested that perhaps the children could pray more at home. He didn't use the decision - or the timing - to attack the "godlessness" of the move. I was well into my 30's before I found out that In God we Trust was only added to coins and other stuff during the early 1950's when communism = no God. 

Here,  the concept of religion as an integral part of character formation is recognized; so is interest in language,  mechanical arts, and theater as well as proximity to where one lives. What are the families priorities? It's a  voucher system; every child gets one, every school accepts it; all schools are monitored for academic standards; and all students take the same tests. It's accepted that religion  can be a part of schooling as can yoga; there is no need to penalize those who wish a focus.

California provides tenure to school teachers after 3 years of teaching. Can you imagine? Many are C students at best. Summers off.Pension. Health care. You want a  school that mentions religion? Pay for it yourself, has been the American way.  Once religion = philosophy in the minds of people, they can see that a voucher system can work and that the most important teachers - those for ages 5 through 10 - can be paid well if good or fired if bad. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Robert Harper said:

 Of course,  such should start within a family unit. As for the government, I think the system I see here in Holland is much better than that of America's. I grew up where my parents paid for parochial schools and were heavily property-taxed to pay for the schools. Didn't seem fair to me then and still doesn't. My father agreed with the existing principle, when I once brought it up since, he felt that the separation of government and religion was properly maintained by such. At a press conference JFK was asked aboutthe Court decision banning prayers in schools and he suggested that perhaps the children could pray more at home. He didn't use the decision - or the timing - to attack the "godlessness" of the move. I was well into my 30's before I found out that In God we Trust was only added to coins and other stuff during the early 1950's when communism = no God. 

Here,  the concept of religion as an integral part of character formation is recognized; so is interest in language,  mechanical arts, and theater as well as proximity to where one lives. What are the families priorities? It's a  voucher system; every child gets one, every school accepts it; all schools are monitored for academic standards; and all students take the same tests. It's accepted that religion  can be a part of schooling as can yoga; there is no need to penalize those who wish a focus.

California provides tenure to school teachers after 3 years of teaching. Can you imagine? Many are C students at best. Summers off.Pension. Health care. You want a  school that mentions religion? Pay for it yourself, has been the American way.  Once religion = philosophy in the minds of people, they can see that a voucher system can work and that the most important teachers - those for ages 5 through 10 - can be paid well if good or fired if bad. 

 

 

I won’t go into a long defense of mediocre teachers, but I will say it can be a can of worms. Who decides which teachers are worthy? What criteria? The problems in US public education go much deeper than that. Local Property Tax based funding is inherently unfair. 

I think of FDR’s proposed Second Bill of Rights. It’s shameful what has happened to public education here. Only the wealthy can have well educated children now. I grew up in the Bronx in the 1950’s in a government subsidized housing project. I went to public schools where there were no children of privilege. CCNY was practically free and had open enrollment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Paul said;

Local Property Tax based funding is inherently unfair. 

It’s shameful what has happened to public education here. Only the wealthy can have well educated children now

 

I agree completely Paul, Property Tax based funding has always been unfair and Secondary education is out of the grasp of the middle class.

We can all probably agree about too liberal tenure, but public schools in the U.S, are  underfunded.  Grade school teachers are very underpaid and in some extreme cases cases buy materials out of their own pockets to provide the barest implements for their classrooms. Unfortunately, vouchers in the U.S has been an attempt by Conservatives to break the public school system, and put in their alternative.. There is that old Colin Powell adage about Iraq that "if you break it, you own it".  But if all they do is just break the system, I don't think the proponents are worried about eventually owning it, as they can always  retreat into opulent private obscurity and send their kids to nice private schools. And now they are starting to expose various private boondoggles in current state voucher systems.

Whatever vagaries people attribute to Trump, he has been very clear in his education priorities with the appointment of a billionaire Republican contributor Betsy Da Voss as head of the Department of Education. She has been  a firm believer in the voucher system in Michigan, a state with huge education problems . I'm reminded of a MSM "60 minutes" interview, where we got a pleasantly dismissive  inkling of what her priorities are.

As I've seen in conducting radio interviews, you can have a cause of good merit or not but if you have a bad spokesman, you're done!

Unfortunately I couldn't just get the straight 60 minutes interview without a lot of spin. The interview sections are from 1:28 to 3:11, and 8:09 to 9:21.

https://youtu.be/ahoDMkCd_Ac

 

Edited by Kirk Gallaway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course the government censoring the Internet is an abomination.

 

Why aren't Google, FB, YouTube, Instagram, et. al., subject to the same rules and regulations that newspapers and television have to follow? You cause to be published something false or defamatory, you can be held accountable via . civil suit. 

 

I could grow my newspaper circulation tremendously, I think, were I not held liable for what was printed in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×