iceberg
Diamond Member
- May 15, 2017
- 36,788
- 14,920
- 1,600
heh - how about AND YOU WERE THERE movies in grade school. well, depending on how old you are.opinions and editorials have slants and biases and are, or were, clearly marked. the fact that our regular news has evolved into editorials is quite telling in why no one knows what the hell is going on anymore. we're following opinions of the writers who are too lazy to get the facts like they should.With all due respect, Coyote? If you attempt to claim that CNN is average when it come to trustworthiness then why would anyone take you seriously? CNN is what it is. They have a pronounced "slant" to their news...and that's being generous. Claiming otherwise borders on farce!You seriously rate CNN as "average", Coyote? LOLWas that in the OP or the article? If so, please show it to me.
I asked, because that seemed to be what you were asserting.
The fact is, leftist bed wetters have been destroying shit across the country. There is nothing false about that statement. Some twittertwat posting a picture has nothing to do with the fact most of the media is BULLSHIT. I'm not singling any of it out. It's ALL DESIGNED TO MANIPULATE OPINIONS.
Pretending as if NPR, PBS, CBS, NBS or CNNBS is fully credible makes you look like just as big a retard as those who hang on every word Hannity speaks and act as if he has no agenda.
.
I am asserting what is in the OP.
If any of that is wrong (per your claim of NPR credibility) - point it out.
On sources and media - there those that are good, better, average, and largely laughable. I rate NPR as good. CNN average. Hannity is opinion - talk show.
Edited to add - we all have to trust sources to some degree because for the most part we don't have first hand info.
Yes.
I suspect there sources you rate as good that, well, I would find laughable.
Having a "slant" or a "bias" does not mean not credible - it means it has a bias. You read it with that in mind. They all have some form of bias. Not credible in my view is a source that repeatedly provably false material, does not correct errors, and uses certain types of red flag language.
And, I would ask the same of you - why would anyone take any source of yours as "credible"?
The news sources I tend to like offer a pretty clear distinction between editorial and opinion, and news. I really do not like the blurring of opinion and news, or for that matter, entertainment and news. Remember the old Walter Conkrite days?
the trouble is, salon, vox, slate and many "news" sites are nothing more than glorified opinions and editorials. that line has been hammered to death and all the time i think we're all guilty of hauling an opinion piece in here to back up how we feel. but when i see in a story adjectives that tell me how to feel - i stop. when i see "sources say" - i stop. when i see words that degrade any party in the story, i stop.
that isn't news. that's venting.