Media Bias

[Archy1221]

On 3/31/2022 at 2:35 PM, Enhance said:

They claim they're 50/50. You want them to claim they're what, 55/45? 60/40?

I’m not in the exact percentage game?  Saying they slant left would be accurate though.   
 

On 3/31/2022 at 2:35 PM, Enhance said:

I think you missed the point which was that the AP

I understood what you were trying for just fine.   Unfortunately it just didn’t work out.  

[Enhance]

37 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

I’m not in the exact percentage game?  Saying they slant left would be accurate though.   

Stop being pedantic. You know as well as I do that this wouldn't actually change anything about them in your eyes, and even if they did admit a nominal-bordering-on-irrelevant slant left, they're still one of the most unbiased major news outlets in this country. So is this actually about their news coverage, which is pretty good, or about being able to say you're right about them?

 

Which you still haven't really explained how those tweets prove they slant left, despite two requests to do so. The best you were able to come up with was "tone", which in the provided context proves nothing. If that is your only evidence then yes, I disagree with your assertion of bias. The evidence provided so far is weak and hyper-sensitive at best.

 

Quote

I understood what you were trying for just fine.

Then I look forward to you reasonably calling out other businesses and corporations whose marketing messages do not 100% align with your opinions of them and their work.

[Archy1221]

23 minutes ago, Enhance said:

Stop being pedantic. You know as well as I do that this wouldn't actually change anything about them in your eyes, and even if they did admit a nominal-bordering-on-irrelevant slant left, they're still one of the most unbiased major news outlets in this country. So is this actually about their news coverage, which is pretty good, or about being able to say you're right about them?

 

Which you still haven't really explained how those tweets prove they slant left, despite two requests to do so. The best you were able to come up with was "tone", which in the provided context proves nothing. If that is your only evidence then yes, I disagree with your assertion of bias. The evidence provided so far is weak and hyper-sensitive at best.

 

Then I look forward to you reasonably calling out other businesses and corporations whose marketing messages do not 100% align with your opinions of them and their work.

Absolutely,   Just let me know what thread to put them in.  

[nic]

On 4/3/2022 at 1:41 PM, Lorewarn said:

Today I learned that twitter determines if newspapers can report on stories.

Congrats!

 

Edit: in all seriousness, a bunch of concern in 2020 about how much “news” people get from social media? It directs a lot of people to articles who wouldn’t otherwise go find them. 

[nic]

but, but, but…it was Russian disinformation intended to try and swing the election….

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/04/03/hunter-biden-story-is-an-opportunity-reckoning/

“For now, what’s more compelling than the assorted accusations about the Bidens’ behavior is this question: Why is confirmation of a story that first surfaced in the fall of 2020 emerging only now? When the New York Post published its blockbuster exclusive on the contents of a laptop said to have been abandoned at a Delaware repair shop by Hunter Biden, mainstream media organizations balked at running with the same narrative. Social media sites displayed even greater caution," 

 

 

[DevoHusker]

could go in censorship as well. feel free to move if needed

 

 

 

 

[DevoHusker]

 

 

[ZRod]

4 hours ago, nic said:

but, but, but…it was Russian disinformation intended to try and swing the election….

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/04/03/hunter-biden-story-is-an-opportunity-reckoning/

“For now, what’s more compelling than the assorted accusations about the Bidens’ behavior is this question: Why is confirmation of a story that first surfaced in the fall of 2020 emerging only now? When the New York Post published its blockbuster exclusive on the contents of a laptop said to have been abandoned at a Delaware repair shop by Hunter Biden, mainstream media organizations balked at running with the same narrative. Social media sites displayed even greater caution," 

 

 

Look up when the Steele dossier was "leaked" and by who (hint: buzzfeed January 2017). Then what publications had read it prior to the 2016 election (hint: The NYT, WaPo, New Yorker, ABC, etc.).

 

Now tell me there is media bias with Hunter...

[nic]

4 hours ago, ZRod said:

Look up when the Steele dossier was "leaked" and by who (hint: buzzfeed January 2017). Then what publications had read it prior to the 2016 election (hint: The NYT, WaPo, New Yorker, ABC, etc.).

 

Now tell me there is media bias with Hunter...

WaPo is admitting it. I don’t have to say anything.  well they are making excuses. Plus I have no idea what you are getting at…may have to think about it a bit. 

[nic]

5 hours ago, DevoHusker said:

could go in censorship as well. feel free to move if needed

 

 

 

 

I posted it over there earlier….but here is the new majority owner

 

this could be fun.

[teachercd]

1 hour ago, nic said:

I posted it over there earlier….but here is the new majority owner

 

this could be fun.

I hate myself...I sold my twitter stock off years ago at a loss!  

[ZRod]

3 hours ago, nic said:

WaPo is admitting it. I don’t have to say anything.  well they are making excuses. Plus I have no idea what you are getting at…may have to think about it a bit. 

They're not admitting anything. They're just opening a dialogue of whether or not what social media did was right or wrong.

 

And my point was that the older and more trusted forms of media didn't really have an issue with the dossier or the laptop (whether or not they were real or fake), they were political fodder that was treated almost the same. Stories weren't published about them until after the election. This isn't something major news outlets struggle with. They have a robust editorial review process and have been in these waters many times. They make mistakes but generally they get it right.

 

Social media on the other hand is a relatively fledgling medium trying to find it's editorial way. That being said Twitter original banned the article because it contianed stolen/hacked material which seems like a good policy. As an extreme example you'd probably want hack revenge porn to be blocked as well, so what makes someone's personal computer files any different from that?

[knapplc]

In all the thumb wrestling over Hunter's laptop and the media, does anyone know what incriminating evidence has been found on this thing? Is Hunter in trouble for the laptop's contents, or is Joe?

[BigRedBuster]

52 minutes ago, knapplc said:

In all the thumb wrestling over Hunter's laptop and the media, does anyone know what incriminating evidence has been found on this thing? Is Hunter in trouble for the laptop's contents, or is Joe?

https://www.vox.com/22992772/hunter-biden-laptop

 

It's still shady because the computer store was owned by a big Trump fan and then he gave the info to Rudy.  So.....is the info fake or real?

[knapplc]

2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

https://www.vox.com/22992772/hunter-biden-laptop

 

It's still shady because the computer store was owned by a big Trump fan and then he gave the info to Rudy.  So.....is the info fake or real?

 

I've read that. There's nothing really incriminating in that article, especially for President Biden. That's why I'm asking what the big deal is.

 

But you're right about the provenance of the laptop - anyone beating this drum who doesn't acknowledge the exceedingly shady and circuitous path this thing took to where it is today isn't being honest about the conversation.