daz28 Posted January 24 Posted January 24 Just now, JDHillFan said: In very short order you have gone from: Fox BAD to “I read it” to mischaracterizing the story to “I think” Well done No intention to mischaracterize. I should have said published/not published. Fox is still bad, I did read it, and I was going off recollection(which was correct). Better done?
JDHillFan Posted January 24 Posted January 24 25 minutes ago, daz28 said: No intention to mischaracterize. I should have said published/not published. Fox is still bad, I did read it, and I was going off recollection(which was correct). Better done? Mediaite BAD? Maybe it’s Politico BAD.
daz28 Posted January 24 Posted January 24 10 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: Mediaite BAD? Maybe it’s Politico BAD. Most of em bad.
JDHillFan Posted January 24 Posted January 24 6 hours ago, daz28 said: Most of em bad. This is not breaking news though you seem to think you’re onto something that the rest of us are unaware of. How about sharing your thoughts on the proper way to stay informed in today’s media landscape?
daz28 Posted January 24 Posted January 24 8 hours ago, JDHillFan said: This is not breaking news though you seem to think you’re onto something that the rest of us are unaware of. How about sharing your thoughts on the proper way to stay informed in today’s media landscape? I see no shortage of misinformation on an hourly basis, so maybe it is breaking news. My advice would be to get the feel for a source. They barely even try to hide their slant anymore, so it's not that hard. The real problem is people want to be fed slanted news. If your source is always complaining about trump, then they're lefties. If they are constantly talking about liberals, they're righties.
JDHillFan Posted January 24 Posted January 24 1 minute ago, daz28 said: I see no shortage of misinformation on an hourly basis, so maybe it is breaking news. My advice would be to get the feel for a source. They barely even try to hide their slant anymore, so it's not that hard. The real problem is people want to be fed slanted news. If your source is always complaining about trump, then they're lefties. If they are constantly talking about liberals, they're righties. Savvy! What sources do you have a feel for?
daz28 Posted January 24 Posted January 24 3 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: Savvy! What sources do you have a feel for? These are all considered to be somewhat center sources: BBC; Forbes; The Hill; Newsweek; RealClear Politics; Reuters; Marketwatch; Newsnation. Wallstreet Journal articles that aren't opinion. I'm sure some people consider some of them slanted, but nothings perfect. The only thing I'd suggest personally is looking for quotes. Then look into the quotes for things that can be confirmed via other sources. The only reason I read that Fox article is because it had plenty of quotes. Unfortunately, none of them had any details or other sources that could back up/confirm their claims.
BillsFanNC Posted January 24 Author Posted January 24 Or you could be savvy by ignoring the news outlets that have been repeatedly proven to be gaslighting liars with the biggest stories and issues. The reliable media.
JDHillFan Posted January 24 Posted January 24 6 minutes ago, daz28 said: These are all considered to be somewhat center sources: BBC; Forbes; The Hill; Newsweek; RealClear Politics; Reuters; Marketwatch; Newsnation. Wallstreet Journal articles that aren't opinion. I'm sure some people consider some of them slanted, but nothings perfect. The only thing I'd suggest personally is looking for quotes. Then look into the quotes for things that can be confirmed via other sources. The only reason I read that Fox article is because it had plenty of quotes. Unfortunately, none of them had any details or other sources that could back up/confirm their claims. Kudos to you for being sincere with this. Cheers 2 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Or you could be savvy by ignoring the news outlets that have been repeatedly proven to be gaslighting liars with the biggest stories and issues. The reliable media. I would like to think that comes with age, but Redhawk and Frankish have disproved that. 1
daz28 Posted January 24 Posted January 24 2 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Or you could be savvy by ignoring the news outlets that have been repeatedly proven to be gaslighting liars with the biggest stories and issues. The reliable media. Says the guy who posts ANYTHING that confirms his bias, and doesn't even remove the things that I showed him, which are clearly false. My advice to you is ACTUALLY READ some of the crap you post, and at least try to confirm some of it. Who am I kidding, you're just here to troll, hate, and bait.
BillsFanNC Posted January 24 Author Posted January 24 Periodic check in... https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276 Yes, original false story is still up just as it was in October 2020. Not so much as a one sentence correction at the end.
Taro T Posted January 24 Posted January 24 1 hour ago, daz28 said: These are all considered to be somewhat center sources: BBC; Forbes; The Hill; Newsweek; RealClear Politics; Reuters; Marketwatch; Newsnation. Wallstreet Journal articles that aren't opinion. I'm sure some people consider some of them slanted, but nothings perfect. The only thing I'd suggest personally is looking for quotes. Then look into the quotes for things that can be confirmed via other sources. The only reason I read that Fox article is because it had plenty of quotes. Unfortunately, none of them had any details or other sources that could back up/confirm their claims. It's not so much that a particular source is Right/Left/Center/Whatever, it's that most all the sources have a horse in the race and if you understand which horse they back you can get an idea of what it is they're trying to leave out of the story. WSJ & Fox - RNC; OAN - 45/47; NYT & CNN - mainstay DNC; WaPo - the IC; MSNBC - progressive wing of DNC; etc. And realize if they are talking about their team, things likely aren't quite as rosy as they were conveyed and if they're talking about another team, things likely aren't quite as dire as they seem. And it isn't so much that any / all of them "lie"; it's a matter of what they cover and what they omit from what they cover. And even within a particular source, there are individual reporters / journalists that are better than most from that source. Catherine Herridge worked across the full spectrum and is working independently now - she is one of the few good ones. And even she and the other good ones will get stuff wrong on occassion. There are other good ones as well and a ton of really bad ones. Your are right in looking for actual quotes and 1st hand source material. But beware of snippets of quotes - they can and often are used to convey a totally different meaning to something someone said than what they meant. Also, beware the headline of the article that misstates what the article ACTUALLY says. And, lastly, you can have the exact same event reported by different reporters and both can truthfully report what just happened but the article will make it seem like something completely different happened. Based off an old joke but appropriate here - two different reporters were there watching the events of the parable where Jesus hopped out of the apostles' boat and went to shore striding on the top of the water; one's headline was "Jesus walks on water - it's a miracle" the other's was "Jesus can't swim." Both witnessed the same event; both "truthfully" reported what happened; but 1 gives a much more accurate image to the reader of what happened than the other did. 1
BillsFanNC Posted Sunday at 02:06 PM Author Posted Sunday at 02:06 PM "Trying to give the campaign, particularly at the debate on Thursday, a talking point to push back on Trump on this" - John Brennan Can you say election interference? 1
Doc Posted Sunday at 03:13 PM Posted Sunday at 03:13 PM They should be glad they're not being charged with any crimes.
Recommended Posts