Jump to content

Talk:Lying press

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): FerMacFarlane.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See also section

[edit]

Is there any reason that I'm missing for Fox News to be listed here? Do they use the term "Lying press" frequently, or are they supposed to be an example of what would be considered lying press? It seems like a weird thing to put in the see also section. JohnSchmuck (talk) 13:24, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Use on twitter

[edit]

I've seen this used on Twitter from Americans. Are there any good sources to reference this phenomenon? Bearian (talk) 00:05, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"lying press?"

[edit]

Lying press would be "lügende Presse" in German. Lügenpresse means literally "lies' press" or "press of lies", since Lügen is the plural form of Lüge, meaning "lie". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:57:6E0C:EE04:14F8:E5BC:C255:1C79 (talk) 12:29, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is a difference between a proper translation, and a literal gloss. Correctrix (talk) 02:27, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Always used

[edit]

After the war the Communists in East Germany used it also. Also Leftwingers in the West used it.And they was sometimes right.The biggest german newspaper "photoshoped" pictures,they put iron bars or something into the hands of demonstrators.You dont belive?They tried it even with a famous german green poltician! http://www.fluter.de/ein-schlagstock-macht-schlagzeilen


Nobody thinked that it was a Nazi word.Its just a word that came in your mind if you want to describe the press in a short word.

How the press works can you see by this joke,but he meant it real:Perhaps the Russian Intel service launched the word....and he is one of the famoust News speakers! http://meedia.de/2016/01/28/ulrich-wickert-begriff-luegenpresse-moeglicherweise-vom-russen-geheimdienst-lanciert/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.254.92.94 (talk) 07:22, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article doesn't say it's a Nazi word. It says it was a word used by a variety of German political movements that was also adopted by the Nazis. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:58, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1.129.107.186 (talk) 07:09, 1 October 2019 (UTC)When Hitler was informed that the British media was portraying him as an enemy of Britain, Hitler wrote to Lord Rothermere stating that in his 4-5,000 speeches he had not written or spoken a single word against Britain or its interests. The Luegenpresse did exist and was responsible for the hate-psychoses against Germany during WW1 and WW2.[reply]

Reference 2 Seems Problematic

[edit]

The second reference — Wiener Zeitung, 2 September 1835, p. 990; Allgemeine Zeitung, no. 69, 9 March 1840, p. 547 — seems odd. They reference a daily issue of each newspaper, but reference page numbers far larger than any daily newspaper could or would have. Have these references been checked? --184.64.110.38 (talk) 07:39, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a {{vs}} tag to flag this issue. Perhaps someone with access to the source will check it. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:00, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I actually found the reference for Allgemeine Zeitung in the Google Books archives. It's a large compendium of many of the dailies. I kind of expected that, but couldn't be sure, since the reference didn't mention an archival compendium. https://books.google.ca/books?id=OtRDAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=L%C3%BCgenpresse&f=false There are actually two page 547s. Here is an image of the page with the reference to Lugenpresse. http://i.imgur.com/XyLko0m.png I'm just going to assume the first reference is accurate, since the second reference is (I realize that might not be standard protocol, but I'm personally satisfied). --184.64.110.38 (talk) 20:00, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pegida

[edit]

Is there any reason why we shouldn't describe Pegida as an "Islamophobic far-right" organization? This seems to be verifiable([1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]) and highly relevant. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:04, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Connolly, Kate (6 January 2015). "Pegida: what does the German far-right movement actually stand for?". The Guardian. Retrieved 16 January 2015. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |newspaper= (help)
  2. ^ Alexander I. Stingl (16 December 2015). The Digital Coloniality of Power: Epistemic Disobedience in the Social Sciences and the Legitimacy of the Digital Age. Lexington Books. ISBN 978-1-4985-0193-4. has led, induced by the media event that is ISIS, to the resurgence of a populist demonstration culture in PEGIDA (Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the Occident) on the extreme Right, which has found supporters in the ...
  3. ^ Enes Bayraklı; Farid Hafez (23 March 2016). European Islamophobia Report 2015. SETA. p. 56. ISBN 978-605-4023-68-4. Although founded in neighbouring Germany, PEGIDA has gained some support in Belgium. Support for the far-right and Islamophobic organisation is more keenly seen in Dutch-speaking Flanders, than in francophone Wallonia and Brussels.
  4. ^ Margetts, Helen; John, Peter; Hale, Scott A.; Yasseri, Taha (2016). Political turbulence: how social media shape collective action. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. p. 3. ISBN 9780691159225. Some have seen the rise of far-right and anti-Islamist groups, as in Germany where protests by the Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the Occident (PEGIDA) have been attended by thousands, matched by a counter-movement of ...
  5. ^ Greg Albo; Leo Panitch (22 December 2015). The Politics of the Right: Socialist Register 2016. Monthly Review Press. p. 5. ISBN 978-1-58367-575-5. Pegida is a classic far-right anti-immigration movement.
  6. ^ Shannon Latkin Anderson (19 November 2015). Immigration, Assimilation, and the Cultural Construction of American National Identity. Taylor & Francis. p. 16. ISBN 978-1-317-32875-9. In Germany, the far-right antiIslam movement Pegida found massive audience in its anti-Islamic, anti-immigration marches
  7. ^ "ANTI-ISLAM ORGANIZATION PEGIDA IS EXPORTING HATE ACROSS EUROPE". Newsweek. The 200 or so demonstrators trudging down the road are supporters of PEGIDA, a far-right German group whose name is an acronym for Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West.
  8. ^ "France bans march through Calais by far-right Pegida group". ibtimes.co.uk.
  9. ^ "Germany's refugee crisis is fueling the far-right Pegida movement". pri.org.
  10. ^ "Germany reveals plans to relax deportation rules for foreign criminals". CNN. Protesters from the far-right PEGIDA movement attend a rally in Leipzig on Monday

1.129.107.186 (talk) 07:16, 1 October 2019 (UTC) The primary determinant should be truthfulness! If Pegida is attempting to present information truthfully then leave them alone. The truth offends many, especially liars.[reply]

Change Article Title to What it Actually Is.

[edit]

Americans use "Lugenpresse" not "Lying Press", and I see no reason why some Americanized form of the German text "Lügenpresse" (such as "Lugenpresse") cannot be used to approximate the German word. Trump's constant use of the phrase "fake news" when referring to MSM indicates this really is a "thing" (meaning popular). As an American, when using a word I've adapted from the German language to apply to today's Mass Media, I do not appreciate Wikipedia censoring or editing my use of my language to convey my meaning in the manner in which I intend. I don't need Wikipedia to "edit" my language to the translation of LUGENPRESSE when I say LUGENPRESSE. I don't WANT the translation; I want the actual Americanized English adaptation from the German. That's the word that I, and others, are using, and it's none of Wikipedia's business regarding the politics. When I say LUGENPRESSE I mean LUGENPRESSE and I don't mean "Lying Press" or "Dishonest Press" or "Less than Forthcoming Press" or "Not Telling You the Whole Truth Press. I mean LUGENPRESSE, and if someone wants to know exactly what I mean when I use the word LUGENPRESSE, I expect Wikipedia to produce an Article titled LUGENPRESSE and not some sanitized, dumbed-down, redefined and decontextualized phrase "Lying Press". That is NOT what I mean. If I wanted to say "LYING PRESS", I would say "LYING PRESS", and I wouldn't ask Wikipedia's permission to do that either. Fix this, and stop censoring intelligent people's language, or things are going to go very, very badly, just like they did last time.2605:6000:6947:AB00:41DB:A259:DF4C:4019 (talk) 07:30, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This term is, at least how it is used now...

[edit]

...the right-wing version of the leftist "manufactured consent": Both terms imply that the press is in league with whatever bête noir du jour either of the sides claim is responsible for the society's ills. --Boris Baran - ✉ 08:34, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Media Culture

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2022 and 12 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rjaipaul (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by NikkiMT (talk) 16:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lying_press&oldid=1208639385"