A guide for parsing the news and propaganda from liberal to conservative

[JakeStarkey]

The following description makes some sense from Liberal Utter Garbage/Conspiracy Theories to Conservative Utter Garbage/Liberal Theories. I am interested what board members think of the Mainstream (minimal partisan bias) list: The Wall Street Journal, etc.

 

[martybegan]

The following description makes some sense from Liberal Utter Garbage/Conspiracy Theories to Conservative Utter Garbage/Liberal Theories. I am interested what board members think of the Mainstream (minimal partisan bias) list: The Wall Street Journal, etc.

That Briebart is with infowars, and Occupy democrats isnt off the left side of the chart shows this for what it is, more left partisan attempts at equivocation.

And CNN in the center? Really? The Times in the center, Really?

Worthless Chart is Worthless.

 

[Tehon]

The rubes are easily distracted by shiny objects.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

LMAO @ CNN, Reuters and USA Today in the middle...Reuters publishes BS polls and gets caught and they are neutral? LOL

We won't even go into the whoppers CNN have told

 

[JakeStarkey]

The following description makes some sense from Liberal Utter Garbage/Conspiracy Theories to Conservative Utter Garbage/Liberal Theories. I am interested what board members think of the Mainstream (minimal partisan bias) list: The Wall Street Journal, etc.

That Briebart is with infowars, and Occupy democrats isnt off the left side of the chart shows this for what it is, more left partisan attempts at equivocation.

And CNN in the center? Really? The Times in the center, Really?

Worthless Chart is Worthless.

Breitbart and Infowars are in the pink on the Right and so is Occupy Democrats on the left.

Either you can't read a chart or you are being deliberately a deliverer of 'fake news.'

The defenders of the Fake News of the conservatives are loud this morning.

 

[martybegan]

The following description makes some sense from Liberal Utter Garbage/Conspiracy Theories to Conservative Utter Garbage/Liberal Theories. I am interested what board members think of the Mainstream (minimal partisan bias) list: The Wall Street Journal, etc.

That Briebart is with infowars, and Occupy democrats isnt off the left side of the chart shows this for what it is, more left partisan attempts at equivocation.

And CNN in the center? Really? The Times in the center, Really?

Worthless Chart is Worthless.

Breitbart and Infowars are in the pink on the Right and so is Occupy Democrats on the left.

Either you can't read a chart of you are being deliberately a deliverer of 'fake news.'

The defenders of the Fake News of the conservatives are loud this morning.

How is Briebart "fake" news. briebart doesn't shy away from the fact that it is biased, but to put it at the level of infowars and Occupy democrats is proof of bias in the chart, even if puitting CNN and the Times in the "middle" isn't enough of a giveaway.

The chart is more fake than Briebart ever is.

 

[Tehon]

Breitbart is shit.

 

[USNavyVet]

And this chart shows why the Dems lost. They actually think their "news" is minimal partisanship when in fact the opposite is true.

 

[Tehon]

The following description makes some sense from Liberal Utter Garbage/Conspiracy Theories to Conservative Utter Garbage/Liberal Theories. I am interested what board members think of the Mainstream (minimal partisan bias) list: The Wall Street Journal, etc.

Sorry Jake, I just noticed that you intended for this to be a clean discussion.

I don't really have a problem with the graph on strictly partisan terms. It's not an issue that I am overly sensitive to.

 

[ZZ PUPPS]

The author that produced that lib spin wish list chart didn't even list the number one US network - CBS. So much for accuracy and thoroughness.

 

[MisterBeale]

Look at the original image. . . . What do you notice? That's right, you'll notice there is no attribution, IOW, who made the damn thing.

Now look at this one, what do you notice that is different?

That's right, you'll notice there is no attribution in the one you posted, IOW, nobody could find out who made the damn thing on yours. Are you trying to be a shady M'fker? lol


I noticed when it first came across my social network feed, the attribution was nixed as well. This is an obvious attempt at disguising the bias of the author, of which she admits she has. This is not to be taken seriously, AT ALL.

Well, I went to the twitter account of the person that made it. She's just a Hollywood actress from the left coast, so there is your obvious bias. Vanessa Otero - IMDb

To that point, she is, clearly a neo-liberal. That said, it can't be said that she doesn't have a sense of humor and isn't aware of her NWO bias. She is about as intellectual and knowledgeable about politics as your average housewife. She doesn't know shit. Still, she'd be fun to hang with though.

Vanessa Otero on Twitter

"
TinyTachyon ‏@tinytachyon Dec 14


@vlotero

Bland

Neoliberal

Consensus

Is

Not

"Minimal

Bias"

1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes



Vanessa Otero ‏@vlotero
@tinytachyon

You.

Could.

Make.

Your.

Own.

Chart.

And.

It.

Would.

Be.

So.

Woke.

• Likes 4
• 
  

8:11 AM - 14 Dec 2016
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes


TinyTachyon ‏@tinytachyon 22h22 hours ago

1. 1. @vlotero i believe i have been owned, online
      
      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes

• Vanessa Otero ‏@vlotero 20h20 hours ago
  @tinytachyon All in good fun. Much love
  
  
  
  0 replies 0 retweets 1 like

 

[JakeStarkey]

The following description makes some sense from Liberal Utter Garbage/Conspiracy Theories to Conservative Utter Garbage/Liberal Theories. I am interested what board members think of the Mainstream (minimal partisan bias) list: The Wall Street Journal, etc.

That Briebart is with infowars, and Occupy democrats isnt off the left side of the chart shows this for what it is, more left partisan attempts at equivocation.

And CNN in the center? Really? The Times in the center, Really?

Worthless Chart is Worthless.

Breitbart and Infowars are in the pink on the Right and so is Occupy Democrats on the left.

Either you can't read a chart of you are being deliberately a deliverer of 'fake news.'

The defenders of the Fake News of the conservatives are loud this morning.

How is Briebart "fake" news. briebart doesn't shy away from the fact that it is biased, but to put it at the level of infowars and Occupy democrats is proof of bias in the chart, even if puitting CNN and the Times in the "middle" isn't enough of a giveaway. The chart is more fake than Briebart ever is.

Nonsense. I agree that CNN does not belong in the middle. The other poster is a global conspiracy guy, so he is disregarded and on silent ignore for this thread from here on out.

The placings are of course debatable, based on solid facts and evidence, but not fake nes.

 

[martybegan]

The following description makes some sense from Liberal Utter Garbage/Conspiracy Theories to Conservative Utter Garbage/Liberal Theories. I am interested what board members think of the Mainstream (minimal partisan bias) list: The Wall Street Journal, etc.

That Briebart is with infowars, and Occupy democrats isnt off the left side of the chart shows this for what it is, more left partisan attempts at equivocation.

And CNN in the center? Really? The Times in the center, Really?

Worthless Chart is Worthless.

Breitbart and Infowars are in the pink on the Right and so is Occupy Democrats on the left.

Either you can't read a chart of you are being deliberately a deliverer of 'fake news.'

The defenders of the Fake News of the conservatives are loud this morning.

How is Briebart "fake" news. briebart doesn't shy away from the fact that it is biased, but to put it at the level of infowars and Occupy democrats is proof of bias in the chart, even if puitting CNN and the Times in the "middle" isn't enough of a giveaway. The chart is more fake than Briebart ever is.

Nonsense. I agree that CNN does not belong in the middle. The other poster is a global conspiracy guy, so he is disregarded and on silent ignore for this thread from here on out.

The placings are of course debatable, based on solid facts and evidence, but not fake nes.

Again, show me how Briebart is fake news.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Almost all institutions of higher education are gearing up for a logic and information class mandatory for all freshmen and all those there now. It will teach students and faculty and staff how to parse information sources and recognize 'fake news.' Good on them. Almost all will be in place by first term of summer.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The following description makes some sense from Liberal Utter Garbage/Conspiracy Theories to Conservative Utter Garbage/Liberal Theories. I am interested what board members think of the Mainstream (minimal partisan bias) list: The Wall Street Journal, etc.

That Briebart is with infowars, and Occupy democrats isnt off the left side of the chart shows this for what it is, more left partisan attempts at equivocation.

And CNN in the center? Really? The Times in the center, Really?

Worthless Chart is Worthless.

Breitbart and Infowars are in the pink on the Right and so is Occupy Democrats on the left.

Either you can't read a chart of you are being deliberately a deliverer of 'fake news.'

The defenders of the Fake News of the conservatives are loud this morning.

How is Briebart "fake" news. briebart doesn't shy away from the fact that it is biased, but to put it at the level of infowars and Occupy democrats is proof of bias in the chart, even if puitting CNN and the Times in the "middle" isn't enough of a giveaway. The chart is more fake than Briebart ever is.

Nonsense. I agree that CNN does not belong in the middle. The other poster is a global conspiracy guy, so he is disregarded and on silent ignore for this thread from here on out.

The placings are of course debatable, based on solid facts and evidence, but not fake nes.

Again, show me how Briebart is fake news.

I don't have to. You have to show how it is not. Neither the crazy liberals nor the nutty conservatives are going to get away with 'fake news' again.

 

[martybegan]

No, i don't. you posted a chart placing it with sites known to post puff pieces and made up opinions masquerading as fact. It's up to you to defend it.

 

[MisterBeale]

Almost all institutions of higher education are gearing up for a logic and information class mandatory for all freshmen and all those there now. It will teach students and faculty and staff how to parse information sources and recognize 'fake news.' Good on them. Almost all will be in place by first term of summer.

Terrific.

After I learned about Chomsky and Berneys, I never looked at the MSM the same way again.

 

[Silent Warrior]

Most poster's definition of fake news - Any news source that disagrees with me.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, i don't. you posted a chart placing it with sites known to post puff pieces and made up opinions masquerading as fact. It's up to you to defend it.

Yes, you do. You are now spamming and warned. Stop. Tell us 'why' you think Breitbart is legitimate.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Most poster's definition of fake news - Any news source that disagrees with me.

To the uninformed reader, yes.