"Fake News"

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks

Ban "fake news" sites?

Yes
1
13%
No
7
88%
 
Total votes: 8

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15961
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: "Fake News"

Postby Jimbo » 31 Jan 2019, 01:11

toomanyhatz wrote:I apologize. I read it using my critical thinking skills. I know I wasn't supposed to.

So perhaps you could explain to me in easy-to-understand steps what I'm supposed to be concluding that I'm not concluding.


Thanks for reading the thing. My conclusion after reading the Greenwald piece is that there is a very odd, undemocratic, slanderous, conspiratorial effort in these usually (formerly) reliable media sources to make Trump - and Russia - look bad. These are not simple mistakes for if they were, statistically, there would be at least a story or two which made them look good. Your Trump-bias aside, what point do you think Greenwald was trying to make. Why do you think he wrote this story?
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 27708
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: "Fake News"

Postby toomanyhatz » 31 Jan 2019, 01:45

Oh, I don't think his motivations are in question.

What's in question (to my mind) is that he proves a "slanderous, conspiratorial effort" as you put it.

And really? There would be at least a story or two which made them look good? Why? Are they required to find positive stories in the interest of balance? Trump is not redeemable in my mind. I would happily use whatever means it took to get rid of him if was up to me. Fake news? Sign me up. But then again I'm not claiming to be a journalist.

I've never claimed there's no bias in how news is reported. Only that you don't understand what Fake News is. Sticking to that still, I"m afraid.
Jimbo wrote:My point is to save the world from WWIII.

Jimbo wrote:Trump is right. The collusion conspiracy theory has been debunked and you seem to refuse to look at the evidence.

1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017 2018!!

User avatar
Sneelock
Posts: 12570
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: "Fake News"

Postby Sneelock » 31 Jan 2019, 01:57

Russia good. Dems bad. deserve TRUMP. bad bad bad.
anything else is fake.
"If you can't fly -- you can't be a Byrd."

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15961
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: "Fake News"

Postby Jimbo » 31 Jan 2019, 02:17

toomanyhatz wrote:Oh, I don't think his motivations are in question.


No, you can't slip out of the question so easily. I told you as honestly as I could what I concluded from the article. If you think it is business as usual at these media outlets - where mistakes do happen - why would Greenwald make the effort to call them out, to mock them? If you asked me the same question I'd say Greenwald found a perfect "man bites dog" story where he found a spate of mistaken news stories - all anti-Trump-Russia - which statistically did not add up. Strange, to say the least, thus real news.

If you are faulting me for calling, say, the Russia sabotaged the Vermont power grid story as "fake news" in the same vein as the "Three Headed Baby Ate My Lunch" story you got me. I was going for snark.
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 67705
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: "Fake News"

Postby Diamond Dog » 31 Jan 2019, 09:05

Jimbo wrote: These are not simple mistakes for if they were, statistically, there would be at least a story or two which made them look good.


Really Jimbo - find another obsession. You're just not very good at this one.
"Excuse my dust."
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits "
"It put me back in my place and made me realize, yes I'm just a cunt in a clown suit."

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 27708
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: "Fake News"

Postby toomanyhatz » 31 Jan 2019, 18:01

Jimbo wrote:
toomanyhatz wrote:Oh, I don't think his motivations are in question.


No, you can't slip out of the question so easily. I told you as honestly as I could what I concluded from the article. If you think it is business as usual at these media outlets - where mistakes do happen - why would Greenwald make the effort to call them out, to mock them? If you asked me the same question I'd say Greenwald found a perfect "man bites dog" story where he found a spate of mistaken news stories - all anti-Trump-Russia - which statistically did not add up. Strange, to say the least, thus real news.

If you are faulting me for calling, say, the Russia sabotaged the Vermont power grid story as "fake news" in the same vein as the "Three Headed Baby Ate My Lunch" story you got me. I was going for snark.


Still confused at what you're trying to convince me of here. Yes, there's a big difference between the two - one was accurately reported based on the information that they had at the time (which was later corrected when the information turned out to be false), and the other one is invented/made up from whole cloth.

I mean, I guess your point is that the media should have been suspicious of the story but weren't "because Russia Russia Russia!" But they didn't make up the story or exaggerate it or do anything other than accurately report what was reported to them. Blame the people that jumped to conclusions then, not the messenger.

I'm down with snark - I'll snark back and forth all day. But you DO actually seem to understand the difference. So why do you keep adding stuff that isn't fake news to a thread called "Fake News?"
Jimbo wrote:My point is to save the world from WWIII.

Jimbo wrote:Trump is right. The collusion conspiracy theory has been debunked and you seem to refuse to look at the evidence.

1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017 2018!!