Perfect example of why the leftist media is complete garbage

[rhodescholar]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/...h-fear-russian-meddling-but-also-us-cash.html

This article is so poorly written and biased I needed 3 tries to finish it. Anyone reading my posts knows how I utterly despise the NYT to my core, and hope/pray it goes bankrupt. This disgraceful article is typical of how it represents its very low quality of journalism.

Comparing how it describes conservatives with how it does democrats and leftists with whom it agrees is astounding in how divergent the two sides are portrayed; conservatives are "combative" and "far right", while democraps are "moderates" and spoken of in soft, pleasant and positive terms.

This is utter fucking garbage, fake journalism, designed to manipulate the reader and it is long past time that this pos rag got called out on it.

 

[konradv]

Sounds like someone can't handle the truth.

 

[rhodescholar]

Sounds like someone can't handle the truth.

Uh yeah, the "truth": all democrats/liberals = good, all conservatives = bad.

When you're willing to expand beyond the second grade, then come back to my thread with something of maturity to offer...

That is also missing the point of my op, which is that it is NOT the place of the fucking journalist to determine for us who is "good"/likeable and who is not, their opinions on such things are irrelevant and should not be included in these articles. A decent editor would have removed that crap, but being the pos NYT rag, they didn't.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Actually, its an excellent article, well documented and the issue is and should be a very real concern to us all. The real reason RWNJs hate legit news is they're willing to report against the lying, cheating, stealing drumpf.

OP - Just stick to the state sanctioned news sources and you'll be okay. Meanwhile, lean down, put your head between your knees and take some long deep breaths.

 

[rhodescholar]

Actually, its an excellent article,

Like a typical far left idiot, the news can be biased - as long as the bias favors their lunatic agenda - but if that bias is conservative, whoa, then that's just not acceptable. You're a moron.

 

[Meane]

Sounds like someone can't handle the truth.

Uh yeah, the "truth": all democrats/liberals = good, all conservatives = bad.

When you're willing to expand beyond the second grade, then come back to my thread with something of maturity to offer...

That is also missing the point of my op, which is that it is NOT the place of the fucking journalist to determine for us who is "good"/likeable and who is not, their opinions on such things are irrelevant and should not be included in these articles. A decent editor would have removed that crap, but being the pos NYT rag, they didn't.

They're not telling you what to think. They're telling what the Dutch officials think. These kinds of articles are always written from the side it is trying to represent. No, they're not good at it but the things you think are wrong are wrong are generally not the things the Dutch (in this case) think are wrong.

But since you go into the trouble of sharing your anxiety with everyone else, why not make a few pointers. This is what they say-this is why I think it is wrong. This is the part that is trying to manipulate me, and so on.

Of course, you don't have to read the articles at all if they drive you mad.

 

[rhodescholar]

They're not telling you what to think.

But they are, as they lace every one of their articles with respect to politics with such stark differences in language using warm tones to describe liberals/democrats and harsh, extreme terms when a republican or conservative is mentioned.

They're telling what the Dutch officials think. These kinds of articles are always written from the side it is trying to represent.

This is the whole point - they should NOT be telling anyone what to think. Their job is to report the facts and inform - not manipulate into thinking one way or the other, that should be up to the reader to decide. And I should point out it is blatantly obvious with the NYT, as I do not see this kind of crap with many other publications like the WSJ. Interesting that it is the liberal side that feels the need to have to do this kind of thing, don't you think?

But since you go into the trouble of sharing your anxiety with everyone else, why not make a few pointers. This is what they say-this is why I think it is wrong. This is the part that is trying to manipulate me, and so on.

I did in the OP; but here's some good ones:

1) "Mr. Wilders’s backing of Israel, where he once lived, has set him apart from other far-right groups..."

Who's to say that Wilders is "far right"? I have NEVER seen them call moveon, MSNBC or other like-minded entities or political officials "far left." Many people would call him centrist, including me, so why would the idiot writer need to say that unless they had an agenda to push?

2) "though he himself has expressed inflammatory views on the subject."

Again, it is NOT the place of the NYT to claim that Pipes' statements are extreme or inflammatory, they certainly NEVER do so when arab muslims are interviewed who claim all jews need to be removed from Israel. They even have had lunatics like Ian Lustick write editorials that Israel should be destroyed in their fucking editorial pages - would they ever publish someone who claimed all arab muslims should be mass deported to saudi arabia?

3) "One, the Gatestone Institute, lists John R. Bolton, a combative former United Nations ambassador under George W. Bush, as its chairman. Another, the International Freedom Alliance Foundation, is backed by Robert J. Shillman, a wealthy Trump supporter..."

"Combative"? I've never seen them use that term to describe ANY liberals, even James Carville. And why do they need to mention that Shillman is "wealthy", are there no "wealthy" Obama or Clinton supporters, whom they have NEVER described that way?

I'd have less of an issue with them doing this if this was in the editorial section, or they used such terminology to describe democrats and liberals - but they never do. This is not journalism, its propaganda/garbage.

 

[cosimdm]

I've got it: The CIA used Umbrage to hack the Dutch and make it seem as if the Russians are meddling in the Dutch election. Cf> Democratic Party= Russians; Podesta leaks- Russians etc. We have seen it before. Hilarious!!!

• 

 

[blastoff]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/...h-fear-russian-meddling-but-also-us-cash.html

This article is so poorly written and biased I needed 3 tries to finish it. Anyone reading my posts knows how I utterly despise the NYT to my core, and hope/pray it goes bankrupt. This disgraceful article is typical of how it represents its very low quality of journalism.

Comparing how it describes conservatives with how it does democrats and leftists with whom it agrees is astounding in how divergent the two sides are portrayed; conservatives are "combative" and "far right", while democraps are "moderates" and spoken of in soft, pleasant and positive terms.

This is utter fucking garbage, fake journalism, designed to manipulate the reader and it is long past time that this pos rag got called out on it.

Based on their shrinking circulation, ad revenue, and staff cuts over the past several years I'd say they are being called out, and there's nothing to stop the downward spiral IMO. Plus, when it comes to adversaries I prefer they suffer a slow agonizing demise rather than a quick bullet to the head.

 

[rhodescholar]

Based on their shrinking circulation, ad revenue, and staff cuts over the past several years I'd say they are being called out, and there's nothing to stop the downward spiral IMO. Plus, when it comes to adversaries I prefer they suffer a slow agonizing demise rather than a quick bullet to the head.

You're my new favorite poster here. I might steal your post and put it up on my bedroom ceiling.

 

[blastoff]

Based on their shrinking circulation, ad revenue, and staff cuts over the past several years I'd say they are being called out, and there's nothing to stop the downward spiral IMO. Plus, when it comes to adversaries I prefer they suffer a slow agonizing demise rather than a quick bullet to the head.

You're my new favorite poster here. I might steal your post and put it up on my bedroom ceiling.

Oh, you say that to all the boys...

 

[Marion Morrison]

Sounds like someone can't handle the truth.

Uh yeah, the "truth": all democrats/liberals = good, all conservatives = bad.

When you're willing to expand beyond the second grade, then come back to my thread with something of maturity to offer...

That is also missing the point of my op, which is that it is NOT the place of the fucking journalist to determine for us who is "good"/likeable and who is not, their opinions on such things are irrelevant and should not be included in these articles. A decent editor would have removed that crap, but being the pos NYT rag, they didn't.

Apparently these so-called "journalists" think it is. I am sick to death of it.