Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
42 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

You are actually defending calling innocent people terrorists? Seriously WTF is wrong with you. BTW country B is run by a literal terrorist organization so maybe an intelligent person waits for confirmation that a hospital actually was blown up? 

 

He's too busy looking for qanon and then telling us that we're all supporting whatever nonsense he finds.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
55 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I don't know where you got that. Stop making things up.

Someone who indiscriminately bombs hospitals is a terrorist, how else would you define those actions? The NYT called the Israelis terrorist by blaming them for this. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
41 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

Someone who indiscriminately bombs hospitals is a terrorist, how else would you define those actions? The NYT called the Israelis terrorist by blaming them for this. 

Well that's certainly a circuitous route ...

  • Eyeroll 1
Posted
3 hours ago, B-Man said:

At first I thought that, how did they expect to get away with this lie ?

 

When the sun came up this morning the hospital was still going to be there.

 

And then I started to read responses from around the world and here also,

It showed me why.

 

It doesn't matter that it was disproved, the lie is fact now.

 

I've searched and nowhere have I seen that it's still standing. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
12 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

At first I thought that, how did they expect to get away with this lie ?

 

When the sun came up this morning the hospital was still going to be there.

 

And then I started to read responses from around the world and here also,

It showed me why.

 

It doesn't matter that it was disproved, the lie is fact now.

 

 

 

 

Going deeper into the false coverage...

 

Notice the main thrust of the reporting was never about the 500 dead, efforts to bring aid to the victims or anything of the sort.

 

The main thrust was to blame Isreal.

 

If it was about being first to report, how hard is this headline?

 

Explosion near Gaza Hospital. Hamas, Isreal Blame Each Other. Unconfirmed Casualties Could Climb To 500. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
9 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Well that's certainly a circuitous route ...

Not circuitous at all, stating this group did an action that everyone agrees is terrorism. Apparently that concept is hard for you. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)

"axis of evil", "GOP rebels", Natalee Holloway, "Fetterman slaps down squad", "the devil", "hero"...it's dumbed down, dualist "news" for morons.  everything is simple black or white. No gray.  No attempt at explanations or motivations. Violence is entertainment.  And these are supposed to be journalists.  A profession known for its innate longing to ask and answer difficult questions and for intellectualism.  Fox is helping destroy America through propaganda and kindergarten level reporting (the headlines in the link will change.  the quality of the reporting won't):

 

https://www.foxnews.com

 

Compare.  While far from perfect, more "fair and balanced" with stories on both sides of the potentially most impactful story and war in decades and no titillation for idiots living lives of quiet desperation:

https://www.cnn.com

 

and before you all start throwing around "elite" here's what intellectualism actually means (good in journalists, agree?):

the exercise of the intellect at the expense of the emotions.

PHILOSOPHY

the theory that knowledge is wholly or mainly derived from pure reason; rationalism.

Edited by Joe Ferguson forever
  • Eyeroll 1
Posted
26 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

"axis of evil", "GOP rebels", Natalee Holloway, "Fetterman slaps down squad", "the devil", "hero"...it's dumbed down, dualist "news" for morons.  everything is simple black or white. No gray.  No attempt at explanations or motivations. Violence is entertainment.  And these are supposed to be journalists.  A profession known for its innate longing to ask and answer difficult questions and for intellectualism.  Fox is helping destroy America through propaganda and kindergarten level reporting (the headlines in the link will change.  the quality of the reporting won't):

 

https://www.foxnews.com

 

Compare.  While far from perfect, more "fair and balanced" with stories on both sides of the potentially most impactful story and war in decades and no titillation for idiots living lives of quiet desperation:

https://www.cnn.com

 

and before you all start throwing around "elite" here's what intellectualism actually means (good in journalists, agree?):

the exercise of the intellect at the expense of the emotions.

PHILOSOPHY

the theory that knowledge is wholly or mainly derived from pure reason; rationalism.

You must have missed the intellectualism (good in journalism) in the changing headlines and reporting in the NYT, aka “The Paper of Record” over the last 48-72 hours.
 

Your hiatus did nothing for your “awareness”. Pity. 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, JDHillFan said:

You must have missed the intellectualism (good in journalism) in the changing headlines and reporting in the NYT, aka “The Paper of Record” over the last 48-72 hours.
 

Your hiatus did nothing for your “awareness”. Pity. 

Journalists working in respected acclaimed outlets generally do their best.  sometimes they don't and make mistakes- like in any profession, medicine for example.  sometimes they're just not any good.  Watch for the outlets with consistently nuanced and balanced reporting.  u won't find that on Fox.

Edited by Joe Ferguson forever
  • Eyeroll 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

Journalists working in respected acclaimed outlets generally do their best.  sometimes they don't and make mistakes- like in any profession, medicine for example.  sometimes they're just not any good.  Watch for the outlets with consistently nuanced and balanced reorting.  u won't find that on Fox.

Once upon a time, perhaps. Media outlets, no matter which side they are on, are no longer about reporting. They are about advocating. Everyone knows that. Seeing these journalists as truth seekers is more than a little

naive. 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/opinion/the-public-editor-is-the-new-york-times-a-liberal-newspaper.html

  • Agree 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Orlando Tim said:

Not circuitous at all, stating this group did an action that everyone agrees is terrorism. Apparently that concept is hard for you. 

How about "Israeli missile misses target, hits parking lot outside hospital." Which was certainly possible, now looking unlikely. 

  • Agree 1
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, JDHillFan said:

Once upon a time, perhaps. Media outlets, no matter which side they are on, are no longer about reporting. They are about advocating. Everyone knows that. Seeing these journalists as truth seekers is more than a little

naive. 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/opinion/the-public-editor-is-the-new-york-times-a-liberal-newspaper.html

"Some are more equal than others" - Orwell.

https://www.purevpn.com/blog/unbiased-news-sources/

 

https://www.makeuseof.com/top-unbiased-news-sources/

 

And my fav from League of Women voters

https://my.lwv.org/california/torrance-area/article/how-reliable-your-news-source-understanding-media-bias-2022

Edited by Joe Ferguson forever
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

LMAO. referencing very biased sites to tell one what source are trustworthy.

 

LMAO.

 

In reality some lies got the terrorist supporters to loudly tell everyone exactly what they are.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
42 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said:

referencing very biased sites to tell one what source are trustworthy.


Notice eye roll never calls out any of the 💩 Bonnie posts from REDSTATE and all the other pathetic “sources” she shares?

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Eyeroll 1
Posted
Just now, BillStime said:


Notice eye roll never calls out any of the 💩 Bonnie posts from REDSTATE and all the other pathetic “sources” she shares?

 

 

 

 

 

its like one of you post something, then the other replies following the same exact script.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Posted
2 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

How about "Israeli missile misses target, hits parking lot outside hospital." Which was certainly possible, now looking unlikely. 

 

How about not reporting on something based on what Hamas claims?

  • Agree 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Tommy Callahan said:

LMAO. referencing very biased sites to tell one what source are trustworthy.

 

LMAO.

 

In reality some lies got the terrorist supporters to loudly tell everyone exactly what they are.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Post some ranking sources for media bias that you approve of....Sure, WSJ is far left.  Moron.

28 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

How about not reporting on something based on what Hamas claims?

How bout you trade in your lab coat for a helmet and go report for us?

  • Eyeroll 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...