- Thread starter
- #41
Where do you get your new from TM?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
I go to Drudge everyday for the headlines then I go to FreeRepublic for stories posted by news sources all over the US and Internationally.
I've found that you usually have to reconstruct the news. This is especially true with quotes and "studies". When "news" involves studies the best thing to do is go back to the study and read it to determine if it was done with a bias or not. When it involves quotes you usually have to find a transcript instead of relying on the headline. Bot sides will clip around only providing the title line and never showing the quote in context. I'm to the point that when a story originates from an "unnamed source" that I am very skeptical.
Mike