Fake News

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

 

Here's another great article about the lefts fake news panic. I really think we can merge the liberal freakout thread with the fake news thread as their is so much overlap between the two.

 

http://nypost.com/2016/12/11/liberals-fake-news-panic-show-they-cant-handle-the-truth/

So...you don't think there is any issue with people believing fake news.

Are these questions coming from the same person that chastises those who have called out mainstream media bias? If you read what I said previously, I think fake news and all the bias in the media are equally harmful to the American people. I just find it funny that, prior to November 8, we heard nothing about fake news, and now that Hillary lost, all we are hearing about is Fake news (when Russia is not the scapegoat).

Hey...I gave you an idea on a great thread. You going to take me up on it?

 

 

Nice dodge. If you are interested in creating a new thread, go for it. I'm not going to do your work for you.

 

Oh come on...I think it would be a good thread. You obviously have a problem with whatever media I consume. So, I'm giving you a chance to show me what media I SHOULD consume to get the truth.

[Enhance]

 

 

 

 

Here's another great article about the lefts fake news panic. I really think we can merge the liberal freakout thread with the fake news thread as their is so much overlap between the two.

 

http://nypost.com/2016/12/11/liberals-fake-news-panic-show-they-cant-handle-the-truth/

Cool - then we agree that CNBC is to Fox what Breibart is to ... well, theres nothing like it.

 

Youre more naaive and uninformed than I gave you credit for Bni if you think this is left leaning issue. In fact - I say your attitude is the exact problem we face and why its so scary.

 

 

Please point me to where I said that media bias and misinformed articles only happens on the left. What I stated is that at the present time, its the left in this country that are now talking about fake news after the November election. If this was such a huge issue, why didn't you bring this up prior to November 8? Please answer that for me.

I think it's totally fair to suggest that the recent fake news outrage is being pushed by people who tend to lean left or down the middle. But, it was definitely an issue prior to the election, though it wasn't receiving the attention it is now.

 

So, now that we've gotten that out of the way, my question for you is simple - does that really matter? Can't we all acknowledge that, yes, this is probably a more liberal based movement while similarly acknowledging that it's a disgusting problem and should be rectified?

 

This also shouldn't really come as a shock - post-election periods are reserved for post-election analysis, and issues that may not have garnered much traction during the race become talking points afterwards. This happens after every single election.

 

 

Sure, I agree with much of what you said, but what I don't agree with is all of the excuse making to try to delegitimize a very strong Trump victory on November 8. Nobody thought he would win let alone get over 300 EVs. I am all for post-election analysis, but whether its Russia or fake news, that is not why Hillary and the Dems were clobbered this election. Believe it or not, after the nastiest election in history, the election actually came down to issues and policies, and Trump's message in the rust belt resonated and his campaign strategy played out just as their campaign expected.

You're entitled to that entire opinion.

 

When presented with societal issues, it is important to evaluate why the concern exists in the first place, but it's equally important to then get past that and focus on the solution. Many of us understand that you and a lot of other conservatives believe this is all the product of leftist butt hurt. That may be WHY it's garnering so much attention, but the truth is that the issue was there BEFORE the attention. Did it cost Clinton the election? I don't believe so, but that doesn't mean we should neglect it.

 

If you or anyone else's only contribution to the discussion is "this is just an excuse" then you're quite simply ignoring that there is a problem.

[BigRedBuster]

a very strong Trump victory on November 8.

 

 

Seriously....

 

You don't need to repeat the propaganda that comes out of the Trump camp.

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here's another great article about the lefts fake news panic. I really think we can merge the liberal freakout thread with the fake news thread as their is so much overlap between the two.

 

http://nypost.com/2016/12/11/liberals-fake-news-panic-show-they-cant-handle-the-truth/

Cool - then we agree that CNBC is to Fox what Breibart is to ... well, theres nothing like it.

 

Youre more naaive and uninformed than I gave you credit for Bni if you think this is left leaning issue. In fact - I say your attitude is the exact problem we face and why its so scary.

Please point me to where I said that media bias and misinformed articles only happens on the left. What I stated is that at the present time, its the left in this country that are now talking about fake news after the November election. If this was such a huge issue, why didn't you bring this up prior to November 8? Please answer that for me.

I think it's totally fair to suggest that the recent fake news outrage is being pushed by people who tend to lean left or down the middle. But, it was definitely an issue prior to the election, though it wasn't receiving the attention it is now.

 

So, now that we've gotten that out of the way, my question for you is simple - does that really matter? Can't we all acknowledge that, yes, this is probably a more liberal based movement while similarly acknowledging that it's a disgusting problem and should be rectified?

 

This also shouldn't really come as a shock - post-election periods are reserved for post-election analysis, and issues that may not have garnered much traction during the race become talking points afterwards. This happens after every single election.

Sure, I agree with much of what you said, but what I don't agree with is all of the excuse making to try to delegitimize a very strong Trump victory on November 8. Nobody thought he would win let alone get over 300 EVs. I am all for post-election analysis, but whether its Russia or fake news, that is not why Hillary and the Dems were clobbered this election. Believe it or not, after the nastiest election in history, the election actually came down to issues and policies, and Trump's message in the rust belt resonated and his campaign strategy played out just as their campaign expected.

You're entitled to that entire opinion.

 

When presented with societal issues, it is important to evaluate why the concern exists in the first place, but it's equally important to then get past that and focus on the solution. Many of us understand that you and a lot of other conservatives believe this is all the product of leftist butt hurt. That may be WHY it's garnering so much attention, but the truth is that the issue was there BEFORE the attention. Did it cost Clinton the election? I don't believe so, but that doesn't mean we should neglect it.

 

If you or anyone else's only contribution to the discussion is "this is just an excuse" then you're quite simply ignoring that there is a problem.

First off my apologies as I am typing on my phone now and suck at that. And as I said earlier I agree with some of your points, and I agree that fake news and MSM bias is a major issue for our country. I not disputing that there are too many garbage stories out there on the left and right, and frankly if the left is now coming on board with how bad our media is, that is a good thing. My only complaint is that the come to jesus moment on this topic appears to coincide with the election of Trump. But hey, I am more optimistic about this country than I have been in a long time, and I will try to ignore the lefts venting on this topic if it means they have come around to accept that fake or biased media is not good for this country.

[Enhance]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here's another great article about the lefts fake news panic. I really think we can merge the liberal freakout thread with the fake news thread as their is so much overlap between the two.

 

http://nypost.com/2016/12/11/liberals-fake-news-panic-show-they-cant-handle-the-truth/

Cool - then we agree that CNBC is to Fox what Breibart is to ... well, theres nothing like it.

 

Youre more naaive and uninformed than I gave you credit for Bni if you think this is left leaning issue. In fact - I say your attitude is the exact problem we face and why its so scary.

Please point me to where I said that media bias and misinformed articles only happens on the left. What I stated is that at the present time, its the left in this country that are now talking about fake news after the November election. If this was such a huge issue, why didn't you bring this up prior to November 8? Please answer that for me.

I think it's totally fair to suggest that the recent fake news outrage is being pushed by people who tend to lean left or down the middle. But, it was definitely an issue prior to the election, though it wasn't receiving the attention it is now.

 

So, now that we've gotten that out of the way, my question for you is simple - does that really matter? Can't we all acknowledge that, yes, this is probably a more liberal based movement while similarly acknowledging that it's a disgusting problem and should be rectified?

 

This also shouldn't really come as a shock - post-election periods are reserved for post-election analysis, and issues that may not have garnered much traction during the race become talking points afterwards. This happens after every single election.

Sure, I agree with much of what you said, but what I don't agree with is all of the excuse making to try to delegitimize a very strong Trump victory on November 8. Nobody thought he would win let alone get over 300 EVs. I am all for post-election analysis, but whether its Russia or fake news, that is not why Hillary and the Dems were clobbered this election. Believe it or not, after the nastiest election in history, the election actually came down to issues and policies, and Trump's message in the rust belt resonated and his campaign strategy played out just as their campaign expected.

You're entitled to that entire opinion.

 

When presented with societal issues, it is important to evaluate why the concern exists in the first place, but it's equally important to then get past that and focus on the solution. Many of us understand that you and a lot of other conservatives believe this is all the product of leftist butt hurt. That may be WHY it's garnering so much attention, but the truth is that the issue was there BEFORE the attention. Did it cost Clinton the election? I don't believe so, but that doesn't mean we should neglect it.

 

If you or anyone else's only contribution to the discussion is "this is just an excuse" then you're quite simply ignoring that there is a problem.

First off my apologies as I am typing on my phone now and suck at that. And as I said earlier I agree with some of your points, and I agree that fake news and MSM bias is a major issue for our country. I not disputing that there are too many garbage stories out there on the left and right, and frankly if the left is now coming on board with how bad our media is, that is a good thing. My only complaint is that the come to jesus moment on this topic appears to coincide with the election of Trump. But hey, I am more optimistic about this country than I have been in a long time, and I will try to ignore the lefts venting on this topic if it means they have come around to accept that fake or biased media is not good for this country.

Agree with some here as well, but as someone who has worked in a variety of positions for the media, I can say without hesitation that many accusations of bias and partisanship are generally irrational and unfounded.

 

This is particularly true at the local level, where I've been accused of being a liberal just as much as I've been accused of being a conservative.

 

One of the more humorous aspects of all this, and probably saddest, is that we have an incredible amount of people in this country who don't know (or don't care to know) what the difference is between editorialism and reporting.

[HuskerNation1]

 

a very strong Trump victory on November 8.

 

 

Seriously....

 

You don't need to repeat the propaganda that comes out of the Trump camp.

 

 

Wow, that is all you have to say. Prior to November 8, most of the electoral college calculations had Hillary winning over 300 EVs with claims that would be a "landslide" which to me signifies something greater than "strong victory." I guess if that is all you have to come back with on this topic, I will just have to smile.

[BigRedBuster]

I'm glad you're smiling because I like people to be happy.

 

Still doesn't negate the fact you are great at repeating propaganda that comes out of trump camp.

 

Sometimes nothing else needs to be said.

[Danny Bateman]

 

 

a very strong Trump victory on November 8.

 

 

Seriously....

 

You don't need to repeat the propaganda that comes out of the Trump camp.

Wow, that is all you have to say. Prior to November 8, most of the electoral college calculations had Hillary winning over 300 EVs with claims that would be a "landslide" which to me signifies something greater than "strong victory." I guess if that is all you have to come back with on this topic, I will just have to smile.

It signifies that narratives are stupid and the calculations, which after all are just guesses, were wrong. He won by a very small margin in a few key states, but lost by almost 3 million votes, so anyone claiming a mandate or a "landslide victory" (I.e., the man himself) is also laughably misconstruing the strength of the win.

 

Everyone should take a look at that link in post #119. I feel like that is a pretty accurate shake-out.

 

BRB is right, though. Propaganda is dangerous. It's why I don't make a habit of perusing excessively left-wing media sites. Especially in an era where the vast majority of the media got copaught with their pants down reacting to Turmp or flat out doling out free airtime for empty podiums, rather than covering him critically and responsibly, fake news to advance agendas and cans in on clicks is rising, and PEOTUS himself would rather take time maligning the media as illegitimate than leading the country, people HAVE to educate themselves well. It's a landscape fraught with land mines right now.

[Moiraine]

The predictions were wrong but that doesn'tvmake them guesses. Polling centers need to do some research to improve their methodology.

[Enhance]

 

Honest question - unethical, yes, but illegal?

 

(reference to the DNC question part)

[funhusker]

^^^I completely understand where he's coming from. And there are a lot people that agree with him. What I don't understand is how people are okay with Russia hacking in just because it benefited them. It is possible to be upset by both the DNC and the Russian government.

[Enhance]

^^^I completely understand where he's coming from. And there are a lot people that agree with him. What I don't understand is how people are okay with Russia hacking in just because it benefited them. It is possible to be upset by both the DNC and the Russian government.

The reason I posted it was less to do with the cyberattack but more the question of legality - what Donna Brazile did may have been highly unethical, but I've never heard anyone before try and suggest it was illegal.

 

But on the note of the cyberattack, I don't know if it was in this thread or another, but there are some statistics now that show Republicans have drastically started changing their views on Russia/Putin. I'll see if I can find where that was or if anybody else knows what I'm talking about.

 

If that's true, I guess it should come as no shock - many voters will blindly follow their candidate's lead, shooting first and asking questions later.

[Fru]

^^^I completely understand where he's coming from. And there are a lot people that agree with him. What I don't understand is how people are okay with Russia hacking in just because it benefited them. It is possible to be upset by both the DNC and the Russian government.

 

Critical thinking is not a strong suit of our populace.

 

We have strong evidence that a foreign country interfered with our election and a whole subset of the country says "Meh" and moves on.

 

How this doesn't terrify people and isn't the story of the century is utterly baffling.

[NM11046]

 

^^^I completely understand where he's coming from. And there are a lot people that agree with him. What I don't understand is how people are okay with Russia hacking in just because it benefited them. It is possible to be upset by both the DNC and the Russian government.

 

Critical thinking is not a strong suit of our populace.

 

We have strong evidence that a foreign country interfered with our election and a whole subset of the country says "Meh" and moves on.

 

How this doesn't terrify people and isn't the story of the century is utterly baffling.

 

Keep in mind who his key voter population was as well.

[Fru]

 

 

^^^I completely understand where he's coming from. And there are a lot people that agree with him. What I don't understand is how people are okay with Russia hacking in just because it benefited them. It is possible to be upset by both the DNC and the Russian government.

 

Critical thinking is not a strong suit of our populace.

 

We have strong evidence that a foreign country interfered with our election and a whole subset of the country says "Meh" and moves on.

 

How this doesn't terrify people and isn't the story of the century is utterly baffling.

 

Keep in mind who his key voter population was as well.

 

 

Lol, I'm well aware.