MSM It's Not Just A US Perception Problem

[Larkinn]

http://usmessageboard.com/showpost.php?p=631846&postcount=6

Yes I saw the blog. I already discredited the first 3 links. What exactly is the point of posting it again?

 

[Annie]

Yes I saw the blog. I already discredited the first 3 links. What exactly is the point of posting it again?

Not blogs, studies. You can spin however you like.

 

[Larkinn]

Not blogs, studies. You can spin however you like.

And I'd like evidence that they are peer reviewed, like you claimed. Only the first one please, the second two are obviously crap.

Its not me spinning kid. You are posting utter bullshit which you can't even defend.

 

[Annie]

And I'd like evidence that they are peer reviewed, like you claimed. Only the first one please, the second two are obviously crap.

Its not me spinning kid. You are posting utter bullshit which you can't even defend.

Nope, not happening. I've posted the links that bring you to the studies. If you refuse, that is your choice. The results are obvious, to this point in time.

 

[Larkinn]

Really...the MSM is all lying, they are so liberal, blah blah, but yet you believe blogs and cite them as evidence without even reading them? Well they have links by gollee, they must be accurate! What a ridiculous standard. The MSM gets trashes because its easy to do because they report on everything and yes, sometimes they get it wrong and there is always a different perspective you can see something from. Oh that and people expect the MSM to pony up truckloads of evidence for every claim, but when bloggers say they are lying, well a link to its own story will do.

 

[Larkinn]

Nope, not happening. I've posted the links that bring you to the studies. If you refuse, that is your choice. The results are obvious, to this point in time.

I went to the studies. I pointed out why they are ridiculous. Obviously you haven't even looked at them well enough to defend them. At least you aren't trying to defend the blogger, good on you for that, although a "whoops I fucked up" would be nice. Don't worry, I know it won't happen.

 

[Annie]

Really...the MSM is all lying, they are so liberal, blah blah, but yet you believe blogs and cite them as evidence without even reading them? Well they have links by gollee, they must be accurate! What a ridiculous standard. The MSM gets trashes because its easy to do because they report on everything and yes, sometimes they get it wrong and there is always a different perspective you can see something from. Oh that and people expect the MSM to pony up truckloads of evidence for every claim, but when bloggers say they are lying, well a link to its own story will do.

I not only read them, I'm familiar with the studies. You are not the only one with advanced degrees. Bullying me will not work.

 

[Larkinn]

Nope, not happening. I've posted the links that bring you to the studies. If you refuse, that is your choice. The results are obvious, to this point in time.

So you made a claim, I asked for a link and you said "nope, not happening". Well, alright then.

 

[Larkinn]

I not only read them, I'm familiar with the studies. You are not the only one with advanced degrees. Bullying me will not work.

Not familiar enough to defend them. Don't bother...your blustering on this matter says it all.

 

[Annie]

Not familiar enough to defend them. Don't bother...your blustering on this matter says it all.

as does your lack of effort.

 

[Larkinn]

as does your lack of effort.

I'm not going to bother researching them farther if you won't even address preliminary claims. You said it was peer reviewed, you back it up. You said that liberal sources werent ok, so why are conservative sources? Ridiculous.

 

[Annie]

I'm not going to bother researching them farther if you won't even address preliminary claims. You said it was peer reviewed, you back it up. You said that liberal sources werent ok, so why are conservative sources? Ridiculous.

UCLA, NY Times, mediasearch are hardly conservative sources for links and resources, but you just go on spinning.

 

[Larkinn]

UCLA, NY Times, mediasearch are hardly conservative sources for links and resources, but you just go on spinning.

Mediaresearch isn't conservative? From the main page on its site "leader in documenting, exposing, and neutralizing liberal bias". Then, coincidentally enough, it attempts to document and expose what it sees as liberal bias. No...its not conservative at all.

By the way still waiting for evidence it was peer reviewed.

 

[Annie]

Mediaresearch isn't conservative? From the main page on its site "leader in documenting, exposing, and neutralizing liberal bias". Then, coincidentally enough, it attempts to document and expose what it sees as liberal bias. No...its not conservative at all.

By the way still waiting for evidence it was peer reviewed.

ok, that slipped in, go for the other two. I do not have to do your research I'm not challenging you. Of course, neither do you. It's a messageboard.

 

[Larkinn]

ok, that slipped in, go for the other two. I do not have to do your research I'm not challenging you. Of course, neither do you. It's a messageboard.

It slipped in? And apparently you aren't even reading what I'm saying since that was my second time posting it.

And no you don't need to "do my research". However YOU made a claim, it therefore seems that YOU should back it up. After all, you wouldn't make a claim you didn't know was true, would you?...

 

[Annie]

It slipped in? And apparently you aren't even reading what I'm saying since that was my second time posting it.

And no you don't need to "do my research". However YOU made a claim, it therefore seems that YOU should back it up. After all, you wouldn't make a claim you didn't know was true, would you?...

No you were questioning all, which means you didn't bother checking them out. I played a gambit and lost. Still doesn't change the onus.

 

[Larkinn]

No you were questioning all, which means you didn't bother checking them out. I played a gambit and lost. Still doesn't change the onus.

No, actually I did check them out which you would have realized had you bothered to read what I said.

Two merely say that journalists tend to be democrats/liberals and one you stated was peer reviewed that you still haven't backed up. Besides the fact that one of them is from mediaresearch. You "played a gambit"? Meaning what? Either you lied or you didn't even read what you were citing, neither outcome which shines particularly favorably on you.

I "questioned all" because all have problems with them. Don't blame me if your standards are incredibly shoddy. Was the blog a "gambit" as well? I mean it did have links after all....

 

[Annie]

No, actually I did check them out which you would have realized had you bothered to read what I said.

Two merely say that journalists tend to be democrats/liberals and one you stated was peer reviewed that you still haven't backed up. Besides the fact that one of them is from mediaresearch. You "played a gambit"? Meaning what? Either you lied or you didn't even read what you were citing, neither outcome which shines particularly favorably on you.

I "questioned all" because all have problems with them. Don't blame me if your standards are incredibly shoddy. Was the blog a "gambit" as well? I mean it did have links after all....

Nope, you didn't read all the links. Sorry.

 

[Larkinn]

Nope, you didn't read all the links. Sorry.

Actually I pretty much proved I did, while you pretty much proved you didn't.

This is ridiculous...its like pulling teeth trying to get you to read your own damn links, while you are making asinine claims. I read them...which is how I was able to figure out that mediaresearch is a conservative group, and the blog you posted too was bullshit. Or do you think I just guessed on those things? I don't "play gambits" like you do. Come back when you have something meaninful to say.

 

[Annie]

Actually I pretty much proved I did, while you pretty much proved you didn't.

This is ridiculous...its like pulling teeth trying to get you to read your own damn links, while you are making asinine claims. I read them...which is how I was able to figure out that mediaresearch is a conservative group, and the blog you posted too was bullshit. Or do you think I just guessed on those things? I don't "play gambits" like you do. Come back when you have something meaninful to say.

You come back when you check out the links. Sorry, but you are just not going to bully me as you have others.

I not only read them, I was honest enough to say I recognized a gambit when I took it. You are intelligent enough to go after the one that was not UCLA or NY Times. Even then, you'll have to dig a bit.