Fake News; Buzz Feed...

[Mountain Man]

You are nothing if not predictable.

Your powers of prediction are hardly impressive. When you toot your own self-righteous horn, it's an easy bet that someone is going to call on it.

[oxmixmudd]

Like I said, you're nothing if not predictable

Jim

[Mountain Man]

Out of curiosity, do you also self-righteously cluck your tongue at Christians who voted for Hillary, Obama, or Romney, or you do reserve your hypocrisy only for President Trump?

[JimL]

Out of curiosity, do you also self-righteously cluck your tongue at Christians who voted for Hillary, Obama, or Romney, or you do reserve your hypocrisy only for President Trump?

Out of curiosity Ollie, do you ever look in the mirror?

[lilpixieofterror]

It's hilarious to watch you distort my words to make them fit you narrative that anyone that does not support trump is evil and propagates or supports falsehoods.

I mentioned only CNN and what CNN did. Which was the right thing.

To 'allow the false story to circulate' implies they had the other information and sat on it - which clearly in terms of the high schooler's statement they did not. He issued the statement, they put it up on their website. I have no way of knowing when they had access to the alternate videos, but it does not appear there was any significant delay in posting those either.

[lilpixieofterror]

I'm not indifferent to them or whatever harassment they received Pix. You asked me why the story wasn't fake news. Not if it was bad for those that jumped to judgement to harass the kid. Of course it was wrong. Of course it was bad. Just like it was wrong of Trump to launch his base against a college Freshman for daring to challenge Him.

That was the very first concern I had when I saw the first video clip - what would people with your or MM's mindset on the liberal side but without your moral restraint do to him. And don't kid yourself. You and MM are just clones of that same mindset in a different direction.

But I wasn't answering those questions pix. I was answering whether or not the reporting on the event was "fake news".


Jim

[lilpixieofterror]

Not exactly. But pretty much every day I do ask myself what stupid or callously indifferent thing will Trump do today, and I wonder how or what extent people like you or MM will ditch your religious moorings and stated morals as you justify whatever stupid or immoral thing he happens to have done that day.


Jim

Harassing teens and getting entire internet mobs to attack and harass them = okay, as long as you admit you were wrong after the damage is done.

Saying mean things to those that did that = EVIL!!!



The logic of those suffering from TDS...

[lilpixieofterror]

No, it implies that they rushed the story out the door without doing even the bare minimum of fact checking because they salivate over any story that they think makes Trump look bad. Even if they had done nothing more than type Nathan Philips' name into an internet search engine, they would have immediately learned of his activism, his sketchy claims about his military service record, and the fact that he and his group had attempted to disrupt a Catholic service the night before. Instead, CNN gave him airtime to spread his lies without challenging a single one of them. That's anything but responsible journalism.

I keep asking him if he would like the media to do the same thing to him or his family... still no response...

[Mountain Man]

The thing that ox continues to downplay is the damage that is done when a false story is allowed to enter the public consciousness over a 24- to 48-hour period. Sure, the media can always hide behind a false sense of due diligence by quietly issuing a correction after the fact, but the correction never gets as much airtime as the original story, and it's the original story that a lot of people end up remembering. I can't tell you how many times I've had conversations with colleagues where they'll mention a false story, and I'll say, "Actually, that's not true," and then I explain the facts and that the original story was eventually retracted. The response is almost always surprise followed by, "Well, I never heard that."

[oxmixmudd]

Did you even read the post you replied to? Apparently not, for I answered your question quite clearly in it. The answer is no, im not ok with people abusing others or rushing to judgement. But your conception of that element of this story is incorrect. News outlets in general tend to value news over the safety of those affected by their reporting, so that element of this specific event is not specific to this event and it is wrong to characterize it as belonging to only one side of the liberal conservative news bias debate. But I agree it is a problem.

It is appropriate to point out that you, mm and others, otoh, have mocked nearly every concern i have raised over abuse directly, not accidentally, instigated by trump or his supporters, which quite clearly leads to the conclusion you only care about what happened to this kid because he was or appears to be a Trump supporter.

Jim

[oxmixmudd]

The thing that ox continues to downplay is the damage that is done when a false story is allowed to enter the public consciousness over a 24- to 48-hour period. Sure, the media can always hide behind a false sense of due diligence by quietly issuing a correction after the fact, but the correction never gets as much airtime as the original story, and it's the original story that a lot of people end up remembering. I can't tell you how many times I've had conversations with colleagues where they'll mention a false story, and I'll say, "Actually, that's not true," and then I explain the facts and that the original story was eventually retracted. The response is almost always surprise followed by, "Well, I never heard that."

Given you consistent and unwavering mockery ofthe all sich concerns i have raised over the last months, your 'concern' simply cant be considered in any way genuine.

And I havent downplayed that element, i have simply resisted you and pixes efforts to shift the discussion from whether or not the story was fake news.

Jim

[lilpixieofterror]

Did you even read the post you replied to?

Apparently not, for I answered you question quite clearly in it. The answer is no, im not ok with people abusing others ir rushing to judgement. And no matter what side of the debate. You and mm, otoh, have mocked nearly every concern i have raised over abuse instigated by trump or his supporters, which quite clearly leads to the conclusion you only care about wbut at happened to this kid because he was appears to be a Trump supporter.

[Mountain Man]

Given you consistent and unwavering mockery ofthe all sich concerns i have raised over the last months, your 'concern' simply cant be considered in any way genuine.

And I havent downplayed that element, i have simply resisted you and pixes efforts to shift the discussion from whether or not the story was fake news.

There's no question that the liberal media was pushing fake news. Did they necessarily know it was fake news? Maybe not, but that's because they obviously didn't do minimal due diligence before giddily running with the anti-Trump narrative, and it took a responsible and reputable news organization like Breitbart calling them on it before they said, "Oh, uh, right, I guess the kids actually were innocent. Oops."

Anyway, this thread is about the BuzzFeed fake news, not the MAGA hat wearing kids fake news.

[oxmixmudd]

There's no question that the liberal media was pushing fake news. Did they necessarily know it was fake news? Maybe not, but that's because they obviously didn't do minimal due diligence before giddily running with the anti-Trump narrative, and it took a responsible and reputable news organization like Breitbart calling them on it before they said, "Oh, uh, right, I guess the kids actually were innocent. Oops."

Anyway, this thread is about the BuzzFeed fake news, not the MAGA hat wearing kids fake news.

When I entered the discussion, the topic was the MAGA hat wearing kids.

It wasn't 'fake news'. It was news, but the news was generated by a video edited to show one specific point of view. That video WAS distorted and biassed. But it made the news and prompted a response. And as is typical these days, because of hateful attitudes like those you and pix carry full tilt in these threads, the high schools students were targeted. The fault is not the news itself. It is the originator of the video and those that on seeing it resorted to hateful and vicious attacks. People that are encouraged by the type of rhetoric Trump (and you and pix on these pages) are famous for.

I will return to my original statement. CNN, as best I can tell, responded appropriately to all of it. They reported all sides, and offered commentary that discussed several aspects of what happened, including that the rush to judgement was wrong.

And I will reiterate that your concern over this student is nothing more than crocodile tears arising not out of any genuine compassion, but plain and simple opportunistic banter.

I've been complaining for months about this sort of vicious attack from Trump supporters - AT TRUMPS BECK AND CALL (not a side effect of a news report but rather purposed and direct attacks via twitter or at rallies) - and you especially have mocked the people targeted each and every time. You have never on these pages exhibited any real compassion for any person suffering as a result of something Trump has done.

Jim

[Tassman]

There's no question that the liberal media was pushing fake news. Did they necessarily know it was fake news? Maybe not, but that's because they obviously didn't do minimal due diligence before giddily running with the anti-Trump narrative, and it took a responsible and reputable news organization like Breitbart calling them on it.

Breitbart is A QUESTIONABLE SOURCE: "A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence."

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/breitbart/

Anyway, this thread is about the BuzzFeed fake news, not the MAGA hat wearing kids fake news.

https://qz.com/1531484/maga-hats-are...n-do-about-it/