Associated Press (1 Viewer)

Thales750

Formerly Jsanders
Local time
Today, 04:19
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
2,733
Show me ALL the questions.
Show me how they chose their subjects.

Do you understand how polls are conducted? Do you understand why some polls carry more weight than others? Do you understand that companies are paid to conduct polls? Do you also understand that if they produce undesirable answers, they don't get repeat customers;)

The people who make the odds are very experienced in always coming out on the winning side of a wager.
 
Show me ALL the questions.
Show me how they chose their subjects.

Do you understand how polls are conducted? Do you understand why some polls carry more weight than others? Do you understand that companies are paid to conduct polls? Do you also understand that if they produce undesirable answers, they don't get repeat customers;)

The people who make the odds are very experienced in always coming out on the winning side of a wager.
Funny how only viewers of conservative news have any understanding of, well pretty much anything.
So you first attempt is to say something that sounds clever.
You vote that the Associted Press is fake news. Is that about right?
 
You vote that the Associted Press is fake news. Is that about right?
Yep. Where do you think the news papers get their stories from? When I read an article and I can tell the opinion of the "reporter", then I am not reading news. I am reading opinion. The difference is no longer taught in what currently passes for journalism classes.
 
I get it that many folks believe that they have the only source of real news.
In this thread I think it would interesting to see if people can find a logical means of defending their sources.

Let the Media Games begin:

US voters concerned about post-election violence and efforts to overturn the results: AP-NORC poll



I'll take the bait. Here's my way of trying to ensure I get all the information: I discipline myself / force myself to read quite a bit from news sources on the far left (MSNBC), far right (OANN), and in between (Fox, CNN). I have found this approach to be very successful in giving me the feeling, at least, that I have heard presumably the best arguments on different sides of an issue. While I am reading the far left stuff I can't say I enjoy it, but I enjoy the feeling that I am thoroughly hearing-out the 'other side'. A lot of MSNBC articles I just shake my head, but I keep reading anyway since once in a while I'll get a nugget that makes me reconsider my position on something or other

There IS no way to 'defend your sources' - all news organizations' content is birthed from a primal mixture of bias, facts and spin.
The best thing you can do is the same thing mankind has been doing for ages - try to hear out all sides on an issue as honestly as you can.
 
Last edited:
The problem with the left wing media is that they continuously overplay their hand. Trump says some pretty stupid stuff on his own. It really isn't necessary to "interpret" his words for us. And yet they persist. AND they misquote him when what he said wasn't stupid enough so they always come off looking like the liars they are. Really dumb.
 
The problem with the left wing media is that they continuously overplay their hand. Trump says some pretty stupid stuff on his own. It really isn't necessary to "interpret" his words for us. And yet they persist. AND they misquote him when what he said wasn't stupid enough so they always come off looking like the liars they are. Really dumb.
By left wing, you mean any source not tied onto the daily right wing talking points. You can no longer distinguish between left and
any media this side of the extreme right. Your consistent agreement with every aspect of right wing spin is proof.
I feel bad for you people, being so convinced that you are the victims of every conspiracy in the world.

The worst part is that you won't even take the time to wonder who benefits from your obsession.
 
What part about mis-quote and mis-interpret was unclear to you? The latest hysteria was the talking heads telling anyone who would listen that Trump threatened Liz Chaney when he did no such thing if you actually listen to his remarks. I will not "interpret" them for you. Please listen for yourself to his entire statement and then come back and apologize.

What about this is "spin"? When the perps get called out they respond "this is what he MEANT". NO, the media's job is to report what he SAID if it was newsworthy. The media is not supposed to "interpret". They report unless they have an opinion show. In that case, if they are honest, they are clear as to what is their opinion and what is fact.
 
I get the best and most up to date news going. First of all everything on X is up to date. Everything is exposed and challengeable... So the community on X , very similar to the community here, makes sure things don't get too far out of kilter...

But then I take it to another level...

The large language model behind X which is called Grok, is absolutely brilliant and unbiased... I see a story on X that doesn't make sense, so I paste it into Grok and ask it to research it for me and tell me what's really going on... It's like having access to my very own top Notch researcher/reporter...
 
Last edited:
So you first attempt is to say something that sounds clever.

Well I didn't get that impression. I thought it was a very good description of how polling works...

And judging from your usual modus operand, the implied insult in your response is predictable, hence, if Pat was really clever, she would have ignored you .....
 
Well I didn't get that impression. I thought it was a very good description of how polling works...

And judging from your usual modus operand, the implied insult in your response is predictable, hence, if Pat was really clever, she would have ignored you .....
It was her being insulting.
 
Only the faux-Democratic ones.
Come on Doc, being convinced y'all are all victims is the central theme of all conservative propaganda. That, and innumeracy of course
Actually almost all propaganda has an element of victimization to it. Conservatives just made a science out of it.
 
2024-11-04 15_19_52-Voice - (3) Messages.png
 
You are being obtuse, and you know it. Pretending you dont know what I mean. I suspect you actually do see the similarities being Nazi and MAGA propaganda.
Who's the victim? Liberals have been victimized by the orange Hitler for eight years. ;)
 
Last edited:
Those pets that were executed by the FBI must have been seriously dangerous. We don't even execute mass murderers because everyone except the unborn deserves to live. Maybe someone in the FBI could leak the name of the neighbor that complained.

I wonder if the owners have a case against the FBI for destroying their business without even a lawsuit and a trial. I guess it was somehow urgent to remove those dangerous beasts from YouTube before they acquired any more fans.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom