In this world, you are going to have to separate facts from editorial content yourself... oh well, personal responsibility and whatnot. \C-Mag wrote: ↑Thu Dec 27, 2018 1:43 pmHanarchy Montanarchy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 27, 2018 1:34 pmSpoken like a Critical Theorist.
Truth is a lark, just find what I already agree with.
This is not a good way to view the world.
Looking for factual media is better than bias free news.
Example:
Benghazi attack and the subsequent cover up. I looked over articles from a wide, wide range of sources. The Corporate Media carried water for the administration, it was about a shitty video. The alphabet news told us it was great we found this guy that made the video and tossed is hateful ass in jail.
In a month, I had correctly learned what was really going on................ and I didn't learn it from corporate media, I learned it from small news outlets and blogs. Benghazi was about an Obama-Clinton Illegal Weapons Smuggling Operation gone bad, with the intent to smuggle weapons to Islamic radicals who would take down Assad (Regime Change), and be allowed to have a Caliphate in return.
And the folks that followed the alphabet propaganda didn't give a fuck about the US citizens that were killed, the stupid film maker jailed or the Syrians killed because of our illegal arms smuggling.
And, you are going to have to give your fellow countrymen the chance to do the same, which means not getting triggered over clickbate that speaks exclusively to the absolute lowest morons. That ain't most people, despite what the edgy anti-democracy crowd would have you believe Most people are just a few degrees from yourself in either direction.
There probably isn't much light between us on Benghazi, or Media/Obama sycophancy. That doesn't mean we need to go full conspiracy theory on the concept of facts.