Media Bias

[Forty Two]

Whatever you say Forty Two.

So here's a question for you that won't require any upsetting efforts. If you make a joke about a politician you voted for, does that count as criticism or support?

Again, I'm not inclined to engage in "efforts" that you won't engage in. And, I'm not inclined to continue answering your inquiries, when you don't extend the same courtesy by answering my questions.

But, this time I will, again, extend that courtesy - if I make a joke about a politician I voted for, it might be criticism, or it might be support, depending on the joke.

[Joe]

Whatever you say Forty Two.

So here's a question for you that won't require any upsetting efforts. If you make a joke about a politician you voted for, does that count as criticism or support?

Again, I'm not inclined to engage in "efforts" that you won't engage in. And, I'm not inclined to continue answering your inquiries, when you don't extend the same courtesy by answering my questions.

But, this time I will, again, extend that courtesy - if I make a joke about a politician I voted for, it might be criticism, or it might be support, depending on the joke.

Okay, I made two jokes about Hillary Clinton, both mildly critical but playing on silly tropes. I levied two serious criticism of her foreign policy and debunked two false claims about her which I counted as positive. I reviewed all of my posts. I'm a little surprised I've said so little about her.

So, you want to try a month of yours.

[Forty Two]

Whatever you say Forty Two.

So here's a question for you that won't require any upsetting efforts. If you make a joke about a politician you voted for, does that count as criticism or support?

Again, I'm not inclined to engage in "efforts" that you won't engage in. And, I'm not inclined to continue answering your inquiries, when you don't extend the same courtesy by answering my questions.

But, this time I will, again, extend that courtesy - if I make a joke about a politician I voted for, it might be criticism, or it might be support, depending on the joke.

Okay, I made two jokes about Hillary Clinton, both mildly critical but playing on silly tropes. I levied two serious criticism of her foreign policy and debunked two false claims about her which I counted as positive. I reviewed all of my posts. I'm a little surprised I've said so little about her.

So, you want to try a month of yours.

I might. But, for what purpose? Are we trying to establish that my anti-Trump posts pale in comparison to my pro-Trump posts? If that's it, then that's already established. This will be the fourth time I've acknowledge that fact.

[Joe]

Whatever you say Forty Two.

So here's a question for you that won't require any upsetting efforts. If you make a joke about a politician you voted for, does that count as criticism or support?

Again, I'm not inclined to engage in "efforts" that you won't engage in. And, I'm not inclined to continue answering your inquiries, when you don't extend the same courtesy by answering my questions.

But, this time I will, again, extend that courtesy - if I make a joke about a politician I voted for, it might be criticism, or it might be support, depending on the joke.

Okay, I made two jokes about Hillary Clinton, both mildly critical but playing on silly tropes. I levied two serious criticism of her foreign policy and debunked two false claims about her which I counted as positive. I reviewed all of my posts. I'm a little surprised I've said so little about her.

So, you want to try a month of yours.

I might. But, for what purpose? Are we trying to establish that my anti-Trump posts pale in comparison to my pro-Trump posts? If that's it, then that's already established. This will be the fourth time I've acknowledge that fact.

Ah, Forty Two, you persist in misunderstanding. I can't tell you what you would learn, just that is useful to fact check your perceptions. After all, you get called a Russian troll and a Trump shill pretty regularly, for all you claim that you criticize Trump.

Are you sure you aren't misremembering? I did a not so quick perusal of your last month's posts where Trump was mentioned, and you only offered two critical posts, yesterday after I pointed it out. This is against 57 posts either defending or touting the guy. You had 10 jokes, mostly about "Trump Derangement Syndrome."

It's no big deal to me, since that was what I expected, but had I found 10 critical posts, I would have changed my perception to a more correct one. Either way, it was a a good use of time, since it fact checked my perception.

In your case, maybe the effort would give you a taste of what reporters sometimes go through to dig out a story, and that would be useful in and of itself for the topic of this thread. Given the level of work involved, how strong is the temptation for reporters to just go along with the prevailing narrative, especially if it conforms to their biases.

I suspect Cunt will be happy to get back to the topic.

[Woodbutcher]

Joe, maybe 42's sense of humour is such that we cannot really understand most of his jokes for or against Trump. Therefore it just might be possible that he has posted for or against jokes about Trump. We just don't get them.

[Joe]

Joe, maybe 42's sense of humour is such that we cannot really understand most of his jokes for or against Trump. Therefore it just might be possible that he has posted for or against jokes about Trump. We just don't get them.

It's quite possible, Woodbutcher. After all, I seldom get his logic.

[Cunt]

I seldom make criticisms of Trump, but love some of the humour. Most of it turned to shit as soon as you see the comic hating instead of being funny.

but some of them are still good. I like the bad lip reading of the SOTU, for instance.

I'm pretty sexy, I don't walk in nature, I don't like shy kids, I think guys are the BEST

[Forty Two]

Whatever you say Forty Two.

So here's a question for you that won't require any upsetting efforts. If you make a joke about a politician you voted for, does that count as criticism or support?

Again, I'm not inclined to engage in "efforts" that you won't engage in. And, I'm not inclined to continue answering your inquiries, when you don't extend the same courtesy by answering my questions.

But, this time I will, again, extend that courtesy - if I make a joke about a politician I voted for, it might be criticism, or it might be support, depending on the joke.

Okay, I made two jokes about Hillary Clinton, both mildly critical but playing on silly tropes. I levied two serious criticism of her foreign policy and debunked two false claims about her which I counted as positive. I reviewed all of my posts. I'm a little surprised I've said so little about her.

So, you want to try a month of yours.

I might. But, for what purpose? Are we trying to establish that my anti-Trump posts pale in comparison to my pro-Trump posts? If that's it, then that's already established. This will be the fourth time I've acknowledge that fact.

Ah, Forty Two, you persist in misunderstanding. I can't tell you what you would learn, just that is useful to fact check your perceptions. After all, you get called a Russian troll and a Trump shill pretty regularly, for all you claim that you criticize Trump.

I don't find it to be "regularly." You're free to check your perceptions on that by reviewing the posts on this forum. However, what I see is just a couple people doing that, and forgive me if I don't give a fuck what someone like Scot Dutchy says.

Again, what do you mean "for all you claim that you criticize Trump." What claim in that regard do you think I've made? I've only claimed that I've done it. I admit that my criticisms do not come close to equaling my supportive posts. What's the problem? I support his Presidency. I like his policies, generally speaking, and far more often than I oppose them.

Are you sure you aren't misremembering? I did a not so quick perusal of your last month's posts where Trump was mentioned, and you only offered two critical posts, yesterday after I pointed it out. This is against 57 posts either defending or touting the guy. You had 10 jokes, mostly about "Trump Derangement Syndrome."

Which is exactly in line with my statement that I have admitted several times that my critical posts do, in fact, pale in comparison to my pro-Trump posts. Why wouldn't they? I support his policies. Why do I need more critical posts? So that I agree with you more? If not for that reason, then why?

It's no big deal to me, since that was what I expected,

and what I acknowledged clearly, several times - this is now the fifth time.

but had I found 10 critical posts, I would have changed my perception to a more correct one. Either way, it was a a good use of time, since it fact checked my perception.

My 2 posts is more than you'll find with most anti-Trumpers here. Check Tero's posts, and Scot Dutchy, pErvin, Hermit, JimC, yourself --

What is the point of this? Why do I need ore critical Trump posts? What would that tell you?

In your case, maybe the effort would give you a taste of what reporters sometimes go through to dig out a story, and that would be useful in and of itself for the topic of this thread. Given the level of work involved, how strong is the temptation for reporters to just go along with the prevailing narrative, especially if it conforms to their biases.

I suspect Cunt will be happy to get back to the topic.

Do you believe that you are making sense?

One, I know what a good reporter goes through. And, I know that bad reporters (which is most of them) don't do that, and generally push a narrative.

What is it, though, that you want me to realize about my posts here? That they are overwhelmingly anti-Trump? I said they were. I never said otherwise. So, what do you want? Me to realize that I'm wrong in some way, because the number of posts anti-Trump are not as high as you would think is reasonable?

[Joe]

Again, I'm not inclined to engage in "efforts" that you won't engage in. And, I'm not inclined to continue answering your inquiries, when you don't extend the same courtesy by answering my questions.

But, this time I will, again, extend that courtesy - if I make a joke about a politician I voted for, it might be criticism, or it might be support, depending on the joke.

Okay, I made two jokes about Hillary Clinton, both mildly critical but playing on silly tropes. I levied two serious criticism of her foreign policy and debunked two false claims about her which I counted as positive. I reviewed all of my posts. I'm a little surprised I've said so little about her.

So, you want to try a month of yours.

I might. But, for what purpose? Are we trying to establish that my anti-Trump posts pale in comparison to my pro-Trump posts? If that's it, then that's already established. This will be the fourth time I've acknowledge that fact.

Ah, Forty Two, you persist in misunderstanding. I can't tell you what you would learn, just that is useful to fact check your perceptions. After all, you get called a Russian troll and a Trump shill pretty regularly, for all you claim that you criticize Trump.

I don't find it to be "regularly." You're free to check your perceptions on that by reviewing the posts on this forum. However, what I see is just a couple people doing that, and forgive me if I don't give a fuck what someone like Scot Dutchy says.

Again, what do you mean "for all you claim that you criticize Trump." What claim in that regard do you think I've made? I've only claimed that I've done it. I admit that my criticisms do not come close to equaling my supportive posts. What's the problem? I support his Presidency. I like his policies, generally speaking, and far more often than I oppose them.

Are you sure you aren't misremembering? I did a not so quick perusal of your last month's posts where Trump was mentioned, and you only offered two critical posts, yesterday after I pointed it out. This is against 57 posts either defending or touting the guy. You had 10 jokes, mostly about "Trump Derangement Syndrome."

Which is exactly in line with my statement that I have admitted several times that my critical posts do, in fact, pale in comparison to my pro-Trump posts. Why wouldn't they? I support his policies. Why do I need more critical posts? So that I agree with you more? If not for that reason, then why?

It's no big deal to me, since that was what I expected,

and what I acknowledged clearly, several times - this is now the fifth time.

but had I found 10 critical posts, I would have changed my perception to a more correct one. Either way, it was a a good use of time, since it fact checked my perception.

My 2 posts is more than you'll find with most anti-Trumpers here. Check Tero's posts, and Scot Dutchy, pErvin, Hermit, JimC, yourself --

What is the point of this? Why do I need ore critical Trump posts? What would that tell you?

In your case, maybe the effort would give you a taste of what reporters sometimes go through to dig out a story, and that would be useful in and of itself for the topic of this thread. Given the level of work involved, how strong is the temptation for reporters to just go along with the prevailing narrative, especially if it conforms to their biases.

I suspect Cunt will be happy to get back to the topic.

Do you believe that you are making sense?

One, I know what a good reporter goes through. And, I know that bad reporters (which is most of them) don't do that, and generally push a narrative.

What is it, though, that you want me to realize about my posts here? That they are overwhelmingly anti-Trump? I said they were. I never said otherwise. So, what do you want? Me to realize that I'm wrong in some way, because the number of posts anti-Trump are not as high as you would think is reasonable?

Ah Forty Two, you're overthinking things again. It's just a suggestion. If I wanted to tell you were wrong, I'd do so directly.

However, I will need some evidence to back your claim that your posts "are overwhelmingly anti-Trump." I put you firmly in the pro-Trump camp. Nice, Freudian slip though.

And yes, I am making sense, but you may want to reread the thread to get the context.

[Forty Two]

I haven't made a claim that my posts are "overwhelmingly anti-Trump." My posts are very much majority pro-Trump. I've never claimed otherwise - Oh, I see, that last paragraph has a typo - sorry about that. What I meant to say was that the are overwhelmingly "pro-Trump" and I have said they were several times. I never said otherwise. So, that was my mistake there - typing too fast.

I'm not going to bother re-reading the thread. You can make a coherent point, if you like. Otherwise, there isn't anything we've disagreed on here. I am very much pro-Trump. Most of my posts suggest that. That's the same as any of the folks who are anti-Trump. I have some posts that criticize him, and I certainly don't like the guy personally (or at least I so strongly suspect that I would loathe him personally, that I don't really need to think much more about it). I find his treatment of other people to be lacking, and he fouls up on a lot of things when dealing with others. A bunch of stuff bothers me about him. But, alas, we can't always get what we want, and on balance he's preferable to the alternatives.

[Cunt]

Dr. Soh has a neat-o take on media bias. I hadn't expected it to be so prevalent in academia, but of course it is.

Having met lots of academics, I should have known.

[Joe]

I haven't made a claim that my posts are "overwhelmingly anti-Trump." My posts are very much majority pro-Trump. I've never claimed otherwise - Oh, I see, that last paragraph has a typo - sorry about that. What I meant to say was that the are overwhelmingly "pro-Trump" and I have said they were several times. I never said otherwise. So, that was my mistake there - typing too fast.

I'm not going to bother re-reading the thread. You can make a coherent point, if you like. Otherwise, there isn't anything we've disagreed on here. I am very much pro-Trump. Most of my posts suggest that. That's the same as any of the folks who are anti-Trump. I have some posts that criticize him, and I certainly don't like the guy personally (or at least I so strongly suspect that I would loathe him personally, that I don't really need to think much more about it). I find his treatment of other people to be lacking, and he fouls up on a lot of things when dealing with others. A bunch of stuff bothers me about him. But, alas, we can't always get what we want, and on balance he's preferable to the alternatives.

Yes, your typing does tend to outpace your comprehension from time to time. I'm glad you caught it this time.

[Forty Two]

Oh snap

oh snap.gif (783.26 KiB) Viewed 2613 times

[Scot Dutchy]

Russian troll farm was shut down by US military on day of midterms – as it happened

The US military blocked internet access to a company underwritten by an oligarch close to Vladi­mir Putin during the 2018 midterms

At least two seemed to have survived.

[Seabass]

So the "left biased" Washington Post published an article that likens Ilhan Omar with Steve King. Wtf?

Ilhan Omar is the Steve King of the left

This is the trouble with news orgs trying so hard to be "balanced" when one side is clearly out of its collective gourd. This woman is getting attacked and smeared into oblivion for merely criticizing the BDS movement as well as America's unconditional support for Israel.