SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
The president, the prior attorney general, and the most recent pick for the federal reserve board were all CNN commentators.
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.
Media Criticism (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter ren hoek
- Start date
Long Ball Larry
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Sorry this is another in a continuing series of right wing bloggers posting MSM stories.
- The Trumpites are currently skulking but I absolutely guarantee that in multiple places in the RW blogospheres and forums across the intertubes Trump supporters are posting this Daily Caller report which is just a reframing of original reporting by the N.Y. Times - which of course they’d never so much as click at.
- The Trumpites are currently skulking but I absolutely guarantee that in multiple places in the RW blogospheres and forums across the intertubes Trump supporters are posting this Daily Caller report which is just a reframing of original reporting by the N.Y. Times - which of course they’d never so much as click at.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
ren hoek
Footballguy
‘If true’: MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell substitutes wishful thinking for journalism 
By Erik Wemple
Media critic with a focus on the ups and downs and downs of the cable-news industry.
August 29 at 2:38 PM
There’s a two-word phrase that will stick with MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell for some time, if not his entire career. He invoked it over and over on his Tuesday night program in reference to Donald Trump’s dealings with Deutsche Bank. “I may have some information in this next hour which would add a great deal to their understanding of that, if true, and I’ll be discussing it here in the beginning of the show,” said O’Donnell at the outset of his opinion program, during the handoff from colleague Rachel Maddow.
He went to the wishing well again: “I want to get your reaction to what it could mean, if true, and I stress if true because this is a single source.”
And again: “That would explain, it seems to me, every kind word Donald Trump has ever said about Russia and Vladimir Putin, if true, and I stress the ‘if true’ part of this.”
And again: “If true, that would explain every kind word Donald Trump has ever said about Russia and Vladimir Putin — if true. If true, that would be a significant factor in Vladimir Putin’s publicly stated preference for presidential candidate Donald Trump over presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.”
And again: “Stress if true.”
And ad nauseam: “If true. The key words of this opening discussion tonight are ‘if true.’”
Actually, no: The key words of the opening discussion were the uncorroborated, wish-fulfillment garbage that O’Donnell presented to his viewers: Namely, that according to his “single source,” loan documents from Deutsche Bank involving Trump “show that he has co-signers. That`s how he was able to obtain those loans. And that the co-signers are Russian oligarchs.”
John Heilemann, an MSNBC national affairs analyst, regurgitated the cautionary phrase of the moment and then proclaimed how big a story this could be: “Got to stress if true, but if true, the reporting that you have … it’s the skeleton key, right, that opens — picks the lock on so many fundamental mysteries of the Trump era.”
Well, guess what: Those fundamental mysteries are going to remain in the shadows going into the Labor Day weekend. Because after engaging in pathological emphasis of the “if true” dimension of his “reporting,” O’Donnell on Wednesday was forced to retract the story.
By Erik Wemple
Media critic with a focus on the ups and downs and downs of the cable-news industry.
August 29 at 2:38 PM
There’s a two-word phrase that will stick with MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell for some time, if not his entire career. He invoked it over and over on his Tuesday night program in reference to Donald Trump’s dealings with Deutsche Bank. “I may have some information in this next hour which would add a great deal to their understanding of that, if true, and I’ll be discussing it here in the beginning of the show,” said O’Donnell at the outset of his opinion program, during the handoff from colleague Rachel Maddow.
He went to the wishing well again: “I want to get your reaction to what it could mean, if true, and I stress if true because this is a single source.”
And again: “That would explain, it seems to me, every kind word Donald Trump has ever said about Russia and Vladimir Putin, if true, and I stress the ‘if true’ part of this.”
And again: “If true, that would explain every kind word Donald Trump has ever said about Russia and Vladimir Putin — if true. If true, that would be a significant factor in Vladimir Putin’s publicly stated preference for presidential candidate Donald Trump over presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.”
And again: “Stress if true.”
And ad nauseam: “If true. The key words of this opening discussion tonight are ‘if true.’”
Actually, no: The key words of the opening discussion were the uncorroborated, wish-fulfillment garbage that O’Donnell presented to his viewers: Namely, that according to his “single source,” loan documents from Deutsche Bank involving Trump “show that he has co-signers. That`s how he was able to obtain those loans. And that the co-signers are Russian oligarchs.”
John Heilemann, an MSNBC national affairs analyst, regurgitated the cautionary phrase of the moment and then proclaimed how big a story this could be: “Got to stress if true, but if true, the reporting that you have … it’s the skeleton key, right, that opens — picks the lock on so many fundamental mysteries of the Trump era.”
Well, guess what: Those fundamental mysteries are going to remain in the shadows going into the Labor Day weekend. Because after engaging in pathological emphasis of the “if true” dimension of his “reporting,” O’Donnell on Wednesday was forced to retract the story.
ren hoek
Footballguy
Oh no- the Sanders campaign criticized the Washington Post's "Fact Checker". Therefore, Bernie = Trump!
Warren Gunnels @GunnelsWarren
NEWS: The Bernie 2020 campaign has just sent a detailed letter to @washingtonpost editor @PostBaron demanding a retraction of the inaccurate "fact check" article about @BernieSanders & medical bankruptcy.
We await Mr. Baron's response. Read the letter: https://bernie.substack.com/p/bernie-2020-demands-retraction-of
Warren Gunnels @GunnelsWarren
NEWS: The Bernie 2020 campaign has just sent a detailed letter to @washingtonpost editor @PostBaron demanding a retraction of the inaccurate "fact check" article about @BernieSanders & medical bankruptcy.
We await Mr. Baron's response. Read the letter: https://bernie.substack.com/p/bernie-2020-demands-retraction-of
Last edited by a moderator:
Encumbrance
Footballguy
Fact Checkers? S'Nope!ren hoek said:
Max Power
Footballguy
I want to address the fact that some people think the main stream media is the only source for news. Unbiased and unfiltered truths.
1) the MSM has been wrong before. Enough that I dont need to source it. I dont think it was always wilful negligence, but they arent rocking a 100%
2) Twitter and Reddit are now two huge entities in the new reporting world and they aren't entirely regulated yet. The MSM took a while to come around to these entities. They have falsely reported stories that Twitter video debunked.
3) take a guy like Jimmy Dore. Total liberal but also very critical of the MSM. The guy puts out a show a day about how bad they are. He has Aaron Mate on often who just received an award for how factual his reporting is and at times it isnt in line with MSM talking points. Which btw he thinks the Biden/Ukraine thing isnt totally cut and dry.
4) The ratings are going to crap. Blame whomever you need to, but the underlying reason is that the trust in MSM is way down. Fox holds steady, but the others have no leg to stand on after 2 years of hoax reporting.
5) Trump calling out the media. REGARDLESS of your feelings about Trump, people will continue to believe and rally around the point every time we see an inaccuracy. MSM has plenty of them.
6) Double standards and woke culture are finally eating into the MSM narrative. Don Lemon is not a good guy. Rachel Maddow is becoming a Russiagate punchline. People are seeing this now.
So this is why I question the MSM. I'll go to a source people asterisk like fox news and follow the source reporting. In 2016. CNN lost their reputation of being above reproach.
Snopes is bullcrap. Debunking and conspiracy theory are just the go to words to get past anything the media doesnt want to cover. Hey Epstein is a conspiracy theory right now.
Washington Post... a legit paper right? Let's talk some facts here. Owned by Jeff Bezos, who is likely the richest man America. 33% of his Amazon employees are not paid a living wage and on government assistance. Does Amazon pay taxes? Yes, but not at the rate it should. Meaning Mr Bezos' employees are putting food on their table by your tax dollar. So tell me you trust his Washington Post to be unbiased. Total sham.
1) the MSM has been wrong before. Enough that I dont need to source it. I dont think it was always wilful negligence, but they arent rocking a 100%
2) Twitter and Reddit are now two huge entities in the new reporting world and they aren't entirely regulated yet. The MSM took a while to come around to these entities. They have falsely reported stories that Twitter video debunked.
3) take a guy like Jimmy Dore. Total liberal but also very critical of the MSM. The guy puts out a show a day about how bad they are. He has Aaron Mate on often who just received an award for how factual his reporting is and at times it isnt in line with MSM talking points. Which btw he thinks the Biden/Ukraine thing isnt totally cut and dry.
4) The ratings are going to crap. Blame whomever you need to, but the underlying reason is that the trust in MSM is way down. Fox holds steady, but the others have no leg to stand on after 2 years of hoax reporting.
5) Trump calling out the media. REGARDLESS of your feelings about Trump, people will continue to believe and rally around the point every time we see an inaccuracy. MSM has plenty of them.
6) Double standards and woke culture are finally eating into the MSM narrative. Don Lemon is not a good guy. Rachel Maddow is becoming a Russiagate punchline. People are seeing this now.
So this is why I question the MSM. I'll go to a source people asterisk like fox news and follow the source reporting. In 2016. CNN lost their reputation of being above reproach.
Snopes is bullcrap. Debunking and conspiracy theory are just the go to words to get past anything the media doesnt want to cover. Hey Epstein is a conspiracy theory right now.
Washington Post... a legit paper right? Let's talk some facts here. Owned by Jeff Bezos, who is likely the richest man America. 33% of his Amazon employees are not paid a living wage and on government assistance. Does Amazon pay taxes? Yes, but not at the rate it should. Meaning Mr Bezos' employees are putting food on their table by your tax dollar. So tell me you trust his Washington Post to be unbiased. Total sham.
Mister CIA
Footballguy
Max Power
Footballguy
No. It is my opinion and thoughts and with such a generic reply I assume that you find it too dumb to reply to or you cant formulate your opinions.
God bless
Edit: noticed the screen name now. Does that mean anything?
Last edited by a moderator:
Mister CIA
Footballguy
I mean this without malice, but your thoughts are a bit incoherent, like output of an AI bot that spent a month crawling Twitter.
But I'm with you. I don't like CNN either. Not because they are dishonest, but because it's a terrible product, and the New York Times is closing in fast.
Max Power
Footballguy
Well I do drink at 4 am on nights I dont work, but what dont you like? I'm an average joe American and if I'm misinformed, teach me with some cold hard truths.
One day I point to an affidavit and sworn testimony as proof, but get told it's all a lie. Day 2 someone quotes it as "debunked" without sourcing and no one questions it.
If a guy like John Solomon is making up documents, then these major new networks need to flagging it front and center.
ren hoek
Footballguy
It's been a big week for media malpractice. It is stupid hard to keep up with all the distortions and misdirection in msm, but we're gonna do it in this thread!
-CNN apparently oversaturates footage of Bernie Sanders to make him look more red, sickly: CBS video, vs. CNN's deathly ill red saturation above. AP video of the same interview made him look completely normal. I believe Shamrock posted this in another thread.
-Elizabeth Warren's viral moment in a CNN Town Hall was prompted by a question from a maxed-out Elizabeth Warren donor; CNN doesn't disclose. CNN pawns off Democratic party hacks as organic questioners rather unapologetically in their Town Halls.
-LA Times publishes oped, "It’s time for Bernie and his bros to get behind Elizabeth Warren"- doesn't disclose that the author worked for Warren's daughter while she headed Demos.
-ABC News broadcasts fake Syria bombing video that's actually from a Kentucky military show in 2017
On a side: not sure if it's been posted here yet, but this video shows some good examples of how big-time TV pundits trivialize the Sanders campaign and his supporters. Hate to go there but there's an obvious msm bias towards independent, nascent political candidacies.
-CNN apparently oversaturates footage of Bernie Sanders to make him look more red, sickly: CBS video, vs. CNN's deathly ill red saturation above. AP video of the same interview made him look completely normal. I believe Shamrock posted this in another thread.
-Elizabeth Warren's viral moment in a CNN Town Hall was prompted by a question from a maxed-out Elizabeth Warren donor; CNN doesn't disclose. CNN pawns off Democratic party hacks as organic questioners rather unapologetically in their Town Halls.
-LA Times publishes oped, "It’s time for Bernie and his bros to get behind Elizabeth Warren"- doesn't disclose that the author worked for Warren's daughter while she headed Demos.
-ABC News broadcasts fake Syria bombing video that's actually from a Kentucky military show in 2017
On a side: not sure if it's been posted here yet, but this video shows some good examples of how big-time TV pundits trivialize the Sanders campaign and his supporters. Hate to go there but there's an obvious msm bias towards independent, nascent political candidacies.
The Commish
Footballguy
Genuine question to all you obsessed with our media....why the #### do you pay ANY attention to it at all? I get turning on a debate or covering a live event going down, but outside of that it makes ZERO sense, especially when there are other outlets that are pretty decent. Did you ever stop to think that if you stopped giving this outlets oxygen, they just might see the impact and change their ways? They're here to generate ratings...period...full stop. Every slapfight you guys have over the media just contributes to the problem. You're pouring gasoline on the fire while #####ing that it's getting bigger.
Max Power
Footballguy
I'd like to think the 4th estate still has integrity. What and how they report has a substantial influence on our society. If society doesn't hold them accountable, we are heading into a dark era.The Commish said:
This has probably been going on a long time, but now with social media exposing the poor or misleading work done by the media, we really need to have our eyes and ears open for the truth.
That ABC video wasn't just a mistake. It was manufactured misinformation. Every time that happens Trump's claim of fake news becomes validated in some voters eyes. Why would anyone not have an issue with that?
The Commish
Footballguy
You aren't holding them accountable if you're still watching them and giving them oxygen. There's no way around it
There are plenty of ways to get legit news and information without ever referencing or watching or reading our MSM ever.
Max Power
Footballguy
To be fair I don't watch CNN often or read the LA Times. Maybe I'll watch some ABC news reporting, but that is mostly because I'm waiting for something else on ABC to start. I didn't see a single one of those stories on their first run.You aren't holding them accountable if you're still watching them and giving them oxygen. There's no way around it
All I can really do is point out the inaccuracy. I can't stop airports from showing CNN on every TV at every gate.
The Commish
Footballguy
Max Power
Footballguy
If enough eyes are opened, maybe MSM changes its ways. I still think a good percentage of people don't ever question the media, and they should.
The Commish
Footballguy
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
I see the guy who spent months passing along media reports claiming that Seth Rich was assassinated by Democratic operatives at the behest of Hillary Clinton is here to tell us that the media is being unfair to a presidential candidate.
Sure, why not.
Sure, why not.
Max Power
Footballguy
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Thanks! I also thought it was important to put the hilarious argument here in context.
Max Power
Footballguy
Yes. The fact that you jumped to another issue instead of addressing the content in this tread speaks volumes.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
There are two things at issue here:
1. The media makes mistakes sometimes. This is true! I'm glad people hold them accountable for those mistakes. Incidentally, the people who most often do so are ... media. Gizmodo, for example (responsible the story about the ABC News video) is a side formerly under the Gawker media umbrella, the one crippled by billionaire Trump ally Peter Thiel. The lesson here isn't "Trump is right, fake news!" The lesson here is to support independent and passionate journalists who do important work and don't let billionaire hedge funders pick them apart and litigate them to death or sell them off in pieces.
2. The media has it out for Sanders. This is utterly laughable. On this issue it is important, I think, to point out that the person making the argument has also put forth other totally baseless conspiracy theories about presidential candidates and has shown a tendency to buy into easily disproven fringe nonsense.
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
Bashing the “mainstream media” as a whole is something I just don’t get. No one is claiming that any media entity is perfect or beyond making an error. But the idea that we should ignore the journalistic institutions that have historically been the most accurate and have the most rigorous editorial standards in favor of what, blogs by conservatives who have little to no editorial oversight?
Max Power
Footballguy
So we agree that the media needs to be held accountable and I also agree independent journalists produce more factual and less bias material. I will gladly support them, but the problem becomes keeping up with the volume of news. These independent journalists can't cover every story up to the high standards set, so we rely on falling back to MSM for our information. So when the MSM goes out of it's way to alter videos or fails to verify facts, Trump gets to call it "fake news". He calls things that aren't fake news "fake" at times and a typical American doesn't follow up on his claims. So when something can easily be pointed to as an example it's bad for everyone.
So I'm left here wonder what ABC news was thinking airing what they did. It was an altered video and claimed to be something it wasn't. After being called on it, their response was to remove the content and issue a written apology. To my knowledge they haven't gone back on air to apologize or admit the mistake. Is it beneficial to them to air an altered story to millions (which the facts may have even been 100% accurate) just to issue a written apology not seen by many later? I don't know.
I've never stomped my foot on the Bernie thing. I'm not a Bernie guy, but I do think his anti establishment views aren't well received by the established media. If you don't agree, that is fine, I don't have any interest arguing that point.
You can point out what you think my mindset is when I approach a story, but I think there is a more constructive way to do it than the initial reply though. How you broke it down in the above post is much better. The Seth Rich thing was 3 years ago, so I'm not sure everything I've ever posted in the thread about it. I don't think I ever said Hillary had him killed. I likely did post a story saying the DNC should be looked at. I think it also speaks the frame of mind calling anything Seth Rich related a totally baseless conspiracy theory. The case is still an unsolved murder with a proposed motive that doesn't make much sense. So as of right now nothing has been proven or disproves any theory 100%.
ren hoek
Footballguy
I don’t have cable. I don’t give them a dime. Pointing out their deception on websites they don’t profit from doesn’t help them at all.The Commish said:
But millions of people watch them religiously, and the talking points I see on msm inevitably make their way to this board too. It also enables Trump to call them fake news and land shots against their credibility, which is a problem in itself. It also takes down credible, honest news outlets down a peg when they #### on the floor of journalism like that.
So I think it’s an interesting subject to talk about. If it bothers you like that, just click on other threads.
The Commish
Footballguy
Make no mistake about it....it doesn't bother me at all. You guy do you. You continue to drive people to those various sites with your 'hot takes' all day and twice on Sunday for all I care. But it really is entertaining to watch you guys complain about something you're feeding. Entertaining? Bad word...puzzling. That's a better word. I was asking the question because for the life of me I can't figure you guys out on my own.I don’t have cable. I don’t give them a dime. Pointing out their deception on websites they don’t profit from doesn’t help them at all.
But millions of people watch them religiously, and the talking points I see on msm inevitably make their way to this board too. It also enables Trump to call them fake news and land shots against their credibility, which is a problem in itself. It also takes down credible, honest news outlets down a peg when they #### on the floor of journalism like that.
So I think it’s an interesting subject to talk about. If it bothers you like that, just click on other threads.
ren hoek
Footballguy
Who's going to CNN/FOX/MSNBC etc. on account of us talking about it? Who are these people that are becoming MSM viewers off of these posts? I don't think we're feeding anything.
The Commish
Footballguy
You really don't think people here go to those sites via the links you guys provide or go to those sites to see what the hubbub is all about for themselves? Ok. In your post above with the video it's all about MSNBC, CNN etc....
There is a massive obsession with our MSM and its "slant" in this country and it drives people to those sites daily. If you don't think giving them credibility by bringing them up all the time isn't a contributor, we'll agree to disagree. That's a position I don't even know how to argue against, so I'm not even going to try
ren hoek
Footballguy
Most of the links in here aren't to the network or article itself, but a user commenting on them in a 'fair use' sense. I just flipped through the thread, the only MSM links I saw were Saints linking to an Atlantic piece, Saints linking to a Chuck Ross tweet which linked to a DC article which linked to a NYT piece, and a post I made linking to WaPo (which was them criticizing MSNBC). Not seeing your argument where people hear why CNN sucks and then feel driven to go check out CNN.You really don't think people here go to those sites via the links you guys provide or go to those sites to see what the hubbub is all about for themselves? Ok. In your post above with the video it's all about MSNBC, CNN etc....
There is a massive obsession with our MSM and its "slant" in this country and it drives people to those sites daily. If you don't think giving them credibility by bringing them up all the time isn't a contributor, we'll agree to disagree. That's a position I don't even know how to argue against, so I'm not even going to try
Now, if you want to talk about viewers feeding MSM, you might talk about @timschochet. I'm pretty sure he watches Fox News everyday, just to come here and complain about how awful Fox News is.
The Commish
Footballguy
Stealthycat
Footballguy
Stealthycat
Footballguy
I just went to cnn.com
I did a control find on "Syria" "Turkey" "Kurds" ..... the only thing was Gabbard and Buttgig spatting on the debate last night
what are we, a few days after the withdraw and the media anti-Trump Kurds/Syria hysteria ..... and now? nothing ? not a peep ?
why ?
I did a control find on "Syria" "Turkey" "Kurds" ..... the only thing was Gabbard and Buttgig spatting on the debate last night
what are we, a few days after the withdraw and the media anti-Trump Kurds/Syria hysteria ..... and now? nothing ? not a peep ?
why ?
apalmer
Footballguy
I did the same search and got (from the last 24 hours):
Republican senators both blast and praise Trump's Syria policy
Trump administration intensifies Syria damage-control efforts
Russian military police are now patrolling the line between Syrian and Turkish forces
Turkey's assault in Syria is a boon for Erdogan. Here's why
US troops express anger at Trump's Syria policy: 'We betrayed' the Kurds
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
[scooter]
Footballguy
Stealthy is referring to front page headlines that contain the words "Syria", "Turkey" or "Kurds", of which there are none.
Not sure what his point is, though, since it tends to contradict the theory that CNN has a left-wing bias.
The Commish
Footballguy
So now the "left wing" media ISN'T covering the Syria issue in your view? I swear I'll never understand how you reconcile ANY of your positions in an honest way. Oh, exhibit A ren of what I was talking about. There are several Stealthy's on this board.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
I'm trying but failing to imagine the journey a person must go on where they end up more concerned about what a website says about a horrible massacre of important longtime US allies that will also boost ISIS than about the government that stepped aside and let it all happen for no particular reason.
Can you walk me through that, as a Trump supporter? Honest question here. I just don't get it. Because from where I'm sitting it seems like the people we should be attacking this morning are, in order:
1 Erdogan and his forces, who are doing the massacring and the ISIS-empowering
2. The Trump administration, who tacitly approved of the massacring and the ISIS-empowering that was an obvious and inevitable consequence of their recent foreign policy decisions
3. The American voters who empowered and continue to support the Trump administration despite loud, repeated warnings and pleas from their fellow Americans that the Trump administration would be exactly as cruel, incompetent and dangerous as they're currently proving themselves to be
...
...
1,532,857: Some random online layout editor at CNN
Am I wrong here?
Chicago Hooligan
Footballguy
Stealthycat
Footballguy
CNN has articles now
my point is - this is THE news isn't it? It was for days, .... and now? it isn't?
Media .... they paint what they want using half truths, sometimes outright lies to get a response from the people reading/viewing. They have to do something everyday to grab people's attention, else we become bored and click another page. And if your main reading group is liberal? You'll cater to that. Its just how its become now :(
[scooter]
Footballguy
You're being disingenuous here. CNN has had articles on Syria from day one. But the news moves swiftly and not every update finds space on the front page.
I mean, you're basically criticizing CNN for not doing the FoxNews "BENGHAZI!" strategy.
Stealthycat
Footballguy
one of the biggest stories IMO .... Epstein. What he did, and the people who did it with him .... enough to bring down top political figures and royalty. Killed/died in jail, and all that chatter/news?
where is it today ?
that's how easily media can manipulate what society focuses on
[scooter]
Footballguy
Have there been any recent updates in Epstein's story that weren't publicized?
I'm not sure if you understand how journalism works. You do realize that news organizations do not exist for the sole purpose of publicizing stale conspiracy theories about dead people.......right?
apalmer
Footballguy
Where's Chevy Chase when you need him? "This just in: Francisco Franco and Jeffrey Epstein are both still dead."*
*Not an actual quote.
