- Joined
- May 22, 2012
- Messages
- 104,363
- Reaction score
- 67,508
- Location
- Uhland, Texas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Isn't what you just said there completely ass backwards? They do present facts but cover it up? How do you cover up facts if you present them?
Examples:
The Hunter Biden laptop(s) exist (fact), but their content is said to (likely?) be Russian disinformation (opinion and spin).
A severe weather event has occurred (fact), but the cause was alleged to have been AGW (opinion and spin).
Shootings occurred during a BLM protest (fact), the alleged perp was a white supremacist and carried the illegally possessed gun used across state lines (nonsense based on ??? and spin).
I'm not saying that to knock you, because in this conversation, I agree with you more than I disagree. What I am saying is that if people trust nobody, but yet trust that the "facts" that they see are truly "facts", then clearly you are giving even just a little bit of trust.
Now, if many of us are in agreement that simply reporting the news is what we all want, warts and all, then we have to give that trust. How does one earn that trust? It is clear that FOX, CNN, MSNBC, OANN, etc, is more worried about money. The thing is, is that you HAVE to be worried about money, in order to stay in business and ply your trade. The ratings, whether we like it or not, clearly show that the general public watches Hannity, Maddow, Carlson, etc, much more than "the news".
Most folks are easily able to discern opinion and news analysis segments from those purported to be straight news. What is harder for many (most?) to discern is the difference between a confirmed fact and any accompanying opinion and spin. The use of extraneous adjectives (far-right or left-leaning) and adverbs (extremely or slightly) can be a tell, but not conclusive proof that the underlying ‘facts’ are being grossly distorted.