Has Anyone Else Completely Lost Faith In The Media?

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Out of curiosity, can you cite an example where JR was wrong(factually) on the Occupy movement, given proof of the error, and then his failing to acknowledge it?

I may not (in fact I know I don't) agree with JR on certain issues, but rarely is the disagreement based on underlying facts, which you seem to be saying when you say he says "a lot of things that are wrong", our disagreements usually involve application of those facts.

We disagree b/c I am just smarter than you. Always have been, always will be.

[dmek25]

it seems like the GOP followers are crying over spilled milk. their party is out of power, so they have lost faith in our govt. their presidential hopeful has a ton of skeletons that are now being re reported, so they have lost faith in the media. boo hoo i say

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Further, you were wrong when you initially made the statement ("Fox is banned") in the Occupy thread. I pointed out the error then, but, consistent with your methodology, you ignored it. Now, in a thread lambasting the media for their playing fast and loose with the truth, you repeat - and assert as truth - a fact which you have not verified, the error of which was previously pointed out and which is consistent with your complete and utter contempt for Fox.

I haven't ignored anything, nor do I recall the post from the other thread. Chances are I just didn't see the post. Chill out.


Are you asking me to point out where Fox lies? If so, I can definitely do that.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Out of curiosity, can you cite an example where JR was wrong(factually) on the Occupy movement, given proof of the error, and then his failing to acknowledge it?

I may not (in fact I know I don't) agree with JR on certain issues, but rarely is the disagreement based on underlying facts, which you seem to be saying when you say he says "a lot of things that are wrong", our disagreements usually involve application of those facts.

Opinion based. I don't recall anything off the top of my head or anything I care to dig for to be honest with you.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by dmek25

it seems like the GOP followers are crying over spilled milk. their party is out of power, so they have lost faith in our govt. their presidential hopeful has a ton of skeletons that are now being re reported, so they have lost faith in the media. boo hoo i say

Well if you have followed any of my post you will know that I lost faith both in Gov. & the media long before Obama took office.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Speaking of Fox. Let's see exactly why they are banned in Canada.


Statutes and Regulations | CRTC


-requires that "a licenser may not broadcast….any false or misleading news."



I think the US should pass the same type of legislation that our neighbors to the north have. Would make for better quality news.

What happened to your freedom of speech you talk about in the OWS thread?

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I haven't ignored anything, nor do I recall the post from the other thread.

After you made an earlier claim that Fox was banned in Canada, and in response to the post I quoted above, you responded to later portion of the post (which I did not quote here) but said nothing in response to the portion I quoted above. Thus, because you had clearly read the post but only responded to one portion of it, I made the assumption - as I believe any reasonable person would - that you had decided to ignore your highlighted error.

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Are you asking me to point out where Fox lies? If so, I can definitely do that.

No. I am highlighting the hypocrisy of you making the statement "Fox is banned in Canada" based on unverified information in light of your constant attacks on Fox for just the same action.

I have no problem with the concept that not all of what Fox claims as "fact" is not actually factual. At the same time, not all they claim as fact is fiction either. The same is true of CNN, MSNBC and other media outlets.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Opinion based. I don't recall anything off the top of my head or anything I care to dig for to be honest with you.

Well that's a heck of a statement to make, and then not want to dig for it to back up your position.

Let me put it another way, earlier in the thread you said you felt the US ought to enact a law which

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

-requires that "a licenser may not broadcast….any false or misleading news."

I think the US should pass the same type of legislation that our neighbors to the north have.

then you make a fairly broad accusation against JR:

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

You[JoeRedskin] say a lot of things that are wrong, especially in your stance with the Occupy Movement, but that doesn't stop you.

and when asked to validate your statement, you say in effect, I don't have to prove my statement.

Seems like we need a law prohibiting false or misleading claims on BB's (heavy sarcasm intended)


JR, for all his faults, is a very accurate person when he makes statements of facts. I know he takes a bit of pride in that. Argue his conclusions all day long, but a mistaken conclusion is far different than presenting erroneous facts, and the accusation of such isn't something that should be brushed over because you "don't care to dig for it".



Back on point of this topic, the media gives no claim (other than for revenue) of being worthy of faith. Each outlet panders to their base in order to garner more advertising revenue and a larger base. Unlike the government, which is SUPPOSED to present the good for all citizens and thus lost faith is a critical thing, lost faith in the media simply means finding a media outlet more suited towards your own beliefs.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

and when asked to validate your statement, you say in effect, I don't have to prove my statement.

I think he's wrong on many of his stances, that doesn't mean what he's said is accurate or inaccurate based on facts. I think you are reading into too much of what I said.

Technically, he was wrong when he stated I hate corporations and rich people, but who's keeping track. :cheeky-sm


Much like the current media, you are detracting on the meat of what's important with a side show of who's right and wrong. I admitted to being wrong about the Fox in Canada thing, and here we are 7 posts later still talking about me being wrong? Let's talk about our pathetic media. Thanks.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I think he's wrong on many of his stances, that doesn't mean what he's said is accurate or inaccurate based on facts. I think you are reading into too much of what I said.

Technically, he was wrong when he stated I hate corporations and rich people, but who's keeping track. :cheeky-sm


Much like the current media, you are detracting on the meat of what's important with a side show of who's right and wrong. I admitted to being wrong about the Fox in Canada thing, and here we are 7 posts later still talking about me being wrong? Let's talk about our pathetic media. Thanks.

Funny thing tho'. You pulled one sentence out of my post, made a silly sidestep, then ignored the end of my post which laid out my answer to why the premise of the thread is wrong, and then accused me of detracting from the meat. But fine.

Our media is pathetic, simply because we have lots of air time available to whiny mediots who make bold statements then do nothing in terms of proving whether their statements are factually accurate or not. And when called on it they use poor critical thinking skills to avoid direct answers and muddle their actual responses because they are unable to accept that they are wrong. Of course, no one here forced to listen to just one side of a discussion, although many end up doing just that.

Of course the argument could be made that it is the availability of all points of views, from mediots to talking heads, to scholars, that allows the US, and other nations that encourage free speech, to grow and move beyond shallow thinking as a nation, and also leads to more open and honest debate, where one is forced to contemplate every point of view and not just their exclusive way of thinking.

[mlmpetert]

Quick and short Op-Ed from the NY Times:

Media blames Aurora on right—Gabriel Malor - NYPOST.com

Expanded version from theblaze:

Six Moments Where the Media has Wrongly Blamed Violence on Conservatives | TheBlaze.com

[firstdown]

Funny thing is Fox is not banned in Canada and I'm not sure where you got that from.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Funny thing is Fox is not banned in Canada and I'm not sure where you got that from.

That is correct. I mistakenly went on RFK, jr.'s article about it being banned. It is in fact not banned in Canada, and I even researched a few cable stations that carry it after JR's correction.

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

That is correct. I mistakenly went on RFK, jr.'s article about it being banned. It is in fact not banned in Canada, and I even researched the few cable stations that carry it after JR's correction.

I guess “few” means something different depending on the person.

But for those like me it may be worth noting that when NCSkins says "the few" he means more than 10 and what i would normally refer to "the vast majority”. There is however “one” notable exception, as Videotron, Canada’s third largest cable provider which is targeted towards the French speaking Canadians does not carry the channel. I would offer an opinion as to why but I am unable to read French-Canadian:

Services de Téléphonie, Internet, Télévision et Mobile | Vidéotron

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

I guess “few” means something different depending on the person.

But for those like me it may be worth noting that when NCSkins says "the few" he means more than 10 and what i would normally refer to "the vast majority”. There is however “one” notable exception, as Videotron, Canada’s third largest cable provider which is targeted towards the French speaking Canadians does not carry the channel. I would offer an opinion as to why but I am unable to read French-Canadian:

Services de Téléphonie, Internet, Télévision et Mobile | Vidéotron

My words should have been "a few" and not "the few". I didn't look at every single carrier in Canada, just a few. If I remember correctly, Videotron is one of the ones that didn't carry it because they already had another type of "fox news" conservative type station already.