Scott Adam’s had an interesting take on it a couple days ago. More or less, he said big pharma isn’t necessarily advertising to the consumer, but buying ad space so the media outlets will feel obliged to never do any in depth reporting that would put pharmaceutical companies in a negative light. I never thought of it that way but as always, follow the money.
if you ban the advertising, they'll just move to a more opaque model like "sponsoring reporters" or "grants" the way the climate activists have colonized the AP newswire.
as a system, it's not fixable. the game will keep moving.
i think we just need to let the reputation market finish gutting TV. the boomers are the last generation that fall for it.
I am a boomer and I wasn't falling for it since the Kennedy assassinations. Not even Walter Kronkite the most tRusted man in telebishion. Most of my working life I had no time for teevee. I always wondered why they called shows programs (not really. It became obvious that they were programing . . . us. More wondered why they weren't more subtle about it).
Advertising: why must I be subjected to the same lame ads for products I would never buy all of the time. I do get a kick out of pHarma ads and all the warnings at the end of the ad essentially saying: "You are screwed", and "Death is normal."
anywho, I think most of those who found there way here feel pretty same - same.
When I was a child my dad told us (the kids) to not watch advertisements on our TV because they lied. That was in the 1950's. I followed his advise. He was right, He said the same thing about the government.
So did my parents. We got to watch a few shows Friday evenings and on weekends. We needed to get homework done 1st. They always encouraged us to go out and play when the weather was good. I also discovered the area library and became an avid reader.
I enjoy TV and the new media versions. It is entertainment. A chance to rest the brain for an hour. I make fun of the ads. Take this, it will make your skin look better, it may kill you and for sure pollute your liver shortening your life, but you your skin will be brilliant (before it decomposes)!
Yes, yes! Why was I watching cigarette commercials at 15:30 after school with my cat along with Rocky and Bullwinkle? heehee Thank The Lord that my Wee Geordie did not start smoking. He was a 16-pound bad-@$$
BUT. Another issue is how often definitions are "updated" as a result of trials...or for no reason other than to fool the general population, like I've said before with vaccine, herd immunity and a pandemic itself.
Not sure how we combat that. Might be pretty tough to roll that back.
I think the best solution is from the bottom up, encouraging regular people to learn the truth about things. Transparency. Trying to impose solutions from the top down doesn't usually work.
Which is exactly why we must be laser focused on preserving first ammendment rights above all else. What follows from that is never guaranteed, of course, but loud dissent at all absurdity is our only hope.
Sure does not work. Look at it on a smaller scale with families. I was the only one who noticed that the emperor had no clothes and became a scapegoat... a badge proudly worn.
This has gone beyond absurd in the last few decades. Nearly 20 years ago I saw a presentation with a graph that showed adoption of a certain class of drugs, and another with the history of "official" guidelines for diagnosis based on certain blood chemistry metrics. Overlaying the two, when sales began to flatten, within a few months the guidelines were revised to include more patients. It was pretty clear, but not talked about.
The thing not getting attention is risk. Doctors follow the guidelines, many fearing for their license if they don't. They don't consider the risk of medication and do not consider the risk of missing an actual diagnosis by using drugs that mask symptoms. The result in missing a serious diagnosis like liver disease (often masked by statin drugs) is death.
BTW, drug companies do not want to kill patients, nor do they want to cure them. An exec at a large pharma company explained this to me more than 2 decades ago: Death is something we can't treat with drugs, nor is health. We need patients in between to sell drugs.
Patrick, you have to read “ The real Anthony Fauci” book by JFK jr. & most importantly please read “ Turtles All the way Down.” I practically guarantee that you will feel different about vaccines afterward. I was never anti- vax until Covid. After I read these 2 books that are full of undisputed facts, I’m certain. Vaccines are a scam. All of them. Every single one. Honest. Read the books. Read Turtles first. 😣
Wait, I don’t get it. Can you elaborate? Maybe I’m tired. I just know that we are the only country that allows Pharma commercials, besides New Zealand. That alone should be a red flag for something? 😂 I’m sick of them.
**This reply may cause confusion, death, stomach upset, or dizziness. Speak to your health care provider if you have these symptoms ( except death). This is not a complete list of side- effects.
•••••••••••••••••••••
…………………………,.,.,
.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,, ( that’s all the small print you can never read!) 🥵
They could at least be compelled to make a disclaimer that they are being sponsored by “whoever” when reporting on a related story which could be related to said sponsor.
Several of the most arrogant media "personalities", including the one in the meme, have argued that politicians should wear sponsor's names on their suites like NASCAR drivers (not a bad idea IMO). Yet few have volunteered to do the same (also a good idea IMO). What's good for the goose....
Just as the government has done with the Censorship Industrial Complex, they could set up complex networks of NGOs and other front organizations to hide the true source of the money. Similar with political contributions.
"move to" should be "do even more of". Sponsoring research, conferences and and academic journals, for example. I'm a fan of the natural decay solution. Not sure I'm as optimistic as it seems many people I meet in later generations are falling for the updated version.
If you are looking for conspiracy, the collusion between "news" media, pharma and governments would be fruitful to explore. Plenty to see there - and not just legacy media, all media is in this game.
There is another purpose to advertising drugs everywhere, beyond the short-term: the ever present message is "take the drug and trust the experts" is a longer term socialization (indoctrination?) that normalizes what should not be normal, a drug dependent population. Every time I see any health care provider, I get asked to list all the medications I take, and the list is short (none). Usually met with suspicious and disapproving looks. Over 50 and you are supposed to be taking drugs. You will be diagnosed with something requiring regular dosing. The "diagnostic" definitions keep expanding and "guidelines" lower the bar for classifying patients as this, that or the other dire affliction. The long-term propaganda has made a drug-free 65 year old "not normal".
Agree! I even have M.S. and have decided to go drug free as long as I can. These drugs have so many side effects with a benefit of 30% effective for slowing progression of disease? I’m rolling the dice, and so far so good. 👍 At my neurologist’s office , there are 2 pages available to write current medications! 🙈
When I broke my foot, I met with a podiatrist to fix it up. When he got to the medications page on the form I filed out he asked "did you forget to fill this out?" and I said "nope, that's it!" and he said "right on!'. Not many MDs react that way. Most try to convince me I need more drugs.
I'm not anti-drug. I'm anti-stupid blinding conformance without thinking. Medication can be effective and beneficial when used correctly, not mixed with the wrong things, and so on.
They're already doing that, though. How many Colberts said they were paid for doing the song and dance? I found exactly ONE, but I'm sure there are others.
Sad that so many boomers fell for it. Of course I vaccinated my children 31-40 years ago, I did not want them to die from pneumonia contracted by having measles or give birth some day to a deformed child because they caught rhubella during pregnancy. But then, a vaccine was a little more of a direct line... a few are affected negatively but it directly attacks the virus. Now we are attacked via ads that repeat the 3-4 syllable name of a med at least 10x during the 'mirsh but never tell you what it is for, but clearly it changes the weather and you are able to dance in perfect harmony with nature after being prescribed "blah-blah-blah-blavy."
I don't think that vaccines have ever directly attacked the virus, have they? My understanding is that they are supposed to act as a non-replicating biomolecular proxy for the virus, to stimulate the immune system to focus on attacking anything that looks like them. The vaccine is supposed to train the immune system, but it's the immune system that always provides whatever immunity one has.
I still watch FOX Business, and Gutfeld on FOX News, but no other msm (except sports broadcasts). Don't make me give up college football, my sports obsession.
Unfortunately, Big Pharma, especially since the Scamdemic, is eyebrow deep in large denomination cash and can buy pretty much anything it wants, like the CDC, the FCC, state and national elections, usurpers pretending to be President, etc, etc, ad nauseam. The Insurance Industry is its only competition for Top Spot. As a "does anyone else remember" aside, does anyone else remember back 50 or 60 years ago when the left raged about people turning to pharmaceuticals to solve all their everyday problems? The Stones, e.g. "She goes running for the shelter of her mother's little helper"? Now, it seems, the left has again flip-flopped, and few have noticed and fewer are publicly calling them on it. Bravo Gato!
Thinking some more - it isn't just the boomers falling for it - my kids in 30-40 range fell for it... their spouses are in medical professions and probably the reason for it. :-(. . I worked in a hospital microbiology lab for 20 yrs before moving on to IT. That environment in medicine can be toxic.
I wish it were true - what you say - that “the boomers” are the last that “fall for it”.
First of all, I happen to “a boomer” (hate that term) who has never fallen for it - ever! And I know quite a few fellow boomers who haven’t fallen for it.
Further, I actually know quite a few younger people - not sure which gen - but not boomers - who have fallen hook line and sinker for the big Pharma LIES!!
And further, I really hate it when people lump all “boomers” as one dumb group.
It’s just another form of hatred and prejudice - and separation. More of what we do NOT need.
And more of what our “overlords” are trying to create: separation, hatred, chaos.
Yes, I think that far too many people swallowed the bait and believe the myths.
I think the constant barrage of drug adds serves to normalize the idea that you MUST be on some drug. It creates a dependence mind set. And that is what the "overlords" can exploit. Separation, hate and chaos are tactics. Total control is the objective ;-)
I wonder if you could somehow extend liability to platform providers for the advertisers they allow? The left has already opened that door somewhat by allowing lawsuits against firearm manufacturers for what someone does with their products.
Media advertising is effectively an implied endorsement -- you as the controlling organization found the content acceptable to allow onto your programming. If that opens you up to secondary liability for that endorsement, maybe there would some selectiveness applied?
Yes yes I like this idea. Let the ambulance chasers have at it, it is what they are good at. I took this drug because I saw it on ABC and I trusted them to have my interests at heart and now I have two heads. Gimme all your money.
I was thinking about that for places that give incentives for “ vaccines.” I’m nauseated ( literally!) when I’m walking through a grocery or drug store and they are offering free items or money off your bill if you get a flu shot, or Covid shot. It’s disgusting! I want corporate to be charged with accessory for harming citizens. MRNA is in some flu shots now. They don’t know long- term effects but most current studies are coming back with negative side effects. That’s ridiculous that stores do this!
I understand the feeling but I am generally against bans. For some obvious reasons (and repeating the obvious is in my job description):
1. They generally do not work as advertised (pun intended)
2. the usual answer to "who decides what to ban?"
The "old media" generates revenue from advertising. "new media" has introduced a plethora of additional ways to monetize the eyes on the screen. The objective is money, power or both. Providing information is not a goal of media.
Or is expecting the media to "investigate" anything the real problem? Just an observation ;-) IMO the larger problem is too many people looking to these platforms and believing they are getting accurate information.
I'm convinced like 80-90% of the legacy corporate media and late night talk shows funding comes from Big Pharma ads. If those get banned, which they should, that might finally be the end of some of these programs no one is watching.
I truly dislike/hate the pharm direct to consumer ads. Most countries do not allow them. The ads make it look like all the "beautiful people" take their drugs and you should too, so you look like them.
Big Pharma's criminal monopoly on healthcare is entirely due to the power of the purse. Colleges would lose their funding if anyone ever questioned the brainwashing doctors have to submit to.
Researchers at my alma mater found a cure for cancer many years ago. Big Pharma demanded they stop or they would end funding. They took the research off campus and when that was discovered Big Pharma demanded they be fired or they would cut funding. They had to back off to preserve their jobs and medical school funding.
RICO prosecutions are needed for this criminal enterprise. They have been suppressing cures since their inception because keeping people sick and dependent on drugs for life is how they maximize profits.
I don't think I ever heard the details because it was in proprietary development. Control group studies showed cancer being eliminated in significant numbers.
I thought biotech was going to solve all of our medical problems in the late 80's-90's. I found several companies that had promising trial results for curing cancer. Every time Big Pharma swooped in and bought them out and you never heard anything more about those cures.
15 years ago I was at a party talking to the CFO of a biotech company. I told him that story. His response was "nobody even tries to do that anymore because you can't get those products to market".
Millions of people are suffering and dying to support monopoly profiteering.
Big Pharma & Big Elites ( Bill Gates, Soros, etc.), but the “ CURE”. And then the researcher signs their life away or has an
“ accident.” 🙈
The same happens with all inventions that might change our world. Remember the guy that invented the car that runs on water? All water; ocean, rain, tap, lake, etc. He met with the CIA? FBI? , and he sold the patent & was mysteriously poisoned, the same day. 😯 That was his last words to his brother, “ I’ve been poisoned.”
Nancy: Check out new studies with Ivermectin & Fenbendizole. Very promising results for even turbo cancers.
Bobby Kennedy related that he was grateful that FOX News was willing to give him airtime in the past but when he had a particularly damning topic regarding big pharma, Murdoch, (the original owner of FOX, correct?🤔), told him straight out that he couldn't air it because of his pharma advertisers.
And how much did Scott Adams get paid to mock the unvaccinated? The CDC had almost a billion dollars to "Get the message out" and they targeted influencers, TV writers and comedians to "MOCK the unvaccinated" which he did several times.
Someone should ask him that. I did and got kicked off his site.
I’m not trying to sell anyone on Scott Adams, but yes I caught that too. He’s reeled it in a bit since. I don’t like it that there’s so many consequences to experience but everyone had a choice to make. There’s a few other things I disagree with him on but I do like his ideas and humor.
You’re ok, I’m ok. I’m gonna assume your kids are ok. All good choices. I heard that too and was surprised. Maybe he owned it before but I didn’t catch it so yes that caught me off guard. A lot of folks are doing some mental gymnastics to come to terms with how all that went down, but at least they’re acknowledging it, each in they’re own way and not being canned immediately by social media. I think/hope that there’s a reckoning to come.
I think that's absolutely right. A few people might see an ad and want to talk to the doctor into prescribing whatever-it-is, but I think the much greater impact is Pharma's control over the media landscape.
I don’t watch TV much, but get occasional ambient exposure. I happened to see one drug ad that didn’t even say what condition the drug was supposed to treat — kind of a major omission if you’re trying to get a consumer interested. My conclusion was just as Adams concluded.
Few deductions made by Scott Adams have ever been more on-point. Big Pharma ain't a bunch of dummies!
Consider: Advertising time is an income source for the TV networks. In fact, EVERTHING they broadcast is in service of the viewer continuing to watch their network long enough to see an advertisement, for which they sold the time, to someone. As a consequence, everything broadcast by a station is in service to its advertisers. The viewers are PRODUCTS sold by the networks to their advertisers. (The "why is Facebook free?" model keeps being relevant!)
I think it’s true that they are buying editorial control and also that it’s much worse than that. The pharmaceutical industry buys sufficient clout in our government to easily end the requirement to list a drug’s potential side effects during the tv ad. It is their purposeful choice to spend half the ad slot describing, out loud, vague and often dangerous medical conditions.
Normalizing the expectation that all cures involve negative side effects behooves them straightforwardly enough, and beyond mere legal CYA. Side effects are a feature not bug of modern medicine, as each can be treated by additional prescriptions (causing new side effects, requiring subsequent prescriptions, in a feedback loop that ends in hospice and bankruptcy). However, this side-effects-as-repeat-sales-generator functions perfectly well without disclosing the existence or even possibility of said side effects. The question still remains, why choose to inform viewers about all these unhealthy potential conditions?
Without doubt, pharmaceutical companies understand concepts like the Nocebo Effect and Medical Student’s Disease. Could it be that they choose to spend billions of dollars worth of airtime speaking aloud all manner of disease states (ranging from vaguely normal to acutely dangerous) because they believe it will manifest as disease by acting audio-visually upon the audience’s subconscious? Could it be that pharma is a malevolent egregore using dark magic to cast disease curses upon a hypnotized humanity?
I think it’s true that they are buying editorial control and also that it’s much worse than that. The pharmaceutical industry buys sufficient clout in our government to easily end the requirement to list a drug’s potential side effects during the tv ad. It is their purposeful choice to spend half the ad slot describing, out loud, vague and often dangerous medical conditions.
Normalizing the expectation that all cures involve negative side effects behooves them straightforwardly enough, and beyond mere legal CYA. Side effects are a feature not bug of modern medicine, as each can be treated by additional prescriptions (causing new side effects, requiring subsequent prescriptions, in a feedback loop that ends in hospice and bankruptcy). However, this side-effects-as-repeat-sales-generator functions perfectly well without disclosing the existence or even possibility of said side effects. The question still remains, why choose to inform viewers about all these unhealthy potential conditions?
Without doubt, pharmaceutical companies understand concepts like the Nocebo Effect and Medical Student’s Disease. Could it be that they choose to spend billions of dollars worth of airtime speaking aloud all manner of disease states (ranging from vaguely normal to acutely dangerous) because they believe it will manifest as disease by acting audio-visually upon the audience’s subconscious? Could it be that pharma is a malevolent egregore using dark magic to cast disease curses upon a hypnotized humanity?
I always wondered, "Who the hell goes to the doctor and asks for Txryzampthical like they go to Home Depot and ask about a Ryobi cordless weedwhacker??"
These people were literally paid to push the jabs, but very very very rarely told us they were paid to do so. (I think there's a word for that?)
And it went far beyond late-night talk shows, though that was a major focus. Church leaders, mommy influencers, social media stars.....the HHS targeted anybody who could possibly convince somebody else to take the shot. They even wanted to give kids EXTRA CREDIT for taking the jabs. (That's even worse than the burger deal!)
To the extent that I care about what is good for anyone other than my family, it's pretty much my call. When it comes to putting myself or my family at risk for some whacked out virtue-signaling scheme, no matter how good it makes you feel about yourself, count me out.
If you are telling me that I need to have a foreign substance injected in my body so thyat someone else might not get sick, I'm going to tell you to take your "social contract" and put it where the sun doesn't shine.
No, I don't have to accept your assurances that the vaccine you want to stick into me or mine is safe and effective; I get to ask questions and demand proof.
The first rulers of the State claimed divinity. Then they claimed to be anointed by God. Now it is the social contract, the terms of which are never specifically defined, and which no one has ever seen, signed or agreed to.
It is all mythological bullshit to justify the ancient paradigm of rulers and ruled.
See session 4 of Event 201. It was ALL about communication, and leveraging "white hats" in the community - trusted influencers, religious leaders, community leaders, etc. In our faith, I received "word" that upper leaders in our church were heavily strong-armed into promoting the jabs to the worldwide congregation.
Im not even religious but for me, one of the most emblematic worst of the WuFlu scam reaction was the churches kowtowing to & acting as mouthpieces for the State.
I agree with you, SimComm, but I also disagree, if only in nuance. We all should KNOW that influencers are paid. TV personalities are paid. Hell, damned-near anyone who promotes a product is paid. That isn't exactly news. Announcing it would just be overkill---it's been true for decades. The current social media market has simply "flattened out" who can belly-up to the trough, but the trough is still there and has always been!
We know Colbert is paid to host the show, that does not extend to him being a pharma whore. Your pastor is paid to run the church, that does not extend to him being a pharma whore.
Point One, I love your use of "whore" since it directly applies!
Point Two, no real argument. (I tend to think everyone on TV is at least a little bit of a whore though, particularly hosts and anchors. Yes, I'm jaded.) Anyway...
#PointTaken
By the way, in full disclosure, let no one assume, from my jadedness, that I decry TV. I'm a recovering TV-holic, but I'm not even trying to get back on the wagon to recovery. I don't believe the stuff I watch, but I watch like an addict looks forward to his next ride on the White Horse. Now, I haven't watched TV news in a couple decades, but the rest, well... #ItIsWhatItIs
Even those who purport to support RFK’s health initiative tend to only talk about the processed food angle and steer clear of the pharma issues . . . Looking at you Fox News.
Fox is just controlled opposition… Another mockingbird media shill… it always upsets me to see my family members that are supposedly conservative watching Fox news… I just roll my eyes. 🙄
When Sean Hannity was pushing so hard for the vaccine, I wanted to vomit. 🤮
I’ve never watched FOX either. Not so big on total trust of the GOP as a politically marooned ex democrat but I’ll give them a chance. If they step in President Trumps way, they will expose themselves for what they re@lly are.
As a lifelong independent who registered R last year, sort of trust about 1/3-1/2 of the GOP, but I do trust Trump and most of his picks to be locked and loaded to upset the apple cart.
I am not sure I trust anyone in DC but Trump and his crew are the best hope we have. And it's kind of like that relative you don't really like but you stand up for them when someone outside the family criticizes them-the more the left came after Trump, the more I liked him.
At most, about 1/2 (if that) of GOP is decent. The other 1/2 is bought and paid for. I say that as someone who has never been a Democrat, and now not a Republican either.
Sean was very late to the vaccine myths. I do NOT think he's very smart to begin with. I watch 2 shows (sometimes 3) for their entertainment value. Fox also has mostly cheerful commentators. But for actual news, I take to the internet.
you are right. I can't stand Hannity. His personality and behavior has always disgusted me. He really needs to shut up. I bet his wife can't stand him either
I was telling my Dad about RFK jr and how he’d be good for us, going into my usual scree about how vaccinations are bad and do not prevent Covid infection. I had never done this scree in front of Dad who (because of family pressure (will never forgive them) got his clot shots when they came out despite my worried advisories against it. ( the worst part is I took him, telling him he could change his mind as we were on line both times). He has afib now and I usually avoid the subject . It’s heartbreaking. The evening together ended shortly after 💔
Obviously saw the Colbert pics. Damn it man just a quick glimpse stimulated my brain. I remembered how I felt the moment I first saw his silly little jig during the height of the covid vaccine. Rough times brother, rough times!
I find most of the commercials to be hilarious. The side effects of the so-called meds are typically way more scary sounding than the diseases they are sold to control (not cure).
sorry. It was the first thing that came into my head. haha haha Sad tv. Who watches tv? ppl in nursing homes, subjected unwillingly? how big is this audience - 6 people that work for pharma?
This monstrous assumption has been based on fear and indoctrination and that is that the medical mafia and big pharma are inventions that will save lives. You never save a life in reality, only postpone death. Has anyone in the medical mafia ever explained "safe and effective" using verified and trustworthy information?
Other than idiot governments blowing each other up and sending armies to die for the dumbest causes, the medical mafia and big pharma are both in the death industry as well. Have they created a healthier world with their drugs and interventions? Look around and find the down and dirty answer.
We watch virtually no live, broadcast TV. I record everything on a TIVO DVR so we can FF through commercials. One humorous exception: we like to mock drug commercials during sporting events we watch. We like to see how grossed out and repulsed we get by the side-effects. On a more serious note, see Alex Berenson's Substack today for an interesting piece on RFK, Jr. In it he talks about limiting pharma advertising, saying he doubts we can ban it outright. Many other countries do, but I'm not necessarily arguing we should emulate them. (As my sainted mother always said: "If all your friends jumped off a bridge would you, too?")
I don’t either. I DVR cable shows I do watch and fly past commercials. So far Amazon prime hasn’t done drug ads but everything is cluttered with ads there now. Even when you pause a program an ad shows up. I stream british stuff and like PBS classics and a few science shows. Almost Every cable channel has faded away in my house. We will probably cut it completely off next year. The Spectrum cable TV repair guy told us they will be going full streaming soon. From an app. Are they sure everyone wants to deal with an app and how much will that cost since “cable” or boxes will be unnecessary.
It is only allowed here & in New Zealand. All other countries do not allow direct to consumer adverts on the TV. Ever sit in a doctors waiting room and pick up a mag. AARP for example is loaded with drug adverts. As are all the other ones. That is another form of direct to consumer advertising. It’s truly criminal. Step right in… yes we are suggesting/selling what you saw while sitting out there.
Scott Adam’s had an interesting take on it a couple days ago. More or less, he said big pharma isn’t necessarily advertising to the consumer, but buying ad space so the media outlets will feel obliged to never do any in depth reporting that would put pharmaceutical companies in a negative light. I never thought of it that way but as always, follow the money.
Yep. That's why I'm now for banning pharma ads from tv. Maybe the news would be interested in investigating them, then.
if you ban the advertising, they'll just move to a more opaque model like "sponsoring reporters" or "grants" the way the climate activists have colonized the AP newswire.
as a system, it's not fixable. the game will keep moving.
i think we just need to let the reputation market finish gutting TV. the boomers are the last generation that fall for it.
I am a boomer and I wasn't falling for it since the Kennedy assassinations. Not even Walter Kronkite the most tRusted man in telebishion. Most of my working life I had no time for teevee. I always wondered why they called shows programs (not really. It became obvious that they were programing . . . us. More wondered why they weren't more subtle about it).
Advertising: why must I be subjected to the same lame ads for products I would never buy all of the time. I do get a kick out of pHarma ads and all the warnings at the end of the ad essentially saying: "You are screwed", and "Death is normal."
anywho, I think most of those who found there way here feel pretty same - same.
When I was a child my dad told us (the kids) to not watch advertisements on our TV because they lied. That was in the 1950's. I followed his advise. He was right, He said the same thing about the government.
Same
My mother (way back in the day as I'm a boomer) called it the "idiot box," and regulated our screen time back then.
So did my parents. We got to watch a few shows Friday evenings and on weekends. We needed to get homework done 1st. They always encouraged us to go out and play when the weather was good. I also discovered the area library and became an avid reader.
The libraries have gone woke. Hard to find a book/movie now that isn't woke.
I enjoy TV and the new media versions. It is entertainment. A chance to rest the brain for an hour. I make fun of the ads. Take this, it will make your skin look better, it may kill you and for sure pollute your liver shortening your life, but you your skin will be brilliant (before it decomposes)!
And with "cable" TV people pay to watch ads. That was not the purpose of cable.
Now too for netflix and Amazon. Both of which I greatly underwatch.
Admission... have Amazon, will NEVER use netflix under its current ownership and agenda. I do not love amazon but it is useful.
I know, really! But if "the market" will pay for it, why not charge?
Yes, yes! Why was I watching cigarette commercials at 15:30 after school with my cat along with Rocky and Bullwinkle? heehee Thank The Lord that my Wee Geordie did not start smoking. He was a 16-pound bad-@$$
I think you're right.
BUT. Another issue is how often definitions are "updated" as a result of trials...or for no reason other than to fool the general population, like I've said before with vaccine, herd immunity and a pandemic itself.
Not sure how we combat that. Might be pretty tough to roll that back.
Perhaps RFK should make that an objective?
I think the best solution is from the bottom up, encouraging regular people to learn the truth about things. Transparency. Trying to impose solutions from the top down doesn't usually work.
Which is exactly why we must be laser focused on preserving first ammendment rights above all else. What follows from that is never guaranteed, of course, but loud dissent at all absurdity is our only hope.
Top down is called "totalitarian dictatorship".
Agree
Sure does not work. Look at it on a smaller scale with families. I was the only one who noticed that the emperor had no clothes and became a scapegoat... a badge proudly worn.
100% agree
"...encouraging regular people to learn...." Ain't gonna happen! In general, people are too lazy and/or stupid.
This has gone beyond absurd in the last few decades. Nearly 20 years ago I saw a presentation with a graph that showed adoption of a certain class of drugs, and another with the history of "official" guidelines for diagnosis based on certain blood chemistry metrics. Overlaying the two, when sales began to flatten, within a few months the guidelines were revised to include more patients. It was pretty clear, but not talked about.
The thing not getting attention is risk. Doctors follow the guidelines, many fearing for their license if they don't. They don't consider the risk of medication and do not consider the risk of missing an actual diagnosis by using drugs that mask symptoms. The result in missing a serious diagnosis like liver disease (often masked by statin drugs) is death.
BTW, drug companies do not want to kill patients, nor do they want to cure them. An exec at a large pharma company explained this to me more than 2 decades ago: Death is something we can't treat with drugs, nor is health. We need patients in between to sell drugs.
Statins and cholesterol levels are an excellent example.
Yes, that's a good idea.
Vaccine in particular must refer to what it always did, not this mRNA crap.
Patrick, you have to read “ The real Anthony Fauci” book by JFK jr. & most importantly please read “ Turtles All the way Down.” I practically guarantee that you will feel different about vaccines afterward. I was never anti- vax until Covid. After I read these 2 books that are full of undisputed facts, I’m certain. Vaccines are a scam. All of them. Every single one. Honest. Read the books. Read Turtles first. 😣
Thanks, I've browsed "The Real Anthony Fauci" but never heard of "Turtles All The Way Down".
I'm already quite anti-vaxx after the last four years made clear what a scam the mRNA injections are.
Turtles looks good. Added the blurb to my own site to get it a little more visibility:
https://patrick.net/post/1347021/2022-08-15-sudden-infant-death-syndrome-sids-may?start=212#comment-2119745
Wait, I don’t get it. Can you elaborate? Maybe I’m tired. I just know that we are the only country that allows Pharma commercials, besides New Zealand. That alone should be a red flag for something? 😂 I’m sick of them.
**This reply may cause confusion, death, stomach upset, or dizziness. Speak to your health care provider if you have these symptoms ( except death). This is not a complete list of side- effects.
•••••••••••••••••••••
…………………………,.,.,
.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,, ( that’s all the small print you can never read!) 🥵
To Ryan G.
Lolol.
I agree with your post!
Not all of us aging cats fell for it LOL. This snarky old barn cat has not trusted a thing the media said after the second Iraq invasion.
Ban pharma ads in ALL media and the media must report ALL income by company of origin. None of this anonymous sponsoring through foundations etc.
This boomer has not had a TV for 10 years ;)
Try 37.
51.
And you're still alive!...;]
They could at least be compelled to make a disclaimer that they are being sponsored by “whoever” when reporting on a related story which could be related to said sponsor.
Several of the most arrogant media "personalities", including the one in the meme, have argued that politicians should wear sponsor's names on their suites like NASCAR drivers (not a bad idea IMO). Yet few have volunteered to do the same (also a good idea IMO). What's good for the goose....
Totally! Esp love that Politico’s should have to wear them! Ahaha!
Just as the government has done with the Censorship Industrial Complex, they could set up complex networks of NGOs and other front organizations to hide the true source of the money. Similar with political contributions.
Ugh - so exhausting to keep up with all their corrupt schemes.
I’m a boomer as well. I’m may have made a few bad choices. However, I was not driven by advertising since I was about 13 years old.
I think a lot of boomers stopped falling for it by 2021.
"move to" should be "do even more of". Sponsoring research, conferences and and academic journals, for example. I'm a fan of the natural decay solution. Not sure I'm as optimistic as it seems many people I meet in later generations are falling for the updated version.
If you are looking for conspiracy, the collusion between "news" media, pharma and governments would be fruitful to explore. Plenty to see there - and not just legacy media, all media is in this game.
There is another purpose to advertising drugs everywhere, beyond the short-term: the ever present message is "take the drug and trust the experts" is a longer term socialization (indoctrination?) that normalizes what should not be normal, a drug dependent population. Every time I see any health care provider, I get asked to list all the medications I take, and the list is short (none). Usually met with suspicious and disapproving looks. Over 50 and you are supposed to be taking drugs. You will be diagnosed with something requiring regular dosing. The "diagnostic" definitions keep expanding and "guidelines" lower the bar for classifying patients as this, that or the other dire affliction. The long-term propaganda has made a drug-free 65 year old "not normal".
Agree! I even have M.S. and have decided to go drug free as long as I can. These drugs have so many side effects with a benefit of 30% effective for slowing progression of disease? I’m rolling the dice, and so far so good. 👍 At my neurologist’s office , there are 2 pages available to write current medications! 🙈
It really bothers him that I’m not on something.
I’m high on Life & God. 😇💕
When I broke my foot, I met with a podiatrist to fix it up. When he got to the medications page on the form I filed out he asked "did you forget to fill this out?" and I said "nope, that's it!" and he said "right on!'. Not many MDs react that way. Most try to convince me I need more drugs.
I'm not anti-drug. I'm anti-stupid blinding conformance without thinking. Medication can be effective and beneficial when used correctly, not mixed with the wrong things, and so on.
They're already doing that, though. How many Colberts said they were paid for doing the song and dance? I found exactly ONE, but I'm sure there are others.
https://plusmommy.com/vaccination-story/
That (link) is kinda sick IMHO. Using CDC as a reference?? Which, unfortunately, is what a lot of people do.
I am a boomer and I've NEVER fallen for their crap. My dad (who passed in 2020 at 96) always said "follow the money." Best advice!!
Sad that so many boomers fell for it. Of course I vaccinated my children 31-40 years ago, I did not want them to die from pneumonia contracted by having measles or give birth some day to a deformed child because they caught rhubella during pregnancy. But then, a vaccine was a little more of a direct line... a few are affected negatively but it directly attacks the virus. Now we are attacked via ads that repeat the 3-4 syllable name of a med at least 10x during the 'mirsh but never tell you what it is for, but clearly it changes the weather and you are able to dance in perfect harmony with nature after being prescribed "blah-blah-blah-blavy."
I don't think that vaccines have ever directly attacked the virus, have they? My understanding is that they are supposed to act as a non-replicating biomolecular proxy for the virus, to stimulate the immune system to focus on attacking anything that looks like them. The vaccine is supposed to train the immune system, but it's the immune system that always provides whatever immunity one has.
That was the definition before 2020.
Now the "train the immune system" is not required to be a vaccine.
I still watch FOX Business, and Gutfeld on FOX News, but no other msm (except sports broadcasts). Don't make me give up college football, my sports obsession.
Unfortunately, Big Pharma, especially since the Scamdemic, is eyebrow deep in large denomination cash and can buy pretty much anything it wants, like the CDC, the FCC, state and national elections, usurpers pretending to be President, etc, etc, ad nauseam. The Insurance Industry is its only competition for Top Spot. As a "does anyone else remember" aside, does anyone else remember back 50 or 60 years ago when the left raged about people turning to pharmaceuticals to solve all their everyday problems? The Stones, e.g. "She goes running for the shelter of her mother's little helper"? Now, it seems, the left has again flip-flopped, and few have noticed and fewer are publicly calling them on it. Bravo Gato!
Thinking some more - it isn't just the boomers falling for it - my kids in 30-40 range fell for it... their spouses are in medical professions and probably the reason for it. :-(. . I worked in a hospital microbiology lab for 20 yrs before moving on to IT. That environment in medicine can be toxic.
I wish it were true - what you say - that “the boomers” are the last that “fall for it”.
First of all, I happen to “a boomer” (hate that term) who has never fallen for it - ever! And I know quite a few fellow boomers who haven’t fallen for it.
Further, I actually know quite a few younger people - not sure which gen - but not boomers - who have fallen hook line and sinker for the big Pharma LIES!!
And further, I really hate it when people lump all “boomers” as one dumb group.
It’s just another form of hatred and prejudice - and separation. More of what we do NOT need.
And more of what our “overlords” are trying to create: separation, hatred, chaos.
Yes, I think that far too many people swallowed the bait and believe the myths.
I think the constant barrage of drug adds serves to normalize the idea that you MUST be on some drug. It creates a dependence mind set. And that is what the "overlords" can exploit. Separation, hate and chaos are tactics. Total control is the objective ;-)
they used to be banned
Cigarette commercials were banned.
On a side note, how many alcohol commercials do you see vs pharma commercials? 🤔
Yes and that worked so well to stop people smoking cigarettes lol.
More pharma than booze these days. May be a factor of my demographic (over 60).
I wonder if you could somehow extend liability to platform providers for the advertisers they allow? The left has already opened that door somewhat by allowing lawsuits against firearm manufacturers for what someone does with their products.
Media advertising is effectively an implied endorsement -- you as the controlling organization found the content acceptable to allow onto your programming. If that opens you up to secondary liability for that endorsement, maybe there would some selectiveness applied?
Yes yes I like this idea. Let the ambulance chasers have at it, it is what they are good at. I took this drug because I saw it on ABC and I trusted them to have my interests at heart and now I have two heads. Gimme all your money.
I was thinking about that for places that give incentives for “ vaccines.” I’m nauseated ( literally!) when I’m walking through a grocery or drug store and they are offering free items or money off your bill if you get a flu shot, or Covid shot. It’s disgusting! I want corporate to be charged with accessory for harming citizens. MRNA is in some flu shots now. They don’t know long- term effects but most current studies are coming back with negative side effects. That’s ridiculous that stores do this!
I understand the feeling but I am generally against bans. For some obvious reasons (and repeating the obvious is in my job description):
1. They generally do not work as advertised (pun intended)
2. the usual answer to "who decides what to ban?"
The "old media" generates revenue from advertising. "new media" has introduced a plethora of additional ways to monetize the eyes on the screen. The objective is money, power or both. Providing information is not a goal of media.
I'm normally against bans, too -- but if one industry is literally paying off the media so they don't get investigated, that's a problem.
Or is expecting the media to "investigate" anything the real problem? Just an observation ;-) IMO the larger problem is too many people looking to these platforms and believing they are getting accurate information.
I'm torn, because if they start acting straight, I'll probably be out of a job.
On the other hand, an honest media would be a huge boon for Americans who still do trust the media.
We do have an honest media. You are part of it.
I'm convinced like 80-90% of the legacy corporate media and late night talk shows funding comes from Big Pharma ads. If those get banned, which they should, that might finally be the end of some of these programs no one is watching.
Especially now that there are no more election ads.
The Harris-Walz campaign is still requesting donations.
Disagree, mate.
The State should not be in the business of banning pretty much anything other than violations against person and property, and especially the media...
I agree with you! It's just that I think this is one of those "pretty much" exceptions.
I did not think this four years ago.
I hear you, but I am a free speech absolutist, and fear that once the camel's nose gets under the tent... We end up with a Ministry of Truth.
We've got about 50 Ministry of Truths already.
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/media-claims-rfk-would-destroy-the
Exactly my point.
I truly dislike/hate the pharm direct to consumer ads. Most countries do not allow them. The ads make it look like all the "beautiful people" take their drugs and you should too, so you look like them.
like
Big Pharma's criminal monopoly on healthcare is entirely due to the power of the purse. Colleges would lose their funding if anyone ever questioned the brainwashing doctors have to submit to.
Researchers at my alma mater found a cure for cancer many years ago. Big Pharma demanded they stop or they would end funding. They took the research off campus and when that was discovered Big Pharma demanded they be fired or they would cut funding. They had to back off to preserve their jobs and medical school funding.
RICO prosecutions are needed for this criminal enterprise. They have been suppressing cures since their inception because keeping people sick and dependent on drugs for life is how they maximize profits.
What was the cure Pete?
"What was the cure Pete?"
I don't think I ever heard the details because it was in proprietary development. Control group studies showed cancer being eliminated in significant numbers.
I thought biotech was going to solve all of our medical problems in the late 80's-90's. I found several companies that had promising trial results for curing cancer. Every time Big Pharma swooped in and bought them out and you never heard anything more about those cures.
15 years ago I was at a party talking to the CFO of a biotech company. I told him that story. His response was "nobody even tries to do that anymore because you can't get those products to market".
Millions of people are suffering and dying to support monopoly profiteering.
Big Pharma & Big Elites ( Bill Gates, Soros, etc.), but the “ CURE”. And then the researcher signs their life away or has an
“ accident.” 🙈
The same happens with all inventions that might change our world. Remember the guy that invented the car that runs on water? All water; ocean, rain, tap, lake, etc. He met with the CIA? FBI? , and he sold the patent & was mysteriously poisoned, the same day. 😯 That was his last words to his brother, “ I’ve been poisoned.”
Nancy: Check out new studies with Ivermectin & Fenbendizole. Very promising results for even turbo cancers.
Bill Gates BUYS the cure. ( research or patent)
Bobby Kennedy related that he was grateful that FOX News was willing to give him airtime in the past but when he had a particularly damning topic regarding big pharma, Murdoch, (the original owner of FOX, correct?🤔), told him straight out that he couldn't air it because of his pharma advertisers.
And how much did Scott Adams get paid to mock the unvaccinated? The CDC had almost a billion dollars to "Get the message out" and they targeted influencers, TV writers and comedians to "MOCK the unvaccinated" which he did several times.
Someone should ask him that. I did and got kicked off his site.
I’m not trying to sell anyone on Scott Adams, but yes I caught that too. He’s reeled it in a bit since. I don’t like it that there’s so many consequences to experience but everyone had a choice to make. There’s a few other things I disagree with him on but I do like his ideas and humor.
Yeah. It was just yesterday that he said such and such vax injury study was bogus, then went on to explain his genius in getting double Pfizered.
He'll never listen to a real scientist like Kevin McKernan explain how deceptive pfizer was, such as starting at minute 43:
https://anandamide.substack.com/p/danny-jones-podcast
So his head will always be in the sand regarding his poor life choices.
You’re ok, I’m ok. I’m gonna assume your kids are ok. All good choices. I heard that too and was surprised. Maybe he owned it before but I didn’t catch it so yes that caught me off guard. A lot of folks are doing some mental gymnastics to come to terms with how all that went down, but at least they’re acknowledging it, each in they’re own way and not being canned immediately by social media. I think/hope that there’s a reckoning to come.
Cui bono baby!
🆘🚨 yes indeedie
I think that's absolutely right. A few people might see an ad and want to talk to the doctor into prescribing whatever-it-is, but I think the much greater impact is Pharma's control over the media landscape.
and medical journals
I don’t watch TV much, but get occasional ambient exposure. I happened to see one drug ad that didn’t even say what condition the drug was supposed to treat — kind of a major omission if you’re trying to get a consumer interested. My conclusion was just as Adams concluded.
Few deductions made by Scott Adams have ever been more on-point. Big Pharma ain't a bunch of dummies!
Consider: Advertising time is an income source for the TV networks. In fact, EVERTHING they broadcast is in service of the viewer continuing to watch their network long enough to see an advertisement, for which they sold the time, to someone. As a consequence, everything broadcast by a station is in service to its advertisers. The viewers are PRODUCTS sold by the networks to their advertisers. (The "why is Facebook free?" model keeps being relevant!)
I think it’s true that they are buying editorial control and also that it’s much worse than that. The pharmaceutical industry buys sufficient clout in our government to easily end the requirement to list a drug’s potential side effects during the tv ad. It is their purposeful choice to spend half the ad slot describing, out loud, vague and often dangerous medical conditions.
Normalizing the expectation that all cures involve negative side effects behooves them straightforwardly enough, and beyond mere legal CYA. Side effects are a feature not bug of modern medicine, as each can be treated by additional prescriptions (causing new side effects, requiring subsequent prescriptions, in a feedback loop that ends in hospice and bankruptcy). However, this side-effects-as-repeat-sales-generator functions perfectly well without disclosing the existence or even possibility of said side effects. The question still remains, why choose to inform viewers about all these unhealthy potential conditions?
Without doubt, pharmaceutical companies understand concepts like the Nocebo Effect and Medical Student’s Disease. Could it be that they choose to spend billions of dollars worth of airtime speaking aloud all manner of disease states (ranging from vaguely normal to acutely dangerous) because they believe it will manifest as disease by acting audio-visually upon the audience’s subconscious? Could it be that pharma is a malevolent egregore using dark magic to cast disease curses upon a hypnotized humanity?
I think it’s true that they are buying editorial control and also that it’s much worse than that. The pharmaceutical industry buys sufficient clout in our government to easily end the requirement to list a drug’s potential side effects during the tv ad. It is their purposeful choice to spend half the ad slot describing, out loud, vague and often dangerous medical conditions.
Normalizing the expectation that all cures involve negative side effects behooves them straightforwardly enough, and beyond mere legal CYA. Side effects are a feature not bug of modern medicine, as each can be treated by additional prescriptions (causing new side effects, requiring subsequent prescriptions, in a feedback loop that ends in hospice and bankruptcy). However, this side-effects-as-repeat-sales-generator functions perfectly well without disclosing the existence or even possibility of said side effects. The question still remains, why choose to inform viewers about all these unhealthy potential conditions?
Without doubt, pharmaceutical companies understand concepts like the Nocebo Effect and Medical Student’s Disease. Could it be that they choose to spend billions of dollars worth of airtime speaking aloud all manner of disease states (ranging from vaguely normal to acutely dangerous) because they believe it will manifest as disease by acting audio-visually upon the audience’s subconscious? Could it be that pharma is a malevolent egregore using dark magic to cast disease curses upon a hypnotized humanity?
I always wondered, "Who the hell goes to the doctor and asks for Txryzampthical like they go to Home Depot and ask about a Ryobi cordless weedwhacker??"
No one, if Adams is correct.
No one even remembers the name, much less makes an appointment. Of course that's why they do it.
Thats the ticket
These people were literally paid to push the jabs, but very very very rarely told us they were paid to do so. (I think there's a word for that?)
And it went far beyond late-night talk shows, though that was a major focus. Church leaders, mommy influencers, social media stars.....the HHS targeted anybody who could possibly convince somebody else to take the shot. They even wanted to give kids EXTRA CREDIT for taking the jabs. (That's even worse than the burger deal!)
https://www.judicialwatch.org/covid-19-vaccine-campaign/
Right on SimComm.
This is why the "social contract" is a myth.
To the extent that I care about what is good for anyone other than my family, it's pretty much my call. When it comes to putting myself or my family at risk for some whacked out virtue-signaling scheme, no matter how good it makes you feel about yourself, count me out.
If you are telling me that I need to have a foreign substance injected in my body so thyat someone else might not get sick, I'm going to tell you to take your "social contract" and put it where the sun doesn't shine.
No, I don't have to accept your assurances that the vaccine you want to stick into me or mine is safe and effective; I get to ask questions and demand proof.
I WILL NOT GIVE UP MY AGENCY FOR ANYONE.
Sorry. I think we were supposed to be funny....but I'm feeling intemperate today!
I live in the intemperate zone, and I feel winter coming on.
White hot with anger and hovering around Kelvin with any trust i had with our institutions.
Move over because a lot of us want to sit on this bench with you. Pass the McCallan bottle.
I hope you brought enough for everyone.
We are going to need a nice longhouse to fit the benches.
And a cask or two of this: https://usshop.themacallan.com/products/the-macallan-sherry-oak-18-years-old
In a couple hours you can be intemperate in the comments of my infuriating article ;) It has to do with this subject.
Oh no. I'll have to do a 4 finger pour tonight!...:)
three fingers poured for you and one finger to the world.
Who needs fingers? Just pour until you fill the glass.
Don't drink angry Ryan, just drink.
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/media-claims-rfk-would-destroy-the
Be as intemperate as you like!
Gets me riled up too Ryan.
Add about 100 likes to your post, Ryan.
The first rulers of the State claimed divinity. Then they claimed to be anointed by God. Now it is the social contract, the terms of which are never specifically defined, and which no one has ever seen, signed or agreed to.
It is all mythological bullshit to justify the ancient paradigm of rulers and ruled.
It is far past time for a new paradigm.
No more rulers.
"terms of which are never specifically defined"
Exactly this. Oldest trick in the bag.
I never saw the social contract and I certainly didn't sign it. . .
See session 4 of Event 201. It was ALL about communication, and leveraging "white hats" in the community - trusted influencers, religious leaders, community leaders, etc. In our faith, I received "word" that upper leaders in our church were heavily strong-armed into promoting the jabs to the worldwide congregation.
This was a really good article on church malfeasance:
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/repent-my-call-to-church-leaders-over-their-covid-sins/
UGGH....don't get me started!....:)
Im not even religious but for me, one of the most emblematic worst of the WuFlu scam reaction was the churches kowtowing to & acting as mouthpieces for the State.
Ours did not. But many did to their shame.
Ours did, and that's why we left.
"It's safe and effective," they said. "Do it for your church family," they said. "Don't be selfish," they said.
"We're outta here," we said. "We are no one's guinea pigs," we said. "God gave us a brain and He expects us to use it," we said.
I agree with you, SimComm, but I also disagree, if only in nuance. We all should KNOW that influencers are paid. TV personalities are paid. Hell, damned-near anyone who promotes a product is paid. That isn't exactly news. Announcing it would just be overkill---it's been true for decades. The current social media market has simply "flattened out" who can belly-up to the trough, but the trough is still there and has always been!
We know Colbert is paid to host the show, that does not extend to him being a pharma whore. Your pastor is paid to run the church, that does not extend to him being a pharma whore.
Point One, I love your use of "whore" since it directly applies!
Point Two, no real argument. (I tend to think everyone on TV is at least a little bit of a whore though, particularly hosts and anchors. Yes, I'm jaded.) Anyway...
#PointTaken
By the way, in full disclosure, let no one assume, from my jadedness, that I decry TV. I'm a recovering TV-holic, but I'm not even trying to get back on the wagon to recovery. I don't believe the stuff I watch, but I watch like an addict looks forward to his next ride on the White Horse. Now, I haven't watched TV news in a couple decades, but the rest, well... #ItIsWhatItIs
Even those who purport to support RFK’s health initiative tend to only talk about the processed food angle and steer clear of the pharma issues . . . Looking at you Fox News.
Fox is just controlled opposition… Another mockingbird media shill… it always upsets me to see my family members that are supposedly conservative watching Fox news… I just roll my eyes. 🙄
When Sean Hannity was pushing so hard for the vaccine, I wanted to vomit. 🤮
I’ve never watched FOX either. Not so big on total trust of the GOP as a politically marooned ex democrat but I’ll give them a chance. If they step in President Trumps way, they will expose themselves for what they re@lly are.
As a lifelong independent who registered R last year, sort of trust about 1/3-1/2 of the GOP, but I do trust Trump and most of his picks to be locked and loaded to upset the apple cart.
I am not sure I trust anyone in DC but Trump and his crew are the best hope we have. And it's kind of like that relative you don't really like but you stand up for them when someone outside the family criticizes them-the more the left came after Trump, the more I liked him.
I'm going to hang on to that glass half full. If I imagine it, they will come.
Yes. Me too. I believe Trump is there for a reason. He’s been protected for something BIG. I’M IN.
At most, about 1/2 (if that) of GOP is decent. The other 1/2 is bought and paid for. I say that as someone who has never been a Democrat, and now not a Republican either.
I strongly believe that We the People have been heard by God. We have gotten this far for hope to be pulled out from under us. Don’t give up!!
He also keeps pushing the Ukraine war.
Sean was very late to the vaccine myths. I do NOT think he's very smart to begin with. I watch 2 shows (sometimes 3) for their entertainment value. Fox also has mostly cheerful commentators. But for actual news, I take to the internet.
you are right. I can't stand Hannity. His personality and behavior has always disgusted me. He really needs to shut up. I bet his wife can't stand him either
Fox News lost me when they fired Tucker, that was the only thing I ever watched.
Well, there's whores, and there's honest whores.
Perhaps the 51 current or former "Intelligence" professionals?
Thems is just weasels. [Apologies to actual weasels, those lovely sleek creatures.]
Colbert's pro vax spot revealed the true depths of his lunacy.
Kitten looks like I feel. It’s heartbreaking
I was telling my Dad about RFK jr and how he’d be good for us, going into my usual scree about how vaccinations are bad and do not prevent Covid infection. I had never done this scree in front of Dad who (because of family pressure (will never forgive them) got his clot shots when they came out despite my worried advisories against it. ( the worst part is I took him, telling him he could change his mind as we were on line both times). He has afib now and I usually avoid the subject . It’s heartbreaking. The evening together ended shortly after 💔
I wonder how much of Pharma’s income comes directly (or one-or-two-steps removed) from the Federal Government.
Somewhere between 90 and 99.99%, I’d guess.
Obviously saw the Colbert pics. Damn it man just a quick glimpse stimulated my brain. I remembered how I felt the moment I first saw his silly little jig during the height of the covid vaccine. Rough times brother, rough times!
He’s not my brother 🤮
I find most of the commercials to be hilarious. The side effects of the so-called meds are typically way more scary sounding than the diseases they are sold to control (not cure).
He who pays the piper calls the tune.
that is a good one!!
ABSOLUTELY!!!! Big pharma DOMINATES television. It's disGUSTING!!!
Thought control!
"If you don't eat your meat, you can't have any pudding!"
We don't need no vaccination
We don't need no thought control
No filthy facecloths in the classroom
Hey! Fauci! Leave them kids alone!
Love it!
👏🏼👏🏼"praise the Lord and pass the 💉💉immunizations.💉💉💉
💊 ... and the other 🔴 ⚫️ 🟡 🔷 drugs, 💊 💊🟡 💊 💊more drugs for ❎ 🔴every🔴 ⚫️body!!!💊💊👏🏼👏🏼
Brilliant paraphrasing Rosemary!
sorry. It was the first thing that came into my head. haha haha Sad tv. Who watches tv? ppl in nursing homes, subjected unwillingly? how big is this audience - 6 people that work for pharma?
Overweight people dancing and singing about Jardiance. Just who is their target market?
Oh gosh, and on it goes from there.
It is putrid. TV news blabbery shows are over.
Next up, ?? all of the shows where the script consists of about 11 words and 7 of them are profanity
in my mind this was the only reason there _was_ a pandemic, i.e. why cnn et al. were constantly running the death-o-meter
This monstrous assumption has been based on fear and indoctrination and that is that the medical mafia and big pharma are inventions that will save lives. You never save a life in reality, only postpone death. Has anyone in the medical mafia ever explained "safe and effective" using verified and trustworthy information?
Other than idiot governments blowing each other up and sending armies to die for the dumbest causes, the medical mafia and big pharma are both in the death industry as well. Have they created a healthier world with their drugs and interventions? Look around and find the down and dirty answer.
The prig probably thought he'd be lauded as some sort of edgy hero saving us all from ourselves.
All I see is one of those silly wooden jointed men who dance on a paddle while stuck on the end of a stick ( needle?) He is pathetically dangerous.
We watch virtually no live, broadcast TV. I record everything on a TIVO DVR so we can FF through commercials. One humorous exception: we like to mock drug commercials during sporting events we watch. We like to see how grossed out and repulsed we get by the side-effects. On a more serious note, see Alex Berenson's Substack today for an interesting piece on RFK, Jr. In it he talks about limiting pharma advertising, saying he doubts we can ban it outright. Many other countries do, but I'm not necessarily arguing we should emulate them. (As my sainted mother always said: "If all your friends jumped off a bridge would you, too?")
I don’t either. I DVR cable shows I do watch and fly past commercials. So far Amazon prime hasn’t done drug ads but everything is cluttered with ads there now. Even when you pause a program an ad shows up. I stream british stuff and like PBS classics and a few science shows. Almost Every cable channel has faded away in my house. We will probably cut it completely off next year. The Spectrum cable TV repair guy told us they will be going full streaming soon. From an app. Are they sure everyone wants to deal with an app and how much will that cost since “cable” or boxes will be unnecessary.
It is only allowed here & in New Zealand. All other countries do not allow direct to consumer adverts on the TV. Ever sit in a doctors waiting room and pick up a mag. AARP for example is loaded with drug adverts. As are all the other ones. That is another form of direct to consumer advertising. It’s truly criminal. Step right in… yes we are suggesting/selling what you saw while sitting out there.