They wonder why we dont trust them. Media bias thread.

[Speaker to Animals]

Somebody should get the names and addresses of some CNN actors.

[Speaker to Animals]

Just to be crystal clear about the intent of these lugenpresse lawyers:

Chris Cuomo announced Monday night that CNN will not condemn but instead justify political violence against anyone it defines as “bigots” — which, according to the network’s editorial tone over the past two years, signals open season on all Trump supporters for violent activists like Antifa and the Black Bloc.

To legitimize political violence, Cuomo said, “All punches are not equal morally… Drawing a moral equivalency between those espousing hate and those fighting it, because they both resort to violence emboldens hate, legitimized hateful belief and elevates what should be stamped out.”

https://www.breitbart.com/big-journalis ... nce-right/

CNN is technically now a terror organization. They literally use calls to violence to intimidate Trump supporters and anybody that stands in the path of their political agenda. They openly defend and call upon a federally identified domestic terrorist organization to attack people.

Make no mistake about why they wanted the names and addresses of those jurors.

These people are criminals and this is the beginning of civil war. Nobody is safe with people like this threatening them with terroristic violence.

If they somehow obtain and publish those jurors' identities, the response from the American people better be swift and absolute. Because if nothing happens to the likes of CNN for that, this is going to get really fucking bad for Americans in general.

[clubgop]

Just to be crystal clear about the intent of these lugenpresse lawyers:

Chris Cuomo announced Monday night that CNN will not condemn but instead justify political violence against anyone it defines as “bigots” — which, according to the network’s editorial tone over the past two years, signals open season on all Trump supporters for violent activists like Antifa and the Black Bloc.

To legitimize political violence, Cuomo said, “All punches are not equal morally… Drawing a moral equivalency between those espousing hate and those fighting it, because they both resort to violence emboldens hate, legitimized hateful belief and elevates what should be stamped out.”

https://www.breitbart.com/big-journalis ... nce-right/

CNN is technically now a terror organization. They literally use calls to violence to intimidate Trump supporters and anybody that stands in the path of their political agenda. They openly defend and call upon a federally identified domestic terrorist organization to attack people.

Make no mistake about why they wanted the names and addresses of those jurors.

These people are criminals and this is the beginning of civil war. Nobody is safe with people like this threatening them with terroristic violence.

If they somehow obtain and publish those jurors' identities, the response from the American people better be swift and absolute. Because if nothing happens to the likes of CNN for that, this is going to get really fucking bad for Americans in general.

The court denied them. So if jurors are compromised that's a mistrial. It might be a mistrial now. This the exact right thread for this.

[TheReal_ND]

The judge denied CNN, Buzzfeed and co. He is currently being protected by US marshals, as well as his family I am assuming.

The interesting thing I learned from this was that this isn't without precedent apparently. There is no right for jurors to be held secret like there is in the UK, just like there is a myth that voters are to be held secret like in Australia which was forced to enact such a law to combat labor unions.

[BjornP]

Bias is good and not what this thread is really about. You all love your own biases, obviously. As you should. Bias has always been part of journalism. But when you're choosing not to report on something or someone, because you're in league with the very powers you're meant to keep in check, thats not "bias". That’s media being politics, instead of reporting on it. Corrupt politics.

[clubgop]

Bias is good and not what this thread is really about. You all love your own biases, obviously. As you should. Bias has always been part of journalism. But when you're choosing not to report on something or someone, because you're in league with the very powers you're meant to keep in check, thats not "bias". That’s media being politics, instead of reporting on it. Corrupt politics.

Considering I started this thread I tell you what it is about.

Bias exist, our press our media, pretends as if it doesn't exist, or they act as some demi god beings that are immune to it. They are unbiased and how dare we suggest otherwise. They cant be honest and tell us outfront about their biases so they put on these acts like dirty dick then wonder why after decades of this tired old act no ones buys it anymore.

Everytime they make a mistake or totally get something wrong and have to issue a correction it's always in the Republican's or conservatives favor. But the damage done by the initial smear outdoes any redemption by the retraction. Time and time again, but the same old tired crew, like dirty dick, swear bias doesn't exist.

[BjornP]

Bias is good and not what this thread is really about. You all love your own biases, obviously. As you should. Bias has always been part of journalism. But when you're choosing not to report on something or someone, because you're in league with the very powers you're meant to keep in check, thats not "bias". That’s media being politics, instead of reporting on it. Corrupt politics.

Considering I started this thread I tell you what it is about.

Bias exist, our press our media, pretends as if it doesn't exist, or they act as some demi god beings that are immune to it. They are unbiased and how dare we suggest otherwise. They cant be honest and tell us outfront about their biases so they put on these acts like dirty dick then wonder why after decades of this tired old act no ones buys it anymore.

Everytime they make a mistake or totally get something wrong and have to issue a correction it's always in the Republican's or conservatives favor. But the damage done by the initial smear outdoes any redemption by the retraction. Time and time again, but the same old tired crew, like dirty dick, swear bias doesn't exist.

Fox is biased, Breitbart is biased, National Review is biased. You and me are biased. I think you misunderstand bias to be some sort of "bad" thing, and the dishonesty of a media outlet like CNN or MSNBC goes way beyond that. It isn't. Bias is simply what colors your worldview. It's important not to confuse it with lying. Everyone is biased, but everyone doesn't let it get in the way of reporting on the news.

Mike already provided ample proof (not that I haven't seen enough over the years) that places like CNN are so close to, so enmeshed in, Democrat politics that they are more like what Fox is to Republicans. As a check on government power - if it's traditional Democrat - they are unreliable. That’s not just "bias".

[clubgop]

Bias is good and not what this thread is really about. You all love your own biases, obviously. As you should. Bias has always been part of journalism. But when you're choosing not to report on something or someone, because you're in league with the very powers you're meant to keep in check, thats not "bias". That’s media being politics, instead of reporting on it. Corrupt politics.

Considering I started this thread I tell you what it is about.

Bias exist, our press our media, pretends as if it doesn't exist, or they act as some demi god beings that are immune to it. They are unbiased and how dare we suggest otherwise. They cant be honest and tell us outfront about their biases so they put on these acts like dirty dick then wonder why after decades of this tired old act no ones buys it anymore.

Everytime they make a mistake or totally get something wrong and have to issue a correction it's always in the Republican's or conservatives favor. But the damage done by the initial smear outdoes any redemption by the retraction. Time and time again, but the same old tired crew, like dirty dick, swear bias doesn't exist.

Fox is biased, Breitbart is biased, National Review is biased. You and me are biased. I think you misunderstand bias to be some sort of "bad" thing, and the dishonesty of a media outlet like CNN or MSNBC goes way beyond that. It isn't. Bias is simply what colors your worldview. It's important not to confuse it with lying. Everyone is biased, but everyone doesn't let it get in the way of reporting on the news.

Mike already provided ample proof (not that I haven't seen enough over the years) that places like CNN are so close to, so enmeshed in, Democrat politics that they are more like what Fox is to Republicans. As a check on government power - if it's traditional Democrat - they are unreliable. That’s not just "bias".

Bias is bad when you lie about it. You comparing MSNBC to CNN is bad because at this point at least MSNBC is honest about it. Breitbart is honest, National review is honest. They make no bones about it. You what you are getting going in. That is fine. When you try to put up this facade that you are not then you are lying and you are lying about everything all the time. Everything becomes a political decision based on upkeep of that facade rather than any sort of journalism.

[BjornP]

Ok, I accept that CNN can't be compared to MSNBC or Fox, etc. when it comes to (honesty about) bias. But I recently read that CNN viewership is actually microscopic in relation to total US population. How many Americans, and I'm not talking online, but day to day real world, people you hear talking when grocery shopping, family dinners, at work, etc. actually consider CNN as neutral and objective as... whatever you'd consider as the most neutral US media outlet?

[Haumana]

but day to day real world, people you hear talking when grocery shopping, family dinners, at work, etc. actually consider CNN as neutral and objective as... whatever you'd consider as the most neutral US media outlet?

That is an interesting question but it assumes the idea that people consider their media inputs to begin with.

How many people do you know in the "day to day real world, people you hear talking when grocery shopping, family dinners, at work, etc." actually consider any of this subject matter? I am pretty sure that I can count them on one hand.