The first bit I'll agree with. From there I guess we'll disagree on how sincere he is.
This made me kinda sad today...
- Thread starter The Midnight
- Start date
The first bit I'll agree with. From there I guess we'll disagree on how sincere he is.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
I have seen everyone in this thread calling him out. One side lol. You see what you want to see I guess.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
Bulletproof is the only person from that side ive seen do it. But Im talking about the media on the left.
Please tell me who the left media is, so I can avoid them. Can I read stuff from the left media when the reporter is very conservative who find their own stories and write them? How about a conservative media group that has liberal reporters? What makes media left? What people within turns them left?
Should I start watching Fox news, are they good news? You seem to post stuff from them and claim to be better informed than others.
I like how you get to decide that one side gets the benefit of the doubt, and why that one person gets the benefit of the doubt.
It's almost like you're Morgan Freeman, narrating world events.
Alfalfa
Well-Known Member
*crickets*
Douchebag K
Well-Known Member
lol what a bunch of garbage this entire story is All of it.
http://bfy.tw/Lxe7
Simple enough to me. Two simple strings, CNN and "has been updated"
Very first article I find is the following:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/20/opinions/dear-trump-loyalists-opinion-dantonio/index.html
Which contains the following just under the picture:
The second article in the google search gets me here:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/20/politics/trump-authority-border-personnel/index.html
And at the end of the article:
As far as actual evidence of changing the article... ****. I think what you're asking for just isn't reasonable. But... sure? I guess? Here's a link to the times stating CNN corrected a story on Trump.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/08/business/media/cnn-correction-donald-trump-jr.html
Anything more than that... eat a dick. If you go all "Find me a document that exists that contains MS word formatted corrections. Like my English teacher did. And yes, that's totally reasonable.", then you really, REALLY need more help than I'm willing to offer. Fifteen minutes spent searching and trying to word this properly is just exhausting.
Alfalfa
Well-Known Member
Can't decipher what you're saying. Also not sure if you're fighting with me. But maybe you're misunderstanding my question. Framer said that CNN change their stories after the fact, without documenting the edits. I asked him to provide a proof of that serious claim, as it would delegitimize CNN as a source of information. No response. Thus, *crickets*. The examples you provided show the opposite; that CNN document any changes they make to their articles.
They do say it has been updated but don't specify what was added or if any information has been changed or removed.
framer
Well-Known Member
You want an article form CNN saying that they add content without timestamps to their articles? Do you READ their articles? They obviously inserted the interview information from the teenager into their "Native American Elder" article, did it come with an edit notification? No? Well there you go.
The last time I saw them remove or change content was during the Kavanaugh hearings with the accusations made by Avennetti's client. They could make the claim that things were later "clarified" but they definitely toned down the article after getting more information without alerting readers. I read both edits of the article.
Didn't take screenshots, because I really don't owe you anything.
Alfalfa
Well-Known Member
I understand that new info is sometimes added to articles, specially ones about an ongoing event. Is that the complaint that framer has? Adding information without time stamping it? That's different from "ninja editing" which is changing the information without notice in order to deceive.
Alfalfa
Well-Known Member
I don't read their articles. And I wasn't expecting you to have screenshots. I expect that there are people out there watching out for these things (since so many cry about fake news).
I appreciate the more nuanced complaint about their tone. And I understand. CNN is not exactly a top quality news organization. But I doubt they ninja edit anything the way you implied originally.
I think it started with me finding the earliest article about the Sandmann incident to show that they did have a statement from Sandmann, but that article had been updated. I mentioned that unprompted and said I didn't know specifically what might have been added, etc. He ran with it, called it a ninja edit and proclaimed with certainty it was the statement from Sandmann that was added after the fact.
Not fighting. Just trying to paint the picture that most information isn't locked in a cabinet. Most of the time it's on first page of the right Google search.
Ok. Maybe fighting a little bit. Doing other people's homework is exhausting.
Red
Well-Known Member
Well, in the course of his administration, their have been events, and comments from Trump, that have not been taken well by many Native Americans and their supporters. Just a week before this incident, Trump included the Wounded Knee massacre in a "joke" about Elizabeth Warren:
https://studybreaks.com/thoughts/trumps-wounded-knee-remarks/
That certainly was fresh in the mind of some, and by now opponents of Trump have come to expect these insults from him anyway, and for good reason. Referring to Warren as Pocahontas at an award ceremony for Navaho code breakers but one recent example. I mean, everyone knows he only talks to his base, that he's president only to those Americans, there's never been a more exclusionary president in our recent history, so of course the Native American is going to get the benefit of the doubt in the minds of many Americans, with a MAGA hat in the photo. MAGA in the story line. People can say that's wrong, makes perfect sense to me. The president is exclusionary toward minorities.
Much longer term reasons behind the benefit of the doubt too, obviously. Native Americans have not exactly got the long end of the stick over the course of our nation's history. Started a long time ago. Didn't have the right to vote till 1924, I read today didn't get the vote in Utah until 1957. Just the tip of the iceberg of a complex and difficult history of American and Native American relations. (Where I live, the English introduced total war to the natives, by roasting them alive by the hundreds in two huge massacres of woman and children. The natives here were unfamiliar with that style of "warfare".)
So, throw a MAGA hat in the equation, a veritable avatar for exclusion of people of color, and you just get a most recent reason why he would be given the benefit of the doubt by many.
So, just trying to provide a little context as to to why he might get the benefit of the doubt.
Red
Well-Known Member
MAGA is the avatar of a nationalist cult. These eruptions of nationalistic fervor seem like contagions, whose participants don't recognize what they are endorsing while it's happening. Two world wars resulted in part from this primitive impulse. And it seems people just don't recognize it while it's happening. It's MAGA and Trump now, and here in the United States, but it's appearing in other right wing movements elsewhere, in Europe, in Brazil.
And that is all MAGA and Trump represent. Another eruption of this peculiar impulse that has not always turned out well when in this form and to this degree. MAGA, a personality cult generating hyper nationalism.
I think the instinctive reaction to the hat is because the viewer recognizes the negativity associated with this movement. Good. They should.
And that is all MAGA and Trump represent. Another eruption of this peculiar impulse that has not always turned out well when in this form and to this degree. MAGA, a personality cult generating hyper nationalism.
I think the instinctive reaction to the hat is because the viewer recognizes the negativity associated with this movement. Good. They should.
I'm saying this to you with the utmost respect, but "benefit of the doubt" ends once there is no longer any doubt. Phillips was not truthful in his early interviews. Stolen valor, misrepresentation of the facts, he was the instigator. He may have his reasons, but he has not demonstrated the least bit of integrity.
I'm not going to stand here and say one of the things that makes Trump unacceptable to me is his lack of integrity and then give someone a pass because they also opposed to Trump. Integrity matters to me. Phillips doesn't have any. I don't need allies like that. I don't want allies like that. He can have whatever excuse he wants, he was not honest. He invalidated any value he could have had in this conversation.
Last edited:
CNN at it again... They just can't stop with the ninja edits...
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/24/us/missing-boy-casey-hathaway-search/index.html
Obviously there were reporters on scene for this missing persons incident. They should have never reported that this person went missing when they probably knew right where he was and that he would obviously be found safe. I mean they are going to have reporters covering a case like this, so there's really no way they didn't know how all this was going to turn out. But they wanted to manipulate us into caring that there was a missing boy, even though he was going to be found safe.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/24/us/missing-boy-casey-hathaway-search/index.html
Obviously there were reporters on scene for this missing persons incident. They should have never reported that this person went missing when they probably knew right where he was and that he would obviously be found safe. I mean they are going to have reporters covering a case like this, so there's really no way they didn't know how all this was going to turn out. But they wanted to manipulate us into caring that there was a missing boy, even though he was going to be found safe.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
You pretty much just said MAGA is akin to the rise of Nazi Germany.
This is why there is such a huge disconnect. Its insulting. The two are not even close. Why does the arguement against MAGA have to go to extreme levels to make the point seem valid? You know, you could make a compelling point even if it was rooted in more of a factually based reality.
The truth is MAGA stands for many different things for different people. Some may just see it as symbol for needing better economic conditions. In fact, I would argue that thats exactly what it stands for, for most people. Some may celebrate it as and see it with racist views associated. But I think its much fewer than you think.
Do you really think that someone how this country after everything thing it has seen and done, with all the knowledge it has gained, lesson's learned, etc.. that in just a few short years it would let its self become just like Nazi Germany? We still have world war 2 vets alive. There families are alive and have been influenced by the events. This same country gave so much help fighting that war. Alot of those same people are the same people the left accuses of being Nazi's.
Saying we need people to come into the country legally is not the same as gas the Jews and get them out of the country. Its just not.
Ya, you are supposed to push back and keep things in check. Keep things in balance. But the left is pushing back, pushing there friend over the table, out the window, into the street, in front of the car, then off the cliff. Then wonders why people are in the defensive.