User not logged in - login - register
Home Calendar Books School Tool Photo Gallery Message Boards Users Statistics Advertise Site Info
go to bottom | |
 Message Boards » » The Liberal Media Page 1 ... 35 36 37 38 [39], Prev  
horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

The NYT is essentially smearing AOC again. They are trash and play this game all the time. Backhandedly of course in a round about way
https://presswatchers.org/2020/07/the-new-york-times-has-a-misogyny-problem-too/

I'm not going to explain it because its sophisticated enough to let the article have to walk you through the whole thing.

7/24/2020 6:30:00 PM

StTexan
All American
1459 Posts
user info
edit post

Joy Reid literally “hoped” the US would get worse today

7/24/2020 8:45:34 PM

NyM410
J-E-T-S
50084 Posts
user info
edit post

https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1286876397252689922?s=21

Local media is a cesspool thanks in large part to Sinclair. And there is no liberal alternative.

Well meaning local broadcasts like WRAL (owned by CBC) sanitize the news to the point they normalize everything Trump says and people can’t realize is obvious mental decline and general craziness... and then there is Sinclair..

^^ you’re such a trash person who has some God complex like you understand things on a level that the “regular people” just can’t. What would we do without Earl here to explain everything to us idiots

[Edited on July 25, 2020 at 7:19 AM. Reason : X]

7/25/2020 7:18:29 AM

horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

Its literally the opposite so I don't know where you got that. If I thought that, there would be no point in posting. (Why even bother talking to people who can't understand things on the level you can?) I'm so confident that everyone can understand the things I understand that I think its as simple as exposing them to the same information.

I also didn't even try to explain that story because its too sophisticated that I will mess it up so I left it to the authors because they did it better than I could (again, the opposite of what you're saying). Again, you're probably taking something someone else did and attributing it to me because no part of your response applied to my post.

7/25/2020 9:01:04 AM

NyM410
J-E-T-S
50084 Posts
user info
edit post

To be fair, I misread what you said. So I apologize. I read it essentially as “I’m not going to explain it to you people because it’s far too sophisticated.”

So. Mea culpa.

[Edited on July 25, 2020 at 10:10 AM. Reason : X]

7/25/2020 10:09:54 AM

rwoody
Save TWW
30397 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"During David Brooks' livestream today, I implored you guys not to ask him why, if he hates millennials so much, did he marry one. Well that backfired ?? https://t.co/RJ1MooZGp4"

7/25/2020 11:14:47 AM

horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

Big tech platforms are marking claims as "misinformation" and then linking to fact checking websites that say they are simply unconfirmed or that there is not sufficient evidence to prove the claim.

But when MSM makes a claim that "sources" told them Kushner was urging Trump to concede and Kushner denies it, it doesn't get labeled as misinformation.

Huge double standard.

11/11/2020 5:10:02 PM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

No, not really. Here, let me give you a dumbed down and exaggerated example that perhaps even you can appreciate:

Consider one questionable news source that claims George Soros' favorite food is bratwurst, while another questionable news source claims his favorite food is twice baked aborted fetus, served in virgin's blood. You see (assuming I still have to spell it out for you), it is not simply a function of the reliability of the source. It is also a function of how inflammatory, provocative, and shit-stirring the news is, as well. Not only is it not a double standard to give more cautious labels to inflammatory reports, it is actually prudent.

You're Welcome! Let me know if you have any other basic logic issues you are currently struggling with.

11/11/2020 6:01:38 PM

horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

I'm struggling with this.
https://twitter.com/robbystarbuck/status/1325622425640443905
Quote :
"It is also a function of how inflammatory, provocative, and shit-stirring the news is, as well."

This is how all authoritarian powers justify their use of censorship. Of course, any news that is damaging to the credibility of the authority is going to be provocative, inflammatory and shit-stirring. Might as well go full on North Korea. I'm glad you understand why they operate the way they do and value stability (the greater good) over the unfiltered truth. People aren't mature enough to filter information on their own so you have to do it for them.

[Edited on November 11, 2020 at 10:51 PM. Reason : k]

11/11/2020 10:50:38 PM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"This is how all authoritarian powers justify their use of censorship. Of course, any news that is damaging to the credibility of the authority is going to be provocative, inflammatory and shit-stirring. Might as well go full on North Korea. I'm glad you understand why they operate the way they do and value stability (the greater good) over the unfiltered truth. People aren't mature enough to filter information on their own so you have to do it for them."


Wow! Somehow you managed to get it almost completely backwards.

Unfiltered truth? LOL! Let me remind you, the topic was spreading unsupported bullshit. Do you know the difference between unfiltered truth and unsupported bullshit? It would not surprise me to learn that you do not.

No. What leads to full on North Korea type shit is allowing a leader to spread unsupported bullshit and propaganda unchecked by the media...especially when that unsupported bullshit and propaganda is also inflammatory, provocative, and shit stirring.

11/12/2020 1:40:05 AM

horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

CNN spread unsupported bullshit and I just showed you proof in that tweet yet no one was there to call them on it.

I'm not saying they aren't censoring things that are unsupported. I'm saying that they are doing it when they don't like the story but when they like the story they let the unsupported bullshit ride. That is propaganda. Its not about truth for them. Its about choosing what you talk about and choosing what you censor. The media is simply a tool to control how people think.

[Edited on November 12, 2020 at 3:35 AM. Reason : triple negative in my post]

[Edited on November 12, 2020 at 3:36 AM. Reason : we just lived through 4 years of mostly unsupported theories dominating the media cycle]

11/12/2020 3:35:13 AM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

^Already been addressed. If you stop going around in circles, perhaps we may have a conversation.

11/12/2020 10:15:08 AM

Geppetto
All American
2016 Posts
user info
edit post

Not to point out another obvious fact, but CNN reporting two conflicting statements from within the Trump whitehouse doesn't necessarily imply that CNN is wrong.

Trump is known to contradict himself tweet to tweet if you give him 24 hours. It would not surprise me that Kushner gave one set of advice. Trump shot it down and told him to go away, so he then came back with another proposal that might be more palatable for Trump.

In any other White House I would exclude this as a likely possibility, but in this one, you have to at least consider it.

11/12/2020 10:31:49 AM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

^

11/12/2020 10:54:24 AM

horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

Anonymous sources have no accountability and the gymnastics you are willing to do to justify it proves that. We've seen people take countless stories and run with them as fact. Even things like the Russian bounties have never been substantiated. They could literally say "sources" told them (anything) and you would consider it as truth. This is really the test that you don't actually care about unsubstantiated claims. The whole argument basically boils down to an appeal to authority allowing you to give these "news" outlets the benefit of the doubt.

There has to be a name in order for it to at least have some accountability attached to it. You want to hold Trump and his supporters accountable but don't want to hold your corporate overlords accountable at all.

[Edited on November 12, 2020 at 12:50 PM. Reason : they've been wrong so many times]

11/12/2020 12:49:52 PM

Geppetto
All American
2016 Posts
user info
edit post

So do you contend that Watergate never happened since Deep Throat was an anonymous source?

11/12/2020 5:14:21 PM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

Yeah, I bet horosho would've been a Nixon bootlicker back when Deep Throat was spilling the beans.

Look, we're dealing with an administration which has created a work atmosphere where employees don't feel like they have the opportunity to speak openly and candidly. You (horosho) are intent on finding fault with the messenger for this predicament, for some reason, while the rest of us lay the blame where it actually belongs--at the source.

[Edited on November 12, 2020 at 5:47 PM. Reason : ]

11/12/2020 5:46:47 PM

horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

Do you not see the problem with accepting any negative thing you hear about this administration just because you know this administration is shady? Do you not see how that gives the media an opportunity to make up things because they know you think the administration is capable of them? Basically allowing them to get away with reporting realistic fiction as long as it is believable.

I never thought about watergate like that. It is interesting to go back dissect historical events with newly obtained perspective. I've done that with a lot of the wars and seen them in different light but watergate still exists in my mind the way it was presented to me which, like other historical events, is likely completely biased and one sided.

[Edited on November 13, 2020 at 6:45 PM. Reason : it was fact that iraq had wmd in 2004. todays twitter would mark tweets stating otherwise as misinf]

11/13/2020 6:44:28 PM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

Jesus Christ, can you at least stick to the fucking topic?

Let me remind you, yet again, that the subject was the spread of unsupported bullshit, and how Trump being called out for spreading unsupported bullshit vs CNN not being called out for reporting rumors of what Jared did or did not tell Donald is not a double standard.

At no point did I claim nor imply you should be "accepting any negative thing you hear about this administration"....you fucking moron.



11/13/2020 7:45:24 PM

horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

OMFG I didn't realize how much I missed that moving the goal pic. I was distracted by the watergate posts. I wasn't talking about Trump specifically. I was talking about how anything posted online that they don't already know about being labeled as unsupported misinformation. We just went through 4 years of unsupported rumors being reported by the media but the moment a media source reported one about Biden, it was completely shut down. Thats the double standard. Its not media bs vs Trump bs, its media vs media on stories based on whether they hurt or help Trump.

11/13/2020 11:15:26 PM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

11/14/2020 12:54:13 AM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"There has to be a name in order for it to at least have some accountability attached to it."



.......followed by..........


Quote :
"I never thought about watergate like that. "



Looks like I've found the double standard you seem so fucking concerned about.

LMFAO!!!

I'll listen to you bitching about double standards only after you've eliminated your own, boy.

11/14/2020 6:47:06 PM

horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

I wasn't alive during watergate so theres no need for me to go back and process all of its nuances critically. I don't have a position on it. It would be interesting to go back and do that but I'm not sure how useful it would be.

11/15/2020 12:52:24 PM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

Nevertheless, it is a counterexample disproving your

Quote :
"There has to be a name in order for it to at least have some accountability attached to it."


bullshit.

11/15/2020 5:41:22 PM

horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

I'm speaking in 2020. You can't necessarily take things being said today and apply them to historical times. Whats true today may or may not have always been true.

11/15/2020 5:48:19 PM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"Whats true today may or may not have always been true."


Oh, look, another fucking retarded comment. So let me get this straight: According to you, then due to his lack of candor, right now it is neither true nor false that, for example, Trump has been money laundering with Russians for decades. Then, say 10 years later, when documents are produced proving it, it suddenly just becomes true, like some kind of Schrödinger's cat wave form collapse bullshit.

Get the fuck outta here.

The Nixon admin was crooked from the Watergate incident on. It didn't suddenly become true once Deep Throat revealed his identity. I'm just pointing out you would be a prime target for a con man due to your inability to, in the absence of hard facts, judge the relative credibilities of the parties in question (for example re: Trump vs the media). Get the fuck outta here with that, "Person A says one thing, Person B says another......gee how ever could we know who to believe" bullshit game.

I'm claiming you would've gotten it wrong then (Watergate).

I'm claiming you're getting it wrong now (Trump admin).

Just because you have anachronistic advantage to judge Watergate properly, that doesn't mean you're not a fucking moron in judging relative credibilities. Even a dumbass can get the story right from 50 years ago; it takes some critical thinking skills to do it in real time.

11/15/2020 6:12:13 PM

horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

You got most of that right but the only part you are wrong about is the credibility of the media. I don't know what the credibility of the media was like back then but today I know not to believe the media because we have continuously seen them perpetuate known lies. Costly lies. You are not vulnerable to Trump's con but are completely vulnerable to the media con. You also show authority bias when it comes to believing anything that comes from "intelligence agencies" .

The difference with me is, I'm not saying believe Trump and don't believe the media. I'm saying don't believe Trump, the media, the democrats, or any part of the deep state. Don't believe any of them. The only place I should be vulnerable to criticism is the wisdom of drawing equivalence betweeen Trump and all these other parties.

Quote :
"I'm claiming you would've gotten it wrong then (Watergate).

I'm claiming you're getting it wrong now (Trump admin)."


I'm claiming you would've gotten Iraq wrong because the media, CIA, pentagon, and white house were more "credible" than Saddam because you continuously mischaracterize "evil vs evil" as "good vs evil". It turns out, the whole world is run by pieces of shit who are all constantly trying to outpower each other at the expense of everyday people.

Just because Saddam was a piece of shit, you gave the white house a blank check to make up whatever they wanted about him in order to do whatever they wanted to do. The media didn't question its credibility or properly scrutinize evidence and at the end of the day, the fabrication was all justified because "dictator man bad".

11/15/2020 6:44:47 PM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
" You also show authority bias when it comes to believing anything that comes from "intelligence agencies" ."


I think you lost the thread of the conversation again. Kindly point out where I've said you should believe anything that comes from intelligence agencies.

Liar.

Quote :
"I'm saying don't believe Trump, the media, the democrats, or any part of the deep state."


And yet you get on here and defend Trump. Get the fuck outta here.

Quote :
"I'm claiming you would've gotten Iraq wrong because the media, CIA, pentagon, and white house were more "credible" than Saddam because you continuously mischaracterize "evil vs evil" as "good vs evil"."


I "would've" gotten Iraq wrong? Get the fuck outta here. Dude, I'm 50 years old. I remember Iraq firsthand, you fucking moron; it wasn't really that long ago. And I opposed the war. You know, for someone who preaches about demanding evidence for this or that, you sure as fuck are ready to make bullshit assumptions about me, you fucking liar.

Fuck you and your dishonesty.

11/15/2020 6:58:06 PM

horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

Ok I am sorry for making an assumption about your position. I incorrectly attributed a line of thinking to your previous comments about the unique danger of Trump with your comments in this thread.

I failed to consider the possibility that someone could have come to that conclusion in many alternatives ways. For example, you could have believed everything you were fed by Powell, Bush, the CIA, the media, and most of the political establishment, but opposed war without thinking they all lied. That would leave you free to believe Trump was uniquely dangerous but I'm still lost on how that could leave any of those parties with significantly more credibility than Trump to the point where you would believe anything they say as long as its against Trump. I could be wrong again, but hey, I approach every situation open to the possibility that I might be wrong.

11/15/2020 10:05:01 PM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

You're still way the fuck off, dude. Where did I say Trump was "uniquely dangerous"? Jesus, you can't even get it right when you try to fix it.

That Iraq thing was far from the first false attribution you made to me:

You've been doing it consistently since the beginning.

[Edited on November 15, 2020 at 10:21 PM. Reason : ]

[Edited on November 15, 2020 at 10:23 PM. Reason : ]

11/15/2020 10:19:16 PM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"but I'm still lost on how that could leave any of those parties with significantly more credibility than Trump to the point where you would believe anything they say as long as its against Trump."


And I'm still lost on how you came to that conclusion about me, liar.

11/15/2020 10:34:16 PM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

^I'm still awaiting clarification on that, asshole.

11/16/2020 10:09:19 AM

horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

I came to that conclusion because you've never questioned the validityof Trump leaks and anonymous stories over the last 4 years. Most of which were never proven true. When have you questioned the validity of a story that hurt Trump?

You explode into tantrum so often that it distracts from the flow of the conversation. This makes it more difficult to follow and easier to make mistakes which then send you further into rage. This cycle continues until you've filled the page with nonsense.

What if, when someone attributes something to you incorrectly, you decided to simply correct them, clarify your true position and move on?

11/16/2020 8:59:30 PM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"I came to that conclusion because you've never questioned the validityof Trump leaks and anonymous stories over the last 4 years."


And you know this.....how?

Have you been spying on me?

Quote :
"What if, when someone attributes something to you incorrectly, you decided to simply correct them, clarify your true position and move on?"


Because your entire argument has been to caricaturize one position of mine after another, then attacking that caricature. You never once address my actual points. That is what distracts from the conversation.

How about you simply stop misattributing things to me, asshole? That too much to ask, you fucking moron?

[Edited on November 16, 2020 at 9:03 PM. Reason : ]

11/16/2020 9:02:41 PM

horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

I will try and I will also try to remove hyperbole from my posts because a lot of times you really hang on to that instead of the point. I'll try to do better but know that theres a chance I may not be capable of meeting your expectations. What if I'm just "dumb"? Is this how you deal with people who aren't as smart as you? You cuss them out and berate them for not being as smart?

11/16/2020 9:06:30 PM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

No, I don't cuss you out because you're a fucking moron.

I cuss you out because you're a fucking asshole, moron.

11/16/2020 9:08:39 PM

Cabbage
All American
1406 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"I will try and I will also try to remove hyperbole from my posts because a lot of times you really hang on to that instead of the point"


How could it be otherwise when the only "point" you ever manage to make is due to your hyperbole and caricaturization? I don't think you can even pull your own weight in a debate without resorting to such bullshit. (I've yet to see it happen, anyway).

11/16/2020 9:11:01 PM

horosho
All American
1865 Posts
user info
edit post

MSM blacked out a bunch of presidential candidates and now want to claim they respect democracy and are the key to its survival.
https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1330595697159270400

11/22/2020 5:07:10 PM

 Message Boards » The Soap Box » The Liberal Media Page 1 ... 35 36 37 38 [39], Prev  
go to top | |
Admin Options : move topic | lock topic

© 2020 by The Wolf Web - All Rights Reserved.
The material located at this site is not endorsed, sponsored or provided by or on behalf of North Carolina State University.
Powered by CrazyWeb v2.37 - our disclaimer.