The internet takeover thread

[BjornP]

Ok, so what new word would you guys use for the process of uncovering facts about an event, process or person using a combination of interviews with sources, sifting through relevant data in textform, and the ability to tie all that together into a story that most readers/viewers would be able to understand?

When you guys discuss politics how do you even know that what you're discussing is really happening, if you don't trust your news media at all? How do you for example even trust there's a guy called Kavanaugh making his way into the WH (or whatever his relevance/possible relevance to the WH might be, didn't bother reading that much about him)?

If there exist any media that you trust, just a little, how can you trust them, even a little? Do they have their own... "information gatherers", or are they simply reading the same AP/Reuters handouts everyone else is and merely interpreting it their way?

Who would you trust to uncover the real dirt on Hillary, on the companies the MSM love, on prominent SJW's, those sorts of people? And what would you then call what those people do when they do that?

[SuburbanFarmer]

The only people not regurgitating Reuters/AP are “alternative media” - podcasters and fringe sites. This is why we’re all losing our minds right now.

[BjornP]

The only people not regurgitating Reuters/AP are “alternative media” - podcasters and fringe sites. This is why we’re all losing our minds right now.

And where and how do those alternative media, podcasters and fringe sites get their hands on information/facts/sources not covered by AP/Reuters?

[SuburbanFarmer]

The only people not regurgitating Reuters/AP are “alternative media” - podcasters and fringe sites. This is why we’re all losing our minds right now.

And where and how do those alternative media, podcasters and fringe sites get their hands on information/facts/sources not covered by AP/Reuters?

One hopes through some sort of contact within the organization that they’re reporting on.

In the case of Zerohedge, it’s a range of financial reports, RT and foreign media. For others, you might see some items that were dug up in local papers or through actual journalism, but that’s exceedingly rare.

[C-Mag]

I look for sites with good documentation and a good record of being right

The Last Refuge and True Pundit do not dissapoint

[C-Mag]

The only people not regurgitating Reuters/AP are “alternative media” - podcasters and fringe sites. This is why we’re all losing our minds right now.

I disagree
We are tearing ourselves apart because one side refuses to stand behind free and fair elections

[SuburbanFarmer]

The only people not regurgitating Reuters/AP are “alternative media” - podcasters and fringe sites. This is why we’re all losing our minds right now.

I disagree
We are tearing ourselves apart because one side refuses to stand behind free and fair elections

...just as the other side did in 2008.
Don’t pretend it’s a Good/Bad Guy thing.

[C-Mag]

NEGATIVE

The N.Y. Times confirmed there is an organized resistance against Trump
Project Veritas is confirming it with video released this week
Numerous FBI and DOJ personnel have been fired and demoted for illegal activity against Trump

[BjornP]

And where and how do those alternative media, podcasters and fringe sites get their hands on information/facts/sources not covered by AP/Reuters?

One hopes through some sort of contact within the organization that they’re reporting on.

In the case of Zerohedge, it’s a range of financial reports, RT and foreign media. For others, you might see some items that were dug up in local papers or through actual journalism, but that’s exceedingly rare.

I look for sites with good documentation and a good record of being right

The Last Refuge and True Pundit do not dissapoint

And I'd call what you hope and look for, examples of what journalism at least should aspire to. If one "destroys journalism" as clubby and StA seem to argue, one (hopefully intends to build something to replace it) and if the standards for that replacement are "having (or cultivating) contacts within an organization being reported on", or "good information and a record of getting things right", that's just creating journalism all over again. One can discuss the accuracy of ZH or one might not like the political views on True Pundit, but the reason you trust them is because you expect what I'd call journalism from them.

[BjornP]

NEGATIVE

The N.Y. Times confirmed there is an organized resistance against Trump
Project Veritas is confirming it with video released this week
Numerous FBI and DOJ personnel have been fired and demoted for illegal activity against Trump

..and I know I've posted this article a few times, but it bears repeating as a data point, there really, objectively, is a disproportionately liberal media bias in US media:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... ast-215048

In a sense, the media bubble reflects an established truth about America: The places with money get served better than the places without. People in big media cities aren’t just more liberal, they’re also richer: Half of all newspaper and internet publishing employees work in counties where the median household income is greater than $61,000—$7,000 more than the national median. Commercial media tend to cluster where most of the GDP is created, and that’s the coasts. Perhaps this is what Bannon is hollering about when he denounces the “corporatist, global media,” as he did in February at the Conservative Political Action Conference. If current trends continue—and it’s safe to predict they will—national media will continue to expand and concentrate on the coasts, while local and regional media contract.