What's new
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.

Daily Beast Reports the Columbus Girl was Unarmed and Knife was Lying on the Ground (1 Viewer)

ekbeats

Footballguy
The Daily Beast ripped for publishing misinformation about Columbus police shooting
 

Talk about inciting a riot.  But hey, I’ve been told there is nothing to this and it’s just an isolated incident:

1. I assume some in here think the story was “appropriately sourced.”  It came from an eyewitness at the scene and the Beast was just reporting what they had been told.

2. I also assume some in here think this is not an example of left wing bias in the media and that this myth is just a tired old trope.

3. All is good because they corrected the story right after the facts came out.

In other news the Daily Beast is still shown as more reliable than Fox News on the Media Bias Chart. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
2. According to tim this is not an example of left wing bias in the media and that this myth is just a tired old trope.
First off I didn’t say anything about this story, this is the first it has come to my attention. 
 

Second I can’t speak as to the trustworthiness of this particular source. I read the Daily Beast from time to time, but as a place for opinion, not hard news. Apparently they got something wrong here. Did they get it wrong on purpose, as you seem to be implying? If you want to convince me of that you’d better have some hard evidence. (But if and when you do I’ll accept it). 
 

As I wrote in the Sicknick thread, unless the media is perfect 100% of the time you’ll always be able to accuse them of being biased. But when they report something that pleases you, it will simply be accepted without challenge. 

 
The Daily Beast ripped for publishing misinformation about Columbus police shooting
 

Talk about inciting a riot.  But hey, I’ve been told there is nothing to this and it’s just an isolated incident:

1. According to Sho the story was appropriately sourced.  It came from an eyewitness at the scene and the Beast was just reporting what they had been told.

2. According to tim this is not an example of left wing bias in the media and that this myth is just a tired old trope.

3. All is good because they corrected the story right after the facts came out.

In other news the Daily Beast is still shown as more reliable than Fox News on the Media Bias Chart. 
This is a great reason to condemn The Daily Beast as a reputable news source.   I have no idea who consumes their "news" -- but it would never occur to me to consider The Daily Beast as a media source, unless you also include things like National Enquirer.   I don't see this as liberal bias -- I see it as a reminder of how absurd it is that anyone pretends this is anything other than clickbait.

 
This is a great reason to condemn The Daily Beast as a reputable news source.   I have no idea who consumes their "news" -- but it would never occur to me to consider The Daily Beast as a media source, unless you also include things like National Enquirer.   I don't see this as liberal bias -- I see it as a reminder of how absurd it is that anyone pretends this is anything other than clickbait.
I wasn't joking when I said our forum approved Media Bias Chart ranks them as more reliable than Fox News, and only slightly left of center ("Skewing Left").

 
The Daily Beast ripped for publishing misinformation about Columbus police shooting
 

Talk about inciting a riot.  But hey, I’ve been told there is nothing to this and it’s just an isolated incident:

1. According to Sho the story was appropriately sourced.  It came from an eyewitness at the scene and the Beast was just reporting what they had been told.

2. According to tim this is not an example of left wing bias in the media and that this myth is just a tired old trope.

3. All is good because they corrected the story right after the facts came out.

In other news the Daily Beast is still shown as more reliable than Fox News on the Media Bias Chart. 
Sho has not commented on this story from the Beast...so take your lies about what I said elsewhere.

Also...we have a media thread for such things...starting a new one everytime any of them get it wrong just floods the board.

Do me a favor...keep my name out of your posts if you are just going to fabricate things.

 
Apparently they got something wrong here. Did they get it wrong on purpose, as you seem to be implying? If you want to convince me of that you’d better have some hard evidence. (But if and when you do I’ll accept it). 
The reporting on this story amounts to, at best, a reckless disregard for the truth.  Are they intentionally making stuff up just to inflame things?  Probably not.  But if they were, I'm not sure that the reporting would actually look any different.

 
The reporting on this story amounts to, at best, a reckless disregard for the truth.  Are they intentionally making stuff up just to inflame things?  Probably not.  But if they were, I'm not sure that the reporting would actually look any different.
It’s partly the rush to be first to post a developing story.  The get the headline and the clicks.  Filling in the details appears to be secondary.   

 
The reporting on this story amounts to, at best, a reckless disregard for the truth.  Are they intentionally making stuff up just to inflame things?  Probably not.  But if they were, I'm not sure that the reporting would actually look any different.
Looked like the typical race to report the story...go with a witness (and they screwed the pooch seemingly talking to just one witness...the aunt of the victim).

The laughable part is FoxNews bagging on them and NPR as if Fox doesn't get anything wrong.  It reaks of the same hypocrisy we see here.

A biased source with a mixed record poorly reported it....so lets have another poor source call them out.  

Definitely needed a new thread for that.

 
Sho has not commented on this story from the Beast...so take your lies about what I said elsewhere.

Also...we have a media thread for such things...starting a new one everytime any of them get it wrong just floods the board.

Do me a favor...keep my name out of your posts if you are just going to fabricate things.
Oh I’m sorry.  I thought you had made it pretty clear in the Sicknick thread that news outlets were ok publishing key facts on breaking news stories as long as they used sources in the know.  What changed?

 
The reporting on this story amounts to, at best, a reckless disregard for the truth.  Are they intentionally making stuff up just to inflame things?  Probably not.  But if they were, I'm not sure that the reporting would actually look any different.
At this point, it seems that if the facts at hand don't advance the narrative and get ratings or grievance points from the aggrieved "communities," then they're just omitting the facts.

This is reckless.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Looked like the typical race to report the story...go with a witness (and they screwed the pooch seemingly talking to just one witness...the aunt of the victim).

The laughable part is FoxNews bagging on them and NPR as if Fox doesn't get anything wrong.  It reaks of the same hypocrisy we see here.

A biased source with a mixed record poorly reported it....so lets have another poor source call them out.  

Definitely needed a new thread for that.
Gotta have that whataboutism. Update the reputable source list yet?

 
I think this is a reasonable assessment. Purposely getting things wrong is not a reasonable assessment. 
 
I don't believe The Daily Beast is in the business of reasonable assessments.  I think they went with their the narrative on this one because they know people like yourself will give them a pass, as usual.

 
The Daily Beast got it wrong, alight.  If they had just simply said "anonymous sources" or "sources close to X" then this would have been 100% fact and board-cop approved!
I don’t believe the reputable mainstream media (for example the Washington Post or New York Times) would have run with such a headline without more evidence. 

 
I haven’t given them a pass. 
Let's be honest here, Tim.  You give the MSM pass after pass after pass.  Your excuse is, "Well, it's just a mistake".   What we're telling you if that "mistake" is happening time after time after time after time and with the same narrative - it's not a "mistake" anymore.  It's purposeful and deliberate.  THAT should give you pause but you're in here day after day after day saying, "There is no liberal bias".   It's as plain as day.

How many more "mistakes" is it going to take for you to believe that we're all being fed narratives, not the truth?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Let's be honest here, Tim.  You give the MSM pass after pass after pass.  Your excuse is, "Well, it's just a mistake".   What we're telling you if that "mistake" is happening time after time after time after time and with the same narrative - it's not a "mistake" anymore.  It's purposeful and deliberate.  THAT should give you pause but you're in here day after day after day saying, "There is no liberal bias".   It's as plain as day.

How many more "mistakes" is it going to take for you to believe that we're all being fed narratives, not the truth?
It's kind of like a register being off at the end of the day.  It could be just a mistake, poor counting.  But if that error is always short, it's likely someone is stealing.  Statistically if things are just mistakes, they tend to balance out on which side the errors fall on.  These sure seem one sided.

 
Oh I’m sorry.  I thought you had made it pretty clear in the Sicknick thread that news outlets were ok publishing key facts on breaking news stories as long as they used sources in the know.  What changed?
This used one source.  A family member.

and thats it.  If you don’t see the difference between that from an outlet like the daily beast and two law enforcement officials corroborating a story, not sure I can help you and seems clear you are just trying to take shots and play gotcha

But yes. Make comments about other posters and mischaracterize what was said in hopes to get a reaction.

 
This is a great reason to condemn The Daily Beast as a reputable news source.   I have no idea who consumes their "news" -- but it would never occur to me to consider The Daily Beast as a media source, unless you also include things like National Enquirer.   I don't see this as liberal bias -- I see it as a reminder of how absurd it is that anyone pretends this is anything other than clickbait.
LeBron James. 

 
Not a fan of the Beast. Yuck.

Citing other posters by name as if they had commented on the Daily Beast story is a giant **** move. 

 
LeBron James Posts Photo Of Cop Who Protected Black Girl From Being Stabbed: ‘YOU’RE NEXT!

Really hope that costs LeBron about 8-figures. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've never even heard of The Daily Beast.  But the name alone would be enough for me not to pay any attention to them as a serious new source.   Honestly when I saw the thread title I assumed that The Daily Beast was a new The Onion.  🤷‍♂️

 
It's kind of like a register being off at the end of the day.  It could be just a mistake, poor counting.  But if that error is always short, it's likely someone is stealing.  Statistically if things are just mistakes, they tend to balance out on which side the errors fall on.  These sure seem one sided.
Except that when it comes to the MSM, the register is almost never short. Errors that deserve retractions are extremely rare, and deliberate errors made for political purposes are, to the best of my knowledge, non-existent. Since Dan Rather nearly 20 years ago I’m frankly not aware of one. 

 
LeBron James Posts Photo Of Cop Who Protected Black Girl From Being Stabbed: ‘YOU’RE NEXT!

Really hope that costs LeBron about 8-figures. 
The “You’re Next” was followed by “accountability”, which clearly means that LeBron wanted this guy arrested and held to justice like Derek Chauvin. Obviously that was before the revelation that the story wasn’t what people thought it was. LeBron removed the tweet. 
Obviously it was a rush to judgment, but it wasn’t nearly as despicable as some are making out here.

 
Don’t get me wrong: LeBron is in the wrong and should apologize. But it’s not quite as bad as people are making out. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top