The Corruption Of Journo-list

[Aunt Spiker]

It was a "secret" list that has just recently been brought to light.
I guess you would think that Russian spies aren't that important because they were ignored for 10 yrs.

Ok - I'm obviously missing out on some key info, here - I have more reading to do and I'll come back with a more informed opinion later.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Understand what that means. It means they followed a method, but not whether they asked the right question or not.

Oh that's cute, you think you know more about this than me. I was a broadcasting major and we learned about bias dude. The methodology was upheld, that means it was fairly, equally, and properly applied. The study was quoted in multiple classes of mine because it was upheld. My professors spent extra time teaching against biased reporting because of THAT study. So don't condescend to me about understanding anything about this.

What is flawed is what they present can't answer the question.

It answered it fine, you just don't like the answer.

 

[Josie]

There were actually 400 journalists on the list, accoring to KeyWiki.

Pro Obama “JournoLista” Outed – New “Can of Worms” Opened « KeyWiki Blog

 

[BWG]

Understand what that means. It means they followed a method, but not whether they asked the right question or not.

Oh that's cute, you think you know more about this than me. I was a broadcasting major and we learned about bias dude. The methodology was upheld, that means it was fairly, equally, and properly applied. The study was quoted in multiple classes of mine because it was upheld. My professors spent extra time teaching against biased reporting because of THAT study. So don't condescend to me about understanding anything about this.

Careful Boo, I got lucky and he put me on ignore because I wouldn't take his 'Because I Said So' as a valid rebuttal...:lol:

 

[Boo Radley]

Oh that's cute, you think you know more about this than me. I was a broadcasting major and we learned about bias dude. The methodology was upheld, that means it was fairly, equally, and properly applied. The study was quoted in multiple classes of mine because it was upheld. My professors spent extra time teaching against biased reporting because of THAT study. So don't condescend to me about understanding anything about this. It answered it fine, you just don't like the answer.

I thinkn I know enough. Can't say what you know. Don't care either. I care about whether you're right on this or not. And you're not. I too have been taught about biased reporting (teach it as well). You can't determine bias in they way they attempt to. You have to spend painstaking time looking at lanuage and unaccountable inaccuracy. There are too many variables to determine bias they way they tried to determine it.

 

[Boo Radley]

Careful Boo, I got lucky and he put me on ignore because I wouldn't take his 'Because I Said So' as a valid rebuttal...:lol:

You may be right.

 

[LaMidRighter]

You may be right.

Nope, he's a hack and a dishonest poster which is why I put him on ignore.

EDIT- You are dangerously close to that yourself.

 

[Boo Radley]

Nope, he's a hack and a dishonest poster which is why I put him on ignore.

EDIT- You are dangerously close to that yourself.

Well, that scares me. :lamo

 

[LaMidRighter]

Well, that scares me. :lamo

Yeah, you're a funny guy. Not funny as in all that humorous or even somewhat witty. More funny in watching you try to wiggle out of an argument and defer to talking points when you get your ass handed to you by just about everyone on the board. You're right, THAT is funny.

 

[Boo Radley]

Yeah, you're a funny guy. Not funny as in all that humorous or even somewhat witty. More funny in watching you try to wiggle out of an argument and defer to talking points when you get your ass handed to you by just about everyone on the board. You're right, THAT is funny.

:lamo

I thought you were running away?

Dude, give it your best shot. Try actually making an argument and let's have at it.

 

[BWG]

Careful Boo, I got lucky and he put me on ignore because I wouldn't take his 'Because I Said So' as a valid rebuttal...

You may be right.

Well, been fun but you aren't even smart enough to know what a stereotype is so now I'll have to put you on ignore. I think it's even more hilarious that you laugh at all of this instead of just owning your incompetance. Well, been fun. Bye loser.

So worth the points.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news-mainstream-media/77857-britain-plans-decentralize-health-care-12.html#post1058884020

Boo, I told ya...:2rofll:

Sometimes things are just tooooooo easy...:mrgreen:

 

[zimmer]

I think you mean, "Yeah, we get a little irritated when the press acts as unabashed propagandists when it isn't our propaganda.

Most everybody's like that.

It's the same with judicial decisions -- the judge is only activist when they make a decision we don't agree with.

No.
Being a former Lefty, and one who had to dig out of the propaganda mess served daily through the media and enforced through the halls of higher education, I deplore the mass of ignorance and exclusion they practiced for years. It is a disservice to the country and electorate. Howard Fineman explains how this occurred, how the press became an arm of the Democrat Party a handful of years ago.
Fineman: 'Mainstream Media Party' is over - Politics - Howard Fineman - msnbc.com

That no Lib Journolist, or Lib (s0-called) journalist called for a shut down, or reported on the collusion, speaks volumes about who these people are.

I think FOXNEWS does the job as well as anyone. This may piss off leftists used to monopoly status, but they do report both sides. Nobody much complained when Roger Ailes was successfully running CNBC. But FOX has raised the ire of leftists... I understand why.

Ailes explains himself well in the following interview if you are interested:

Q & A

.