Remember me
▼ Content

Does mass media convince people?


Does mass media convince people?13-06-2019 04:12
randybump
☆☆☆☆☆
(3)
I'm wondering because I know of many movies with strong environmental themes. For instance, has "Ferngully" every convinced someone to go from coal to solar energy?

My thought is that it is too easy to forget or miss the message cloaked in dramatization and other forms of media means are not being directed towards the people that aren't already convince. Like my uncle isn't going to watch, "Chasing Coral" or listen to the daily report about the polar caps.

What media has been the best to convince people? To combine with that, what message has been used: fear, hope, or something else?
13-06-2019 04:38
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7976)
There are already plenty of examples of movies affecting people's religions. 'Day After Tomorrow' convinced a lot of people that the Gulf Stream is actually shutting down. I'm sure the required viewing of 'An Inconvenient Truth' by those in the schools (excuse me...indoctrination centers) convinced a number of them that 'global warming' is real, even though it can't be defined.

People watching science fiction shows are convinced it's possible to terraform a planet.

People watching various aircraft crashes in the movies are convince that if an airplane touches the ground at anything other than a paved runway, it will blow up in a giant fireball, even if there is no fuel on board!

Yes, unfortunately, a lot of people feel that the movies are somehow real.

Mass media convinces the ignorant.
13-06-2019 17:55
HarveyH55
★★★☆☆
(692)
I'm probably not the best opinion on this, since I've never paid for TV, broadcast only. Rarely watch movies. I don't think the media has the power to warp minds as it once did. Journalism hasn't been objective in a long time, mostly marketing and hype, leans to one side, usually to the left. Everything else is pretty much fiction. How 'real', are reality shows? Think most people are aware of the sad state of the media. Even 'social' media, is mostly imagination. Any hidden messages are usually tainted by the fictitious nature of the content.
13-06-2019 18:34
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7976)
HarveyH55 wrote:
I'm probably not the best opinion on this, since I've never paid for TV, broadcast only. Rarely watch movies. I don't think the media has the power to warp minds as it once did. Journalism hasn't been objective in a long time, mostly marketing and hype, leans to one side, usually to the left. Everything else is pretty much fiction. How 'real', are reality shows? Think most people are aware of the sad state of the media. Even 'social' media, is mostly imagination. Any hidden messages are usually tainted by the fictitious nature of the content.


Journalism has always been biased. It's just that people are recognizing it now.


The Parrot Killer
16-06-2019 01:59
randybump
☆☆☆☆☆
(3)
Into the Night wrote:
There are already plenty of examples of movies affecting people's religions. 'Day After Tomorrow' convinced a lot of people that the Gulf Stream is actually shutting down. I'm sure the required viewing of 'An Inconvenient Truth' by those in the schools (excuse me...indoctrination centers) convinced a number of them that 'global warming' is real, even though it can't be defined.

People watching science fiction shows are convinced it's possible to terraform a planet.

People watching various aircraft crashes in the movies are convince that if an airplane touches the ground at anything other than a paved runway, it will blow up in a giant fireball, even if there is no fuel on board!

Yes, unfortunately, a lot of people feel that the movies are somehow real.

Mass media convinces the ignorant.


I suppose that is true. Many can develop conceptions, right or wrong, from mass media. I think the next question is what makes someone take action? Believing something is true and acting against it is another matter. My hypothesis is there must be some pain or discomfort to cause action. In that case only those that are empathetic will feel the pain within media. Others would just acknowledge and ignore.
16-06-2019 02:06
randybump
☆☆☆☆☆
(3)
HarveyH55 wrote:
I'm probably not the best opinion on this, since I've never paid for TV, broadcast only. Rarely watch movies. I don't think the media has the power to warp minds as it once did. Journalism hasn't been objective in a long time, mostly marketing and hype, leans to one side, usually to the left. Everything else is pretty much fiction. How 'real', are reality shows? Think most people are aware of the sad state of the media. Even 'social' media, is mostly imagination. Any hidden messages are usually tainted by the fictitious nature of the content.


There a definite appeal towards emotion in media now, but I would say that could be more compelling for people, which is why they do it. I suppose the jump is assuming it's in the right direction. You also bring up a good point. The gray area between fact and fiction is getting more and more arduous. I can't even trust phone calls now.
16-06-2019 05:50
HarveyH55
★★★☆☆
(692)
randybump wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
I'm probably not the best opinion on this, since I've never paid for TV, broadcast only. Rarely watch movies. I don't think the media has the power to warp minds as it once did. Journalism hasn't been objective in a long time, mostly marketing and hype, leans to one side, usually to the left. Everything else is pretty much fiction. How 'real', are reality shows? Think most people are aware of the sad state of the media. Even 'social' media, is mostly imagination. Any hidden messages are usually tainted by the fictitious nature of the content.


There a definite appeal towards emotion in media now, but I would say that could be more compelling for people, which is why they do it. I suppose the jump is assuming it's in the right direction. You also bring up a good point. The gray area between fact and fiction is getting more and more arduous. I can't even trust phone calls now.


I've known most of my adult life, that when someone you don't know, tries to sell you something, that you weren't looking to buy, it's probably a scam. It could be only that you could get a much better deal, by shopping around. Even stuff I read, or see on TV, online, I'll shop around, get more information, compare to similar products, read reviews. I don't take a single source or opinion, as gospel truth.

I don't think most people get emotionally attached that easy anymore, they might enjoy talking about what they see in the media, but more in an entertainment sort of way. They'll talk about it, but not likely to change their lifestyles, or spend a lot of money. Some people do, but more as a hobby, not that they feel they have to do something. I've got a few solar panels, never expected to go green, or power my entire house. Thought it would be useful, if power went out for a few days or weeks. Never had a chance to find out, power usually restored hours after a hurricane passes. Never got around to installing enough panels to run a coffee maker. I can keep a laptop powered, and my rechargeable devices topped off, run a TV. I got enough perspective on how useful solar panels really are, and it won't be good enough to replace fossil fuel generators. People who cover their roof s with panels, and grid-tie, aren't making money, or getting hugely reduced power bills. They have to drastically reduce their energy use, change their old appliances out, for low energy. Use less power at night. Basically, solar is a lie, if you want to use it, you have to sacrifice to get all the benefits promised. The installation cost might be a good deal, even cheap with subsidies, but in reality, you are going to spend a lot more on low power lighting, and appliances. You either buy back power at night, or do without. Large battery banks and high power inverters are incredibly expensive, that's why most people grid-tie their solar panels.
16-06-2019 09:24
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7976)
randybump wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
There are already plenty of examples of movies affecting people's religions. 'Day After Tomorrow' convinced a lot of people that the Gulf Stream is actually shutting down. I'm sure the required viewing of 'An Inconvenient Truth' by those in the schools (excuse me...indoctrination centers) convinced a number of them that 'global warming' is real, even though it can't be defined.

People watching science fiction shows are convinced it's possible to terraform a planet.

People watching various aircraft crashes in the movies are convince that if an airplane touches the ground at anything other than a paved runway, it will blow up in a giant fireball, even if there is no fuel on board!

Yes, unfortunately, a lot of people feel that the movies are somehow real.

Mass media convinces the ignorant.


I suppose that is true. Many can develop conceptions, right or wrong, from mass media. I think the next question is what makes someone take action? Believing something is true and acting against it is another matter. My hypothesis is there must be some pain or discomfort to cause action. In that case only those that are empathetic will feel the pain within media. Others would just acknowledge and ignore.


A belief in a religion, especially if the nature of the religion is fundamentalist, such as the Church of Global Warming, or the Church of Karl Marx.


The Parrot Killer
16-06-2019 18:14
James___
★★★★☆
(1286)
randybump wrote:
I'm wondering because I know of many movies with strong environmental themes. For instance, has "Ferngully" every convinced someone to go from coal to solar energy?

My thought is that it is too easy to forget or miss the message cloaked in dramatization and other forms of media means are not being directed towards the people that aren't already convince. Like my uncle isn't going to watch, "Chasing Coral" or listen to the daily report about the polar caps.

What media has been the best to convince people? To combine with that, what message has been used: fear, hope, or something else?



One reason why I took an interest in climate change is because of the movie An Inconvenient Truth. Seriously. They showed nothing in how science supported their claim that CO2 was causing climate change.
With the people in here, they basically say that the climate doesn't change. It keeps things simple. They ignore the observations made throughout history. They say that historians who recorded what is climate change in all likelihood are a part of the religion of global warming and cooling.
Science just doesn't support it while it does. These guys don't know how CO2 gained traction as causing global warming. I've posted it before but they only care to say that our climate doesn't change.
With itn and damann, they actually have a thread where they defined what everything is and they basically reject science.

http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/the-faith-basis-for-radiometric-data-d6-e2610.php
16-06-2019 18:33
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7976)
James___ wrote:
randybump wrote:
I'm wondering because I know of many movies with strong environmental themes. For instance, has "Ferngully" every convinced someone to go from coal to solar energy?

My thought is that it is too easy to forget or miss the message cloaked in dramatization and other forms of media means are not being directed towards the people that aren't already convince. Like my uncle isn't going to watch, "Chasing Coral" or listen to the daily report about the polar caps.

What media has been the best to convince people? To combine with that, what message has been used: fear, hope, or something else?



One reason why I took an interest in climate change is because of the movie An Inconvenient Truth.
And you bought into it hook, line, and sinker.
James___ wrote:
Seriously. They showed nothing in how science supported their claim that CO2 was causing climate change.

Yet you claim they did. Make up your mind, dude.
James___ wrote:
With the people in here, they basically say that the climate doesn't change.
It doesn't, despite different climates. There is no global climate.
James___ wrote:
It keeps things simple.

Inversion fallacy.
James___ wrote:
They ignore the observations made throughout history.
There are none. There is no global climate.
James___ wrote:
They say that historians who recorded what is climate change in all likelihood are a part of the religion of global warming and cooling.
There is no such recording. There is no global climate.
James___ wrote:
Science just doesn't support it while it does.
Nonsensical statement. Try English. It works better.
James___ wrote:
These guys don't know how CO2 gained traction as causing global warming.

Yes we do. The Church of Global Warming stems from the Church of Karl Marx. CO2 used as the excuse to shut down industry.
James___ wrote:
I've posted it before but they only care to say that our climate doesn't change.
There is no such thing a global climate.
James___ wrote:
With itn and damann, they actually have a thread where they defined what everything is and they basically reject science.
The Wordsmith thread is one I started. It had one simple rule: the source of the definition must be given. That thread has since expanded into The Manual. So far, it provides the only definition of 'global warming' or 'climate change' to date. If you want to define them, go right ahead.
James___ wrote:
http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/the-faith-basis-for-radiometric-data-d6-e2610.php

This is not a dictionary. It is a thread discussing some of the weaknesses in radiometric dating instrumentation.


The Parrot Killer
16-06-2019 22:14
HarveyH55
★★★☆☆
(692)
Climate doesn't change... Had a very pleasant climate all day, but no it looks like we will be changing to a much wetter climate in a few minutes. could be a violent climate change as well, some definite cooling, clouds moving fast, and some gust of wind. Fortunately, don't thing the climate change will last an hour, maybe 30-40 minutes. Could use some rain anyway. I agree that there is no global climate, but locally, it changes all the time. We haven't had a hard freeze or snow in central Florida in decades, but it wasn't too uncommon.
17-06-2019 03:05
James___
★★★★☆
(1286)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Climate doesn't change... Had a very pleasant climate all day, but no it looks like we will be changing to a much wetter climate in a few minutes. could be a violent climate change as well, some definite cooling, clouds moving fast, and some gust of wind. Fortunately, don't thing the climate change will last an hour, maybe 30-40 minutes. Could use some rain anyway. I agree that there is no global climate, but locally, it changes all the time. We haven't had a hard freeze or snow in central Florida in decades, but it wasn't too uncommon.


Climate doesn't change.

We haven't had a hard freeze or snow in central Florida in decades,

Thank you for sharing your experience Harvey.
17-06-2019 18:39
Into the Night
★★★★★
(7976)
James___ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Climate doesn't change... Had a very pleasant climate all day, but no it looks like we will be changing to a much wetter climate in a few minutes. could be a violent climate change as well, some definite cooling, clouds moving fast, and some gust of wind. Fortunately, don't thing the climate change will last an hour, maybe 30-40 minutes. Could use some rain anyway. I agree that there is no global climate, but locally, it changes all the time. We haven't had a hard freeze or snow in central Florida in decades, but it wasn't too uncommon.


Climate doesn't change.

We haven't had a hard freeze or snow in central Florida in decades,

Thank you for sharing your experience Harvey.


The climate in central Florida does have freezes and sometimes even snow. Not often, but it does sometimes happen.


The Parrot Killer
17-06-2019 21:32
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3688)
James___ wrote: Climate doesn't change.

We haven't had a hard freeze or snow in central Florida in decades,

So which is it? Does Climate not change or does it change drastically every few decades?

Oh, here's one answer, by the way:

Florida Freezes Timeline:
http://flcitrusmutual.com/render.aspx?p=/industry-issues/weather/freeze_timeline.aspx


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist




Join the debate Does mass media convince people?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Chinese people are practical, not ideological.729-04-2019 21:08
Young people banding together to demand more action on climate change023-04-2019 15:06
Climate change is creating toxic crops and poisoning some of world's poorest people, scientists warn022-03-2019 17:30
Climate change could make insurance too expensive for ordinary people – report522-03-2019 10:04
Climate Change Is Now On The Political Agenda, Thanks To People Still Too Young To Vote317-03-2019 12:08
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact