Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Theory Why the mainstream media is truly against gore/shocker sites

L

Lebensmüder

Soon to be deleted account
★★★
Joined
Aug 21, 2018
Posts
5,202
All day long they tell you about "human dignity" or shit like that, but this is nothing more than a moral foundament that they need to rally the average normalfag against these "dark sites on the Internet", which serves mostly their own interests.
If you truly think that it is about morals you haven't been paying attention, a journalist would film his dying mother if it gave him one more cent. "Journalist morals" - this is an oxymoron, a combination of words that mutually exclude each other. The media never hesitated to show people violence if they wanted people to see it to rally them behind their cause.

They hate gore/shocker sites, because they are a) a threat to their monopoly for the supply of the fulfillment of certain human desires (like fucking and death which are the basic principles of any animal with the human animal being no exception) and b) a threat to their own narratives.


The media (of course) fears competition - particularly if it's for presenting material that people crave to see to satisfy their urges, of course a monopoly is always what you should aim for (for self-interest alone).

And the media selectively presents violence (or everything really) to tell a story (for didactic/pragmatic reasons always necessary and often for manipulative reasons too).
No piece of violent media or any media gets into the TV or the newspaper without being cut apart or reduced to the most basal things that the personnel deems as interesting (=subjective). This is only pragmatic because no person can truly inform himself about everything, but even if there was no own agenda information would get lost and context destroyed making the events appear in completely different lights. This would happen if we actually had neutral journalists (another oxymoron, because no person is neutral/free of biases) unintentionally/due to human subjectivity too, but like every human they have an agenda/their own views and interests which they want to further and often egregious/ignoble lies get deliberately propagated (note: faking something is not necessary, deliberately including or withholding information is enough to destroy the truth).
If now an individual had access to the original material he could watch it and form his own opinion and if necessary present it to combat the claims of journalists (which at least gets some counter information in the world which maybe could reach some normal cattle/comple newfag that then starts questioning things).
This is not possible anymore when sites like LiveLeak/BestGore/Rotten/Hoodsite/whatever don't exist. Now they can claim whatever they want and all you will get is the butchered information that passed the human centipede of the personnel already.

The same reason why they ban manifestos of mass shooters/serial bombers/etc. so quickly nowadays, they don't want people to have access to the original files (only to their subjective interpretation of them), they don't want you to have the ability to form your own opinion about it, they want you to adopt their opinion, "inspiring copycats" is bullshit, if they actually cared for human lives they wouldn't constantly report about mass shootings which then creates the impetus of acquiring fame via a mass shooting (the same reason why so many serial killers existed back in the day, nowadays nobody reports on them, so that only truly sick fucks that would have done it anyways commit these crimes, simple famewhores like Berkowitz or the Zodiac would now commit mass shootings to get attention). Let's be honest, how many here know Bundy/Gacy/Dahmer and how many of you know recently caught/identified serial killers like Fuller/Vérove/Metaxas or others? These crimes still happen/get solved, but nobody cares about them, because they are no longer politically relevant (back in the day they would have been reported because the left blamed serial killings on patriarchy, while the right blamed it on pornography, these issues are however not relevant anymore unlike mass shootings where they argue for gun control and more censorship for everything but the mainstream media).

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfwJeHtrWNI

They withhold the manifestos in order to spin narratives that simply aren't true to further political agendas (like saying that Eric Harris & Dylan Klebold were Neo-Nazis despite their diaries containing mulitple paragraphes were they describe how they would kill racists or like saying that a paranoid schizophreniac like Tobias Rathjen was politically/MGTOW/incel motivated) and without reading the manifesto people have to eat it up.

Protecting "human dignity" (an arbitrary construct btw) is and was never the impetus to ban these sites, controlling the information that you get was. Now they can present criminals as saints (like with BLM) and/or turn normal people into criminals (like with Rittenhouse whose trial they currently want to cancel and where they selectively only show the answer of the judge towards the flaws of the prosecution) and/or simply invent egregious shit (like the Hunts of Chemnitz).
 
Last edited:
I would advise abstaining from them. Game designers often use those sites for Mortal Kombat gore like games, and they develop mental issues.
 
High iq thread good job
 
All you had to say was: the media selectively presents content to its viewers to fit both the viewership bias (eg. liberal vs. conservative) and the overarching hegemonic agenda.

It really isn't that deep but I agree with you fully. This phenomenon has been occurring since any form of media could be mass consumed. Look at the mass shooting that occurred in Vegas 4 years ago that had the highest amount of casualties in an attack like that in American history and hasn't been brought up since. Now look at the Parkland shooting that happened almost 4 years ago and had only 17 deaths but is still being talked about in the news to this day. Its all selective cherry picking in order to tailor a given issue or memory-hole another. And not just the media, any form of government restricts what its denizens can view to a certain extent.

Also, that video of Ted Bundy speaking in a drawn out word salad was so retarded. This is the same argument as video games being blamed for irl violence. His argument is that he sought to enact violence irl because he watched violent porn? Small brain take.
 

Similar threads

Moroccancel2-
Replies
3
Views
121
unluckygenes
U
fukurou
Replies
4
Views
167
ItsovERfucks
ItsovERfucks
Foremostfiend
Replies
11
Views
726
Dr. Autismo
Dr. Autismo
SlayerSlayer
Replies
4
Views
265
Raider919
Raider919

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top