Jump to content

Media Bias Thread


Hugo Stiglitz

Recommended Posts

UK's Telegraph pays large sum to the First Lady over lies they printed.

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/president-donald-trump-slams-daily-telegraph-over-melania-trump-story 

The "Newseum" is apparently going to close. Imagine that. It's almost as if the credit goes to the man in the arena, those who strive to do the deeds, and not the cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/25/arts/design/newseum-sold-johns-hopkins.html

 

Edited by Thetexashammer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Thetexashammer said:

UK's Telegraph pays large sum to the First Lady over lies they printed.

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/president-donald-trump-slams-daily-telegraph-over-melania-trump-story 

The "Newseum" is apparently going to close. Imagine that. It's almost as if the credit goes to the man in the arena, those who strive to do the deeds, and not the cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.

 

The building is being sold to Johns Hopkins. The fate of the Newseum remains undetermined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

CNN paid commentator goes on a crazy rant about "right wing conspiracies" that CNN was, pardon the wordplay here, colluding with Muller on the Stone raid. More guys than got Bin Laden, a helicopter, and two armored vehicles. Anyway CNN was there with cameras. Because Mueller brought them along for fun. Notice after that dude's rant ends, he didn't deny it. CNN was asked later if they were tipped and refused to answer the question. Reliable Sources is their media ombudsman show, the show the allegedly shoots straight down the middle, that cuts through the weekly BS. Um, yeah, about that.

They aim to misbehave, but not in a cool way like Nathan Fillion, in the obnoxious Brian Stelter way. It's a planned thing. All those guys should be fired. THE MOST TRUSTED NAME IN NEWS@!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!!1!!1!!!!! Destroyed their franchise completely. State controlled media at its finest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weren't there tweets, I believe the day before Stone's arrest, the guy that said he expected to be indicted, that a grand jury had convened and issued an indictment? Seriously, I don't know how all these things play out but pretty sure this has been discussed and dismissed as a nothingberder. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not following why that’s deranged. That’s exactly what cyber attacks on infrastructure would hope to do. Create chaos because of our dependence on the power grid in every day life. Do you think that we’ve not developed the same capabilities knowing how impactful it would be in wartime?

Should we just ignore it or should we try to solve for it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Lurch said:

I’m not following why that’s deranged. That’s exactly what cyber attacks on infrastructure would hope to do. Create chaos because of our dependence on the power grid in every day life. Do you think that we’ve not developed the same capabilities knowing how impactful it would be in wartime?

Should we just ignore it or should we try to solve for it?

I think it's extremely unlikely that such an event would take place, and fearmongering about it on Maddow is pretty deranged.  It's similar to the right-wing nutjobs who fearmonger about EMP attacks from Russia and China.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, clearly we should ignore the Russians and Chinese in the power grids.  Especially since the current President is fully capable of handling any foreseeable crisis.

Maddow was reporting what the intelligence agencies are currently saying and throwing out some worst case scenarios.

Complete derangement!

 

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/31/2019 at 12:57 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Yes, clearly we should ignore the Russians and Chinese in the power grids.  Especially since the current President is fully capable of handling any foreseeable crisis.

Maddow was reporting what the intelligence agencies are currently saying and throwing out some worst case scenarios.

Complete derangement!

 

When the grid does get hacked and part of it actually does go down, the freakout is going to be something to behold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ben Hunt writes a good blog on markets/politics etc for those that are unfamiliar.  

Here’s an interesting tracking tool they’re experimenting with.

https://www.epsilontheory.com/fiat-news-index-november-2018/

Some points from their tracking news in November:

  • Going straight to the source with Reuters and Bloomberg continues to looks like a good choice.
  • Whether because of reliance on these and other wire services, or because of its own newsroom standards, the SF Chronicle continues to stand out among print options.
  • If you are reading Fox News, the BBC, NY Times or Washington Post for political news, that news was explained to you more often in November than it would have been in almost any other major news outlet – at levels comparable to those of pure commentary websites.
  • Beware the paradox of science journalism: if climate science coverage over the last month is in any way indicative, it is filled with more explainers and a lower percentage of just-the-facts-ma’am coverage than even some of the most polarizing political topics. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/6/2019 at 7:58 AM, GRHorn said:

Ben Hunt writes a good blog on markets/politics etc for those that are unfamiliar.  

Here’s an interesting tracking tool they’re experimenting with.

https://www.epsilontheory.com/fiat-news-index-november-2018/

Some points from their tracking news in November:

  • Going straight to the source with Reuters and Bloomberg continues to looks like a good choice.
  • Whether because of reliance on these and other wire services, or because of its own newsroom standards, the SF Chronicle continues to stand out among print options.
  • If you are reading Fox News, the BBC, NY Times or Washington Post for political news, that news was explained to you more often in November than it would have been in almost any other major news outlet – at levels comparable to those of pure commentary websites.
  • Beware the paradox of science journalism: if climate science coverage over the last month is in any way indicative, it is filled with more explainers and a lower percentage of just-the-facts-ma’am coverage than even some of the most polarizing political topics. 

 

Or learn how to think critically and read whatever you want. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Or learn how to think critically and read whatever you want. 

Maybe.  

I just thought it was an interesting way of looking at which outlets provide straight info vs others. 

All things equal I’d rather have news presented to me without an attached explanation of what or how I’m supposed to think about it. YMMV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, ChickenSandwich said:

"How do you know you’re being lied to? How do you know you’re being manipulated?"

 

Well Lara, considering you gave Dylan Davies airtime, I can only guess you're asking this earnestly and not rhetorically, and it does feel odd having to explain this to a journalist, but maybe see if your source has told a different story on 3 separate occasions, all knowable to you, before you broadcast him telling a another account that stands alone from his first 3 accounts.

Edited by Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...