Re: Re: Re: Actually he's just saying things backwards
So I've noticed. That, and the boogeyman call in which anyone who disagrees with them or dares to criticise their Glorious Leader is apostate, or worse still... a leftist!
People need to stop being so sodding well dishonest.
Sod it, I'm going to start selling hooded robes with "Make America great again" printed on them for Trump worshipers to buy while they march around chanting, "Hail unto Trump, our glorious leader, he can do no wrong. Send Hillary to jail."
From what I'm seeing in the comments here I'd make a bloody fortune if I did.
Seriously, give up the partisan nonsense. Neither side has any virtue worth splitting the nation over.
People who do not fall down and worship Trump when the (host of musical instruments) are played are not necessarily biased against him — or in favour of Team Tweedledee. The man is a jerk and there's nothing wrong with calling him out for jerk-ery. If he gets something right he'll be patted on the back for it.
Indeed. It behooves us, then, to insist on fact-checking ourselves and to only support the most accurate outlets. Those who support the ones that pander to their prejudices encourage fake reports and entrench the partisan difference between us.
The DNC does not control the media, the Establishment does. Playing the partisan game is not going to break their stranglehold on politics; it will consolidate it.
That is Truthout's model and, well... have you ever read it? It's a full-on left-wing propaganda machine with liberalism and progressivism on the side. And you all KNOW I don't do the partisan thing so this is not a histrionic declaration on my part.
However, on the basis that even a stopped clock is right twice a day I'll check it out from time to time if I'm intrigued by the headlines and snippets featured on Twitter — I'm friendly with some people on the progressive/liberal side and they share the articles. In between the bias and the slanting there are indeed bits of news but you have to tease the facts out from between the opinions. Since I find it a bind to do that I don't usually bother with it.
The mainstream press is fairly accurate unless a hot-button issue is involved, so "tornado strikes trailer park" is going to be true. Again, you have to pick your way through the bias to get to the facts, but they don't tend to lay it on so thick in the news reports as a rule. In the opinion pieces, anything goes. I've learned to give Krugman a wide berth because he's too tied up with ideological concerns to think things through. Example: his take on TTIP and TPP until he was called out for going, "Ooh (a piece of candy!), a trade agreement!" while ignoring real concerns about ISDS.
News agencies usually provide the raw materials for the papers to report on so they're worth paying attention to. Whatever your usual source is, watch out for bias; if they're describing the situation in terms that provoke a particular sentiment or play to a particular echo chamber, I'd not pay too much attention to it. There's no perfect source of information so don't get too hung up about it, just be a bit wary when reading their stuff.
Authoritarianism is everybody's problem and it exists on both sides. Whereas the right was going nuts during the Obama regime spreading fake news about his citizenship, etc., we now have the progressive/liberals at it over Russian hacking, etc.
As for censorship, what do you call it when people hop in here and try to bully Mike into writing posts that they approve of instead of his generally public-minded libertarian-leaning work?
Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...
America doesn't really have a left, by which I mean "state runs all the things, private property abolished, wealth redistributed."
What it does have is some noisy radical progressives and an assortment of liberals who caucus with them, which is what are being called "the left" along with anyone who disagrees with you. Now go and do a search on Breitbart.com and any of the groups identified as targets above. It's not hard to find some very nasty stuff in there. The Daily Kos is certainly biased but I wouldn't say it's radical.
At the moment they're bashing Trump but I'm not seeing anything particularly radical in there. I don't tend to read the Daily Kos because of its bias.
Americans need to learn and understand how the democratic process works and utilise that to effect change. It means organising instead of forming bands of violent reactionaries who get themselves killed in the name of $sacred cow.
I'm already hearing Disney's "When I see an elephant fly" over liberal progressives Red Scaring each other over the possibility of the Russians having hacked electronic voting machines. It really is extraordinary. Sometimes I wonder if I've entered the Twilight Zone. That's it, that's the explanation.
On the post: San Francisco MTA Forced To Give Free Rides After Network Infected With Ransomware
Re: IT Does not control direction and budget
On the post: San Francisco MTA Forced To Give Free Rides After Network Infected With Ransomware
Re:
On the post: Media Critic Calls On Journalists To Be Obedient Stenographers
Re: Re:
On the post: Media Critic Calls On Journalists To Be Obedient Stenographers
Re: Re: Re: Actually he's just saying things backwards
People need to stop being so sodding well dishonest.
On the post: Somehow Everyone Comes Out Looking Terrible In The Effort For Election Recounts
Re: Re:
From what I'm seeing in the comments here I'd make a bloody fortune if I did.
Seriously, give up the partisan nonsense. Neither side has any virtue worth splitting the nation over.
On the post: Somehow Everyone Comes Out Looking Terrible In The Effort For Election Recounts
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Somehow Everyone Comes Out Looking Terrible In The Effort For Election Recounts
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
He was called out for blotting his copybook over TPP; we don't let him get away with messing up.
I've also seen certain Republican politicians patted on the back for standing up against the surveillance state, e.g. Rand Paul.
On the post: Facebook, China, Fake News And The Slippery Slope Of Censorship
Re:
On the post: Facebook, China, Fake News And The Slippery Slope Of Censorship
Re:
On the post: Facebook, China, Fake News And The Slippery Slope Of Censorship
Re: Re: Re: ... and I go armed.
Read this, mate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings
On the post: Facebook, China, Fake News And The Slippery Slope Of Censorship
Re: Re: The Gate Keepers
On the post: Facebook, China, Fake News And The Slippery Slope Of Censorship
Re: Re: Fake News?
However, on the basis that even a stopped clock is right twice a day I'll check it out from time to time if I'm intrigued by the headlines and snippets featured on Twitter — I'm friendly with some people on the progressive/liberal side and they share the articles. In between the bias and the slanting there are indeed bits of news but you have to tease the facts out from between the opinions. Since I find it a bind to do that I don't usually bother with it.
The mainstream press is fairly accurate unless a hot-button issue is involved, so "tornado strikes trailer park" is going to be true. Again, you have to pick your way through the bias to get to the facts, but they don't tend to lay it on so thick in the news reports as a rule. In the opinion pieces, anything goes. I've learned to give Krugman a wide berth because he's too tied up with ideological concerns to think things through. Example: his take on TTIP and TPP until he was called out for going, "Ooh (a piece of candy!), a trade agreement!" while ignoring real concerns about ISDS.
News agencies usually provide the raw materials for the papers to report on so they're worth paying attention to. Whatever your usual source is, watch out for bias; if they're describing the situation in terms that provoke a particular sentiment or play to a particular echo chamber, I'd not pay too much attention to it. There's no perfect source of information so don't get too hung up about it, just be a bit wary when reading their stuff.
On the post: Facebook, China, Fake News And The Slippery Slope Of Censorship
Re: Re: Re: Fake News?
As for censorship, what do you call it when people hop in here and try to bully Mike into writing posts that they approve of instead of his generally public-minded libertarian-leaning work?
On the post: After All That, E-Voting Experts Suggest Voting Machines May Have Been Hacked For Trump
Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...
I'm not sure that promoting partisanship is healthy. We shouldn't give anyone a pass for behaving badly.
On the post: After All That, E-Voting Experts Suggest Voting Machines May Have Been Hacked For Trump
Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...
What it does have is some noisy radical progressives and an assortment of liberals who caucus with them, which is what are being called "the left" along with anyone who disagrees with you. Now go and do a search on Breitbart.com and any of the groups identified as targets above. It's not hard to find some very nasty stuff in there. The Daily Kos is certainly biased but I wouldn't say it's radical.
At the moment they're bashing Trump but I'm not seeing anything particularly radical in there. I don't tend to read the Daily Kos because of its bias.
On the post: Trump Formally Picks Two Net Neutrality Opponents To Head FCC Transition
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://on-t-internet.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/come-revolution-good-luck-with-that.html
Americans need to learn and understand how the democratic process works and utilise that to effect change. It means organising instead of forming bands of violent reactionaries who get themselves killed in the name of $sacred cow.
On the post: Another State Court Says Speedy Fourth Amendment Violations Are Still Just Fourth Amendment Violations
Re: Re: Re: Re: That pesky Constitution
On the post: Woman Sues Google Because SEO Guy Wrote A Mean Blog About Her Company
Re: Re: I don't know how Dawn Bennett isn't in prison
We don't tend to take negative comments at face value here on TD.
On the post: NSA Leaked More Hacking Tools, Leading To Calls To Fire Its Director... Who Ran To Trump For Support
Re:
On the post: President Obama Claims He Cannot Pardon Snowden; He's Wrong
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Next >>