Quote:
Originally Posted by dfgg
Now now Toothsayer no need to start throwing insults. Calm down there buddy.
You started this. I posted factual content and you went all weird and partisan, attacking the source and then implying that this was because of my character ("never change, Tooth").
Quote:
My issue is not with the content. But you post from a source that is known for straight up making stuff up.
Cite the claim that the Daily Telegraph has a poorer track record for factual accuracy than an average reputable news source? What you believe above came straight out your fevered/deranged partisan brain and has no connection to reality.
Quote:
Basically a rightwing fake news website.
There goes your chimp brain again. It's owned by Emmanuel Goldstein, everything Emmanuel Goldstein touches is fake. Do you realize your epistemology is all ****ed up?
Unlike you I'm not uneducated or unworldly enough to believe that right leaning news is "fake" and left leaning news is "true" (or vice versa). All have their biases...right now the left has an insane anti-Trump bias. When Obama was in power, parts of the right had an insane anti-Obama bias.
Murdoch news is as reputable as any other news, more on some topics, less on others (it depends on the topic). You just don't spot the biases of your own side because you're up to your neck in them, and your own side has been running a propaganda campaign, attacking the media that doesn't agree with them. That you believe otherwise is kind of sad. This idea that one side is right and reasonable and are impartial commentators and the other side lie and distort is just amazing; anyone with any knowledge of history or journalism or even human nature would laugh at you. Both sides are partisan and both right and wrong and both lie and distort in ridiculous ways. There's not a hair between in how much. Yet a good portion of people (you included) actually believe that it's just one side. We live in weird times.
Quote:
I guess I am a complete idiot for not trusting them right? If this is so obvious, why can't you find a reputable source?
Because sources that you believe are "reputable" simply aren't documenting this fake news event. It makes them look bad, and they're mostly tribal cheerleaders to impress sheep like you. I read across the spectrum and this was the first decent documenting of this event that I read.
But nonetheless I found you a tweet from a senior CNN reporter in my post above who says exactly the same thing as Emmanuel Goldstein's site. Thus your chimp brain should be sated - someone from your side said it, it's beyond reproach now.
Quote:
Why post a link from tabloid journalism.
Because it had a good list of the sources and timeline. If the NYT wants to document the rabid anti-Trump fake news that has infected US mainstream commentary for well over a year, and yesterday wiped $200 billion off the stock market, then I'll post them instead, if only to avoid the kind of weird bull**** that partisan idiot partake in, like you above. Until they do, I post things that are sourced and factual.
Your problems with tribalism and broken epistemology are irrelevant to the discussion.
Last edited by ToothSayer; 12-02-2017 at 03:27 PM.