pantherclub
Footballguy
Come on man, lets not do this here. Dont try and make it "right" when you got duped and showed your behind yet again.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
CNN: Questions As To Whether Jussie Smollett Faked Attack (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Joe Bryant
- Start date
djmich
Footballguy
djmich
Footballguy
The problem is “the sides”. One side was already using the story to prove the other side horrible, erode it backfired.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I think it does, but to be fair I think the current “non-liberal” side is opposed to facts, science, expertise, and reality.
So, I’d like the news to not take those positions. Which would mean a liberal bias.
If you mean CNN and MSNBC, sure they slant left.
If you mean Fox, it slants right.
May I recommend Reuters?
sho nuff
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
avoiding injuries
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
Whoops. Remember when I wrote 95%? Lets make it 99% with this story, and perhaps I’m being generous.
I swear this is beginning to sound like the Tonya Harding story. Or, did anyone see that tv series “A Very English Scandal” with Hugh Grant? Some people are just too dumb for fiction.
djmich
Footballguy
A tad harsh on the non liberal side of media but I think more on the mark than off.
pantherclub
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
I already acknowledged that I was wrong about this.pantherclub said:
But I didn’t jump the gun. I didn’t really form any opinion on this story until I watched an interview with Smollett. I believed him. Your post reads as if I did something wrong here. If so, I don’t know what that would be.
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
You would like to see it, but actually not really, really, really since you didnt read it? It is right there in the link. Like click on the link I posted and then there it is.sho nuff said:
Tom Skerritt
Footballguy
Did you believe him due to the “facts” or simply because you wanted it to be true? If the latter, then shame on you.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
If it helps, the liberal media is realizing how well it sells to not care about facts and shifting that way to make money.djmich said:
Hopefully The Correspondent makes a dent in all of this.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
A Very English Scandal was wonderful.timschochet said:
This is not as well thought out as that was.
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/02/jussie-smollett-attack-police-report
Jussie Smollett did not initially want to report the racist, homophobic attack he endured last Tuesday morning, a recently released police report states. The actor, who was attacked by two men who yelled racial and homophobic slurs before allegedly putting his head in a noose, sustained mild injuries and bruising, the report states—and although at first he did not want to report the incident, he ultimately decided it would be in his best interest to speak with law enforcement.
CNN, which obtained the police document through a FOIA request, reports that Smollett did not recall any distinguishing features about his attackers, beyond the fact that they were dressed in black and wearing ski masks; he also could not remember the direction they ran in. He did, however, tell police that as the two approached him, they said, “Empire fa---t n---er.” He also told police that he had received hate mail at his place of work several days prior to the attack. Smollett reportedly received a letter at Fox Studios in Chicago that read, “You will die black f-g.”
Police have released images of two persons of interest in the case, amid an outpouring of support for Smollett from Hollywood and beyond. In a rare, raw moment on The Late Show, Ellen Page tearfully condemned the attack, as well as Vice President Mike Pence for his attitude toward L.G.B.T.Q. people. In a statement, Smollett’s family emphasized that what the actor endured was not an isolated incident. “Make no mistake,” his family wrote, “words matter. Hateful words lead to hateful actions. Radical love is the only solution, but passivity will be our downfall. We, as a family, will continue to work for love, equity and justice until it reigns supreme in our nation and all over the world.”
Jussie Smollett did not initially want to report the racist, homophobic attack he endured last Tuesday morning, a recently released police report states. The actor, who was attacked by two men who yelled racial and homophobic slurs before allegedly putting his head in a noose, sustained mild injuries and bruising, the report states—and although at first he did not want to report the incident, he ultimately decided it would be in his best interest to speak with law enforcement.
CNN, which obtained the police document through a FOIA request, reports that Smollett did not recall any distinguishing features about his attackers, beyond the fact that they were dressed in black and wearing ski masks; he also could not remember the direction they ran in. He did, however, tell police that as the two approached him, they said, “Empire fa---t n---er.” He also told police that he had received hate mail at his place of work several days prior to the attack. Smollett reportedly received a letter at Fox Studios in Chicago that read, “You will die black f-g.”
Police have released images of two persons of interest in the case, amid an outpouring of support for Smollett from Hollywood and beyond. In a rare, raw moment on The Late Show, Ellen Page tearfully condemned the attack, as well as Vice President Mike Pence for his attitude toward L.G.B.T.Q. people. In a statement, Smollett’s family emphasized that what the actor endured was not an isolated incident. “Make no mistake,” his family wrote, “words matter. Hateful words lead to hateful actions. Radical love is the only solution, but passivity will be our downfall. We, as a family, will continue to work for love, equity and justice until it reigns supreme in our nation and all over the world.”
OrtonToOlsen
Footballguy
avoiding injuries
Footballguy
This is MAGA country where there’s so little violence and racism from conservatives that you have to hire Nigerians.
sho nuff
Footballguy
I clicked your link and quoted what it said. You know, that whole part in quotes where it says possible? If that is why people are mad at the reporting, they need to re-evaluate themselves complaining about the reporting of the incident.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Well there isn’t so little violence though...as has been pointed out before that far right groups are responsible for a great number of violent attacks in this country.
This was the first link but there are plenty more.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/national/in-the-united-states-right-wing-violence-is-on-the-rise/2018/11/25/61f7f24a-deb4-11e8-85df-7a6b4d25cfbb_story.html
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
You said you would like to see the original reporting. The "original reporting" the twitter thread was based on was available right in the tweet. Like right there clear as day. Even tweeter would be like "Oh look an article, read it."
I am not wasting my time with your nonsense today. So by all means get your last word post in and enjoy it. Not getting trolled by your falsehoods today resulting in an endless loop of junk.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Not just one report...but all of it that has gotten people so upset about what they reported. Reporting that those things were possible in this aalleged attack was responsible journalism.
If that’s nonsense to show that the article you quoted didn’t just play it up as everything smollett said was true...then I’d again say people need to read closer rather than being so offended by the reporting.
And by 'great number' you mean a small fraction of a percent of overall violence in the country. There are over 800,000 cases of aggregated assaults in the US, less than 1000 are classified as hate crimes and only 50% of the hate crimes ones are even done by whites.
Ketamine Dreams
Footballguy
Really? Everyone knows they have a huge liberal slant. Tim, you are a nice guy, but you fail to see a lot of what goes on around you.timschochet said:
sho nuff
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
Tom Skerritt
Footballguy
An intelligent person would have to admit that the idea of a gay black man being attacked by racist homophobes is entirely plausible. Perhaps that is why Smollett thought he could get away with it.
sho nuff
Footballguy
No...everyone doesn’t know or even believe there is a huge liberal slant. In fact, it just doesn’t appear to be close to true by any measure.
timschochet
Footballguy
Honestly? Both.
But again I need to clarify the second part. I wanted it to be true because I didn’t want to think this guy was a liar- (I don’t really know him but I’ve always liked his sister going back to Friday Night Lights, and she supported him on this- it will probably hurt her career as well) and also because as I wrote I believe it IS true that the Trump era has increased bigotry.
But I DON’T want it to be true that somebody was viciously attacked, ever.
timschochet
Footballguy
But why would he want to? That’s the most bizarre part. Why take such a risk that could ruin your career? For what?
Tom Skerritt
Footballguy
But you wanted it to be true also because it would put a very bad light on the pro-Trump contingent. Right? Even I can admit that. But I didn’t believe his story from the very beginning. None of it made sense. It baffles me how people were so easily duped.
Former NPR CEO opens up about liberal media bias
Most reporters and editors are liberal — a now-dated Pew Research Center poll found that liberals outnumber conservatives in the media by some 5 to 1, and that comports with my own anecdotal experience at National Public Radio. When you are liberal, and everyone else around you is as well, it is easy to fall into groupthink on what stories are important, what sources are legitimate and what the narrative of the day will be.
This may seem like an unusual admission from someone who once ran NPR, but it is borne of recent experience. Spurred by a fear that red and blue America were drifting irrevocably apart, I decided to venture out from my overwhelmingly Democratic neighborhood and engage Republicans where they live, work and pray. For an entire year, I embedded myself with the other side, standing in pit row at a NASCAR race, hanging out at Tea Party meetings and sitting in on Steve Bannon’s radio show. I found an America far different from the one depicted in the press and imagined by presidents (“cling to guns or religion”) and presidential candidates (“basket of deplorables”) alike.
I spent many Sundays in evangelical churches and hung out with 15,000 evangelical youth at the Urbana conference. I wasn’t sure what to expect among thousands of college-age evangelicals, but I certainly didn’t expect the intense discussion of racial equity and refugee issues — how to help them, not how to keep them out — but that is what I got.
At Urbana, I met dozens of people who were dedicating their lives to the mission, spreading the good news of Jesus, of course, but doing so through a life of charity and compassion for others: staffing remote hospitals, building homes for the homeless and, in one case, flying a “powered parachute” over miles of uninhabited jungle in the western Congo to bring a little bit of entertainment, education and relief to some of the remotest villages you could imagine. It was all inspiring — and a little foolhardy, if you ask me about the safety of a powered parachute — but it left me with a very different impression of a community that was previously known to me only through Jerry Falwell and the movie “Footloose.”
Early this year, I drove west from Houston to Gonzales, Texas, to try my hand at pig hunting. It was my first time with a gun, and the noticeably concerned owner of the ranch at first banished me to a solitary spot on the grounds. Here, he said, the pigs would come to me and I could not pose a danger to anyone else. It was a nice spot indeed but did not make for much of a story, so I wandered off into the woods, hopefully protected by my Day-Glo hunting vest.
I eventually joined up with a family from Georgia. The group included the grandfather, Paps, and the father, CJ, but it was young Isaac, all of 8 years old, who took on the task of tutoring me in the ways of the hunt. He did a fine job, but we encountered few pigs (and killed none) in our morning walkabout. In the afternoon, with the Georgians heading home, I linked up with a group of friends from Houston who belied the demographic stereotyping of the hunt; collectively we were the equivalent of a bad bar joke: a Hispanic ex-soldier, a young black family man, a Serbian immigrant and a Jew from DC.
None of my new hunting partners fit the lazy caricature of the angry NRA member. Rather, they saw guns as both a shared sport and as a necessary means to protect their families during uncertain times. In truth, the only one who was even modestly angry was me, and that only had to do with my terrible ineptness as a hunter. In the end, though, I did bag a pig, or at least my new friends were willing to award me a kill, so that we could all glory together in the fraternity of the hunt.
I also spent time in depressed areas of Kentucky and Ohio with workers who felt that their concerns had long fallen on deaf ears and were looking for every opportunity to protest a government and political and media establishment that had left them behind. I drank late into the night at the Royal Oaks Bar in Youngstown and met workers who had been out of the mills for almost two decades and had suffered the interlocking plagues of unemployment, opioid addiction and declining health. They mourned the passing of the old days, when factory jobs were plentiful, lucrative and honored and lamented the destruction and decay of their communities, their livelihoods and their families. To a man (and sometimes a woman), they looked at media and saw stories that did not reflect the world that they knew or the fears that they had.
Over the course of this past year, I have tried to consume media as they do and understand it as a partisan player. It is not so hard to do. Take guns. Gun control and gun rights is one of our most divisive issues, and there are legitimate points on both sides. But media is obsessed with the gun-control side and gives only scant, mostly negative, recognition to the gun-rights sides.
Take, for instance, the issue of legitimate defensive gun use (DGU), which is often dismissed by the media as myth. But DGUs happen all the time — 200 times a day, according to the Department of Justice, or 5,000 times a day, according to an overly exuberant Florida State University study. But whichever study you choose to believe, DGUs happen frequently and give credence to my hunting friends who see their guns as the last line of defense for themselves and their families.
At one point during my research, I discovered a video of a would-be robber entering a Houston smoke shop, his purpose conveyed by the pistol that he leveled at the store clerk. But the robber was not the only armed person in the store. The security cameras show Raleigh, the store clerk, walking out from behind the counter, calmly raising his own gun and firing an accurate stream of bullets at the hapless robber. The wounded robber stumbles out, falls over the curb and eventually ends up under arrest.
It is not just defensive gun use that makes the video remarkable — it is Raleigh himself, who evidences such a nonchalance that he never bothers to put down the cigarette that he is smoking. At the end, Raleigh, having protected his store, enthuses, “Castle Doctrine, baby” — citing a law that allows a person to use force to defend a legally occupied place.
It is an amazing story, though far from unique, but you simply won’t find many like it in mainstream media (I found it on Reddit).
It’s not that media is suppressing stories intentionally. It’s that these stories don’t reflect their interests and beliefs.
It’s why my new friends in Youngstown, Ohio, and Pikeville, Ky., see media as hopelessly disconnected from their lives, and it is how the media has opened the door to charges of bias.
The mainstream media is constantly under attack by the president. They are “frankly disgusting,” “tremendously dishonest,” “failing,” “they make up the stories” and are now threatened with loss of broadcast licenses if they continue to author “fake news.” And that is just a random Wednesday’s worth of words from Donald Trump.
Some may take pleasure in the discomfort of the media, but it is not a good situation for the country to have the media in disrepute and under constant attack. Virtually every significant leader of this nation, from Jefferson on down, has recognized the critical role of an independent press to the orderly functioning of democracy. We should all be worried that more than 65 percent of voters think there is a lot of fake news in the mainstream media and that our major media institutions are seen as creating, not combating, our growing partisan divide.
Some of this loss of reputation stems from effective demagoguery from the right and the left, as well as from our demagogue-in-chief, but the attacks wouldn’t be so successful if our media institutions hadn’t failed us as well.
None of this justifies the attacks from President Trump, which are terribly inappropriate coming from the head of government. At the same time, the media should acknowledge its own failings in reflecting only their part of America. You can’t cover America from the Acela corridor, and the media need to get out and be part of the conversations that take place in churches and community centers and town halls.
I did that, and loved it, though I regret waiting until well after I left NPR to do so. I am skeptical that many will do so, since the current situation in an odd way works for Trump, who gets to rile his base, and for the media, which has grown an audience on the back of Washington dysfunction. In the end, they are both short-term winners. It is the public that is the long-term loser.
Ken Stern is the president of Palisades Media Ventures and the former CEO of National Public Radio. His book “Republican Like Me: How I Left the Liberal Bubble and Learned to Love the Right” (Harper) is out Tuesday.
Most reporters and editors are liberal — a now-dated Pew Research Center poll found that liberals outnumber conservatives in the media by some 5 to 1, and that comports with my own anecdotal experience at National Public Radio. When you are liberal, and everyone else around you is as well, it is easy to fall into groupthink on what stories are important, what sources are legitimate and what the narrative of the day will be.
This may seem like an unusual admission from someone who once ran NPR, but it is borne of recent experience. Spurred by a fear that red and blue America were drifting irrevocably apart, I decided to venture out from my overwhelmingly Democratic neighborhood and engage Republicans where they live, work and pray. For an entire year, I embedded myself with the other side, standing in pit row at a NASCAR race, hanging out at Tea Party meetings and sitting in on Steve Bannon’s radio show. I found an America far different from the one depicted in the press and imagined by presidents (“cling to guns or religion”) and presidential candidates (“basket of deplorables”) alike.
I spent many Sundays in evangelical churches and hung out with 15,000 evangelical youth at the Urbana conference. I wasn’t sure what to expect among thousands of college-age evangelicals, but I certainly didn’t expect the intense discussion of racial equity and refugee issues — how to help them, not how to keep them out — but that is what I got.
At Urbana, I met dozens of people who were dedicating their lives to the mission, spreading the good news of Jesus, of course, but doing so through a life of charity and compassion for others: staffing remote hospitals, building homes for the homeless and, in one case, flying a “powered parachute” over miles of uninhabited jungle in the western Congo to bring a little bit of entertainment, education and relief to some of the remotest villages you could imagine. It was all inspiring — and a little foolhardy, if you ask me about the safety of a powered parachute — but it left me with a very different impression of a community that was previously known to me only through Jerry Falwell and the movie “Footloose.”
Early this year, I drove west from Houston to Gonzales, Texas, to try my hand at pig hunting. It was my first time with a gun, and the noticeably concerned owner of the ranch at first banished me to a solitary spot on the grounds. Here, he said, the pigs would come to me and I could not pose a danger to anyone else. It was a nice spot indeed but did not make for much of a story, so I wandered off into the woods, hopefully protected by my Day-Glo hunting vest.
I eventually joined up with a family from Georgia. The group included the grandfather, Paps, and the father, CJ, but it was young Isaac, all of 8 years old, who took on the task of tutoring me in the ways of the hunt. He did a fine job, but we encountered few pigs (and killed none) in our morning walkabout. In the afternoon, with the Georgians heading home, I linked up with a group of friends from Houston who belied the demographic stereotyping of the hunt; collectively we were the equivalent of a bad bar joke: a Hispanic ex-soldier, a young black family man, a Serbian immigrant and a Jew from DC.
None of my new hunting partners fit the lazy caricature of the angry NRA member. Rather, they saw guns as both a shared sport and as a necessary means to protect their families during uncertain times. In truth, the only one who was even modestly angry was me, and that only had to do with my terrible ineptness as a hunter. In the end, though, I did bag a pig, or at least my new friends were willing to award me a kill, so that we could all glory together in the fraternity of the hunt.
I also spent time in depressed areas of Kentucky and Ohio with workers who felt that their concerns had long fallen on deaf ears and were looking for every opportunity to protest a government and political and media establishment that had left them behind. I drank late into the night at the Royal Oaks Bar in Youngstown and met workers who had been out of the mills for almost two decades and had suffered the interlocking plagues of unemployment, opioid addiction and declining health. They mourned the passing of the old days, when factory jobs were plentiful, lucrative and honored and lamented the destruction and decay of their communities, their livelihoods and their families. To a man (and sometimes a woman), they looked at media and saw stories that did not reflect the world that they knew or the fears that they had.
Over the course of this past year, I have tried to consume media as they do and understand it as a partisan player. It is not so hard to do. Take guns. Gun control and gun rights is one of our most divisive issues, and there are legitimate points on both sides. But media is obsessed with the gun-control side and gives only scant, mostly negative, recognition to the gun-rights sides.
Take, for instance, the issue of legitimate defensive gun use (DGU), which is often dismissed by the media as myth. But DGUs happen all the time — 200 times a day, according to the Department of Justice, or 5,000 times a day, according to an overly exuberant Florida State University study. But whichever study you choose to believe, DGUs happen frequently and give credence to my hunting friends who see their guns as the last line of defense for themselves and their families.
At one point during my research, I discovered a video of a would-be robber entering a Houston smoke shop, his purpose conveyed by the pistol that he leveled at the store clerk. But the robber was not the only armed person in the store. The security cameras show Raleigh, the store clerk, walking out from behind the counter, calmly raising his own gun and firing an accurate stream of bullets at the hapless robber. The wounded robber stumbles out, falls over the curb and eventually ends up under arrest.
It is not just defensive gun use that makes the video remarkable — it is Raleigh himself, who evidences such a nonchalance that he never bothers to put down the cigarette that he is smoking. At the end, Raleigh, having protected his store, enthuses, “Castle Doctrine, baby” — citing a law that allows a person to use force to defend a legally occupied place.
It is an amazing story, though far from unique, but you simply won’t find many like it in mainstream media (I found it on Reddit).
It’s not that media is suppressing stories intentionally. It’s that these stories don’t reflect their interests and beliefs.
It’s why my new friends in Youngstown, Ohio, and Pikeville, Ky., see media as hopelessly disconnected from their lives, and it is how the media has opened the door to charges of bias.
The mainstream media is constantly under attack by the president. They are “frankly disgusting,” “tremendously dishonest,” “failing,” “they make up the stories” and are now threatened with loss of broadcast licenses if they continue to author “fake news.” And that is just a random Wednesday’s worth of words from Donald Trump.
Some may take pleasure in the discomfort of the media, but it is not a good situation for the country to have the media in disrepute and under constant attack. Virtually every significant leader of this nation, from Jefferson on down, has recognized the critical role of an independent press to the orderly functioning of democracy. We should all be worried that more than 65 percent of voters think there is a lot of fake news in the mainstream media and that our major media institutions are seen as creating, not combating, our growing partisan divide.
Some of this loss of reputation stems from effective demagoguery from the right and the left, as well as from our demagogue-in-chief, but the attacks wouldn’t be so successful if our media institutions hadn’t failed us as well.
None of this justifies the attacks from President Trump, which are terribly inappropriate coming from the head of government. At the same time, the media should acknowledge its own failings in reflecting only their part of America. You can’t cover America from the Acela corridor, and the media need to get out and be part of the conversations that take place in churches and community centers and town halls.
I did that, and loved it, though I regret waiting until well after I left NPR to do so. I am skeptical that many will do so, since the current situation in an odd way works for Trump, who gets to rile his base, and for the media, which has grown an audience on the back of Washington dysfunction. In the end, they are both short-term winners. It is the public that is the long-term loser.
Ken Stern is the president of Palisades Media Ventures and the former CEO of National Public Radio. His book “Republican Like Me: How I Left the Liberal Bubble and Learned to Love the Right” (Harper) is out Tuesday.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
pantherclub
Footballguy
pantherclub
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
But yes, still, in fact, an opinion piece that doesn’t claim a huge liberal slant. Which is what posters too exception to.
pantherclub
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
GoBirds
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
Probably because he doesn’t get personal like this...
And he doesn’t actually break any of the terms of service for the website.
If you can not see the bias in media reporting you are blinded by your own bias. It is not even remotely a debateable topic.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Why are you doing this? I did not say there was no bias. I stated that there isn’t a huge liberal slant. That was the conversation being had when you jumped in with your opinion piece that didn’t refute what I had stated.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
