By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - A brilliant breakdown of the current state of journalism and fake news.

Maxosaurus-rex on 22 May 2018
SuaveSocialist said:
John2290 said:

No. Simply no.

Yes.  Simply yes.  The people whingeing about "Fake News" are typically whingeing about news they don't like--and it's typically because of negative press for Dear Leader.  Take your feelings out of the equation and you find that the MSM is  generally far more reliable, reputable, and based on the facts than fringe media.  

Eh, no. Npr has been guilty of providing fake news about shootings along with CNN. Gun laws are extremely mis reported. Npr has also been guilty of fake news of police activity and social issues. And npr is one of the better news sources 



Around the Network
SuaveSocialist on 22 May 2018
John2290 said:
SuaveSocialist said:

Yes.  Simply yes.  The people whingeing about "Fake News" are typically whingeing about news they don't like--and it's typically because of negative press for Dear Leader.  Take your feelings out of the equation and you find that the MSM is  generally far more reliable, reputable, and based on the facts than fringe media.  

If you truly believe there is a large media organization out there that does not lie, twist or lean on their own bias you are being fooled. 

The fringe media plays in the Majors as far as lies, twisting or bias is concerned.  In that regard, the MSM plays Little League comparatively.  If you truly believe that fringe media is even close to being as reliable, reputable or factual as the MSM, then you are living in an alternate reality.  



SuaveSocialist on 22 May 2018
John2290 said:
SuaveSocialist said:

The fringe media plays in the Majors as far as lies, twisting or bias is concerned.  In that regard, the MSM plays Little League comparatively.  If you truly believe that fringe media is even close to being as reliable, reputable or factual as the MSM, then you are living in an alternate reality.  

If you read my post I said NO media is immune.

If you read your post you'd see you disagreed that the MSM is generally far more reliable, reputable and factual than fringe media.

                                                                                 Your exact reaction was: "No. Just no."

                                               



DirtyP2002 on 22 May 2018

I trust Fox News!

Now give Trump the Nobel price and let's go clubbing baby seals after that!



Imagine not having GamePass on your console...

Vinther1991 on 22 May 2018

The decline in credibility of the major news media in the english speaking world is extremely worrying. Several of those are getting highly influenced by radical leftism that are using their position to campaign politically. CNN, New York Times, Washington Post, Guardian, The Independent and Channel 4 have all flushed their credibility down the toilet in favour of politics and fake news. And by doing so they have helped the alternative, radical right media, like InfoWar, to get credibility in a lot of peoples eyes.
It's an extremely discomforting realization to wake up to, the fact that you don't know anymore which sources to trust.

I understand that it is impossible to be completely unbiased in journalism, but a lot of these media aren't even trying, or only barely. Some english media that still hold some credibility in my eyes include The Wall Street Journal, The Atlantic and BBC, yet these still need to improve.

Here in Scandinavia the media are a lot better (in my eyes), though they also need to improve quite a bit.

I strongly recommend everybody to use multiple media sources all across the political spectrum, and be extremely critical and careful.



Around the Network
Pemalite on 22 May 2018
Louie said:

I wish I could still trust those sources. I was a huge fan of fivethirtyeight.com from 2008-2016 and loved data journalism in general. I always knew Nate Silver (From fivethirtyeight) was a liberal but never doubted the he presented the facts as they were. Then came the 2016 primaries and Silver and his colleagues continuously misread every poll and number imaginable because they clearly showed Trump was about to win. Then they proceeded to say Trump had no chance to win the presidency for a long time. I've been pretty burned from data journalism ever since because as a data journalist you can spin numbers in a lot of ways to support your political agenda (confirmation bias) and people will be even more influenced by that than your average news report - because hey, it's all backed up with numbers, right?

Same in the german elections: The AfD (right-wing party), of which I was NOT a fan, polled at about 8% for months. Then, a week before the elections, pollsters suddenly had AfD numbers rise to above 10% and they got 12.6% in the elections, higher than any pollster predicted. And the low polling numbers continuously had been used by the media to tell people that no one wanted to vote AfD, the AfD was a Nazi party, etc. Also, the boss of one of the biggest german polling institutes Forsa, always commented on his institutes' numbers and used to spin them (in hindsight it definitely was spinning) to tell people how unpopular the AfD was. I voted liberal in the elections but I later regretted not voting AfD - because the behaviours shown by polling institutes and the media was very, very undemocratic in my opinion: Basically scaring people away from voting AfD by using numbers and stats which turned out to be wrong (and they must have known at that point because they had underestimated the AfD in literally every single local election in the year before). 

Well. Data Journalism is certainly a better outlet than what some conspiracy theorists like Infowars propagates.

However, you can never take a singular outlet as 100% gospel, regardless of track record, regardless if they are progressive or conservative. (Liberal has a different meaning here I think, they are right-wing.)
Why? Because, human beings are prone to being wrong and making mistakes.

Which is why there is value in citations, at-least the source is citing other studies and outlets, so that minimizes the potential of being incorrect, doesn't eliminate, minimizes.

John2290 said:

Actually Ireland and no, We can't trust our oen RTE or ore closet neighbour from satellite TV Sky or BBC ot that of that outlets sky brings to it's service like CNN, Fox, Msnmc. Etc etc etc. The closest thing the unfiltered news without bias ot opinion is Bloomberg that's all business news. 

I do have to give credit where credit is due though as BBC and Sky aren't nearly as bad CNN or FOX but that's like saying RT is better than CNN because it's critical of the US 24/7. All of them are cancer to what news and journalism ought to be. 

Can't say I have ever looked at any of those outlets.

It all comes down to citations and evidence in the end... If a news outlet is basing itself on that, then they can be taken with a degree of seriousness in my eyes, that should mean certain aspects will share some commonality with parts of the scientific method.


With that in mind, I tend to spend most of my time engrossed in the tech world, so my "news" is usually tech orientated from outlets like Anandtech.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Zoombael on 23 May 2018
John2290 said:

I feel we are loosing here, even in the age of the most free information in history. Nothing but misinformation and bias. 

Whos losing? 

Who is we? You and me? Are you losing against me? Is Trump losing against the media, the reason why you feel like "we" are losing?

 

I didnt watch the clip, because im mobile.

 

From my perspective, we are all liars and crooks. An attitude that has manifested over the years and it has proven to be the only truth.



Hunting Season is done...

Tulipanzo on 23 May 2018
John2290 said:
Tulipanzo said:

Sorry I'm not objective enough to understand the intricacies of the Nazi Pug Lad™ case. 

Also shame to hear the media killed Lobster Daddy, what a loss.

 

Checking his video history, as well as, you know, the title of the video, tells me pretty conclusively: twat.

Your contribution pretty much clinches it 

Get out of hear ya damn troll. If you're not a troll I have to assume mental illness or an extremely bad day. Bring it somewhere else.

It seems actually I should stick around, if your best explanation to someone being critical of your fave Youtuber is to accuse them to be mentally ill.

I've seen more dignified responses from grounded 12 year olds.

I would have expected better, you should try and remain objective. Your opinion is "getting interjected" here, what a slip!

 

Funnily enough you have provided no explanation yet as to why Nazi Pug Lad™ is at all incorrect.

Sums it up perfectly, tbh, though I guess the pug is not technically a Nazi.



Jaicee on 23 May 2018

I agree. CNN/ABC/NBC/CBS are FAKE NEWS!! Watch Fox & Friends. There is NO COLLUSION!! Clinton-Obama colluded. Investigate them!



forest-spirit on 23 May 2018

A huge problem I see is with people abandoning news outlets they consider unreliable for alt-sites with even less credibility. If you have a problem with dishonesty and made-up stories and you start getting you news from a source with even worse journalistic integrity instead, you're obviously doing it wrong. Or, the problem never was about whether something is true or not.

Then you have alternative facts (how is this even a thing!?) and people who'd rather have alt-facts that corresponds to their point-of-view than real facts that spells out a truth they don't like. I believe Ricky Gervais said something along the lines of "people today believes their opinion is worth as much as others opinions, which is quite right, but then you have people who believe that their opinion is worth as much as other peoples facts", and "alternative facts is what we used to call lies".