- Joined
- Sep 18, 2011
- Messages
- 83,705
- Reaction score
- 58,410
- Location
- New Mexico
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Although the Daily Mail‘s article cited nothing more than an unverifiable “source” for all that it reported, numerous new outlets including the Daily Caller, Fox News, Newsmax, and Hollywood Life picked up the story, citing in turn only the tabloid.
And that my friends is how the right wing echo chamber works. And has been working like this for some time.
The Trump rule of journalism, embraced by his lemmings on the right: The media is fake news, and not to be believed. Until it tells me something I want to hear.
:lamoThat's what I thought. One site. My own personal fact check found the Snopes piece stacked against dozens of others who reported otherwise.
:lamo
Originally Posted by poweRob
Although the Daily Mail‘s article cited nothing more than an unverifiable “source” for all that it reported, numerous new outlets including the Daily Caller, Fox News, Newsmax, and Hollywood Life picked up the story, citing in turn only the tabloid.
And that my friends is how the right wing echo chamber works. And has been working like this for some time."
One post up.
:lamo
But wait, isn't this precisely how the left's alt-left MSM partners report the news?
Intel chiefs presented Trump with claims of Russian efforts to compromise him - CNNPolitics.com
"....multiple sources tell CNN."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/03/02/anonymous-sources-are-absolutely-killing-trumps-presidency/?utm_term=.0366a57658d7
The story relies on unnamed Justice Department officials.
But, but, but......
:2rofll:
Goose/gander lollipops
The difference here is that when CNN claims something from an anonymous source or whatnot it is usually completely true or mostly true. They're far from perfect but there is still an element of credibility with what they say. Now contrast that with The Daily Caller or Infowars where they have a record of just flat out making stuff up without an ounce of evidence to back it up and they do it on a daily basis. Trump has now aligned himself with completely unreliable sources of information so his credibility is dirt.
Right. "The difference here....."
So the difference is the left's unverifiable and unidentifiable sources are not to be questioned, while any source that doesn't support the agenda is not credible.
Credibility with the left's MSM partners disappeared long ago. That is a shame, but that's the cemetery they buried themselves in.
Look, I know you guys have trouble separating fact from fiction but the thing is... you can tell how things are by observing them over time. CNN publishes information that usually ends up being highly truthful. The Daily Caller and Infowars publish information that usually ends up being complete bull****. Obama has a record of saying things that end up being highly truthful. Trump already has a record of saying things that end up being complete bull****.
Do you see a pattern here?
then how do you know about it?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?