Social Justice Warriors Thread
-
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Re: Social Justice Warriors Thread
GP has a correspondent. Breitbart sends somebody there too.
-
- Posts: 2434
- Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:34 pm
Re: Social Justice Warriors Thread
He was only probing those women with deep investigative procedures trying to create an in-depth story.pineapplemike wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 6:47 pmalright! the image i found was from when sean spicer was the press secretary, early 2017 i imagine. note that glenn thrush is sitting there too, this was after he admitted to being a hack journalist in private emails with john podesta, but before being removed from his job for sexual harassment
-
- Posts: 1881
- Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm
Re: Social Justice Warriors Thread
Both sides certainly are biased.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:53 amIt is, both sides are biased. I don't see how you can avoid that. The danger is people conflating bias with fake news.
One has 10x the volume but both are biased.
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Social Justice Warriors Thread
10x the ratings or 10x the number of media outlets?nmoore63 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 8:48 amBoth sides certainly are biased.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:53 amIt is, both sides are biased. I don't see how you can avoid that. The danger is people conflating bias with fake news.
One has 10x the volume but both are biased.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
- Posts: 1881
- Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm
Re: Social Justice Warriors Thread
If you don’t grasp that that the vast majority of the media in America comes from the left than I can’t help you.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 8:51 am10x the ratings or 10x the number of media outlets?nmoore63 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 8:48 amBoth sides certainly are biased.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:53 am
It is, both sides are biased. I don't see how you can avoid that. The danger is people conflating bias with fake news.
One has 10x the volume but both are biased.
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Social Justice Warriors Thread
No, I understand that but just wanted to clarify what you meant by 10x the volume.nmoore63 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:05 amIf you don’t grasp that the vast majority of the media in America comes from the left than I can’t help you.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
- Posts: 3657
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2016 11:15 am
Re: Social Justice Warriors Thread
Are you trying to go for the excuse that because Fox News gets more viewers than CNN and MSNBC combined that somehow the biases negate each other?
You also have to factor in the non-cable news shows that all lean left. CBS, ABC, NBC. Then you have 90% of newspapers that lean left. In my state there are 2 major newspapers. Both are about as subtle about their bias as MSNBC, with a little bit of CNNs fake neutral claim tossed in. Then you have the internet, where there is at least a little more balance between left and right sources. Again though, the major sites are affiliated with networks or newspapers, and get most of the eyeballs. Go to Google news when not logged in as yourself and you will see that almost every single source for story comes from a left-sided site.
It's not even close.
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Social Justice Warriors Thread
Sounds like the right need to get their shit together. What is stopping them having more outlets?PartyOf5 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:26 amAre you trying to go for the excuse that because Fox News gets more viewers than CNN and MSNBC combined that somehow the biases negate each other?
You also have to factor in the non-cable news shows that all lean left. CBS, ABC, NBC. Then you have 90% of newspapers that lean left. In my state there are 2 major newspapers. Both are about as subtle about their bias as MSNBC, with a little bit of CNNs fake neutral claim tossed in. Then you have the internet, where there is at least a little more balance between left and right sources. Again though, the major sites are affiliated with networks or newspapers, and get most of the eyeballs. Go to Google news when not logged in as yourself and you will see that almost every single source for story comes from a left-sided site.
It's not even close.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
- Posts: 3657
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2016 11:15 am
Re: Social Justice Warriors Thread
A combination of:Montegriffo wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 9:35 amSounds like the right need to get their shit together. What is stopping them having more outlets?
- The major online outlets like Google, Facebook, and Youtube are overrun by liberals who are constantly coming up with ways to bury right wing viewpoints.
- The journalism field mostly consists of liberals.
- The big corporations that own most stations and papers are led by liberals.
-
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Re: Social Justice Warriors Thread
Major MSM products are almost always bullshit. You get more facts from independent players. The problem there is that those players broadcast via social media tools like YouTube, Facebook, etc. The companies that control those social networks do everything possible to rig or outright censor the best competition of the MSM.
For instance, in basic searches on latest news stories on YouTube, you often have to click through two or three screens worth of MSM content. This content has very low view counts and often shit ratings, but YouTube deliberately puts that out front of the sources that have very high ratings and view counts.
Example: Tim Pool is a liberal alternative media guy that people link to here fairly often. He has what is a modest 353k subscribers. He posted a video on the Smollet hoax and how the MSM fucks shit up two days ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2eBSiv3UB4 As of this post's composition, this video has 136k views. This guy is a small player and he beats most of the propaganda personalities in the MSM (though not the big names like Hannity or Maddow).
There are alt media guys on YouTube that regularly beat ratings of the very best ratings the MSM can possibly get.
But if they get too big for their britches, YouTube will proceed to demonitize them. If that doesn't work, YouTube will start handing out nebulous community guideline strikes. If that doesn't work, they will eventually shadow ban or outright ban the YouTuber and delete the content.
These social media companies are not even making decisions on a profit basis any longer. It's straight political dogma, even if that means losing money.
People can and do regularly beat the liberal MSM. The problem is that the corporataucracy proceeds to go so far as to ban some of them essentially from the Internet itself. As odious as Alex Jone's behavior was regarding the Sandy Hook parents, that wasn't the reason he was basically kicked off the Internet. He was kicked off the Internet because he gets bigger views than MSM. He's their competitor.
For instance, in basic searches on latest news stories on YouTube, you often have to click through two or three screens worth of MSM content. This content has very low view counts and often shit ratings, but YouTube deliberately puts that out front of the sources that have very high ratings and view counts.
Example: Tim Pool is a liberal alternative media guy that people link to here fairly often. He has what is a modest 353k subscribers. He posted a video on the Smollet hoax and how the MSM fucks shit up two days ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2eBSiv3UB4 As of this post's composition, this video has 136k views. This guy is a small player and he beats most of the propaganda personalities in the MSM (though not the big names like Hannity or Maddow).
There are alt media guys on YouTube that regularly beat ratings of the very best ratings the MSM can possibly get.
But if they get too big for their britches, YouTube will proceed to demonitize them. If that doesn't work, YouTube will start handing out nebulous community guideline strikes. If that doesn't work, they will eventually shadow ban or outright ban the YouTuber and delete the content.
These social media companies are not even making decisions on a profit basis any longer. It's straight political dogma, even if that means losing money.
People can and do regularly beat the liberal MSM. The problem is that the corporataucracy proceeds to go so far as to ban some of them essentially from the Internet itself. As odious as Alex Jone's behavior was regarding the Sandy Hook parents, that wasn't the reason he was basically kicked off the Internet. He was kicked off the Internet because he gets bigger views than MSM. He's their competitor.