• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the mainstream news media a disgrace? In the tank for Hillary?

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
34,478
Reaction score
17,282
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I'm no fan of Infowars, but the following video is the most comprehensive smackdown of the mainstream news media I've seen in quite a while. It is definitely worth taking the time to watch...

Language warning

[video=youtube;GpLAzAZXi2A]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=504&v=GpLAzAZXi2A[/video]
 
No Grim, just no.

Infowars, a 24/7 whacko hangout for conspiracy theorist mental patients simply doesn't have the right to complain or point out flaws in a high school newspaper, let alone the national media.
 
I'm no fan of Infowars, but the following video is the most comprehensive smackdown of the mainstream news media I've seen in quite a while. It is definitely worth taking the time to watch...

Language warning



Grim, I voted for Reagan and Bush 41...and if Bush 41 were running today, I'd gladly vote for him again. Why? Because he's honorable and forthright enough that he stood up to the far right when he was in the White House. He realized that he was president of ALL the people, and wasn't just there to push this or that partisan agenda. And I can tell you that just as he was absolutely right to NOT continue on to Baghdad (even though I like the rest of my fellow servicemembers didn't understand why at the time, and Trump has stated that Bush 41 was wrong btw), he would know to flatly ignore anything from InfoWars, just as he'd flatly ignore anything from {pick a far-left site of your choice}.
 
I'm no fan of Infowars, but the following video is the most comprehensive smackdown of the mainstream news media I've seen in quite a while. It is definitely worth taking the time to watch...

Language warning



Infowars is a conspiracy website that plants misinformation, false flags, distortions about national tragedies in the media.....and profits from the suffering and misery of victims and their families. It's not a credible source, Grim.


Donald Trump and the “Amazing” Alex Jones - The New Yorker
 
I'm no fan of Infowars, but the following video is the most comprehensive smackdown of the mainstream news media I've seen in quite a while. It is definitely worth taking the time to watch...

Language warning



Is that map draped against his own wall at the mental institution he belongs to?
 
I'm no fan of Infowars, but the following video is the most comprehensive smackdown of the mainstream news media I've seen in quite a while. It is definitely worth taking the time to watch...

Language warning



I'm not clicking on a link to Infowars, but why do you think it's disgraceful for a media source to support one candidate over another? News media do not have a responsibility to be unbiased, they have a responsibility to sell advertising- hence, you're not a customer, you're a product. You're what they sell to their customers. I know, I know, it sucks and in a perfect world there'd be at least one impartial, objective source of information but that's just not physically possible. You can suspend your own opinion and weigh one source against the others, looking for the next best thing or you can just go with whichever source closest agrees with you.
 
I for one would not want to take it up the ass from HRC
 
No Grim, just no.

Infowars, a 24/7 whacko hangout for conspiracy theorist mental patients simply doesn't have the right to complain or point out flaws in a high school newspaper, let alone the national media.

Attack the source and ignore the content... So typical.
 
Grim, I voted for Reagan and Bush 41...and if Bush 41 were running today, I'd gladly vote for him again. Why? Because he's honorable and forthright enough that he stood up to the far right when he was in the White House. He realized that he was president of ALL the people, and wasn't just there to push this or that partisan agenda. And I can tell you that just as he was absolutely right to NOT continue on to Baghdad (even though I like the rest of my fellow servicemembers didn't understand why at the time, and Trump has stated that Bush 41 was wrong btw), he would know to flatly ignore anything from InfoWars, just as he'd flatly ignore anything from {pick a far-left site of your choice}.

Attack the source and ignore the content... So typical.
 
I'm not clicking on a link to Infowars, but why do you think it's disgraceful for a media source to support one candidate over another? News media do not have a responsibility to be unbiased, they have a responsibility to sell advertising- hence, you're not a customer, you're a product. You're what they sell to their customers. I know, I know, it sucks and in a perfect world there'd be at least one impartial, objective source of information but that's just not physically possible. You can suspend your own opinion and weigh one source against the others, looking for the next best thing or you can just go with whichever source closest agrees with you.

Attack the source and ignore the content... So typical.

btw, it is a YouTube link, not a Infowars link.
 
Attack the source and ignore the content... So typical.

btw, it is a YouTube link, not a Infowars link.

Ignore the content? My whole post was about the content.
Did you even read what I wrote?
 
Ignore the content? My whole post was about the content.
Did you even read what I wrote?

Topic: Video commentary on MSM and their bias.

How can you comment on a video you have not watched?
 
Attack the source and ignore the content... So typical.

It's garbage content. No real meat, just a bunch of one liners exaggerated or taken from context. Couldn't get through more than a minute before just wanting away from the lunatic propaganda.
 
No Grim, just no.

Infowars, a 24/7 whacko hangout for conspiracy theorist mental patients simply doesn't have the right to complain or point out flaws in a high school newspaper, let alone the national media.

doug.jpg
 
Attack the source and ignore the content... So typical.

Typical of you to post discredited, debunked, hyper partisan, tin foil hat, sources and expect to be taken seriously.
 
Typical of you to post discredited, debunked, hyper partisan, tin foil hat, sources and expect to be taken seriously.

You should really read what people post before commenting... and while you're at it, actually watch and evaluate the content of videos that people post, before you ideologically dismiss them out of hand.

Now if you want to discuss anything in particular he said, let's hear it... If not, your wasting your time with the partisan blather.
 
Attack the source and ignore the content... So typical.

btw, it is a YouTube link, not a Infowars link.
It's an Infowar Youtube video...and no one is buying it, Grim. And rightly so....


"....the source of the information is clearly important. It’s intuitively obvious that not all sources are equal, and some sources are more authoritative than others. Imagine, for example, that during a trial, the prosecution brought in some guy off of the street and asked him to testify about the forensic evidence of the case. The defense would very correctly attack the source of that information by arguing that this person was not a credentialed expert and, therefore, his testimony should not be trusted. There is obviously nothing fallacious about that, and the prosecution clearly couldn’t respond by accusing the defense of a genetic fallacy (they also couldn’t respond by saying “well he watched some Youtube videos on crime scene investigations and he’s read some blogs and done thousands of hours of research”)....

In other words, there is nothing wrong with attacking a source, if the source of the information is actually germane to whether or not you should trust the information. So, if someone cites questionable sources like Youtube videos or personal anecdotes, there is nothing wrong with you saying that we shouldn’t trust that information, because the sources actually are unreliable. That’s no different from not trusting some guy off the street as an expert witness in a courtroom. Remember, that the burden of proof is always on the person making the claim, so it is their responsibility to provide you with evidence from a trustworthy source. As a result, if they make a claim like, “vaccines are dangerous” and their “evidence” is an Info Wars article, you are under no obligation to discredit that article. Rather, it is their obligation to provide you with evidence from a reliable source...."

https://thelogicofscience.com/2016/01/18/the-genetic-fallacy-when-is-it-okay-to-criticize-a-source/


It's your responsibility to post a credible source to your claims, Grim...not ours.
 
Attack the source and ignore the content... So typical.

What content? It's just a bunch of losers whining because they always lose. That is what losers do, there is no use whining about it. If this was a bizarro world where losers win you would be praising the media for their great job. Switch sides if you want to win. You are more than welcome to hop on board the progress train. It's not the media, it is your ideology. We are so over it as a nation.
 
Last edited:
I'm no fan of Infowars, but the following video is the most comprehensive smackdown of the mainstream news media I've seen in quite a while. It is definitely worth taking the time to watch...

Language warning



100% the truth, and anyone with a brain knows it.

The most pathetic denial I have seen was Donna Brasile's interview with Megan Kelly. Donna was caught dead to rights, and everyone knew it, and her pathetic attempt to squirm away was just amateur hour.
 
Attack the source and ignore the content... So typical.

It is because they KNOW the content is not defendable.

When this all first came out, all the MSM talked about was O'Keeffe, not the content of the video.

They have no leg to stand on the content. It eliminates ALL doubt that Hillary and the DNC DIRECTLY paid people to agitate / foment trouble at the rallies. Their own words.

...and where is the FBI on all this.....Comey is on the phone with Hillary asking what action he should take. He will do what she tells him to do.

Hillary may even sacrifice someone "for the cause".

I hope it is Donna Brasille. I hate that arrogant bitch.
 
I'm no fan of Infowars, but the following video is the most comprehensive smackdown of the mainstream news media I've seen in quite a while. It is definitely worth taking the time to watch...

Language warning



Yes the mainstream media is a disgrace. I don't need a conspiracy loon website to point that out. I find it hypocritical of Clinton and other libs to claim the Russians are trying to manipulate the elections when the media at the start has been trying to manipulate the elections.
 
Attack the source and ignore the content... So typical.

Attack the source and ignore the content... So typical.

Attack the source and ignore the content... So typical.

Attack the source and ignore the content... So typical.

Attack the source and ignore the content... So typical.

btw, it is a YouTube link, not a Infowars link.

Ignore the source as long as it suits your agenda. So damn typical of you.
 
Back
Top Bottom