America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 4 years ago by delta1. 74 replies replies.
2 Pages<12
Let's talk about OANN
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
delta1 Offline
#51 Posted: Thu, Mar 19 2020, 6:33 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,778
OANN, trust us...
delta1 Offline
#52 Posted: Thu, Mar 19 2020, 6:34 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,778
frankj1 wrote:
if ever we all agreed that sources of the reported news has bias, I'd still be quite surprised to ever read anything from any political side as bar-lowering as:

"Is it alarming that major media players, just to oppose you, are siding with foreign state propaganda, Islamic radicals, and Latin gangs and cartels and they work right here out of the White House with direct access to you and your team?"

it's the quote that is alarming. Is there not a con among us that would admit to raising an eyebrow at least?




Walter Cronkite would've had a cow and two calves had any journalist asked such a question...
frankj1 Offline
#53 Posted: Thu, Mar 19 2020, 6:40 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,215
teedubbya wrote:
That is scary and more so that not only are some ok with that, leadership is ok with that.

How does anyone regardless of political affiliation get so invested in one or two news outlets? (edit....no not a MACS Q...he he uses more sources like TASS ans INFOWARS I keed I keed)....

let's hope leadership isn't in on this potential plant.

It Can't Happen Here
written in 1935 by Sinclair Lewis in the height of European fascism.
Must be the 50th time I've mentioned it.

No, I don't think we are there, but I believe every time the free press is scorned or limited or trashed OR REPLACED by disguised speakers for the state is a threat to opening that door cuz...first the free press, then the judiciary, and then it can happen here.
victor809 Offline
#54 Posted: Thu, Mar 19 2020, 7:49 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Did you miss the part of his presser where he actually suggested that?

I'm working off memory here but the gist of the statement was "you guys are too crowded for proper social distancing, we should have about 75-80% less people in here... I should just do this with 2 or 3 of you, the ones I like".
victor809 Offline
#55 Posted: Thu, Mar 19 2020, 7:51 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Here's the actual quote:
"You’re actually sitting too close. We should probably get rid of another 75, 80 percent of you. I’ll have just two or three that I like in this room. I think that’s a great way of doing it. We figured a new way of doing it."
frankj1 Offline
#56 Posted: Thu, Mar 19 2020, 7:56 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,215
it always creeps before it storms in

hoping those that like policies will value the bigger picture even more than the short win.
MACS Offline
#57 Posted: Thu, Mar 19 2020, 8:39 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,747
I think he says that crap just to watch people go nuts. He does that a lot, as you know. I don't think the American people would tolerate that. I know I wouldn't, regardless if I think most of them are biased.

Frank... yes, that was a dumb thing for the journalist to say. As was the MSNBC journalist that said Trump should be prosecuted for negligent homicide for his response to the pandemic.

*shrug*

We're all biased in our own way. The 6 corporations that pretty much run our media happen to be left leaning.
teedubbya Offline
#58 Posted: Thu, Mar 19 2020, 8:56 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
But this was at a press conference with the prez. Not an opinion spew.

I respected McCain when he set the woman straight about Obama being Muslim. That used to be the norm.
frankj1 Offline
#59 Posted: Thu, Mar 19 2020, 9:33 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,215
McCain was not on my like list but that was correct.

Shawn, I guess what makes alarms go off for me is the line between FREE press and Official News Outlet of the State.
That guy was no different than a "reporter" at a press conference covering Fatty Fat Un...the creeping begins.

at least the stupid MSNBC (did I spell that right?) person is not paid to tell us what the Government would have us believe.
Bad precedent to have this chit start...talking big picture, as you know.
MACS Offline
#60 Posted: Thu, Mar 19 2020, 9:58 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,747
I agree with you, Frank. It just seems to me we have the opposite. 1 network in favor, the rest against, when what we should have is just unbiased reporting from all of them.

The journalist was a she. Chanel Rion. I think she is their "Whitehouse Correspondent". If she's going to be that way they may need to select a new one.
CelticBomber Offline
#61 Posted: Thu, Mar 19 2020, 10:50 PM EST
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
frankj1 wrote:
if ever we all agreed that sources of the reported news has bias, I'd still be quite surprised to ever read anything from any political side as bar-lowering as:

"Is it alarming that major media players, just to oppose you, are siding with foreign state propaganda, Islamic radicals, and Latin gangs and cartels and they work right here out of the White House with direct access to you and your team?"

it's the quote that is alarming. Is there not a con among us that would admit to raising an eyebrow at least?




Don't touch the Mother Flocking Banana Frank.... it's all around us. The thinking, not the banana. That would be a 'UGE banana.
frankj1 Offline
#62 Posted: Thu, Mar 19 2020, 11:38 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,215
MACS wrote:
I agree with you, Frank. It just seems to me we have the opposite. 1 network in favor, the rest against, when what we should have is just unbiased reporting from all of them.

The journalist was a she. Chanel Rion. I think she is their "Whitehouse Correspondent". If she's going to be that way they may need to select a new one.

the numbers liking and disliking any administration will go back and forth (even though you are indisputably correct, they should be unbiased) but the dangerous times are when they speak for or work for the one in power.
we can pick and choose among the opinions of the free azzholes.
frankj1 Offline
#63 Posted: Thu, Mar 19 2020, 11:59 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,215
don't recall the name of the class I was in at Boston University over a half century ago,probably in the Communication arena, but there was a segment we dealt with about recording vs reporting...not vs like a fight, but about how the two methods impacted public opinion.

If we really wanted totally unbiased information, we think we'd get that by asking for news personnel to say what happened without a personal agenda. And yet we'd still not get the same interpretation from the audience. Basically, it is impossible to get agreement on what was just witnessed by more than one person. And that may not be bad...

This point was driven home by having the class watch staged situations and write what they just witnessed. The differences in what was "recorded" was mind blowing. People see things through the filters they already have adopted...even simple little two minute scenarios of no political consequence.
ZRX1200 Online
#64 Posted: Fri, Mar 20 2020, 12:30 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,582
When they’re introducing editorialization into factual reporting THEY have gutted the “Free Press” and their duty as the 5th column.

The Free Press should never be to the Politburo or a propaganda arm for any party. And yet.......

I would love a free press.
delta1 Offline
#65 Posted: Fri, Mar 20 2020, 1:21 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,778
still a few "neutral" media sites, but you have to look for them: Wall Street Journal, AP, Reuters, BBC News, USA Today, NPR Online...



but the lack of bias makes for boring news...
victor809 Offline
#66 Posted: Fri, Mar 20 2020, 2:44 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
delta1 wrote:
still a few "neutral" media sites, but you have to look for them: Wall Street Journal, AP, Reuters, BBC News, USA Today, NPR Online...



but the lack of bias makes for boring news...


They're probably on twitler's "do not invite" list

Did we all see his response to the reporter today?

Reporter from NBC "What do you say to Americans watching right now who are scared?"
Twitler: "I say that you are a terrible reporter, that's what I say. I think that's a very nasty question. And I think that's a very bad signal that you're putting out to the American people."

Sigh....

And we even had a cameo from Sean Spicer. Who donnie two-scoops pretended not to know when he had him ask his questions.
tailgater Offline
#67 Posted: Fri, Mar 20 2020, 2:50 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
They're probably on twitler's "do not invite" list

Did we all see his response to the reporter today?

Reporter from NBC "What do you say to Americans watching right now who are scared?"
Twitler: "I say that you are a terrible reporter, that's what I say. I think that's a very nasty question. And I think that's a very bad signal that you're putting out to the American people."

Sigh....

And we even had a cameo from Sean Spicer. Who donnie two-scoops pretended not to know when he had him ask his questions.



Trump was right.
But he shouldn't have said it. Which is part of his personality flaw.


I watched today's conference from MA governor Baker.
He got two questions in a row from reporters wondering why Massachusetts wasn't in lock down like California.
The governor, who I'm no fan of, gave a great answer yet the question was re-asked in a different manner.

Yes. Bad reporter.
Floating these ideas out there allow the paranoid and scared to cling to the ideas as having merit. They don't. But the media makes their living creating the fear.
izonfire Offline
#68 Posted: Fri, Mar 20 2020, 2:50 PM EST
Joined: 12-09-2013
Posts: 8,644
victor809 wrote:
Reporter from NBC "What do you say to Americans watching right now who are scared?"
Twitler: "I say that you are a terrible reporter, that's what I say. I think that's a very nasty question. And I think that's a very bad signal that you're putting out to the American people."

You didn't find his response comforting???
teedubbya Offline
#69 Posted: Fri, Mar 20 2020, 2:52 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
He teed Trump up to lead. Trump chose a different path. Meh



I'm starting to like Trump. I think he's great.
victor809 Offline
#70 Posted: Fri, Mar 20 2020, 2:53 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
Trump was right.
But he shouldn't have said it. Which is part of his personality flaw.


I watched today's conference from MA governor Baker.
He got two questions in a row from reporters wondering why Massachusetts wasn't in lock down like California.
The governor, who I'm no fan of, gave a great answer yet the question was re-asked in a different manner.

Yes. Bad reporter.
Floating these ideas out there allow the paranoid and scared to cling to the ideas as having merit. They don't. But the media makes their living creating the fear.



The reporter was lobbing him a softball question to give him a nice feel good soundbite. Yes, a terrible reporter, but only from the perspective that I think feel good soundbites are awful and are going to reduce the panic and possibly increase survivability. I'm aiming for 50% death rate over 60.... save that social security for me.

Twitler called it a "nasty question". Dude was literally offering him the easiest question one could expect from this mess.
teedubbya Offline
#71 Posted: Fri, Mar 20 2020, 3:00 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
It was an easy Q... not nasty at all

he just doesn't like the reporter and is too petty to be professional.


oops. I love him and think it was great.
teedubbya Offline
#72 Posted: Fri, Mar 20 2020, 3:01 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Yall don't understand how hard presidentin be. nasty mean questions asked to every President ever in a similar spot don't help!

He did answer a Q the other day about what did you tell your son.....
delta1 Offline
#73 Posted: Fri, Mar 20 2020, 3:42 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,778
this is very bad...but we are doing great...I give it a 10...
delta1 Offline
#74 Posted: Fri, Mar 20 2020, 3:46 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,778
Trump's media relations will only be dangerous when/if he can turn off open/non state approved reporting...

so far, we're not even close to public support for that...his group of media haters isn't large enough to shut down the hated mainstream media...
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages<12
Back to Top