iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
31 Mar 2011, 8:52 am
JakobVirgil wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
I'm not saying it is or is not a fake, I would like to see the rest of the page, cause it cuts off the name of the paper.
I am wondering why the hell media outlets haven't posted up the paper on their web pages, guess it is cause it would make too much sense.
I am wondering why the hell media outlets haven't posted up the paper on their web pages, guess it is cause it would make too much sense.
Because a conservative conspiracy is what actually exists, not a liberal one. You're just hooked by really crappy bait.
Mocking Query: Are you going to suggest that next the lizard people are invading the world?
The people who believe the Icke conspiracy stuff are the same as the birthers. I'm just pointing out that there's more material for one to believe in a republican conspiracy theory more than a birther conspiracy theory.
saying that fox news is a right-wing outfit with a conservative agenda is not the endorsement a conspiracy theory.
a conspiracy theory requires that there be a plot of which the mainstream is not aware.
this is why conspiracy theorists are obsessed with media bias.
When most of the mainstream media vote Democrat along a party line basis, it isn't hard to figure out that they have a bias.
there you go. saying that the mainstream media anchors are mostly Democratic not a conspiracy. saying the the companies they work for are mostly Republican also not a conspiracy. The center is liberal. The left and right are ideological..
saying that mainstream media is a communist front is conspiracy theory. Saying that mainstream media part of a cover-up of anything is conspiracy theory. bias is inherent but I don't think it overwhelms real content.
Bias filters content.
31 Mar 2011, 9:09 am
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
I'm not saying it is or is not a fake, I would like to see the rest of the page, cause it cuts off the name of the paper.
I am wondering why the hell media outlets haven't posted up the paper on their web pages, guess it is cause it would make too much sense.
I am wondering why the hell media outlets haven't posted up the paper on their web pages, guess it is cause it would make too much sense.
Because a conservative conspiracy is what actually exists, not a liberal one. You're just hooked by really crappy bait.
Mocking Query: Are you going to suggest that next the lizard people are invading the world?
The people who believe the Icke conspiracy stuff are the same as the birthers. I'm just pointing out that there's more material for one to believe in a republican conspiracy theory more than a birther conspiracy theory.
saying that fox news is a right-wing outfit with a conservative agenda is not the endorsement a conspiracy theory.
a conspiracy theory requires that there be a plot of which the mainstream is not aware.
this is why conspiracy theorists are obsessed with media bias.
When most of the mainstream media vote Democrat along a party line basis, it isn't hard to figure out that they have a bias.
there you go. saying that the mainstream media anchors are mostly Democratic not a conspiracy. saying the the companies they work for are mostly Republican also not a conspiracy. The center is liberal. The left and right are ideological..
saying that mainstream media is a communist front is conspiracy theory. Saying that mainstream media part of a cover-up of anything is conspiracy theory. bias is inherent but I don't think it overwhelms real content.
Bias filters content.
sure but it is a question of how much and which content.
if I read a diary of say a labor radical from the 1930's I can trust that it will have a pro-labor bias.
but I can also trust to some extant the dates times places and that he has valid if biased versions of events.
the same would be true of the diary of his boss.
bias does not make something invalid.
on the other hand if something is propaganda then we can discount the surface meaning.
weigh and count and judge things presented as facts regardless of the source.
and ignore anything that is pure propaganda i.e. pravda, fox news, z-magazine, boys-life, the watchtower, air america etc.
because those things exist to bolster the belief of the faithful and are not part of the real dialogue.
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
31 Mar 2011, 9:15 am
JakobVirgil wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
I'm not saying it is or is not a fake, I would like to see the rest of the page, cause it cuts off the name of the paper.
I am wondering why the hell media outlets haven't posted up the paper on their web pages, guess it is cause it would make too much sense.
I am wondering why the hell media outlets haven't posted up the paper on their web pages, guess it is cause it would make too much sense.
Because a conservative conspiracy is what actually exists, not a liberal one. You're just hooked by really crappy bait.
Mocking Query: Are you going to suggest that next the lizard people are invading the world?
The people who believe the Icke conspiracy stuff are the same as the birthers. I'm just pointing out that there's more material for one to believe in a republican conspiracy theory more than a birther conspiracy theory.
saying that fox news is a right-wing outfit with a conservative agenda is not the endorsement a conspiracy theory.
a conspiracy theory requires that there be a plot of which the mainstream is not aware.
this is why conspiracy theorists are obsessed with media bias.
When most of the mainstream media vote Democrat along a party line basis, it isn't hard to figure out that they have a bias.
there you go. saying that the mainstream media anchors are mostly Democratic not a conspiracy. saying the the companies they work for are mostly Republican also not a conspiracy. The center is liberal. The left and right are ideological..
saying that mainstream media is a communist front is conspiracy theory. Saying that mainstream media part of a cover-up of anything is conspiracy theory. bias is inherent but I don't think it overwhelms real content.
Bias filters content.
sure but it is a question of how much and which content.
if I read a diary of say a labor radical from the 1930's I can trust that it will have a pro-labor bias.
but I can also trust to some extant the dates times places and that he has valid if biased versions of events.
the same would be true of the diary of his boss.
bias does not make something invalid.
on the other hand if something is propaganda then we can discount the surface meaning.
weigh and count and judge things presented as facts regardless of the source.
and ignore anything that is pure propaganda i.e. pravda, fox news, z-magazine, boys-life, the watchtower, air america etc.
because those things exist to bolster the belief of the faithful and are not part of the real dialogue.
Even propaganda has some truth mixed in with it, since an outright lie is easily rejected.
31 Mar 2011, 9:22 am
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
I'm not saying it is or is not a fake, I would like to see the rest of the page, cause it cuts off the name of the paper.
I am wondering why the hell media outlets haven't posted up the paper on their web pages, guess it is cause it would make too much sense.
I am wondering why the hell media outlets haven't posted up the paper on their web pages, guess it is cause it would make too much sense.
Because a conservative conspiracy is what actually exists, not a liberal one. You're just hooked by really crappy bait.
Mocking Query: Are you going to suggest that next the lizard people are invading the world?
The people who believe the Icke conspiracy stuff are the same as the birthers. I'm just pointing out that there's more material for one to believe in a republican conspiracy theory more than a birther conspiracy theory.
saying that fox news is a right-wing outfit with a conservative agenda is not the endorsement a conspiracy theory.
a conspiracy theory requires that there be a plot of which the mainstream is not aware.
this is why conspiracy theorists are obsessed with media bias.
When most of the mainstream media vote Democrat along a party line basis, it isn't hard to figure out that they have a bias.
there you go. saying that the mainstream media anchors are mostly Democratic not a conspiracy. saying the the companies they work for are mostly Republican also not a conspiracy. The center is liberal. The left and right are ideological..
saying that mainstream media is a communist front is conspiracy theory. Saying that mainstream media part of a cover-up of anything is conspiracy theory. bias is inherent but I don't think it overwhelms real content.
Bias filters content.
sure but it is a question of how much and which content.
if I read a diary of say a labor radical from the 1930's I can trust that it will have a pro-labor bias.
but I can also trust to some extant the dates times places and that he has valid if biased versions of events.
the same would be true of the diary of his boss.
bias does not make something invalid.
on the other hand if something is propaganda then we can discount the surface meaning.
weigh and count and judge things presented as facts regardless of the source.
and ignore anything that is pure propaganda i.e. pravda, fox news, z-magazine, boys-life, the watchtower, air america etc.
because those things exist to bolster the belief of the faithful and are not part of the real dialogue.
Even propaganda has some truth mixed in with it, since an outright lie is easily rejected.
exactly that is why it should be avoided like the plague.
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
31 Mar 2011, 9:44 am
31 Mar 2011, 3:12 pm
31 Mar 2011, 3:19 pm
31 Mar 2011, 3:36 pm
Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
exactly that is why it should be avoided like the plague.
You should practice what you preach.
Fox News drones forfeit the right to (falsely) try and point out propagandist views in others
Seriously, if you had paid attention to Fox News you would have known the things about Obama that is giving you buyer's remorse long before November 2008. Instead, you blindly dismissed Fox News, because your leftist idols told you to.
Get this through your head: I used to watch CNN and MSNBC. They lost my trust, and quite frankly Fox News gained my trust. They gained my trust because I backchecked what they were saying and found that they were telling the truth. You know I wish you were right about Glenn Beck being crazy, however if I believed that I would be ignoring the evidence proving that he knows what he is talking about and isn't off his rocker. Oh by the way I still backcheck what I read/watch on Fox News.
Now back to 2008, the signs and information about Obama was out there and Fox News covered it. However, instead of watching an actual news source like Fox News, you paid attention to News Agencies whose employees kept fawning all over Obama like they wanted him to mate with them so they could have his babies. Then you have the gall to accuse the only media outlet that has had the guts to criticize the "annointed one." Sorry, but you've made it perfectly clear along with some others here that you wouldn't know a valid news source if it walked up and smacked you upside the head with a salmon.
31 Mar 2011, 3:40 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Seriously, if you had paid attention to Fox News you would have known the things about Obama that is giving you buyer's remorse long before November 2008. Instead, you blindly dismissed Fox News, because your leftist idols told you to.
Who are my 'leftist idols'? Nobody told me to dismiss Fox, I made that decision on my own.
Inuyasha wrote:
Get this through your head: I used to watch CNN and MSNBC. They lost my trust, and quite frankly Fox News gained my trust. They gained my trust because I backchecked what they were saying and found that they were telling the truth. You know I wish you were right about Glenn Beck being crazy, however if I believed that I would be ignoring the evidence proving that he knows what he is talking about and isn't off his rocker. Oh by the way I still backcheck what I read/watch on Fox News.
So you stopped trusting the turd on the left and started trusting the turd on the right. You're still getting s**t on your fingers
Inuyasha wrote:
Now back to 2008, the signs and information about Obama was out there and Fox News covered it. However, instead of watching an actual news source like Fox News, you paid attention to News Agencies whose employees kept fawning all over Obama like they wanted him to mate with them so they could have his babies. Then you have the gall to accuse the only media outlet that has had the guts to criticize the "annointed one." Sorry, but you've made it perfectly clear along with some others here that you wouldn't know a valid news source if it walked up and smacked you upside the head with a salmon.
Actually, I didn't. Why are you saying all these things like 'you paid attention to News Agencies etc etc'. I don't cite any of the 'leftist' news agencies you regularly criticize. This is actually really amusing to me, you're making nothing but assumptions on where I stand based on the fact that I disagree with your blind faith in Fox. Good job, buddy!
31 Mar 2011, 3:44 pm
Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Seriously, if you had paid attention to Fox News you would have known the things about Obama that is giving you buyer's remorse long before November 2008. Instead, you blindly dismissed Fox News, because your leftist idols told you to.
Who are my 'leftist idols'? Nobody told me to dismiss Fox, I made that decision on my own.
Just because something sounds crazy doesn't mean it isn't true.
Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Get this through your head: I used to watch CNN and MSNBC. They lost my trust, and quite frankly Fox News gained my trust. They gained my trust because I backchecked what they were saying and found that they were telling the truth. You know I wish you were right about Glenn Beck being crazy, however if I believed that I would be ignoring the evidence proving that he knows what he is talking about and isn't off his rocker. Oh by the way I still backcheck what I read/watch on Fox News.
So you stopped trusting the turd on the left and started trusting the turd on the right. You're still getting sh** on your fingers
I still backcheck what they report to make sure they aren't starting to have the same lack of integrity as MSNBC and CNN.
Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Now back to 2008, the signs and information about Obama was out there and Fox News covered it. However, instead of watching an actual news source like Fox News, you paid attention to News Agencies whose employees kept fawning all over Obama like they wanted him to mate with them so they could have his babies. Then you have the gall to accuse the only media outlet that has had the guts to criticize the "annointed one." Sorry, but you've made it perfectly clear along with some others here that you wouldn't know a valid news source if it walked up and smacked you upside the head with a salmon.
Actually, I didn't. Why are you saying all these things like 'you paid attention to News Agencies etc etc'. I don't cite any of the 'leftist' news agencies you regularly criticize. This is actually really amusing to me, you're making nothing but assumptions on where I stand based on the fact that I disagree with your blind faith in Fox. Good job, buddy!
I don't recall you sourcing anything usually.
31 Mar 2011, 3:51 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Seriously, if you had paid attention to Fox News you would have known the things about Obama that is giving you buyer's remorse long before November 2008. Instead, you blindly dismissed Fox News, because your leftist idols told you to.
Who are my 'leftist idols'? Nobody told me to dismiss Fox, I made that decision on my own.
Just because something sounds crazy doesn't mean it isn't true.
What? How is this in any way a response to what I just said? You accuse me of dismissing Fox based on what my 'leftist idols' tell me, I ask you to please identify these idols, and you reply with that?
Inuyasha wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Get this through your head: I used to watch CNN and MSNBC. They lost my trust, and quite frankly Fox News gained my trust. They gained my trust because I backchecked what they were saying and found that they were telling the truth. You know I wish you were right about Glenn Beck being crazy, however if I believed that I would be ignoring the evidence proving that he knows what he is talking about and isn't off his rocker. Oh by the way I still backcheck what I read/watch on Fox News.
So you stopped trusting the turd on the left and started trusting the turd on the right. You're still getting sh** on your fingers
I still backcheck what they report to make sure they aren't starting to have the same lack of integrity as MSNBC and CNN.
They're all full of it, but Fox is the one that really gets the knee jerkers
Inuyasha wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Now back to 2008, the signs and information about Obama was out there and Fox News covered it. However, instead of watching an actual news source like Fox News, you paid attention to News Agencies whose employees kept fawning all over Obama like they wanted him to mate with them so they could have his babies. Then you have the gall to accuse the only media outlet that has had the guts to criticize the "annointed one." Sorry, but you've made it perfectly clear along with some others here that you wouldn't know a valid news source if it walked up and smacked you upside the head with a salmon.
Actually, I didn't. Why are you saying all these things like 'you paid attention to News Agencies etc etc'. I don't cite any of the 'leftist' news agencies you regularly criticize. This is actually really amusing to me, you're making nothing but assumptions on where I stand based on the fact that I disagree with your blind faith in Fox. Good job, buddy!
I don't recall you sourcing anything usually.
When I am engaged in something that requires sources, then I will provide sources. And you once again do not address my comment but attempt to change the subject with some irrelevant falsehood. You keep asserting I pay attention to 'certain News Agencies' and yet
A) I criticize these agencies
B) You're pulling that out of your ass in a weak attempt to gain points, and
C) All of the Above
31 Mar 2011, 5:58 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
exactly that is why it should be avoided like the plague.
You should practice what you preach.
Fox News drones forfeit the right to (falsely) try and point out propagandist views in others
Seriously, if you had paid attention to Fox News you would have known the things about Obama that is giving you buyer's remorse long before November 2008. Instead, you blindly dismissed Fox News, because your leftist idols told you to.
Get this through your head: I used to watch CNN and MSNBC. They lost my trust, and quite frankly Fox News gained my trust. They gained my trust because I backchecked what they were saying and found that they were telling the truth. You know I wish you were right about Glenn Beck being crazy, however if I believed that I would be ignoring the evidence proving that he knows what he is talking about and isn't off his rocker. Oh by the way I still backcheck what I read/watch on Fox News.
Now back to 2008, the signs and information about Obama was out there and Fox News covered it. However, instead of watching an actual news source like Fox News, you paid attention to News Agencies whose employees kept fawning all over Obama like they wanted him to mate with them so they could have his babies. Then you have the gall to accuse the only media outlet that has had the guts to criticize the "annointed one." Sorry, but you've made it perfectly clear along with some others here that you wouldn't know a valid news source if it walked up and smacked you upside the head with a salmon.
How does one fact-check fox news when all liberal and centrist sources are discounted?
31 Mar 2011, 6:08 pm
Mack27
Deinonychus
Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 382
Location: near Boston Massachusetts USA
31 Mar 2011, 6:13 pm
31 Mar 2011, 6:22 pm
31 Mar 2011, 6:36 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
exactly that is why it should be avoided like the plague.
You should practice what you preach.
who have you heard me quote?
what sites do I cite?
What agenda am I promoting?
now it my eyes that roll ":roll:
" 
actually eye rolling is a sign of contempt
it shows one is not willing to actually engage the view of the opponent.
and is a sign of weakness (not something I would choose to communicate)
that that as some advice from a aspie that passes by learning gesture by rote.
I am gunna put quotes around mine to show good faith
