How the **** is this news?

These 8th-graders from New Jersey refused to be photographed with Paul Ryan - The Washington Post
Is this what the news media has come to now?

What potential importance is there that a couple of pre-teens brainwashed by their parents political ideology have decided that they didn't want to take a ****ing photograph with Paul Ryan?

"But, Aren't kids allowed to have an opinion!!" You might say.

Sure, if it was their opinion.

"But they have the internet, than can do research and form their own opinion" Wrong again.

Middle Schoolers lack the wisdom to properly understand what they research. Instead they see articles like THIS ONE, and assume that Paul Ryan must be a bad guy. Which is exactly what the writer of this article wanted.



Which brings me to why I posted this in the "Bias in the Media" forum.

Republican policies are so objectively harmful that even a child can understand that?

The Washington Post has become the political National Enquirer. Pure partisan hackery.

'Journalists'

:lamo

Cardinal said:

Republican policies are so objectively harmful that even a child can understand that?

Click to expand...

That is certainly, what the spin would like to lead the reader to believe.

I have clients that went on that class trip. I'm going to ask them about it.

Cardinal said:

Republican policies are so objectively harmful that even a child can understand that?

Click to expand...

No doubt.

Have to wonder how old the OP was when he wrote this about Republicans.....

Caine said:

When looking at the direction our country is going, im certain you must ask yourself this question. Do the Republicans have a Plan for the Future? Many issues that make me ponder this have to do with thier "plan" for Iraq. The "plan" it to stick to the original "plan". Is that really a plan for the "future"? Change is necessary, where would this country be without it? Also, one must look at the fiscal issues concerning our nation at the moment. The "plan" for the war was that the oil revenues would pay for the cost of the war. Instead, I have noticed that the future of the Social Security plan has paid for the War instead. Many people believe that this should be privatized, I ask you then, just how that is going to work for people who know nothing of the market, and don't make the kind of money to afford to pay someone for advise on it. The government refuses to address national medical insurance, as restrictions on foreign drugs cause drug costs to go through the roof, as well as medical insurance, and drug companies are making record profits. Millions and Millions of Americans are unemployed, yet the President and his party are allowing illegal immigrants to come over and take jobs he says "Americans' won't do". Many companies are forcing employees to quit smoking by a certain date or be fired because medical insurance is getting too costly. We are at war overseas, yet the government is cutting VA benefits to those who have fought in past wars in order to pay for this one. Americans here at home are suffering because the main focus of our government is a "Nation-Building" war in which the President himself said he does not agree with before being elected in 2000. The White House administration led by President Bush has come under legal scrutiny, as well as the Republican House Chair for illegal actions, and a Californian Republican congressman as well, for accepting bribes.

With all these problems, you must ask... Do the republicans really have a plan for the future??????

https://www.debatepolitics.com/archives/6558-do-republicans-have-plan-future.html#post171335

Click to expand...

Caine said:

Oh.. I forgot to mention the fact that with all the money we are now in debt...

The republicans want to continue giving large amounts of tax cuts to already wealthy people, which is again, keeping us even more and more in debt, but keeping the large corporate campaign donations coming into the republican party.
Hmm... Im sure I'll remember something else as I go on...

https://www.debatepolitics.com/arch...s-have-plan-future-post171403.html#post171403

Click to expand...

:coffeepap

FWIW, it appears as though the "couple of pre-teens brainwashed by their parents political ideology" also walked out of school on Jan 20th to protest Trump.....

SOUTH ORANGE, NJ - South Orange Middle School (SOMS) students walked out of school on Friday, Jan. 20, at about 12:30 p.m. in protest of the Presidential inauguration of Donald Trump.

According to reports, SOMS students began protesting inside the halls at about 12:15 p.m., with the walkout happening shortly afterwards. The protest, which was student-led and organized, was largely organized by eighth grader Harley Cenedella.....

https://www.tapinto.net/towns/soma/articles/south-orange-middle-school-students-walkout-of-sc

Click to expand...

I am very familiar with South Orange, NJ. One of the most liberal towns around here. For example, I believe that they have the largest population of same-sex parents in any town in NJ. Most of the kids I work with from there are pretty politically minded, even at a young age. In fact, MOST of the teens I work with, even as young as 13 have a good basic knowledge of politics, and don't just agree with their parents. In fact, I have several teens who's politics are absolutely opposite from their parents... and not just liberal vs. conservative, but the opposite, too. With the wealth of available information, kids are getting knowledgeable about the world around them, earlier and earlier.

VanceMack said:

The Washington Post has become the political National Enquirer. Pure partisan hackery.

'Journalists'

:lamo

Click to expand...

I would have to agree with your statement. They have been caught in so many false stories lately. Truth/accuracy doesn't exactly seem to be what they are striving for these days. While WaPo wanted to make a big deal that some teens refused to have their picture taken with Paul Ryan, I didn't read where any of the kids wanted to get their picture taken with Nancy Pelosi either.

vesper said:

I would have to agree with your statement. They have been caught in so many false stories lately. Truth/accuracy doesn't exactly seem to be what they are striving for these days. While WaPo wanted to make a big deal that some teens refused to have their picture taken with Paul Ryan, I didn't read where any of the kids wanted to get their picture taken with Nancy Pelosi either.

Click to expand...

what Washington Post stories have been false? Can you list examples?

Caine said:

These 8th-graders from New Jersey refused to be photographed with Paul Ryan - The Washington Post
Is this what the news media has come to now?

What potential importance is there that a couple of pre-teens brainwashed by their parents political ideology have decided that they didn't want to take a ****ing photograph with Paul Ryan?

"But, Aren't kids allowed to have an opinion!!" You might say.

Sure, if it was their opinion.

"But they have the internet, than can do research and form their own opinion" Wrong again.

Middle Schoolers lack the wisdom to properly understand what they research. Instead they see articles like THIS ONE, and assume that Paul Ryan must be a bad guy. Which is exactly what the writer of this article wanted.



Which brings me to why I posted this in the "Bias in the Media" forum.

Click to expand...

The same way this was.


:lol: It was a new jersey school too.

Review Ordered of Video Showing Students Singing Praises of President Obama | Fox News

ModerateGOP said:

what Washington Post stories have been false? Can you list examples?

Click to expand...

Tips For Washington Post Trump Articles Based On Anonymous Leaks

vesper said:

Tips For Washington Post Trump Articles Based On Anonymous Leaks

Click to expand...

A blog?

VanceMack said:

The Washington Post has become the political National Enquirer. Pure partisan hackery.

'Journalists'

:lamo

Click to expand...

Indeed. Anything anti-Trump, anti-Conservative, or anti-Republican on the front page.
Anything with a negative spin for Democrats on the back page, or ignored and not covered at all.

Welcome to political tabloid 'journalism', aka political propaganda, falsely claimed to be the 'news'.

Caine said:

These 8th-graders from New Jersey refused to be photographed with Paul Ryan - The Washington Post
Is this what the news media has come to now?

What potential importance is there that a couple of pre-teens brainwashed by their parents political ideology have decided that they didn't want to take a ****ing photograph with Paul Ryan?

"But, Aren't kids allowed to have an opinion!!" You might say.

Sure, if it was their opinion.

"But they have the internet, than can do research and form their own opinion" Wrong again.

Middle Schoolers lack the wisdom to properly understand what they research. Instead they see articles like THIS ONE, and assume that Paul Ryan must be a bad guy. Which is exactly what the writer of this article wanted.



Which brings me to why I posted this in the "Bias in the Media" forum.

Click to expand...

This is the first time I heard of this.

Was this supposed to be big news?

Caine said:

These 8th-graders from New Jersey refused to be photographed with Paul Ryan - The Washington Post
Is this what the news media has come to now?

What potential importance is there that a couple of pre-teens brainwashed by their parents political ideology have decided that they didn't want to take a ****ing photograph with Paul Ryan?

"But, Aren't kids allowed to have an opinion!!" You might say.

Sure, if it was their opinion.

"But they have the internet, than can do research and form their own opinion" Wrong again.

Middle Schoolers lack the wisdom to properly understand what they research. Instead they see articles like THIS ONE, and assume that Paul Ryan must be a bad guy. Which is exactly what the writer of this article wanted.



Which brings me to why I posted this in the "Bias in the Media" forum.

Click to expand...

That is quite an assumption.

Cardinal said:

Republican policies are so objectively harmful that even a child can understand that?

Click to expand...

More like Liberals and 8th graders share many of the same emotional and behavioural characteristics

You know its time to do some serious and honest introspection when large numbers of children begin to share your ideological and political veiwpoints

Cardinal said:

Republican policies are so objectively harmful that even a child can understand that?

Click to expand...

Children don't understand anything their parents or other adults in their lives don't tell them.

vesper said:

Tips For Washington Post Trump Articles Based On Anonymous Leaks

Click to expand...

Again a conservative telling us that it's better to trust the officials in the Trump administration, handpicked by Trump rather than anonymous sources. Whatever happened to the skepticism of big government?

year2late said:

This is the first time I heard of this.

Was this supposed to be big news?

Click to expand...

I first saw it because it was "Trending News" on facebook. Then on Washington Posts's own website it was in their list of most popular articles at the time I was looking at it... I think it was like 5th or something.

Do I believe that even "THEY" (Wapo) thought it was "Big News"? No. But it was obviously important enough for their agenda to publish and then promote via facebook. Meanwhile, Is this really worth reporting? No. Not unless, of course, your news organization has an agenda to push in the first place.

Utility Man said:

No doubt.

Have to wonder how old the OP was when he wrote this about Republicans.....





:coffeepap

FWIW, it appears as though the "couple of pre-teens brainwashed by their parents political ideology" also walked out of school on Jan 20th to protest Trump.....

Click to expand...

Oh noes... You caught me!!

I don't deny that when I originally got into politics, I did so as a young disgruntled and misled soldier who was upset over the conditions under which I was sent to Iraq in 2003. This obviously started me out as a liberal. But, as most older adults with more wisdom can admit, most of the time one grows out of those liberal leanings as they grow older.

You have to remember, I've been a member on this forum for nearly 12 years now.

ModerateGOP said:

Again a conservative telling us that it's better to trust the officials in the Trump administration, handpicked by Trump rather than anonymous sources. Whatever happened to the skepticism of big government?

Click to expand...

Whatever happened to journalism?

vesper said:

Whatever happened to journalism?

Click to expand...

Is journalism asking Trump crones what happened? That sounds more like Trump university to me.

ModerateGOP said:

Is journalism asking Trump crones what happened? That sounds more like Trump university to me.

Click to expand...

You totally misrepresented the link I posted.

It pointed out several stories the WaPo recently got wrong.

It also went on to post guidelines when reading a WaPo article that coincide with guidelines the media is suppose to use on an active story.

Here let me post them for you.

-In the immediate aftermath, news outlets will get it wrong.
-Don’t trust anonymous sources. If democracy dies in darkness, anonymity is not exactly transparent or accountable. Unless someone is willing to put his or her name with a leak, be on guard.
- Pay attention to how well the reporters characterize the motivations of the anonymous leaker. All leakers have motivation. Does the paper seem to have a grasp on how the motivation affects the veracity of the leak?
-If someone is leaking national security information in order to support the claim of a national security violation, be on guard.
-If someone is claiming a serious national security crisis but not willing to go public with the claim and resign in protest of same, be on guard.
-Compare sources willing to put their name and reputation on the line.
-Big anti-Trump news brings out the fakers.
-Pay attention to the language that the media uses. Is a story about something unimportant being written in such a way as to make it seem more important?
-Beware confirmation bias. Everyone has the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one’s existing beliefs or theories. Be on guard that you don’t accept critical or exonerating evidence to match your political preferences.
-Pay attention to how quickly and fully editors and reporters correct stories based on false information from anonymous sources. If they don’t correct at all, it’s an indication of a lack of respect.

Caine said:

These 8th-graders from New Jersey refused to be photographed with Paul Ryan - The Washington Post
Is this what the news media has come to now?

What potential importance is there that a couple of pre-teens brainwashed by their parents political ideology have decided that they didn't want to take a ****ing photograph with Paul Ryan?

"But, Aren't kids allowed to have an opinion!!" You might say.

Sure, if it was their opinion.

"But they have the internet, than can do research and form their own opinion" Wrong again.

Middle Schoolers lack the wisdom to properly understand what they research. Instead they see articles like THIS ONE, and assume that Paul Ryan must be a bad guy. Which is exactly what the writer of this article wanted.



Which brings me to why I posted this in the "Bias in the Media" forum.

Click to expand...

IMO that is NEWS .................. Those kids actually have a mind of their own & they should be commended for NOT desiring to be photographed with a MAFIA THUG

vesper said:

You totally misrepresented the link I posted.

It pointed out several stories the WaPo recently got wrong.

1. In the immediate aftermath, news outlets will get it wrong.
2. Don’t trust anonymous sources. If democracy dies in darkness, anonymity is not exactly transparent or accountable. Unless someone is willing to put his or her name with a leak, be on guard.
3. Pay attention to how well the reporters characterize the motivations of the anonymous leaker. All leakers have motivation. Does the paper seem to have a grasp on how the motivation affects the veracity of the leak?
4. If someone is leaking national security information in order to support the claim of a national security violation, be on guard.
5. If someone is claiming a serious national security crisis but not willing to go public with the claim and resign in protest of same, be on guard.
6. Compare sources willing to put their name and reputation on the line.
7. Big anti-Trump news brings out the fakers.
8. Pay attention to the language that the media uses. Is a story about something unimportant being written in such a way as to make it seem more important?
9. Beware confirmation bias. Everyone has the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one’s existing beliefs or theories. Be on guard that you don’t accept critical or exonerating evidence to match your political preferences.
10. Pay attention to how quickly and fully editors and reporters correct stories based on false information from anonymous sources. If they don’t correct at all, it’s an indication of a lack of respect.

Click to expand...

I read the link you posted. All stories that they claimed the Washington post got wrong were stories that were "debunked" by Trump administration. That is not exactly an unbiased source of information. But Let me break down these so-called guidelines:

1. They get information as it comes in, that information holds up better than anything I have ever found on the internet which often leads me to more confusion.
2. Anonymous sources have been a part of American Democracy ever since it's founding and probably during it's founding as well. The only people who have problems with anonymous sources are the people they are being anonymous from! Also dictators.
3. Leaks have often been proved by countless officials or what the leaker said would happen actually does. Shocker I know.
4. Why?
5. Why?
6. Sure, but it's hard to do when most of the people who do put their names out there are just making crap up for their 15 mins, like the Seth Rich Detective, Pizzagate losers, and Twitter Trump supporters who cite false data about 3 Million illegals voting.
7. WTF?? That sure does sum up this whole article, but hardly has any rational meaning.
8. To a Trump supporter every bad thing Trump does in unimportant. They'd rather talk about the much smaller problems that plagued the Obama administration.
9. I never do, and yet Trump supporters always say I do, when it is in fact them who do it! EG: Russia.
10. Again, I've asked you to post this false information and you have yet to post it. You just posted a link and then talking points from said link. Can you on your own point to any false story (about Trump) that the Washington Post has put out, and then was later either pulled because of bad journalism, or was forced to retract it completely. I can't think of any off the top of my head, but I can think of plenty from the right-wing media. Even the very, very left wing media (That is not the WP btw)