One has a B.A. from Stanford plus a doctorate in Philosophy from Oxford. The other attended three colleges but never graduated. Somehow, these two individuals are equated to each other? Um...I really hate that Maddow is constantly equated with Hannity.
It is an opinion show. Glad you agree with all her opinions but it is still an opinion show passed off as a news show. Hannity is worse but don't give her a pass because you like her programming. It is all part of the same problem.I really hate that Maddow is constantly equated with Hannity.
I don't think it has ever been passed off as a news show. In fact all the MSNBC shows from Chris Matthew on, Chris Hayes, Rachel and Laurence O'Donnell have never represented themselves or have been promoted by the network as anything other than opinion shows that contain some news. Brian Williams at 11:00PM EST qualifies as a new program but that is the exception to the MSNBC evening lineup.It is an opinion show. Glad you agree with all her opinions but it is still an opinion show passed off as a news show. Hannity is worse but don't give her a pass because you like her programming. It is all part of the same problem.
Not sure where they are going out and saying it is an opinion show. They could at least call it a news and opinion show. I could be wrong but here are links to the shows own website and I don't see anything about it being anything other than a news show.I don't think it has ever been passed off as a news show. In fact all the MSNBC shows from Chris Matthew on, Chris Hayes, Rachel and Laurence O'Donnell have never represented themselves or have been promoted by the network as anything other than opinion shows that contain some news. Brian Williams at 11:00PM EST qualifies as a new program but that is the exception to the MSNBC evening lineup.
Akili Smith and Brett Favre were both NFL quarterbacks, it doesn't mean they are equals.It is an opinion show. Glad you agree with all her opinions but it is still an opinion show passed off as a news show. Hannity is worse but don't give her a pass because you like her programming. It is all part of the same problem.
Why?I really hate that Maddow is constantly equated with Hannity.
They were all examples of fake news. No one has proven otherwise.3 out of 4 weren't fake news and the other was an opinion piece not a news article. Opinion writers speak for themselves not for the publication and publishing an opinion piece doesn't mean the publication is endorsing any facts stated by the opinion writer as verified facts.
Sorry, all your examples of so called fake news were disproven. And if feeding koi and handshakes are the best you can come up with, you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel.They were all examples of fake news. No one has proven otherwise.
For the opinion piece, what you wrote doesn't matter. The publication decided to put that piece on their website under their name. Just because it is opinion, does not mean that if the author states something as a fact in his opinion piece, that it should not be called out if it is blatantly wrong.
Well, he doesI was at KFC last night and on the TV there they had CNN on. At the bottom of the screen was "Trump has a history of disparaging Blacks". They kept this at the bottom of the screen even after cutting to completely different stories. It was on millions of TVs sitting there stated as a fact. Integrity in journalism does not exist anymore.
No they were not? Link me to the posts where they were. I provided 4 examples. And arguing about the content of the articles misses the point. Once it's been established that a news source is faking news and headlines, it throws all of their articles into question.Sorry, all your examples of so called fake news were disproven. And if feeding koi and handshakes are the best you can come up with, you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel.
Opinion pieces from the right and left state facts wrong in major publications every day. Yes, they should be called out. No, the fact that any publication prints is not an endorsement of any erroneous facts stated in the opinion piece and does not make it fake news for the publication (only for the opinion writer).
Trump's history of disparaging blacks is well documented, see Omarosa, LeBron James, Don Lemon, Maxine Waters, Frederica Wilson, Colin Kaepernick, among others.I was at KFC last night and on the TV there they had CNN on. At the bottom of the screen was "Trump has a history of disparaging Blacks". They kept this at the bottom of the screen even after cutting to completely different stories. It was on millions of TVs sitting there stated as a fact. Integrity in journalism does not exist anymore.
Point to an article or blog or whatever where they posted something that was factually incorrect. Let me know if you don't understand what this means.
I'd this is a typical segment / interview on Maddow. I'd be curious to get your thoughts on how this is presented. Seems to me it's mostly fact based and trying to find answers from an expert guest.Why?
Because you generally agree with her opinions and generally disagree with his?
I don't watch her show or clips since she openly wept on TV the night her girl lost.I'd this is a typical segment / interview on Maddow. I'd be curious to get your thoughts on how this is presented. Seems to me it's mostly fact based and trying to find answers from an expert guest.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/manafort-jury-s-questions-set-court-watchers-guessing-1300806211810?v=railb
The first two had videos showing what happenedThey were all examples of fake news. No one has proven otherwise.
For the opinion piece, what you wrote doesn't matter. The publication decided to put that piece on their website under their name. Just because it is opinion, does not mean that if the author states something as a fact in his opinion piece, that it should not be called out if it is blatantly wrong.
The National Enquirer has been around since 1926. Haven't their free speech rights been upheld long before Citizens United?IvanKaramazov said:Nobody thinks that you can legally shut down the National Enquirer or Weekly World News. Even if you don't think they qualify as "the press," they has still have free speech rights. Thanks in part to Citizens United, of course.
You act like this would be difficult to provide.Point to an article or blog or whatever where they posted something that was factually incorrect. Let me know if you don't understand what this means.
I think it is fair to categorize his views towards immigration as extremeThe article took this a dozen steps further and incorrectly implied that Trump is an anti-immigrant extremist.
They weren’t and you didn’t show they were fake news.They were all examples of fake news. No one has proven otherwise.
For the opinion piece, what you wrote doesn't matter. The publication decided to put that piece on their website under their name. Just because it is opinion, does not mean that if the author states something as a fact in his opinion piece, that it should not be called out if it is blatantly wrong.
They took his statement about a violent gang and spun it to make it seem like the statement applied to all immigrants. That kind of spinning is the crux of fake news.I think it is fair to categorize his views towards immigration as extreme
It's not as if I'm a regular Maddow viewer, but yeah that was the last time I tuned in. Hucksterism.Wait that's not true. Someone posted here the time that she tweeted "ZOMG I HAVE TRUMPS TAX RETURNS!!!!". I watched that night too for a few minutes until I realized that was also a farce
Well, that one is a joke.Oh Dear Lord!
https://entertainment.theonion.com/fox-news-apologizes-for-mistaking-patti-labelle-for-are-1828403466Well, that one is a joke.
But they did include pics of Patti LaBelle in one tribute https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/fox-news-pays-tribute-aretha-franklin-image-patti-labelle-220952681.html
No, this article is dated 8-14-18, three days ago, so it wasn't from when Trump called MS-13 members animals. It is a lengthy article, but I don't see where the Vox writer implied that Trump is an anti-immigrant extremist, although with the Muslim Ban, referring to Mexicans immigrants as rapists, one can make a very persuasive argument that he is.https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2018/5/17/17364562/trump-dog-omarosa-dehumanization-psychology
This was from when Trump rightly called MS-13 members violent animals. The article took this a dozen steps further and incorrectly implied that Trump is an anti-immigrant extremist.
oh snap!Well, that one is a joke.
But they did include pics of Patti LaBelle in one tribute https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/fox-news-pays-tribute-aretha-franklin-image-patti-labelle-220952681.html
Andy Warhol meets xenophobic anger.urbanhack said:
There's a difference between an honest mistake and purposely misleading people with fake headlines and fake "facts" in articles.Officer Pete Malloy said:Well, that one is a joke.
But they did include pics of Patti LaBelle in one tribute https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/fox-news-pays-tribute-aretha-franklin-image-patti-labelle-220952681.html
LinkThere's a difference between an honest mistake and purposely misleading people with fake headlines and fake "facts" in articles.
There's a difference between an honest mistake and purposely misleading people with fake headlines and fake "facts" in articles.
Not at allCowboysfan8 said:Why?
Because you generally agree with her opinions and generally disagree with his?
Hmmm...I wonder where he got the enemy of the people line from?A California man was arrested today and charged with making violent threats against Boston Globe employees in retaliation for the paper's editorial on the press.
The man referred to the Globe as "the enemy of the people" and threatened to kill employees.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/california-man-charged-making-violent-threats-against-boston-globe-employees
This guy went way too far but the lying media is also culpableHmmm...I wonder where he got the enemy of the people line from?
Including Fox News, right?This guy went way too far but the lying media is also culpable
Wait, what?This guy went way too far but the lying media is also culpable
Wow. This is like saying that rape victims are culpable for "dressing provocatively".This guy went way too far but the lying media is also culpable