sticky

Anxiety is good for you!

Thank god for the media then! Gives me so much good health!

>>568348
>>568342

DAT SAMEFAG

Also if it were complete censorship the article wouldn't have been in the US edition. That cover had brown people on it. It wouldn't have sold as well.

holy fuck

what the fuck

i saw here a pic where it collects all censored TIME covers, like 10-15 of them, anybody have it?

sticky this thread.

Guys, guys, CHINA is the evil one!

China censors their people!

China is police state!

China evil!

Ignore that the US is passing police state laws, has more raw numbers of prisoners than China (a country with 5x the US population), and any other country in the world. We also have the highest ratio of prisoners to free people (obviously, since we have more prisoners than China).

China is a repressive shithole, but it's hilarious how we seem to be becoming more like them everyday.

I guess the government likes the idea of having that kind of control lol

>>568380
Here it is

Does anyone not get it?

There is a huge effort to make people stupid. It's so they can be easily managed. Who does not get that?

>>568484
I think most of us do

it's the average dude on the street who does not, and that's enough

>US edition covers display topics relevant to US readers
Okay?

>>568500
you mean
>us edition covers display the most unimportant things in the world to make murrikans even more stupid

>>568526
No, I mean
>Americans are, as a rule, much more concerned about internal affairs than most other nationalities
>Time magazine knows this, and plays into that interest to sell more magazines
>capitalism

Also it's the only issue directly marketed to a single country.

>>568498
>>568484
>DURR HURR HAHA US ARE SO STUPID THEY CAN'T EVEN READ SO GUD

You realize the articles are the same, just the covers are different right? (besides minor article differences)

>2011
>reading magazines

>>568552

Sounds like an excuse China would make.

Our media is censored, blatantly, and it's because only five or six people own our media, so the government only had to bribe just them.

>2011
>paying for corporate propaganda and yellow journalism

this is the same media complex that peddles garbage like reality tv stars are amongst the most influential people of the year

>>568578
Your media is censored because it sells you the same articles with a different cover?
Cry me a river.

>>568591

Yes, that's both censorship AND psyops, actually.

"Anxiety is good for you."
vs
"Revolution Redux."

WAIT a second. Time is a good magazine, and they cover some good topics.

If they had different articles for the US, then you have cause to be concerned. But they don't.
They have different covers in the states and world wise because of what sells better on newstands. That's all. No big deal, nothing to see here.

>>568608

> Revolution Redux

> Anxiety is Good for You.

Are you defending this because you are from China?

>>568607
So they're censoring without actually withholding information in any way?
Get the fuck out.

>>568608
The covers have more influence than the entire content of the magazine.

>>568608
No it isn't you fucking idiot.

>>568618
Only to the illiterate.

>>568628

95% of people are dumbfucks

>>568614

I'm not defending it, all I'm saying is

Don't just a book by it's cover

Literally.

>>568628
You're making my point for me.

>>568640
>>568645
You're complaining that you can't absorb all the information in a magazine from just looking at the cover, but you actually have to read it.
You're fucking retarded.

>>568640

and 98 % of statistics are made up on the spot by even dumber fucks.

You're awful condecending if you think you're so much smarter than 95 % of the people

>>568628
No, to everyone. The cover is what everyone looks at first. It summaries the content inside.

Just like how I summarize you're a worthless faggot by what you typed.

>>568626
When you point a finger, you have three pointing back at you. Rarely is this metaphor as apt as it is shown to be with your post.

>>568659
No, that's not what a cover is for. A cover is supposed to draw your eye so you pick up the magazine and look at the table of contents (which summarizes the content).

>>568653
>You're complaining that you can't absorb all the information in a magazine from just looking at the cover, but you actually have to read it.

That's not what I'm saying. At all.

>You're fucking retarded.
Yes. Yes you are.

>>568608
>TIME
>good

lolno

>>568655
in my country, yes i am

only 7% of all people are college graduates in my country, and of those 7% half is just "study hard to gain reputation and moniez, knowledge is not important" type of people. so i can say, yes i am smarter (or at least more informed about the world)

>>568667
>metaphore
Aphorism

This isn't a new development. It's been this way for ages.

Happens in Europe for some headlines too. All the issues have the same content anyway.

>>568683
>being a college grad makes you smarter/more informed
Oh look, a teenager.
>>568680
You're claiming changing a cover picture equals censorship. That is only true if you believe the cover picture to be where all the information is contained.