|
Post by Raymond306 on Jan 27, 2017 18:19:50 GMT -6
Have you noticed how "news" and "fact-checking" have become separate and unrelated activities? When I was young radio news reporter I received two weighty bits of advice. I was told, that on the surface "news" and "gossip" are pretty much the same thing, a recounting of what people say and what they do. The difference is when people listen to our news they are assuming that we are being totally, factually correct. The other advice regarded the nature of truth in a news story. Example: Were I to attend a meeting of the city council and in the middle the meeting the mayor were to declare the moon is made of green cheese, I might duly quote that utterance in my resulting news story. In this case the "truth" of the story has nothing to do with the actual composition of the moon. The TRUTH would be the mayor was quoted accurately and in context. Lately the pejorative "fake news" is being tossed about like a cafeteria food fight. So what is fake news? To define it I rely on the news reporting advice I received all those years ago. Have you ever read " The Onion?" If not you've missed out on some of the funniest satire around, presented as "news." Bogus, totally made up, fake news. No one would ever mistake a story in The Onion for a bona fide news report. Except that has happened now and then. Someone would be sent an emailed story taken from The Onion and suddenly thousands and hundreds of thousands of otherwise sane citizens would be up in arms and ready to riot until someone reveals the story as being a news satire, totally made up. Fake. Back in my college days I eagerly devoured every monthly issue of the National Lampoon. Funny as hell, but totally satirical. In these cases the writers weren't the least bit concerned with factual accuracy; they were just trying to entertain. Well, that and get across and editorial opinion, but everyone understood they weren't pretending to be journalists. Today's purveyors of fake news in the MSM don't paint with as broad a brush as The Onion or National Lampoon. They are more subtle, more discrete with the fakery. But, regarding that advice I was given back in the day, their efforts are an insult to journalism and true journalists everywhere.
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Jan 27, 2017 19:04:08 GMT -6
I'm guessing that if you actually got all the way through that opening posting you might be inclined to ask, "OK, so do you have an example?" Well, I'm glad you asked. I thought this might be a thread that would be easy to continue because the examples of fake news are all around us, every day. The problem is most people don't recognize these stories as being "fake" because, as I said earlier, the news organizations can be very subtle. You have to read between the lines. Gosh! Republicans are wringing their hands, sweating bullets, over the prospect of having to do something they'll probably regret down the road. (gasp) The headline of the story? "Behind closed doors, Republican lawmakers fret about how to repeal Obamacare" Of course I'll let you read the story for yourself. The Post included a number of quotes taken from Republicans attending the meeting. What I found interesting is that, with one exception, all these quotes were taken from some of the biggest RINOs in Congress. I looked them up at The Conservative Review. (By the way, I heartily recommend CR if you want to know who conservative or liberal your congressional representatives might be. In this case of these case all be one of those quoted had been given a rating of "F" based on the "conservatism" of their record in congress. So basically the Washington Post supports their their headline by citing Republicans who, but for a couple of congressional votes, would be Democrats. Fake!
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Jan 28, 2017 14:56:54 GMT -6
Oh boy! This one is going to be fun. Here's the headline: Merkel Takes on Starbucks in Bashing Over Unfair Tax Practices OMG! What has Starbucks done now? Here, I'll let you read the whole story as it was published in Bloomberg News. Spoiler Alert! The tenor of the story implies Starbucks is guilty of committing illegal acts. Oy! Exploiting global arrangements?!? Sounds serious. GASP! Tax avoidance! How despicable! Yes, yes, it's worse than I thought. Tell us, how did Starbucks perpetrate this heinous tax avoidance crime? HOLD IT! Excuse me? Did that story just say Starbucks had "agreements" with the Netherlands and Luxemburg and THAT is how they ended up not paying the taxes? Agreements? You mean LEGAL agreements? Schemes! SCHEMES! Holy Jesus, save us! I'll bet! Wait a minute. Here's what is understandable. The Germans (and presumably the entire EU) have screwed themselves and now Merkle is pissed at Starbucks? If you remember I said the tenor or theme of the story was that Starbucks has engaged in some illegality. The term "tax avoidance" is used twice in this short piece. Let's look that up: tax avoidancenoun1. reduction or minimization of tax liability by lawful methodWhoa! Nowhere in this story are we given any indication that "tax avoidance" means paying fewer taxes by legal means. Sort of like "Do you have any legal dependents?" "Why yes, I have two children." OMG! He avoided paying as much income tax by listing 2 dependents on his 1040 form. That dirty thieving bastard! So basically Angela Merkel is pissed off because international companies enter into legal agreements with certain members of the European Union and other members of the EU (e.g. Germany) are bound by these agreements because they are members of the EU? Hmmmm. Can anyone say "Brexit?"
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Feb 9, 2017 13:57:01 GMT -6
An eye-opening poll just released by Emerson College (in Massachusetts, not considered a bastion of conservative thought) says more Americans consider the Trump Administration to be truthful than consider the elite media to be truthful. According to story in Townhall.com SHOCKER: 90% of the Republicans in the polling results consider the media to be liars.
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Feb 10, 2017 12:10:22 GMT -6
I'll admit I've become somewhat confused. I came across a short news blurb from KRGV-TV in Rio Grande Valley, Texas. It's so short I'll quote the whole story right here. Well, all of it except for the last sentence: Then we come to, what might be considered the news story equivalent of, the "money shot." HOLD IT! What? What's all this nonsense about the Mexican economy taking a hit if these illegal aliens recross the border and go back to being legal citizens again? We've been told all this time by a plethora of "experts" and "authorities" and "general know-it-alls" that the U.S. should roll out the red carpet to the illegals because they would be a great blessing to the U.S. economy, driving the engine of the economy, laying the groundwork for great growth in our economy. And now we have a story and a quote from a Mexican official saying (in essence) "Holy shit! We get those people back here and it will be a disaster!". My question is this: Is this fake news? Is Senor Almanza Armas lying? Is KRGV-TV lying about what he really said? Or have all those we-know-better-than-you experts on our side been lying all this time about the benefits of flooding the country with illegal aliens?
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Feb 11, 2017 0:38:49 GMT -6
Well, repatriated Mexican nationals, will certainly make less money in Mexico. So, they won't be sending home all the cash they were making while living here.
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Feb 11, 2017 9:07:35 GMT -6
...they won't be sending home all the cash they were making while living here. Ahhhh, yes, thank you! That fact falls under "stuff I know but forgot I knew." All the billions of dollars going into Mexico slipped my mind, but you are so right. The amount of U.S. dollars that get injected into the Mexican economy is considerable. Conversely, these billions of dollars are NOT getting into the U.S. economy as they would if our own citizens were being employed in these jobs. So much of what happens in our country, all countries, is interconnected for good or bad. Or as the old proverb goes: For loss of a nail the shoe was lost, for loss of the shoe the horse was lost, for loss of the horse the rider was lost, for loss of the rider the battle was lost, for loss of the battle the kingdom was lost. We're teetering on the loss of our "kingdom." Time to get those damned shoes nailed back onto those horses. Perhaps we have a chance to see that happen.
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Feb 21, 2017 10:07:14 GMT -6
This is a good story for this thread, not necessarily because I think the information contained is particularly NON-factual. But it is based on a journalistic habit that lends itself to fakery. I'll illustrate the point with my own "emphasis."
And the story continues in the he said/she said manner but, as per their habit, Reuters rarely puts a name to "he" or "she." I understand that news reporters are often required to keep information source identities confidential in order to keep the information coming. However, as I said before, this can lend itself to "fake news", a.k.a. LIES.
Now for the editorial comment on the content. I don't think its our business what the EU does internally. It is our business to do what is in the best interests of the United States and let the EU do what it wants. In addition, what the individual members of the EU want to do is their business. And we (the U.S.) can interact with them, individually or en mass, as we see fit.
If the European Union has problems with that, hell, they can damned well work it out for themselves, and we can damned well continue to do what is in our best interest.
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Mar 4, 2017 0:17:53 GMT -6
Ray, why don't you want to come argue in a larger forum? I am tired of hearing crickets here. This is just one thread at gtplanet. The American thread. I am having a tough time swatting down the libs here. They swarm. There are a couple of intelligent conservatives, but we need more. Here is my latest post, a reply to Sessions lies in his confirmation hearing. On the previous page I posted this meme in response to Pence's AOL account and the Russian thing. It got some like, but pissed off a lot of libs. It is good fun over there. Why not come? it is free.
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Mar 4, 2017 12:07:32 GMT -6
Ray, why don't you want to come argue in a larger forum? I am tired of hearing crickets here. This is just one thread at gtplanet. The American thread. I am having a tough time swatting down the libs here. What I find fascinating is you have the energy and obvious motivation to go to some great effort to promote a discussion web site controlled by the lunatic left, but you can't lift a finger to provide any meaningful content here. Perhaps there would be one less cricket if you'd get off your ass and provided a cogent contextual comment here, oh say, once or twice a month.
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Mar 4, 2017 13:03:44 GMT -6
If I had something to say and I were going to post a flyer with my message, I would post it in a public place that gets some traffic. Not on a tree in the middle of the woods.
Also I don't have to worry about the moderators over at gtplanet editing my posts. It seems the Goskomizdat only works here.
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Mar 4, 2017 15:24:05 GMT -6
If I had something to say and I were going to post a flyer with my message, I would post it in a public place that gets some traffic. Not on a tree in the middle of the woods. Meh! My tree. My woods. Call it a therapeutic blog. Also I don't have to worry about the moderators over at gtplanet editing my posts. It seems the Goskomizdat only works here. That's just wonderful. Then why don't you help me out a little bit. Just go to your favorite political threads at gtplanet and post something like: "Hey, don't put up with a bunch of lunatic leftists bombarding you with nonsense; come to the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy where you can at least chum around with those of your won political persuasion."
And then you leave a hot link there: vrwc.boards.net That would work out, don't you think? And, of course, you won't have to worry about the moderators there saying anything about it.
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Mar 5, 2017 15:29:49 GMT -6
When I first saw Trump's tweets about wire tapping, I didn't believe them. In Trump's mind the whole Russian thing is fake news. I thought this was just Trump's way of sticking it right back at them.
Now after watching this video, I am not so sure.
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Mar 5, 2017 18:21:14 GMT -6
When I first saw Trump's tweets about wire tapping, I didn't believe them. In Trump's mind the whole Russian thing is fake news. I thought this was just Trump's way of sticking it right back at them. I watched Mark Levin this morning, too. I think this "wire tapping" story has legs and I'm glad of it. It's about time we had a Republican president who had the gonads to stand up and serve it up with the same gusto with which the Democrats have been dishing it up for years. It's nice to see Donald Trump bringing out pictures and saying, "Let's see now, who else has been talking with Russian ambassadors. Whoa! Look at all those Democrats!" Here again we the people are going to be well served by the fact that the old guard media no longer have monopoly over which news the public is allowed to have access to, and which news is swept under the rug. They are still doing it with total obliviousness, but now we have "new" media that isn't afraid, or intimidated and now we can get all the news if we just look around. This biggest issue in the "wire tapping" scandal is the term itself. Wire tapping is a specific, court approved activity involving a suspect and a specific phone line. When Barack Obama (or his people) says "In never authorized any wire taps on Donald Trump or his campaign." he is probably telling the truth. But he's also parsing his words. Was the legal privacy of Donald Trump's and his campaign's private communications violated by the Obama administration? I wouldn't be the least bit surprised. Did Obama officially authorized it. He didn't have to. And THAT'S the point. Barack Obama never specifically signed off on having the IRS give political conservatives a hard time in violation of the law. He didn't need to. Lois Lerner knew what he wanted and didn't have to be told what to do. And I'd bet Obama never told his Department of Justice (under Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch) to commit all the gross acts of malfeasance of office they did. But he didn't need to. They knew was they needed to do. Obama doesn't have to tell the Democrat hacks in the State Department and DoJ and Department of Defense and EPA and other major bureaucracies to sabotage the Trump Administration any way they can. They know what is expected of them. They are happy warriors for the cause.
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Mar 16, 2017 17:06:25 GMT -6
Today in Houston there was an anti-Trump protest. News producer on the phone: "What's that you say? A Trump protest?" "Get to the choppa!!!"
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Mar 16, 2017 21:05:57 GMT -6
This is so typical of the Statist Fake News. They'll do anything to pretend their lunatic devotees are the vast majority that they'll publish any story promoting that story line not matter how foolish it makes them look.
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Mar 18, 2017 16:20:27 GMT -6
This is one of my favorite YouTube conservatives.
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Mar 18, 2017 21:07:59 GMT -6
What is so perfect about this is that conservative humor doesn't have to rely on dreaming up outrageous bogus fantasies. Merely reciting the facts as they known and displaying them in the proper light is all it takes to reduce the audience to hysterics..
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Mar 25, 2017 13:54:16 GMT -6
Ran across a rather fascinating article in the NYT Business Section. It is not, in itself, "fake news" although liberal "interpretation" is present, such as in this statement: Actually Shepard Smith is the left-wing Democrat news anchor at FNC who freely peppers his "straight" news stories with left-wing editorial observation, so it's no surprise the left-wing hack New York Times would characterize him as "evenhanded." Still the story is an interesting read if for no other reason it tries to give an honest examination of the important news going on this past week that you probably would have missed if your only source of news was what is referred to as the Main Stream Media.
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Mar 25, 2017 15:01:04 GMT -6
The article is behind a paywall. I have reached my 10 free articles for the month. Who knew I read that much NY Times?
It comes from clicking at all those damn Drudge links.
BUT, have no fear, the incognito window is here to save the day. Oh wait, I think this article was posted on Drudge as well.
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Mar 25, 2017 15:07:37 GMT -6
I guess you'll have to wait until April to see what you're missing. Damn!
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Mar 25, 2017 15:10:17 GMT -6
I guess you'll have to wait until April to see what you're missing. Damn! No, if you right click on the link and open it in an Incognito window (Chrome), you can read the article.
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Mar 25, 2017 15:46:31 GMT -6
Oh good. I misunderstood you.
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Mar 25, 2017 16:07:08 GMT -6
I know it is probably not ethical to bypass their paywall, but, considering I used to frequent phone phreaking bulletin boards when I was a teen to get Sprint and MCI long distance access codes, I think I have come a long way.
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Mar 25, 2017 16:18:13 GMT -6
So, we're talking about the New York Times and you are concerned about whether or not you are ethical? Come on!
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Mar 25, 2017 16:35:30 GMT -6
So, we're talking about the New York Times and you are concerned about whether or not you are ethical? Come on!
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Mar 28, 2017 16:03:25 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Mar 28, 2017 16:51:14 GMT -6
“It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.” ~ Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Mar 28, 2017 18:49:50 GMT -6
The reason I posted that, was to show how disingenuous they are. The scare tactic that they start the segment with, the then and now photos from the 70's pollution and today's is complete rubbish. Why not show photos from 2008 and today? The story is about rolling back Obama policies after all.
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Mar 29, 2017 16:39:45 GMT -6
What is so sad is that there are millions of liberals in America and Europe who actually believe this nonsense. Right now, today, lefties in the U.S. are suffering exploding head syndrome over Donald Trump rolling back some of Barack Obama's imperial edicts. Or course not all lefty-wing progressives believe it. There are the get quick rich artists like Al Gore, Jr. who seen the global warming hoax as a way to makes millions of dollars scaring gullible Democrats. And then there are those we refer to as the "watermelons." Green on the outside but red on the inside. These are the European-grown anti-free market, anti-democratic Marxists who couldn't kill the West with Communism to they're trying again with Environmentalism. But hey, picture comparisons can be rather educational. And as for the bimbos of The View, this one pretty much sums up that lefty gaggle of gals:
|
|