When a fearsome and ancient species emerges from the ocean, dramatically revealing themselves to humanity, an international crisis is triggered. With the entire population at risk, UNIT step into action as the land and sea wage war.
Yes, it's a conspiracy theory when I have researched something and come to a conclusion
There are lots of real conspiracies, and lots of theories about ones that are not real. The people who spread those all have done "research". There is a reason why a large part of proper academical work is actually describing your process and discussing its shortcomings with others before publishing. Looking things up is, by itself, not research.
Kanga wrote:
the system has existed for hundreds of years as you point out
I have done no such thing. My statement was referring to the time since WW2, which is the most recent "major war" I was referring to. Based on our previous conversations, I believe we fundamentally disagree on whether or not the arrival of ubiquitous mass media (more so than the initial arrival of mass media via the printing press) and personal communication technology has fundamentally changed the dynamics of how society and politics work. I believe it did, and that measuring anything by the previously existing standards now is an exercise in futility.
Kanga wrote:
what makes the media extremely similar with the same modern liberal points repeated again and again and again is just an implementation of "Don't be an ass", you really have to wonder why that slogan didn't result in the same outcome just 20 years ago.
It, uh, did eventually result in the very outcome we are looking at. That's very much the point. The "ideology" we are discussing was not grown in a lab, as much as some would like to believe. It is simply the logical conclusion many of us semi-independently arrived at after western society largely accepted the premise that cooperation is the best way to get anything we want done, done.
by Kanga posted 2 weeks ago
some_one wrote:
Nice conspiracy theory, if somewhat dimished by the amount of people in the "regime" who are actually less happy with the way these things are going than the actual population.
Here's a different one, relying less on active pressure from anyone, and simplified:
The "west" has had a fairly long time without major wars or famine, so lots of people started asking questions secondary to survival, such as "when is it okay to be an asshole?". Turns out "never" is the only answer you can give without risk of seeming like, y'know, an asshole, so the consensus has been inching towards that. There are still lots of people in the world for whom not being allowed to be an asshole would be a challenge to their worldview or even way of life. So, some of those have started trying to convince as many others, who wouldn't otherwise care, that they are in the same boat. The resulting "faction" starts looking a lot like one of those who, historically, were pretty quick to actively interfere with the operations of public broadcasting. Because of that, most of the people working in that sector feel disinclined to help them with anything: It would be directly against their own interests. The faction is also, despite appearances for those involved, not a majority, meaning most corporate media will also not hop on that cause, as they have less to gain from that than from attempts (however hamfisted) to appeal to all kinds of different niche audiences.
Yes, it's a conspiracy theory when I have researched something and come to a conclusion but then at the same time the system has existed for hundreds of years as you point out but really what makes the media extremely similar with the same modern liberal points repeated again and again and again is just an implementation of "Don't be an ass", you really have to wonder why that slogan didn't result in the same outcome just 20 years ago.
by davejo90 posted 2 weeks ago
It started OK for me then they decided to add the love element in to it and I immediately got switched off by it. Fast forwarded through the last episode for more of the same.
I wonder why writers feel it necessary to include the love angle when it's science fiction, no science fiction should have love angles, it really is not necessary IMO.
by some_one posted 3 weeks ago
Kanga wrote:
After having looked deeply into this topic I can tell you with no doubt in my mind that all major media is incentivized so heavily to move in the direction that the regime desires that there is no "free" media. You spoke about laws to protect BBC from the state.. well there is no law protecting them against getting their funding pulled so if they put out things that the British state don't like.. we know how that will end.
Besides that, there is various funding organs who will only invest if there is x amount of social justice, likewise the investment vehicle they setup for the production will have an easier time if it's ESG friendly, ASA will allow you more if you play ball just as Ofcom will be friendlier. In short there is a million quangos that you have to bend a knee to and every little time you do, the needle is moved just a tiny bit towards exactly what the regime broadly wants and in the end, you're just putting out propaganda.
Nice conspiracy theory, if somewhat dimished by the amount of people in the "regime" who are actually less happy with the way these things are going than the actual population.
Here's a different one, relying less on active pressure from anyone, and simplified:
The "west" has had a fairly long time without major wars or famine, so lots of people started asking questions secondary to survival, such as "when is it okay to be an asshole?". Turns out "never" is the only answer you can give without risk of seeming like, y'know, an asshole, so the consensus has been inching towards that. There are still lots of people in the world for whom not being allowed to be an asshole would be a challenge to their worldview or even way of life. So, some of those have started trying to convince as many others, who wouldn't otherwise care, that they are in the same boat. The resulting "faction" starts looking a lot like one of those who, historically, were pretty quick to actively interfere with the operations of public broadcasting. Because of that, most of the people working in that sector feel disinclined to help them with anything: It would be directly against their own interests. The faction is also, despite appearances for those involved, not a majority, meaning most corporate media will also not hop on that cause, as they have less to gain from that than from attempts (however hamfisted) to appeal to all kinds of different niche audiences.
Back to the actual show... this really didn't need to exist. It was basically an overlong episode of Doctor Who, slightly above average quality as of recently, because it showed some people at least sometimes being competent at their job.
They all but said it in the last episode that the basic idea was "what happens when the Doctor doesn't show up" and the answer they came up with is apparently "we fuck it all up". The environmental stuff was pretty much just window dressing, it didn't matter much to anything in the end and could have been addressed less.
Weirdly enough, I think this might have been improved by simply removing both protagonists.
It wasn't really bad, but it didn't need to exist.
by Kanga posted 3 weeks ago
g371 wrote:
This is a teamwork BBC + Disney. Also I don't think that any of this by default is some gov synchronized effort, because it's all over the place and has a strategic stupidity. It's simply vegan like preaching and screeching idiots thinking that they do good. But more often than not they just make things worse, because... they are stupid.
After having looked deeply into this topic I can tell you with no doubt in my mind that all major media is incentivized so heavily to move in the direction that the regime desires that there is no "free" media. You spoke about laws to protect BBC from the state.. well there is no law protecting them against getting their funding pulled so if they put out things that the British state don't like.. we know how that will end.
Besides that, there is various funding organs who will only invest if there is x amount of social justice, likewise the investment vehicle they setup for the production will have an easier time if it's ESG friendly, ASA will allow you more if you play ball just as Ofcom will be friendlier. In short there is a million quangos that you have to bend a knee to and every little time you do, the needle is moved just a tiny bit towards exactly what the regime broadly wants and in the end, you're just putting out propaganda.
by g371 posted 3 weeks ago
Kanga wrote:
This is regime propaganda pushing the approved message on climate change, microplastics, transitioning, pollution, anti-militarism etc. The rights to Doctor Who of which this is a spinoff is owned by the BBC so it's not really a surprise that it has turned out this way since the BBC is owned by the British state.
This is a teamwork BBC + Disney. Also I don't think that any of this by default is some gov synchronized effort, because it's all over the place and has a strategic stupidity. It's simply vegan like preaching and screeching idiots thinking that they do good. But more often than not they just make things worse, because... they are stupid. Like in this case let's take a look at oceans pollution/plastics stuff. It's a real and serious issue. What this lunacy will achieve? Somebody will start to care what is being dumped into oceans, enters food chain and ends up floating in every organism? Nope, all this will achieve is that further attempts to address this issue will have an association with raging lunatics.
BBC is protected by law from gov influence, the same problem is in almost every other developed country. There are mechanisms to protect freedom, but nobody saw coming that those who are protected will hit their heads hard. Exact same we have in my country, gov funded media agency instead of an objective reporting has "opinions" and obviously are leaning in a certain direction. And if somebody points that out, they start to screech like crazy that their rights are being infringed lala. How all this will end also is clear, at least for a while we all will enjoy wannabe-Adolf regimes who will come to power by simply doing/promising the opposite, I saw this coming already 10 years ago, since it's a pretty basic math. Pendulum just will swing to the other side and overshoot. That's why in my book all these woke efforts are absolutely idiotic, they don't solve anything, just create a mountain of new issues on top of existing. And they think that they are so sneaky and clever that nobody will notice non-stop stream of bs injections while in reality most of the time it's such propaganda amateur hour that it's an insult to an intelligence. You can check Twitter today what is their new hot "world saving" topic today and max 6 months later it will be in some show 1:1.
Also, the irony that this virtue signaling even is in English. That's the usual 1+1=11.
Nigeria - ~19,000 metric tons annually
Africa's largest contributor: Rapid urbanization, inadequate waste systems
by Kanga posted 3 weeks ago
g371 wrote:
I also have thought about it. It's impossible that ALL of them are in such isolated bubble that nobody understands that it's a total garbage. I think simply wins "need to pay the bills" and they play along. And I already long ago have predicted that once this woke circus will go out of fashion we will hear hilarious stories from behind the scenes - when those people will be able to speak freely and won't worry about their job security (because now they for sure are worried, since tolerance preachers are nowhere close to tolerant).
This is regime propaganda pushing the approved message on climate change, microplastics, transitioning, pollution, anti-militarism etc. The rights to Doctor Who of which this is a spinoff is owned by the BBC so it's not really a surprise that it has turned out this way since the BBC is owned by the British state.
The people working for the BBC today are fully aware of what they are doing but see it as a sort of greater good to push out shite like this as long as it promotes all the things they like.
by tchala posted 3 weeks ago
Yep, for ALL that we got a 4 hour worth of sub-standard Splash with guns
by tchala posted 4 weeks ago
Is this turning into Splash (1984 Tom Hanks+ Darly Hannah)?
by g371 posted 1 month ago
fassy wrote:
MimiCarr wrote:
My most sincere apologies to all that worked on the show.
I seriously ask myself: Are the people working on that show... from producer, director to the actors actually think what they do is pretty good? Do they sit in their comfy couch and when screening the episodes to their family are proud of what they delivered?
Probably just another illustration of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
I also have thought about it. It's impossible that ALL of them are in such isolated bubble that nobody understands that it's a total garbage. I think simply wins "need to pay the bills" and they play along. And I already long ago have predicted that once this woke circus will go out of fashion we will hear hilarious stories from behind the scenes - when those people will be able to speak freely and won't worry about their job security (because now they for sure are worried, since tolerance preachers are nowhere close to tolerant).
Follow
Yes, it's a conspiracy theory when I have researched something and come to a conclusion
There are lots of real conspiracies, and lots of theories about ones that are not real. The people who spread those all have done "research". There is a reason why a large part of proper academical work is actually describing your process and discussing its shortcomings with others before publishing. Looking things up is, by itself, not research.
I have done no such thing. My statement was referring to the time since WW2, which is the most recent "major war" I was referring to. Based on our previous conversations, I believe we fundamentally disagree on whether or not the arrival of ubiquitous mass media (more so than the initial arrival of mass media via the printing press) and personal communication technology has fundamentally changed the dynamics of how society and politics work. I believe it did, and that measuring anything by the previously existing standards now is an exercise in futility.
what makes the media extremely similar with the same modern liberal points repeated again and again and again is just an implementation of "Don't be an ass", you really have to wonder why that slogan didn't result in the same outcome just 20 years ago.
It, uh, did eventually result in the very outcome we are looking at. That's very much the point. The "ideology" we are discussing was not grown in a lab, as much as some would like to believe. It is simply the logical conclusion many of us semi-independently arrived at after western society largely accepted the premise that cooperation is the best way to get anything we want done, done.
Here's a different one, relying less on active pressure from anyone, and simplified:
The "west" has had a fairly long time without major wars or famine, so lots of people started asking questions secondary to survival, such as "when is it okay to be an asshole?". Turns out "never" is the only answer you can give without risk of seeming like, y'know, an asshole, so the consensus has been inching towards that. There are still lots of people in the world for whom not being allowed to be an asshole would be a challenge to their worldview or even way of life. So, some of those have started trying to convince as many others, who wouldn't otherwise care, that they are in the same boat. The resulting "faction" starts looking a lot like one of those who, historically, were pretty quick to actively interfere with the operations of public broadcasting. Because of that, most of the people working in that sector feel disinclined to help them with anything: It would be directly against their own interests. The faction is also, despite appearances for those involved, not a majority, meaning most corporate media will also not hop on that cause, as they have less to gain from that than from attempts (however hamfisted) to appeal to all kinds of different niche audiences.
Yes, it's a conspiracy theory when I have researched something and come to a conclusion but then at the same time the system has existed for hundreds of years as you point out but really what makes the media extremely similar with the same modern liberal points repeated again and again and again is just an implementation of "Don't be an ass", you really have to wonder why that slogan didn't result in the same outcome just 20 years ago.
I wonder why writers feel it necessary to include the love angle when it's science fiction, no science fiction should have love angles, it really is not necessary IMO.
Besides that, there is various funding organs who will only invest if there is x amount of social justice, likewise the investment vehicle they setup for the production will have an easier time if it's ESG friendly, ASA will allow you more if you play ball just as Ofcom will be friendlier. In short there is a million quangos that you have to bend a knee to and every little time you do, the needle is moved just a tiny bit towards exactly what the regime broadly wants and in the end, you're just putting out propaganda.
Nice conspiracy theory, if somewhat dimished by the amount of people in the "regime" who are actually less happy with the way these things are going than the actual population.
Here's a different one, relying less on active pressure from anyone, and simplified:
The "west" has had a fairly long time without major wars or famine, so lots of people started asking questions secondary to survival, such as "when is it okay to be an asshole?". Turns out "never" is the only answer you can give without risk of seeming like, y'know, an asshole, so the consensus has been inching towards that. There are still lots of people in the world for whom not being allowed to be an asshole would be a challenge to their worldview or even way of life. So, some of those have started trying to convince as many others, who wouldn't otherwise care, that they are in the same boat. The resulting "faction" starts looking a lot like one of those who, historically, were pretty quick to actively interfere with the operations of public broadcasting. Because of that, most of the people working in that sector feel disinclined to help them with anything: It would be directly against their own interests. The faction is also, despite appearances for those involved, not a majority, meaning most corporate media will also not hop on that cause, as they have less to gain from that than from attempts (however hamfisted) to appeal to all kinds of different niche audiences.
Back to the actual show... this really didn't need to exist. It was basically an overlong episode of Doctor Who, slightly above average quality as of recently, because it showed some people at least sometimes being competent at their job.
They all but said it in the last episode that the basic idea was "what happens when the Doctor doesn't show up" and the answer they came up with is apparently "we fuck it all up". The environmental stuff was pretty much just window dressing, it didn't matter much to anything in the end and could have been addressed less.
Weirdly enough, I think this might have been improved by simply removing both protagonists.
It wasn't really bad, but it didn't need to exist.
After having looked deeply into this topic I can tell you with no doubt in my mind that all major media is incentivized so heavily to move in the direction that the regime desires that there is no "free" media. You spoke about laws to protect BBC from the state.. well there is no law protecting them against getting their funding pulled so if they put out things that the British state don't like.. we know how that will end.
Besides that, there is various funding organs who will only invest if there is x amount of social justice, likewise the investment vehicle they setup for the production will have an easier time if it's ESG friendly, ASA will allow you more if you play ball just as Ofcom will be friendlier. In short there is a million quangos that you have to bend a knee to and every little time you do, the needle is moved just a tiny bit towards exactly what the regime broadly wants and in the end, you're just putting out propaganda.
This is regime propaganda pushing the approved message on climate change, microplastics, transitioning, pollution, anti-militarism etc. The rights to Doctor Who of which this is a spinoff is owned by the BBC so it's not really a surprise that it has turned out this way since the BBC is owned by the British state.
This is a teamwork BBC + Disney. Also I don't think that any of this by default is some gov synchronized effort, because it's all over the place and has a strategic stupidity. It's simply vegan like preaching and screeching idiots thinking that they do good. But more often than not they just make things worse, because... they are stupid. Like in this case let's take a look at oceans pollution/plastics stuff. It's a real and serious issue. What this lunacy will achieve? Somebody will start to care what is being dumped into oceans, enters food chain and ends up floating in every organism? Nope, all this will achieve is that further attempts to address this issue will have an association with raging lunatics.
BBC is protected by law from gov influence, the same problem is in almost every other developed country. There are mechanisms to protect freedom, but nobody saw coming that those who are protected will hit their heads hard. Exact same we have in my country, gov funded media agency instead of an objective reporting has "opinions" and obviously are leaning in a certain direction. And if somebody points that out, they start to screech like crazy that their rights are being infringed lala. How all this will end also is clear, at least for a while we all will enjoy wannabe-Adolf regimes who will come to power by simply doing/promising the opposite, I saw this coming already 10 years ago, since it's a pretty basic math. Pendulum just will swing to the other side and overshoot. That's why in my book all these woke efforts are absolutely idiotic, they don't solve anything, just create a mountain of new issues on top of existing. And they think that they are so sneaky and clever that nobody will notice non-stop stream of bs injections while in reality most of the time it's such propaganda amateur hour that it's an insult to an intelligence. You can check Twitter today what is their new hot "world saving" topic today and max 6 months later it will be in some show 1:1.
Also, the irony that this virtue signaling even is in English. That's the usual 1+1=11.
Philippines - ~356,000 metric tons annually
Primary sources: Rivers in highly populated coastal areas, inadequate waste management
India - ~126,000 metric tons annually
Hotspots: Ganges and other major river systems, urban coastal cities
Malaysia - ~73,000 metric tons annually
Issues: Rapid urbanization, waste importation (until recent restrictions)
China - ~70,700 metric tons annually
Note: Historically #1 but has improved waste management; still significant due to size
Indonesia - ~56,300 metric tons annually
Concerns: Archipelago with dense coastal populations, river pollution
Brazil - ~38,000 metric tons annually
Sources: Amazon basin, extensive coastline, urban waste
Vietnam - ~28,000 metric tons annually
Factors: Long coastline, Mekong Delta pollution, manufacturing growth
Bangladesh - ~24,000 metric tons annually
Issues: Ganges-Brahmaputra delta, dense population, limited infrastructure
Thailand - ~23,000 metric tons annually
Sources: Tourism, river systems, packaging waste
Nigeria - ~19,000 metric tons annually
Africa's largest contributor: Rapid urbanization, inadequate waste systems
I also have thought about it. It's impossible that ALL of them are in such isolated bubble that nobody understands that it's a total garbage. I think simply wins "need to pay the bills" and they play along. And I already long ago have predicted that once this woke circus will go out of fashion we will hear hilarious stories from behind the scenes - when those people will be able to speak freely and won't worry about their job security (because now they for sure are worried, since tolerance preachers are nowhere close to tolerant).
This is regime propaganda pushing the approved message on climate change, microplastics, transitioning, pollution, anti-militarism etc. The rights to Doctor Who of which this is a spinoff is owned by the BBC so it's not really a surprise that it has turned out this way since the BBC is owned by the British state.
The people working for the BBC today are fully aware of what they are doing but see it as a sort of greater good to push out shite like this as long as it promotes all the things they like.
I seriously ask myself: Are the people working on that show... from producer, director to the actors actually think what they do is pretty good? Do they sit in their comfy couch and when screening the episodes to their family are proud of what they delivered?
Probably just another illustration of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
I also have thought about it. It's impossible that ALL of them are in such isolated bubble that nobody understands that it's a total garbage. I think simply wins "need to pay the bills" and they play along. And I already long ago have predicted that once this woke circus will go out of fashion we will hear hilarious stories from behind the scenes - when those people will be able to speak freely and won't worry about their job security (because now they for sure are worried, since tolerance preachers are nowhere close to tolerant).