Relotius Case: Fraudulent Reporting in Spiegel

121 posts in this topic

2 hours ago, balticus said:

You confuse subtlety with honesty and you might not be smart enough to understand the difference or to detect misinformation wrapped in sophistication or sophistry.

Another example of your subtle 'politeness'?...  This has been your 'politeness' since the beginning by the way.

 

I understood your point the first time you wrote it. For you, it's a tool to paint everything with the same brush. I disagree and you haven't convinced me otherwise.

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

Of these hundreds, which do you read regularly?   I never implied that WaPo or WashTimes stands in for anything, but i believe they exemplify the problems of American media. 

Of American sources, only a few "regularly". None are "mainstream". We've at least both already agreed most American newsmedia are not that great. A few posts ago, I'd have listed some.

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

You have attributed ideas to me which i have not written. 

You do not make your points clearly and seem to intentionally obfuscate. Perhaps because you enjoy being able to scoff "What, you didn't even know my argument?".

 

Clearly, assuming that you were discussing in good faith was wrong.

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

I am not convinced that making or losing money is the only reason people go into the media business.  

That was never my point.

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

Who has financed Falun Gong since the beginning?   

You are beating around the bush again. If you have a point to make, make it. I might guess the answer you're looking for, but won't take the bait.

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

Distribution is important.   People can self-publish novels but without marketing and distribution, it is difficult to reach a big audience. 

Difficult sure, but easier than ever before. "Nobodies" are less reliant on traditional marketing or distribution gatekeepers. It makes a difference. (True that Tumblr, Youtube, FB, Apple Store et al are just another kind of gatekeeper...and to no one's surprise becoming more politicized)

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

Anybody can start a blog, but branding in media matters.   You find the WaPo brand less unreliable than the WashTimes brand, for example.

It's not so much about the brand to me, but I won't pretend I'm immune. Branding is just marketing jargon for reputation. This can be based on a number of things.

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

Perhaps your assertion that others don't know much about American history or current events is simply projection.  

Nah. But nice "polite" attempt at deflection...

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

Anti-war, climate change activists, animal rights activists, pro-abortion activists,  animal rights activists, and people who want a new stadium in their respective city because they identify as fans of a certain sports team could also fit under your definition of those driven by identity politics. 

Despite your facetiousness, hypothetically they could. That's why it's insidious.

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

I don't think it is so broad.

Feel free to clarify your definition. I have mine, and know what I base it on.

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

PETA seems to be quite active near places which experiment on animals, butcher animals for food, or skin animals for fur.   This is unsurprising.     They think it is wrong.

It's amazing how quickly you lose the plot. Yes, and who volunteers and staffs PETA?

 

Like pro-lifers outside clinics, the power wielded (or not) as well as the success (or not) is irrelevant to whether they are identity politics groups. 

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

If you say so.  I tend to think that evangelical Christians have far less power than you think.  

Another attempt to move the goalposts. The point is, they are a conservative identity politics group. You haven't given any arguments as to how you might refute this (or the KKK point). Instead, you are ignoring the point entirely and trying to shift the argument to that it doesn't actually matter if they are because __________. Stay focussed. 

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

Otherwise i wouldn't put a whole lot of weight on your opinion.  

So now you can understand my view of you...

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

Yet you have mentioned the amount of money the NRA showers on politicians as if support is simply a question of money.   Are you backing away from that?

Quote me where I said this.

 

My point is that anti-gun control types (can) exist as a category of identity politics.


Personally, I think little will change anytime soon, because "real change" is a constitutional/judicial issue not a money issue (you perhaps see no difference).

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

Biased by design rather than necessarily malign.

I am still not sure if you are very naive or very cynical...

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

In theory, but not in practice.     I don't see multiple independent voices on many topics.  

How hard do you really look?

 

2 hours ago, balticus said:

If people buy media businesses which don't make money, but can sway public opinion, why do you think they buy those businesses?   

Duh. Nowhere have I said this isn't the case, that's why I wrote what you're replying to.

 

3 hours ago, balticus said:

Hard to say what you mean by "Leftist".  

That's my point.

 

3 hours ago, balticus said:

Nobody invented globalization.   It has been part of human existence for a very long time.   

That's my point. Glad you agree with me.

 

Now I only write the following because you yourself mentioned it earlier: perhaps your English really is deficient if you can't detect what is fairly obvious irony. 

 

3 hours ago, balticus said:

You are stuck in an outdated and oversimplified left versus right paradigm.   

Nah. I've repeatedly said it's not about right vs. left.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/1/2019, 8:33:16, alderhill said:

The "gun problem" it not even about guns so much really, it's about the power/limits of government. So to make a point on these limits, this rich and influential special interest group (i.e. an identity group), courts politicians and other patronage networks (including newsmedia). In this way, they wield their influence. Perhaps not all gun owners identify strongly as such, but enough do to make a difference. This is identity politics. 

 

Will this quote work for you?    I interpreted this correctly or otherwise as a reference to the NRA (special interest group) and money.       

 

By "courts", did you mean send flowers, candy, and take the politicos out to nice restaurants, the opera, or sporting events?     

 

Which of the MSM gives favorable coverage to gun-rights?   Who are these mysterious patrons who seem to be able to outspend the Bloombergs of the world?     

 

If you are not referring to money, would you agree that the notion that the NRA can outspend billionaires who are posture as gun-control advocates is absurd?    Only someone who is unable to do basic arithmetic could be fooled by this easily detectable charade.     

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry King said that CNN doesn't do news anymore. They just cover Trump. But it has been obvious for a long time that the media is being turned into a propaganda machine.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/5/2019, 12:14:32, balticus said:

By "courts", did you mean send flowers, candy, and take the politicos out to nice restaurants, the opera, or sporting events?     

You'll have to ask them exactly what they do. 

 

Quote

Which of the MSM gives favorable coverage to gun-rights?   Who are these mysterious patrons who seem to be able to outspend the Bloombergs of the world?

The conservative ends of the media spectrum, very obviously. The NRA has enough patrons to exist, that is clear. As for their membership rolls, you'll have to ask them to provide that. Saying that one elephant is bigger than two rhinos is again besides the point.

 

Quote

If you are not referring to money, would you agree that the notion that the NRA can outspend billionaires who are posture as gun-control advocates is absurd? Only someone who is unable to do basic arithmetic could be fooled by this easily detectable charade.     

Ah, the poor widdle NRA. Again you're moving the goalposts. 2nd amendment fanatics are a conservative identity politics group, counter to the spurious argument that only liberals or Leftists™ engage in identity politics. It doesn't really matter how much money they have, or else it also wouldn't matter that fringe west coast liberal arts college SJW isolates have even less money than the NRA and other gun lobbyists. A spider is a spider, whether it's a tiny spider mite or a goliath birdeater.

 

On 1/4/2019, 3:53:47, WiccaChica said:

The KKK are a fringe movement that had no influence for 40+ years. The Pro-lifers, evangelicals and the "gun nuts" are all shunned by the establishment and often mocked.

Not in conservative circles. You're also trying to move the goalposts. That you finally acknowledge they're conservative identity politics group is good enough for me. SJWs are also roundly mocked, the term itself is a pejorative one.

 

Quote

Some of them may be about identity politics but they have far less power than those from the example that I've given you. The Evergreen College case was supported by academia and by the media to a certain degree.

Other fringe media. Evergreen College is an exceptional place, due to its MO.

 

If you think the KKK had less power than some sheltered fringe SJWs on a small very liberal arts college in Oregon you need to read some history books. What you are saying is so plain factually wrong, it's stunning. Shocking to see someone in 2019 defending the KKK.

 

Quote

By the way, how are pro-lifers and the 2nd amendment people about identity politics? Because they have strong opinion on the issues that they lobby for?

Now you're seeing the light a little. All politics involves some aspect of identity of course, but not to lose the thread too much. Not all politics is identity politics, but identity politics is not only about race or gender. That you are willfully blind to conservative bannermen of identity politics shows your bias well enough.

 

Quote

supported by the university administration. 

Likening Evergreen College to every university in the US is what's absurd. Have you studied in the US? Have you ever even been in the US? Ironically enough, it is clear to me that you are getting a skewed view from your media source(s).

 

Quote

I didn't realize those four expressions were forbidden...

Words have meanings, even if you prefer to deal in hyperbole.

 

Quote

You seem a bit frustrated here...

No, I mean it. You rail against the media and spew conspiracy theory, when it really couldn't be easier for you to be the media yourself. Put your money where your mouth is. All the "alternative facts" you read wouldn't be possible if elites truly controlled everything. If you want to see what that's like, trying living in Russia or China.

 

Quote

You are certainly entitled to your opinion however the tape was edited in order to mislead the public about Zimmerman and here is a quotation from Wikipedia

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fake_news

You still haven't proven malicious intent. If there were, Zimmerman would have sued by now. Nothing about Zimmerman at the wikipedia link.

 

Quote

In other words they were not sorry; they were only sorry they were caught.

Prove it.

 

Quote

Who benefits from this economy? I keep on hearing how great the economy is in Britain

Really? I keep hearing how it's swirling round the shitter. And post-Brexit, if only you wait a little longer and make an offering in the volcano, suddenly free trade manna will rain from everywhere that's not Europe. 

 

You obviously missed the reference to the quote anyway. That's the problem when you know less about American culture and politics than you realize. Which I wouldn't really care about, I mean why should a British millennial know about American politics from the 90s? Except that you are trying to position yourself as some kind of expert on America vis-a-vis identity politics, which has roots stretching back further than today. It's fine if you say "I don't know about that", I won't bash you for admitting not knowing something you shouldn't be expected to know, but you don't do that. The opposite...

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, alderhill said:

You'll have to ask them exactly what they do. 

 

So you don't actually know what you mean when you say the NRA "courts" polticians.

 

7 hours ago, alderhill said:

 

The conservative ends of the media spectrum, very obviously. The NRA has enough patrons to exist, that is clear. As for their membership rolls, you'll have to ask them to provide that. Saying that one elephant is bigger than two rhinos is again besides the point.

 

Saying a herd of elephants is bigger than an ant colony is a no-brainer.   You're not competent at arithmetic like most journalists.  

 

7 hours ago, alderhill said:

 

Ah, the poor widdle NRA. Again you're moving the goalposts. 2nd amendment fanatics are a conservative identity politics group, counter to the spurious argument that only liberals or Leftists™ engage in identity politics. It doesn't really matter how much money they have, or else it also wouldn't matter that fringe west coast liberal arts college SJW isolates have even less money than the NRA and other gun lobbyists. A spider is a spider, whether it's a tiny spider mite or a goliath birdeater.

 

You seem to not understand what it means to "move the goalposts".   

 

No strong feelings about the NRA either way, but utterly convinced that people who seem the group as all powerful and deep pocketed are math challenged.    The argument has no basis unless the billionaires speaking out in favor of gun control are not sincere and have not put their money behind serious legislative reform.     Imagine that.   

 

7 hours ago, alderhill said:

Shocking to see someone in 2019 defending the KKK.

 

Your remark is dishonest.   

 

I simply stated that the KKK has not exerted any real power for over 40 years.    Have you ever actually visited the US?

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, balticus said:

So you don't actually know what you mean when you say the NRA "courts" polticians.

Now I really do think your English is deficient. 

 

Quote

Saying a herd of elephants is bigger than an ant colony is a no-brainer.   You're not competent at arithmetic like most journalists.  

You're dancing around your points as usual. I wonder if you're incapable of clearly stating your arguments, or just enjoy being obtuse. This isn't a matter of arithmetic. 

 

I am not a journalist, but it's nice to see more of your famous "politeness". :)

 

Quote

You seem to not understand what it means to "move the goalposts".   

 

You seem to not see that you are, in fact, attempting to move the goalposts. Of course I do not expect honest reflection from you, I don't think you're capable.

 

Quote

No strong feelings about the NRA either way, but utterly convinced that people who seem the group as all powerful and deep pocketed are math challenged.    The argument has no basis unless the billionaires speaking out in favor of gun control are not sincere and have not put their money behind serious legislative reform.     Imagine that.   

Who said they were "all powerful or deep-pocketed" anyway? You're falsifying your quotes.

 

It's besides the point. Identity politics doesn't require wealth, although it does help.

 

Quote

Your remark is dishonest.   

Hah, gotcha. It's only as dishonest as you. If I am defending the WaPo, then she (and you now?) are defending the KKK. That's your "logic", so I am glad that you see it as dishonest. Hypocrites often don't realize they are hypocrites, of course.

 

Quote

I simply stated that the KKK has not exerted any real power for over 40 years. 

And? They're a conservative identity politics group. Period.

 

Quote

Have you ever actually visited the US?

Literally more times than I could count. (Perhaps you will say that is my poor arithmetic.) So, have you?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, alderhill said:

 

Who said they were "all powerful or deep-pocketed" anyway? You're falsifying your quotes.

 

It's besides the point. Identity politics doesn't require wealth, although it does help.

 

Your words were:

 

The "gun problem" it not even about guns so much really, it's about the power/limits of government. So to make a point on these limits, this rich and influential special interest group (i.e. an identity group), courts politicians and other patronage networks (including newsmedia). In this way, they wield their influence. Perhaps not all gun owners identify strongly as such, but enough do to make a difference. This is identity politics.

 

Again, my English might be defiicient, but is "rich" different than "deep pocketed" ?   Rich is relative.   Look at the yearly NRA budget and compare it to Mike Bloomberg's net worth.     If it is not a money issue, then the majority of the US Congress is sympathetic to the gun owner identity group.    The idea that the NRA buys Congress is a joke to anyone who actually looks at the numbers.    The boogeyman group strikes again.  

 

So are the NRA lobbyists really so compelling and charming?    More so than the Hollywood low lifes who pretend to care about the topic?    I am guessing the latter would be more fun, richer, and throw better parties than the gun lobby.      

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those still in denial that the media doesn't engage in some sort of fake news narrative just look at the recent Covington Catholic school example.  Instead of actually doing some fact checking they engaged in a smear campaign against a high student who was simply smirking and wearing a MAGA hat.  It was also rather a coincidence that the media initially left out who was yelling racist taunts at the high school students, Hebrew Israelites, who are a black supremacist group.

 

At least this Atlantic contributor admits to being in the wrong:  I Failed the Covington Catholic Test

 

Yes some outlets have apologized but this seems to be a frequent tactic: create fake news, incite a lynch mob and then apologize after the damage is already done. Just look at some of these Twitter reactions, calling for these kids to be doxxed and even killed:

 

1.png.dc8b4d9955a8021aeb5c482caa2621ce.p

 

1.png.523f77a565f43060b43fde984c535317.p

 

I think these two people are terrible human beings and they don't care whether or not these children actually did anything.  They just want blood on their hands.  However it was a false media narrative that steered them in this direction.  Furthermore why was this even news?  16 year old smirks at a 64 year old man...

 

 

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear: 

 

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-01-21/native-american-harassed-maga-kids-exposed-outrage-culture-grifter

 

Here's our chap in a music video:

 

 

Ooops.

 

Quote

The point is this, as BigLeaguePolitics so eloquently summarizes:

Phillips is not simply a random Native man who was accosted by “racist” MAGA-hat wearing teens, as the mainstream press has reported. He is connected to leftist activists who donate large sums to leftist causes.

“[Phillips] is a Vietnam Veteran and former director of the Native Youth Alliance,” according to Heavy.

The Native Youth Alliance appears to be a standalone entity. However, as BigLeaguePolitics' Patrick Howley points out, the larger well-funded Native Youth Leadership Alliance - which told us that it is not associated with Phillips - is currently promoting Phillips’ fundraising campaign stemming from the incident with the Catholic teens. The Native Youth Leadership Alliance (NYLA) is a non-profit organization that is funded by the same far-left power players who are often involved in bankrolling leftist causes. The organization’s funding partners include the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and the Social Justice Fund Northwest.

 

There goes that Rockefeller name again. And they call me a tinfoiler! :)

 

By the way very few of you know Bill Gates owns the top 4 floors of the Mandalay 'Bay in Vegas, along with that Saudi Alwaleed (he of upside down in Riyadh Ritz fame). Small world.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2019, 8:40:34, alderhill said:

Not in conservative circles. You're also trying to move the goalposts. That you finally acknowledge they're conservative identity politics group is good enough for me. SJWs are also roundly mocked, the term itself is a pejorative one.

I know of literally no conservative or right winger that supports the KKK. Their membership has dropped to basically 0 compared to what it was in the 1960s and public support is definitely in single digits. Therefore this is a fringe movement. Also I didn't say that pro-lifers, evangelicals and the "gun nuts" are shunned and mocked in conservative circles. I said they are shunned by the establishment. Face it; most of the media and academia swing left and as do NGOs and the US Supreme Court did so until very recently.

 

On 1/17/2019, 8:40:34, alderhill said:

If you think the KKK had less power than some sheltered fringe SJWs on a small very liberal arts college in Oregon you need to read some history books. What you are saying is so plain factually wrong, it's stunning. Shocking to see someone in 2019 defending the KKK.

Where did I defend the KKK? That's bollocks. And I'm not talking about the 1960s. I'm talking about today. The KKK has no power today but the SJW outrage mobs on Twitter and Facebook do and they do influence their targets using intimidation.

 

On 1/17/2019, 8:40:34, alderhill said:

Now you're seeing the light a little. All politics involves some aspect of identity of course, but not to lose the thread too much. Not all politics is identity politics, but identity politics is not only about race or gender. That you are willfully blind to conservative bannermen of identity politics shows your bias well enough.

If you're about to define identity politics as pretty much all politics then my point would be that the left are all about race/gender/religion-baiting. Every time there is an interaction involving a white person with a non-white person or a person from a minority religion, it must mean something or there must be some hidden racism. The left has done a lot to stir up racism and yet they accuse conservatives of being racist.

 

On 1/17/2019, 8:40:34, alderhill said:

Likening Evergreen College to every university in the US is what's absurd. Have you studied in the US? Have you ever even been in the US? Ironically enough, it is clear to me that you are getting a skewed view from your media source(s).

Evergreen College is just one of many examples. Ever hear of the Progressive Stack?

 

Quote

The progressive stack technique attempts to counter what its proponents believe is a flaw in traditional representative democracy, where the majority is heard while the minority or non-dominant groups are silenced or ignored.[1] In practice, "majority culture" is interpreted by progressive stack practitioners to mean White people, men and young adults, while non-dominant groups include women, people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender, people of color, and very young or older people.

 

This is actually being used by a T.A. at the University of Pennsylvania. You can think what you like but the left and cultural Marxists are quite strong on campus in the USA as they are in England.

 

On 1/17/2019, 8:40:34, alderhill said:

No, I mean it. You rail against the media and spew conspiracy theory, when it really couldn't be easier for you to be the media yourself. Put your money where your mouth is. All the "alternative facts" you read wouldn't be possible if elites truly controlled everything.

You can call me a conspiracy theorist all you like but I've given you several examples of fake news and dishonesty in the MSM and you've chosen to stick your head in the sand and engage in logic chopping. Joker just posted another example where the MSM didn't bother to fact check and presented a false narrative. You can say this is sloppy journalism but the fact of the matter is that it happens much too often for it to be a coincidence.

 

Quote

If you want to see what that's like, trying living in Russia or China.

Russians and Chinese have access to foreign media via Internet. They can access Facebook, Youtube, Twitter or other social media. You should have said North Korea.

 

On 1/17/2019, 8:40:34, alderhill said:

You still haven't proven malicious intent. If there were, Zimmerman would have sued by now. Nothing about Zimmerman at the wikipedia link.

You've ignored Wikipedia's definition of fake news but here it is again.

 

Quote

Fake news is written and published usually with the intent to mislead in order to damage an agency, entity, or person, and/or gain financially or politically

This tape did mislead the public as stated and MSNBC did gain politically since it fits their narrative of a racist shooting a black guy.

 

On 1/17/2019, 8:40:34, alderhill said:

Prove it.

Did they admit their mistake before or after they were caught? Also it's funny the mistake was in tune with the views of the network. Yes I know this is circumstantial evidence but it happens much too often. You're not going to convince anybody that it was an honest mistake.

 

On 1/17/2019, 8:40:34, alderhill said:

Really? I keep hearing how it's swirling round the shitter. And post-Brexit, if only you wait a little longer and make an offering in the volcano, suddenly free trade manna will rain from everywhere that's not Europe. 

 

Actually just recently the number of candidates for job openings has dropped and employers found themselves under pressure to raise wages. Quite a bad thing I suppose.

 

On 1/17/2019, 8:40:34, alderhill said:

You obviously missed the reference to the quote anyway. That's the problem when you know less about American culture and politics than you realize. Which I wouldn't really care about, I mean why should a British millennial know about American politics from the 90s? Except that you are trying to position yourself as some kind of expert on America vis-a-vis identity politics, which has roots stretching back further than today. It's fine if you say "I don't know about that", I won't bash you for admitting not knowing something you shouldn't be expected to know, but you don't do that. The opposite...

Rubbish. I've given you links and evidence and you have yet to counter them with a link of your own. Sorry but the "I'm older and know better than you" fallacy won't work with me.  By the way I know it was Bill Clinton's campaign slogan in 1992 but what are you trying to say with it?

 

 

 

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2019, 10:09:06, J0ker said:

 

 

1.png.dc8b4d9955a8021aeb5c482caa2621ce.p

 

1.png.523f77a565f43060b43fde984c535317.p

 

 

 

That Kathy Griffin bitch is as horrid as she is ugly as is the other guy. This story is probably one of the most disgusting examples of lying that I have ever seen. And it's these celebrities that are calling for violence against kids.

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Svetlana.Petro said:

 And it's these celebrities that are calling for violence against kids.

LOL you've just made a ground-breaking discovery:  celebrities are scum and hypocrites. B)

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Svetlana.Petro said:

That Kathy Griffin bitch is as horrid as she is ugly as is the other guy. This story is probably one of the most disgusting examples of lying that I have ever seen. And it's these celebrities that are calling for violence against kids.

If you're going to make a point it might be better to not say bitch or ugly. Not a redeeming factor so renders your point as fractious at best.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, McDee said:

If you're going to make a point it might be better to not say bitch or ugly. Not a redeeming factor so renders your point as fractious at best.

I never was a "nice girl" so I couldn't care less about political correctness or so called polite society if they tolerate these kinds of threats against minors. They are both ugly on the outside and inside so I have no sympathy for them.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Svetlana.Petro said:

I never was a "nice girl" so I couldn't care less about political correctness or so called polite society if they tolerate these kinds of threats against minors. They are both ugly on the outside and inside so I have no sympathy for them.

 

Griffin is trying unsuccessfully to avoid being irrelevant.   If you call her "ugly", she would probably be glad that someone noticed her.  

 

I am no fan of the Atlantic, but this was interesting.   The situation was comparable to a Tom Wolfe novel.   "Uncle Tomahawk" is pure comedy gold.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/media-must-learn-covington-catholic-story/581035/

 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, balticus said:

I am no fan of the Atlantic, but this was interesting.   The situation was comparable to a Tom Wolfe novel.   "Uncle Tomahawk" is pure comedy gold.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/media-must-learn-covington-catholic-story/581035/

That's actually a reasonable article.  I'm appalled to see other journalists doubling down and coming up with more fake news stories attempting to smear these lads. If you read some of the comments from the WaPo or Twitter you'll see people saying how the smirk was an example of this kid using white privilege while ignoring that the Native American man lied about being surrounded by them. I reckon these people are seriously ill. Is it a sin to be a white male? Every time a white person finds himself in conflict with a non-white it's automatically about race? I supported nobody in 2016 but I've started to like Trump after I see who the alternative is.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/20/2018, 4:06:58, AlexTr said:

If that were the case, then we will soon see FOX News terminating the contracts of Carlson, Hannity and Igraham, right? What a doofy thing to say! Here's what happened: reporter lied and got caught and is now out of a job. End. of.

Let's see FOX News do that.

 

Those people you mentioned are all hosts on opinion shows. They are never presented as journalists.

 

I do think it's dishonest to say that people on the left do something, or people on the right do something. Dishonest people do dishonest things. We have to stop letting media put us at odds with each other just because we have different worldviews.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, WiccaChica said:

 I supported nobody in 2016 but I've started to like Trump after I see who the alternative is.

 

The real alternative was Bernie but the Globalists stole it for Hilary. it seems the videos have been censored from Youtube by the Mockingbird media, but if you search using "uncensored" you get this:

 

 

There are others like Ron Paul who call for an audit of the Fed but the only one with the balls to take them on and a military behind him is Mr T. 

 

An audit of the Fed is coming:

 

https://massie.house.gov/newsroom/press-releases/press-release-us-representative-massie-reintroduces-bill-to-audit-the

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Mississippian said:

Those people you mentioned are all hosts on opinion shows. They are never presented as journalists.

Indeed, but I think it's very easy to forget that nuance when your network is called FOX NEWS (... or CNN), and 95% of the time, sells itself as news. Most people think they are journalists, although the talking heads on TV news often do the least actual journalistic footwork. 

 

19 hours ago, Mississippian said:

I do think it's dishonest to say that people on the left do something, or people on the right do something. Dishonest people do dishonest things. We have to stop letting media put us at odds with each other just because we have different worldviews.

Agreed.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now