The Problem of Misinformation

[Acim]

Prepare to be shocked. I don't defend any news source reguardless of of how much it may be in line with my political bias.

But that's not what you asked me.

Though I must admit there is no major network that is appealing to my bias. While I tend to be more liberal I am not a democrat. I am not a republican. I strive not to have any kind of group loyalty because it is intrinsic of the natuer of group loyalty to have emotional bias.

Also doesn't pertain to what you asked me.

You said "in any way, actually align with your personal beliefs." I would think answering no to that would be odd. Like if Fox News reports that President Obama did such and such, that would mean if your answer is no, then it is your personal belief that Obama is not POTUS. Hence, I took the "in any way" to be literal.

But chose to address it shortly because the whole point of that paragraph didn't follow from what I was saying before you chimed in with this question.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

But that's not what you asked me.

No. Its what you are doing.

Also doesn't pertain to what you asked me.

You said "in any way, actually align with your personal beliefs." I would think answering no to that would be odd. Like if Fox News reports that President Obama did such and such, that would mean if your answer is no, then it is your personal belief that Obama is not POTUS. Hence, I took the "in any way" to be literal.

But chose to address it shortly because the whole point of that paragraph didn't follow from what I was saying before you chimed in with this question.

Then I will ask it again. Plainer this time.

Do you watch fox news because its bias fall in line with your own bias?

 

[Acim]

Do you watch fox news because its bias fall in line with your own bias?

Not the only reason, but that's one of them. I watch or read news outlets that have visible bias I don't align with.

 

[tytlyf]

Not the only reason, but that's one of them. I watch or read news outlets that have visible bias I don't align with.

You should be watching the news for factual journalism. Not bias and opinion. News is supposed to be straight forward and boring giving facts and evidence. Not 99% opinion and bias.

 

[esmith]

You should be watching the news for factual journalism. Not bias and opinion. News is supposed to be straight forward and boring giving facts and evidence. Not 99% opinion and bias.

Where are you finding that?
List with title of news program/print/audio sources please.

 

[tytlyf]

Where are you finding that?
List with title of news program/print/audio sources please.

CSPAN is the best option. In the mornings from 7-10am. No bias, no opinion, straight fact checking on demand. The guests will have their opinions, but they are questioned. No cut off, not bullied, not silenced, not cutting their mic. It's a call-in show. You will learn a very good amount of information watching "Washington Journal"

 

[esmith]

CSPAN is the best option. In the mornings from 7-10am. No bias, no opinion, straight fact checking on demand. The guests will have their opinions, but they are questioned. No cut off, not bullied, not silenced, not cutting their mic. It's a call-in show. You will learn a very good amount of information watching "Washington Journal"

Well I do watch a couple of news programs that have guest, from both sides of an issue and the only issue that I see is one guest interrupting the other, with the host trying to maintain order. So you have yours and I have mine. Each to your own. But I might try CSPAN if my mornings allow it. Some of us do have others things that have to be done before and after the sun comes up. Guess you don't.
Ah, but the guest have their opinions.
Now the host of the show may not show bias, but the guest give their opinions. Correct?
So is it not possible that you filter out what you don't want to hear from the "opinions" and take the "opinions" that you agree with as factual truth. Something leads me to that conclusion reading your posts.

 

[tytlyf]

Well I do watch a couple of news programs that have guest, from both sides of an issue and the only issue that I see is one guest interrupting the other, with the host trying to maintain order. So you have yours and I have mine. Each to your own. But I might try CSPAN if my mornings allow it. Some of us do have others things that have to be done before and after the sun comes up. Guess you don't.

I noticed you didn't mention your source. That's ok, I know what it is. I don't have to get up before the sun rises, I chose a different path of work. I don't like going to bed before 8pm

Ah, but the guest have their opinions.
Now the host of the show may not show bias, but the guest give their opinions. Correct?
So is it not possible that you filter out what you don't want to hear from the "opinions" and take the "opinions" that you agree with as factual truth. Something leads me to that conclusion reading your posts.

Opinions aren't facts. You're also leaving out propaganda. RW media is very good with propaganda and mind tricks. Normal news doesn't do that.
RW media controls the message, if they don't like what a guest is saying, they will continually cut them off, bully them, cut their mic, end the segment very short, go to commercial, etc.

 

[esmith]

I noticed you didn't mention your source. That's ok, I know what it is. I don't have to get up before the sun rises, I chose a different path of work. I don't like going to bed before 8pm.

Nice snide remark there. FYI, I haven't been in bed before 10PM in many years(unless I'm sick and I can't remember when that was) and then usually read for an hour or so and then up between 6-7AM. Animals have a tendency to want to be fed. Work? I don't work, I'm retired. Even when I was not retired, I didn't have the luxury of playing at work, which is good, I guess, wouldn't know.

Opinions aren't facts. You're also leaving out propaganda. RW media is very good with propaganda and mind tricks. Normal news doesn't do that.
RW media controls the message, if they don't like what a guest is saying, they will continually cut them off, bully them, cut their mic, end the segment very short, go to commercial, etc.

Now I must admit that I do watch one or two opinion based programs, but unlike you I know the difference between opinion and factual presentations (see that is an opinion). It doesn't sound like you know the difference between opinion and propaganda; to you any opinion that does not conform to your beliefs is propaganda. Unfortunately there are many like you on both sides of the political spectrum; however it seems that your side of the spectrum are more inclined to pigeon-hole opinion in the propaganda box.
Now tell you what if I get a chance I will give CSPAN a chance, the only problem is I don't have 3 hours in the morning to watch or listen to TV (except this winter, but I have other commitments I have to honor also). So I'll try your show if you will try 2 of the news programs I watch. Watch a little or all. Here they are.
Special Report with Bret Baier
Tucker Carson Tonight
Note: Carson had a real nice talk with Glenn Greenwald about his Dec 10 The Intercept here is the link The Intercept No interruptions, not cut mics, no bullying just a reporter interested in listening. On the same program a real nice talk with Hawaii Representative Tulsi Gabbard. Again just a reporter interested in what she had to say.
So you see there are news programs on FNC that are not opinion based. Yes, there may be a little bias but it is not opinion based programming except from those that are guests. (from both political spectrums)

 

[Acim]

You should be watching the news for factual journalism. Not bias and opinion. News is supposed to be straight forward and boring giving facts and evidence. Not 99% opinion and bias.

I'm saying bias is unavoidable. It visibly occurs in science, so to think journalism would somehow, magically be devoid of it, is nonsensical.

Btw, you lost your point with me at the word "should."

 

[Acim]

CSPAN....<snip>... No bias, no opinion, straight fact checking on demand. The guests will have their opinions...<snip>

It's interesting how you framed that.

 

[Acim]

Opinions aren't facts. You're also leaving out propaganda. RW media is very good with propaganda and mind tricks. Normal news doesn't do that.
RW media controls the message, if they don't like what a guest is saying, they will continually cut them off, bully them, cut their mic, end the segment very short, go to commercial, etc.

All of this is either not true or debatable. But we get it, it's your schtick and you'll not budge from this type of rhetoric. It's become comical, cause this was being said pre-election and how RW media was fooling people and Hillary will win in historical landslide. You'll see that I'm right post election.

 

[Lyndon]

So a bunch of gullible idiots got fooled to vote for Trump, and you think that's a good thing??????

 

[esmith]

So a bunch of gullible idiots got fooled to vote for Trump, and you think that's a good thing??????

So are you saying that I'm a gullible idiot?
Just want to get this straight.

 

[Lyndon]

I'm saying Trump couldn't have won without a lot of gullible idiots voting for him.

 

[Acim]

I'm saying Trump couldn't have won without a lot of gullible idiots voting for him.

How is that different than any other POTUS in American history?

 

[esmith]

I'm saying Trump couldn't have won without a lot of gullible idiots voting for him.

Then if you believe that, how do you see me?

 

[Sha'irullah]

I have always been of the opposite opinion and regard leftist media as being the most biased and false. Now so they are deceptively false. FOX takes the time to not misquote a person while MSNBC goes out of the way to edit dialogue on retakes.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I have always been of the opposite opinion and regard leftist media as being the most biased and false. Now so they are deceptively false. FOX takes the time to not misquote a person while MSNBC goes out of the way to edit dialogue on retakes.

What world do do you live in where fox doesn't misquote? And also what do you consider fox news specifically? Which is opinion/entertainment and which is news? LIkewise what part of MSNBC is opinion/entertainment vs news? Where did the misquotes come from?

MSNBC is crooked but they are merely the kettle to the fox pot.

 

[Sha'irullah]

What world do do you live in where fox doesn't misquote? And also what do you consider fox news specifically? Which is opinion/entertainment and which is news? LIkewise what part of MSNBC is opinion/entertainment vs news? Where did the misquotes come from?

MSNBC is crooked but they are merely the kettle to the fox pot.

I never said I consider FOX saintly or reliable in the sense that I would quote them in research. But I consider them a lot better than MSNBC. Also they are all "entertainment" in some sense but FOX does it more in some sense as they do not mind extended mockery.

As for misquotes I am referring to MSNBC's repeated habit of using newscasters to portray information or dialogue and chop up the audio/video or apply it to an entirely irrelevant topic.

For example, MSNBC was covering some topic some years ago. I cannot think of what it was exactly but it involved either deforestation or the creation of windmills. The Republicans accused them of trying to destroy national icons like the bald eagle and also to preserve forests. But MSNBC refused to bring up a single conservative argument because they must portray us as "anti environment." Unknown to many but leftist political ideals are the most anti environment of the group encouraging unnecessary industrialization for increases in population.

I will try and find the exact article or issue because it was the turning point which made me a conservative in the first place.