![]() |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=mooby;1216235]Idk who Lee Merritt or Shaun King is so idc. Rally with a false narrative?
What do you want here? For the grieving family of the little girl who was killed to come out publicly and say "listen guys, we think it was a white guy in a red pickup but let's just take a few days, calm down, think rationally, explore all alternatives before we put statements in the media? P.S. anyone who goes on witch hunts when this shit happens, whether it's Shaun King, Reddit, etc. whomever and starts asking the public to gather more info on potential suspects can eat a shit sandwich. People's lives get ruined over that shit.[/quote] Good post! I found this but pretty sure Chico will dismiss it. [url]https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/06/science/stress-trauma-eyewitness-events.html[/url] |
Re: Media Bias
linking a murder, with a gun, to gun control is wrong?
|
Re: Media Bias
[quote=Giantone;1216305]Good post!
I found this but pretty sure Chico will dismiss it. [url]https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/06/science/stress-trauma-eyewitness-events.html[/url][/quote] lol...this isn't new news. LOL the NYT is simply making excuses because the boogeyman didn't exist. False accusations that are weaponize politically is dangerous. They created a racist narrative to push a political agenda. You think this somehow ok? Look at the facts, if live in Houston and your a minority, what's most likely to kill you? What's the biggest threat to your life? Its not the boogeyman that Lee Merritt, Congress Woman Shelia Jackson, Shaun King made it out to be this last week...this is a false narrative that continues to be weaponized to splinter this country. You are fueling hate based on racist accusations which are untrue. Look at the facts in the Houston and crime demographics, there you will find the answer. No, actually turn a blind eye, that's what liberals have done in Chicago, New Orleans, Baltimore, Cleveland, Chicago, etc. |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=Giantone;1216305]Good post!
I found this but pretty sure Chico will dismiss it. [url]https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/06/science/stress-trauma-eyewitness-events.html[/url][/quote] I was correct. |
Re: Media Bias
Chico man. Your hatred towards the left and your obliviousness towards the right is amazing. Especially when everything you hate about the left is EXACTLY what the right does on a minute to minute basis. I suggest you go outside, take a cold shower, come back inside, and take a fresh look at what is actually happening in this country.
|
Re: Media Bias
[quote=punch it in;1216342]Chico man. Your hatred towards the left and your obliviousness towards the right is amazing. Especially when everything you hate about the left is EXACTLY what the right does on a minute to minute basis. I suggest you go outside, take a cold shower, come back inside, and take a fresh look at what is actually happening in this country.[/quote]
This isn't about right or left...Ive been critical of the bias coverage of Fox News which I think their slant is dishonest. Just as I would of MSNBC. But one thing I have accepted is Fox and MSNBC will continue to serve their bubble. Fine. What I don't think is fine is how biased presentation/information has now seeped into mainstream media organizations where center should be what we expect. Lay out the facts and let the viewer decide. Opinion Editorials are fine as back page filler, labeled properly, etc. but what we see is editorials presented a factual news...which it is not. It starts there and goes all the way up to Fake News. This isn't only the nightly news, this is news shows and morning news shows. If your gonna talk issues, present facts...if your gonna talk about the issues, then coverage should be fair. If you look at Fox news and can identify issues you have problems with...whether is language choice, editorial opinions past as factual news, not presenting all relative facts, limited context, not presenting all sides arguments, misleading stats, negative slant, etc....which Im sure you could easily do. By taking the same scope...do it for MSNBC coverage...it might be tougher for you, but I sure you could. We live in an age of information overload...I think its important to be able to discern what we see and hear. Now when it comes to politicians...bullshit reigns right? |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=Chico23231;1216347]
If you look at Fox news and can identify issues you have problems with...whether is language choice, editorial opinions past as factual news, not presenting all relative facts, limited context, not presenting all sides arguments, misleading stats, negative slant, etc....which Im sure you could easily do. By taking the same scope...do it for MSNBC coverage...it might be tougher for you, but I sure you could. We live in an age of information overload...I think its important to be able to discern what we see and hear .[/quote] Chico you can and people do do it. You just don't give people credit for it. Your bias shows in your statment you say you can see it at FOX but MSNBC might be tougher,BS,MSNBC is more balanced in my opinion but that is the point people will watch what they want to watch? Chico none of this is new,MSM has been like this since corporations made their news departments show a profit, now they must play to their audience and their sponsors FOX chose a side as does CNN. Here is an idea............stop watching them . |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=Giantone;1216374]Chico you can and people do do it. You just don't give people credit for it. [B]Your bias shows in your statment you say you can see it at FOX but MSNBC might be tougher[/B],BS,MSNBC is more balanced in my opinion but that is the point people will watch what they want to watch? Chico none of this is new,MSM has been like this since corporations made their news departments show a profit, now they must play to their audience and their sponsors FOX chose a side as does CNN. Here is an idea............stop watching them .[/quote]
I was talking to Punch directly...meaning if he leans left it may be harder to spot on MSNBC if your unwilling to be objective. I gotta spell it out for G1. Why are you so mad? This is an example of the garbage fake news rhetoric about the Jazmine Barnes: Look at this racist trash accusing the police to be white supremacists: [url]https://www.theroot.com/could-police-have-prevented-7-year-old-jazmine-barnes-1831459355[/url] |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=Chico23231;1216376]I was talking to Punch directly...meaning if he leans left it may be harder to spot on MSNBC if your unwilling to be objective. I gotta spell it out for G1.
Why are you so mad? This is an example of the garbage fake news rhetoric about the Jazmine Barnes: Look at this racist trash accusing the police to be white supremacists: [url]https://www.theroot.com/could-police-have-prevented-7-year-old-jazmine-barnes-1831459355[/url][/quote] Chico ,please don't try the grade school spin on me. Your the one who seems to have anger issues and your postings back me up . |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=Chico23231;1216376]I was talking to Punch directly...meaning if he leans left it may be harder to spot on MSNBC if your unwilling to be objective. I gotta spell it out for G1.
Why are you so mad? This is an example of the garbage fake news rhetoric about the Jazmine Barnes: Look at this racist trash accusing the police to be white supremacists: [url]https://www.theroot.com/could-police-have-prevented-7-year-old-jazmine-barnes-1831459355[/url][/quote] You are correct, Chico. That article is garbage. It's one thing to say racists have infiltrated police forces, which according to the FBI is a real thing, it's another thing to say police forces are inherently racist. The difference is I ignore it, you point it out, which drives clicks. What is your point? Every base has extremism, from (imo) Fox News, Breitbart, to (in your opinion) The Root, to extremist Christians, Muslims, etc. there will always be a small minority of people that live their life in that extremist way. Does it suck these extremists have a voice? Yes, in much of the same way Breitbart has a voice and is allowed to pollute people's minds with their garbage. But you ain't gonna solve it by trying to point it out to us. How many of us do you think read The Root? |
Re: Media Bias
Speaking of agendas let's look at this Business Insider article that MSN picked up and stuck on their page:
[url]https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/taxes/how-much-would-alexandria-ocasio-cortezs-tax-plan-cost-americans/ar-BBRSx2f?li=BBnb7Kz[/url] The first paragraph (which analysts say is the 2nd most read part of the article after the headline, which most people read without even clicking the article nowadays: [quote=Business Insider] Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has touted a plan that would tax multimillionaire Americans 60-70% to fund massive energy and infrastructure overhauls related to a plan that aims to reduce the country's carbon emissions to zero and eliminate fossil fuels in 10 years. [/quote] This sentence conveniently leaves out the fact that her plan is based on a marginal tax rate, which means anything under 10 million wouldn't be taxed at 70% and only profits above 10 million would hit that tax rate. So if you make more than 10 million in a given year that first 10 million isn't taxed at 70 percent. Anything above it is. That's a major difference then people believing if you made 10 million it would be taxed at 70%. Now granted, the 2nd paragraph focuses on that detail, but in an age where readers barely skim headlines I believe that makes a big impact. Hell, if you read the whole article you will see if she did that it wouldn't even be the first time in American history that would be done. Eisenhower had it at 90% in the 50's, JFK/LBJ at 70% through the 70's, and Reagan dropped it to 50% in the early 80's before it bottomed out near its' current rate of 39.6% in 1986. Imagine a world where corporations might be allowed to move all of their profits offshore to horde wealth, but the owners of those companies couldn't. I can't wait to hear why you think the gov't should leave their hands out of these innocent multi-millionaire's pockets Chico. Because the current system is soooooo effective. |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=mooby;1216395]Speaking of agendas let's look at this Business Insider article that MSN picked up and stuck on their page:
[url]https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/taxes/how-much-would-alexandria-ocasio-cortezs-tax-plan-cost-americans/ar-BBRSx2f?li=BBnb7Kz[/url] The first paragraph (which analysts say is the 2nd most read part of the article after the headline, which most people read without even clicking the article nowadays: This sentence conveniently leaves out the fact that her plan is based on a marginal tax rate, which means anything under 10 million wouldn't be taxed at 70% and only profits above 10 million would hit that tax rate. So if you make more than 10 million in a given year that first 10 million isn't taxed at 70 percent. Anything above it is. That's a major difference then people believing if you made 10 million it would be taxed at 70%. Now granted, the 2nd paragraph focuses on that detail, but in an age where readers barely skim headlines I believe that makes a big impact. Hell, if you read the whole article you will see if she did that it wouldn't even be the first time in American history that would be done. Eisenhower had it at 90% in the 50's, JFK/LBJ at 70% through the 70's, and Reagan dropped it to 50% in the early 80's before it bottomed out near its' current rate of 39.6% in 1986. Imagine a world where corporations might be allowed to move all of their profits offshore to horde wealth, but the owners of those companies couldn't. I can't wait to hear why you think the gov't should leave their hands out of these innocent multi-millionaire's pockets Chico. Because the current system is soooooo effective.[/quote] It’s socialism and a garbage ass plan. I hope to god you don’t honestly believe this is viable and numbers work out? Jesus Christ |
Re: Media Bias
[QUOTE=Chico23231;1216376]I was talking to Punch directly...meaning if he leans left it may be harder to spot on MSNBC if your unwilling to be objective. I gotta spell it out for G1.
Why are you so mad? This is an example of the garbage fake news rhetoric about the Jazmine Barnes: Look at this racist trash accusing the police to be white supremacists: [url]https://www.theroot.com/could-police-have-prevented-7-year-old-jazmine-barnes-1831459355[/url][/QUOTE] I am quite capable of deciphering the truth for myself. Imo Fox is such fake news it is criminal. Literally criminal. They should be indicted for aiding and abetting. They spin such racist rhetoric it is mind numbing. MSNBC is obviously not the gospel by any means but they are much more honest than Fox. I can show you countless examples of them berating Obama for things and championing Trump for the exact same things. They ignore absolutely everything that isn’t part of their agenda, and than harp on one isolated incident to push their agenda. MSNBC is not nearly as one sided, and 90% of the people that say they are do it because the Orange guy calls them fake news. It is the same tactic Nixon used, or Hitler for that matter once they realized their dirty little secrets were bubbling to the surface. Trump knows the truth is going to come out eventually- hell it has been coming out for months and months - unless of course it is just coincidence that everyone he has surrounded himself with the last several years has these weird connections to Mother Russia. Imo CNN and MSNBC are simply calling it like they see it - and history will prove them to be right. Very soon. Fox is literally working for the Whitehouse. Terrorists pouring in over the southern border. Drugs in the “caravan”. Lol. Pull troops out of Syria and let Russia and Iran have their way - and send troops to keep the brown people... i mean the rapist terrorist drug dealers out. LMAO. Racist trash. And MSNBC and CNN constantly bash Obama for pulling out of Iraq too early. Meanwhile Fox has no issues with Syria - just when Obama pulled out of Iraq. You are right forget about right vs left. It is truth vs lies. At the end of the day someone actually does have to be telling the truth - though along the way it just feels like two different spins. History will show who was lying. It already is if you pay attention and connect the dots. |
Re: Media Bias
SEC media bias getting served a bowl of dicks tonight. Big ones.
|
Re: Media Bias
[quote=punch it in;1216428]I am quite capable of deciphering the truth for myself. Imo Fox is such fake news it is criminal. Literally criminal. They should be indicted for aiding and abetting. They spin such racist rhetoric it is mind numbing.
MSNBC is obviously not the gospel by any means but they are much more honest than Fox. I can show you countless examples of them berating Obama for things and championing Trump for the exact same things. They ignore absolutely everything that isn’t part of their agenda, and than harp on one isolated incident to push their agenda. MSNBC is not nearly as one sided, and 90% of the people that say they are do it because the Orange guy calls them fake news. It is the same tactic Nixon used, or Hitler for that matter once they realized their dirty little secrets were bubbling to the surface. Trump knows the truth is going to come out eventually- hell it has been coming out for months and months - unless of course it is just coincidence that everyone he has surrounded himself with the last several years has these weird connections to Mother Russia. Imo CNN and MSNBC are simply calling it like they see it - and history will prove them to be right. Very soon. Fox is literally working for the Whitehouse. Terrorists pouring in over the southern border. Drugs in the “caravan”. Lol. Pull troops out of Syria and let Russia and Iran have their way - and send troops to keep the brown people... i mean the rapist terrorist drug dealers out. LMAO. Racist trash. And MSNBC and CNN constantly bash Obama for pulling out of Iraq too early. Meanwhile Fox has no issues with Syria - just when Obama pulled out of Iraq. You are right forget about right vs left. It is truth vs lies. At the end of the day someone actually does have to be telling the truth - though along the way it just feels like two different spins. History will show who was lying. It already is if you pay attention and connect the dots.[/quote] Ive seen multiple instances of Fox news disagreeing with Trump. Actually during the run for President, his most famous spat was with Megan Kelly...You remember that? If you think Fox news should be arrested...then clearly you are a fascist and have no use for the Constitution. So thanks again for your opinion. Also, in reading the AOC New Green Socialist Deal I'm getting excited about the Unicorn farms! Should be fun! |
Re: Media Bias
[QUOTE=Chico23231;1216447]Ive seen multiple instances of Fox news disagreeing with Trump. Actually during the run for President, his most famous spat was with Megan Kelly...You remember that?
If you think Fox news should be arrested...then clearly you are a fascist and have no use for the Constitution. So thanks again for your opinion. Also, in reading the AOC New Green Socialist Deal I'm getting excited about the Unicorn farms! Should be fun![/QUOTE] And Megan Kelly quickly departed from Fox after that spat. Im sure she saw the writing on the wall. I was obviously being sarcastic about Fox news being arrested they have the right to spew racist hatred and lies that contribute HEAVILY to the divisiveness of our country. They have the right to mislead numb nuts and play the role of national security adviser all they want. |
Re: Media Bias
Again you do not have to agree with the stance of either Fox or MSNBC, but Fox is spewing hate, rhetoric, and fear mongering. That is not only wrong but dangerous. MSNBC is not doing this.
|
Re: Media Bias
[quote=punch it in;1216454]Again you do not have to agree with the stance of either Fox or MSNBC, but Fox is spewing hate, rhetoric, and fear mongering. That is not only wrong but dangerous. MSNBC is not doing this.[/quote]
.........after tonight's address to the nation it should be fun to watch all the "fact checking" going on with trumps lies. Surprise he just isn't tweeting it. |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=punch it in;1216454]Again you do not have to agree with the stance of either Fox or MSNBC, but Fox is spewing hate, rhetoric, and fear mongering. That is not only wrong but dangerous. MSNBC is not doing this.[/quote]
Fox isn’t doing anything msnbc or cnn has done daily.fear mongering and rhetoric...man it’s clear it’s on both sides. Your not being objective. And there is plenty of evidence that in the past year many fox talking heads disagreeing with president trumps position. Just google it. |
Media Bias
[QUOTE=Giantone;1216516].........after tonight's address to the nation it should be fun to watch all the "fact checking" going on with trumps lies. Surprise he just isn't tweeting it.[/QUOTE]
Honestly G-1 there is no such thing as fact checking anymore. Trumpers just spin “fact checking “ into “media bias”, “fake news”, “alternative facts”. Call it whatever you want. Lol. |
Re: Media Bias
Chico, they've got you surrounded...
[IMG]http://cdn-9chat-fun.9cache.com/media/photo/aoXYWk661_480w_v1.jpg[/IMG] |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=punch it in;1216536]Honestly G-1 there is no such thing as fact checking anymore. Trumpers just spin “fact checking “ into “media bias”, “fake news”, “alternative facts”. Call it whatever you want. Lol.[/quote]
Yes, now kellyanne is calling them "unfortunate misstatements". |
Re: Media Bias
Fact checking trump and I am honestly trying to get a cross section here..........
[url]https://qz.com/1517758/border-wall-facts-to-read-before-trumps-speech-tonight/[/url] [url]http://time.com/5497260/donald-trump-border-wall-fact-check/[/url] [url]https://www.npr.org/2019/01/08/683205814/fact-check-trumps-oval-office-pitch-for-a-border-wall[/url] [url]https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/08/us/politics/trump-speech.html[/url] What's interesting FOX's Shepard Smith (who I like ) jumped on trump but I could not find FOX posting info on it,only thye Daily Beast talked about it............ [url]https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-gets-instant-fact-check-from-fox-news-shepard-smith-after-oval-office-speech[/url] |
Re: Media Bias
[url]https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/05/the-times-gives-maddow-the-cold-shoulder[/url]
The NY Times recently yanked one of its journalists from Rachel Maddow amid concerns about cable-news “bias.” Dean Baquet “thinks it’s a real issue.” It’s not just Maddow. The Times has come to “prefer,” as sources put it, that its reporters steer clear of any cable-news shows that the masthead perceives as too partisan, and managers have lately been advising people not to go on what they see as highly opinionated programs. It's not clear how many shows fall under that umbrella in the eyes of Times brass, but two others that definitely do are Lawrence O’Donnell’s and Don Lemon’s, according to people familiar with management’s thinking. Hannity’s or Tucker Carlson’s shows would likewise make the cut, but it's not like Times reporters ever do those anyway. I’m told that over the past couple of months, executive editor Dean Baquet has felt that opinionated cable-news show are getting, well, even more opinionated. Baquet and other managers have become increasingly concerned that if a Times reporter were to go on one of these shows, his or her appearance could be perceived as being aligned with that show’s political leanings. “He thinks it’s a real issue,” one of my Times sources said. “Their view,” said another, “is that, intentionally or not, it affiliates the Times reporter with a bias.” This time its the executive editor saying it, not Chico. Good to hear he agrees. |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=Chico23231;1224167][url]https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/05/the-times-gives-maddow-the-cold-shoulder[/url]
The NY Times recently yanked one of its journalists from Rachel Maddow amid concerns about cable-news “bias.” Dean Baquet “thinks it’s a real issue.” It’s not just Maddow. The Times has come to “prefer,” as sources put it, that its reporters steer clear of any cable-news shows that the masthead perceives as too partisan, and managers have lately been advising people not to go on what they see as highly opinionated programs. It's not clear how many shows fall under that umbrella in the eyes of Times brass, but two others that definitely do are Lawrence O’Donnell’s and Don Lemon’s, according to people familiar with management’s thinking. Hannity’s or Tucker Carlson’s shows would likewise make the cut, but it's not like Times reporters ever do those anyway. I’m told that over the past couple of months, executive editor Dean Baquet has felt that opinionated cable-news show are getting, well, even more opinionated. Baquet and other managers have become increasingly concerned that if a Times reporter were to go on one of these shows, his or her appearance could be perceived as being aligned with that show’s political leanings. “He thinks it’s a real issue,” one of my Times sources said. “Their view,” said another, “is that, intentionally or not, it affiliates the Times reporter with a bias.” This time its the executive editor saying it, not Chico. Good to hear he agrees.[/quote] I agree too, you are bias all so! |
Re: Media Bias
I just thought it interesting to compare the takeaways from both CNN and Fox on Mueller's testimony.
I put the links if you want to read more depth on them, I just put the sentence they chose to bold. [url="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/robert-mueller-hearings-here-are-5-big-takeaways"]Fox's top 5[/url] takeaways from Mueller's Testimony 1. Mueller said the findings of his investigation do not exonerate Trump and added the president can still be prosecuted when he leaves the White House 2. Muller was forced to clear up confusion as to why he didn't indict Trump 3. Mueller testified that he did not meet with Trump for the job of FBI director, contradicting previous statements by the president 4. Mueller said Trump and Donald Jr. praising WikiLeaks was "problematic" 5. Mueller said Russian election interference is an ongoing issue that will continue in 2020 [URL="https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/24/politics/robert-mueller-testimony-highlights/index.html"]CNN's top 5[/URL] (they actually had 10, but I cut it at 5) 1. Trump's tweets showed how anxious he actually was 2. Mueller disappointed Republicans 3. ... and Democrats 4. Mueller was shaky -- especially at the start 5. Mueller directly contradicted Trump on FBI job |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=CRedskinsRule;1225604]I just thought it interesting to compare the takeaways from both CNN and Fox on Mueller's testimony.
I put the links if you want to read more depth on them, I just put the sentence they chose to bold. [url="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/robert-mueller-hearings-here-are-5-big-takeaways"]Fox's top 5[/url] takeaways from Mueller's Testimony 1. Mueller said the findings of his investigation do not exonerate Trump and added the president can still be prosecuted when he leaves the White House 2. Muller was forced to clear up confusion as to why he didn't indict Trump 3. Mueller testified that he did not meet with Trump for the job of FBI director, contradicting previous statements by the president 4. Mueller said Trump and Donald Jr. praising WikiLeaks was "problematic" 5. Mueller said Russian election interference is an ongoing issue that will continue in 2020 [URL="https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/24/politics/robert-mueller-testimony-highlights/index.html"]CNN's top 5[/URL] (they actually had 10, but I cut it at 5) 1. Trump's tweets showed how anxious he actually was 2. Mueller disappointed Republicans 3. ... and Democrats 4. Mueller was shaky -- especially at the start 5. Mueller directly contradicted Trump on FBI job[/quote] I think if folks remove the editorial/opinion shows of Tucker Carlson, Hannity which are clearly right, the actual "news" portion of the fox new broadcast station is way more legitimate than CNN or MSNBC. It simply is...they actually report entire stories and don't cherry pick. And when the regular news portion do give analysis or an editorial they will criticize the administration. And this criticism is daily. |
Re: Media Bias
That's one of the things that drives me most crazy - in high school English class we spent a fair amount of time on the various roles within journalism, namely how to tell the difference between news reporting and opinion pieces. In the mid 90s that was viewed mostly through the lens of print journalism.
But I now feel like it's very easy to look at cable news networks through the same lens and identify which programs are reporting news and which are opinion based. It seems far, far too many Americans can't tell the difference, and they actually rely on opinion programs for their actual news. Consequently they don't realize that consuming news this way inherently leads to the development of bias in their own minds. They consume news with a confirmation bias and they don't even realize it. Every American should know that to get your [B]news[/B], you should be consuming it through fact based news reporting programs and written pieces. Never through opinion pieces. You can supplement with opinion programs once you're up on the facts, but it should not be the source for keeping up with current events and facts. You're never going to be presented with a fair and complete evaluation of the situation this way. We should all know this but for some reason we don't. Or we don't care. |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=Schneed10;1225611]That's one of the things that drives me most crazy - in high school English class we spent a fair amount of time on the various roles within journalism, namely how to tell the difference between news reporting and opinion pieces. In the mid 90s that was viewed mostly through the lens of print journalism.
But I now feel like it's very easy to look at cable news networks through the same lens and identify which programs are reporting news and which are opinion based. It seems far, far too many Americans can't tell the difference, and they actually rely on opinion programs for their actual news. Consequently they don't realize that consuming news this way inherently leads to the development of bias in their own minds. They consume news with a confirmation bias and they don't even realize it. Every American should know that to get your [B]news[/B], you should be consuming it through fact based news reporting programs and written pieces. Never through opinion pieces. You can supplement with opinion programs once you're up on the facts, but it should not be the source for keeping up with current events and facts. You're never going to be presented with a fair and complete evaluation of the situation this way. We should all know this but for some reason we don't. Or we don't care.[/quote] I actually remember in both High School AND College in English and Literature , that there was a clear progression from reading-writing-to critical thinking and analysis. Do they teach this anymore? I took a higher level literature/critical thinking college which was required to satisfy a course....it was taught by a wife of a guy who was on a Washington dc weekly tv politics show. We looked a social issues and read editorial/opinion/analysis pieces by authors such as Chomsky (left) and Krauthammer (right) about each. Our job in the course was to analyze the arguments and then at the techniques each author used to make their arguments. It was eye opening and a gateway to objectivity. We weren't having arguments about the issues but the instruments...and putting aside subjective "FEELINGS", everyone seemed to agree with points made by every author or view point. I think it was one of the few course with extremely high attendance and everyone enjoyed it. If you just read through social media, critical thinking seems not to be a part of today society. |
Re: Media Bias
If you're getting your news through social media, you're doing it wrong. Facebook has no incentive to distinguish real from fake news.
Also +1 great post Schneed. |
Re: Media Bias
[QUOTE=Chico23231;1225614]I actually remember in both High School AND College in English and Literature , that there was a clear progression from reading-writing-to critical thinking and analysis. Do they teach this anymore?
I took a higher level literature/critical thinking college which was required to satisfy a course....it was taught by a wife of a guy who was on a Washington dc weekly tv politics show. We looked a social issues and read editorial/opinion/analysis pieces by authors such as Chomsky (left) and Krauthammer (right) about each. Our job in the course was to analyze the arguments and then at the techniques each author used to make their arguments. It was eye opening and a gateway to objectivity. We weren't having arguments about the issues but the instruments...and putting aside subjective "FEELINGS", everyone seemed to agree with points made by every author or view point. I think it was one of the few course with extremely high attendance and everyone enjoyed it. If you just read through social media, critical thinking seems not to be a part of today society.[/QUOTE]I wish college level non biased critical thinking classes were required for every 16 year old. It would be an eye opener across the board. Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=mooby;1225615]If you're getting your news through social media, you're doing it wrong. Facebook has no incentive to distinguish real from fake news.
Also +1 great post Schneed.[/quote] No I’m not getting my news, but I’m reading responses to news on social media and I really think people are generally getting dumber. It use to be kinda laughed at when people would mention nazi or use nazi comparison because how false and intellectually lazy it was considered. Now people throw it around daily...it clownish. |
Re: Media Bias
Always been plenty of dumb people out there they just have a voice now with social media.
|
Re: Media Bias
I hope this guy dies in prison!
[url]https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/alex-jones-loses-another-legal-battle-in-sandy-hook-defamation-case-173408653.html[/url] U.S. Alex Jones Loses Another Legal Battle In Sandy Hook Defamation Case HuffPost Sebastian Murdock,HuffPost 6 hours ago Reactions Reblog on Tumblr Share Tweet Email Scroll back up to restore default view. Conspiracy theorist and lawsuit magnet Alex Jones lost another legal battle last week when a court struck down an appeal related to a defamation lawsuit against him and his fearmongering website Infowars. Infowars and Jones are defendants in a lawsuit brought by Neil Heslin, the father of 6-year-old Jesse Lewis, who was one of 20 children and six adults killed when a gunman stormed Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut in 2012. In the years since the shooting, Heslin and other Sandy Hook parents have received death threats and online harassment from followers of Jones’ Infowars website, which over the years has repeatedly claimed the shooting was a hoax and the parents are “crisis actors.” Infowars contributor Owen Shroyer is also named in the lawsuit. In the latest court filing, the Texas Court of Appeals ordered Infowars to “pay all costs” related to the failed appeal that Infowars filed against Heslin, who is being represented by Mark Bankston of the Texas law firm Farrar & Ball. Previously, Heslin filed a motion of contempt in the case after the website refused to comply with a court-ordered demand to hand over internal emails and documents related to discussions about Sandy Hook. Now the website will pay up in addition to handing over the information. As Right Wing Watch first pointed out: |
Re: Media Bias
Media bias? The fact is, all media is govt run propaganda.
It's entertainment, distraction. None of it us true. So called fact checking is a waste of time. All the facts are propaganda. It's all a lie. |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=Indian-brave;1231712]Media bias? The fact is, all media is govt run propaganda.
It's entertainment, distraction. None of it us true. So called fact checking is a waste of time. All the facts are propaganda. It's all a lie.[/quote] [IMG]http://m.quickmeme.com/img/5e/5e6116694147369871eda4b177afec9ad0dce249c30070c34952716e7d639098.jpg[/IMG] |
Re: Media Bias
[quote=MTK;1225661]Always been plenty of dumb people out there they just have a voice now with social media.[/quote]
As if to further prove your point: Ladies and gentlemen, the Warpath's newest member: [quote=Indian-brave] Media bias? The fact is, all media is govt run propaganda. It's entertainment, distraction. None of it us true. So called fact checking is a waste of time. All the facts are propaganda. It's all a lie. [/quote] |
Re: Media Bias
[URL]https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/today-anchors-react-to-matt-lauer-rape-allegation-this-is-shocking-and-appalling-%e2%80%94-watch-video/ar-AAIv9Vn?li=BBnbfcL[/URL]
Disturbing shit coming out about Matt Lauer in Ronan Farrow's new book "Catch and Kill" If this is true Lauer needs to be in prison. Edit: Lauer with the clapback. [URL="https://www.foxnews.com/media/matt-lauer-rape-accusation-open-letter-here"][COLOR=#0066cc]https://www.foxnews.com/media/matt-lauer-rape-accusation-open-letter-here[/COLOR][/URL] Fox News seems to be the only one carrying the full statement, so there it is. Everybody else seems to be crucifying Lauer. Idk who to believe, so I'm not gonna pick a side. But it does seem suspicious that she would continue having an affair with Lauer if he anally raped her in Sochi. |
Re: Media Bias
[url]https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/democracy-dies-over-chips-guac-washington-post-reporters-slammed-for-picture-wishing-merry-impeachmas[/url]
so much objective journalism here |
Re: Media Bias
Chico if you don't enjoy Ricky Gervais' monologue at the Golden Globes I don't know you at all. I thought it was fantastic.
[url]https://twitter.com/alexsalvinews/status/1214003629377478656?s=09[/url] |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:08 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.