@tbskbskysocial
Fuck the apartheid state of Israel and all the fuckers that fund her🖕 Do not follow me if, you voted for Brexit, you back the Tories, or think Refuck UK is anything but a far right tantrum/clown show!! 🚫 DMs,🚫 FUCKING DICK PICs!!, seen one seen them all!
Israel is bombarding, literally bombarding, two Middle East capitals, Beirut and Tehran, killing 100s of civilians, and yet the US and UK media continue to portray Iran as the threat to the region.
Israel has nukes, but Iran is the nuclear threat.
We live in Orwellian times.
Same here 👌
Best advert for atheism I’ve seen in a while.
👍
Or is it simply that viewers have become more critical of how stories are constructed - not just what’s reported?
The evidence is there, they need to get rid of him
Genuine question - do you think mainstream media is losing viewers because of changing technology and habits? Or is it because people have clocked the strawman framing and selective language that often shows up in reporting?
If you’re disputing the evidence of people’s eyes and ears while dismissing documented reporting, you start sounding more like a gatekeeper than a watchdog. Have a good day.
What a load of bollocks!
No one cares about debating an apartheid state - we’re focused on an apartheid colonial project committing a genocide while restricting journalists.
You don’t need deep academic analysis to see subtle bias - sustained attention to the reporting is enough to notice it.
Bringing up armed groups doesn’t cancel out documented statements from state authorities about restricting press access. You don’t get to erase facts by shifting blame - try again.
Israel restricts independent journalists from entering Gaza while the genocide continues, yet official military statements are circulated globally within minutes. When one side controls access and its narrative is reported as fact, that’s not transparency - that’s information control.
If this is “professional reporting,” can you explain why headlines so often read “Gazans died” instead of naming who killed them? Language that removes the actor removes accountability. That’s framing.
Headline writers simplify, distort, inflame - and then pundits host panels asking why society feels divided.
The post is about media framing in general - not a personal campaign against a specific outlet 👍
Someone else did the heavy lifting - I just shared it - but yes, it’s subtle framing that feels like gaslighting once you clock it.
Apparently.
Brexit was the moment I stopped consuming news passively and started questioning how narratives are built.
It's very subtle, but once you clock it, how you process information is permanently changed.
Apparently.
100%
Should a raging racist cunt represent a diverse constituency?
🔘 Yes
🔘 No
Labour could bring back our water into public hands but they care more about investors than they do about you
This is a country with 200 years of existence that proudly speaks about equality and opportunity…
…and yet has never elected a female president.
No surprises here.
Pay attention to the verbs. Pay attention to who gets named. Pay attention to who “says” and who “did.”
That’s how perception is shaped - not with blatant lies, but with careful framing.
This 👇👇
You just know she's gonna keep getting things done. 💚😍
So your entire argument is built on one blog post and a 2019 article? That’s not evidence of current policy - that’s selective sourcing.
Have a nice evening 👋
Turning refugee protection into a 30-month revolving door, strip away certainty from people fleeing war and persecution - and then roll it out behind a brown Home Secretary so it looks balanced.
Using diversity as political cover doesn’t make a policy just.
It makes the cynicism worse!!
Go Greens!
