"Alternative Facts": Trump's War on the Media

[Joe Bagadonuts]

I don't consider it a personal attack, I consider it a statement of fact. Your presence is a blight on this discussion board. You are immune to reason, facts, nuance, complexity, and anything else necessary to have reasonable discourse. There are many informed, intelligent persons on the right. You are not one of them.

I don't answer your question because I don't give a sh**, and because engaging with you is a complete waste of time.

Given that you are clearly willing to engage with him it is sort of telling that you want to avoid his question. It's pretty obvious that it bothers you that he has this fact right. It's also pretty transparent that you deal with that inconvenience by simply ignoring the facts.

 

[Eminence]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...press-briefing-hours-after-trump-slams-media/

W.H blocked CNN, Politico, Buzzfeed, LA Times and the New York Times from a press briefing.

AP and Times boycotted in response. WSJ claims that they were not aware at the time or they would have joined the boycott.

That's to far IMO. I don't support it.

Edit: When this was tried with Fox News under Obama other networks pushed back. Openly challenging why it was appropriate for the W.H. to determine who is or is not news. Other networks stopped doing interviews where Fox was prohibited.

The is terrible and a direct challenge to freedom of speech IMO. One of 3 main areas that had me worried over this new administration.

Yeah, not cool.

But it wasn't really tried under Obama... Fox forget to send their **** in to register basically if I remember correctly(wanna say it was the Fed doing something). Still let them attend despite it being Fox's screw up.

 

[DutchJazzer]

Yeah, not cool.

But it wasn't really tried under Obama... Fox forget to send their **** in to register basically if I remember correctly(wanna say it was the Fed doing something). Still let them attend despite it being Fox's screw up.

LOL

 

[LogGrad98]

Tell me what you think, that's a better place for a conversation. I don't really like having hypothetical conversations/ what about this or let me see what ways I can poke holes in something. It's just silly.

I don't think the needs to be any rules except consent. I don't think it's consensual sex for a teenager to have sex with an adult. If sex is consensual, go for it. I don't think kids have an ability to consent. Yes that age might arbitrary but limits have to be set somewhere. Also if less are in place and everyone knows them then there is no excuse. It's not some magical math equation it's simply getting its protecting people who need protection and a line has to be drawn.



[/URL]

https://rewire.news/article/2012/03...t-laws-send-young-men-to-jail-consensual-sex/

Interesting article about this subject. The ages are not always just arbitrary, there is reasoning for it. I am not saying I agree with the reasoning, but it isn't just plucked out of a hat either. It is very much driven by societal norms of the region and time.

 

[Red]

I'm posting this, after reading it last night, because I want it to be part of the public record in this particular thread. I can't recommend reading this highly enough. The best analysis of what's going on that I have read to date. Man, what an eye opener this is!!!

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-media-steve-bannon-donald-trump-nigel-farage

"You can take an existing trending topic, such as fake news, and then weaponise it. You can turn it against the very media that uncovered it. Viewed in a certain light, fake news is a suicide bomb at the heart of our information system. Strapped to the live body of us – the mainstream media."

 

[DutchJazzer]

I'm posting this, after reading it last night, because I want it to be part of the public record in this particular thread. I can't recommend reading this highly enough. The best analysis of what's going on that I have read to date. Man, what an eye opener this is!!!

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-media-steve-bannon-donald-trump-nigel-farage

"You can take an existing trending topic, such as fake news, and then weaponise it. You can turn it against the very media that uncovered it. Viewed in a certain light, fake news is a suicide bomb at the heart of our information system. Strapped to the live body of us – the mainstream media."

is this fake news?


[video=youtube_share;B-hwxaSiLrY]https://youtu.be/B-hwxaSiLrY

sure seems weaponized to me!

 

[Red]

is this fake news?


[video=youtube_share;B-hwxaSiLrY]https://youtu.be/B-hwxaSiLrY

sure seems weaponized to me!

No, Dutch, it isn't. It's the most educational piece on the origins of fake news I've ever read. I cannot recommend it enough. You would learn a great deal reading it. I'm absolutely certain anybody would. I should think, from your own perspective, it would be seen as a great development, actually. Unless you're referring to the video you posted in your reply. I have not watched it. But the article I posted will teach anyone more on the origin and future of this trend then virtually anything else you'll come across. And, as I said, it should read as a good development from your perspective.....

Actually, I imagine you are in fact referring to the video you posted. I'm much more interested in the educational value of the article I posted, and considered using it for a new thread altogether. At any rate, I hope you read it....

 

[fishonjazz]

No, Dutch, it isn't. It's the most educational piece on the origins of fake news I've ever read. I cannot recommend it enough. You would learn a great deal reading it. I'm absolutely certain anybody would. I should think, from your own perspective, it would be seen as a great development, actually. Unless you're referring to the video you posted in your reply. I have not watched it. But the article I posted will teach anyone more on the origin and future of this trend then virtually anything else you'll come across. And, as I said, it should read as a good development from your perspective.....

Actually, I imagine you are in fact referring to the video you posted. I'm much more interested in the educational value of the article I posted, and considered using it for a new thread altogether. At any rate, I hope you read it....

Speaking to dutch rationally will never work.
I applaud your effort though.

 

[Red]

Speaking to dutch rationally will never work.
I applaud your effort though.

I'm nothing if not naive, lol.

 

[DutchJazzer]

No, Dutch, it isn't. It's the most educational piece on the origins of fake news I've ever read. I cannot recommend it enough. You would learn a great deal reading it. I'm absolutely certain anybody would. I should think, from your own perspective, it would be seen as a great development, actually. Unless you're referring to the video you posted in your reply. I have not watched it. But the article I posted will teach anyone more on the origin and future of this trend then virtually anything else you'll come across. And, as I said, it should read as a good development from your perspective.....

Actually, I imagine you are in fact referring to the video you posted. I'm much more interested in the educational value of the article I posted, and considered using it for a new thread altogether. At any rate, I hope you read it....

if it is not fake news, a cnn employee who calls him self a journalist is spreading a LIE!


loretta lynch never ever ever ever recused herself from anything!

he is openly spreading misinformation!

 

[Red]

Weaponized Narrative is the New Battlespace:

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2017/01/weaponized-narrative-new-battlespace/134284/

"Weaponized narrative seeks to undermine an opponent’s civilization, identity, and will by generating complexity, confusion, and political and social schisms. It can be used tactically, as part of explicit military or geopolitical conflict; or strategically, as a way to reduce, neutralize, and defeat a civilization, state, or organization. Done well, it limits or even eliminates the need for armed force to achieve political and military aims.

The efforts to muscle into the affairs of the American presidency, Brexit, the Ukraine, the Baltics, and NATO reflect a shift to a “post-factual” political and cultural environment that is vulnerable to weaponized narrative. This begs three deeper questions:

How global is this phenomenon?

Are the underlying drivers temporary or systemic?

What are the implications for an American military used to technological dominance?"

 

[Red]

if it is not fake news, a cnn employee who calls him self a journalist is spreading a LIE!


loretta lynch never ever ever ever recused herself from anything!

he is openly spreading misinformation!

Dutch, I'm afraid we are just inadvertently confusing each other. When I said no, it isn't fake news, I was referring to the article I posted just prior to your reply that included the CNN link. And that's because, when you asked me "is this fake news?", I thought you were in fact asking that question regarding the article I posted. In retrospect, I should have simply edited in a reply that was less confusing to you. I still have not watched that video, Dutch. I only brought the thread back up because I honestly believed the article I posted taught me more about how fake news is actually generated then any other information I have come across. And, since this thread involves "alternative facts" and "alternative news", I wanted that article to be part of the public record here. It really should be read by anyone interested in the development of fake news and the "post fact" era. I take it you did not read it, and would prefer to just carry on with a *** for tat argument. I was not interested in doing that, to be honest. Although that may seem out of form to you. Despite my many flaws, education on the subjects at hand has always been my principle aim.