Politics XXXV (Life in the Vault is about to change)

[Bartimaeus]

44 minutes ago, ShadySands said:

I'm surprised how little coverage I've seen of this outside of more conservative news sites

Biden's a creep. Has been for a long time. He's also been a very conservative member of the party most of his years. As of this election cycle, he's now also become increasingly incomprehensible and insincere (or deluded). It is painful to hear him speak much as it is to hear Trump. I do so wish he wasn't the counter-choice to a somehow significantly worse man and party.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

2 hours ago, ShadySands said:

I'm surprised how little coverage I've seen of this outside of more conservative news sites

If I'm not mistaken, the story was broke by the same guy who broke the story about Kavanaugh which only adds to the parallels. It's clearly a double standard that will be used to discredit people who come forward with stories of assault, but by now it's clear the Democrats care more about their position as the party of "woke" corporations than they do about the PR they use to scam working class folks into voting for them. I've said it before, but this election will be between two mentally ill old men credibly accused of sexual assault and who will **** the world up to make the stock market line crawl up for five minutes.

[Guard Dog]

3 hours ago, ShadySands said:

I'm surprised how little coverage I've seen of this outside of more conservative news sites

Not surprising at all. It's a misnomer to say the news is fake. Nothing you see on Fox, or CNN, or MSNBC is false. It's all true, just not all the truth. And it is framed in such a way that the context suits they story they want to tell. The "media" is not in the business of informing. They are not and have never been the gatekeepers of objective truth. They are peddling a narrative and they report on what suits that narrative and ignore what does not. 

And this is not new. 

[BruceVC]

4 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

Not surprising at all. It's a misnomer to say the news is fake. Nothing you see on Fox, or CNN, or MSNBC is false. It's all true, just not all the truth. And it is framed in such a way that the context suits they story they want to tell. The "media" is not in the business of informing. They are not and have never been the gatekeepers of objective truth. They are peddling a narrative and they report on what suits that narrative and ignore what does not. 

And this is not new. 

When you say the there is no fake news or false news that is on any of these channels that is difficult to  understand?

I can give you plenty of examples of fake\false news especially on Fox, for example Fox News in the beginning of the virus reported that the virus was nothing but a scam to impeach Trump. How is that not fake\false news ...Im genuinely confused by your argument ?

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/27/media/trish-regan-fox-news/index.html

 

Edited April 28, 2020 by BruceVC

[Guard Dog]

4 hours ago, BruceVC said:

When you say the there is no fake news or false news that is on any of these channels that is difficult to  understand?

I can give you plenty of examples of fake\false news especially on Fox, for example Fox News in the beginning of the virus reported that the virus was nothing but a scam to impeach Trump. How is that not fake\false news ...Im genuinely confused by your argument ?

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/27/media/trish-regan-fox-news/index.html

 

Don't confuse news reporting with news commentary. Trish Reagan, Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Rachel Maddow, Anderson Cooper, etc. are all commentators. They operate very much like a newspaper editorial page. They discuss the news, giver their opinion of it, "tell you what to think" if you will. 

On CNN from 11 AM through 4 PM is all news reporting with a little bit of commentary. After 4 PM it's all commentary with a little bit of reporting. OANN is all news until 5 PM, then all commentary. Fox is news from 9 AM to 12 PM then commentary the rest of the time. 

The commentators are generally bound by the same ethics (such as they are) or regular journalists. Sean Hannity will not look at the camera and say "Bruce is a pinko commie trying to undermine our great President with his internet posts". That would be obviously false. But he might say "Evidence suggests that Bruce is a pinko commie trying to undermine our great President with his internet posts." See how they do that? Take a statement of fact that is false and add two words, a bare fig leaf to hide behind, that makes it an opinion that still sounds like a fact. 

Watch their shows for that and you'll see they do that all hour long. They will mix definitive statements of fact with opinion skillfully and interchangeably to tell you a story and most folks never catch the difference. The definitive statements of fact will be true. "Joe Biden has been accused of sexual assault" Truth. "How can this great country support a serial sexual predator for President?" Commentary.  See how Biden's name is not mentioned in the second sentence?  You don't say "How can this great country support a serial sexual predator for President like Joe Biden?" Follow a factual statement with commentary and the viewer just blends them together in their head.  

This happens all the time on the TV channels. It also happens on the websites. You'll read sentences like this "Reports say Bruce is a pinko commie trying to undermine our great President with his internet posts" or "According to some sources Bruce is a pinko commie trying to undermine our great President with his internet posts", The statement does not HAVE to be factual. They tell you they are repeating what someone else told them but coming from them it's assumed by the news consumer to be true. If they find whatever news channel they are consuming to be credible. 

I know tis sounds terrible. And they ALL do it. Every single one. But, if it makes you feel any better, it has always been this way. 

[Gfted1]

And they have a global reach. smh. Whoever owned "the press" back in 1791 probably paid someone to get it added to the 1st amendment.

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, Guard Dog said:

Don't confuse news reporting with news commentary. Trish Reagan, Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Rachel Maddow, Anderson Cooper, etc. are all commentators. They operate very much like a newspaper editorial page. They discuss the news, giver their opinion of it, "tell you what to think" if you will. 

On CNN from 11 AM through 4 PM is all news reporting with a little bit of commentary. After 4 PM it's all commentary with a little bit of reporting. OANN is all news until 5 PM, then all commentary. Fox is news from 9 AM to 12 PM then commentary the rest of the time. 

The commentators are generally bound by the same ethics (such as they are) or regular journalists. Sean Hannity will not look at the camera and say "Bruce is a pinko commie trying to undermine our great President with his internet posts". That would be obviously false. But he might say "Evidence suggests that Bruce is a pinko commie trying to undermine our great President with his internet posts." See how they do that? Take a statement of fact that is false and add two words, a bare fig leaf to hide behind, that makes it an opinion that still sounds like a fact. 

Watch their shows for that and you'll see they do that all hour long. They will mix definitive statements of fact with opinion skillfully and interchangeably to tell you a story and most folks never catch the difference. The definitive statements of fact will be true. "Joe Biden has been accused of sexual assault" Truth. "How can this great country support a serial sexual predator for President?" Commentary.  See how Biden's name is not mentioned in the second sentence?  You don't say "How can this great country support a serial sexual predator for President like Joe Biden?" Follow a factual statement with commentary and the viewer just blends them together in their head.  

This happens all the time on the TV channels. It also happens on the websites. You'll read sentences like this "Reports say Bruce is a pinko commie trying to undermine our great President with his internet posts" or "According to some sources Bruce is a pinko commie trying to undermine our great President with his internet posts", The statement does not HAVE to be factual. They tell you they are repeating what someone else told them but coming from them it's assumed by the news consumer to be true. If they find whatever news channel they are consuming to be credible. 

I know tis sounds terrible. And they ALL do it. Every single one. But, if it makes you feel any better, it has always been this way. 

I have never thought about it like that and it certainly changes things, thanks for this post because I can now see what you mean by the huge difference between commentary and reporting 

It also answers my previous post  about the erosion of freedom of speech in the USA. You dont have to change the USA constitution around what defines freedom of speech because my concerns are always about commentary and not reporting....a huge distinction 

I have really learnt something new today and that will shape future points I make on this type of topic 

 

[Calax]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

I have never thought about it like that and it certainly changes things, thanks for this post because I can now see what you mean by the huge difference between commentary and reporting 

It also answers my previous post  about the erosion of freedom of speech in the USA. You dont have to change the USA constitution around what defines freedom of speech because my concerns are always about commentary and not reporting....a huge distinction 

I have really learnt something new today and that will shape future points I make on this type of topic 

 

Look up "Outfoxed" on youtube. It's old (I think it was circa 2006?) and anti-Fox News/News Corp, but it goes through and explains how these techniques are used. They specifically target O'Reilly as he was their biggest commentator for a long time.

[Guard Dog]

4 minutes ago, Calax said:

Look up "Outfoxed" on youtube. It's old (I think it was circa 2006?) and anti-Fox News/News Corp, but it goes through and explains how these techniques are used. They specifically target O'Reilly as he was their biggest commentator for a long time.

Hannity, Maddow, and Beck were always the biggest offenders IMO. But they al do it. Every last one. 

[213374U]

Another day in Bizarro World, where Bruce is a pinko commie and tech megacorps side with users against states.

(I know, it's really more about resistance to ceding control and tech hurdles, but still...)

[Skarpen]

Trump derangement syndrome has achieved tremendous levels. Shortly after president Trump mentioned a possibility of using UV light to fight viruses from inside the body the collective attack on a company that was developing such technology ensured that they were banned from YouTube and all social media platforms. That's right, to ensure they could spin another story to attack Trump establishment and their corporate envoys will bury information on developed medical treatments:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/an-experimental-ultraviolet-light-treatment-for-covid-19-takes-political-heat-11588005938

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/apr/26/pharmaceutical-firm-aytu-bioscience-testing-uv-lig/

https://247sports.com/college/texas-tech/board/102960/Contents/an-experimental-ultraviolet-light-treatment-for-covid19-takes-146550334/

 

They will also paint and existing treatments as a hoax and will go all the way including silencing their own who got the treatment and got better. I talk of course about doctors successfully using chloroquine in COVID-19 cases.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/apr/25/michigan-state-rep-karen-whitsett-blames-gov-whitm/

https://www.fox2detroit.com/news/state-representative-karen-whitsett-calls-out-democratic-party-following-covid-19-recovery

 

Remember, there is no bias among the media and their corporate friends. They only want what's best for you... if you obey.

[HoonDing]

The best presidents were all **** grabbers.

 

well, and the worst too.

[Malcador]

Interesting company, Aytu.  Apparently they were selling fraudulent COVID tests, earlier this year, huh. 

If only Trump didn't act like an oracle and could communicate without having interpretations provided, would be a lot less fusses.

[Skarpen]

32 minutes ago, Malcador said:

If only Trump didn't act like an oracle and could communicate without having interpretations provided, would be a lot less fusses.

Doubtful. If someone wants to interpret something in a bad way then no amount of explaining will convince them otherwise. 

[Zoraptor]

At one point everyone was selling 'fraudulent' tests, even now the best kits aren't all that accurate (bit more than 90%, iirc). Theoretically both antibody and PCR kits should be accurate, practically they aren't. Having said that, there's a shed load of stock manipulation going on with claims of miracle cures. Maybe Donald can suggest Tulip Bulbs as a treatment next, for some fun historicity.

Both of Trump's suggested treatments actually do have some sort of precedent or sense behind them ("lavage" has been a treatment for damaged lungs for ages, albeit the 'disinfectant' used is plain old saline), the problem is the way he suggested them and he's made clear by calling it sarcasm that he didn't mean a sensible treatment when he suggested them.

 

[Bartimaeus]

I'm surprised he hasn't suggested Trump Steaks.

[Malcador]

2 hours ago, Skarpen said:

Doubtful. If someone wants to interpret something in a bad way then no amount of explaining will convince them otherwise. 

No explanation needed if he communicates properly.  But then again, I assumed he heard about something then barely remembered it and decided to roll with it in the briefing, for some reason.  So I guess it's a problem on both ends with him, heh.

 

31 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

I'm surprised he hasn't suggested Trump Steaks.

Hm, this reminds me, what's Kushner up to ?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

52 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

I'm surprised he hasn't suggested Trump Steaks.

They've been discontinued. Maybe he'll reccomend Carl's jr chicken nuggets or the offerings of some other fast food company that donates to him.

[Bartimaeus]

1 hour ago, KaineParker said:

They've been discontinued. Maybe he'll reccomend Carl's jr chicken nuggets or the offerings of some other fast food company that donates to him.

I wonder if he's still eating McDonalds every day.

[Zoraptor]

6 hours ago, Malcador said:

Hm, this reminds me, what's Kushner up to ?

We're up to..

"Ah yes, most certainly. When I mentioned we could put them on the priority list for PPE, they were so willing it was almost pathetic."

or maybe

"Why contain it? Let it spill over into the schools and churches. Let the bodies pile up in the streets. In the end, they'll beg us to save them."

..in the Deus Ex opening cinematic, I think.

Which is probably closer to documentary than satire at this point, about the only thing he seems to be doing at the moment is stealing everyone else's PPE orders for some sort of massive federal stockpile.

[Guard Dog]

Looks like Justin Amash will run for President: https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/28/politics/justin-amash-exploratory-committee/index.html

He's got my vote. I'd rather be eaten by ants than cast my lot for that idiot Trump. And hell will freeze solid before I ever vote for a goddamned Democrat.

[HoonDing]

I'd rather vote for a commie than a democrat

[Amentep]

23 hours ago, Gfted1 said:

And they have a global reach. smh. Whoever owned "the press" back in 1791 probably paid someone to get it added to the 1st amendment.

Ben Franklin, wasn't it?  

[Gfted1]

58 minutes ago, Amentep said:

Ben Franklin, wasn't it?  

Secretly using the Pennsylvania Gazette to astroturf for the British, no doubt.  

[Skarpen]

It seems Sweden is not so welcoming and friendly after all. Bad Sweden, bad.

https://voiceofeurope.com/2020/04/swedish-official-says-migrants-fail-because-swedes-are-prejudiced/