Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

And Now They Come For Your Speech...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    I see you still don't understand the meaning of the phrase "X if not Y," and I'm not even going to explain it to you because it's much more amusing to watch you twist in the wind.
    I see that once again you prefer insinuations and personal attacks instead of giving an answer. This is the forth time I ask you to reply to this part: "It seems to me you have misunderstood some posts in here when you conclude that "quite a few of you seem implicitly if not openly in favor of it." Can you point me to anyone who is openly in favour of it? I know you have misinterpreted Roy to be in favour of it. Can you point me to some actual words in which anyone is openly in favour of government censorship? And no, I am not looking for you to tell me what other posters "really" mean or imply according to you. I am looking for their actual words in which they openly say that they like the idea of government censorship."

    Let's see if you are able to give a factual reply with no personal attack.
    "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

    Comment


    • #47
      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
      Than a fool in the eyes of God


      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
        News is by definition new information that is published to inform the public - if the the public ( the social media sites) has to know whether this previously unknown information is true or not then they are being asked to be omniscient
        Nah. News comes in different flavors. Sure, sometimes it's brand new, breaking, exclusive, and nobody can check it, but that's rare. There's always a way to check a news story all by yourself, if nothing else for internal consistencies. Does the story match the headline?

        And for aggregators and "value added" pieces like the propaganda out of Gatewaypundit, click through to see if the original sources are saying the same thing. Take the Breitbart story linked above. If you follow the links backwards to find out if China has banned Phoenix News, you find it isn't true, because it was actually a popular Chinese aggregator that chooses to be translated Phoenix New Media.

        Some sources lack proper editorial review, and by their uncorrected bobbles, they're easy to spot. Liars get sloppy when nobody's minding the store.

        Now I can understand why Gatewaypundit might be soiling their shorts over the idea of somebody putting a sticker up on their articles calling out the stink, but the standard deflection, calling out their inquisitors for bias, or in this case, "fascism,' is getting a bit long in the tooth.

        People aren't buying it anymore.

        You don't want to get spanked for lying, stop lying. Problem solved. Hyperventilation won't do anything but make you dizzy.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by lao tzu View Post
          Nah. News comes in different flavors. Sure, sometimes it's brand new, breaking, exclusive, and nobody can check it, but that's rare. There's always a way to check a news story all by yourself, if nothing else for internal consistencies. Does the story match the headline?

          And for aggregators and "value added" pieces like the propaganda out of Gatewaypundit, click through to see if the original sources are saying the same thing. Take the Breitbart story linked above. If you follow the links backwards to find out if China has banned Phoenix News, you find it isn't true, because it was actually a popular Chinese aggregator that chooses to be translated Phoenix New Media.

          Some sources lack proper editorial review, and by their uncorrected bobbles, they're easy to spot. Liars get sloppy when nobody's minding the store.

          Now I can understand why Gatewaypundit might be soiling their shorts over the idea of somebody putting a sticker up on their articles calling out the stink, but the standard deflection, calling out their inquisitors for bias, or in this case, "fascism,' is getting a bit long in the tooth.

          People aren't buying it anymore.

          You don't want to get spanked for lying, stop lying. Problem solved. Hyperventilation won't do anything but make you dizzy.
          Yeah, people dismissing sources for bias and calling everyone a fascist has gotten pretty old, hasn't it?
          I DENOUNCE DONALD J. TRUMP AND ALL HIS IMMORAL ACTS.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by lao tzu View Post
            Nah. News comes in different flavors. Sure, sometimes it's brand new, breaking, exclusive, and nobody can check it, but that's rare. There's always a way to check a news story all by yourself, if nothing else for internal consistencies. Does the story match the headline?

            And for aggregators and "value added" pieces like the propaganda out of Gatewaypundit, click through to see if the original sources are saying the same thing. Take the Breitbart story linked above. If you follow the links backwards to find out if China has banned Phoenix News, you find it isn't true, because it was actually a popular Chinese aggregator that chooses to be translated Phoenix New Media.

            Some sources lack proper editorial review, and by their uncorrected bobbles, they're easy to spot. Liars get sloppy when nobody's minding the store.

            Now I can understand why Gatewaypundit might be soiling their shorts over the idea of somebody putting a sticker up on their articles calling out the stink, but the standard deflection, calling out their inquisitors for bias, or in this case, "fascism,' is getting a bit long in the tooth.

            People aren't buying it anymore.

            You don't want to get spanked for lying, stop lying. Problem solved. Hyperventilation won't do anything but make you dizzy.
            Sure you can tell with some stories, but not always, and if it were the law you would have to know always.

            And a large chunk of accusations of "fake news" is just people reacting to sources they don't like. I see it all the time with liberals and "Faux News" and "Breitbart?" accusations right here on this site, and with conservatives with "The Failing New York Times" and "CNN" accusations. You did it yourself just a few posts ago.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              Sure you can tell with some stories, but not always, and if it were the law you would have to know always.
              If it were the law, people might even read it before commenting. But as it is, it's just a bill proposed by one state congresscritter with no co-sponsors out in California, and folks are free to mischaracterize to their heart's content, with nobody's oxen gored.

              And a large chunk of accusations of "fake news" is just people reacting to sources they don't like. I see it all the time with liberals and "Faux News" and "Breitbart?" accusations right here on this site, and with conservatives with "The Failing New York Times" and "CNN" accusations. You did it yourself just a few posts ago.
              Well, I call out Breitbart because I check sources, and Breitbart doesn't check out, as above. After you've spotted enough fake articles from the news equivalent of AIG, and recognize it's not the exception, it's the rule, you do what you should, cast them and those who quote them as irresponsible.

              Breitbart is fake news, and the same for the propaganda primetime at FNC, which their own news anchors have described as lacking any meaningful editorial standards. Despite being debunked by his own network's news programming, Hannity has never retracted his Seth Rich and Uranium One conspiracy theories.

              That can't be said for the New York Times. When Jayson Blair was busted, they ran a 24 page analysis of how they screwed up. They've had that kind of accountability forever. My favorite international feature writer when I was in college, a guy named Uli Schmetzer, couldn't account for two quotes and he was out the door.

              The Breitbarts out there don't even admit to mistakes, let alone correct them, let alone analyze them to figure out how they can prevent it from happening again. The correction for the Schmetzer issue was to require reporters to provide their sources to their editors. They amped up their editorial review.

              There's a market for folks who want their news straight, and another for those who want it crooked.

              You can't just assume equivalence.

              That's the road to accusing murder victims of being murderers, because hey, they must be just as bad. It doesn't stand up to any kind of scrutiny, and worse, it's loaded to provide cover to bad actors. Only the biased news sources get any benefit from returning the accusations. Objective journalists who can defend their work don't need those deflections.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by lao tzu View Post
                If it were the law, people might even read it before commenting. But as it is, it's just a bill proposed by one state congresscritter with no co-sponsors out in California, and folks are free to mischaracterize to their heart's content, with nobody's oxen gored.



                Well, I call out Breitbart because I check sources, and Breitbart doesn't check out, as above. After you've spotted enough fake articles from the news equivalent of AIG, and recognize it's not the exception, it's the rule, you do what you should, cast them and those who quote them as irresponsible.

                Breitbart is fake news, and the same for the propaganda primetime at FNC, which their own news anchors have described as lacking any meaningful editorial standards. Despite being debunked by his own network's news programming, Hannity has never retracted his Seth Rich and Uranium One conspiracy theories.

                That can't be said for the New York Times. When Jayson Blair was busted, they ran a 24 page analysis of how they screwed up. They've had that kind of accountability forever. My favorite international feature writer when I was in college, a guy named Uli Schmetzer, couldn't account for two quotes and he was out the door.

                The Breitbarts out there don't even admit to mistakes, let alone correct them, let alone analyze them to figure out how they can prevent it from happening again. The correction for the Schmetzer issue was to require reporters to provide their sources to their editors. They amped up their editorial review.

                There's a market for folks who want their news straight, and another for those who want it crooked.

                You can't just assume equivalence.

                That's the road to accusing murder victims of being murderers, because hey, they must be just as bad. It doesn't stand up to any kind of scrutiny, and worse, it's loaded to provide cover to bad actors. Only the biased news sources get any benefit from returning the accusations. Objective journalists who can defend their work don't need those deflections.

                regardless of your special pleading on how you are not biased at all on news sources I do agree this will never make it into law. It is in effect making the government the policemen of the press, which would be illegal. Even when they try to couch it in terms of making the social media sites do the dirty work.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                  So the government wants the power to decide what is or isn't "fake news". What's the worst that could happen?

                  Source: China Suspends Four News Apps for ‘Fake News’ and ‘Vulgar Content’

                  Chinese authorities have reportedly suspended four popular news apps from the country’s Android store in an attempt to tighten control over the spread of news and information.

                  The South China Morning Post reports that state regulators demanded that four news services including Toutiao, Phoenix News, NetEase News, and Tiantian Kuaibao remove their downloading services by 3 p.m. on Monday afternoon.

                  The move is reportedly an attempt by authorities to “regulate order in the broadcasting environment” as the Chinese Communist Party (CPC) seeks to clamp down on all possible political dissent and spreading of negative information.

                  http://www.breitbart.com/national-se...ulgar-content/

                  © Copyright Original Source


                  Oh...
                  Although I'm not a fan of this move by China, I am curious. Are the apps in question disseminating false information?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    regardless of your special pleading on how you are not biased at all on news sources
                    The other alternative is just admitting I'm right to look for unbiased news, and you're wrong to keep defending yellow journalism.

                    And promise to change your ways, go forth, and sin no more.

                    I do agree this will never make it into law.
                    Not only will the actual bill never make it into law ...

                    It is in effect making the government the policemen of the press, which would be illegal. Even when they try to couch it in terms of making the social media sites do the dirty work.
                    Neither will this ... oh wait, hey, dude, you had more, and didn't share!

                    Never trust a pirate.

                    Comment

                    Related Threads

                    Collapse

                    Topics Statistics Last Post
                    Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                    16 responses
                    142 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post One Bad Pig  
                    Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                    53 responses
                    382 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post Mountain Man  
                    Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                    25 responses
                    112 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post rogue06
                    by rogue06
                     
                    Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                    33 responses
                    197 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post Roy
                    by Roy
                     
                    Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                    84 responses
                    364 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post JimL
                    by JimL
                     
                    Working...
                    X