Who's Behind Nat Geo....

[BrainSellz]

this was inspired by the documentary on marijuana that aired on nat geo, jan 16th......
this explains alot....

first off news corp owns nat geo....who runs news corp? rupert murdoch....him and his family own the most shares of News Corp which is about 30%....now check THIS out, one of ruperts 6 kids, actually the one that stands to take over when daddies gone is on the board of directors for- news corp.....oh yeah and dudes a billionaire of course....it gets better, james murdoch, the son that stands to take over is ALSO the non executive director of Glaxo Smith Kline, for whatever "non" means, which is one of the BIGGEST pharma companies in the country.....it all makes sense now....

oh and last but not least, the 19th world billionaire....Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Alsaud from saudi arabia owns 7% of
News Corp.....

as early as the 80's we had around 50 different media companies....now we have 6....

 

[Noobian]

Consolidation and deregulation have been the banes of the telecommunication industry for decades. It was no accident that Fox news channel came about right after that happened.

 

[Sam the Caveman]

Consolidation and deregulation have been the banes of the telecommunication industry for decades. It was no accident that Fox news channel came about right after that happened.

fox news is also owned by Rupert Murdock

 

[Noobian]

Yeah that's my point Sam...first the repubs deregulated the industry, then old Rupert set up a propaganda channel for them, and since then it's been all down hill. I'm only half kidding saying that too. When the industry was being regulated by the big bad government, channels like Foxnews were not allowed to be so blatant in their political "spin". Deregulation has opened the flood gates to "anything goes" media broadcasting, and I think it has impacted our country negatively because of it.

 

[Sam the Caveman]

I think the different news channels have everybody at odds with each other due to these "news commentator" shows. (Maddow, O'Reilly, etc...) These types of shows should not be allowed on any respectable news channel. I don't need anyone telling me what I should think about the news.

I think its a collaborative effort to keep us fighting about inconsequential issues with each other so we don't catch on to what's really going on.

Investigative reporting is a thing of the past now since all corporations actively protect each other from public scrutiny. The courts have ruled that news organizations don't have to tell the truth, so of course you won't see much factual scrutiny of anything.

 

[SpasticGramps]

Yeah that's my point Sam...first the repubs deregulated the industry, then old Rupert set up a propaganda channel for them, and since then it's been all down hill. I'm only half kidding saying that too. When the industry was being regulated by the big bad government, channels like Foxnews were not allowed to be so blatant in their political "spin". Deregulation has opened the flood gates to "anything goes" media broadcasting, and I think it has impacted our country negatively because of it.

And CNN isn't spinning so fast they can't see straight? I hate FOX new, but I'm not one to say the others aren't a bunch of propagandist either. They all have their agenda. Feed us shit and keep us in the dark. Divide and conquer.

6 media companies controlling everything you see. 6 banks controlling most of the world's finances.

Hooray for Fascism.

 

[Iron_Lion]

this explains alot....

first off news corp owns nat geo....who runs news corp? rupert murdoch....him and his family own the most shares which is about 30%....now check THIS out, one of ruperts 6 kids, actually the one that stands to take over when daddies gone is on the board of directors for- news corp.....oh yeah and dudes a billionaire of course....it gets better, james murdoch, the son that stands to take over is ALSO the non executive director of glaxo smith kline, for whatever "non" means, which is one of the biggest pharma companies in the country.....it all makes sense now....

oh and last but not least, the 19th world billionaire....Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Alsaud from saudi arabia owns 7% of
News Corp.....

as early as the 80's we had around 50 different media companies....now we have 6....

Might be time to take a break from the edibles

The media is scary

 

[SpasticGramps]

 

[ZEROorDIE]

im sorry but what the hell does all this have to do with National Geographic.

from what ive seen a good majority of their programming is unbiased and educational. including the ones on marijuana/other drugs and bigger issues like christopher columbus and shit like that

but yes the major media corporations hold far too much power over the masses. Turn off the boob tube

 

[BrainSellz]

6 media companies controlling everything you see. 6 banks controlling most of the world's finances.

in 20 years there will be 100 billionaires controlling EVERYTHING while EVERYONE else is either poor, on their meds or in one of their jail'z.....

Might be time to take a break from the edibles

The media is scary

no edibles today ...just a LITTLE/alot suspicious of that nat geo doc.....

 

[woolybear]

Somehow when I saw this 'drugged' series on the tv guide I knew to skip it... Fuk nat'l geographic, go with PBS, who did that show with cannabis, tulips, potatoes and apples... shit can't remember... no propaganda BS in that one....

oh yeah... THE BOTANY FO DESIRE... zero propganda

 

[headiez247]

This is all old news and I'm not sure what your getting at when it comes to Nat Geo.

First you need to get your facts straight. You are referring to National Geographic Channel, the TV station.

National Geographic Society, the organization and publication, is one of the largest NON-PROFIT institutions on the planet. They are unibased and all about education.

Somehow when I saw this 'drugged' series on the tv guide I knew to skip it... Fuk nat'l geographic, go with PBS, who did that show with cannabis, tulips, potatoes and apples... shit can't remember... no propaganda BS in that one....

Ya that's pretty retarded to because Nat Geo Doc's appear on PBS all the time.

Nat Geo the TV station is owned 75% by News Corp, yes.

But if you think that some billionaire calls the heads of Nat Geo TV every day and says "ok I want you to do a documentary on Pot, but you need to do it in this way and stress these facts because thats what I want" then you guys are just straight up conspiracy theorists. It just doesn't work that way.

These days people love to jump on the "billionaires run the world and everything is fake" but Nat Geo is legit.

People should do some proper research before insulting a company that was formed in 1888.

 

[BrainSellz]

i shouldve put NatGeo....my bad, will try to fix that....did you happen to see the program about marijuana sunday night?

 

[Noobian]

Headie when you're talking about billionaires you have to think much bigger than you're used to thinking. Why would Rupert Murdoch himself set policy when he has, millionaires, six figure ballers, mid level managers and on down all there to do that for him? He is the owner of a WORLDWIDE GLOBAL CONGLOMERATE. Think about the ramifications of what that means.

And speaking of National Geographic, I think that it's one of the greatest magazines of all time. This magazine single handedly allowed millions of boys that lived in the 1960'-1980's to experience the rich and extremely bountiful African peoples and cultures first hand.



Mostly right

 

[BrainSellz]

But if you think that some billionaire calls the heads of Nat Geo TV every day and says "ok I want you to do a documentary on Pot, but you need to do it in this way and stress these facts because thats what I want" then you guys are just straight up conspiracy theorists. It just doesn't work that way.


People should do some proper research before insulting a company that was formed in 1888.

....nope, i believe a billionaire is smart enough to have a team in place to take care of an agenda....

....

 

[Misuseofyou]

And speaking of National Geographic, I think that it's one of the greatest magazines of all time. This magazine single handedly allowed millions of boys that lived in the 1960'-1980's to experience the rich and extremely bountiful African peoples and cultures first hand.

Aaahah! I'll own up, I did it too.

 

[headiez247]

I have met and talked with multiple Nat Geo TV directors and producers and I can assure you there is no "agenda" from above.

One could make the argument that the news stations are influenced by the owners, an argument I would partially agree with, but to say that Nat Geo TV is secretly run by a 79 year old billionaire who has a team in place to ensure that the only programming that airs is that which yields to his feelings on the subject is comical.

 

[BrainSellz]

I have met and talked with multiple Nat Geo TV directors and producers and I can assure you there is no "agenda" from above.

One could make the argument that the news stations are influenced by the owners, an argument I would partially agree with, but to say that Nat Geo TV is secretly run by a 79 year old billionaire who has a team in place to ensure that the only programming that airs is that which yields to his feelings on the subject is comical.

really i dunno what to say to all this.....
this isnt a conspiracy theory..

 

[supermanlives]

national geographic is responsible for showing me boobies LOL i was so glad when i first saw a white girl naked that here tits were perky.

 

[woolybear]

Ya that's pretty retarded to because Nat Geo Doc's appear on PBS all the time.

Not debating that I'm retarded or not, on the particular channels in question, and after watching botany of desire, I descided to skip the series on instinct.

As far as nat'l geo having shows on PBS, sure, when your showing documentaries about penguins or digging gold or any other 'nature' shit there's no real room for controversy.... mix in war on drugs and/or reefer madness and you have another thing going on budday!

I read nat'l geo magazine for most of my life, way past the BOOBIES stage. I guess I'm media-saavy.