|
|
Post by whodatguy on Apr 27, 2012 16:23:18 GMT -5
Some are pretending they are not. Yeah, really. Stop pretending you big pretender you. You are the poster child for bias on the politics forum. Here's your sign. |
|
|
|
Post by (R)uffda! on Apr 27, 2012 17:21:14 GMT -5
1) We get it. I'm a jerk. I'll try to be a better person. Move on.
2) I don't know what "Here's your sign" means, but, by all means, keep saying it.
|
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Apr 29, 2012 21:55:50 GMT -5
Well....if I can hear a story multiple times in the sticks of rural Nebraska, that is a prime example of exposure that you claimed was not happening enough? Correct? Incorrect. Easy study for a large sample. Google the incident and pull up the news articles by date, notice the frequency, when they occur, and what media is covering it. You could also not at how interested people are in the topic on this board (and m=how many people here frequent lots of news sites) and notice when the first post is compared to when the incident occurred. |
|
|
|
Post by holidayhusker on Apr 30, 2012 0:29:00 GMT -5
Well....if I can hear a story multiple times in the sticks of rural Nebraska, that is a prime example of exposure that you claimed was not happening enough? Correct? Incorrect. Easy study for a large sample. Google the incident and pull up the news articles by date, notice the frequency, when they occur, and what media is covering it. You could also not at how interested people are in the topic on this board (and m=how many people here frequent lots of news sites) and notice when the first post is compared to when the incident occurred. Not buying it lone...sorry. |
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Apr 30, 2012 9:30:42 GMT -5
Incorrect. Easy study for a large sample. Google the incident and pull up the news articles by date, notice the frequency, when they occur, and what media is covering it. You could also not at how interested people are in the topic on this board (and m=how many people here frequent lots of news sites) and notice when the first post is compared to when the incident occurred. Not buying it lone...sorry. Yep...those darn facts from all over the world that you can verify...always shady. |
|
|
|
Post by holidayhusker on Apr 30, 2012 9:45:32 GMT -5
Not buying it lone...sorry. Yep...those darn facts from all over the world that you can verify...always shady. LOL...I'm not buying your ,"facts." |
|
|
|
Post by (R)uffda! on Apr 30, 2012 13:26:10 GMT -5
holiday's one of those guys who thinks he's entitled to his own set of facts. If he says your facts are not his facts, what can you do?
There is no Truth. That seems to be the general drift I've been hearing a lot here lately. It's all about biased websites and "everyone does it" and hidden agendas.
The problem with all of this, of course, is that people just give up. They have placed themselves beyond the reach of reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by holidayhusker on Apr 30, 2012 14:08:37 GMT -5
holiday's one of those guys who thinks he's entitled to his own set of facts. If he says your facts are not his facts, what can you do? There is no Truth. That seems to be the general drift I've been hearing a lot here lately. It's all about biased websites and "everyone does it" and hidden agendas. The problem with all of this, of course, is that people just give up. They have placed themselves beyond the reach of reason. I dont' have a problem with facts. What I do have a problem with is people like you who loiter on liberal internet sites and then present their findings as fact. There is a difference. Do you believe the" facts," that Rush Limbaugh presents? The truth is subjective. |
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Apr 30, 2012 15:06:40 GMT -5
holiday's one of those guys who thinks he's entitled to his own set of facts. If he says your facts are not his facts, what can you do? There is no Truth. That seems to be the general drift I've been hearing a lot here lately. It's all about biased websites and "everyone does it" and hidden agendas. The problem with all of this, of course, is that people just give up. They have placed themselves beyond the reach of reason. I dont' have a problem with facts. What I do have a problem with is people like you who loiter on liberal internet sites and then present their findings as fact. There is a difference. Do you believe the" facts," that Rush Limbaugh presents? The truth is subjective. No, you seem to have a problem with facts that don't agree with your position, or any facts reported by a liberal organization regardless of its merit: e.g. when you attacked a Motherjones article previously without looking at the data presented as the data was very simple not was not skewed in any manner. As for the facts I presented here. What's the problem with them? Google a topic and filter for news articles, it doesn't differentiate from what source the article is coming from, and the dates are right there from the source articles. |
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Apr 30, 2012 15:08:07 GMT -5
Yep...those darn facts from all over the world that you can verify...always shady. LOL...I'm not buying your ,"facts." It's funny how when you 'LOL' at facts, it seems to mean you haven't looked at them, and have no facts to dispute them. |
|
|
|
Post by (R)uffda! on Apr 30, 2012 15:10:37 GMT -5
There you go. You don't have a problem with facts, but you think truth is subjective.
Truth can be hard to ascertain, but it is NOT subjective. And it can be found on liberal AND conservative websites.
This is exactly my point. Present me with facts to back up your argument and I hope I have an open enough mind to be swayed (although you probably doubt it). Not everything is an opinion. Agreed? To just dismiss things without actually doing the heavy-lifting required is a cop-out. We are all guilty of this.
Just an example: Media Matters has a clear liberal bias -- they fact check conservative sources. But does that mean they are incapable of getting the facts correct?
As for main stream journalism, keep in mind that their PRIMARY JOB is to fact check what people in power present as facts. Too often, that is seen as a liberal bias.
This is the problem I have with Fox News. Too often, they don't stick with facts. I am sure this is something you find fault with with so-called liberal sources -- and rightly so. But we both make a huge mistake if we summarily dismiss the facts because of the source.
|
|
|
|
Post by (R)uffda! on Apr 30, 2012 15:13:10 GMT -5
And this takes us back to lonewolf's point. You have the opportunity to see for yourself if your position is correct or not. He's provided you with the means.
LOL is a cop-out.
|
|
|
|
Post by holidayhusker on Apr 30, 2012 15:27:22 GMT -5
There you go. You don't have a problem with facts, but you think truth is subjective. Truth can be hard to ascertain, but it is NOT subjective. And it can be found on liberal AND conservative websites. This is exactly my point. Present me with facts to back up your argument and I hope I have an open enough mind to be swayed (although you probably doubt it). Not everything is an opinion. Agreed? To just dismiss things without actually doing the heavy-lifting required is a cop-out. We are all guilty of this. Just an example: Media Matters has a clear liberal bias -- they fact check conservative sources. But does that mean they are incapable of getting the facts correct? As for main stream journalism, keep in mind that their PRIMARY JOB is to fact check what people in power present as facts. Too often, that is seen as a liberal bias. This is the problem I have with Fox News. Too often, they don't stick with facts. I am sure this is something you find fault with with so-called liberal sources -- and rightly so. But we both make a huge mistake if we summarily dismiss the facts because of the source. I find it amusing when most of the media in this country leans toward the left yet you have a problem with the ONE source of news that leans right. Do you realize how hypocritical that is? MSNBC not only had a problem sticking with the facts, they tried to change them. Where is your criticism of them? |
|
|
|
Post by (R)uffda! on Apr 30, 2012 15:55:07 GMT -5
Why are you changing the subject?
(That was NBC, not MSNBC, btw. They acknowledged the problem and FIRED the person who did it. When has Fox ever done this? Again, your point always seems to be: EVERYONE does it. Even if this is true, and I would argue that it isn't, there are degrees to this. What main stream news source does what Fox does? The answer? None of them. MSNBC is your best example and they PALE in comparison. Why? They don't make things up. Yes, their evening shows have an agenda. They pick and choose. But they don't make things up.
I don't watch MSNBC much (who does?), so correct me if I'm wrong.
I would also contend that the reason people think most news media "leans to the left" is because they used to do what they are supposed to do: question those in power. That is not a conservative thing to do.)
|
|
|
|
Post by truffleshuffle on May 1, 2012 0:19:37 GMT -5
Yep...those darn facts from all over the world that you can verify...always shady. LOL...I'm not buying your ,"facts." that's because you're not "book smart" |
|
