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

Epstein Found Dead In Cell...

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

  • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Isn't that a problem with all media? Because of the 24 hour news cycle, they seem to ALL be so "rushed to the deadline" that they don't do the necessary fact checking. When I was younger, it was always seen as a rush to check all the facts before you "went on the air" at 6 or 11 PM ---- the goal these days is to be 2 seconds faster than the other guy to bring the "exclusive" story.
    Yep. But nowadays the public attention span is so short that by the time fact checking can be done, the audience has moved on.
    "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

    Comment


    • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
      Good example. Breitbart claimed immediately after the El Paso shooting that there were multiple shooters based on conflicting reports. They did at least later retract.
      Here is another interesting example i commented on: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post659210

      And a case we discussed at an earlier point in which almost all statements are wrong: https://www.mediamatters.org/breitba...edly-dissolves
      "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


      • Originally posted by Charles View Post
        Here is another interesting example i commented on: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post659210

        And a case we discussed at an earlier point in which almost all statements are wrong: https://www.mediamatters.org/breitba...edly-dissolves
        You're complaining about a headline? I asked for non-nitpicky examples, Charles.

        I wonder why you didn't link to the earlier discussion in your second example.
        Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

        Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
        sigpic
        I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

        Comment


        • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
          Yep. But nowadays the public attention span is so short that by the time fact checking can be done, the audience has moved on.
          It's like in newspapers which bury retractions of front page stories they messed up deep inside the paper several days later.

          I'm always still in trouble again

          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

          Comment


          • I know somebody who believes that early news reports are the accurate ones because the media hasn't had a chance to make everything up. In the case of El Paso, she believes only the one local news channel who interviewed a witness who claimed to have seen four shooters. That is your brain on QAnon.
            "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

            Comment


            • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
              Yep. But nowadays the public attention span is so short that by the time fact checking can be done, the audience has moved on.
              And that's true with both the liberal and conservative spin cycles, no?
              "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                And that's true with both the liberal and conservative spin cycles, no?
                Yes.
                "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                Comment


                • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                  I know somebody who believes that early news reports are the accurate ones because the media hasn't had a chance to make everything up. In the case of El Paso, she believes only the one local news channel who interviewed a witness who claimed to have seen four shooters. That is your brain on QAnon.
                  Yeah, a logical view would be that if you're getting... well, you know!
                  "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                    You're complaining about a headline? I asked for non-nitpicky examples, Charles.
                    You do realize that headlines are quite important, right? They are meant to give the conclusion. Errors in the conclusion is a minor detail? So, if the headline gives a wrong impression, it is very important. Claiming a reliable media source has said what an unmaned source said is not a minor detail.

                    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                    I wonder why you didn't link to the earlier discussion in your second example.
                    If you have read that, you know that those who point to errors are right and that it is not just minor details. I simply was not able to find that old thread. The article sums it up quite well.
                    "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


                    • Originally posted by Charles View Post
                      You do realize that headlines are quite important, right? ....
                      In this day and age, Charles, headlines are DESIGNED to be clickbait. They want your attention. And they're true to the maxim "if it bleeds, it leads". So, no, headlines are NOT "quite important". They often are so far out of touch with the article they introduce...

                      In the old days, headlines were an indication of what's to follow.
                      In these days, headlines are designed to get YOU to follow.
                      "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        In this day and age, Charles, headlines are DESIGNED to be clickbait. They want your attention. And they're true to the maxim "if it bleeds, it leads". So, no, headlines are NOT "quite important". They often are so far out of touch with the article they introduce...

                        In the old days, headlines were an indication of what's to follow.
                        In these days, headlines are designed to get YOU to follow.
                        You make statements as if this is the standard in all headlines everywhere. It is far more complex than that. Some media are far more realiable than others. And even if you were right it still would do nothing to prove me wrong when I point out that Breitbart manipulates in the headline.

                        And perhaps you should read your own post again. You realize that the only thing you can say in favour of Breitbart in this case is that generally headlines are designed to be clickbait. Any serious media would rather not have that kind of defence.
                        "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


                        • Originally posted by Charles View Post
                          You make statements as if this is the standard in all headlines everywhere.
                          Then allow me to clarify -- it is quite common all over the internet.

                          It is far more complex than that. Some media are far more realiable than others.
                          And that gets lost in the fight, because the most aggressive one gets the attention. Classic example "Dog bites man" vs "Man bites dog".

                          And even if you were right
                          When am I NOT?

                          it still would do nothing to prove me wrong when I point out that Breitbart manipulates in the headline.
                          He does. Others do as well. It's incredibly common, particularly on the internet.

                          And perhaps you should read your own post again.
                          OK

                          You realize that the only thing you can say in favour of Breitbart in this case is that generally headlines are designed to be clickbait.
                          No, that's not the only thing I CAN say, but I go with "generally, headlines are designed to be clickbait", in that everybody is competing for the attention of the reader.

                          Any serious media would rather not have that kind of defence.
                          "Serious Media" is like "honest used car salesman". They're out there, but few and far between. IMOHBAO
                          "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                            In this day and age, Charles, headlines are DESIGNED to be clickbait. They want your attention. And they're true to the maxim "if it bleeds, it leads". So, no, headlines are NOT "quite important". They often are so far out of touch with the article they introduce...

                            In the old days, headlines were an indication of what's to follow.
                            In these days, headlines are designed to get YOU to follow.
                            It's not uncommon for a headline to blatantly contradict the content of the article. Another favorite trick is to present the headline as a leading question (i.e. "Did Trump collude with Russia?") even if the answer is no.
                            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


                            • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                              It's not uncommon for a headline to blatantly contradict the content of the article. Another favorite trick is to present the headline as a leading question (i.e. "Did Trump collude with Russia?") even if the answer is no.
                              It's all about "HEY, look at ME!"
                              "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                                It's not uncommon for a headline to blatantly contradict the content of the article. Another favorite trick is to present the headline as a leading question (i.e. "Did Trump collude with Russia?") even if the answer is no.
                                I am not surprised that this is your impression based on the sources you provide here. You should find better sources.
                                "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

                                Working...
                                X