Slashdot Mirror
Salon: Republicans Are Launching Fake Local News Sites To Spread 'Propaganda' (salon.com)
"The Tennessee Star claims to be the 'most reliable' online local paper in the state," reports Salon. "In fact it's just a GOP front." An anonymous reader quotes their report:
An investigation by the fact-checking outlet Snopes found that several new local news websites are actually being launched by Republican consultants whose company is funded in part by the candidates the sites cover. Politico first reported last year that Tea Party-linked conservative activists Michael Patrick Leahy, Steve Gill and Christina Botteri were behind the "Tennessee Star," a website that purported to be a local news website but mostly posted content licensed from groups linked to big Republican donors. Snopes discovered that the trio has since launched similar sites in other battleground states ahead of the 2020 elections: the Ohio Star and the Minnesota Sun...
The group behind the sites does not appear content with just three outlets. According to Politico, Leahy has purchased domain names associated with Missouri, New England, the Dakotas, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin, most of which are electoral battleground states that will be vital in 2020.
Kathleen Bartzen Culver, who heads the Center of Journalism Ethics at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, told Snopes that political operatives are free to launch their own news platforms, but it's a problem if they are trying to deceive readers into believing the sites are nonpartisan local news. "I have no problem with advocacy organizations creating content that reinforces the positions they take on public policy issues on the left, right or center. The issue comes in when they're not transparent about that advocacy," Culver said... "The information sphere is so polluted right now that the average citizen has trouble telling what is real and what is not," Culver told Snopes. "I find that very troubling within a democracy."
An investigation by the fact-checking outlet Snopes found that several new local news websites are actually being launched by Republican consultants whose company is funded in part by the candidates the sites cover. Politico first reported last year that Tea Party-linked conservative activists Michael Patrick Leahy, Steve Gill and Christina Botteri were behind the "Tennessee Star," a website that purported to be a local news website but mostly posted content licensed from groups linked to big Republican donors. Snopes discovered that the trio has since launched similar sites in other battleground states ahead of the 2020 elections: the Ohio Star and the Minnesota Sun...
The group behind the sites does not appear content with just three outlets. According to Politico, Leahy has purchased domain names associated with Missouri, New England, the Dakotas, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin, most of which are electoral battleground states that will be vital in 2020.
Kathleen Bartzen Culver, who heads the Center of Journalism Ethics at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, told Snopes that political operatives are free to launch their own news platforms, but it's a problem if they are trying to deceive readers into believing the sites are nonpartisan local news. "I have no problem with advocacy organizations creating content that reinforces the positions they take on public policy issues on the left, right or center. The issue comes in when they're not transparent about that advocacy," Culver said... "The information sphere is so polluted right now that the average citizen has trouble telling what is real and what is not," Culver told Snopes. "I find that very troubling within a democracy."
One that goes back to our oldest elections, though I think those papers were mostly focused on slandering opponents.
for the party the coined the term 'fake news' (and 'alternative facts'), the Republicans seem to generate more of it than the rest of the world combined.
..republicans into the sun
I'm confused slashdot editors, which is it Russian Internet trolls or Republican internet trolls are manipulating elections.
Exactly. So-called "fact-checkers" can't be trusted.
This has nothing to do with nerds. Nor is it news... /.
Salon is the biggest piece of shit masquerading as journalism out there right next to Mother Jones and The Daily Stormer. Who gives a rat's ass what they think?
Do better,
Delusional.
An article on Salon.com complaining about fake news and 'fronts' for a particular political party is highly ironic.
When did slashdot become a politics site where propaganda sources are allowed like salon? Np, we do not want this in our nerd news. Keep this crap on twitter.
Salon, a Democrat propaganda house calling another website propaganda. Interesting... NOT
Never forget the false flag operation at Alabama.
I repeat...
Never forget the false flag operation at Alabama.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/19/us/alabama-senate-roy-jones-russia.html
The DNC are proven liars who have been caught red-handed. Never trust them.
why?
IS ANYONE PROOFREADING? "The group behind the sites does not appear content with just three outlets. According to Politico,"
Now let's hear her weigh in on the MSM's 'ethics'.
Sometimes campaigns need to be creative to get their message out. This is especially true when the mainstream media acts as a gatekeeper, as if it is their job to protect the voters from wrong think.
"I find that very troubling within a democracy."
Should have been:
"I find that very troubling within a oligarchy."
Sorry that someone is cutting into your fake news biz guy.
And they DON'T have a problem with CNN?
Salon is one of the worst left wing ones pretending to be neutral.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
As opposed to CNN that is totally unbiased.
No. None of what you said is true. Even "Let the GOP have one too." Fox News is a prominent "news" source, wholly run for the Republican party. You have got to be troll to claim to be unaware of Fox. You might not know of Sinclair, which is also a conservative news organization, that has been buying up local stations. They are converting local news programs into propaganda machines for the Republicans. So the right is not hurting for "news" outlets.
Space Shuttle was a program that strapped humans to an explosion and tried to stab through the sky with fire and math
The Irony is amazing.
It was naught but three years ago when left leaners were quoting an citing RT, constantly.
Look if these sites were satirical in nature, it'd be one thing. But these "news" sites are proclaiming to be actual journalistic news organizations. But they're more or less mouthpieces supported by and for prominent Republicans in their area. They exist to push an ideology. This is disturbing and the fact that after 2016's Fake News debacles, you'd think either party would be rather adverse towards creating yet more fake news. I'm disappointed in the Republican party...
Doesn't political advertising need to be labeled as such? I realize Fox News doesn't do this.
Also, this appears to be a case of "a small group of Republicans" and not Republicans in general.
They are starting new sites with a focus on local (State) level news. Most local news sites are owned by a handful of large companies.
https://www.businessinsider.co...
These people are obviously responding to a need for news that the public feels isn't being met.
https://www.cjr.org/the_media_...
https://www.acsh.org/news/2018...
https://thehill.com/homenews/m...
Simply because a website sources some of their news from large national sources does not make it fake news. Local news companies source stories from Reuters and the Associated Press all the time. Why do you think you can find the exact same article in a range of news outlets?
Presuming news to be fake simply because it comes from a different political perspective is hubris at best.
Conservatives can't let little things like FACTS get in the way of their delusional view of the world, so any news outlet that actually reports the facts becomes their enemy. That's why they love Fact-Free Fox - it's the news for the new American Taliban Party - they'll tell you what you can do, how you can vote, and how you should live.
Why are political news on Slashdot all of a sudden? Actually there has been an increase of this garbage. I don't give a fuck if you are Republican, Democrat, anarchist, whatever, don't post your garbage here. Fuck off already.
Yeh you should be banned immediately.
/. is the only place I go for news.
This story just came up for me and the first (chronologically) 20 posts are about how we can't trust the mainstream media and how the Republicans deserve a voice. I guess this is how a country ends, in a tidal wave of propaganda screaming about "both sides!"
Space Shuttle was a program that strapped humans to an explosion and tried to stab through the sky with fire and math
Yes, the multi-billion dollar news stations that are not fox, owned by a few select families, want to educate the American citizens to make America great again. I have a lollipop for you, sucker.
This open info-warfare suggests that the endgame of American democracy is at hand, finally we'll see a resolution.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Snopes is nothing more than DNC hack machine. Has been for some time. This is nothing more than the pot calling the kettle black.
Its already running and have all the con-artists in place already.
Maybe Salon doesn't know this but it been like FOREVER that CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc are all in bed with the democrats. Clinton or Obama says something and the media forwards it on as truth but if Bush or Trumps says something they are suddenly obligated to "fact check" and doubt everything the say and filter it to the people with "the Republican is claiming that allegedly water is wet and the sky is blue but we have some political pundits here who disagree with those outrageous claims".
Go fuck yourself you pathetic little shit.
The fact that you posted your inane drivel without the slightest sense of irony is sickening.
And when Trump easily wins again in 2020 you dumbfucks will double down once again with this juvenile garbage.
THEN you'd be all rage induced spittle flinging. Because you're only bored because (a) This is from the right, which you expected, though insist is a lefitst only thing, and (b) because you dont want to know or anyone else to care that the rightwing are doing it.
When did slashdot become a politics site where propaganda sources are allowed like salon? Np, we do not want this in our nerd news. Keep this crap on twitter.
There's been the occasional politics piece on Slashdot for at least a decade or more. This isn't new.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
The irony here is that you get a shrill call out if there's any perceived partisanship in the media that favors republican interests in a backdrop where there is an overwhelming bias for democrat interests across a wide swath of mainstream media that SJW's just wink at.
And this has zero to do with technology and is another nail in the relevancy coffin of slashdot. The political crap is boring. If I wanted that, there are plenty of other places to go that offer more insightful analysis.
Oh, is it because if they don't, then you are fucked ideologically and can no longer delude yourself that you're rational at all in politics, so therefore they HAVE to be assumed to be doing it...
Even if you claim HuffPo is left leaning, it's no "worse" than Breibart, both of them for the purposes of this illustration (leaving aside the actual rhetoric and its toxicity differences aside) claim to be left or right wing promotional rags.
THIS is lying to you.
Something that if it were a lie against your current political ideology would have you up in arms and incandescent with rage, but since it supports your ego and preconceptions, you HAVE to pretend it is a big pile of nothing by asserting out of pure hope that the dems do it too.
You haven't even tried to look like you checked. You just blatantly asserted they MUST do it too.
Lame.
You know Fox is basically controlled opposition and that any time one of their, in many cases real conservative hosts, start talking too close to the core about what's wrong they get shit-canned right? Fox news is right-wing news with a restraining bolt.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
The Republicans of today are not what they claim to be. I'm old enough to remember the 70s. I grew up with people who remember WWII. Today's "conservatives" are anything but. A conservative would never endorse homosexual marriage. There would be zero waffling on the issue. A conservative would not happily go to war at the drop of a hat. A conservative would not want a wall built, because it means more government meddling. True conservatives are penny pinchers. True conservatives want term limits, no lobbying, and far less meddling in foreign affairs. If Ron Paul would have been elected, we would be a lot better off. Not saying he was the panacea, but we don't have true conservatives in office. True conservatives wouldn't make deals with the left. There is not a single true conservative in office in America at the federal level. All of them have shown their true colors in some way.
CNN doesn't shill for the DNC?
You know they've actually admitted (finally) that they have debate questions to Hillary ahead of time right?
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
He's a sucker for thinking Fox is truly right-wing.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Of course, if a bunch of Democrats get together and put together a biased newspaper, then it's okay?
Salon IS Fake News To Spread 'Propaganda'
FTFA
We need *new* straws to grasp at!
From the pro globalist shills at Salon.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Everyone knows "New England" is the most recent State to be ratified! Who is pushing fake news now, bitch!
Salon says "orange news site bad". NPCs aghast on slashdot, news for NPCs.
Salon & Snopes, both left leaning publications getting upset about a right leaning publication. Nothing new here, not sure why this is news or worthy of /.
The economics of news journalism is already completely broken and getting worse. Advertisers desperate to get readers' attention turn to obtrusive animated ads that only serve to annoy. News sites desperate for revenue permit this, even though it makes their pages basically unreadable. It's true even for sites that charge subscription fees, like NY Times. The only ad-free, readable sites are those supported by people or governments with a political ax to grind and a point to make. It's a perfect storm.
You claim Dems are just as bad, you have to prove that. You already accept the facts that show your side, the republicans, do it. Your mere assertion that the dems do it is pure bullshit and partisan lying.
The entire rest of the post is pure bullshit too. Nowhere does it indicate in reality anything like "a party that wants to elevate anything and everything that is not a white male at the expense of white males", that's just because YOU are being fucked over by the republicans and meanwhile some of the fucking over done to non white males is being undone (while they are still being fucked over by the same things you are). And because you are losing, you demand to blame someone else for winning.
Sure as shit can't blame the wealthy class. That would be "socialist" and you've been programmed to HATE that.
"The Democrats would love nothing more than see total gun confiscations"
So would the police, the republicans (they want muslims to be forbidden guns, along with the long standing prohibition of guns for people arrested for drug possession, something more frequently done to black me, though white and black both possess M-J equally frequently, so the difference is not the criminality but the rigour with which the laws are applied to each race). Indeed 95% of Americans would love to see total gun confiscations. See Hannity: he wants total gun confiscations. So does Trump. Those MS-13 guys should have their guns taken from them, they both agree.
What? I missed out "MS-13"? Well that's what you did. ASSUMING that your claim of what Janet Reno said was ANYTHING connected with reality. You don't provide proof, only your assertion.
" Both sides are evil."
So therefore you will NOT allow republicans to be attacked for being evil....
Right...
See where your claim to "they're both evil" merely proves the repubicans (and yourself) are evil? Both left and you on the right agree the rightwing are evil. But only the rightwing insist the left re evil.
And you only defend the evil republicans, never the "evil" democrats. Making you support the evil republicans evident.
And you DO know that Bernie is running as a democrat, yes? Yet you will run hate on that party and insist "they're both evil" so that Bernie will be knocked out because if you get your way, nobody gets a vote unless they WANT that brand of evil, meaning absolutely no Bernie votes.
YOU are what is toxic to America. You remove the democracy from it by asserting both are evil to delegitimise ANY politician.
When did slashdot become a politics site where propaganda sources are allowed like salon? Np, we do not want this in our nerd news. Keep this crap on twitter.
There's been the occasional politics piece on Slashdot for at least a decade or more. This isn't new.
Emphasis on occasional. The political bullshit both in articles and comments has become a daily thing.
Your only possible defence is to claim both sides are, then you can point to your side's evil as "proof" that you're a reliable "balanced" witness to reality. It's a load of fucking shite, but it's the best they can do now that Trump and the RWNJs have taken hold of the entire republican party, making it undeniable in its toxic evil.
Are you for real? https://www.aim.org/aim-column... https://dailycaller.com/2017/0... https://www.washingtonexaminer...
When did Slashdot become filled with right-wing Trump lover dipshits who try to discredit factual reporting by playing the "partisan politics" card?
Go fuck your self ivan. Fuck you, fuck your mother, fuck your culture, fuck your leadership. I want you dead.
"CNN doesn't shill for the DNC?"
Did you not know what shill means????
It doesn't mean leaking questions to Hillary early so she can rehearse debate points. That's not shilling, FFS.
Here soon, the conservatives will start calling Fox News fake liberal media, because they merely withhold information and deceive, rather than create all-out fabrications. "You ain't trying if you ain't cheating." should be the conservative slogan.
article filled with with out of context quotes that implicated thiomeorsal as the cause of autism, for six years after it was published? This is still plaguing us to this day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadly_Immunity What about the time they accused Milo Yiannopoulos of supporting pedophilia at the same as deleting an interview with the owner of the website "virtuous pedophiles"? Salon is a rag and now Slashdot is too.
Here's a snapshot of their wikipedia page in case anyone decides to get cute: http://web.archive.org/web/20190306124742/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salon_%28website%29
If that's restrained, I don't even want to know what they be like totally unhinged.
Yeah, but we're hell-bent on having a the Communist Revolution in America, so, like...it's ok for Salon to be biased. You know??? OMG *rolls eyes*
"You can vote yourself into Socialism, but you have to shoot your way out"
Life is not for the lazy.
Bernie would introduce bills to cut political funding and do much of what you claim. As for gay marriage, unless you believe you want to marry another person of your gender if you were allowed to, therefore you cannot afford to allow gay marriage, why on earth would it matter?
No, the bibble doesn't count. For a start, ORIGINALLY Adam was supposed to pick one of he other animals, but he refused god's request and he made Lillith, who didn't work out either, so he made Eve. See where that got the story... So according to the bibble, bestiality should be the first option.
No, you don't get to pick and choose bits you like. Either the bibble is god's word and therefore all of it is "true" and should be followed, or some of it AT THE LEAST is, and you need proof that bits of it is real that you choose BEFORE you can claim that they should be law for everyone. Otherwise all you'redoing is making your personal preference the law for others. Care to let a Muslim Socialist make your choices for you by force of government?
FFS, TRUE conservatives if hey also adhere to what you claim (small government, not interfering in people's personal matter) would want gays allowed to be married, because not allowing it would be government interference in people's lives. Or, if you refuse to allow that and pretend instead that marriage is government interfering, then you have to remove marriage from law altogether. Ban it altogether if you want to ban gays getting married. Because that is what you are doing:banning people from being married because they are gay, you're not freely allowing marriage.
News if fact based. It's not liberal or conservative, it's facts.
That's got to be the most delusional thing I've read in a while.
You better go out and get it yourself!
At this point, I don't think ANY of the news sites are that trustworthy, reliable or honest. Print journalism is dying a slow, painful death because nobody is really interested in paying for newspaper or magazine subscriptions anymore. Everyone has gotten used to trying to obtain the news online for free. (What's that? A paywall is in the way? Well, time to find one of those browser extensions that helps you bypass it! Can't do that? Ask someone else to copy/paste the content to a social media site so you can read it for free!)
Sure - they can make a little money in the online world, via pop-up ads or getting businesses to sponsor them in some manner. But then, you're back to the news likely having a bias towards whoever is funding it.
The TV news? It went from being a loss-leader to a profit center long ago, but did so by only concerning itself with maximizing eyeballs watching it. That meant getting rid of the costly "investigative reporting" that would span a whole week's worth of newscasts. Ditch the editorials where "equal time would be provided for those with opposing viewpoints". Make everything a neatly packaged 30 second spot and mix in "feel good, fluff" with anything hard-hitting, so ensure viewers don't come away unhappy enough so they blame their feelings on your channel. Cover all the sports and weather things, no matter what else is happening. Don't expect to become real well informed from any of that newstainment!
I mean, I just posted yesterday how disgusted I've been some of the recent BBC reporting -- and they've always been regarded as one of the last few trusted news sources. (Slashdot even featured one of their bone-headed articles trying to argue why we need to be concerned about the trend towards listening to streaming and digital music instead of buying it to play on physical media. Lame attempt at equating it with accelerating climate change! That's the stuff I might expect from an environmental extremist blogger, but not the BBC.)
If that's restrained, I don't even want to know what they be like totally unhinged.
Breitbart
So I would say that there is no bias, or at most 10% bias, since they could include 10% more trump in the news.
What YOU mean is that the coverage is negative of him. Except on right wing propaganda sites like breibart, daily stormer and Fox News.
But complaining about trump 90% of the time would only be biased if he was not bad 90% of the time.
However, since his decisions have been 99% bad, he's made tens of thousands of lies in office, and he's completely incompetent at the job 100% of the time, the only bias there is being too nice to him.
A claim that "orange man bad" is not bias against trump, the orange man, if he IS bad. And facts, real life reality facts, show he is.
MAGA ... that is all
Because it all comes from Snopes. Salon is just what you have to click through for some reason. They should have skipped the BS and went straight to the source.
When it became a relevant part of nerd culture. Politics has impact on tech trade, tech companies, how we consume media through tech, not to mention being a good politician means you have to be a nerd about a lot of topics.
Do you think we need uneducated clowns in politics or something?
I don't think I've ever seen anyone, especially a politically aware American, quoting RT. Left or Right. Maybe Trump would do that but hes not really Left OR Right, is he?
FUCK YOU IVAN.
InfoWars
In fact I would say unhinged pretty much defines Alex Jones.
If you want to listed to level-headed unfiltered right-libertarian news listen to David Knight on the same network.
I'm not saying Alex is wrong (all that often, on occasion sure) just unhinged. If you want to listen to people who would probably be left wing in another world where they weren't be steam-rolled by it Paul Jospeh Watson and Owen over on the War Room show are your call. Owen has sort of become unhinged recently too, he started out as sort of a left-wing refugee, but he's starting to be a bit more like Alex now.
Fox news is nowhere close to "off the leash". The guys above are and it scares the ever living shit out of the left-wing. The only way to protect their place in the world is to convince the rest of the world Fox is right-wing and drive them to it, lest they find something truly off the leash and further endanger their grip on the media and then the public mindset.
Nah its pretty much been a daily occurrence for a long time.
The difference is YOU as a person are feeling more dvided from the mainstream and are feeling like perhaps some sort of conspiracy over arching OMG LIBERAL LEFTIES are trying to cram some sort of warped un-truth down your throat.
The truth is, you're getting older, more conservative, more fat, and are feeling attacked by the constant barrage of anti-white-male crap you see everyday, amirite, so fuck politics, now hold my beer, amirite?
So utter fail yet again.
You clearly are bigoted and are anti-democrat, pro republican and totally out to lunch when it comes to rationality.
Salon is going to lose a lot of readers by publishing something so contrary to blindly held beliefs of their readership.
Center leaning/right wing people have been told forever now "twitter/google/etc" are allowed to enforce the rules they want as they're a private company.
"If you don't like the rules of their network... go make your own network!"
Now that its actually happening, people are crying "omg! pull their funding! Slander their name! This is an outrage!"
And Reynolds Aluminum changed their formula so that the DNC mind control waves get through your tinfoil hat!
NO WHERE TO HIDE!
All the major news companies have strong political biases of their own.
Nobody is free from bias. There is nobody you can trust to be the "fact checker" or enforcer.
And this has always been true; it's just much more obvious in the internet age.
Its probably true, but Snopes is no longer a reliable source. They compromised integrity for partisanship a couple years ago and its going to take a long time to regain credibility. Snopes is supposed to call out misinformation. Deciding to rank certain and provable false claims as a 'we arent sure, its possible but we just dont know' for DNC related stuff was a stupid ass move. If your going to call out misinformation, you have to have a religious level of commitment to the truth, regardless where it leads you. Using influence to sway opinion was never what the site was intended for. Thats an abuse of trust that is hard to regain. I have never seen them call a truth a lie, but I have seen them abuse the in-between-ratings and thats poor journalism if you ask me.
Salon isn't under the guise of local news all over the country, releasing choreographed propaganda from the DNC. Nice try Einstein.
"Reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Colbert
You clicked. And you even commented. And you got modded up, meaning more clicks and even better, lots of user engagement.
/. does two things: Advertisement and User Generated content. Both rely on clicks. If you want this stuff to go away stop clicking on it.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
You know Fox is basically controlled opposition and that any time one of their, in many cases real conservative hosts, start talking too close to the core about what's wrong they get shit-canned right? Fox news is right-wing news with a restraining bolt.
No, fox news is an unashamed propaganda channel. Their job is expressly to lie to their viewers and readers in order to push a specific viewpoint.
And I'm not an American... I'm worldly enough to know when someone is obviously lying and Fox News meets that criteria, they don't even bother hiding it any more. Their "reports" are going beyond mere exaggeration, often into the territory of complete fabrication. Even when easily observed facts and evidence are clearly arrayed against them they'll still tell you water isn't wet with a straight face. None of the other mainstream US channels are nearly as bad although I wouldn't class any as reliable, none of them are as bold as Fox news when it comes to pissing on your back and telling you it's raining.
Fox News is on the same level as Russia Today. It's entirely a political mouth piece, the only difference between Fox and RT is that Fox's viewers actually pay to be lied to (fair enough, that kind of fantasy indulgence will cost you £300 an hour in London).
Before you ask, the number one factor in news source trustworthiness is an organisations ability to issue errata and retractions. Fox news will only issue a retraction when ordered by a court... and even then they'll try as hard as they can to bury it.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
eat shit and die
Being liberal and being a front for a political party's messaging are two different things.
You're literally accusing Slashdot of working with members of the Democratic party to push that organization's agenda.
If not, then you chose your words poorly. Words matter.
I don't trust any of you people anymore. Right or left you are both a bunch of agenda driven nut bags.
Slashdot has always been a bottom of the barrel clickbait site.
At no time in it's history has Slashdot generated any unique content of it's own. It has always simply monetized flamebait.
Hope that helps you understand, you brainfagget.
Irrelevant.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Bias isn't in the facts per se but the choice of stories to drumbeat on, day after day, year after year, to get people concerned to build a solid coalition for "your side".
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Yes, the so-called "facts" should not be trusted. The so-called "theories of evolution" are a lie. The so-called moon landings are a hoax. The so-called "space" does not exist. "Free markets" and "trickle down" are not fantasies, but actually work. Both the victims and the perps share the blame. It ain't bigotry and racism when we do it. Religious fundamentalism of our kind is good.
And so on.
Correct. The GOP managed to...
Get Buzzfeed to run a story that Trump told Cohen to lie to Congress, which CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, ... all ran as well.
They then got them all to run the story on how racist the kids from Covengton were despite overwhelming evidence showing otherwise. Now WaPo and CNN are both being sued for $250 million for these "Fake News" stories.
The GOP followed that up with all those same outlets running the fake Jussie Sommellet story as well.
They are getting good at planting blatantly "Fake News" stories in NYT, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and so on. They have gotten so good at it those news outlets have lost all credibility.
So you are correct GOP has managed to destroy the left's credibility on issues.
OR
The left is so dip shit stupid they can't figure out a fact to save their own lives.
Which is more believable?
No, I'm simply accusing what comes out of Slashdot on the front page on a regular basis to be the product of a DNC fanboi.
A couple of owners ago Slashdot was rather neutral, the past two owners at least have been quite left-leaning.
I salute Slashdot for more or less leaving the classic moderation in place, though I do go back and look at some old post and see "-2 Moderation" on some of my post that are less forgiving of the left wing, even some that appear to have been down-moded after the comment period has ended, though I'm not 100% sure. I am beginning to wonder if they don't bias the scoring system a bit these days.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Any time there's shade on republicans there's people coming out of the woodwork complaining about political news 'all of a sudden'
You missed all the news about the FCC and Huawei and trade deals and unemployment and laws and bills and the list goes on.
We need more people paying attention and less people becoming willfully ignorant as you suggest
There is something to be said for investigating the desire to use AGW as levarage for massive government control of the economy, when class warfare no longer works at the polls
I wish there was further investigation into this aspect, but it is lost in all the hoopla regardless of veracity.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Is Full On Venezuela Communist Now?
It is 100% true. Every word he said.
Looks up Snopes; but don't use Snopes to do it. It is a "company" of 1 guy - along with the numerous photos and meetings he partakes in with democratic elite.
All the other news organizations are total democratic mouth pieces.
This story definitely belongs on Slashdot. It involves how technology is being used to spread news, factual or not. Journalism with integrity requires that the reader be able to fact-check the news being shared. It requires that the reader have some degree of certainty about who the author is. If these websites are tantamount to political ads then the implications need to be considered. While the internet loves anonymity, in a democracy, we find it important to disclose political ads. This is why, on television commercials, political ads are clearly labelled.
We're supposed to be jerking each other off over our oh-so-clever dunking on Republicans.
Did you know that they are all racist, dumb, backwards hicks?
Did you know that the fragile pissboys get offended if you call them that? Isn't that hilarious?
Did you know that they believe lies and lie themselves?
Did you know that orange man bad?
Ha ha ha, I sure love seeing Snopes and Salon putting those dumb, backwards hicks in their place!
Ah, Whataboutism. Such a marker of despearation and deflection. Try again.
"Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
These aren't. They are lying about their process. So the complaint is not about you nutballs getting your own echo chamber to scream insults and circle jerk on, it's making fake news sites lying to people.
You DO know that lying to people is a bad thing, right? Even if it is your rightwing apparatchiks doing it.
If the sites said they were rightwing rags, then there would be no complaint.
Trust a righwingnutjob to find a way to work in their persecution complex into this...
When most people talk about climate change in modern times, anthropogenic nature is almost always implied. Being anthropogenic used to be debatable so anthropogenic origin wasn't implied because discussions often orbited around the observational data that global climate was changing and the cause wasn't as certain.
This has changed and there's nearly insurmountable evidence now that climate change is not only occurring, it's being driven by human interactions on the planet (an anthropogenic process).
The typical line of questioning I see is first, if the person believes current scientific consensus on climate change (anthropogenic driver). If the person disagrees, they typically ask if the person believes sets of observational data that's out there and for a rationale why not, if not. If the person does believe the observational data, they ask what they do believe the driver is and why. Questioning also typically asks if the person disagrees with the consensus, what is their evidence and line of reason.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." --Sagan.
I argue that counter-claims fall in the same boat.
CNN, MSNBC, Wapo, NY Times, BuzzFeed, and many others create propaganda every day for Democrats. Each of these sources has been caught red handed multiple times yet many in the tech community ignore it. Talk about burying your head in the sand...
why are you posting AC, its hard to follow which of the two of you is posting? The first time I heard the phrase was post 2012 when a bunch of congressional dems wanted to shut down news sites that were not 'certified' by them as legitimate. However, their list of sites they did not like were 100% conservative ones and not one liberal site among them. That in itself seems strange considering it would be a statistical impossibility that only conservative sites would be capable of running skewed stories. I warned everyone here back then that if they did not take a 1st amendment stand, and they went along with this blatantly obvious partisan attack, simply out of political convenience, this shit would come back to haunt them. Apparently you guys (not you specifically but /. as a whole) did not take my warning seriously enough. Here we are a decade later and we simply cant trust any news source any more unless its parroting what we want to believe. Thats simply not how news is supposed to work.
but did a terrible job obfuscating the DNS transfer from the lapsed domain and got busted.
I liked the way Myth Busters did their fact checking. They filmed experimentation to prove or disprove results. You know, that scientific method we seem to be lacking these days. Independent verified experimentation.
IMO its not just Fox news. Its ALL of the 24hr news channels. To be clear, the actual News segments are not full of bullshit opinion and political spin. Unfortunately the 24hr news channels only air news for about 10-15min every hour at most. The rest of the time its the stupid ass talk shows which are clearly not news, but opinions about a particular snippet of half of a news story. I think our country would be in a lot less divided state if we simply ditched all these news channels and just went back to the evening news like the days of Walter Cronkite.
Are you contending that the information in the article isn't factual?
its all of them, CNN too. basically if its not the two achormen sitting at the desk giving the 15min news segment, its a show where a host gives opinion in order to sway the viewer to their point of view. By the very definition that is not news. Its a persuasive argument paper, or in terms of politics, propaganda.
guy and his wife actually, but yes
It's an old Soviet tactic that was borrowed and perfected by a GOP operative named Karl Rove. Take whatever your faults are and accuse your opponent of them. It puts them on the defensive and distracts from you and your problems. It wouldn't work if we had a media that wasn't owned lock, stock and barrel by mega corps but, well, we do.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
You mean like salon.com does for Democrats? No hypocrisy here.
so what happens when they get caught publishing non-facts, ones they forgot to fact check? How does that automatically make you want to believe it because its parroting your personal opinion? thats not facts friend. Thats manipulation. You would think for someone so sick of Fox doing this, you'd recognize others doing it too. I mean if your ex-wife got caught cheating on you, you'd think you'd be more likely to spot the same warning signs if your new wife starts doing it too.
No, it doesn't, unless actually purchased by a candidate's campaign organization or one registered to support or oppose a candidate. General poisoning of the news well is just fine, and is considered "free speech." As a practical matter, all coverage of political activities and people involved in politics has to be considered "fake" or "advertising" to some extent; actual relevant facts may fall out of it occasionally, but it's hard to identify them against the background noise.
And yes, the Left may have developed some of the worst practices, but they were definitely commercialized and weaponized by the Right. As has been noted many times, in politics as with wildlife, the only thing you find in the middle of the road is roadkill.
its having shows on a news network that are not news. They call them Commentary. It has no place on a news channel. They might as well just rent out the extra air time running Rogain commercials. Sean Hannity - not a news segment, Rachel Maddow - not a news segment, Bill O'Reilly - not a news segment, I really dont have the energy to list them all. The problem is that people see them on a news station and assume that they are there to simply report facts. When your segment consists of bringing on guests who are partisan and practically had the 'talking points of the day' faxed to them 10min before going on air, you simply are not a news segment. Unfortunately everyone else seems to think they are.
Even if I gave my name, how would you know anything more about me? And why would that at all matter? Thought and logic require the inspection of hte words used, not the stature of the author, to do so is either genetic fallacy (you must be wrong because of who you are) or an appeal to authority (you must be right because of who you are).
Tht you demand something irrelevant adds YET AGAIN to the moron count and your lack of any actual cortical action you profess.
If who I was not what I say is important, then provide full details so everyone can find who you are in reality, not what label you attached to an anonymous coward psudonym.
AGW?
says fake democratic news site 'Salon'.
Salon is the epitome of fake news and propaganda. 90% of news sites are Democratic propaganda including main stream news. I see the socialists are already lining up excuses as to why their pathetic candidate loses to Trump in 2020.
I’d say that RT is miles better than FoxNews. At least the pieces about topics not related to Russian matters are well written and informative. FoxNews and CNN are smelly drivel.
I think it's funny you pointing to Salon's political bias (which it certainly does have) while making claims of an eminent communist revolution in this country. You either don't understand what communism is or have a personal political bias so far departed from reality that you're consciously choosing to characterize the mild Leftist push the Democrats are actually experiencing as communism.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
mostly the same here. If only because they do NOT censor. The mod points might get abused a bit but overall I can see every post by simply adjusting the filter. I get to see multiple points and arguments. I get to see things I had not considered. Of course sometimes I see just parroting of talking points, which is sad because this site does not appeal to facebook morons. We've all read 1984, some of us a very long time ago. We should always be prepared to discover we have been the victims of double-think. I would more people were more skeptical instead of thinking they are in some epic battle of good-vs-evil when the good side happens to be a political party. The 'good' side in these debates are us everyday people, not any political party. Their goal is to tell you what to do, no matter who wins, thats their goal. They all have an inherit motive to mislead you in pursuit of that goal.
You can't prove whether something happened or not using the scientific method. Nor whether did or did not make a certain statement. That's mostly what Snopes deals with, and since the truth has tended to have a liberal bias in the past few years, the delicate supporters of the Mango Mussolini get annoyed.
They're literally run by an embezzler, a prostitute, and a dominatrix. I'll probably get voted down as a troll even though it's true.
Slashdot is user submitted, though there are a couple editors who definitely have extreme slants. As for the rest, you aren't wrong.
My wife leans extreme left where I fall solidly in the middle/independent category. We've clashed more and more under the current administration because frankly something serious has changed. The right traditionally has played loose on facts and Fox News outright manufactures things sometimes. The left traditionally presents logical arguments and their lies usually take the form of omission, p-hacking, or cherry picking. This helps create their intellectual image since the right presents no logical refute to what they say creating the impression the right are a bunch of dupes and idiots and anyone with a brain falls on the left. They win the debate every time because they have no logical opponent. The radical shift is that the left is looking more and more like the traditional right, facts and logic are now also omitted and emotional arguments are presented. CNN more and more simply looks like the left Fox News.
Applying basic critical thinking to fact checking of the state of the union speech I wasn't able to find a single fact check that limited itself to "facts." All included opinion including things like "but that is actually the result of earlier policies" when talking about a positive outcome or statistic. The outcome or statistic is a fact, giving opinions about whether it is a residual of the previous administrations policy or the current one is outside the scope of a fact check.
the difference is that our old debates were about us discussing how we are marching right toward an orwellian future. This blind loyalty to one side is new. I mean who would ever suspect that the company making radar detectors was the same company selling the radar enforcement equipment to law enforcement. Or that the anti-virus companies released virus' to drive product demand. Oh wait, we heard that and it totally made sense. Tell someone that their picking a side in a 1-sided battle and no matter who you pick your going to get the same result, they think your crazy. The more they can get us to sign up for the blame game the less work they have to do. The ultimate goal is to keep it 50/50 so as to always claim the other side is the reason nothing gets done. We fall for it, they collect paychecks and backdoor cash. We get screwed in the end no matter which way the wind blows.
which is the pro-corporate, anti-worker arm of the Democratic party. CNN is just pro corporate. They don't care about parties one way or another. That leaves Fox News and the Local stations (unless you count stuff like Bloomberg which is as pro-corporate as it gets). The local stations are completely owned by an outfit called "Sinclair Media". Google "Sinclair Must Run" if you want an idea where their loyalties are.
What I'm saying is that it's not about balance between DNC and GOP. It's about pro-corporate and pro-worker. That's where the balance is skewed. If I want to hear a narrative that isn't 100% pro-corporate/anti-worker I've got to dig up YouTube channels like TYT and Secular Talk and maybe the BBC.
What we have here is a mainstream media that is moderately left wing on social issues (moderate, they only started openly supporting Gay Marriage when the polls changed in favor) and hard right on anything economic. There is no balance here whatsoever. Hell, Trump got $6 billion in free advertising from our Media. How much did Bernie get?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
How about some specifics. Your accusations are too general to evaluate. And a couple of mistakes doesn't necessarily mean the whole kit and caboodle is rotten. They are run by people, and people make mistakes. I've disagreed with the scoring myself on occasion.
Table-ized A.I.
Fuck you, asshole, that's as much FAKE NEWS as the fake-ass 'news' sites in TFA. Fuck you, eat shit, and die, astroturfing GOP shilling piece of garbage.
If I search for "Snopes DNC" the only thing that comes up is this. Can you post some specific links (with commentary if the links don't already have it)?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
but snopes did get caught claiming someone might possible be true (not definitely true but true leaning) when everyone else admitted otherwise. When they, (and by 'they' you do know its just a guy and his wife right?) did that a few times their credibility suffered. Its very possible that they are accurate in this discovery. But when they choose to list other left-leaning claims as 'possible' instead of 'false' it turned them into effectively the same caliber as any other political smear campaign. Most smear campaigns actually do find factual information, but they will certainly, and purposely, withhold any potentially self-damaging information. Snopes should have stayed out of politics. They were awesome when they stuck to debunking nigerian price email.
the Mueller investigation continues apace with multiple convictions and indictments. It's even profitable. And China-Gate is just getting started.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
That's not even close to true. You're saying that all the other news sources in the world are controlled by the DNC, except for Fox News? Doesn't it seem more likely that they're all just reporting the news accurately?
I hate that phrase. It used to be a matter of integrity to avoid hypocrisy. If you did something that you railed against, and someone tells you that its pretty much the same thing as this other thing your against, you would say 'fair point' and give it more consideration. Now its an -ism. How dare you point out that I am railing against something I was all for just a couple years ago! Anyone using the phrase whataboutism should simply just run around going 'Do as I say, not as I do!', thats about all they are good for. Purposefully choosing to protect one group of people for the same behaviors another group of people are condemned for is the root basis for every single other social justice topic of the day. This doesn't matter if the topic is gay marriage, white privilege, racial profiling, xenephobia, homophobia, it really boils down to some manner of inequality. Yet by dismissing a clear point of allowing one side to do something and railing against another side doing the same thing when it pertains to politics is still, without question, inequality.
Germans popularized Lying Press (WW1) A more modern translation would be Fake News.
The phrase was so popular during Hitler that it still caries a stigma today.
Given that Trumps writer for the Art of the Deal said he looked around Trumps place to find any books and found only a few... one was a book of Hitler's speeches, it makes sense that Trump would "come up with" the idea.
Keep in mind Trump takes credit for stuff other people do and blames bad things on others that he did. Blatantly, so you can't ever assume he is telling the truth and his supporters lack any critical thinking so the simple answer is: he got it from reading about Hitler from the book he owns on the man.
The irony of salon.com expressing outrage over biased and fact free news coverage is outstanding.
Catch a clue progs.
I think it funny that you believe that AOC is "mild Leftist". Call it what you will. What they want is to take my money so that the politicians can decide who deserves it. In every case where it has been tried to date, the politicians have always decided that it was they and their supporters that deserved it. No thank you.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
follow the thread rsilvergun started with the same request. I'll dig it up again but while searching i ran into other examples of them doing it for monsanto too.
Haha! You obviously haven't paid any attention to all the montages of all the liberal outlet using the exact same wording after the DNC puts out their talking points.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
The same Snopes that is run by an ultra-Liberal asshole that has already been caught lying and spreading misinformation as a part of their "fact checks"?
They don't shill for the DNC?
If you really believe that, put it to a simple test. Just watch for the "Republicans Pounce" stories. This is where they report on Republicans screwing up. They report on what the Republican actually did. But, when a Democrat screws up...say, the use antisemitic tropes, for instance...then the story is Republicans trying to use the even for political gain...Republicans Pounce.
I'll wait for your analysis.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Not just the choice of stories, but also how they are framed.
If Republicans do something stupid, the story is wall-to-wall "Conservative does something stupid".
When Democrats do something stupid, the story is "Conservatives react to something stupid".
It even has a name, because the trope is used so much. "Republicans Pounce."
Once you start seeing it, you will be unable to unsee it.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Well, I can't find the link to meta-moderate anymore, and I haven't gotten any mod points for several months. It is starting to feel fishy.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
"I think it funny that you believe that AOC is "mild Leftist"."
I think it's funny that you think that AOC is the entirety of the Democratic party and not just one of 235 Democratic house members who represent's only one of New York's 27 congressional districts. Is the entire Republican party libertarian because the people of Kentucky elected Rand Paul to the Senate?
" What they want is to take my money so that the politicians can decide who deserves it."
Every government, no matter where on the political spectrum, does this. It's what governments do and the odds are fairly certain you're in favor of government doing this in some sort of context so you can quit with the delusion that only those on the Left practice what you describe.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
BS. This has been going on for as long as political speech has. The simple fact is that most in the DNC had not seen an oppositional news source in their lifetimes and decried when any subjective reporting did not align with their narrow world-view (e.g. choosing what to report or placing blind trust in non-verified sources). Free speech can be a bitch when it is not you speaking.
politicians already take your money and give it to who they decide deserves it, just now they decide that it goes to the corporate interests and billionaires
It's always been like this. There were always bad sources of information out there. The targets have ALWAYS been the people with low intelligence, the people with brain chemical imbalances, the willfully-ignorant and the actually-ignorant. I was born in the 1970s, and there were ALWAYS conspiracy theories being thrown around. You think they were invented yesterday? The internet has just amplified the effect by 100.
You know that a news source is trustworthy when the people generating the news are named. The reporters, writers, and editors have actual names, and actual credentials. Where the people involved have actual journalistic credentials, and their source of income is transparent, and they have an explicit, written code of conduct that emphasizes factuality, and any bias is explicitly stated up front. Translation: a transparent, subscription-based news source.
All of mass media is "right wing". That's where the money is. The news is directed by advertisers, not politics, beyond that of the advertisers, of course.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
I think it is funny that you don't have a clue what Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez supports or stands for, but somehow know how it shall cost you personally.
Please show your work.
You put way too much effort into that response, and throwing pearls to the swine.
Whenever you hear "whataboutism", you simply say, *Yeah? What about it?! FUCK YOU!* Even that will probably go over their heads, being the dumbasses that they are. You don't waste your energy trying to reason with a fanboi sociopath. They are too primal.
She stand for theft of personal wealth all while pushing some batshit insane NGD which is nothing more than a Communist Manifesto to the likes of a Chinese Great Leap Forward. It would also leave 100+ MILLION dead from starvation and strife all the same. THAT IS WHAT SHE STANDS FOR!! She's queen of death in the making!
Snopes is just a guy (used to be guy and his wife) that researched old chain-letter style e-mails so you could point to something to show grandma that Bill Gates isn't going to send her $1000.
There's no particular reason anyone should have put any amount of faith in their findings.
Snopes doesn't always come to the right conclusion, but they always provide their sources.
If you think they're wrong today just because they were wrong in the past, then please be aware that you are vulnerable to manipulation. All someone has to do to convince you that something is true is to have someone you distrust say the opposite. You should try to be a little more skeptical!
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
In "every case" are you including most of Europe? Most, if not everything I have seen pushed by the current Democratic Congressional Freshmen, or Presidential candidates are out-of-line with what you see in parts of Europe right now: single payer healthcare, living wages, etc... And it is pretty easy to argue that places like Germany or Sweden have not descended into Kleptocracies.
O RLY?
This is a Snopes article. Not sure why they linked to a salon write-up of the Snopes story tho.
https://www.snopes.com/news/20...
Pretending to be neutral, seriously? I think you've been clicking the wrong link.
Go ahead, take a quick look, I'll wait. Quickly scanning a few of the stories should tell you how the site leans. While the stories are not out and out right fake, they are misleading. Much like almost every other "news" source I've ever seen, I'm looking at you CNN, Times, FOX, New Yorker, LA, etc... What is not said is often just as important as what is said. All this illustrates is that you should never rely on news from one source. Try to compare at least three different sources, with different takes on the news, and the truth is somewhere in the middle.
Also I don't know how much digging was needed; just look at the Contact Us -> Privacy Policy. It clearly states this is a product of "Star News Digital Media, Inc" and lists all the associated websites. Really it looks like some company started a business selling political sites to candidates. It wouldn't surprise me if they offer the same type of sites to the other party and make money from both side.
This also reeks of the common "Voters Guide" that each party mails out to me every voting year, of which the slant is so bad even my kid knows something is up (and he's only 9).
P.S. The weather forecast is hilarious, "Today is forecast to be Much Warmer than yesterday."
Are you trying to make a joke about the Sinclair "This is extremely dangerous to our democracy" bit?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
“If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're mis-informed.”
Mark Twain
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
mostly the same here. If only because they do NOT censor.
Yes they certainly do, but typically only delete AC posts, because fuckem right?
Each post has a unique Comment Identification Number right next to the date and time of the comment. They are incremental. Run a script and iterate over the numbers (remember to limit the SID too) and you will find holes. 404's returned from some CIDs.
Yes. Some posts sometimes are censored. This has been happening for a decade, but has been dramatically ramped up in the last two years. Why they let the guy harassing Kendall and other trolls post yet occasionally deleting posts with polite argumentation and sources which go against the summary narrative, I do not know.
well, I did have Jack in the Box tacos yesterday, it's just a matter of time....
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
i said this story is probably true but they do have a credibility issue, theyve been caught skewing the results. Even the WaPo has called them out, I linked their article in another thread. RealClear politics rated them and showed that they actually cited THEMSELVES as sources of their fact checking. Its fact checking. You cannot site yoursel or for that matter opinion articles (they scored a 90% on the topic f using the media as their 'fact check'. Considering journalists often use snopes for their fact checking, this means that a journalist runs with an article because snopes said another journalist said its true)
Believe me, I am highly skeptical, of everything. Im one of the few that believe both sides of these debates work in concert to keep us believing the world would be a better place if only the other side wasnt preventing progress. The reality is this 50/50 split serves to guarantee no progress ever happens and noone is ever held accountable. its entirely by design. But some more tidbits of this supposedly fact-only not bias'ed group:
Snopes’ main political fact-checker is a writer, Kim Lacapria. Before writing for Snopes, Lacapria wrote for Inquisitr, a blog known for publishing fake quotes and even downright hoaxes. Couple of examples
https://www.inquisitr.com/6700...
https://www.rawstory.com/2015/...
While at Inquisitr, she consistently displayed clear partisanship. She described herself as “openly left-leaning” and a liberal. She trashed the Tea Party as “teahadists.” She called Bill Clinton “one of our greatest” presidents. She claimed that conservatives only criticized Lena Dunham’s comparison of voting to sex because they “fear female agency.” She once wrote: “Like many GOP ideas about the poor, the panic about using food stamps for alcohol, pornography or guns seems to have been cut from whole cloth–or more likely, the ideas many have about the fantasy of poverty.” (A simple fact-check would show that food stamp fraud does occur and costs taxpayers tens of millions.) These are not good traits if you're trying to portray yourself as someone only about the facts.
After blogging the Inquisitr, Lacapria joined Snopes, where she regularly plays defense for any rumor or otherwise against democrats.
She wrote a “fact check” article about Jimmy Carter’s unilateral ban of Iranian nationals from entering the country that looks more like an opinion column arguing against Donald Trump’s proposed Muslim ban. https://www.snopes.com/fact-ch...
After the Orlando terror attack, Lacapria claimed that just because Omar Mateen was a registered Democrat with an active voter registration status didn’t mean he was actually a Democrat. Her “fact check” argued that he might “have chosen a random political affiliation when he initially registered.” Eactly how is this fact checking and not a platform to substitute her opinions as given facts. The FACT was he was a registered democrat. Why did she need to downplay this fact and rate it as a Mixture and not simply True. https://www.snopes.com/fact-ch...
here is the quote
"What that lone fact means is the subject of a good deal of speculation, with possibilities ranging from Mateen’s being a supporter of Democratic ideology to his simply having chosen a random political affiliation when he initially registered. Mateen didn’t appear on the FBI’s radar until 2013, and it’s possible that in the ten years between 2006 and 2016 his political outlook (whatever it was to begin with) might have changed radically, even
Again, you may not agree with their conclusions but at least they provide their sources so that people can think for themselves and come to their own conclusions, optimistic though this may be!
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
I see the editors are getting their marching orders for the DNC. Gotta spread that fake news or evil Republican Nazis won't let them legalize dating 8 year olds or whatever new thing Democrats want.
Snopes is independent. There is 0 evidence to support your argument.
There is 0 evidence of this claim.
When something nefarious is pointed out, it doesn't mean its time to seek out nefarious activities of others to justify your own, it means its time to learn and do what is right.
The idea isn't to weaponize fake news, the idea should be to remove it. For the benefit of all.
Claiming that because we're raising the issue of fake news and its impact to American's doesn't mean that we're full on Venezuela Communist now and to assert such is assinine.
They were awesome when they stuck to debunking nigerian price email."
They were awesome when they werent debunking all the repubtard bullshit I was told to believe without questioning, because, well because.
FTFY.
Hang the mother fuckers for treason shoot them in the face on sight.
Anyone involved.
Pot meet kettle.
The repubtards believe anything that a KNOWN liar tells them, because he's one of them.
Repubtard fallacy committed: blame the left/poor/blacks/immigrants.
You repubtards are so used to believing lies that you come here spouting fake numbers and lies and expect us to be as stupid as you?
Fuck off, but 100 million people will dieeeeeee. LOL nice number pulled out of your ass. Why will those people die? What's the reason? The cause? You list none of those because you are spreading lies another repubtard told you.
He's a repubtard that commits the repubtard fallacy everytime he opens his mouth. He can be ignored.
I mean shit more than 50% of his post are downmodded. I bet his daughter dates a black guy and he's mad. Black guy has bigger dick.
Thank you Salon for being #brave
Citation needed.
Republican fallacy detected.
Deflect blame the left.
Repubtard fallacy detected.
Blames the left for the rights stupid shit we call them out on.
Republicans pounce. LOL I have never once
Heard this saying being userd. This is the first time I heard it.
It might be better to say "repubtards pounce on Putins cock"
Post them then you cuck.
Reality is well known for its liberal bias.... this makes it appear that all news outlets share that bias. What youre actually seeing is evidence that your political beliefs are objectively incorrect and morally repugnant.
Sorry you find that uncomfortable, but the universe doesnt really care about your feelings.
Yeah, much better to give a bunch of my money to the government so it can give tax breaks to billionaires and subsidies for fossil fuel companies.... that's not a hand out at all.
In the end it won't be you OR me, it will be us CRUSHED by them.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
That's because almost every post you write is repubtard troll bait. You get downvoted because your post are always blaming "the left".
If we went thru your posting history, all we'd see if you blaming democrats. That song is old buddy. We no longer wish to hear it. You have been a proven liar on slashdot and people know this.
That's why you have no mod points, because you abuse them and
Offer nothing of service back to the community other than "the left is to blame
For destroying mahhhh America"
Fuck off, we will keep modding you down until you take some personal responsibility and stop blaming the left for all your troubles. You are a walking republican fallacy.
Wooow, if you think snopes is considered a democrat front, I think that says all we need to know about your ability to look at information objectively and rationally.
That being said, it's already been very well established that anyone not willing to swallow the republican party line hook line and sinker, is considered to be pushing a "democrat agenda". And that includes card carrying members of the Republican party who dare to step out of line even just once.
And here we go. Are you one of those Russian trolls I keep hearing about? The whole "anything even vaguely "left" sounding is COMMUNISM" line is just so beyond stupid.
Specifics would be a lot more convincing than vague accusations, but I have come to expect nothing more than that from the right.
AC to preserve moderation. Just about every time the right tries to smear something like Snopes or the SPLC or the ACLU they can never say exactly what it is that's wrong with them.
Snopes is supposed to call out misinformation. Deciding to rank certain and provable false claims as a 'we arent sure, its possible but we just dont know' for DNC related stuff was a stupid ass move. .... I have never seen them call a truth a lie, but I have seen them abuse the in-between-ratings and thats poor journalism if you ask me.
Yeah... If the topic has no political slant, or if they say flat-out true or false with documentation, Snopes has seemed to be pretty reliable. But they have long shaded the "maybe" ratings in a certain direction.
The first one I came across was back during the GWB administration. There was some utterly brain-dead rumor going around that Ashcroft was terrified of calico cats because he thought they were of the Devil for some reason. It took Snopes several weeks to change that from "Unverified" to "False", even after they quoted a source saying that asked Ashcroft about this, and he laughed out loud. I'm sure if it were an accusation made about Hillary that it would have been stamped false instantly.
I still consider them a valuable resource, but I don't trust them unreservedly.
CNN fired Donna Brazille for that and there have been suggestions that Fox tipped off Trump to some debate questions as well.
What we know know for a fact is that Sean Hannity is openly campaigning for Donald Trump
And itâ(TM)s all legal. The very same dirty tricks campaigns we pulled off in Iran and other nations as a means to destabilize democracies we disagreed with are now being used against us by âoepatriotsâ who wave the confederate and Nazi flags of our enemies and those stupid red MAGA hats
while looking up links to examples for some others I ran across ratings by real clear politics. It appeared to give snopes high marks. However there was something I found highly disturbing. Based on their ratings, it appears snopes does not actually do any fact checking. They go to google and then if some media outlet is saying the same thing, they use it as a source. Here is the problem, one that even WaPo criticized, most journalist depend heavily on Snopes for their own fact checking. If the fact-checkers are using journalists as facts, and the journalists are using snopes as the facts, then NOBODY is actually checking any facts at all. Its a rumormill by accident. Another interesting statistic is sometimes they use their own website as a source for fact-checking. In other words, if they were fact checking a question 'is tom brokaw gay?' and someone else previously wrote an opinion piece at snopes as to why they thought Tom Brokaw was gay, they would use that as their source to say True, Tom Brokaw is gay. Thats pretty insane right? Thats like asking Trump 'hey do you tell the truth or do you lie?' and he comes back with 'Believe me, I always tell the truth' and that being the end of the inquiry. I wouldnt stop there in my fact-checking and thats not what I get paid to do.
The Democrats (who laundered money through the Perkins-Coie law firm to a British spy and his Russian spy friends to make up a fake golden showers "dossier" on Trump which the British spy, named Christopher Steele, has testified under oath in a British court is unverified trash) told me ir was Russians, or Mecedonian content farmers, or stupid American women listening to the men in their lives that destroyed the plan to elect Hillary in 2016.
ALL the Democrat-affiliated news outlets like ABC,CBS,NBC,PBS,MSNBC,HuffPo,Salon,NYT,WaPo have told me it's so, often using the exact same phrases on the exact same days in their reporting - in perfect alignment to the press releases from the offices of Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi.
The presiendt of CBS news during the Obama years was the brother of one of Obama's top guys. Over at ABC the political talking heads show host is Bill Clinton's old Chief of Staff. NBC's famous talking heads hosts Chris Matthews and Chuch Todd are both former Democrat political staffers. The list goes on and on and on.... Even at taxpayer-run PBS the top political talker for many years was Bill Moyers, the Democrat who helped his old boss presidetn Johnson sell the Vietnam War.
And I'm supposed to worry about the controlled opposition at Fox News who are to all practical purposes the Washington Generals of the news business? The Fox News Sunday political talking heads show is run by Chris Wallace, of all people [sigh]. The news anchor at Fox is Shep Smith, the openly gay Democrat Trump-hater, and somehow Fox News is this giant terrible right wing behemoth??? What, because they have some [largely ineffective] right winger opinion types on in the evening? That's ONE channel on CABLE that in no longer even being run buy the elder Murdoch but is now under the thumb of Trump-hating Democrat Lachlan Murdoch. If you are a Democrat and you are afraid of Fox News, then you have some real confiidence issues, and you apparently fear ANY opposing views even when they are ineffective and weak and designed to make money serving an otherwise unserved market while not really changin things in the culture.
No. snopes was never reliable. you had to be a fucking moron to think snopes was ever reliable.
I've been on this forum for a very long time. Russian Troll?? Fuck the Russians! Fuck Communism, and fuck YOU!
Life is not for the lazy.
Treat NEWS like you do Science or even RottenTomatos.
Site Score Cards, ( when launched, reports, fact checking, etc ) and give it a score.
if a newbie news source starts showing off, the people can see it.
I never understood how social media and all this jazz got out of hand, in the end, people dont want the truth, people just want to complain and point fingers.
The rest of the so-called news is democrat fake news, including this article and everything ever published by Salon.
I’d say that RT is miles better than FoxNews. At least the pieces about topics not related to Russian matters are well written and informative. FoxNews and CNN are smelly drivel.
RT sometimes has good news pieces. They are an intentional mix of accurate news that you can find elsewhere, with a smattering of pure Kremlin propaganda, so your defenses are down when the propaganda is pushed. They need to create that thin veneer of respectability as a shield.
It's an old Marxist line that "everything is political" and it works in multiple ways. This is starting to affect the USA in ways it never has before.
Consider:
1. In any country where government becomes huge, it becomes involved in everything, and thus everything is affected by government which in-turn is run by politicians, so everything becomes political. Many businesses spend money influencing government because it's often more cost-effective to manipulate marketplaces than it is to honestly compete. Everyone with a serious interest in anything affected by government feels the need to get in on the related politics.
2. In Socialist/Marxist regimes, the governments feel the need to tamp down any political opposition, including criticism, because that could lead to a so-called counter-revolution which could end the regime and doom the leaders to trials for all the evil they need to to to run a Marxist country. These governments see everything as politically-connected and important, as a basicmatter of survival for those at the top. As a result, one finds "political officers" in institutions monitoring the politics of the people there.
3. When powerful interests are playing the government game, and the political system includes voters, they need large pools of angry/motivated voters who can be urged to the polls in a hopefully angry and irrational mood (so they can be more easily manipulated to vote angry without paying attention to details). As a result, it becomes a tool for interests on the left, on the right, and even the otherwise non-partisan but highly interested like globalists organizations (interest groups, big business, etc) to stir-up each and every emotional social and cultural hot-button issue and then tie it to something they want voters to act upon.
The USA has been growing its government at a rate that would have shocked our founders for decades, really since the 1930s - this ties to point #1 above. The Democrat party in the USA is now veering so far left that the only past Democrat president that the current Democrats would not denounce as a knuckle-dragging right winger is Obama. In fact, there are now Democrats openly identifying as Socialists, and very few Democrat politicians now will publicly identify as capitalists - which means that a bit of point#2 above is now at play.
If we want to get back to a time when geeks/nerds/techies etc can discuss tech stuff without politics saturating things, and if golfers want to get back to golf without politics and sailors want to get back to sailing without politics, and so on, then we as a society need to get government back under control and shrink it back down to the point that it no longer infests every aspet of our lives.
If government is not involved in 99% of your life, then 99% of your life can be free of politics. Conversely, if government is involved in 99% of your life, then 99% of your life will be political. There is no escape from this.
Science is not done by consensus. Science is done by looking at data and making conclusions. At its most basic one takes data, makes a model to explain the data and then attempts to falsify the model against the real world.
When one side in a scientific debate refuses to make their data available for inspection, when they create false narratives and misleading graphs, when their models fail to predict future outcomes accurately, then it's no wonder some people are skeptical of their theories.
That's a whuddabout deflection by itself. You want attention for your lack of discipline to be swapped to us self-discipling. Since we're gonna throw out stupid deflection memes, I'm gonna go with:
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
CRY MOAR
If you say the same phrase over and over does it make it come true, or does it make you feel like a repetitive idiot?
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
There's plenty of evidence to show Snopes is crooked, but there's not point in bringing it up when you will only accept information checked by Snopes.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Everyone should check the parents post history. It reads like a Russians everywhere insult script, rarely more than a single sentence and almost always an insult with the exception of the occasional "we should submit to the government and give them more power" post.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
"The house is on fire!"
"Who cares, our son is drowning!"
Such a marker of desperation and deflection. Your drowning son clearly must not matter.
I like how you guys can't stand being shown your own failures over and over again. You were wrong. You are still wrong. Now you don't want to face the consequences for your actions.
CRY MOAR
Your tears sustain me. You voted for trump. You DEMANDED this bed, NOW FUCKING LAY IN IT.
The idea that news organizations were ever unbiased is a lie itself. It was most successfully perpetrated by Edward R Murrow and his protege Walter Cronkite, two globalists who did propaganda for the U.S. government during the Second World War and after the war shilled for the left.
Like good propagandists they convinced their viewers that they were unbiased arbiters of the news while cleverly slanting their coverage by not reporting on certain stories.
Most of the media continued to do this for years. It is only recently that they forgo any attempt at journalism at all and have started to report on Twitter postings which are completely unverified.
Of course many of the news items on both the right and the left that get reported as lies are really just soundbites that have nuance removed, that is they are true when taken in a particular framework but lies when taken alone or absent that framework. That's why so many of them are reported by places like PolitiFact as "mostly true" or "mostly false", because in the real world things can seldom be explained in a soundbite.
The WaPo article you linked is hosted on the Washington Times website for some reason.
She wrote a “fact check” article about Jimmy Carter’s unilateral ban of Iranian nationals from entering the country that looks more like an opinion column arguing against Donald Trump’s proposed Muslim ban. https://www.snopes.com/fact-ch... [snopes.com]
The claim refuted on that page is that President Jimmy Carter banned Iranian nationals from entering the U.S. in a manner similar to Donald Trump's proposal to ban the entry of Muslims..
It was rated a "mixture" and they pointed out how it had some elements of truth to it, but was false in the claim that it had any similarity to Trump's proposal of banning all Muslims.
What exactly is wrong with it?
- ACTPM
A "contributor" did that, and she was fired for it.
Of course, in typical Trump style of always projecting, he was also leaked some questions. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/12/books/review-megyn-kelly-tells-tales-out-of-fox-news-in-her-memoir-settle-for-more.html
Do enlighten me. I'm sure there is a wealth of reputable links you can share demonstrating your assertion. So, please do. If its systemic like it is with Republicans, should be an easy endeavor.
You should look up the meaning of the word irrelevant because I don't think it means what you think it does.
So kind of like organized religeon, where they qoute a specifc verse out of context, to justify something they want you to do. Seems plausible
not even a little bit. If you want pretend neutrality go watch some CNN or even Fox News ("Fair and Balanced", though these days it's not even a joke anymore). Salon wears it's politics on it's sleeve and always has.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
"Republicans", they're so nefariously clever, right?
Nobody shoots their way out of Socialism. Without fail, in 100% of cases so far documented, the CIA is the entity shooting their way in. This is extremely well known history. Hell you can watch it in real time in Venezuela!
I've long thought this too. That "conservative" these days is a label that really means "radical".
Nobody anymore seems to be the "conserve the good bits of the past" type of conservative that I once thought I understood. Now "conservative" is synonymous with hate, racism, fear, lies, denialism, etc. Bit of a shame, really.
What can you possibly mean? You are saying Fox News is not as right wing as it wants to be? How can anything be any more right wing than Fox? It defines the right wing. It IS the right wing! It accepts and promotes all the bullshit and never exposes any of it to light.
What sort of restraint do you think Fox shows? I find it difficult to believe you gained +5 Informative for something that makes no sense, so please tell us why people think you are making sense.
Anybody who says SJW in a serious context is an idiot. This is an inviolable law of the Universe, it seems.
Politico has an article talking to Snopes about biased media websites, and are worried about the trend. Make sure HuffPo, Salon and CNN don't get wind of it, they may have a patent on the business model
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
As opposed to Salon....which is one the Democrats fake news networks?
... than National Fake News (a la CNN, MSNBC, WaPO, NYT, etc.) Remember? The media outlets who collaborated with the DNC to publish "Hillary good, Orange Man Bad" propaganda? The ones who allowed Democrat Party subjects to review stories about them before they were published or aired?
Or how about when CNN said it was illegal to view the emails leaked on wikileaks that showed this overt propagandistic collaboration?
This "Republican Bad" argument holds no water anymore because information is right in front of peoples' eyes (if they choose to look at and process it). The corporate media would love it if you would just forget what happened; not notice their overt lies, half-truths, and omissions; and just follow the laser pointer of their narrative.
As the Russia hoax inevitably disappears from sight on corporate media (without retraction or anyone being held accountable for overtly lying to divide average Americans), the laser is now pointing at financial crimes. After that, it will be something else. The real authoritarians are right in front of us, but behind a wall of cover from the corporate media.
You missed one!
You need to claim that any given left wing politician, or better yet all of them are Extreme! Extreme! Extreeeeeeeeeemmmmmmmmmmeeeee!!!
That's how yer rite-thinkin' neybors will no yur serius!
I think it's pretty obvious our posts have been passed along to the collectivist moderation rail-road, I went from +5 to -1 on a few posts and most the others have yo-yoed and I see yours has been attacked to.
The NPCs have better team-work than the rest of us.
Conservative post bad!
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
What you are doing is projection. You're blaming others for your own actions as if being a liberal or having liberal media is the problem. The media reported on these kids and if they didn't want to be used for the propaganda they shouldn't have been sent for propaganda.
Because kids going on a field trip to DC and buying souvenir political attire related to the current sitting president while they are there can't possibly be true. There's no way Occam's razor can be applied here, as this was totally a setup.
It takes all of about one second to realize what bullshit that claim is. At least, for a rational person. But someone who levels accusations of projection towards those making verifiable observations is probably not rational. It's also not uncommon for the liberal media to blame the victim, and sensationalize in order to profit, not caring if they further ruin the victim's lives. Then here you are, doing just that.