|
|
08-27-2019, 04:52 AM
|
|
Shitpost Sommelier
|
|
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
Streisand Effect Theatre.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
__________________
Peering from the top of Mount Stupid
|
08-27-2019, 07:19 AM
|
|
Solipsist
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Kolmannessa kerroksessa
Gender: Male
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
Some excellent suggestions in the twitter comments
|
08-27-2019, 06:48 PM
|
|
Shitpost Sommelier
|
|
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
Bret and a muscular exchange of honest views:
6B5A633C-0436-41CE-8709-5D6F860229CA.png
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
__________________
Peering from the top of Mount Stupid
|
08-27-2019, 07:22 PM
|
|
I read some of your foolish scree, then just skimmed the rest.
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bay Area
Gender: Male
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
It turns out if you challenge someone on twitter to be an adult and say that to your face, while going behind their back to get them fired, they will have no qualms in publishing your e-mail address on twitter and watching you burn.
I expect now he will do the media ‘snowflake’ cry circuit where other talking heads console him over how mean and unfair everyone else is and how as a reasonable white man he deserves to be heard and published in mainstream papers.
In addition it’s clear no one in journalism knows what they are doing when the NYTs puts the guy who’s entire point is to say dumb things and stir shit to drag in readers behind a sign in wall. No I’m not making an account just to see what childish whiney bullshit a right wing climate denier has to say.
Last edited by Ari; 08-27-2019 at 07:36 PM.
|
08-27-2019, 10:23 PM
|
|
Just keep m'nose clean, egg, chips & beans, I'm always full of steam
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: so far out, I'm too far in
Gender: Bender
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
No matter how often I get reminders that this is commonplace, sometimes I still get taken aback when someone who revels, delights, and wallows in being a complete and irretrievable asshole gets upset when called a complete and irretrievable asshole.
__________________
"Her eyes in certain light were violet, and all her teeth were even. That's a rare, fair feature: even teeth. She smiled to excess, but she chewed with real distinction." - Eleanor of Aquitaine
...........
|
08-29-2019, 06:47 PM
|
|
Safety glasses off, motherfuckers
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sarasota, FL
Gender: Bender
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
(Worth loading whole thread, btw)
tl;dr: Author of study says Sanders basically represented it accurately. Kessler gives Sanders three Pinocchios.
Who fact-checks the fact-checkers?
Oh, also:
__________________
Cēterum cēnseō factiōnem Rēpūblicānam dēlendam esse īgnī ferrōque.
|
08-30-2019, 05:21 AM
|
|
Shitpost Sommelier
|
|
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
__________________
Peering from the top of Mount Stupid
|
08-30-2019, 08:38 AM
|
|
Solipsist
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Kolmannessa kerroksessa
Gender: Male
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
I was going to quote something from that article - and then another thing - and then I just accepted that pretty much every paragraph has a powerful quote.
|
08-31-2019, 01:36 AM
|
|
Shitpost Sommelier
|
|
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
Oh Bret.
__________________
Peering from the top of Mount Stupid
|
08-31-2019, 07:25 PM
|
|
Shitpost Sommelier
|
|
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
Further discussion down thread wondering if that keans Bret provided the link and the content manag system shoved it in, or if some editor at NYT googled up Jews as Bedbugs to find the source.
__________________
Peering from the top of Mount Stupid
|
09-08-2019, 06:13 AM
|
|
Shitpost Sommelier
|
|
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
The article got taken down for some reason.
__________________
Peering from the top of Mount Stupid
|
09-08-2019, 02:36 PM
|
|
Solipsist
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Kolmannessa kerroksessa
Gender: Male
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamilah Hauptmann
The article got taken down for some reason.
|
It was too diverse.
|
09-08-2019, 06:18 PM
|
|
here to bore you with pictures
|
|
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
__________________
ta-
DAVE!!!
|
09-15-2019, 02:33 AM
|
|
Shitpost Sommelier
|
|
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
__________________
Peering from the top of Mount Stupid
|
09-15-2019, 04:21 AM
|
|
Safety glasses off, motherfuckers
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sarasota, FL
Gender: Bender
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
And now they've deleted that tweet, too, because their notpology was completely insufficient for the dumpster fire it was notpologising for!
Apparently the actual article is pretty good, though: The Education of Deborah Ramirez - Lawyers, Guns & Money
(Comments are, at least thus far, worth reading as well, but that's the rule rather than the exception with LGM.)
__________________
Cēterum cēnseō factiōnem Rēpūblicānam dēlendam esse īgnī ferrōque.
|
09-15-2019, 05:03 AM
|
|
Shitpost Sommelier
|
|
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Man
And now they've deleted that tweet, too, because their notpology was completely insufficient for the dumpster fire it was notpologising for!
|
I screencapped.
__________________
Peering from the top of Mount Stupid
|
09-15-2019, 09:15 AM
|
|
Shitpost Sommelier
|
|
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
That the NYT is even competitive for Dumbest Ass Tweet Of 2019 in a world with Donald Trump is really saying something. On a deep, dark, shitty level, I'm actually a little impressed.
__________________
Peering from the top of Mount Stupid
|
09-15-2019, 05:35 PM
|
|
here to bore you with pictures
|
|
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
I read the article, too, and it's well done and horrifying. Kavanaugh should never have been appointed, should have never been confirmed.
I actually feel for davidm - This is kind of the perfect example of what he's defending. These reporters who did the hard, good work and found the story.
...then have the advertisement of the article be such at odds with the article that it undermines the whole work.
...or have a right-wing opinion writer bully a professor over a silly tweet because he's more of a snowflake than the snowflakes he complains about.
So much good undermined by easily avoidable public embarrassment.
__________________
ta-
DAVE!!!
|
09-15-2019, 10:04 PM
|
|
Projecting my phallogos with long, hard diction
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dee Cee
Gender: Male
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
I don't feel for david. I've never claimed the NYT doesn't do any good reporting and haven't reported anything damaging about Trump. The fact is that he chooses to lie and present straw man arguments. He could defend the NYT without doing that, but he considers it important to cling to the argument that Clinton lost because, and only because, she was a "shitty candidate", even if it means he has to defend the media with dishonesty.
I've claimed that on net, the Times are not as hard on Trump as they ought to be, and often frame things in a way favorable to Republicans. But it is definitely true that the editors and whoever writes the tweets are frequently worse than the reporting. They choose the headlines. They choose what is front page news, what is worth devoting how much resources to. They're the ones who decided that Clinton's emails were worth more front page reporting than all policy combined in the last couple months of the elections. They're the ones who decided that the election was "over" and therefore reporting on unflattering* minutiae of hacked Clinton emails released by Wikileaks was more important than reporting on policy, or on other stories about Clinton, or on Trump's scandals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amy Chozick, a NYT reporter
A few weeks before Election Day, I was stuck in my cubicle poring over John Podesta’s emails. I wanted to be on the road. “I just feel like the election isn’t happening in my cubicle,” I said. “But it’s over,” an editor replied, reminding me that the Times’s Upshot election model gave Mrs. Clinton a 93 percent chance of winning. The ominous “they” who would keep the glass ceiling intact didn’t look that powerful then.
|
The fact is that I've been clear that I'm mostly talking about coverage priorities - how much coverage things get, what goes on the front page. Headlines and some bad reporters come into it too, the common both-sides framing, etc. but I've never said that NYT's reporters are all bad or even mostly bad, or that they don't print bad, damaging news about Trump.
As it turns out, saying it's more about the editors than the reporters would probably not comfort david anyway, as he's said that he works as an editor for the NYT! A fact that he mentioned once, in a sort of oblique way, but is perhaps relevant, no? Weird how he doesn't mention it more when he's going to the mat for them all the time that he's defending himself.
davidm simply chooses to distort what I say to defend the Times (and sometimes other media outlets) by pointing to the good coverage of Trump that exists, and not to seriously engage with the issue of what gets prioritized and emphasized. The reason is that he doesn't want to admit that the media obsession with Clinton's emails was bad, that the NYT contributed to it, and that it was biased against Clinton and the Democrats and that it's a large part of why Trump got elected. Because he wants to say that it's all about how Clinton was a "shitty candidate". Since he can't really defend the idea that Clinton's emails were more important than ALL POLICY COMBINED for informing the public in the high-minded way the media would like to conceive of its job... he chooses to LIE and say that I'm arguing that the NYT shouldn't have covered her emails at all and want it to be a Democratic propaganda outlet.
I don't feel bad for him that he wants to defend the media for good reasons and they make it hard. Because he's not motivated by good reasons. He would get a sympathetic audience if he wanted to make the argument you make. The reason his job is hard is because he wants to defend the premise that the media bears no blame for Trump's election by hyping Clinton email hysteria (and Clinton Foundation bullshit as well) and it's all that evil bitch's fault**. And it's just not a good premise.
*Mostly only unflattering by innuendo. The fact that the emails were hacked made them seem salacious, because we weren't "supposed" to see them. But in fact, activities like "talking to reporters by email" are typical campaign activities that even people like Saint Bernie and his team do.
**And surely just coincidentally, that means it's not at all davidm's fault or his colleagues'. In fact, he's said that I'm more to blame than him as someone who works at the paper of record, as I voted for Clinton in the irrelevant DC primary and defended her online to a handful of randos.
Last edited by erimir; 09-15-2019 at 10:43 PM.
|
09-17-2019, 05:49 PM
|
|
I read some of your foolish scree, then just skimmed the rest.
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bay Area
Gender: Male
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
Has anyone else noticed the mobile experience on many news sites is basically unusable? It seems like more and more any news site I go to has some autoplay video, an ad that pops up and covers the screen either full or part way that I don’t dare click on because the x might just send me to their site or ads that load in so slowly they keep bumping the text around so I can’t keep my place.
And for what, often like three paragraphs or some dumb slideshow that spreads out 30 sentences into 30 slides and another 10 ads.
|
09-17-2019, 08:57 PM
|
|
Solipsist
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Kolmannessa kerroksessa
Gender: Male
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
50% of "main" stream US sites y'all post are unusable even on desktops over here, because they haven't worked out if they can be bothered to comply with GDPR.
Most of the rest come up OK ... and then 3 seconds later are obscured by ACCEPT ALL COOKIES messages.
|
09-18-2019, 12:03 AM
|
|
Just keep m'nose clean, egg, chips & beans, I'm always full of steam
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: so far out, I'm too far in
Gender: Bender
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
On the plus side, you don't have to live in the US. Not entirely sure whether the UK is a better option these days, but at least Bozo tweets less.
__________________
"Her eyes in certain light were violet, and all her teeth were even. That's a rare, fair feature: even teeth. She smiled to excess, but she chewed with real distinction." - Eleanor of Aquitaine
...........
|
09-18-2019, 02:51 AM
|
|
Shitpost Sommelier
|
|
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
I was talking to an Australian friend the other day on how cool it is that Aus is no longer the biggest retarded stepchild in the Anglosphere.
__________________
Peering from the top of Mount Stupid
|
09-18-2019, 06:57 AM
|
|
Shitpost Sommelier
|
|
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
Thrad about actual fake news!
__________________
Peering from the top of Mount Stupid
|
09-18-2019, 06:59 PM
|
|
Solipsist
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Kolmannessa kerroksessa
Gender: Male
|
|
Re: Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks
A comment:
Quote:
I am considering cancelling my sub to @thetimes because of this. Absolutely disgusting.
|
No you aren't. If you find it "absolutely disgusting" you either don't have a sub and are just prompting others to cancel (maybe a worthy aim, but lying to get others to stop supporting a lying newspaper ... not worthy), or have definitely already cancelled.
If you're only "considering" ceasing payments to an absolutely disgusting organisation ... then you aren't considering it.
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:16 AM.
|
|
|
|