• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump Is Guilty of ‘Numerous’ Felonies, Prosecutor Who Resigned Says

uptower said:
We’ve been hearing this for years and I don’t doubt it’s true. But nothing will be done: rich old white gays are allowed to commit crimes, especially financial ones.
Click to expand...
LOL Rich old white "gays".

Them too, though :)
 
MrNiceGuy said:
That chart itself is ridiculously biased. One, it only includes sources on the right referred to as "misleading info."

However, TYT constantly spews misleading info. Daily Kos too - heck MSNBC and CNN are constant peddlers of misleading info. The notion that CNN and MSNBC would not be included in the selective, incomplete, and propaganda section, at least, is bizarre. They peddled the Russia bounties story (false), they insisted against all evidence on the Syria gassing its people story, they peddled the Sandman story painting him to be a racist, and they went on for almost a year about that Rittenhosue thing only to be "amazed" at trial that the kid actually had a good defense (for a year they peddled misleading info about the known facts of that case).

Propaganda? The mainstream news cites are loaded with it. They have CIA people on their payrolls who are called upon to propagandize almost every current event that occurs. The government and the major media are among the biggest liars out there, and this chart includes them basically as "straight news." LOL.
Click to expand...
I brought third party evidence, its time you do so as well. Adult debate is a discussion of opinions that, when required, need to be supported by facts.is about opinion supported by evidence. We have moved to the evidence stage. You have raised a litany of unsupported objections that are not sufficient to the discussion. We need to see some support for your statements.

As a matter of contrast, I gave you my opinion with some expert support for why I believe they way I do. You gave me an emotional rant in response with many extraneous examples. You brought TYT and Daily Kos into the discussion in a feeble attempt to refute the chart I put in front of you. The Ad Fontes Media chart actually describes each as "Hyper-Partisan Left / High Variation in Reliability (kind of the left equivalent of OAN and Fox, eh?). It does not show either of those "sources" in the same sphere of reliability as CBS, NBC, NYT and WaPo.

The post I made pointed out that CBS, NBC, NYT and WaPo were good news sources and far more reliable than OAN and NewsMax and even Fox New, which are not. Good news sources are found in the green box below.

I made post #109 to show my objection to what appeared to be your characterization in post #93 of FOX, OAN and NewsMax as real news organizations of the equivalent CBS, NBC, NYT, WaPo, CNN, distinguished only by their left/right lean. They are not equivalent because of their respective commitments to journalistic integrity, which CBS, NBC, NYT, WaPO and CNN have, while FOX, OAN and NewsMax do not. It is real news vs. political porn, which is what this chart shows.... again, the issue is not left v right lean of the news, its the factual integrity of the news that matters.


Media-Bias-Chart-9.0_January-2022.jpg

Your emotional response included a rant about a few stories that YOU believe (without evidence) that CNN got wrong. We can have a separate debate about those stories and what they got right and what they got wrong, but it wasn't as clear or as complete a "wrong" as you convey, likely because don't understand those stories or understand how real news organizations work (probably because you get your news from right wing smut sites. I admit that is conjecture on my). MSNBC and CNN are also categorized as skewed left and somewhat less reliable than CBS, NBC, NYT and WaPo..... I personally would agree with that..... but far more reliable than OAN and NewsMax, which still peddle that election was stolen theories, which is demonstrably false.

So, we all appreciate your rant. We are glad you got it out of your system, but you are not debating as you have no support for beliefs. Bear in mind, there are two other "critics" of news that substantially support the chart prepared by Ad Fontes Media. Feel free to actually learn a little bit about what stirs your emotion. They actually have a purpose (other than to get inside your head) and methodology to this.

adfontesmedia.com

Home of Media Bias Chart - Ad Fontes Media

Home of Media Bias Chart Version 9.0 January 2022 Edition - Combined Web, Podcast and TV
adfontesmedia.com adfontesmedia.com
en.wikipedia.org

Ad Fontes Media - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

If you have some credible party evidence that refutes what I have posted, feel free. I always want to learn. But I am not interested in your unsubstantiated impressions and emotions. Hopefully you want to learn as well. When you find yourself arguing against evidence, smart people open their minds to the possibility that their impressions are wrong.
 
Last edited:
upsideguy said:
\.

I made post #109 to show my objection to what appeared to be your characterization in post #93 of FOX, OAN and NewsMax as real news organizations of the equivalent CBS, NBC, NYT, WaPo, CNN, distinguished only by their left/right lean.
Click to expand...
Oh, no, that's not accurate. I did NOT characterize FOX, OAN and NewsMax as real news organizations. One, I don't consider them to be news sources at all. FoxNews is a mainstream propaganda site, much like CNN and MSNBC, but Fox chooses to sell a Republican message, not a Democrat message. So, you've misread my post.

What I said about CBS, NBC, NYT, WaPo etc. is that they purvey false and misleading information constantly, and they are propaganda sources, not "real news." Sure, on innocuous issues, they often get the story mostly right. But, they purveyed false news constantly to spread propaganda - they were part of the russia hoax narrative, they sold the "Russian bounties" false story without evidence, they sold the "Syria gassed its own people" story too. They lied about the Covington Catholic kids. They lied about Kyle Rittenhouse. They spent a year fomenting the 2020-21 riots by pretending that riots weren't riots, but rather "the voice of the unheard."

My point about TYT and Dailykos is not that that they were to be deemed equivalent to mainstream news sources, because they aren't. They are Left wing commentary sources, and they sell a "narrative."

You are correct, I did not present another source of a chart setting out the various news sources on a sliding scale. What I did was point out evident absurdities in the chart you posted. I have no trouble accepting the assertions that OAN and Newsmax are right wing commentary and narrative sources. I will take that as given. What I disagree with, again, is the idea that there are no left wing sources that are "as bad"as dedicated right wing BS commentary sources. There most certainly are. And, the second thing I took issue with was considering CNN or the New York Times as somehow trusted news sources. That's like saying the government is a trusted source.
 
MrNiceGuy said:
Oh, no, that's not accurate. I did NOT characterize FOX, OAN and NewsMax as real news organizations. One, I don't consider them to be news sources at all. FoxNews is a mainstream propaganda site, much like CNN and MSNBC, but Fox chooses to sell a Republican message, not a Democrat message. So, you've misread my post.

What I said about CBS, NBC, NYT, WaPo etc. is that they purvey false and misleading information constantly, and they are propaganda sources, not "real news." Sure, on innocuous issues, they often get the story mostly right. But, they purveyed false news constantly to spread propaganda - they were part of the russia hoax narrative, they sold the "Russian bounties" false story without evidence, they sold the "Syria gassed its own people" story too. They lied about the Covington Catholic kids. They lied about Kyle Rittenhouse. They spent a year fomenting the 2020-21 riots by pretending that riots weren't riots, but rather "the voice of the unheard."

My point about TYT and Dailykos is not that that they were to be deemed equivalent to mainstream news sources, because they aren't. They are Left wing commentary sources, and they sell a "narrative."

You are correct, I did not present another source of a chart setting out the various news sources on a sliding scale. What I did was point out evident absurdities in the chart you posted. I have no trouble accepting the assertions that OAN and Newsmax are right wing commentary and narrative sources. I will take that as given. What I disagree with, again, is the idea that there are no left wing sources that are "as bad"as dedicated right wing BS commentary sources. There most certainly are. And, the second thing I took issue with was considering CNN or the New York Times as somehow trusted news sources. That's like saying the government is a trusted source.
Click to expand...
Again, impressions without evidence. Just because you believe something does not make it true. You want us to take seriously the utterances you put on this board, but they are seemingly without foundation. When asked several times, you failed to produce any evidence (facts or credible third party evidence) to support your assertions. By debate rules, an assertion that can be supported when challenged is to be 'not true'. I can believe in Santa Claus as well, but I would keep it to myself, unless I had evidence, as someone would surely challenge me on the existence of Santa Claus and I would have nothing to produce, so I would not want to make such a foolish assertion. I would keep it to myself.

Sorry pal.... you can believe what you want, but CBS, NBC, NYT, WaPo etc. are indeed real news that have a journalistic process and committed to fact based reporting. Do they sometimes get something wrong? Yes, but when they do the retract the story. The stuff you think they got wrong is both anecdotal, and not as wrong as you portray. They are not wrong because you think they are wrong. Utterances from your head mean nothing, because, without foundation, its more likely that you are wrong than the NYT and WaPo, et al. It is a fact that the NYT and WaPo continues to be considered among the finest newspapers in the world and remain good credible sources for information, as Ad Fontes and MediaBiasFactCheck and others will tell you (each of those run a process).

www.forbes.com

10 Journalism Brands Where You Find Real Facts Rather Than Alternative Facts

Realizing that millions more people are scratching their heads, wondering what to read and where to spend their subscription dollars, here are my top 10 large journalistic brands where I believe you can most often find real, reported facts.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

Top 200 Newspapers in the World by Web Ranking

2019 Newspaper Rankings: 200 most popular newspapers in the world by web ranking.
www.4imn.com

I am sorry that you don't like what they have to say. Given their reputation of outstanding journalism, the facts suggest that the problem is with you. You can't deal with the truth. The certainly is a credible conclusion that I am sure is going through the minds of most of the readers of our sub-thread. This argument really boils down to there is truth and there is what is in your head. Those two things may be aligned at times, but there seems to be no process to be sure those two things are indeed aligned.
 
upsideguy said:
Again, impressions without evidence. Just because you believe something does not make it true.
Click to expand...
No no. Cut that out.

Covington Catholic story - CNN lied - lied - about what happened that day. They paid out a huge defamation suit amount for that lie.

Bounties - that story was debunked thoroughly. This is not me not believing it to be true - it's the story being published by the mainstream news media without any evidence. they lied.

The Syria gas story - never happened, and investigation proved it. Our mainstream media peddled a fake story to gin up war in Syria.

It's been going on for decades - remember in Iraq and the "Iraqi soldiers threw babies out of incubators to die on the floor" pretext to war? They sold that through the mainstream media, which peddles government propaganda.

How bout the Hunter laptop "it's russian disinformation" story? They peddled that lie for months - they had zero evidence for it. Yet they peddled it.

Trump-Russia collusion - false.

How about the "Trump said Nazis were good people!" - total and absolute lie peddled by CNN, ABC, NBC, ABC, CBS, NYT, WaPo and all the usual suspects. The ****ing full quote they kept editing to make it sound like he said that - it says the exact opposite. He says "I'm not talking about the Nazis..." Yet, the media edited and created a "narrative" on behalf of the Democrat Party that Trump doesn't condemn Nazis.

Kids in Cages - when they published pictures from 2014 and attributed them to Trump, when it was kids in Obama-Biden cages. Lie.

Those are no "impressions" - those are proven falsehoods. It's the biggest issue with this "fight against disinformation" nonsense. The mainstream media and the government peddle dis and mis information constantly. They have zero standing to be the arbiters of what is good news and what is fake news.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom