(note: previously posted under "the white rasta" which was a system error)
@Hemphill
you said:
Here is me proving myself right once again...
You want proof of fake news.. Be careful what you ask for.. you might just get red pilled..
Sadly, you just proved what I believed about you. You just destroyed your own case without even realizing it. You think you proved these media outlets are fake news? Not hardly. You only proved that you have no real scientific standard of judgment and proved that you do not understand journalism. For example:
News outlets commonly report whatever the white house says. The idea that Saddam had WMDs was based on the government's intelligence. I remember the news coverage. There was always some doubt on the part of what you call leftist news outlets. I remember. That's why most people on the left did not believe Bush and questioned whether the war was really about oil. But if nothing else, the news has to cover what the white house says. That doesn't mean they believe it and in journalism opinions have to be given as such. So there are "editors" who write "editorials" that often contain opinion. But the "news" isn't supposed to be biased so they try to keep opinions out. That doesn't exist in online media because most of it cannot afford real journalists. Online media gets is news from real journalists and then they put their own spin on it. And the reality is opinions can be wrong, but facts aren't. So journalists investigate and try to get multiple sources. But if this process was infallible we would replace the whole justice system with journalists because the fact is that many people who go to prison are innocent, even though there were investigations and trials and juries. EVERYONE gets it wrong sometimes. You're conflating this human phenomenon with conspiracy, thinking they're getting it wrong on purpose in order to mislead. But that's because propagandists on the right tell you that.
So yes, journalists can't alway embed themselves in saudi mosques and infiltrate terrorist groups (which the CIA can't even do most of the time) in order to verify everything the government says. They're not Marvel superheroes. Journalism doesn't work like that.
Now for your "proof" regarding the debate questions. Dude. There was only one person who was doing that and she was an employee of the DNC. She was NOT a reporter and certainly NOT a journalist. She was not a news anchor. CNN, MSNBC, just like FOX, they ALL pay guest contributors to sit on panels and give their OPINIONS. That's not "NEWS". So you're obviously conflating political pundits with the news. It was journalists on the LEFT that even figured out she had done this and confronted her.
The Zimmerman story was infuriating to me and many other black people because Zimmerman was the only witness of his own crime. The only other evidence of his state of mind came from his call to the police where he was told to back off. Who was it that said Zimmerman was "obsessed"? Give a name. That is an opinion and even though it's accurate it's not news unless backed up by evidence. For me, there was in fact enough evidence to suggest this because if Trayvon was white Zimmerman would not have followed him at all. Zimmerman, like MANY other whites, assumed he was in the area to steal. It reminds me of a video I watched yesterday where a black kid rang someone's doorbell because he had gotten lost and needed directions to the school. There's some noise from the house and the kid backs up, spooked. White guys comes out with a gun as the kid runs for his very life and the guy fires of a shot. Fortunately he missed but what he told the police is that tripped and the gun went off. If it wasn't for the video that lie may have worked. And that's the thing. There are thousands of George Zimmermans and thousands of Trayvons and black people know the truth. And the truth is that racism and racial biases cause whites to act crazy out of fear and they execute black people and then tell lies to cover it up. Suddenly whites in the media were talking about Trayvon like he was the next MMA champ when it was Zimmerman who had the size advantage and the training and none of that should have mattered because Trayvon wasn't asking to fight anyone that night. He was defending himself; Walking While Black. And the truth is whites feel very little sympathy because they feel justified in their fear because racist propagandists bait them and because anytime a black person is arrested their picture makes the news. And because we're targeted more and because there is favoritism by the local news (which are mostly right-leaning thanks in part to the Sinclair group) whites are less likely to be identified by race of have their picture displayed. I was in a small gathering (that occurred as a result of similar cases and BLM affecting the national discourse) that confronted a local news representative about that who admitted there was a problem. So yeah...
“hands up, don’t shoot”
Come on, just admit that there no proper way for black people to ever protest. The legitimacy of these movements do not come from the guilt or innocence of the VICTIM, but rather the fact that the job of the police is to arrest suspects. We have due process in the United States and a presumption of innocence for criminal cases. So when the news often offers details like "oh he was suspected of having a gun or he sold drugs or weed was discovered" none of that gives any cop a James Bond license to kill. And the police use tactics to subdue black people that go way beyond reasonable force because all they have to do is say they were resisting arrest. Police use this concept of resistance in order to play judge jury and sometimes execution. Most often I believe they just want to beat the person up and killing them is accidental. I've seen whites with guns get talked down and disarmed. But the fear that white cops have of black people makes them far more likely to shoot first and lie later. "Better to be judged by 12 than carried out by 6" is what they say. Black people don't protest because of some erroneous justification. That is what ignorant white people think who don't understand the history of the police's relationship with the black community. And they use the airwaves to convince each other that the cops are the good guys. No one is automatically good because of the job they do. And again, you're confusing reporting with editorializing the news. I bet you don't believe all this stuff without really even watching it.
"rape at college campuses".
Same thing here. The allegations themselves are news worthy. Do you think the news waits until after the trial before it decides to tell the story? No. But when its white kids you want the news to be quiet and you're all protective of their reputations. That's white privilege because that almost never happens for us. Fact is, there have been a lot of incidents of rape and other sexual abuse by college students. How was the news supposed to know they were innocent? Because they were white?? Again, you misunderstand how journalism works because you are attacking them based on an outcome they could not have predicted. And I don't recall hearing anyone say "oh yeah they definitely did it". And again.. that would be what? an opinion. aka Not news.
I'll give you 2003 and 2004. Why? 1. Because my post is already too long. 2. Because Brian Williams was wrong and suspended for 6 months. So not only is it unreasonable to assume the news is always perfect, and not only do you have to look at negative consequences suffered by individuals, but you're also totally overlooking the fact hundreds of people work at these organizations and one person's credibility doesn't destroy the credibility of the organization. I mean wow... have you not heard of "retractions"? One reason I think you might be racist too is this absolutism where you judge a group by the actions of a handful of people. And did you not read any of the condemnations by the washington post, cnn, nytimes, etc? No one was okay with that. That's like one doctor getting sued for malpractice and you blame all the hospitals in the city and all their doctors. That's ridiculous.
" The fake news narrative that Donald Trump somehow represents the next coming of Hitler "
Again... this is NOT NEWS. That is an opinion. You cannot attack the NEWS about an OPINION because an OPINION is decidedly NOT THE NEWS.
Now were there indicators and similarities between the rise of Hitler and Trump? ABSOLUTELY. I noticed it myself before anyone on tv said anything. But of course when a person on the alt right who supports trump does a nazi salute that's fine, right? Trump has all these rallies where he inspires acts of terrorism and whites carry it out, posting on social media like "I'm going in" like they are following orders. People are opening attacking minorities in public based on trump's rhetoric. There are training camps for white terrorists now in the US. But... SQUIRREL!!
"The fake news that Donald Trump had no chance whatsoever of winning the presidential election"
Are you kidding me? Again, you are confused by opinion. You don't understand the difference between speculating about polls vs reporting a projected winner. Let me clue you in. Polls try to figure out how an election MIGHT go by asking people beforehand. There's also exit polling that ask people how they voted. However, it depends on who you ask, and especially if you can only ask registered voters because that's whose information you have... especially when you know that most Americans actually do NOT vote... you can easily make a wrong prediction and that's what they did. Now I could understand you calling it fake if the polls were on Trump's side but even Kellyanne Conway proves you wrong there. She was on CNN and other outlets saying their own numbers were telling a different story. All this is different from what happened on election night when enough of the votes were counted that CNN, MSNBC, and others REPORTED that Trump had won. You are confused between what is fact and what is opinion and what is news. Van Jones has opinions. He was targeted by a right wing terrorist bomber because of his opinion. Van Jones is not a journalist or a news anchor. You're simply confused. And in order to avoid opinions you and other right wingers don't like you simply retreat to your absurdly biased bubbles.
|
|
