If it wasn’t for James Clyburn Dems would have nominated Bernie Sanders in the last election. The Socialism thread running through the Democratic Party is much more pronounced than some would like to admit.
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.
Thomas Frank Compares Anti-Trump Media To "Cold War McCarthyism" (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter rockaction
- Start date
How about Biden putting children in cages?
”I’ll take ‘Things You Won’t See on CNN Today’ for $100”.
Last edited by a moderator:
sho nuff
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
There are 140 news items on CNN’s mobile landing page right now. Not one of them deals with the Biden decision to reopen the unaccompanied minor facility, or AOC’s outrage against it. Meanwhile there are 4 articles dealing with Trump.
Last edited by a moderator:
The General
Footballguy
I read about this yesterday. You don’t have to get all your news from CNN. Not a good idea.
The Commish
Footballguy
Only in the PSF can the most watched news channel in the country NOT be part of the MSM
Good Lord
Good Lord
Last edited by a moderator:
sho nuff
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
Yes...like stating a site is not covering something despite evidence that they actually have been.
quick-hands
Footballguy
CNN is to many what briebart is to you. It is ignored. Try to find a link from ladies home journal.
squistion
Footballguy
It was claimed that CNN didn't cover this at all so Sho gave links disproving that. Providing a link from any source other than CNN would have been irrelevant.
sho nuff
Footballguy
The problem is that part is laughable. While Im not fan of CNN, they are not near the awful level of Breitbart.
In addition, the point was that people claimed they weren’t covering it and they have been. And that was just two of the links from a quick search when there were several others.
No. Not to get all technical but what I said was:
How about Biden putting children in cages?
”I’ll take ‘Things You Won’t See on CNN Today’ for $100”.
Sho made the assumption that I was referring to the CNN website and not tv.
squistion
Footballguy
bigbottom
Footballguy
I watched an interview on CNN this morning where the host was asking the guest about Biden reopening the detention centers for minors and how that was different than what Trump did.
joffer
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
3 posts responding after links losted and nothing about it being just about TV.
timschochet
Footballguy
This entire conversation, like so many others in here, keeps coming back to the fact that so many conservatives are convinced that the mainstream media has a strong liberal bias. Whereas most of the rest of us (pretty much anyone who is not a conservative) is simply unconvinced that this is so.
This, it seems to me, is the biggest divide that currently separates the right and left in this country. It is more important than liberal vs conservative ideology.
This, it seems to me, is the biggest divide that currently separates the right and left in this country. It is more important than liberal vs conservative ideology.
I think it’s pretty clear that the example I gave is a compelling one. The big news today was Biden going back on his campaign pledge and opening a migrant detention center for unaccompanied minors. It drew a very strong rebuke from AOC and it was one of the more contentious moments during Psaki’s presser. It is news by any standard. It was lead on FoxNews’ website. But as of 3:00 this afternoon CNN’s homepage had 140 articles and not one of them dealt with this story. You had to go searching for it, and even then the article Sho cited was mostly about other immigration issues. The detention facility was talked about at the end of a long article.
But instead of simply acknowledging the broader point - that the media has a strong liberal bias - we get treated to the usual nits and meaningless points of drivel.
sho nuff
Footballguy
So now we are back to the home page...so not about TV. Can we get the goalposts in one place?
They talked about the detention center in the link from earlier in February and the one from today was covering all immigration and the whole last section was about the facility.
Nits and drivel...classy.
They talked about the detention center in the link from earlier in February and the one from today was covering all immigration and the whole last section was about the facility.
Nits and drivel...classy.
rockaction
Footballguy
No. I'm with ekbeats on this one. We had long debates about "concentration camps" under Trump and I've seen not word one in the national media about this yet. And I knew at the time that this would happen, as did everybody with a pulse. How else to stop people from sending their kids illegally into America? I'm tempted to specifically tune into the MSM and see if this falls under any headlines. Sho providing two links out of 140 on not even the home page to an obviously hyperbolic statement and joke shows the utter literal interpretation and lack of humor that makes the PSF hemorrhage people that otherwise might be good commenters.
ekbeats' point is taken. sho's counter is just what he called it.
This is silly. He re-opened them and it was always going to be that way, screeching to the contrary. I wonder if we have to find the "concentration camp" thread and put all of the liberals here on blast.
ekbeats' point is taken. sho's counter is just what he called it.
This is silly. He re-opened them and it was always going to be that way, screeching to the contrary. I wonder if we have to find the "concentration camp" thread and put all of the liberals here on blast.
Sorry that your topic got derailed. It’s an important conversation that needs to be had. The msm went hard after Trump during his Presidency. At times it became annoying to watch and I wished they would just take the high road and not stoop to Trump’s level. Like my reference above to Proverbs 26:4 and 26:5. I was hoping upon hope that once Biden took office things would return to some semblance of normalcy. Maybe it will and we just need to give it some time for the stench to dissipate.
rockaction
Footballguy
Oh, that wasn't directed at you at all. No problem. You can do what you need to. That was directed at the typical citation asking or providing/exacting crap that makes this place so niggling and stupid at times. When one side starts, the other starts, and it winds up in parsing everybody's language completely literally instead of trying to gather some sort of intent by context or truth in generalization.
I deleted the comment. Didn't do anybody any good left there.
sho nuff
Footballguy
He moved the goalposts after it was shown they would talk about it. And i and others have also commented in other thread that no...its not good that this is happening now too.
Its also not realistic to think everything will change immediately in a new administration.
Also, as mentioned elsewhere...much of Trumps criticism came from separating kids from parents...less so unaccompanied minors.
rockaction
Footballguy
Seriously, you do this in every thread. What is wrong with you?
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Between him and tgunz I'm not sure who is worse at derailing a thread with utter nonsense.
By the way, how does the Cuomo sexual harassment claim not make the evening news?
https://www.foxnews.com/media/abc-cbs-nbc-andrew-cuomo-lindsey-boylan-sexual-harassment
https://www.foxnews.com/media/abc-cbs-nbc-andrew-cuomo-lindsey-boylan-sexual-harassment
He didnt claim CNN wouldnt cover detention facilities. He said CNN wouldnt say anything about children in cages. Your links essential prove that for him. No statements, photos, nada about the cages.
You're so often wrong it's kind of embarrassing you run around trying to correct people all the time.
quick-hands
Footballguy
quick-hands
Footballguy
rockaction
Footballguy
This thread lasted 2 1/2 pages before links and quibbling about links happened. And somebody used "all" instead of "almost all," so it went to the outhouse.
MAC_32
Footballguy
We don't. Blasting nonsense does no one any good. Ignoring them and collaborating with problem solvers does. Nonsense doesn't have a side; it pollutes both of them. But ignoring nonsense isn't who we are, so we won't.
You are conflating mass media with mainstream media. It is not about size of audiance (mass media), it is about ideology. The term mainstream media came to be widely used in the 80's when the media was dominated/monopolized by left-leaning pro-Democrat media which consisted of CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, the New York Times and Washington Post. This lead to the rise of Talk Radio/Rush and FoxNews and other alternative media offering a more Conservative and counter vieepoint than what is presented in the so-called mainstream. People in the mainstream media consider FoxNews to be FauxNews because the viewpoint is counter to the mainstream view.Only in the PSF can the most watched news channel in the country NOT be part of the MSM
Good Lord
Mainstream is the accepted ideological viewpoint of the dinosaurs of the old school media, hollywood, and now big tech which is basically political correvtness. So even the tiniest of news outlets can be considered part of the msinstream if they promote this political correct/left-leaning ideology and conversely a large media outlet can be considered out of the mainstream.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish
Footballguy
Nevermind....that nonsense simply isn't worth it....
Last edited by a moderator:
Lol...pathetic. The correct response was 'thank you for explaining the term'. Instead you will continue to mock and conflate the meaning of the term based on how the left sees it instead of how it is actually used and means.
The Commish
Footballguy
Take your fishing trips somewhere else...not interested in all the mental gymnastics you're twisting yourself into to white wash yet another term to simply mean "the thing I don't agree with". Now that I know the code, I can read what you mean if I choose, so that part I appreciate I guess.
The Commish
Footballguy
But yeah....it's me trying to conflate terms....the above is what I use and what the majority of people use as the definition of the term. Give me a break
Why not take your snarkiness and condescending posts somewhere else? There was not a fishing trip, it was a serious and accurate answer to how the term is used.
The Commish
Footballguy
From the guy who began the interaction with "pathetic"
It may have been serious, so I apologize for assuming it wasn't. It was far from accurate. When I see things are so far off, I automatically assume it's just fishing. The commonly used definition of that phrase is nowhere CLOSE to what you are trying to make it. I posted the definition for you and everything. Perhaps this has everything to do with how the two of us consume news..not sure. Your answers will tell me.
Last edited by a moderator:
If you did a Nexus search for the term Mainstream Media prior to 1980, it would not show up. Rush Limbaugh popularizrd it use in the 1980s and the term is widely used today with no real consistancy. The definition i use is how Rush used the term which was what i described. Rush would later used terms like driveby media or lamestream media to be more pejorative, but Mainstream Media as popularized by Rush was very much the liberally dominated elite news sources which set the tone and narrative for local newspaper and news coverage around the country. Fox News does not fit into that group.
Now you can argue that structure no longer has as much influence on the news today, so maybe the term has lost its original meaning. But we are headed back that way with the emergence of big tech companies controlling what news gets dissemenated.
Now you can argue that structure no longer has as much influence on the news today, so maybe the term has lost its original meaning. But we are headed back that way with the emergence of big tech companies controlling what news gets dissemenated.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
moleculo
Footballguy
It seems the way the right views the definition of "mainstream media" is rooted in a term coined by the biggest partisan hack of all time (still too soon?).
supermike80
Footballguy
Waitttt..when someone PROVES something with a link you accept it? I though they had to , I dont know...say it twice or something. It is incredibly hard to keep track of what you and do not accept here.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Its really not hard to understand...but glad you could chime in with this very helpful post.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
I think it's very useful to have a term that differentiates between the major networks, CNN, the NYT, Washington Post, etc. on one hand, and Brietbart, National Review, Mother Jones, Vox, etc. on the other. It's good that we can easily distinguish between straight news sources and opinion outlets. There's nothing wrong with journals of opinion, of course. They just shouldn't be conflated with straight news.
Fox News and MSNBC create a problem for this dichotomy because they kinda, sorta present themselves as straight news but everybody understands that they're arguably more like journals of opinion than they are news outlets. Or at least everybody recognizes that the other tribe's channel is just gussied-up partisanship with a patina of news. Their own tribe's channel is mostly news with the occasional political analysis show.
Regardless, I don't think it makes me a partisan hack if I treat WaPo differently than OAN.
The Commish
Footballguy
There are terms....liberal media and conservative ....both of which are part of the all encompassing "mainstream media"IvanKaramazov said:
Similar threads
