Why don't people here source check their "links"?

[Texanmike]

I've noticed that around here people throw up all kinds of asinine links and provide them as if they are some sort of hard evidence of facts. MSNBC is not a legitimate source unless you have access to their source information. The same can be said for Fox news... CNN and just about every major "news" manufacturer out there. Journalistic integrity is at an all time low it would seem. How many times are polls that are designed with predetermined outcomes going to be quoted before people go out and look at the construction of the polls they are quoting? I bring this up because it seems that people on both the left and right are doing word searches in google and and literally finding the first source that agrees with them and posting it. If your link includes something like Issues why don't you verify it before you post it. It isn't a rule, I get that... but why not do it just to increase your credibility?

Just an observation. Flame away.

Mike

 

[buckeye45_73]

I think sources are legit, you can check em if you dont belive them. It's not that hard. Plus some of the more partisan sites do have stuff. If it wasnt for the executive privlege, none of the major sites talked about fast and furious, but it still did exist.

 

[Texanmike]

I think sources are legit, you can check em if you dont belive them. It's not that hard. Plus some of the more partisan sites do have stuff. If it wasnt for the executive privlege, none of the major sites talked about fast and furious, but it still did exist.

I'm not saying sources aren't ever legit. I'm saying that you look like an ass if you throw up a link and then it turns out to be completely wrong/false/slanted...

Mike

 

[candycorn]

I've noticed that around here people throw up all kinds of asinine links and provide them as if they are some sort of hard evidence of facts. MSNBC is not a legitimate source unless you have access to their source information. The same can be said for Fox news... CNN and just about every major "news" manufacturer out there. Journalistic integrity is at an all time low it would seem. How many times are polls that are designed with predetermined outcomes going to be quoted before people go out and look at the construction of the polls they are quoting? I bring this up because it seems that people on both the left and right are doing word searches in google and and literally finding the first source that agrees with them and posting it. If your link includes something like Issues why don't you verify it before you post it. It isn't a rule, I get that... but why not do it just to increase your credibility?

Just an observation. Flame away.

Mike

Most don't read their own sources; just the headlines.

A case in point:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/207826-obama-soldiers-in-afghanistan-must-be-fired-upon-to-receive-combat-pay.html#post4805098

 

[The Infidel]

I never trust the 1st site google recommends... I go to tried and true sites that have shown some semblance of crediblity.
Hack sites are outed pretty easily... I wont mention any names

My favorite thing to do is post from youtube... in their own words.

 

[CaféAuLait]

I've noticed that around here people throw up all kinds of asinine links and provide them as if they are some sort of hard evidence of facts. MSNBC is not a legitimate source unless you have access to their source information. The same can be said for Fox news... CNN and just about every major "news" manufacturer out there. Journalistic integrity is at an all time low it would seem. How many times are polls that are designed with predetermined outcomes going to be quoted before people go out and look at the construction of the polls they are quoting? I bring this up because it seems that people on both the left and right are doing word searches in google and and literally finding the first source that agrees with them and posting it. If your link includes something like Issues why don't you verify it before you post it. It isn't a rule, I get that... but why not do it just to increase your credibility?

Just an observation. Flame away.

Mike

If the headline is salacious enough, there is no need to verify it or question it in the hyper-partisan mind. Look to some of the more inflammatory headlines, most are blogs or sites that pander to the extreme mind or perhaps not so extreme mind (see Romney Impersonated a Cop). It’s propaganda for the most part. The news media controls a lot of what we believe and that is scary. It has come to the point that free thinking is really non-existent for many. Or more so some use the media hold to try and sway the truth.

“Believe only half of what you see and nothing that you hear.” ~~ ― Edgar Allan Poe

 

[CaféAuLait]

I never trust the 1st site google recommends... I go to tried and true sites that have shown some semblance of crediblity.
Hack sites are outed pretty easily... I wont mention any names

My favorite thing to do is post from youtube... in their own words.

I do the same and I also go to many different news sources, figuring the truth is somewhere in the middle.

 

[Chris]

Fox and MSNBC are both legitimate links.

 

[Charles_Main]

I've noticed that around here people throw up all kinds of asinine links and provide them as if they are some sort of hard evidence of facts. MSNBC is not a legitimate source unless you have access to their source information. The same can be said for Fox news... CNN and just about every major "news" manufacturer out there. Journalistic integrity is at an all time low it would seem. How many times are polls that are designed with predetermined outcomes going to be quoted before people go out and look at the construction of the polls they are quoting? I bring this up because it seems that people on both the left and right are doing word searches in google and and literally finding the first source that agrees with them and posting it. If your link includes something like Issues why don't you verify it before you post it. It isn't a rule, I get that... but why not do it just to increase your credibility?

Just an observation. Flame away.

Mike

Fact is most people don't see beyond the headline, and Most people only Look at stuff that Favors their Position. Human Nature.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I've noticed that around here people throw up all kinds of asinine links and provide them as if they are some sort of hard evidence of facts. MSNBC is not a legitimate source unless you have access to their source information. The same can be said for Fox news... CNN and just about every major "news" manufacturer out there. Journalistic integrity is at an all time low it would seem. How many times are polls that are designed with predetermined outcomes going to be quoted before people go out and look at the construction of the polls they are quoting? I bring this up because it seems that people on both the left and right are doing word searches in google and and literally finding the first source that agrees with them and posting it. If your link includes something like Issues why don't you verify it before you post it. It isn't a rule, I get that... but why not do it just to increase your credibility?

Just an observation. Flame away.

Mike

when you compare FOX to CNN you lose all credibility

good night

 

[candycorn]

I've noticed that around here people throw up all kinds of asinine links and provide them as if they are some sort of hard evidence of facts. MSNBC is not a legitimate source unless you have access to their source information. The same can be said for Fox news... CNN and just about every major "news" manufacturer out there. Journalistic integrity is at an all time low it would seem. How many times are polls that are designed with predetermined outcomes going to be quoted before people go out and look at the construction of the polls they are quoting? I bring this up because it seems that people on both the left and right are doing word searches in google and and literally finding the first source that agrees with them and posting it. If your link includes something like Issues why don't you verify it before you post it. It isn't a rule, I get that... but why not do it just to increase your credibility?

Just an observation. Flame away.

Mike

when you compare FOX to CNN you lose all credibility

good night

When they employ the same standards; they lose all credibility.

 

[buckeye45_73]

I've noticed that around here people throw up all kinds of asinine links and provide them as if they are some sort of hard evidence of facts. MSNBC is not a legitimate source unless you have access to their source information. The same can be said for Fox news... CNN and just about every major "news" manufacturer out there. Journalistic integrity is at an all time low it would seem. How many times are polls that are designed with predetermined outcomes going to be quoted before people go out and look at the construction of the polls they are quoting? I bring this up because it seems that people on both the left and right are doing word searches in google and and literally finding the first source that agrees with them and posting it. If your link includes something like Issues why don't you verify it before you post it. It isn't a rule, I get that... but why not do it just to increase your credibility?

Just an observation. Flame away.

Mike

when you compare FOX to CNN you lose all credibility

good night

To a partisan hack like you, I guess, CNN is still left, but man they look positively normal considering MSNBC the home of the Marxist!

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I've noticed that around here people throw up all kinds of asinine links and provide them as if they are some sort of hard evidence of facts. MSNBC is not a legitimate source unless you have access to their source information. The same can be said for Fox news... CNN and just about every major "news" manufacturer out there. Journalistic integrity is at an all time low it would seem. How many times are polls that are designed with predetermined outcomes going to be quoted before people go out and look at the construction of the polls they are quoting? I bring this up because it seems that people on both the left and right are doing word searches in google and and literally finding the first source that agrees with them and posting it. If your link includes something like Issues why don't you verify it before you post it. It isn't a rule, I get that... but why not do it just to increase your credibility?

Just an observation. Flame away.

Mike

when you compare FOX to CNN you lose all credibility

good night

When they employ the same standards; they lose all credibility.

same standards?

CNN was started to give the Big 3 networks competition. FOX was started in order to conservatism a voice.

MSNBC went liberal under Olbermeister.

no comparison of yours is valid.

you're an idiot if you think CNN was ever a voice for liberals or the DNC. They go after all parties and ideologies. Always have. They have no god in the fight.

While some people may lean left or right, FOX was started as a right wing voice echo chamber. fact

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Bucky, the neg rep was sent to you in error.

apologies

the smart browser went bonkers jumping around. kill all idiot programmers

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

why do engineers at Google and programmers at Browser companies think their fucked up artificial data speaks to what real people truly desire?

I would kill digital engineers and programmers if I had the power to start a new world order.

 

[buckeye45_73]

why do engineers at Google and programmers at Browser companies think their fucked up artificial data speaks to what real people truly desire?

I would kill digital engineers and programmers if I had the power to start a new world order.

no we need them to program, just waterboard them, it'll straighten them up.

 

[Texanmike]

I've noticed that around here people throw up all kinds of asinine links and provide them as if they are some sort of hard evidence of facts. MSNBC is not a legitimate source unless you have access to their source information. The same can be said for Fox news... CNN and just about every major "news" manufacturer out there. Journalistic integrity is at an all time low it would seem. How many times are polls that are designed with predetermined outcomes going to be quoted before people go out and look at the construction of the polls they are quoting? I bring this up because it seems that people on both the left and right are doing word searches in google and and literally finding the first source that agrees with them and posting it. If your link includes something like Issues why don't you verify it before you post it. It isn't a rule, I get that... but why not do it just to increase your credibility?

Just an observation. Flame away.

Mike

when you compare FOX to CNN you lose all credibility

good night

I would say that most people these days report with the same prejudices. I mean, is it just coincidence that FOX and CNN never look at the same set of facts and view them the same? In fact, they don't view the same set of facts both sides usually ignore anything that doesn't play to their narrative. I'm not saying that either side is always right or always wrong, it is probably a mix of both. The entire point of this was not to call out a side or a network but to ask why people don't do their own research or at least verify the things that an article says before linking to it.

Mike

 

[Darkwind]

when you compare FOX to CNN you lose all credibility

good night

When they employ the same standards; they lose all credibility.

same standards?

CNN was started to give the Big 3 networks competition. FOX was started in order to conservatism a voice. Both statements are lies.

MSNBC went liberal under Olbermeister. MSNBC is the liberals Limbaugh/Hannity/O'Reilly. All at the same time.

no comparison of yours is valid.

you're an idiot if you think CNN was ever a voice for liberals or the DNC. They go after all parties and ideologies. Always have. They have no god in the fight. Anyone who thinks CNN is anything but left wing needs an examination of their mental processes.

While some people may lean left or right, FOX was started as a right wing voice echo chamber. fact It is not a fact, it is a partisan hack lie.

You should have that neurosis looked into.

 

[bitterlyclingin]

I don't think Bloomberg has yet provided the breakdown on the composition of the polling base that gave Obama his thirteen point lead over Romney. They may have used the same polling outfit that the NYT uses whose polling base is comprised of 50 per cent Democrats, 35 per cent independents that voted for Obama, and 15 per cent Republicans.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I've noticed that around here people throw up all kinds of asinine links and provide them as if they are some sort of hard evidence of facts. MSNBC is not a legitimate source unless you have access to their source information. The same can be said for Fox news... CNN and just about every major "news" manufacturer out there. Journalistic integrity is at an all time low it would seem. How many times are polls that are designed with predetermined outcomes going to be quoted before people go out and look at the construction of the polls they are quoting? I bring this up because it seems that people on both the left and right are doing word searches in google and and literally finding the first source that agrees with them and posting it. If your link includes something like Issues why don't you verify it before you post it. It isn't a rule, I get that... but why not do it just to increase your credibility?

Just an observation. Flame away.

Mike

You're making the argument that there is no such thing as the facts, which is the argument that people make who don't want to argue the facts because the facts aren't on their side.

It is a well established factthat to reject a claim or argument solely because whoever makes the claim has a bias is a logical fallacy.