Liberals also hate the liberal media, ironically because it isn't liberal enough.
-.-
I won't speak for anyone else, but to me this is why the New York Times is garbage:
They explicitly and unabashedly published bullshit about Iraqi materiel, as part of a choreographed campaign right alongside the GOP, to advocate for war. Every one of those shitbag reporters working for that rag should have been made to sit behind sandbags recording stories front the front since they wanted the war so damn bad.
That story was instrumental in earning public support for the war effort from people sitting on the fence. An ombudsman for the NYT would later come out to wring their hands and talk about how unsubstantiated it all was, but by the time he did the damage was done.
I cannot wait for the old garbage media to die it's richly deserved death, and 'not being leftist enough' has nothing to do with it.
What? You just posted something about hating the NYT because it wasn't very liberal. And this contradicts me somehow?
Oh, and by the way, the "old garbage media" is already dying, and of course being replaced by quality, courageous and in-depth news sources. LOL! My joke. Being replaced by Breitbart and Buzzfeed.
Buzzfeed has actually developed a solid reputation for investigative reporting.
They had the courage to leak the Trump document for sure. I'm not aware of any investigative journalism they do, although feel free to link me good examples. Their home page is a mess of trash which makes it hard to find anything of substance.
I can't see them replacing venerable-though-imperfect weighty old newspapers like the Washington Post or New York Times.
Here's one: a piece by a biracial woman who grew up in rural Pennsylvania, discussing how recent pieces on the white working class there avoid talking about the non-white working class in those regions, and why that is.
Or this expose on shady psychiatric facilities abusing patients for profit.
Liberals also hate the liberal media, ironically because it isn't liberal enough.
-.-
I won't speak for anyone else, but to me this is why the New York Times is garbage:
They explicitly and unabashedly published bullshit about Iraqi materiel, as part of a choreographed campaign right alongside the GOP, to advocate for war. Every one of those shitbag reporters working for that rag should have been made to sit behind sandbags recording stories front the front since they wanted the war so damn bad.
That story was instrumental in earning public support for the war effort from people sitting on the fence. An ombudsman for the NYT would later come out to wring their hands and talk about how unsubstantiated it all was, but by the time he did the damage was done.
I cannot wait for the old garbage media to die it's richly deserved death, and 'not being leftist enough' has nothing to do with it.
What? You just posted something about hating the NYT because it wasn't very liberal. And this contradicts me somehow?
Oh, and by the way, the "old garbage media" is already dying, and of course being replaced by quality, courageous and in-depth news sources. LOL! My joke. Being replaced by Breitbart and Buzzfeed.
Buzzfeed has actually developed a solid reputation for investigative reporting.
They had the courage to leak the Trump document for sure. I'm not aware of any investigative journalism they do, although feel free to link me good examples. Their home page is a mess of trash which makes it hard to find anything of substance.
I can't see them replacing venerable-though-imperfect weighty old newspapers like the Washington Post or New York Times.
Here's one: a piece by a biracial woman who grew up in rural Pennsylvania, discussing how recent pieces on the white working class there avoid talking about the non-white working class in those regions, and why that is.
Or this expose on shady psychiatric facilities abusing patients for profit.
Nice, long form stuff, thanks. They really hide this stuff though. You could go to that site and think it's nothing more than funny Disney memes and recipes. Is that not a problem?
Liberals also hate the liberal media, ironically because it isn't liberal enough.
-.-
I won't speak for anyone else, but to me this is why the New York Times is garbage:
They explicitly and unabashedly published bullshit about Iraqi materiel, as part of a choreographed campaign right alongside the GOP, to advocate for war. Every one of those shitbag reporters working for that rag should have been made to sit behind sandbags recording stories front the front since they wanted the war so damn bad.
That story was instrumental in earning public support for the war effort from people sitting on the fence. An ombudsman for the NYT would later come out to wring their hands and talk about how unsubstantiated it all was, but by the time he did the damage was done.
I cannot wait for the old garbage media to die it's richly deserved death, and 'not being leftist enough' has nothing to do with it.
What? You just posted something about hating the NYT because it wasn't very liberal. And this contradicts me somehow?
Oh, and by the way, the "old garbage media" is already dying, and of course being replaced by quality, courageous and in-depth news sources. LOL! My joke. Being replaced by Breitbart and Buzzfeed.
Buzzfeed has actually developed a solid reputation for investigative reporting.
They had the courage to leak the Trump document for sure. I'm not aware of any investigative journalism they do, although feel free to link me good examples. Their home page is a mess of trash which makes it hard to find anything of substance.
I can't see them replacing venerable-though-imperfect weighty old newspapers like the Washington Post or New York Times.
Here's one: a piece by a biracial woman who grew up in rural Pennsylvania, discussing how recent pieces on the white working class there avoid talking about the non-white working class in those regions, and why that is.
Or this expose on shady psychiatric facilities abusing patients for profit.
Nice, long form stuff, thanks. They really hide this stuff though. You could go to that site and think it's nothing more than funny Disney memes and recipes. Is that not a problem?
Liberals also hate the liberal media, ironically because it isn't liberal enough.
-.-
I won't speak for anyone else, but to me this is why the New York Times is garbage:
They explicitly and unabashedly published bullshit about Iraqi materiel, as part of a choreographed campaign right alongside the GOP, to advocate for war. Every one of those shitbag reporters working for that rag should have been made to sit behind sandbags recording stories front the front since they wanted the war so damn bad.
That story was instrumental in earning public support for the war effort from people sitting on the fence. An ombudsman for the NYT would later come out to wring their hands and talk about how unsubstantiated it all was, but by the time he did the damage was done.
I cannot wait for the old garbage media to die it's richly deserved death, and 'not being leftist enough' has nothing to do with it.
What? You just posted something about hating the NYT because it wasn't very liberal. And this contradicts me somehow?
Oh, and by the way, the "old garbage media" is already dying, and of course being replaced by quality, courageous and in-depth news sources. LOL! My joke. Being replaced by Breitbart and Buzzfeed.
Buzzfeed has actually developed a solid reputation for investigative reporting.
They had the courage to leak the Trump document for sure. I'm not aware of any investigative journalism they do, although feel free to link me good examples. Their home page is a mess of trash which makes it hard to find anything of substance.
I can't see them replacing venerable-though-imperfect weighty old newspapers like the Washington Post or New York Times.
Here's one: a piece by a biracial woman who grew up in rural Pennsylvania, discussing how recent pieces on the white working class there avoid talking about the non-white working class in those regions, and why that is.
Or this expose on shady psychiatric facilities abusing patients for profit.
Nice, long form stuff, thanks. They really hide this stuff though. You could go to that site and think it's nothing more than funny Disney memes and recipes. Is that not a problem?
Unfortunately, the funny Disney memes and recipes are what pay the bills.
Which, honestly - I'm more okay with obvious clickbait fluff pieces than drumming up controversy over nothing (e-mails!) in order to drive traffic and keep the site afloat. It's a lot easier to separate it from the 'real' journalism.
Miller, of course, is the same person who cited unnamed Bush administration officials, as well as disgraced Iraqi politician Ahmed Chalabi, in her 2002 reporting on Iraq’s (nonexistent) weapons of mass destruction stockpile. Senior Bush administration officials, including Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, and Donald Rumsfeld, all cited Miller’s New York Times reporting to rally public support for the war.
Conservative pundits like Frum, Brooks, etc. still having a job while being unrepentant Iraq War cheerleaders is one of the main causes of loss of credibility in the press.
Also, lol at CNN hiring Sanctorum. Wouldn't be surprised than an Alt-Right superstar like Milo or Cernovich was hired by 2020.
I'm sorry @ED! But if one voted for trump I assume they believed things he said
I'm sure a lot of people believe him when he says he's going to build "a wall" or "bring jobs back. . ." Does that automatically mean they believe him when he says (if I recall) that "Global warming is caused by China?"
It was gross over generalization of Trump voters, backed up by your personal bias (and seemed mostly just to pat yourself, and some members of this thread, on the back). Politifact has Clinton at 25% outright lies (during the campaign one assumes). Does that mean Clinton voters were 25% uninformed (and not for nothing that was an example of backing up statements with something with something resembling "proof")?
Twitter is mostly fine, its people that insist on taking a tweet and dumping it into a conversation devoid of any context and hoping everyone else will suss out why it relates / matters.
Trump lied way way more the Hilary. Often about really easily disprovable things. And to date I don't think he's every admitted actually saying something false. By the record he still looking for the thousands of Muslims in Jersey cheering 9/11.
I'm sorry I'm trying to be nice. But Trump is a liar and if you believe things he says you believe a lot of lies.
and in case you haven't noticed I DONT FUCKING CARE ABOUT TRUMP VOTERS FEELINGS. People deciding their feelings are ore important than actual reality is what got him elected.
Twitter is mostly fine, its people that insist on taking a tweet and dumping it into a conversation devoid of any context and hoping everyone else will suss out why it relates / matters.
There is even a mod that does this.
The problem is Twitter doesn't provide that context on it's own the way, say, an actual article would.
Trump lied way way more the Hilary. Often about really easily disprovable things. And to date I don't think he's every admitted actually saying something false. By the record he still looking for the thousands of Muslims in Jersey cheering 9/11.
I'm sorry I'm trying to be nice. But Trump is a liar and if you believe things he says you believe a lot of lies.
I've talked/argued with way too many Trump voters in the last couple months, and always try to ground the conversation in actual, literal Trump statements to underscore the fact he's a white supremacist, clearly ignorant, incoherent, et cetera. Almost universally, their rebuttal is 'he didn't mean it like that' or, even more forehead-slapping, just 'he didn't mean it.' That standard is not applied to the other side, of course.
Fucking maddening. Also probably a window into why the avalanche of negative campaigning against Trump didn't stop him.
Trump lied way way more the Hilary. Often about really easily disprovable things. And to date I don't think he's every admitted actually saying something false. By the record he still looking for the thousands of Muslims in Jersey cheering 9/11.
I'm sorry I'm trying to be nice. But Trump is a liar and if you believe things he says you believe a lot of lies.
and in case you haven't noticed I DONT FUCKING CARE ABOUT TRUMP VOTERS FEELINGS. People deciding their feelings are ore important than actual reality is what got him elected.
Counterpoint: people ignoring Trump voters' feelings got him elected.
Twitter is mostly fine, its people that insist on taking a tweet and dumping it into a conversation devoid of any context and hoping everyone else will suss out why it relates / matters.
There is even a mod that does this.
The problem is Twitter doesn't provide that context on it's own the way, say, an actual article would.
At the same time, linking to a tweet doesnt disable the rest of the posting functions like typing why the tweet matters.
If someone cold dropped external links, youtube videos, or meme gifs all the time it wouldnt be tolerated, but for some reason tweets get a pass.
Twitter is mostly fine, its people that insist on taking a tweet and dumping it into a conversation devoid of any context and hoping everyone else will suss out why it relates / matters.
There is even a mod that does this.
The problem is Twitter doesn't provide that context on it's own the way, say, an actual article would.
At the same time, linking to a tweet doesnt disable the rest of the posting functions like typing why the tweet matters.
If someone cold dropped external links, youtube videos, or meme gifs all the time it wouldnt be tolerated, but for some reason tweets get a pass.
If you feel a post is bad report it.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Posts
pleasepaypreacher.net
(Oh, you said political, not partisan.)
Here's one: a piece by a biracial woman who grew up in rural Pennsylvania, discussing how recent pieces on the white working class there avoid talking about the non-white working class in those regions, and why that is.
Or this expose on shady psychiatric facilities abusing patients for profit.
Nice, long form stuff, thanks. They really hide this stuff though. You could go to that site and think it's nothing more than funny Disney memes and recipes. Is that not a problem?
That's what pays the bills, sadly.
Unfortunately, the funny Disney memes and recipes are what pay the bills.
Which, honestly - I'm more okay with obvious clickbait fluff pieces than drumming up controversy over nothing (e-mails!) in order to drive traffic and keep the site afloat. It's a lot easier to separate it from the 'real' journalism.
Oh, fuck you, Miller.
If the world worked like that there would be a lot fewer conservative pundits and Republican congressmen and women.
It's a beautiful dream, though.
And by the facts that means they believe absolute falsehoods more often
don't think that's much better
https://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/you-literally-caused-the-iraq-war-internet-rips-judith-miller-for-blaming-war-deaths-on-chelsea-manning/
https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertsamaha/blue-lies-matter
Also, lol at CNN hiring Sanctorum. Wouldn't be surprised than an Alt-Right superstar like Milo or Cernovich was hired by 2020.
WoW
Dear Satan.....
I'm sure a lot of people believe him when he says he's going to build "a wall" or "bring jobs back. . ." Does that automatically mean they believe him when he says (if I recall) that "Global warming is caused by China?"
It was gross over generalization of Trump voters, backed up by your personal bias (and seemed mostly just to pat yourself, and some members of this thread, on the back). Politifact has Clinton at 25% outright lies (during the campaign one assumes). Does that mean Clinton voters were 25% uninformed (and not for nothing that was an example of backing up statements with something with something resembling "proof")?
Steam: adamjnet
Those were the press agencies that he called on in his presser.
Which is why I continue to loathe Twitter.
There is even a mod that does this.
MWO: Adamski
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/lists/people/comparing-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-truth-o-met/
Trump lied way way more the Hilary. Often about really easily disprovable things. And to date I don't think he's every admitted actually saying something false. By the record he still looking for the thousands of Muslims in Jersey cheering 9/11.
I'm sorry I'm trying to be nice. But Trump is a liar and if you believe things he says you believe a lot of lies.
and in case you haven't noticed I DONT FUCKING CARE ABOUT TRUMP VOTERS FEELINGS. People deciding their feelings are ore important than actual reality is what got him elected.
The problem is Twitter doesn't provide that context on it's own the way, say, an actual article would.
I've talked/argued with way too many Trump voters in the last couple months, and always try to ground the conversation in actual, literal Trump statements to underscore the fact he's a white supremacist, clearly ignorant, incoherent, et cetera. Almost universally, their rebuttal is 'he didn't mean it like that' or, even more forehead-slapping, just 'he didn't mean it.' That standard is not applied to the other side, of course.
Fucking maddening. Also probably a window into why the avalanche of negative campaigning against Trump didn't stop him.
Counterpoint: people ignoring Trump voters' feelings got him elected.
pleasepaypreacher.net
If someone cold dropped external links, youtube videos, or meme gifs all the time it wouldnt be tolerated, but for some reason tweets get a pass.
MWO: Adamski
Well, it had to do with their feelings that whites should be supreme in America.
If you feel a post is bad report it.
pleasepaypreacher.net