Supreme Court judge excoriates Intel Agencies puppet outfit the NYT

[Monica33]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/new-y...rt_3742059.html?utm_source=share-btn-copylink
PULLING BACK MEDIA FAKE NEWS STEP BY STEP


SATURDAY, MAR 20, 2021
A New York Supreme Court Judge last week excoriated the New York Times, ruling that they used "reckless disregard" and "acted with actual malice" when two of their reporters deceptively presented opinions as fact in several articles denigrating whistleblower organization Project Veritas.
What the Times did is similar to countless hit-pieces against Zero Hedge and others; using broad, unsupported brush strokes to slander their ideological opponents. We can only hope this sets new precedent for future defamation cases.
* * *
As The Epoch Times' Zachary Stieber reports in detail, writers for the New York Times may have spread deceptive claims about the nonprofit journalism group Project Veritas, a judge ruled this week.


Equally visible on this site where a poster reading Deep State controlled publications like the Guardian and Economist informed us that Zero Hedge is a far right Fake News organisation . Clearly nonsense but this is how the Loony Left best likes to work -- innuendo and double speak and never any hard evidence .

 

[Rogue Valley]

Overall, we rate The Epoch Times Right Biased and Questionable based on the publication of pseudoscience and the promotion of propaganda and conspiracy theories as well as numerous failed fact checks.

The Epoch Times - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[Rogue Valley]

Overall, we rate ZeroHedge an extreme right-biased conspiracy website based on the promotion of false/misleading/debunked information that routinely denigrates the left.

ZeroHedge - Bias and Credibility

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence.

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[Plasmaball]

Epoch times? Lol...

 

[j brown's body]

Epoch times? Lol...

You can always access the story at Russia Today.

 

[mrjurrs]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/new-y...rt_3742059.html?utm_source=share-btn-copylink
PULLING BACK MEDIA FAKE NEWS STEP BY STEP


SATURDAY, MAR 20, 2021
A New York Supreme Court Judge last week excoriated the New York Times, ruling that they used "reckless disregard" and "acted with actual malice" when two of their reporters deceptively presented opinions as fact in several articles denigrating whistleblower organization Project Veritas.
What the Times did is similar to countless hit-pieces against Zero Hedge and others; using broad, unsupported brush strokes to slander their ideological opponents. We can only hope this sets new precedent for future defamation cases.
* * *
As The Epoch Times' Zachary Stieber reports in detail, writers for the New York Times may have spread deceptive claims about the nonprofit journalism group Project Veritas, a judge ruled this week.


Equally visible on this site where a poster reading Deep State controlled publications like the Guardian and Economist informed us that Zero Hedge is a far right Fake News organisation . Clearly nonsense but this is how the Loony Left best likes to work -- innuendo and double speak and never any hard evidence .

You need better sources Ivan.

 

[Plasmaball]

You can always access the story at Russia Today.

More toilet paper

 

[Captain Adverse]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/new-y...rt_3742059.html?utm_source=share-btn-copylink
PULLING BACK MEDIA FAKE NEWS STEP BY STEP


SATURDAY, MAR 20, 2021
A New York Supreme Court Judge last week excoriated the New York Times, ruling that they used "reckless disregard" and "acted with actual malice" when two of their reporters deceptively presented opinions as fact in several articles denigrating whistleblower organization Project Veritas.
What the Times did is similar to countless hit-pieces against Zero Hedge and others; using broad, unsupported brush strokes to slander their ideological opponents. We can only hope this sets new precedent for future defamation cases.
* * *
As The Epoch Times' Zachary Stieber reports in detail, writers for the New York Times may have spread deceptive claims about the nonprofit journalism group Project Veritas, a judge ruled this week.


Equally visible on this site where a poster reading Deep State controlled publications like the Guardian and Economist informed us that Zero Hedge is a far right Fake News organisation . Clearly nonsense but this is how the Loony Left best likes to work -- innuendo and double speak and never any hard evidence .

Actually the judge was ruling on a motion to dismiss the case filed by the New York Times, it was not a final ruling on the actual case.

Here is a link to the actual ruling on said motion:

Order_denying_motion_to_dismiss - DocumentCloud

From what I read the Judge was not "excoriating" the defendant's position, he was simply explaining point by point why their motion to dismiss was denied.

He also makes a point that Project Veritas still has the burden to prove the alleged complaint.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Editorially, there is a very strong Pro-Trump bias, with almost all articles praising Trump and denigrating the left such as these Democratic Party: A Broken Kaleidoscope? and Five Reasons Trump’s Celebration of America Was Epic Display of Patriotism. According to an NBC News report the “outlet has spent more than $1.5 million on about 11,000 pro-Trump advertisements in the last six months, according to data from Facebook’s advertising archive — more than any organization outside of the Trump campaign itself, and more than most Democratic presidential candidates have spent on their own campaigns.” In general, straight news reporting is sourced and mostly low biased, however, op-eds 100% favor the right with some promoting conspiracy theories. During the 2020 Coronavirus outbreak and the 2020 Presidential election, they have promoted misinformation. See failed fact checks below.

Failed Fact Checks

• Jack Andraka, 15, came up with a “100 percent accurate” cancer-detection method that was “168 times faster, 26,000 times less expensive, and 400 times more sensitive” than current methods. – False
• Dubious Posts Tie Political Families to Ukraine Work – False
• No, Yellowstone volcano’s eruption threat level did not increase in 2018 – False (Corrected)
• Concerned artificial intelligence researchers hurriedly abandoned an experimental chatbot program after they realized that the bots were inventing their own language. – False
• Did China’s Communist government create the novel coronavirus in a laboratory and release it into the world as a deadly bioweapon? – False
• President Donald Trump has 232 electoral votes, Joe Biden has 212, 226 or 227. – False

Further, the Epoch Times has a section called Beyond Science that publishes pseudoscience news, such as Supernormal Abilities Developed Through Meditation: Dr. Dean Radin Discusses. Finally, the above referenced NBC News report states “In addition to claims that alien abductions are real and the drug epidemic was engineered by the “deep state,” the channel pushes the QAnon conspiracy theory, which falsely posits that the same “Spygate” cabal is a front for a global pedophile ring being taken down by Trump.”

Overall, we rate The Epoch Times Right Biased and Questionable based on the publication of pseudoscience and the promotion of propaganda and conspiracy theories as well as numerous failed fact checks

The Epoch Times - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/new-y...rt_3742059.html?utm_source=share-btn-copylink
PULLING BACK MEDIA FAKE NEWS STEP BY STEP


SATURDAY, MAR 20, 2021
A New York Supreme Court Judge last week excoriated the New York Times, ruling that they used "reckless disregard" and "acted with actual malice" when two of their reporters deceptively presented opinions as fact in several articles denigrating whistleblower organization Project Veritas.
What the Times did is similar to countless hit-pieces against Zero Hedge and others; using broad, unsupported brush strokes to slander their ideological opponents. We can only hope this sets new precedent for future defamation cases.
* * *
As The Epoch Times' Zachary Stieber reports in detail, writers for the New York Times may have spread deceptive claims about the nonprofit journalism group Project Veritas, a judge ruled this week.


Equally visible on this site where a poster reading Deep State controlled publications like the Guardian and Economist informed us that Zero Hedge is a far right Fake News organisation . Clearly nonsense but this is how the Loony Left best likes to work -- innuendo and double speak and never any hard evidence .

BIG FAIL!!

 

[joko104]

Actually the judge was ruling on a motion to dismiss the case filed by the New York Times, it was not a final ruling on the actual case.

Here is a link to the actual ruling on said motion:

Order_denying_motion_to_dismiss - DocumentCloud

From what I read the Judge was not "excoriating" the defendant's position, he was simply explaining point by point why their motion to dismiss was denied.

He also makes a point that Project Veritas still has the burden to prove the alleged complaint.

Excellent research on a topic before posting an opinion. That is rare on the forum. Thank you. I also always want to read the actual wording of laws and court rulings.

 

[joko104]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/new-y...rt_3742059.html?utm_source=share-btn-copylink
PULLING BACK MEDIA FAKE NEWS STEP BY STEP


SATURDAY, MAR 20, 2021
A New York Supreme Court Judge last week excoriated the New York Times, ruling that they used "reckless disregard" and "acted with actual malice" when two of their reporters deceptively presented opinions as fact in several articles denigrating whistleblower organization Project Veritas.
What the Times did is similar to countless hit-pieces against Zero Hedge and others; using broad, unsupported brush strokes to slander their ideological opponents. We can only hope this sets new precedent for future defamation cases.
* * *
As The Epoch Times' Zachary Stieber reports in detail, writers for the New York Times may have spread deceptive claims about the nonprofit journalism group Project Veritas, a judge ruled this week.


Equally visible on this site where a poster reading Deep State controlled publications like the Guardian and Economist informed us that Zero Hedge is a far right Fake News organisation . Clearly nonsense but this is how the Loony Left best likes to work -- innuendo and double speak and never any hard evidence .

The last desperate attempt to derail a top is citing the fake blog "Media Bias Fact Check" - designed only for THE most gullible.

Media Bias/Fact Check (MBFC) is a website founded in 2015 by editor Dave Van Zandt. The website has been described as an amateur effort to rate news media sources based on +factual accuracy and political bias.
Media Bias/Fact Check - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org
Alexandra Kitty, in a 2018 book on journalism, described MBFC as an apparent "amateur/civic outfit" and wrote that its founder's only qualification was a degree in communications.When Journalism was a Thing. Zero Books. p. 158.

The Columbia Journalism Review describes Media Bias/Fact Check as an amateur attempt at categorizing media bias and Van Zandt as an "armchair media analyst." The Poynter Institute notes, "Media Bias/Fact Check is a widely cited source for news stories and even studies about misinformation, despite the fact that its method is in no way scientific."https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2018/heres-what-to-expect-from-fact-checking-in-2019/

Media Bias Fact Check is either inept and/or dishonest.
Siewert goes on to write that Just Facts is “a deceptive site because they do use facts, but not all the facts in order to mask their right Bias.” As proof of this, she cites two articles that take issue with the Stanford Law Review paper cited by Just Facts. Neither of these articles appeared in a journal, and one of them is from a publication “written and published entirely by Harvard undergraduates.” Siewert does not even attempt to prove whether the critiques have any factual or logical value.

Media Bias Fact Check: Incompetent or Dishonest? - Just Facts
“Media Bias Fact Check,” a media outlet that claims to be “dedicated to educating the public on media bias and deceptive news practices,” is either inept or dishonest.
www.justfactsdaily.com

Anyone citing Media Bias Fact Check might as well be citing The Onion.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

The last desperate attempt to derail a top is citing the fake blog "Media Bias Fact Check" - designed only for THE most gullible.

Media Bias/Fact Check (MBFC) is a website founded in 2015 by editor Dave Van Zandt. The website has been described as an amateur effort to rate news media sources based on +factual accuracy and political bias.
Media Bias/Fact Check - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org
Alexandra Kitty, in a 2018 book on journalism, described MBFC as an apparent "amateur/civic outfit" and wrote that its founder's only qualification was a degree in communications.When Journalism was a Thing. Zero Books. p. 158.

The Columbia Journalism Review describes Media Bias/Fact Check as an amateur attempt at categorizing media bias and Van Zandt as an "armchair media analyst." The Poynter Institute notes, "Media Bias/Fact Check is a widely cited source for news stories and even studies about misinformation, despite the fact that its method is in no way scientific."https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2018/heres-what-to-expect-from-fact-checking-in-2019/

Media Bias Fact Check is either inept and/or dishonest.
Siewert goes on to write that Just Facts is “a deceptive site because they do use facts, but not all the facts in order to mask their right Bias.” As proof of this, she cites two articles that take issue with the Stanford Law Review paper cited by Just Facts. Neither of these articles appeared in a journal, and one of them is from a publication “written and published entirely by Harvard undergraduates.” Siewert does not even attempt to prove whether the critiques have any factual or logical value.

Media Bias Fact Check: Incompetent or Dishonest? - Just Facts
“Media Bias Fact Check,” a media outlet that claims to be “dedicated to educating the public on media bias and deceptive news practices,” is either inept or dishonest.
www.justfactsdaily.com

Anyone citing Media Bias Fact Check might as well be citing The Onion.

 

[joko104]

View attachment 67324032

Some nobody calls a blog media bias fact check and he's now the all knowing god to you.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Some nobody calls a blog media bias fact check and he's now the all knowing god to you.

SPEAK UP! I didn't hear you!

 

[joko104]

SPEAK UP! I didn't hear you!

View attachment 67324036

Too juvenile. Goodbye

 

[Jetboogieman]

Moderator's Warning:

Moved to CT