Jump to content

The importance of the Free and independent Press


Pragidealist

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

Prag is speaking from a different place than most of us. He isn’t wrong. I think he’s talking about an interesting point actually. The internet is working against the people at this point. If the left looks at the right sources (correctly I may add) and says it’s bullshit while the right says the left’s sources are fake news then it ends up an eternal echo chamber. 

 

Obama discussed this with Letterman. I worked for Google for a few years, and Obama was spot on with his take where the internet has become a self fulfilling entity. You will get your version of truth no matter where you look, be it Q, or lizard people, or MAGA, or police violence, or the drug war, or the war machine...etc. The validity of truth is being lost. 

 

To add: I also think Prag is talking about the overall movement toward autocracy currently taking place in the world. Democracy is being proven as inept and dysfunctional. It simply isn’t working any longer for a lot of reasons that we can discuss in other threads. Look at what’s happening in France and Britain, two of the pillars of Democracy. Look what’s happening around us. We legitimately have reason to believe our president is a foreign agent. All the while China made XI the ruler for life. Putin is in as long as he wants. The rise of fascism is all around us. A free press is what differentiates a free society, and I think that’s his point, but it’s working against us if we just begin accepting the government’s word and continue to disintegrate the free press in a manner where every source against our bias is false. 

 

I disagree with the stance what Jamal did was wrong. He wasn’t. He was being even handed and said it’s closed until further review. That’s fair when dealing with people like Thor, Ben, and Tux. Honestly he was pulling a Mueller by saying well not exactly so let’s nip it in the bud. 

Btw - this guy gets it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Okay buddy. You and your ilk all trot out the same insane ramblings, barely literate sentences that only regurgitate the talk radio infused talking points you've been obsessed with ever since it becam

https://www.yahoo.com/news/apos-everybody-apos-bs-alarm-102751907.html Stronger than my opinion, but consistent with why the Special Counsel statement overrides the report, barring something more

The tenor of "the left" insofar as mainstream or institutional Democrats has been very tempered. You can't get a lot of these people to even say they'll start impeachment hearings or anything of the l

https://www.yahoo.com/news/apos-everybody-apos-bs-alarm-102751907.html

Stronger than my opinion, but consistent with why the Special Counsel statement overrides the report, barring something more.

 

Holding out that report as more than it is hurts journalism. Not the other way around. You have to be more careful in today's climate. Dot i's, cross t's and source even better. Journalism is hurt by inaccuracy, as it will be magnified.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Buzz Feed had a responsibility to make sure every piece of the story was 100% dead on. I have no problem with them being called out if even one part of it isn't true. 

 

The special counsel yields a powerful sword in terms of being able to squash a report though. If they didn't like the story coming out(which they clearly do not like anything coming out) they can use the most miniscule part of the story to discredit it. 

 

We'll find out down the road how much blame Buzzfeed had for misreporting. TBD

 

I have no opinion on locking threads. If it's a big/real story more threads will pop up. I can't remember the other thread that was locked and the reason I can't remember is because it was some conspiracy made up bull shit.

 

I don't like the way media outlets are compared or equalized. MSNBC is often called the left's Fox news and CNN is labeled fake news. Fox is straight up lying propaganda and MSNBC isn't. 

 

Buzzfeed's story overall is right, Trump got Cohen to lie for him about the Moscow Trump tower even if it failed a journalistic standard, we know it. The shit Tux posts is so stupid and outrageous we don't even know if he's trolling us or serious. 

 

TW, Trump never denied the Buzzfeed story and Rudy G said it's possible Trump talked to Cohen before he talked to congress, gee I wonder what he said!

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Jamalisms said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/apos-everybody-apos-bs-alarm-102751907.html

Stronger than my opinion, but consistent with why the Special Counsel statement overrides the report, barring something more.

 

Holding out that report as more than it is hurts journalism. Not the other way around. You have to be more careful in today's climate. Dot i's, cross t's and source even better. Journalism is hurt by inaccuracy, as it will be magnified.

This x1000. It speaks to the core why the buzzfeed article was published too early. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jamalisms said:

Emotional freight trains don't brake so well. I'm not jumping in front of it with reason. You guys are in your feels. That it progressed to the creation of this thread makes me laugh.

Bullshit dude. I said more than a few times that I didn't really mind the closing of the thread.

 

For me it's a discussion on semantics more than anything else. 

 

I can have an opinion that my neighbor shouldn't buy a brand new Corvette and then when does, not really give a shit. But then still have a discussion about why he probably shouldn't have done it.

 

You've got your head set on people being emotional and bc of that you're not actually paying attention to anything being said.

 

Prag and I actually have different points on it as well.

Edited by reo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha! Good discussion! 

 

Why was this so hard? 

 

(incidentally- I’ve said before I prefer it Trump is voted out and then charged to impeached. More consequences for both gop and Trump that way.  I suspect that is Mueller’s position as well. I think a lot of consecutive law enforcement agree with Kavanaugh about indicting and charging a sitting President). 

 

I think Buzz did fine if they are accurate but they do need be accurate. I agree that inaccuracies do hurt the free press. I don’t think we should assume inaccuracies or that Mueller’s motives align with broadly sharing information with the public. If he thinks a report will damage his investigation or case then he’ll try to squash it. And alerting ppl of what information they may have could do both.  So I can see multiple reasons Mueller would look to discredit a report and only one is to ensure the public has accurate information. I also would assume that would not be a motivating favor for him. So.. what’s left?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pragidealist said:

We also need to be very careful how we determine “fake news”. 

 

Fake news is rampant propaganda and NOT an inaccurate or changing story by a reporter solid journalistic practices 

Who called it fake news?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jamalisms said:

Lol, ok. Call it what you want.

 

The freight train of ... X ... that manifested in this misplaced and passionate (is that word allowed?) defense of journalism i doesn't brake well.

 

Full steam ahead!

Ha ! Fair enough 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Pragidealist said:

Doesn’t locking a thread imply fake news?

No. Especially when it's partnered with numerous assertions like "for now" and "absent corroboration" and "we'll reassess" and "the refutation was intentionally generic to force us to set aside the whole thing despite that it may be based on a small disagreement" and even the explicit statement:  "Not fake news."

 

In fact, the previously locked thread were retired Fake News because they were, whereas this was locked with wording that indicated it could be reopened. I have started my general belief that the report is probably pretty accurate multiple times. You ignore that because you don't like something you agree with being closed down, regardless of the reason.

 

Which is why your response has been silly and misguided.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jamalisms said:

No. Especially when it's partnered with numerous assertions like "for now" and "absent corroboration" and "we'll reassess" and "the refutation was intentionally generic to force us to set aside the whole thing despite that it may be based on a small disagreement" and even the explicit statement:  "Not fake news."

 

In fact, the previously locked thread were retired Fake News because they were, whereas this was locked with wording that indicated it could be reopened. I have started my general belief that the report is probably pretty accurate multiple times. You ignore that because you don't like something you agree with being closed down, regardless of the reason.

 

Which is why your response has been silly and misguided.

Again - not about what I agree with. It’s about how one judges journalism. There is no need to lock an ever changing story. There is only a need sensor propaganda. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thread was locked because the report lacks adequate support to balance out bring explicitly refuted by the authority and I am trying to moderate carefully to prevent proliferation of recollection incorrect information. It's rare, just like the statement from the special counsel was rare, but it happens. Mostly with shit, fake news. But, in this case, with an actual report that may have been enough to publish but walked a fine line and had been up in their face, for now, hurting journalistic integrity.

 

Part of that is on BuzzFeed publishing without more support. Part of that is on the special counsel. Part of that is on the current climate. Part of that is just natural. But none of the unfortunate result causes the report to outweigh the special counsel statement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Pragidealist said:

Again - not about what I agree with. It’s about how one judges journalism. There is no need to lock an ever changing story. There is only a need sensor propaganda. 

That's not how it will be moderated. Locking a thread is based on evidence in a black and white manner. Judging journalism will not necessarily correlate, similar to how one may disagree personally with abortion but not support abolition of it into law.

 

You'll have to get over it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...