Conservative Propaganda on Local News

[DC Tom]

7 minutes ago, LA Grant said:

 

So, let me get this straight. Your conclusion from the Sinclair "must-runs" is you think what people are objecting to is "neutrality" in news?  That's what you're taking from this?

 

No, people are objecting to corporations exercising editorial oversight.  If that oversight is right-wing.  

[LA Grant]

9 hours ago, snafu said:

 

NYTimes.  Uh huh. I'll look into that.

NYTimes of yesterday:  Admits to burying stories on the holocaust. https://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/14/news/150th-anniversary-1851-2001-turning-away-from-the-holocaust.html

 

NYTimes of today:. Admits to pandering to their liberal readership. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/17/new-york-times-editor-admits-paper-is-very-very-ve/

 

NYTimes mission statement of today (when it was okay to do those things): https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/us/elections/to-our-readers-from-the-publisher-and-executive-editor.html

 

I'm not cherry-picking.  I just don't have the time to give you every example from every newspaper and TV broadcast. As I said in my earlier post (which you edited out), bias is pervasive in TV and it is pervasive in print and it is pervasive in electronic outlets.

 

And your grey lady is a biased whore.

 

I already covered this in my previous response, if you'd bothered to consider the point. I'll try to make it as simple & clear as possible.

 

1. The worst you'll find from the NY Times is that they reported information that proved to be inaccurate, or, they didn't have the complete story. 

2. As you demonstrate, they will be upfront with their errors when it is learned. In other words, the NYT will admit when they were wrong.

3. It is impossible to name a more consistently reliable source for national news. Feel free to try, but it doesn't exist.

4. For example, The Washington Times will gleefully run intentionally misleading headlines like the one you link to. Think about what The Washington Times is doing in the article. It says "Here's an editor from NYT talking over beers about the readership being mostly liberal." then takes that somehow as "proof" that "you can't get facts from the NYT."  This kind of slanted, shoddy coverage is not seen from the NYT. 

 

I frequently see Washington Times, Breitbart, Federalist, American Thinker, Fox News double-down on wrong information with excuses like  "don't blame us, we're  just trying to present the other side." But you won't see The NY Times misrepresent facts, you won't see them spin outright lies, then cower behind "hey don't blame us, we're just showing the other side." 

 

Again, just because news is all made by humans, and all humans hold bias & opinions, does not mean all news is equally biased. 

 

"The Grey Lady" deserves at least as much respect as your mother if not more, considering the NY Times has brought lots of good into the world, whereas your mother only contributed you.

[LA Grant]

12 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

Answering a question with another question just proves that you're a giant douchebag filled with !@#$ juice

 

Yesterday, weren't you b*tching about my posts being too long-winded. The day before, if I provide you with an explainer video, you're afraid to watch it unless it's something you've already seen before. Now, if I employ the Socratic method, this too brings your "shut the f*** up" approach.

 

I know you're comfortable describing yourself as an idiot, Boyst, but it's not your intelligence I find troubling so much as your integrity.

 

You provide nothing of value to any discussion. You can't articulate any thoughts or positions of your own with any coherence. Yet you still bark, bark, bark, bark.

 

Would you describe yourself as a "toady," Boyst? When you look up "stooge" in the dictionary, is it a mirror? If you think of yourself as an independent thinker, why do you never demonstrate this? Are you an obedient manservant or a man?  If you're a man, why are you incapable of articulating your own thoughts beyond repeating "douchebag" as though it has any meaning, weight, or value? 

 

[snafu]

Wrong, fool.  Funny that you started a thread called "conservative propaganda" something something and you spout off about how the liberal bastion of all newsprint is what everyone should read.

 

And leave my family out of this stupidity -- especially my mother.

 

[boyst]

1 minute ago, LA Grant said:

 

Yesterday, weren't you b*tching about my posts being too long-winded. The day before, if I provide you with an explainer video, you're afraid to watch it unless it's something you've already seen before. Now, if I employ the Socratic method, this too brings your "shut the f*** up" approach.

 

I know you're comfortable describing yourself as an idiot, Boyst, but it's not your intelligence I find troubling so much as your integrity.

 

You provide nothing of value to any discussion. You can't articulate any thoughts or positions of your own with any coherence. Yet you still bark, bark, bark, bark.

 

Would you describe yourself as a "toady," Boyst? When you look up "stooge" in the dictionary, is it a mirror? If you think of yourself as an independent thinker, why do you never demonstrate this? Are you an obedient manservant or a man?  If you're a man, why are you incapable of articulating your own thoughts beyond repeating "douchebag" as though it has any meaning, weight, or value? 

 

I didn't even read all that, like 2 sentences...lightly skimmed. But I counted question marks.  5.

 

Also counted thw V's then noticed you questioned my manhood.  How dare you assume my gender!  ::::'teiggereddddndndjensnraaaaawwwrrrr:::

[LA Grant]

15 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

No, people are objecting to corporations exercising editorial oversight. If that oversight is right-wing  disingenuous, manipulative & deceitful.

 

FTFY.

 

Also, people are concerned about having one (1) party in control of all three (3) branches in control of government AND that government outright accusing all other news sources to be "fake" -- and only the one they've cut a favorable deal with as being "real." 

 

Feel free to grow up & stop your martyrdom at any point. 

6 minutes ago, snafu said:

Wrong, fool.  Funny that you started a thread called "conservative propaganda" something something and you spout off about how the liberal bastion of all newsprint is what everyone should read.

 

And leave my family out of this stupidity -- especially my mother.

 

 

Wrong, fool. You're just not connecting the dots, and it appears to be willful. I'm not saying the NYT is the only thing you should read. I'm saying it can be trusted, for the most part, more than any other source you can name. I'm saying to include it in your daily news diet; not because I say so, but because reputations, processes, track record -- that should matter.

 

If you can't see the difference between Sinclair & the NYT on your own, then... idk. 

[snafu]

1 hour ago, LA Grant said:

 

FTFY.

 

Also, people are concerned about having one (1) party in control of all three (3) branches in control of government AND that government outright accusing all other news sources to be "fake" -- and only the one they've cut a favorable deal with as being "real." 

 

Feel free to grow up & stop your martyrdom at any point. 

 

Wrong, fool. You're just not connecting the dots, and it appears to be willful. I'm not saying the NYT is the only thing you should read. I'm saying it can be trusted, for the most part, more than any other source you can name. I'm saying to include it in your daily news diet; not because I say so, but because reputations, processes, track record -- that should matter.

 

If you can't see the difference between Sinclair & the NYT on your own, then... idk. 

 

Well I'm glad that you came along to tell me what to read and trust even though you don't know what news I consume and what I do with the information once I consume it.  Tell me, is reading the NYTimes going to make me become more like you ?

 

[MILFHUNTER#518]

2 hours ago, LA Grant said:

 

FTFY.

 

Also, people are concerned about having one (1) party in control of all three (3) branches in control of government AND that government outright accusing all other news sources to be "fake" -- and only the one they've cut a favorable deal with as being "real." 

 

Feel free to grow up & stop your martyrdom at any point. 

 

Wrong, fool. You're just not connecting the dots, and it appears to be willful. I'm not saying the NYT is the only thing you should read. I'm saying it can be trusted, for the most part, more than any other source you can name. I'm saying to include it in your daily news diet; not because I say so, but because reputations, processes, track record -- that should matter.

 

If you can't see the difference between Sinclair & the NYT on your own, then... idk. 

I won't trust ANY news source that is SOOO AROGANT that they openly admit they have a bias one way or the other and tell me to suck it and swallow because they know what is right for me.

2 hours ago, LA Grant said:

 

So, let me get this straight. Your conclusion from the Sinclair "must-runs" is you think what people are objecting to is "neutrality" in news?  That's what you're taking from this?

What else could it be? Please, PLEASE do tell.

[boyst]

2 hours ago, LA Grant said:

 

FTFY.

 

Also, people are concerned about having one (1) party in control of all three (3) branches in control of government AND that government outright accusing all other news sources to be "fake" -- and only the one they've cut a favorable deal with as being "real." 

 

Feel free to grow up & stop your martyrdom at any point. 

 

Wrong, fool. You're just not connecting the dots, and it appears to be willful. I'm not saying the NYT is the only thing you should read. I'm saying it can be trusted, for the most part, more than any other source you can name. I'm saying to include it in your daily news diet; not because I say so, but because reputations, processes, track record -- that should matter.

 

If you can't see the difference between Sinclair & the NYT on your own, then... idk. 

Sure that's going to be a strong peace to your talk and speech at Canton to my have been there for many of them I'll give away clothes and I remember sitting outside I was getting ready to construct his message for the for Canton and you know it really forcing down memory lane for every little thing as grandmother did for him and everybody else I know you're close to your family who's on that list and why you have no idea 0 I mean

It wrote down and it turned into a snake while said pick it up and pick it up who is Easter Rod but if it needed to be to open the door if it needed to be a ride into a snake I can take for footsteps and cause them to sound like a vast Army I can use a simple flu shot to the fetus skilled Warrior I can cause you to stumble to a warehouse that has thousands of books to bring your dreams to pass have you got to get rid of that limited main stat almighty God the creator of the universe green taste like in the greatness on the inside I have equipped you I've been powered you I'm going before you making crooked places straight I have surrounded you with my favor give me some Russell

 

 

[DC Tom]

2 hours ago, LA Grant said:

 

FTFY.

 

Also, people are concerned about having one (1) party in control of all three (3) branches in control of government AND that government outright accusing all other news sources to be "fake" -- and only the one they've cut a favorable deal with as being "real." 

 

Only if that one party's Republicans.

 

There's a certain percentage of people - of which, I'm certain you're one - who would love a one-party progressive state.

 

2 hours ago, LA Grant said:

If you can't see the difference between Sinclair & the NYT on your own, then... idk. 

 

The Times makes up news.  Sinclair broadcasts it.

[LA Grant]

1 hour ago, DC Tom said:

Only if that one party's Republicans.

 

There's a certain percentage of people - of which, I'm certain you're one - who would love a one-party progressive state.

 

The Times makes up news.  Sinclair broadcasts it.

 

If you'd bothered reading the posts of mine that you deign to respond to, you'd know what kind of party solution I'd prefer. 

 

Don't let your ignorance prevent you from certainty, though. It's served you this long, so why change now?

1 hour ago, snafu said:

Well I'm glad that you came along to tell me what to read and trust even though you don't know what news I consume and what I do with the information once I consume it.  Tell me, is reading the NYTimes going to make me become more like you ?

 

I never claimed to know what you do & don't read, now did I? You broadened the conversation, so I was speaking broadly. When that didn't work, now you fall back on "well you don't know me, so you don't know anything."

 

Reading the NY Times on a daily basis won't make 'you' or anyone else more like 'me' or anyone else, but it would result in you being more well-informed than you were before. It's simple.

1 hour ago, MILFHUNTER#518 said:

I won't trust ANY news source that is SOOO AROGANT that they openly admit they have a bias one way or the other and tell me to suck it and swallow because they know what is right for me.

 

You prefer to have the biases hidden, then? In that case, Sinclair's secrecy is just right for you.

 

Quote

What else could it be? Please, PLEASE do tell.

 

I don't know, what else could it be? It's a mystery alright. I don't know. The answer might even already be in this very thread. I guess you'll never know.

[Wacka]

40 minutes ago, LA Grant said:

 

If you'd bothered reading the posts of mine that you deign to respond to, you'd know what kind of party solution I'd prefer. 

 

Communist? Nazi?

[row_33]

58 minutes ago, Wacka said:

Communist? Nazi?

 

lol ? 

[DC Tom]

2 hours ago, LA Grant said:

 

If you'd bothered reading the posts of mine that you deign to respond to, you'd know what kind of party solution I'd prefer. 

 

Well, you got me there, shitbiscuit.  Unless someone else quotes it, I don't see your nonsense.

[/dev/null]

3 hours ago, LA Grant said:

 

If you'd bothered reading the posts of mine that you deign to respond to, you'd know what kind of party solution I'd prefer. 

 

 

I'm not sure "Re-education Camps" qualify as a party

[boyst]

5 hours ago, LA Grant said:

 

If you'd bothered reading the posts of mine that you deign to respond to, you'd know what kind of party solution I'd prefer. 

 

Don't let your ignorance prevent you from certainty, though. It's served you this long, so why change now?

 

I never claimed to know what you do & don't read, now did I? You broadened the conversation, so I was speaking broadly. When that didn't work, now you fall back on "well you don't know me, so you don't know anything."

 

Reading the NY Times on a daily basis won't make 'you' or anyone else more like 'me' or anyone else, but it would result in you being more well-informed than you were before. It's simple.

 

You prefer to have the biases hidden, then? In that case, Sinclair's secrecy is just right for you.

 

 

I don't know, what else could it be? It's a mystery alright. I don't know. The answer might even already be in this very thread. I guess you'll never know.

ETA Majin Lots you better learn and those of you who do Public Relation you better learn why don't they watch CNN Yelp like people watch CNN but when they hear the Madison Show they know it's for them well don't black people read the New York Times yesterday read the New York Times but when they read it in a black and Ebony they know it's for them targeting angry about it I didn't because I got caught up in it too Longtown water graphic in Pike County call 866-801-8255 I'm glad you did it it just wasn't inclusive enough around you first agree to disagree oh by the way that students discipline more because of implicit racial bias in the Washington post fits right onto what I'm talking about and I'll show you this weekend on the other side

[MILFHUNTER#518]

10 hours ago, LA Grant said:

 

If you'd bothered reading the posts of mine that you deign to respond to, you'd know what kind of party solution I'd prefer. 

 

Don't let your ignorance prevent you from certainty, though. It's served you this long, so why change now?

 

I never claimed to know what you do & don't read, now did I? You broadened the conversation, so I was speaking broadly. When that didn't work, now you fall back on "well you don't know me, so you don't know anything."

 

Reading the NY Times on a daily basis won't make 'you' or anyone else more like 'me' or anyone else, but it would result in you being more well-informed than you were before. It's simple.

 

You prefer to have the biases hidden, then? In that case, Sinclair's secrecy is just right for you.

 

 

I don't know, what else could it be? It's a mystery alright. I don't know. The answer might even already be in this very thread. I guess you'll never know.

Are you a card carrying member of CPUSA?

[3rdnlng]

1 hour ago, MILFHUNTER#518 said:

Are you a card carrying member of CPUSA?

Most likely he is, but the one thing I know for sure is that his bank is Douchebank.

[keepthefaith]

17 hours ago, LA Grant said:

 

 

You prefer to have the biases hidden, then? In that case, Sinclair's secrecy is just right for you.

 

 

 

 

Are you just waking up from a 50 year nap, Austin Powers-like?  Had to pee for a week and now you're just realizing that news stories are coordinated?  My gosh for as long as I can remember the MSM (networks, large cable outlets and large print media) have been reporting the same crap practically on the hour.  Some of it so obvious the talking points are word for word across multiple networks or in print.  Since most political media are left leaning, they haven't reported on their own lazy biases until the recent Sinclair example which tilts the other way. 

 

Heck, the AP and others push out stories and hundreds of outlets just regurgitate them. 

 

Everyone is selling the same fruits and vegetables, but some offer a slightly different mix based on their customers. 

Edited April 7, 2018 by keepthefaith

[TakeYouToTasker]

23 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

No, people are objecting to corporations exercising editorial oversight.  If that oversight is right-wing.  

 

When it's demonstrated over the coming months that most of the things people believe about the world are lies told to them by their government, and that the things that have formed and shaped their opinions have been staged by bad actors working towards their own ends, we'll find out for sure one way of the other.