CNN Sucks!!!

[pineapplemike]

PBS is super lefty too.

I don't mind CNN having a bias but at what point do we start scrutinizing the news organizations that recieve WH press credentials? How many times does CNN need to be proven as a dishonest hack bitch before Jim Acosta loses his front row seat at the briefings?

[apeman]

But if you want objective, neutral news reporting, the better option is to pour some more money into a public service news channel, which owes nothing to no ideological shareholders, but instead the interests of the citizens.

Yes, perhaps a non-partisan, moderate, non-agenda-pushing public organization like NPR, eh?

HAHAHAHAhahhaaAHAHAHAHahahahaAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAWHOOOOOOOO!!!

I will never forgive NPR. What I am about to relay to you is a concrete fact, I heard it with my own ears and had no agenda against NPR at the time.

Right after the election, Trump was asked about a purported rise in antisemitic incidents at a conference, and Trump started to respond by rambling for many sentences about his historic win against Hillary, I am the best winner, really, people tell me that, etc. Typical Trump narcissistic and absurd blabber.

However, his next many sentences were about how how will be a president to everyone, how he is close with jews and has 'em in his fam, he is against antisemitism, etc.

So on its flagship news program at rush hour, NPR play the audio of the question, and then the part where Trump boasts about his electoral win, AND THEN THEY CUT THE AUDIO, and then the hosts offer their commentary: I can't believe he didn't answer the question, this is implicit support for antisemitism, what a dick bag he is, etc.

I mean, these are professional journalist, NPR is putting the audio together, am I really to believe it is an accident that they cut off his response RIGHT BEFORE he said the proper Presidential stuff?

I am still in shock over it, NPR intentionally misrepresented what happened -- and very effectively, I might add.

[Speaker to Animals]

Source?

For what? That CNN gets caught lying all the time? Are you serious?

Well, they certainly have begun to twist stories around, like Faux Noise, I'd just like to see objective evidence of outright lying.

My favorite was the fake SCUD missile attack. CNN is totally faked, dude. They have been so for a long time.


It amuses me that there still exist people who can't bring themselves to believe that these "news" channels are totally fake. After all the shit in the past year or so, they still can't believe it.

[The Conservative]

A media that does not criticize the government, is not a media worth having.

Not that that makes CNN worth having, though. Pretending to be neutral during the election failed miserably. And they Piers frigging Morgan as host for a debate show. Clueless, totally clueless.

As for antifa.... I remember a time years back when no one the DCF knew what antifa even was. The way things are getting reported, it sounds like a word they just discovered, and like a label anyone can get slapped on. As if "antifa" simply means anyone who is anti-"fascist", which can mean simply conservative.

Several things, a media that rightfully criticizes the government is one worth having. One that criticizes for ratings should be taken off the air.

Antifa was quickly realized for what they were by some people on the DFC, it just took longer for the liberally indocterated to accept what they were seeing and accept it for what it was.

It wasn't difficult to figure out what they were about back then. I personally called them a problem from day one. Others like you called them a joke. So please, don't lump everyone into your mistaken view of things to make yourself feel better.

Yeah, can't go wrong with giving government the mandate to ban media that paint government unflatteringly. It's your job as a citizen and an adult to determine if you want to believe in shit-quality news. Government should not ban voices that are critical, no matter how batshit crazy and irrational and "disruptive" the criticism is. I believe that's what the first of your amendments was about...?

I ever only called antifa irrelevant in regards to how they're like in MY country. They've been active here for decades. Both antifa here are different (here they're black bloc anarchists, in the US they're SJW progressives), and the mainstream media coverage of antifa here is nowhere near as positive in the mainstream media of them in US media. They're irrelevant here because they have no power and no one in power that gives a shit about them.

Do you realize you are talking to someone who hasn't watched "TV news" in nearly a decade because of the BS they spout and I wasn't going to raise my son watching the stupid programs or advertisements on TV that brainwash people into being stupid and think it's a good thing.

I read, and listen to the radio, I only watch when I want to see something for my own eyes to come up with my own conclusions. Most Americans don't think they have the time to actually do that, or think at all it seems. Otherwise, if they did we wouldn't be in the shitstorms we are in now.

As for the rest, Antifa themselves are a problem in the US only because the "Liberal Media" allows to give them a voice, and the politics of the group is ingrained with the same money that made the Democrats who they are today. Either way, it doesn't matter, we never will get rid of them until we get control of our media, and that won't happen until people actual wake up and realize they are being spoon fed shit.

[SuburbanFarmer]

But if you want objective, neutral news reporting, the better option is to pour some more money into a public service news channel, which owes nothing to no ideological shareholders, but instead the interests of the citizens.

Yes, perhaps a non-partisan, moderate, non-agenda-pushing public organization like NPR, eh?

HAHAHAHAhahhaaAHAHAHAHahahahaAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAWHOOOOOOOO!!!

I will never forgive NPR. What I am about to relay to you is a concrete fact, I heard it with my own ears and had no agenda against NPR at the time.

Right after the election, Trump was asked about a purported rise in antisemitic incidents at a conference, and Trump started to respond by rambling for many sentences about his historic win against Hillary, I am the best winner, really, people tell me that, etc. Typical Trump narcissistic and absurd blabber.

However, his next many sentences were about how how will be a president to everyone, how he is close with jews and has 'em in his fam, he is against antisemitism, etc.

So on its flagship news program at rush hour, NPR play the audio of the question, and then the part where Trump boasts about his electoral win, AND THEN THEY CUT THE AUDIO, and then the hosts offer their commentary: I can't believe he didn't answer the question, this is implicit support for antisemitism, what a dick bag he is, etc.

I mean, these are professional journalist, NPR is putting the audio together, am I really to believe it is an accident that they cut off his response RIGHT BEFORE he said the proper Presidential stuff?

I am still in shock over it, NPR intentionally misrepresented what happened -- and very effectively, I might add.

I've heard some pretty biased reporting from them as well - usually a snide comment, or turn of phrase. Nothing that was an outright lie though.

The point that he can't manage to answer a simple question without blathering about himself is valid. The question is whether they presented this as evidence of anti-semitism, or evidence of his incoherence.

Also, I've heard them discussing Kushner and Ivankas Jewishness in the past day or so.

[Speaker to Animals]

I mean.. I get it. If I built a time machine and went back like five years to tell myself, "dude, I came back to tell you that all these news channels are totally fake", younger me would probably think older me is pranking him.

We can all accept bias. But to really accept that these operations are pretty much fake fake fake is difficult. But at what point do you have to throw in the towel and stop pretending otherwise? How many lies does it take?

[apeman]

I will never forgive NPR. What I am about to relay to you is a concrete fact, I heard it with my own ears and had no agenda against NPR at the time.

Right after the election, Trump was asked about a purported rise in antisemitic incidents at a conference, and Trump started to respond by rambling for many sentences about his historic win against Hillary, I am the best winner, really, people tell me that, etc. Typical Trump narcissistic and absurd blabber.

However, his next many sentences were about how how will be a president to everyone, how he is close with jews and has 'em in his fam, he is against antisemitism, etc.

So on its flagship news program at rush hour, NPR play the audio of the question, and then the part where Trump boasts about his electoral win, AND THEN THEY CUT THE AUDIO, and then the hosts offer their commentary: I can't believe he didn't answer the question, this is implicit support for antisemitism, what a dick bag he is, etc.

I mean, these are professional journalist, NPR is putting the audio together, am I really to believe it is an accident that they cut off his response RIGHT BEFORE he said the proper Presidential stuff?

I am still in shock over it, NPR intentionally misrepresented what happened -- and very effectively, I might add.

I've heard some pretty biased reporting from them as well - usually a snide comment, or turn of phrase. Nothing that was an outright lie though.

The point that he can't manage to answer a simple question without blathering about himself is valid. The question is whether they presented this as evidence of anti-semitism, or evidence of his incoherence.

Also, I've heard them discussing Kushner and Ivankas Jewishness in the past day or so.

No dude, read what I wrote again, you cannot cut off his response half way through and then have the host comment that he didn't answer the question. Period. I was actually in shock, at the time, I really didn't know the state of the media -- esp NPR -- was this bad.

[SuburbanFarmer]

For what? That CNN gets caught lying all the time? Are you serious?

Well, they certainly have begun to twist stories around, like Faux Noise, I'd just like to see objective evidence of outright lying.

My favorite was the fake SCUD missile attack. CNN is totally faked, dude. They have been so for a long time.


It amuses me that there still exist people who can't bring themselves to believe that these "news" channels are totally fake. After all the shit in the past year or so, they still can't believe it.

Honestly, I see nothing worse than I've seen from Faux Noise. Biased nonsense, usually in the 'commentary' of the anchors. Nothing that was an outright lie, just media manipulation, playing to a narrative.

I don't like it, and I don't watch it unless an election or potential WW3 event is happening. It's garbage for the lowest common denominator.

[kybkh]

I am surprised this isn't on loop.

Breaking: Trans Lives Matter Protesters Mowed Down by Car During St. Louis Street Rally

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/08 ... eet-rally/

[Speaker to Animals]

Well, they certainly have begun to twist stories around, like Faux Noise, I'd just like to see objective evidence of outright lying.

My favorite was the fake SCUD missile attack. CNN is totally faked, dude. They have been so for a long time.


It amuses me that there still exist people who can't bring themselves to believe that these "news" channels are totally fake. After all the shit in the past year or so, they still can't believe it.

Honestly, I see nothing worse than I've seen from Faux Noise. Biased nonsense, usually in the 'commentary' of the anchors. Nothing that was an outright lie, just media manipulation, playing to a narrative.

I don't like it, and I don't watch it unless an election or potential WW3 event is happening. It's garbage for the lowest common denominator.

Did you see me lauding Fox News? No? There you go. FAKE FAKE FAKE. Turn off the T.V.