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)

Facts eventually come out right?  Stories get revised and corrected?  I don't subscribe to the Daily Outrage but I see a lot of time and energy being spent on it.  People have been wrong forever now it's like immortalized on Twitter and Youtube and the shaming never ends.  The question of agenda still matters but IMO there's no way around this now or going back to the way it was.  We as a country just need to be way cooler and stop the snap judgements and endless bickering.

I do wanna say how much I appreciate the long-term content providers in this community.  Y'all know who you are.  FBG is pretty much my primary source of news and analysis.

 
dkp993 said:
Unfortunately it’s not just context, it’s 100% accurate.  And outside of here I’ve seen not one, not one, article even mentioning the actions, or extreme lack thereof, of the adults on the scene.  That’s pure negligence imo.  It also delegitimizes the actual instances of police malfeasance.  
Click to expand...
I agree with both your points. It certainly is negligent. And it takes away from the horribleness of actual police malfeasance by conflating real police work with that which falls outside of the police's scope. And my point to tim and thriftyrocker is that you'll never see that headline or lede in the media, which tells you all you need to know about the narrative being promoted and the fealty shown it.

 
ekbeats said:
The only analogy I can think of with regard to this post is taking a foul shot and shooting it over the backboard.  You are making up stats now.  A Gallup poll from last September shows 86% of Americans think the media is biased.  You are in a very small minority on this issue, and that’s just a fact.

https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/10/poll-americans-think-media-biased-fake-news/
Click to expand...
The only thing I will say about this, and I’ve said it many many times around here. The media is not the problem we are, the media is just providing the headlines for us to click on. If we didn’t click on them they wouldn’t write those headlines. Americans are addicted to drama, they’re only feeding us what we’re asking them to. The media is not to blame for their bias. We are.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
rockaction said:
I agree with both your points. It certainly is negligent. And it takes away from the horribleness of actual police malfeasance by conflating real police work with that which falls outside of the police's scope. And my point to tim and thriftyrocker is that you'll never see that headline or lede in the media, which tells you all you need to know about the narrative being promoted and the fealty shown it.
Click to expand...
Agreed, mostly.  See my next post (one prior to this) for my thoughts on the media.  

 
formerfourdigit said:
Facts eventually come out right?  Stories get revised and corrected?
Click to expand...
The point is that the rush to produce information shows the inherent bias towards the common narrative and that, policy-wise or on a macro level, corrections don't mean as much as first impressions. To the dispassionate observer, maybe a correction is all you need. But the joke about the headlines on the front page and page A2 corrections a week later is one that has meaning here, especially considering the masses and their consumption of news, masses who often rely on headlines that grab and keep attention. You can't ever really effectively correct something once printed. That's why you need a media that doesn't operate on pre-planned narrative constraints, especially left-wing ones. 

And this point about "long-term" content misses the fact that this is a long-standing complaint about the news and its biases. When it manifests again, like it did here, it becomes further evidence to add to the debate that we're on a skewed playing field when it comes to news.

 
BladeRunner said:
The funny thing in all this is that Tim - in defending the MSM and not believing in its bias - is actually proving that propaganda does, indeed, work.  The MSM has hooked him completely - just like Pravda did back in the day.
Click to expand...
That is a very smart take.  

 
rockaction said:
The point is that the rush to produce information shows the inherent bias towards the common narrative and that, policy-wise or on a macro level, corrections don't mean as much as first impressions. To the dispassionate observer, maybe a correction is all you need. But the joke about the headlines on the front page and page A2 corrections a week later is one that has meaning here, especially considering the masses and their consumption of news, masses who often rely on headlines that grab and keep attention. You can't ever really effectively correct something once printed. That's why you need a media that doesn't operate on pre-planned narrative constraints, especially left-wing ones. 

And this point about "long-term" content misses the fact that this is a long-standing complaint about the news and its biases. When it manifests again, like it did here, it becomes further evidence to add to the debate that we're on a skewed playing field when it comes to news.
Click to expand...
People increasingly get their news from social media and so we get basically independent reporters/social media personalities replacing cable news talking heads.  Youtube personalities make mountains more than rank-and-file journos.  Cable news networks are trying to stay relevant.   I apologize for not reading the thread but everyone knows the bias of "The Daily Beast" right?  Everyone here does.  We cannot go back to the way it was before with BBC and the big three networks.  I know you know this @rockactionbut also curious why "especially left-wing".  Michael Flynn and Lin Wood still have a platform to speak from.  Yes they are still on Facebook and Youtube, just gotta look around.

 
ekbeats said:
That is a very smart take.  
Click to expand...
I’m not so sure.  We are all products of our intake.  Tim has been clear he likes CNN/MSNBC - or at least some of those news people/personalities.

while a lot of people don’t take that step and advocate for someone or identify who they listen to and are influenced by

And I haven’t seen anyone that likes to oppose Tim state who they listen to -  lbecause they are likely listening to and being influenced by crack pots on the right 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
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. 
Click to expand...
I would say I'm not that naive, maybe I'm just jaded, but yeah I think it's deliberate.  Honestly if my register for my business were short as often as the media is wrong, I'd be broke by now.

 
How do you guys see this Big Divide playing out in the next 10-20 years?  Will our Union survive?  Put yourself in the year 2041 as if you were in a Recent American History class.  There will be clear patterns in the early 21st century that led to something.  What would that something be?

 
formerfourdigit said:
People increasingly get their news from social media and so we get basically independent reporters/social media personalities replacing cable news talking heads.  Youtube personalities make mountains more than rank-and-file journos.  Cable news networks are trying to stay relevant.   I apologize for not reading the thread but everyone knows the bias of "The Daily Beast" right?  Everyone here does.  We cannot go back to the way it was before with BBC and the big three networks.  I know you know this @rockactionbut also curious why "especially left-wing".  Michael Flynn and Lin Wood still have a platform to speak from.  Yes they are still on Facebook and Youtube, just gotta look around.
Click to expand...
Oh, we had a massive problem during the Trump years of not only false narratives being propagated, but also factual alternatives to reality being propagated by some people very popular on the right. I think there are few people here that actually deny that. Or they might, and perhaps I'm too sanguine about people that agree with me about the MSM and how it leans left. But Flynn and Wood were odious creatures, as is OAN and Fox News. They're not even on the same page as reality. The MSM is still beholden to facts, it's the narrative I have a problem with.

I hope that answers why there's a disparity in attention to right-wing news given on my end. During the pandemic and through this election, I was horrified at the effect right-wing alternative realities were having on people. It was selfish, to be sure, but I couldn't believe the effect disinformation was having on the populace from right-wing channels. It was seriously affecting my existence as a citizen. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
crackattack said:
Officer Sicknick's death was misinformation spread because of anonymous sources. Completely disputed by family members the very next day! Did that stop news outlets and politicians from running with the lie of "beat to death". No! Did the news outlets and politicians say we have conflicting reports? No! They continued the lie of "beat to death". The family, whom I suspect saw the body, talked to Dr's at the hospital, talked to officer Sicknick the night of the 6th, yet non of that info was news worthy. It's obvious.
Click to expand...
:goodposting:

 
ekbeats said:
How do you guys see this Big Divide playing out in the next 10-20 years?  Will our Union survive?  Put yourself in the year 2041 as if you were in a Recent American History class.  There will be clear patterns in the early 21st century that led to something.  What would that something be?
Click to expand...
I can see a clear split/divide of our country. When?? I don't know, but we can't stand as a union like this. I forsee a split into different countries like Russia did. Or smaller countries like Europe. It's sad, but I see no way back.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ramblin Wreck said:
You're saying he's too stupid to realize what he's doing?
Click to expand...
Well, I want to be fair, he really doesn't even have a high school education.  He had an entourage following him around since his early teen days.  He had security at team hotels when the high school he played for went places.  If anyone thinks he actually did schoolwork there they probably believed the Daily Beast original story as well.

 
IvanKaramazov said:
Here's a write-up from the Washington Post on this story.  I'm not going to copy and paste the whole thing, but there's basically one paragraph in the entire piece that actually alludes to the fact that that the girl who got shot was in the process of committing attempted murder.  Here's that paragraph:

Technically this is all accurate.  The aggressor did "appear" to chase somebody, and the reason why it appears that way is because that's in fact exactly what she was doing.  The reason why the thing in her hand "appears to be" a blade is because she was holding a knife.  "Taking a swing" at somebody's head while holding a knife is an action that we would normally just call a stabbing.  That's a lot of euphemism and misinformation packed into one paragraph.

And of course the rest of the story places this incident in the "evil police officer murders an innocent person who was just minding her own business" narrative, which we all know to be false in this case.

If they lie about stuff that I can see for myself on video, why should I believe them about stuff that I'm not in a position to verify one way or the other?  
Click to expand...
Paragraph NINE. 

 
HellToupee said:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/nicholas-reardon-identified-as-cop-who-fatally-shot-16-year-old-makhia-bryant
The daily beat wrote a whole article on Officer Reardon. What a bunch of low life’s at that site
Click to expand...


COLUMBUS, Ohio—The Columbus police officer who fatally shot 16-year-old Ma’khia Bryant on Tuesday during a chaotic encounter involving a knife appears to be a military-trained marksman and son of the department’s longtime basic training sergeant.
Click to expand...
 Again, this is technically accurate.  The officer did fatally shoot one person.  Who was about to murder another person who is alive today thanks to the officer's quick action and remarkable marksmanship.  That "chaotic encounter with a knife" was the attempted murder of a black kid that this officer prevented.

 
The Dude said:
I’m not so sure.  We are all products of our intake.  Tim has been clear he likes CNN/MSNBC - or at least some of those news people/personalities.

while a lot of people don’t take that step and advocate for someone or identify who they listen to and are influenced by

And I haven’t seen anyone that likes to oppose Tim state who they listen to -  lbecause they are likely listening to and being influenced by crack pots on the right 
Click to expand...
I oppose Tim.  I've said before I think those that are as far left as him are downright dangerous---I check out CNN, Fox, my local news, Yahoo, USA today, Reuters.  Quite a few actually.  Difference is I can see bias, on both sides.   I am capable of recognizing it.....That's what males me different.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
CNN/Kendi

Chryon:  Black Author: "Compliance will not save me in the US"

 🤣 

He asks why didn't the officer talk her down...did he watch the video?  Might as well ask why people don't reason with lightning bolts.

 
djmich said:
I didn't see any tie made between his marksman training and ability to respond in time to save a life.  Hmmmm
Click to expand...
I didn't want to even touch upon this for the sake of decorum, but now that major news outlets are doing it, marksmanship is certainly something to assess. That was really risky to fire that shot. He could have hit the other girl. Say what you want about the scene, how he should have acted, or what he should have done -- he saw Ma'Khia (I said her name) moving to kill somebody, isolated her, aimed at her, and performed a difficult shot to stop her. Then rushed to her aid.

I don't know how else to put that without approaching a tone best suited for the cold and callous, so that's the best I can do. Note I used "her" instead of dehumanizing her by treating her as an object or mark.

 
The Dude said:
I’m not so sure.  We are all products of our intake.  Tim has been clear he likes CNN/MSNBC - or at least some of those news people/personalities.

while a lot of people don’t take that step and advocate for someone or identify who they listen to and are influenced by

And I haven’t seen anyone that likes to oppose Tim state who they listen to -  lbecause they are likely listening to and being influenced by crack pots on the right 
Click to expand...
No, not by a long shot.

NPR headlines in the shower. 15 minutes of right wing radio during the commute.  PBS World News if I get home early enough followed by NBC Nightly.

That right there gives me a balanced sampling from Left-Middle-Right and a little internet research on my own to cut the crap that I can't see right through.

You say people are products of their intake, I say those people are dumb and lazy.  

 
ekbeats said:
How do you guys see this Big Divide playing out in the next 10-20 years?  Will our Union survive?  Put yourself in the year 2041 as if you were in a Recent American History class.  There will be clear patterns in the early 21st century that led to something.  What would that something be?
Click to expand...
We’ll be fine. 
I honestly don’t mind people disagreeing with me about bias. When someone like @supermike80 writes “I oppose Tim” I find that amusing; as if my views represent some sort of threat to him. Actually I recognize that I’m quite a bit idiosyncratic and I would never try to claim I represent anyone but myself. 
 

Though I don’t agree with most of you about bias, that’s fine. The danger doesn’t come from that, it comes from rejecting news because you think you’re being lied to deliberately. That’s a real problem, arguably the biggest problem we face as a society today. I’m not going to sit here and pretend that the MSM is not partly at fault for this. They’ve made enough mistakes, some of them quite glaring, to make people suspicious. But it’s still the wrong conclusion.

The right conclusion, IMO, is this: the mainstream media is made up mostly of honest journalists, most of whom, it must be admitted, happen to be liberal. Their political point of view doesn’t deliberately shape the way they present the news; in fact it makes them more intent on always trying to present “both sides”, sometimes to the detriment of the reporting. This desire to present the news fairly conflicts with the always present need to be the first and fastest, and with the economic factor that sensationalism sells. These conflicting interests can normally work together smoothly but sometimes they result in glaring errors and misinformation. These last are then used by conservative platforms in order to “prove” that the MSM cannot be trusted. 

 
I thought it was amazing that the girls father seconds after kicking another girl in the head said.  "You shot a woman?"

But made no move to help his daughter.

 
timschochet said:
We’ll be fine. 
I honestly don’t mind people disagreeing with me about bias. When someone like @supermike80 writes “I oppose Tim” I find that amusing; as if my views represent some sort of threat to him. Actually I recognize that I’m quite a bit idiosyncratic and I would never try to claim I represent anyone but myself. 
 

Though I don’t agree with most of you about bias, that’s fine. The danger doesn’t come from that, it comes from rejecting news because you think you’re being lied to deliberately. That’s a real problem, arguably the biggest problem we face as a society today. I’m not going to sit here and pretend that the MSM is not partly at fault for this. They’ve made enough mistakes, some of them quite glaring, to make people suspicious. But it’s still the wrong conclusion.

The right conclusion, IMO, is this: the mainstream media is made up mostly of honest journalists, most of whom, it must be admitted, happen to be liberal. Their political point of view doesn’t deliberately shape the way they present the news; in fact it makes them more intent on always trying to present “both sides”, sometimes to the detriment of the reporting. This desire to present the news fairly conflicts with the always present need to be the first and fastest, and with the economic factor that sensationalism sells. These conflicting interests can normally work together smoothly but sometimes they result in glaring errors and misinformation. These last are then used by conservative platforms in order to “prove” that the MSM cannot be trusted. 
Click to expand...
You can never drop your arrogance.   You don't threaten me,  I oppose your far left radical thinking.  You as an entity mean nothing-you just represent everything that I feel is wrong with the left. 

And your "right conclusion" is so wrong its laughable.  You have no clue.   To think you believe someone with opinions like yourself, writing for CNN, is trying to present both sides.   Just utterly clueless.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
We’ll be fine. 
I honestly don’t mind people disagreeing with me about bias. When someone like @supermike80 writes “I oppose Tim” I find that amusing; as if my views represent some sort of threat to him. Actually I recognize that I’m quite a bit idiosyncratic and I would never try to claim I represent anyone but myself. 
 

Though I don’t agree with most of you about bias, that’s fine. The danger doesn’t come from that, it comes from rejecting news because you think you’re being lied to deliberately. That’s a real problem, arguably the biggest problem we face as a society today. I’m not going to sit here and pretend that the MSM is not partly at fault for this. They’ve made enough mistakes, some of them quite glaring, to make people suspicious. But it’s still the wrong conclusion.

The right conclusion, IMO, is this: the mainstream media is made up mostly of honest journalists, most of whom, it must be admitted, happen to be liberal. Their political point of view doesn’t deliberately shape the way they present the news; in fact it makes them more intent on always trying to present “both sides”, sometimes to the detriment of the reporting. This desire to present the news fairly conflicts with the always present need to be the first and fastest, and with the economic factor that sensationalism sells. These conflicting interests can normally work together smoothly but sometimes they result in glaring errors and misinformation. These last are then used by conservative platforms in order to “prove” that the MSM cannot be trusted. 
Click to expand...
Wait - you're saying there is ZERO danger in believing everything that's fed to you despite the numerous "mistakes"?

If only if something like this occurred in history that we could look back to and say, "Geez, how could this have happened?  How could they believe all that and not question anything?"

Fully supporting and believing the propaganda is infinitely more deadly than rejecting it outright.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
We’ll be fine. 
I honestly don’t mind people disagreeing with me about bias. When someone like @supermike80 writes “I oppose Tim” I find that amusing; as if my views represent some sort of threat to him. Actually I recognize that I’m quite a bit idiosyncratic and I would never try to claim I represent anyone but myself. 
 

Though I don’t agree with most of you about bias, that’s fine. The danger doesn’t come from that, it comes from rejecting news because you think you’re being lied to deliberately. That’s a real problem, arguably the biggest problem we face as a society today. I’m not going to sit here and pretend that the MSM is not partly at fault for this. They’ve made enough mistakes, some of them quite glaring, to make people suspicious. But it’s still the wrong conclusion.

The right conclusion, IMO, is this: the mainstream media is made up mostly of honest journalists, most of whom, it must be admitted, happen to be liberal. Their political point of view doesn’t deliberately shape the way they present the news; in fact it makes them more intent on always trying to present “both sides”, sometimes to the detriment of the reporting. This desire to present the news fairly conflicts with the always present need to be the first and fastest, and with the economic factor that sensationalism sells. These conflicting interests can normally work together smoothly but sometimes they result in glaring errors and misinformation. These last are then used by conservative platforms in order to “prove” that the MSM cannot be trusted. 
Click to expand...
I am waiting for first unnamed source leak from white house.

Something like "Biden regrets authoring 1994 crime bill".       Something that really spells out systematic racism.

 
My niece was defending herself," she said. "Those were grown, adult women. It looked like that was a child. That was not no child. Those were women attacking my niece, and she was defending herself. I'm angry right now.
Click to expand...
She was trying to stab somebody holding a dog. Self defense, yeah, ok. NBC news all in on propaganda here. 

 
supermike80 said:
You can never drop your arrogance.   You don't threaten me,  I oppose your far left radical thinking.  You as an entity mean nothing-you just represent everything that I feel is wrong with the left. 

And your "right conclusion" is so wrong its laughable.  You have no clue.   To think you believe someone with opinions like yourself, writing for CNN, is trying to present both sides.   Just utterly clueless.
Click to expand...
How far right does one have to be to regard my decidedly moderate views as “far left radical thinking”? 

 
supermike80 said:
You can never drop your arrogance.   You don't threaten me,  I oppose your far left radical thinking.  You as an entity mean nothing-you just represent everything that I feel is wrong with the left. 

And your "right conclusion" is so wrong its laughable.  You have no clue.   To think you believe someone with opinions like yourself, writing for CNN, is trying to present both sides.   Just utterly clueless.
Click to expand...
Tim is not arrogant. I think he likes making bold proclamations, often times based on very little, and he certainly sounds (for lack of a better term) brainwashed by the media, but he’s never struck me as arrogant. 

 
BladeRunner said:
Okay, well, you certainly are NOT a moderate.  There is ZERO doubt about that.  Extreme/Far-Left - probably not - but every month you move further and further so eventually you'll get there.
Click to expand...
Some of my views, for example on immigration, are too pro-libertarian and capitalism to be called moderate. But most of my positions are in the center. Can’t honestly think of a viewpoint that could really be termed leftist. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

glvsav37
Hulu and the Political Ads Issue
2
Replies
67
Views
2K
Desert_Power
Desert_Power
GordonGekko
Did Barack Obama Destroy Abortion Rights By Lying About Codifying Roe v. Wade? (6/26/22 7:24 PST)
Replies
4
Views
537
squistion
squistion
GordonGekko
Did "Canceling" Babylon Bee's Political Satire Change The Future Of All Social Media Forever? (6/5/22 12:30 PST)
Replies
18
Views
741
Juxtatarot
Juxtatarot

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top