Chat Forum
It is currently Sat Sep 21, 2019 4:53 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 101048 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 2500, 2501, 2502, 2503, 2504, 2505, 2506 ... 2527  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 12:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21341
Bokkom wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Smutley wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
The whole "fake news" narrative is successful for Trump because his supporters are convinced that they are being manipulated by a malevolent Media intent on feeding them lies in order to progress some conspiracy or other.

Tbf they are. They are just too thick to realise which one.


It applies to both sides though. Pro-Dem and Pro-Republican media is just horrifically one sided in their reporting. The biased opinion piece has taken over and killed actual journalism.

No.

What is killing actual journalism is a willingness to believe that the media is pushing an agenda which is what you are saying that it is.

Once you believe that, then it's not difficult to find a blogger who will tell you exactly what you want to hear.

Would you say CNN and MSNBC are slightly more sympathetic to the Democrats while Fox News tend to favour the Republicans' cause in their reporting?


More or less. Though I'd remove 'slightly' and replace it with 'blindly'. I replace 'more sympathetic' with 'overtly biased towards' and 'tend to favour' with ' is a relentless right wing propaganda machine for'


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 12:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21341
Rinkals wrote:
If you feel that the news you are getting is inaccurate or 'fake", then check it and make sure that you get your news from more than one source. Look at the evidence and make your judgment based on the likelihood of it being correct.


I do, that doesn't mean the biased news reporting should get a pass on it.

Quote:

But to simply label all MSM as biased undermines the ability of the Media to inform and risks destabilising your democracy by ensuring that the electorate are not properly informed. It legitimises bloggers and other less formal sources by placing them on an equal footing as the MSM even though they may not be required to be held to the same standards.


This is rubbish, If the media is biased across the board, and it every strongly is and always has been (but not to this extent) then it doesn't undermine democracy by dictating the truth. Pointing out Fox News 'fair and balanced' claims is utter shit since the Bill Clinton era and laughably so is not undermining democracy, it strengthens it. Pointing out MSNBC, CNN and TNYT have some weird Trump derangement syndrome these days or that wikileaks exposed how Clinton/Dem establishment influence them for the presidential agenda is not hurting Democracy, in fact the truth only strengthens it.

And as for your bit it about bloggers, what's the point of a MSM media if all they do is act like bloggers with an agenda but with the added muscle of an established news brand to promote it? That's why it's important to criticise the mainstream media when they get it wrong or put an agenda before journalism.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 12:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21341
Fat Old Git wrote:
It's amazing how many people can't manage to do some simple fact checking. Or who even struggle to tell the difference between an opinion piece vs reporting of know verifiable facts.

But when it comes to Trump, you don't really need any media outlets in order to judge him. His own Twitter feed should be more than enough to to convince people that he's dishonest, untrustworthy, and not nearly as clever as he likes to claim.


That's an understatement. :lol:

The issue with the MSM and agendas is for many people, they don't necessarily have time or energy to fact check everything. Life gets in the way. Not everyone is smart. More so I believe it's not so much an issue with fact checking, it's the relentless attempts to dictate what people think, opinion piece dominate papers and news channels rather than news or journalism informing us of what is happening. Journalists are essentially activists. Which means on all sides, rather then challenging corrupt authority they only end up attacking their political opponents and end up defending or hiding the faults of their own side which should be exposed due to their agendas. What's more, base don the wikileaks releases, the particular thing that's disturbing is how the MSM is taking instruction or influence from the establishment political powers. That is in essence the foundation of democracy crumbling.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 2:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:51 pm
Posts: 15958
eldanielfire wrote:
Fat Old Git wrote:
It's amazing how many people can't manage to do some simple fact checking. Or who even struggle to tell the difference between an opinion piece vs reporting of know verifiable facts.

But when it comes to Trump, you don't really need any media outlets in order to judge him. His own Twitter feed should be more than enough to to convince people that he's dishonest, untrustworthy, and not nearly as clever as he likes to claim.


That's an understatement. :lol:

The issue with the MSM and agendas is for many people, they don't necessarily have time or energy to fact check everything. Life gets in the way. Not everyone is smart. More so I believe it's not so much an issue with fact checking, it's the relentless attempts to dictate what people think, opinion piece dominate papers and news channels rather than news or journalism informing us of what is happening. Journalists are essentially activists. Which means on all sides, rather then challenging corrupt authority they only end up attacking their political opponents and end up defending or hiding the faults of their own side which should be exposed due to their agendas. What's more, base don the wikileaks releases, the particular thing that's disturbing is how the MSM is taking instruction or influence from the establishment political powers. That is in essence the foundation of democracy crumbling.

You're not really one to talk tbf. You went all in on Andy Ngo's agenda a few weeks back(whcih bagged him a cool 130k in patreon donations) and he's proved himself a BS artist again this weekend. Maybe shut up with the lecture?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 2:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6336
Location: emmerdale
pepe arrives in hong kong..

Quote:
Image

Hong Kong Protesters Love Pepe the Frog. No, They’re Not Alt-Right.

Spoiler: show
To much of the world, the cartoon frog is a hate symbol. To Hong Kong protesters, he’s something entirely different: one of them.

By Daniel Victor
Aug. 19, 2019

HONG KONG — Ask the Anti-Defamation League, and they will tell you Pepe the Frog is a hate symbol, a cheerleader of racism and anti-Semitism, a friend of alt-right extremists. The sad, green frog is widely viewed as toxic across the world, a signal of a sinister and dangerous worldview.

So it can be a bit jarring to see Pepe in his new role: a pro-democracy freedom fighter in the Hong Kong protests, siding with the people in their struggle against an authoritarian state. The protesters here hold signs with his image, use stickers of him in messaging apps and discussion forums, and even spray paint his face on walls.

Does that mean that Hong Kong protesters are alt-right, or that they support the racism he represents?

The question confuses many protesters, many of whom had no idea about the symbol’s racist connotations elsewhere in the world. They just like him.

“It has nothing to do with the far-right ideology in the state,” one person wrote on LIHKG, an anonymous forum that has been the center of discussion for protesters. “It just looks funny and captures the hearts of so many youngsters. It is a symbol of youth participation in this movement.”

Mari Law, a 33-year-old protester, knows how Pepe is perceived elsewhere, but said it did not matter because Pepe did not carry the same toxic reputation in Hong Kong. Most of the protesters don’t know about the alt-right association, he said.

“To me, Pepe is just a Hello Kitty-like character,” he said.

Few Hong Kongers have shown awareness online about Pepe’s sinister side. There has been little discussion about what symbolism he carries, and in the few occasions it has been pointed out, it has mostly been met with a shrug.

To Hong Kongers, he is just one of them. A sticker pack for messaging apps like Telegram and WhatsApp depict Pepe wearing the protesters’ signature yellow helmet, surrounded by tear gas or holding antigovernment signs. He has also been transformed into a first aid worker and a journalist holding an iPhone.

Emily Yueng, 20, said she had no idea about Pepe’s checkered past. After she learned, she wondered if maybe she and other protesters ought to stop handing out posters with his image at the airport.

“But still, different countries have very different cultures,” she said. “Symbols and colors that mean something in one culture can mean something completely different in another culture, so I think if Americans are really offended by this, we should explain to them what it means to us.”

Pepe was not always seen as a racist symbol. He was created more than a decade ago by Matt Furie, who killed off the character in 2017 after it was adopted by the alt-right.

Members of the alt-right on forums like 4chan and certain corners of Reddit had appropriated his image, much to Mr. Furie’s dismay. He said the frog, perpetually stoned, was meant to be positive, and denounced any link to racist or fringe groups.

“It’s completely insane that Pepe has been labeled a symbol of hate, and that racists and anti-Semites are using a once peaceful frog-dude from my comic book as an icon of hate,” he said in 2016, when the Anti-Defamation League added Pepe to its list of hate symbols.

He added in a 2016 essay for Time magazine: “I understand that it’s out of my control, but in the end, Pepe is whatever you say he is, and I, the creator, say that Pepe is love.”

In Hong Kong, Pepe was never transformed from the chill frog-dude Mr. Furie intended him to be. Mr. Law said he thought Pepe would protest alongside Hong Kongers: Pepe is sad just like them.

“I think we can redefine Pepe in this movement,” he said.

Katherine Li contributed reporting.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/19/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-pepe-frog.html

shadilay, comrades


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 2:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9743
Location: I. S. Of The Bronx
Just like there are ideologues who vote third party because both sides are the same despite evidence. The likes of EDF and Bokkom believe in an MSM agenda. Mind you EDF ha cited Shapiro as a fair interviewer and Glen Greenwald as having a worthy opinion, so you know take it with a grain of salt or arsenic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 4:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4007
Deadtigers wrote:
Just like there are ideologues who vote third party because both sides are the same despite evidence. The likes of EDF and Bokkom believe in an MSM agenda. Mind you EDF ha cited Shapiro as a fair interviewer and Glen Greenwald as having a worthy opinion, so you know take it with a grain of salt or arsenic.

Hey, Bullshitter, I made it abundantly clear that Fox also has a tremendous agenda.
When are you going for that op to restore sight in your other eye?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 6:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3404
Bokkom wrote:
Fox News tend to favour the Republicans' cause in their reporting?


:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 6:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15275
eldanielfire wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
If you feel that the news you are getting is inaccurate or 'fake", then check it and make sure that you get your news from more than one source. Look at the evidence and make your judgment based on the likelihood of it being correct.


I do, that doesn't mean the biased news reporting should get a pass on it.

Quote:

But to simply label all MSM as biased undermines the ability of the Media to inform and risks destabilising your democracy by ensuring that the electorate are not properly informed. It legitimises bloggers and other less formal sources by placing them on an equal footing as the MSM even though they may not be required to be held to the same standards.


This is rubbish, If the media is biased across the board, and it every strongly is and always has been (but not to this extent) then it doesn't undermine democracy by dictating the truth. Pointing out Fox News 'fair and balanced' claims is utter shit since the Bill Clinton era and laughably so is not undermining democracy, it strengthens it. Pointing out MSNBC, CNN and TNYT have some weird Trump derangement syndrome these days or that wikileaks exposed how Clinton/Dem establishment influence them for the presidential agenda is not hurting Democracy, in fact the truth only strengthens it.

And as for your bit it about bloggers, what's the point of a MSM media if all they do is act like bloggers with an agenda but with the added muscle of an established news brand to promote it? That's why it's important to criticise the mainstream media when they get it wrong or put an agenda before journalism.



I'm not terribly surprised that you feel that my opinion is rubbish.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 7:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 32094
Tucker is back. :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 7:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 8100
merry! wrote:
pepe arrives in hong kong..

Quote:
Image

Hong Kong Protesters Love Pepe the Frog. No, They’re Not Alt-Right.

Spoiler: show
To much of the world, the cartoon frog is a hate symbol. To Hong Kong protesters, he’s something entirely different: one of them.

By Daniel Victor
Aug. 19, 2019

HONG KONG — Ask the Anti-Defamation League, and they will tell you Pepe the Frog is a hate symbol, a cheerleader of racism and anti-Semitism, a friend of alt-right extremists. The sad, green frog is widely viewed as toxic across the world, a signal of a sinister and dangerous worldview.

So it can be a bit jarring to see Pepe in his new role: a pro-democracy freedom fighter in the Hong Kong protests, siding with the people in their struggle against an authoritarian state. The protesters here hold signs with his image, use stickers of him in messaging apps and discussion forums, and even spray paint his face on walls.

Does that mean that Hong Kong protesters are alt-right, or that they support the racism he represents?

The question confuses many protesters, many of whom had no idea about the symbol’s racist connotations elsewhere in the world. They just like him.

“It has nothing to do with the far-right ideology in the state,” one person wrote on LIHKG, an anonymous forum that has been the center of discussion for protesters. “It just looks funny and captures the hearts of so many youngsters. It is a symbol of youth participation in this movement.”

Mari Law, a 33-year-old protester, knows how Pepe is perceived elsewhere, but said it did not matter because Pepe did not carry the same toxic reputation in Hong Kong. Most of the protesters don’t know about the alt-right association, he said.

“To me, Pepe is just a Hello Kitty-like character,” he said.

Few Hong Kongers have shown awareness online about Pepe’s sinister side. There has been little discussion about what symbolism he carries, and in the few occasions it has been pointed out, it has mostly been met with a shrug.

To Hong Kongers, he is just one of them. A sticker pack for messaging apps like Telegram and WhatsApp depict Pepe wearing the protesters’ signature yellow helmet, surrounded by tear gas or holding antigovernment signs. He has also been transformed into a first aid worker and a journalist holding an iPhone.

Emily Yueng, 20, said she had no idea about Pepe’s checkered past. After she learned, she wondered if maybe she and other protesters ought to stop handing out posters with his image at the airport.

“But still, different countries have very different cultures,” she said. “Symbols and colors that mean something in one culture can mean something completely different in another culture, so I think if Americans are really offended by this, we should explain to them what it means to us.”

Pepe was not always seen as a racist symbol. He was created more than a decade ago by Matt Furie, who killed off the character in 2017 after it was adopted by the alt-right.

Members of the alt-right on forums like 4chan and certain corners of Reddit had appropriated his image, much to Mr. Furie’s dismay. He said the frog, perpetually stoned, was meant to be positive, and denounced any link to racist or fringe groups.

“It’s completely insane that Pepe has been labeled a symbol of hate, and that racists and anti-Semites are using a once peaceful frog-dude from my comic book as an icon of hate,” he said in 2016, when the Anti-Defamation League added Pepe to its list of hate symbols.

He added in a 2016 essay for Time magazine: “I understand that it’s out of my control, but in the end, Pepe is whatever you say he is, and I, the creator, say that Pepe is love.”

In Hong Kong, Pepe was never transformed from the chill frog-dude Mr. Furie intended him to be. Mr. Law said he thought Pepe would protest alongside Hong Kongers: Pepe is sad just like them.

“I think we can redefine Pepe in this movement,” he said.

Katherine Li contributed reporting.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/19/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-pepe-frog.html

shadilay, comrades


Quote:
The sad, green frog is widely viewed as toxic across the world, a signal of a sinister and dangerous worldview.


Widely?

Quote:
To much of the world, the cartoon frog is a hate symbol


Much of the world?

Can these guys get their heads out of their own arses?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 8:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4042
eldanielfire wrote:
4071 wrote:

So... I read the transcript, rather than a heavily slanted editorial opinion about what the transcript said. And once again you parrot a right-leaning talking point as if it was a fact, without any question. And comparing what you describe what Baquet said with what he actually said is revealing.

It's odd. You claim to be a bit left of centre, yet keep doing this - you critique the MSM and most of the left, very often by gleefully swallowing and regurgitating shit from the right without any fact-checking. You're basically Dave Rubin.


Parroting right leaning talking points :lol: FFS the irony of telling people to check something while do absolutely none yourself. The Hill is about as neutral as news source as you can get in the USA and has been rated as leaning to a liberal left stance by political checker website :lol: :lol: :lol:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-hill/

"Overall, we rate The Hill slightly Left-Center biased based on story selection that very slightly favors the left and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing. (5/18/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 6/15/2018)"

What are my other right wing talking points? Being pro-climate change action? Being pro-choice? Being strongly feminist? Being pro-gun control and in fact being pro-banning all guns? Wanting more government spending on services? Locking Trumps stupid lies only earlier this topic? Criticising Trumps stupid military pending increase? How many of these are re-hashing right wing talking points?

The MSM has been criticised by centralist and left leaning people many times. You have to be really trying hard to deny the obvious about this, if you think the MSM has not been trying to purposely run certain political narratives these past few years. You can also point to the wikileaks transcripts showing that's exactly how the Democrat establishment and Pro Dem MSM work. The concept of framing legitimate criticism as 'right wing talking points' is just a way of saying 'fake news' by establishment Dems/MSM trying to deflect criticism from their own biases.

But the fact is like many left leaning people, I'm rather fed-up of the media's insanity, both left and right.



The Hill story was about Trump's reaction, not about what Baquet said. The Hill offered no opinion either way on what Baquet said. However, there are other outlets (The American Spectator was one that I saw) that have offered a very strong opinion on Baquet, claiming that the NYT cannot possibly recover from the obvious bias shown by the leak and that it demonstrates that the MSM has an anti-Trump agenda that it will pursue, regardless of truth.

Now your reading of events is very much like that. And very much unlike the the lack of editorialising in The Hill or Slate (which originally published the leaked transcript). Almost as if you are getting your spin from right-wing outlets. You've shown this tendency before. You are, no doubt, consuming media across the political spectrum, but are apparently vulnerable to absorbing the right-wing talking points without question. Even if you then subsequently link to left-of-centre outlets that are less editorially biased.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 9:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 32094
4071 wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
4071 wrote:

So... I read the transcript, rather than a heavily slanted editorial opinion about what the transcript said. And once again you parrot a right-leaning talking point as if it was a fact, without any question. And comparing what you describe what Baquet said with what he actually said is revealing.

It's odd. You claim to be a bit left of centre, yet keep doing this - you critique the MSM and most of the left, very often by gleefully swallowing and regurgitating shit from the right without any fact-checking. You're basically Dave Rubin.


Parroting right leaning talking points :lol: FFS the irony of telling people to check something while do absolutely none yourself. The Hill is about as neutral as news source as you can get in the USA and has been rated as leaning to a liberal left stance by political checker website :lol: :lol: :lol:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-hill/

"Overall, we rate The Hill slightly Left-Center biased based on story selection that very slightly favors the left and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing. (5/18/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 6/15/2018)"

What are my other right wing talking points? Being pro-climate change action? Being pro-choice? Being strongly feminist? Being pro-gun control and in fact being pro-banning all guns? Wanting more government spending on services? Locking Trumps stupid lies only earlier this topic? Criticising Trumps stupid military pending increase? How many of these are re-hashing right wing talking points?

The MSM has been criticised by centralist and left leaning people many times. You have to be really trying hard to deny the obvious about this, if you think the MSM has not been trying to purposely run certain political narratives these past few years. You can also point to the wikileaks transcripts showing that's exactly how the Democrat establishment and Pro Dem MSM work. The concept of framing legitimate criticism as 'right wing talking points' is just a way of saying 'fake news' by establishment Dems/MSM trying to deflect criticism from their own biases.

But the fact is like many left leaning people, I'm rather fed-up of the media's insanity, both left and right.



The Hill story was about Trump's reaction, not about what Baquet said. The Hill offered no opinion either way on what Baquet said. However, there are other outlets (The American Spectator was one that I saw) that have offered a very strong opinion on Baquet, claiming that the NYT cannot possibly recover from the obvious bias shown by the leak and that it demonstrates that the MSM has an anti-Trump agenda that it will pursue, regardless of truth.

Now your reading of events is very much like that. And very much unlike the the lack of editorialising in The Hill or Slate (which originally published the leaked transcript). Almost as if you are getting your spin from right-wing outlets. You've shown this tendency before. You are, no doubt, consuming media across the political spectrum, but are apparently vulnerable to absorbing the right-wing talking points without question. Even if you then subsequently link to left-of-centre outlets that are less editorially biased.


Blah blah. Now, what about Baquet's editorialising then and the NYT turning into a crazed SJW blog? Stick to the topic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 9:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 3108
The MSM have a major bias because they report on the awful and truly odd things that the current President does?!? :?

Even republicans who on TV and are against this cancerous abnormality are seen as left leaning and biased now. The hate that the likes of Neil Cavuto get on Fox is crazy.

He is not normal, this is not normal. This is cruel, stupid, corrupt, divisive and stupid.

I am not even talking about the childish tantrums of a 70 year old man on Twitter, it his policies too - they LITERALLY want to kill endangered species FFS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 11:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21341
paddyor wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Fat Old Git wrote:
It's amazing how many people can't manage to do some simple fact checking. Or who even struggle to tell the difference between an opinion piece vs reporting of know verifiable facts.

But when it comes to Trump, you don't really need any media outlets in order to judge him. His own Twitter feed should be more than enough to to convince people that he's dishonest, untrustworthy, and not nearly as clever as he likes to claim.


That's an understatement. :lol:

The issue with the MSM and agendas is for many people, they don't necessarily have time or energy to fact check everything. Life gets in the way. Not everyone is smart. More so I believe it's not so much an issue with fact checking, it's the relentless attempts to dictate what people think, opinion piece dominate papers and news channels rather than news or journalism informing us of what is happening. Journalists are essentially activists. Which means on all sides, rather then challenging corrupt authority they only end up attacking their political opponents and end up defending or hiding the faults of their own side which should be exposed due to their agendas. What's more, base don the wikileaks releases, the particular thing that's disturbing is how the MSM is taking instruction or influence from the establishment political powers. That is in essence the foundation of democracy crumbling.

You're not really one to talk tbf. You went all in on Andy Ngo's agenda a few weeks back(whcih bagged him a cool 130k in patreon donations) and he's proved himself a BS artist again this weekend. Maybe shut up with the lecture?



So you are saying Antifa didn't attack Andy Ngo and he rigged the film? and Antifa haven't been involved in multiple violent incidents? Because that's about all I reported about him. I've not recommended his work nor denied he's a conservative. Either way that has no bearing on the points I made.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 11:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21341
Deadtigers wrote:
Just like there are ideologues who vote third party because both sides are the same despite evidence. The likes of EDF and Bokkom believe in an MSM agenda. Mind you EDF ha cited Shapiro as a fair interviewer and Glen Greenwald as having a worthy opinion, so you know take it with a grain of salt or arsenic.



Glen Greenwald is one of the foremost experts in his area, exposing corruption and cover-ups in both the US and Brazilian governments. He also accurately predicted the likely outcome of the Mueller report, why wouldn't his opinion, which I've disagreed with before be valid as any media commentator?

You're pretty much just listen people you don't agree with as bad and people you do as good and claiming everyone else is biased. I've always at least been critical of even the politics I support (and have done) and can give credit to the end I don't when it is warranted.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 11:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8486
Location: The Fountain of Running Rugby
eldanielfire wrote:
paddyor wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Fat Old Git wrote:
It's amazing how many people can't manage to do some simple fact checking. Or who even struggle to tell the difference between an opinion piece vs reporting of know verifiable facts.

But when it comes to Trump, you don't really need any media outlets in order to judge him. His own Twitter feed should be more than enough to to convince people that he's dishonest, untrustworthy, and not nearly as clever as he likes to claim.


That's an understatement. :lol:

The issue with the MSM and agendas is for many people, they don't necessarily have time or energy to fact check everything. Life gets in the way. Not everyone is smart. More so I believe it's not so much an issue with fact checking, it's the relentless attempts to dictate what people think, opinion piece dominate papers and news channels rather than news or journalism informing us of what is happening. Journalists are essentially activists. Which means on all sides, rather then challenging corrupt authority they only end up attacking their political opponents and end up defending or hiding the faults of their own side which should be exposed due to their agendas. What's more, base don the wikileaks releases, the particular thing that's disturbing is how the MSM is taking instruction or influence from the establishment political powers. That is in essence the foundation of democracy crumbling.

You're not really one to talk tbf. You went all in on Andy Ngo's agenda a few weeks back(whcih bagged him a cool 130k in patreon donations) and he's proved himself a BS artist again this weekend. Maybe shut up with the lecture?



So you are saying Antifa didn't attack Andy Ngo and he rigged the film? and Antifa haven't been involved in multiple violent incidents? Because that's about all I reported about him. I've not recommended his work nor denied he's a conservative. Either way that has no bearing on the points I made.

Are you saying Antifa attacked Andy Ngo with concrete milkshake, and gave him a hemorrhage, from which he miraculously recovered in 24 hrs to give bull shit interviews to Fox News? If you are in any way a Ngo sympathiser, you are part of the problem


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 11:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21341
Rinkals wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
If you feel that the news you are getting is inaccurate or 'fake", then check it and make sure that you get your news from more than one source. Look at the evidence and make your judgment based on the likelihood of it being correct.


I do, that doesn't mean the biased news reporting should get a pass on it.

Quote:

But to simply label all MSM as biased undermines the ability of the Media to inform and risks destabilising your democracy by ensuring that the electorate are not properly informed. It legitimises bloggers and other less formal sources by placing them on an equal footing as the MSM even though they may not be required to be held to the same standards.


This is rubbish, If the media is biased across the board, and it every strongly is and always has been (but not to this extent) then it doesn't undermine democracy by dictating the truth. Pointing out Fox News 'fair and balanced' claims is utter shit since the Bill Clinton era and laughably so is not undermining democracy, it strengthens it. Pointing out MSNBC, CNN and TNYT have some weird Trump derangement syndrome these days or that wikileaks exposed how Clinton/Dem establishment influence them for the presidential agenda is not hurting Democracy, in fact the truth only strengthens it.

And as for your bit it about bloggers, what's the point of a MSM media if all they do is act like bloggers with an agenda but with the added muscle of an established news brand to promote it? That's why it's important to criticise the mainstream media when they get it wrong or put an agenda before journalism.



I'm not terribly surprised that you feel that my opinion is rubbish.


All media is biased. Every newspaper in the UK is biased and it undermines nothing to say that. I can't think of anyone in britain who thinks otherwise or would claim The Guardian isn't a lefty liberal rag or that The Daily Mail isn't conservative and right wing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 11:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21341
Big Nipper wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
paddyor wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Fat Old Git wrote:
It's amazing how many people can't manage to do some simple fact checking. Or who even struggle to tell the difference between an opinion piece vs reporting of know verifiable facts.

But when it comes to Trump, you don't really need any media outlets in order to judge him. His own Twitter feed should be more than enough to to convince people that he's dishonest, untrustworthy, and not nearly as clever as he likes to claim.


That's an understatement. :lol:

The issue with the MSM and agendas is for many people, they don't necessarily have time or energy to fact check everything. Life gets in the way. Not everyone is smart. More so I believe it's not so much an issue with fact checking, it's the relentless attempts to dictate what people think, opinion piece dominate papers and news channels rather than news or journalism informing us of what is happening. Journalists are essentially activists. Which means on all sides, rather then challenging corrupt authority they only end up attacking their political opponents and end up defending or hiding the faults of their own side which should be exposed due to their agendas. What's more, base don the wikileaks releases, the particular thing that's disturbing is how the MSM is taking instruction or influence from the establishment political powers. That is in essence the foundation of democracy crumbling.

You're not really one to talk tbf. You went all in on Andy Ngo's agenda a few weeks back(whcih bagged him a cool 130k in patreon donations) and he's proved himself a BS artist again this weekend. Maybe shut up with the lecture?



So you are saying Antifa didn't attack Andy Ngo and he rigged the film? and Antifa haven't been involved in multiple violent incidents? Because that's about all I reported about him. I've not recommended his work nor denied he's a conservative. Either way that has no bearing on the points I made.

Are you saying Antifa attacked Andy Ngo with concrete milkshake, and gave him a hemorrhage, from which he miraculously recovered in 24 hrs to give bull shit interviews to Fox News? If you are in any way a Ngo sympathiser, you are part of the problem


I'm saying the Portland police investigated the possibility that was he case as claimed at the time. But there is still no relevance to my argument. I'm not claiming I'm not saying bloggers or small news companies are not biased here or don't work with agendas. I also said we are all affected by the agendas of news media, which is why it is so concerning they are biased.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 11:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8486
Location: The Fountain of Running Rugby
eldanielfire wrote:
Big Nipper wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
paddyor wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:

That's an understatement. :lol:

The issue with the MSM and agendas is for many people, they don't necessarily have time or energy to fact check everything. Life gets in the way. Not everyone is smart. More so I believe it's not so much an issue with fact checking, it's the relentless attempts to dictate what people think, opinion piece dominate papers and news channels rather than news or journalism informing us of what is happening. Journalists are essentially activists. Which means on all sides, rather then challenging corrupt authority they only end up attacking their political opponents and end up defending or hiding the faults of their own side which should be exposed due to their agendas. What's more, base don the wikileaks releases, the particular thing that's disturbing is how the MSM is taking instruction or influence from the establishment political powers. That is in essence the foundation of democracy crumbling.

You're not really one to talk tbf. You went all in on Andy Ngo's agenda a few weeks back(whcih bagged him a cool 130k in patreon donations) and he's proved himself a BS artist again this weekend. Maybe shut up with the lecture?



So you are saying Antifa didn't attack Andy Ngo and he rigged the film? and Antifa haven't been involved in multiple violent incidents? Because that's about all I reported about him. I've not recommended his work nor denied he's a conservative. Either way that has no bearing on the points I made.

Are you saying Antifa attacked Andy Ngo with concrete milkshake, and gave him a hemorrhage, from which he miraculously recovered in 24 hrs to give bull shit interviews to Fox News? If you are in any way a Ngo sympathiser, you are part of the problem


I'm saying the Portland police investigated the possibility that was he case as claimed at the time. But there is still no relevance to my argument. I'm not claiming I'm not saying bloggers or small news companies are not biased here or don't work with agendas. I also said we are all affected by the agendas of news media, which is why it is so concerning they are biased.

It seems like you are intent on throwing your own argument with a hammer and the claiming you didn't


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 11:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21341
Big Nipper wrote:
It seems like you are intent on throwing your own argument with a hammer and the claiming you didn't


Throwing what argument? That the MSM is biased because others also have an agenda?

Or that the police claimed Andy Ngo was hit with concrete? Which was true. Which is about all I reported on the matter as I take besides he was beaten up (true and on camera) and a journalist which people here were in denial about for some weird reason. I didn't buy into anything else nor claimed he isn't biased.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=90628&p=6098380&hilit=journalist+antifa#p6098380


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 11:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4007
Calculus wrote:
Bokkom wrote:
Fox News tend to favour the Republicans' cause in their reporting?


:lol:

:lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 12:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:51 pm
Posts: 15958
eldanielfire wrote:
I'm saying the Portland police investigated the possibility that was he case as claimed at the time. But there is still no relevance to my argument. I'm not claiming I'm not saying bloggers or small news companies are not biased here or don't work with agendas. I also said we are all affected by the agendas of news media, which is why it is so concerning they are biased.

I'm not even sure that part is true, it was just a tweet saying that IIRC.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12676
I can't believe Portland police would investigate anything Antifa has done.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 2:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:51 pm
Posts: 15958
https://twitter.com/letsgomathias/status/1163511680720101376

Interesting.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 2:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15275
eldanielfire wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
If you feel that the news you are getting is inaccurate or 'fake", then check it and make sure that you get your news from more than one source. Look at the evidence and make your judgment based on the likelihood of it being correct.


I do, that doesn't mean the biased news reporting should get a pass on it.

Quote:

But to simply label all MSM as biased undermines the ability of the Media to inform and risks destabilising your democracy by ensuring that the electorate are not properly informed. It legitimises bloggers and other less formal sources by placing them on an equal footing as the MSM even though they may not be required to be held to the same standards.


This is rubbish, If the media is biased across the board, and it every strongly is and always has been (but not to this extent) then it doesn't undermine democracy by dictating the truth. Pointing out Fox News 'fair and balanced' claims is utter shit since the Bill Clinton era and laughably so is not undermining democracy, it strengthens it. Pointing out MSNBC, CNN and TNYT have some weird Trump derangement syndrome these days or that wikileaks exposed how Clinton/Dem establishment influence them for the presidential agenda is not hurting Democracy, in fact the truth only strengthens it.

And as for your bit it about bloggers, what's the point of a MSM media if all they do is act like bloggers with an agenda but with the added muscle of an established news brand to promote it? That's why it's important to criticise the mainstream media when they get it wrong or put an agenda before journalism.



I'm not terribly surprised that you feel that my opinion is rubbish.


All media is biased. Every newspaper in the UK is biased and it undermines nothing to say that. I can't think of anyone in britain who thinks otherwise or would claim The Guardian isn't a lefty liberal rag or that The Daily Mail isn't conservative and right wing.

I will concede that the UK media do align their slant to support and reinforce the bias of their readers and that's probably a significant reason why we are here now. Rupert Murdoch's experience in Britain has probably had a huge influence in the direction Fox News has taken and may explain why it is so nakedly partisan.

Most MSM outlets are constantly monitored for the accuracy of their reporting and are held to standards that bloggers, Fox News and other conspiracy theorists can safely ignore.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 2:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5497
Location: The void
Rinkals wrote:
Most MSM outlets are constantly monitored for the accuracy of their reporting and are held to standards

The failing NYT was awarded two Pulitzer prizes for their reporting on Russian collusion, due to their standards for accuracy :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 2:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 3108
Uthikoloshe wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
Most MSM outlets are constantly monitored for the accuracy of their reporting and are held to standards

The failing NYT was awarded two Pulitzer prizes for their reporting on Russian collusion, due to their standards for accuracy :lol:


Have you fact checked the reporting they won for? What category was the award for? Was anything found to be false?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 3:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5497
Location: The void
BokJock wrote:
Uthikoloshe wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
Most MSM outlets are constantly monitored for the accuracy of their reporting and are held to standards

The failing NYT was awarded two Pulitzer prizes for their reporting on Russian collusion, due to their standards for accuracy :lol:


Have you fact checked the reporting they won for? What category was the award for? Was anything found to be false?

Muller did. No collusion. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 3:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8486
Location: The Fountain of Running Rugby
Uthikoloshe wrote:
BokJock wrote:
Uthikoloshe wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
Most MSM outlets are constantly monitored for the accuracy of their reporting and are held to standards

The failing NYT was awarded two Pulitzer prizes for their reporting on Russian collusion, due to their standards for accuracy :lol:


Have you fact checked the reporting they won for? What category was the award for? Was anything found to be false?

Muller did. No collusion. :lol:

Oh lawdy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 3:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 3108
Uthikoloshe wrote:
BokJock wrote:
Uthikoloshe wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
Most MSM outlets are constantly monitored for the accuracy of their reporting and are held to standards

The failing NYT was awarded two Pulitzer prizes for their reporting on Russian collusion, due to their standards for accuracy :lol:


Have you fact checked the reporting they won for? What category was the award for? Was anything found to be false?

Muller did. No collusion. :lol:


:roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 3:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15275
BokJock wrote:
Uthikoloshe wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
Most MSM outlets are constantly monitored for the accuracy of their reporting and are held to standards

The failing NYT was awarded two Pulitzer prizes for their reporting on Russian collusion, due to their standards for accuracy :lol:


Have you fact checked the reporting they won for? What category was the award for? Was anything found to be false?


Doesn't matter.

He's not interested in the accuracy of the story; just whether it is pro or anti Trump.

If it's pro Trump, then it's accurate. if it's anti, then it's fake news which is pretty much the yardstick that trump himself uses.

The point is that a trustworthy Fourth Estate is essential to a functioning democracy because it keeps the voter informed. A Press that operates to peddle a particular agenda without regard for the truth will likely contribute to a dysfunctional democracy and is probably the reason that Britain currently faces Brexit.

Trump's assault on the MSM is nothing less than an assault on the American Democratic structures and their Constitution.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 3:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8038
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 3:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4007
Rinkals wrote:
BokJock wrote:
Uthikoloshe wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
Most MSM outlets are constantly monitored for the accuracy of their reporting and are held to standards

The failing NYT was awarded two Pulitzer prizes for their reporting on Russian collusion, due to their standards for accuracy :lol:


Have you fact checked the reporting they won for? What category was the award for? Was anything found to be false?


Doesn't matter.

He's not interested in the accuracy of the story; just whether it is pro or anti Trump.

If it's pro Trump, then it's accurate. if it's anti, then it's fake news which is pretty much the yardstick that trump himself uses.

The point is that a trustworthy Fourth Estate is essential to a functioning democracy because it keeps the voter informed. A Press that operates to peddle a particular agenda without regard for the truth will likely contribute to a dysfunctional democracy and is probably the reason that Britain currently faces Brexit.

Trump's assault on the MSM is nothing less than an assault on the American Democratic structures and their Constitution.

You still haven't answered my earlier question.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 4:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 3108
Uthikoloshe wrote:
@realDonaldTrump wrote:
Wow, Report Just Out! Google manipulated from 2.6 million to 16 million votes for Hillary Clinton in 2016 Election! This was put out by a Clinton supporter, not a Trump Supporter! Google should be sued. My victory was even bigger than thought!


:nod:


https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/aug/19/donald-trump/donald-trump-wrong-google-manipulating-election-re/

Imagine my surprise :|


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 7:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15275
Bokkom wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
BokJock wrote:
Uthikoloshe wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
Most MSM outlets are constantly monitored for the accuracy of their reporting and are held to standards

The failing NYT was awarded two Pulitzer prizes for their reporting on Russian collusion, due to their standards for accuracy :lol:


Have you fact checked the reporting they won for? What category was the award for? Was anything found to be false?


Doesn't matter.

He's not interested in the accuracy of the story; just whether it is pro or anti Trump.

If it's pro Trump, then it's accurate. if it's anti, then it's fake news which is pretty much the yardstick that trump himself uses.

The point is that a trustworthy Fourth Estate is essential to a functioning democracy because it keeps the voter informed. A Press that operates to peddle a particular agenda without regard for the truth will likely contribute to a dysfunctional democracy and is probably the reason that Britain currently faces Brexit.

Trump's assault on the MSM is nothing less than an assault on the American Democratic structures and their Constitution.

You still haven't answered my earlier question.


I did.

I said that I didn't consider Fox News to be the Republican version of CNN or MSNBC because they do not hold themselves to reporting the truth.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 8:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12676
Rinkals wrote:

I did.

I said that I didn't consider Fox News to be the Republican version of CNN or MSNBC because they do not hold themselves to reporting the truth.


You think the other two do? :shock: :shock: :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 9:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am
Posts: 10350
MSNBC clearly does not and it’s not just Trump supporters who will tell you that.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ozxzNjRqCiE


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 10:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21341
paddyor wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
I'm saying the Portland police investigated the possibility that was he case as claimed at the time. But there is still no relevance to my argument. I'm not claiming I'm not saying bloggers or small news companies are not biased here or don't work with agendas. I also said we are all affected by the agendas of news media, which is why it is so concerning they are biased.

I'm not even sure that part is true, it was just a tweet saying that IIRC.


The link I put has a link to the Independent which said it. Either way, I did not as you say "You went all in on Andy Ngo's agenda" there nor have I ever claimed he's any better than the MSM units I criticise. Which seems to be implied by your reference to it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2019 10:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21341
Rinkals wrote:
I will concede that the UK media do align their slant to support and reinforce the bias of their readers and that's probably a significant reason why we are here now. Rupert Murdoch's experience in Britain has probably had a huge influence in the direction Fox News has taken and may explain why it is so nakedly partisan.

Most MSM outlets are constantly monitored for the accuracy of their reporting and are held to standards that bloggers, Fox News and other conspiracy theorists can safely ignore.


Perhaps but why are you constantly bringing up bloggers? I've never presented an argument to view bloggers over credible reporters.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 101048 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 2500, 2501, 2502, 2503, 2504, 2505, 2506 ... 2527  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ARMitage Shanks, bimboman, Chilli, CrazyIslander, diarm, EverReady, feckwanker, Flametop, Gambass, Gavin Duffy, Laurent, Mad-Scientist, Masterji, pandion, Raggs, SEAsianExpat, St_Badger, sunnybanana, Sydvicious, Toro and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group